I find it amusing when one person doesn't like a game that tons of other people do, and they're decision is that the mechanics weren't executed properly.
Monopoly is probably the best selling board game of all time. It was designed to not be fun.
That is a silly comparison, and you know it. We're talking about actual boardgamers here--people who know better.
Munchkin then, if you're going to use 'we boardgamers' as an argument, even though all it does is make you sound pompous. Popularity has never equaled quality in any medium. There have been lots of examples of something being popular for either a superficial reason, or because of novelty or some other reason that doesn't last.
0
Options
TrynantManiac BrawlerRank 20.100 and full WildRegistered Userregular
edited September 2014
EDIT: In regards to Inksplat's post right before the one above me,
Thank you!
And again, I will give Dead of Winter more plays/chances to 'click,' because all in all, even with a lackluster experience it felt like things would be interest if our group was less new/played differently/whatever.
Downtime I don't see being relieved just by talking and observing, because being passive outside a players turns with exception of things that aren't in the rules at all is still downtime. If a player gets those Survivors that don't add those helpless ones, gets shit tons of actions as a result, and takes longer turns than everyone else, there's only so much waiting that talking (and observing) can alleviate.
Perhaps disliking that there's "no effect" as one of two choices on tons of Crossroads cards is not directly a bad thing, but the snag here is that there were a lot of cards that had either "take a thing that is beneficial or ignore it." What would of been better were more "choose one of two good things," "chooose one of two bad things," more cards with a safer choice or a riskier one, etc. A "nothing happens" status is something that's layered already on the fact that Crossroads often won't trigger anyways is just kind of a redudancy.
A note that difficulty wasn't too easy, or even too hard; it was too inconsistent not only from missions but from how secret objectives will change the flow of game (and Crossroads/Crises can reaaaaally swing things). On the last player turn of our game, we went from "completing main objective during Colony (i.e. resolution) phase" to "lost the game" because the traitor played perfectly beneficially for all his turns before and then as last player on this last turn, seeing the game was about to end, used all his actions to try and screw us--and succeeded! Now, that's most likely us playing "wrong" because we were flat out new to the game; but there's hardly a game state I (or groups I play in) enjoy where a traitor with one good sucker-punch can win the game and this one didn't break the mold.
I suspect (and seems it's confirmed with some glowing praise from a lot of folks), that this game will go over great--marvelously even--with a few groups. I suspect that people who don't dislike Betrayal at House on the Hill but wish it had more strategy will fall in love with this game. Fans of City of Remnants I'd even recommend Dead of Winter to.
But, like SU&SD said in their otherwise glowing review, Dead of Winter won't deliver the most consistent experience. That's not a problem for me--Archipelago is my favorite game and how it plays out varies wildly, but Dead of Winter feels noticeably limited in its appeal based on players' knowledge of the game and their mindset...and a tolerance for certain mechanics that can grate like hell to some people (me). If those requisites are met, go hog wild?
Speaking of story-generating games that vary wildly: Betrayal at the House on the Hill. We were all happy with our first game so we tried it again. The second game went not so well. We rolled up a Haunt that wasn't very fun (not really massive spoilers but just in case*):
It was a treasure hunt where there was no monster or antagonist player. Everyone just ran for "clue tokens" scattered all over the house and rolled to win. Literally, rolled to win. With bonuses provided by the clue tokens you'd rolled for earlier. I can see why the designers thought it might have been fun - running pell mell around a house looking for clues for the fortune of a rich (and dead) eccentric is a cool idea for a great board game. But this isn't the board game to make that concept shine. It just feels like a bait-and-switch when the appeal of the game has always been in playing trashy horror movie.
It was an utter let down.
Still, the other scenarios are probably cooler!
*Hell I'd suggest you read it just so you know to not play that Haunt yourself. House rule some other Haunt instead.
If it makes any difference, I'm glad you did argue for Dead of Winter and it has given me food for thought for my next play. That "thank you!" bit in my previous post was aimed at your last post (even though yes arguing something's quality because lots of people like it has literally been proven wrong). I'm going to probably get Dead of Winter played again tonight with a different group, and I'll see how we like it.
Speaking of story-generating games that vary wildly: Betrayal at the House on the Hill. We were all happy with our first game so we tried it again. The second game went not so well. We rolled up a Haunt that wasn't very fun (not really massive spoilers but just in case*):
It was a treasure hunt where there was no monster or antagonist player. Everyone just ran for "clue tokens" scattered all over the house and rolled to win. Literally, rolled to win. With bonuses provided by the clue tokens you'd rolled for earlier. I can see why the designers thought it might have been fun - running pell mell around a house looking for clues for the fortune of a rich (and dead) eccentric is a cool idea for a great board game. But this isn't the board game to make that concept shine. It just feels like a bait-and-switch when the appeal of the game has always been in playing trashy horror movie.
It was an utter let down.
Still, the other scenarios are probably cooler!
*Hell I'd suggest you read it just so you know to not play that Haunt yourself. House rule some other Haunt instead.
As a generally pro-Betrayal guy, I recommend generating a new Haunt if you've played the one that emerges or it looks like it sucks. Fastest solution is usually to flip rooms 'til you find the next Omen one and consult the chart again.
+2
Options
SixCaches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhexRegistered Userregular
I find it amusing when one person doesn't like a game that tons of other people do, and they're decision is that the mechanics weren't executed properly.
Monopoly is probably the best selling board game of all time. It was designed to not be fun.
That is a silly comparison, and you know it. We're talking about actual boardgamers here--people who know better.
I don't have to defend the game to think saying it was poorly designed is goosey. It may not be for you and your group, but that doesn't make it badly designed.
Nor does its popularity with other groups mean it was designed well. He made his case for mechanics he thought didn't perform well, there's no need to dismiss him, especially on the grounds of it being an unpopular opinion.
Are there points he made you disagree with?
Sure.
1) Downtime. There is almost none. If you're tuned out, then you're playing wrong. Its a social game, and if you aren't talking during everyone's turn, then you're missing out on valuable information, which could of course lead to you being surprised by the traitor.
2) The "nothing happens" option being 'meh' is a matter of opinion. If you have to choose between rescuing children (but taking on helpless survivors) or just leaving them to do what you came to do. That is a "nothing happens" choice, but what else is there supposed to be?
3) Number of actions being random. This is not anything like it sounds in actual play. When you play a card that gives you an extra survivor, 2/3 times it adds Helpless Survivors to the Colony. You do not get away with doing that in almost any game. If someone plays one without a good reason? Everyone is immediately suspicious.
4) Difficulty. This varies by mission, and can be turned up. If you want a traitor, you can make sure there is one.
5) Traitor being able to throw the game at the last minute--this only happens if you play like there isn't a traitor. You have to always play like there's a traitor. If you do, then throwing the game becomes much harder. The traitor can throw a crisis, which is 1 morale. Other than that, they'll have to either steal food to starve the colony, which is 1 morale. And then they've got to try and kill survivors, which is risky and difficult, especially if you're playing as if there is a Traitor and not sitting in a location with a bunch of zombies they can get you overrun by.
This is a good description of the game. I'll tack on my thoughts after having played it a few times. It's been a universal hit so far, and I've played it with a number of different groups.
Downtime - We've experienced almost none as well. For us, this plays like a co-op, especially early in the game. Everyone's involved. Turns also speed up dramatically once everyone knows the game and then it's even less about "here's what I'm mechanically going to do" and way more about, "wait, why are you doing this?" I like games that foster table talk, and this one seems to do a good job of it for us.
I'm not a huge fan of the nothing happens crossroads cards either, but at least in our games, they seem to be kind of rare? Usually there's a real choice to be made. I also like that it gives someone else something to do, and we've had a lot of fun reading them as dramatically as possible. They might not be everyone's favorite mechanic, but it went a long way toward endearing the game to our players who like more story-driven games like, as mentioned earlier, Arabian Nights.
We've won less than half the time. Difficulty seems fine for us. We've had a few tratior-less games and those are certainly easier, but the secret objectives made things dicey the whole way anyway.
Yes, the traitor can throw the game at the last minute, however if you've gotten to that point, then the traitor is playing a better game than everyone else. Also when we'v ehad that happen, it's also meant the traitor had a really hard time actually completing their own objective.
I'm hardly an expert on this game and there might be long term issues that crop up the more we play. My group has been enjoying it more than BSG because it's faster and we've enjoyed the emergent stories that come out of it more.
I don't have to defend the game to think saying it was poorly designed is goosey. It may not be for you and your group, but that doesn't make it badly designed.
I do not agree with this post!
Saying a game is badly designed is something we are allowed to do in this thread, even about popular games. Trynant gave plenty of reasons beyond "my group didn't like it" that he thought the game was badly designed.
I just know that Dead of Winter will never hit our table, because my girlfriend hates hidden traitor games, and we don't generally play games that are 2 hours in length (difficult bosses in Sentinels of the Multiverse aside... she seems to turn a blind eye to that, even when I point it out). Our table goes mostly for co-ops that take about an hour to play. The hour restriction is more important than the co-op restriction, though... long games tend to lose their interest, regardless of theme or mechanics.
"Coming in December: CRISIS expansion for Star Realms! This 48-card expansion comes in four NON-RANDOM 12-card packs. Events introduces game-changing event cards. Heroes adds character cards to the game. Bases & Battleships and Fleets & Fortresses are two collections of powerful new ships and bases."
"Coming in December: CRISIS expansion for Star Realms! This 48-card expansion comes in four NON-RANDOM 12-card packs. Events introduces game-changing event cards. Heroes adds character cards to the game. Bases & Battleships and Fleets & Fortresses are two collections of powerful new ships and bases."
And I bet it'll still be a massive ball-ache to track down in the UK.
Warhammer 40,000 should only be said in full by James Earl Jones. Maybe with a little reverb.
+2
Options
38thDoelets never be stupid againwait lets always be stupid foreverRegistered Userregular
Saturday was my birthday and I actually got to play some boardgames for the first time in way too long. We went to the FLGS, but unfortunately the only thing I could find there was Love Letter in a box which I picked up although I was a bit disappointed the bag wasn't included in the box like the guy at the store said it was. They had a lot of expansions for games I was thinking about buying but were out of stock on the base game.
We came back to my house and played some Love Letter, a game of Vineta, two quick games of Avalon, and two games of Skulls.
We all really liked Love Letter, which is good. My group is pretty heavily against any kind of player elimination, but you are back in so fast that it didn't seem to bother anyone. We could have played more but we were leaving some people out by playing a max 4-player game so we pulled out Vineta.
Vineta is a game I don't really hear much about, we played it for the first time at PAXE two years ago or so on a whim, and really liked it. Basically everyone is a Norse God and you are sinking an island. The island is made out of different districts, and has many colored houses on it. Each player is secretly trying to save a color and a district. You also get points for houses on districts that you sink. The district saving goal is really tough, since only one survives till the end. Mainly we try to grab houses of our color and/or get your houses onto the last district to survive. On your turn you play one card, but everyone selects their card at the same time, and then you play it so you may have to settle for doing something other than what you originally intended. The cards are either flood cards or action cards which mostly move houses around but can also block house movement in one district, lengthen, or shorten the round by one hand. It has all the hallmarks of a great game for me, easy to learn, quick to play, and fun.
I'm not sure if we were playing Avalon wrong, but the games were done in a few minutes. 2 good people on team, pass, same people, pass, last good person on team, pass. evil loses. Second game, 1 evil person on a team and one good, pass, rest of the teams had only good people on them so obviously game completed. We didn't play with the special characters.
Skulls is a coaster based bluffing game similar to Liar's Dice (Maybe. The only thing I actually know about Liar's Dice is that it was in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies). You have four coasters, one with a skull and three with a rose. Everyone puts one coaster facedown and then the first player either bids on how many roses he can flip on the table or puts a coaster down on top of the original. The trick is that you have to flip all of your own before you can flip another persons, and if you flip a skull you lose a coaster. You can still bid while you have a skull down to try and bluff someone. Fun game that you can probably play with 3 red playing cards and a black playing card or the reverse.
I don't have to defend the game to think saying it was poorly designed is goosey. It may not be for you and your group, but that doesn't make it badly designed.
I do not agree with this post!
Saying a game is badly designed is something we are allowed to do in this thread, even about popular games. Trynant gave plenty of reasons beyond "my group didn't like it" that he thought the game was badly designed.
I have some sacred cows of my own (CitOW, TI3, Cyclades, etc) but if someone wants to call them badly designed in good faith then we still coo' yo. They're wrong, but they're not a goose.
tzeentchlingDoctor of RocksOaklandRegistered Userregular
Also Avalon really shouldn't be played with less than 6 people. It's rare that you pick perfect teams, but it is always frustrating when the Resistance happens upon the correct teams and gets lucky.
+1
Options
38thDoelets never be stupid againwait lets always be stupid foreverRegistered Userregular
@admanb Yeah, I should have gone into more detail, the evil person voted good to gain good will, but was not placed back on a team in favor of the new leader nominating themselves. Could have just been bad luck and the speed of the game, but I feel that in BSG for example you have more opportunity to cause issues over the longer game time. Also its not game over if you are "confirmed" evil. Then again the longer game time has kept it off the table the past year.
Also Avalon really shouldn't be played with less than 6 people. It's rare that you pick perfect teams, but it is always frustrating when the Resistance happens upon the correct teams and gets lucky.
I second this. I adamantly suggest never playing that game with 5, especially with people you want to show the game off to. It can end up fun with five, but you're likely to have a lot of games decided by sheer good or bad luck blind picking teams. There isn't a lot of meaningful discussion or lying available when the three person team passes the second mission.
Also Avalon really shouldn't be played with less than 6 people. It's rare that you pick perfect teams, but it is always frustrating when the Resistance happens upon the correct teams and gets lucky.
I second this. I adamantly suggest never playing that game with 5, especially with people you want to show the game off to. It can end up fun with five, but you're likely to have a lot of games decided by sheer good or bad luck blind picking teams. There isn't a lot of meaningful discussion or lying available when the three person team passes the second mission.
The table can mitigate this by playing quick rouns like it's Love Letter. As long as each round is reasonably quick (but not cutting out some table talk) then everyone can get over the occasional botched game as they cruise into the next one.
TimmyRank: MajorFloating in my tin can.Registered Userregular
I love Skull and Roses because it is so tense and full of bravado but also because you can play it with basically anything on hand. I have the edition that is just called Skull (which is gorgeous by the way) but I'm pretty sure I've played it more with a standard deck of cards or coasters than I have with the actual game. Everybody should buy a copy and then not play with it.
Also the expansion packs for star realms will cost $5 each, so $20 for the whole shebang. Totally reasonable, but still a little weird considering the full game was only $15. I don't mind giving those dudes money though.
Sometimes I am not sure if I am playing Advanced Squad Leader or Jenga:
Also played Caverna for the first time yesterday, I am pretty much in love. Kind of just feels like Agricola: Bigger and Better edition to me. Only possible concern is the lack of variability in game set up but maybe they will put out an expansion or something down the line that gives you the option for setting up the buildings randomly. Still, I think it would take a lot of plays for the lack of variability to grate anyway.
And lastly, a question. I have been playing and learning Twilight Struggle with my brother and a friend. So far, in none of our games has anyone even attempted a realignment roll. When is doing so a good idea? Given that it is one of the three ways to spend operations cards I imagine that there is some use to it, even if I am just not seeing it as a new player.
+2
Options
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
Granted I only played once, but I recall using realignment once or twice to try and remove influence from continents where we could not coup, and my opponent didn't have a large presence. It always seemed to me like unless you could really press the advantage with an extra country or two supporting, it was a dicey maneuver though.
jakobaggerLO THY DREAD EMPIRE CHAOS IS RESTOREDRegistered Userregular
If a continent is off limits to coup from defcon (Europe, Asia, ME) you can't realign there either, in the standard rules.
I've not used re-alignment rolls much either, but I'm not a particularly strong player. One nice thing about them is you get one roll per ops point, and can spend those rolls in different countries. Don't use them in places where you have influence and it's baically risk free (apart from opportunity cost). Also, they don't lower defcon, so they're a way of attacking battlegrounds without blowing up the world.
Also I guess, looking over the rules I realized that realignment rolls don't care about the stability of the target country at all so probably the only way to reduce the enemy in a 3 or more stability country.
i bought this asgard game because it was cheap and it looks awesome. its a heavy euro themed around norse mythology. so the entire game youre building temples to gods and preparing for ragnarok, and then the final scoring round is ragnarok (during which all the gods you backed fight it out and whoever wins all the individual battles gets a crapload of points). im pretty excited about it, and it was $19 on amazon. i guess it didn't light the world on fire.
DietarySupplementStill not approved by the FDADublin, OHRegistered Userregular
Expensive haul for me at the FLGS yesterday: Suburbia and Suburbia Inc finally came back in stock, and they had Ladies and Gentlemen, Panic on Wall Street, AND Five Tribes in.
Is it still the best co-operative "panic" like game, or has it been surpassed by newer games like Escape and Space Cadets?
I ask because I plan to visit the FLGS on Saturday and spend a good amount of my birthday money on a few games. And they have a cheap copy of Space Alert in stock, but I currently have so many games on my wishlist that I have no idea which ones to get first.
3DS - 2878-9572-9277
0
Options
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
I've enjoyed Space Alert far more than Space Cadets. Haven't played Escape, but I have doubts it'll be as good an experience as Space Alert as far as hectic co-ops go. XCOM might break some ground in that area, but I wouldn't expect it to outright supersede Space Alert.
...I think I actually like it better than Space Alert. I mean, things can still go really bad fast, but you generally know what you're doing when you actually make your moves since the other players (read: your accountant) actually might have a chance to help fact-check your moves.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
0
Options
TrynantManiac BrawlerRank 20.100 and full WildRegistered Userregular
i bought this asgard game because it was cheap and it looks awesome.
Asgard is cool because like the other What's Your Game? published titles, it only lasts 5 turns. Five excruciatingly brain-burning turns, but still the ratio of heavy-euro to speed-of-play is nice here. The cool mechanics to me are the couple of steps you take before executing actions. First players must reveal which Norse god they will interact with (giving them various actions), then place their workers round robin, THEN execute those worker actions. This leads to a lot of build up of "what will he do if's he's there?" type-stuff. Good game; I wish I could bring it it to the table more often. Unfortunately a good bit of other heavy-euros compete for the same space
Sometimes I am not sure if I am playing Advanced Squad Leader or Jenga
I'm really happy you're playing ASL; I've found it to be a challenge to really get to the table just because of its playtime (2-3 hours on scenarios if you're quick'ish) and its, well, Jenga moments. Also I'm in the process of clipping the edges of all the ASL pieces in my collection. Still. So many boxes
i bought this asgard game because it was cheap and it looks awesome. its a heavy euro themed around norse mythology. so the entire game youre building temples to gods and preparing for ragnarok, and then the final scoring round is ragnarok (during which all the gods you backed fight it out and whoever wins all the individual battles gets a crapload of points). im pretty excited about it, and it was $19 on amazon. i guess it didn't light the world on fire.
the way everything feeds into the final battles looks really neat.
Yeah, I picked it up on sale as well. If you get a group around it, please give a report. It looks neat, but if it's not worth keeping, I can probably sell/trade it at BGG Con by November.
Is it still the best co-operative "panic" like game, or has it been surpassed by newer games like Escape and Space Cadets?
I ask because I plan to visit the FLGS on Saturday and spend a good amount of my birthday money on a few games. And they have a cheap copy of Space Alert in stock, but I currently have so many games on my wishlist that I have no idea which ones to get first.
There is NO way to directly compare Escape with Space Alert, even though they both have timers. In Space Alert, you have to juggle a million things and coordinate everyone's actions. In Escape, the rolling of the dice is nearly the whole game, so it's more of a timed dexterity puzzle than anything else. I really like Escape, and I think it's a game that most people can play and enjoy, but Space Alert is the game that will leave you with epic stories.
Space Cadets... hm. It's still more like Escape than Space Alert. Most people are still just doing their own thing as fast as they can.
If you like Space Alert, I seriously doubt that those other games will satisfy.
jergarmar on
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
Had the chance to play Five Tribes the other day and came away somewhat confused. It plays fairly easily, although once you're stuck with highly competitive gamers I can easily see the game stretch out far beyond the 2h mark and feel like it.
It's all very clever and puzzle-y and very much a well-designed game. But it doesn't feel particularly interesting to play. Which isn't the same as saying it's boring. There are interesting decisions to make, options to consider. And strategy-wise there's enough going on to keep you engaged as you try to keep up with the other players scoring points in one way or another.
But what it all comes down to is that you are just moving a bunch of coloured meeples around the board, and removing others. That is literally 80% of what you do. And all the pretty colours can't really hide the fact, that you're practically playing an abstract game with coloured meeples.
Playing it I was actually reminded of Kingdom Builder. Although there, the minimalism of actions really kills any enjoyment I might have pursuing any strategy. Kingdom Builder just feels so mind-numbingly dull, when all you do is place houses on a coloured space that is randomly determined for you. Five Tribes is far more interesting in that regard. But it still doesn't feel particularly substantial somehow. I recognize the competent design work and tactical/strategic scope it offers, yet afterwards I didn't really feel... satisfied, I guess.
I think it's a good game. Just oddly unfulfilling.
Sometimes I am not sure if I am playing Advanced Squad Leader or Jenga
I'm really happy you're playing ASL; I've found it to be a challenge to really get to the table just because of its playtime (2-3 hours on scenarios if you're quick'ish) and its, well, Jenga moments. Also I'm in the process of clipping the edges of all the ASL pieces in my collection. Still. So many boxes
Good luck!
I am still doing SK stuff but I am having a blast. Just got Decision at Elst because all the other SK stuff is out of print and I am slowly digesting all the new rules. Really, really excited to try one of those multiple day campaign games.
I am really lucky that the friend I play ASL with is also my roommate so we just have a coffee table set up with a game of ASL on it and take turns here and there throughout the day when we find the time and inclination.
Posts
Munchkin then, if you're going to use 'we boardgamers' as an argument, even though all it does is make you sound pompous. Popularity has never equaled quality in any medium. There have been lots of examples of something being popular for either a superficial reason, or because of novelty or some other reason that doesn't last.
Thank you!
And again, I will give Dead of Winter more plays/chances to 'click,' because all in all, even with a lackluster experience it felt like things would be interest if our group was less new/played differently/whatever.
Downtime I don't see being relieved just by talking and observing, because being passive outside a players turns with exception of things that aren't in the rules at all is still downtime. If a player gets those Survivors that don't add those helpless ones, gets shit tons of actions as a result, and takes longer turns than everyone else, there's only so much waiting that talking (and observing) can alleviate.
Perhaps disliking that there's "no effect" as one of two choices on tons of Crossroads cards is not directly a bad thing, but the snag here is that there were a lot of cards that had either "take a thing that is beneficial or ignore it." What would of been better were more "choose one of two good things," "chooose one of two bad things," more cards with a safer choice or a riskier one, etc. A "nothing happens" status is something that's layered already on the fact that Crossroads often won't trigger anyways is just kind of a redudancy.
A note that difficulty wasn't too easy, or even too hard; it was too inconsistent not only from missions but from how secret objectives will change the flow of game (and Crossroads/Crises can reaaaaally swing things). On the last player turn of our game, we went from "completing main objective during Colony (i.e. resolution) phase" to "lost the game" because the traitor played perfectly beneficially for all his turns before and then as last player on this last turn, seeing the game was about to end, used all his actions to try and screw us--and succeeded! Now, that's most likely us playing "wrong" because we were flat out new to the game; but there's hardly a game state I (or groups I play in) enjoy where a traitor with one good sucker-punch can win the game and this one didn't break the mold.
I suspect (and seems it's confirmed with some glowing praise from a lot of folks), that this game will go over great--marvelously even--with a few groups. I suspect that people who don't dislike Betrayal at House on the Hill but wish it had more strategy will fall in love with this game. Fans of City of Remnants I'd even recommend Dead of Winter to.
But, like SU&SD said in their otherwise glowing review, Dead of Winter won't deliver the most consistent experience. That's not a problem for me--Archipelago is my favorite game and how it plays out varies wildly, but Dead of Winter feels noticeably limited in its appeal based on players' knowledge of the game and their mindset...and a tolerance for certain mechanics that can grate like hell to some people (me). If those requisites are met, go hog wild?
Caveat emptor.
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
It was an utter let down.
Still, the other scenarios are probably cooler!
*Hell I'd suggest you read it just so you know to not play that Haunt yourself. House rule some other Haunt instead.
hAmmONd IsnT A mAin TAnk
If it makes any difference, I'm glad you did argue for Dead of Winter and it has given me food for thought for my next play. That "thank you!" bit in my previous post was aimed at your last post (even though yes arguing something's quality because lots of people like it has literally been proven wrong). I'm going to probably get Dead of Winter played again tonight with a different group, and I'll see how we like it.
The best part of Betrayal is that anything can happen, which incidentally is the worst part of Betrayal.
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
As a generally pro-Betrayal guy, I recommend generating a new Haunt if you've played the one that emerges or it looks like it sucks. Fastest solution is usually to flip rooms 'til you find the next Omen one and consult the chart again.
This is a good description of the game. I'll tack on my thoughts after having played it a few times. It's been a universal hit so far, and I've played it with a number of different groups.
I'm hardly an expert on this game and there might be long term issues that crop up the more we play. My group has been enjoying it more than BSG because it's faster and we've enjoyed the emergent stories that come out of it more.
I do not agree with this post!
Saying a game is badly designed is something we are allowed to do in this thread, even about popular games. Trynant gave plenty of reasons beyond "my group didn't like it" that he thought the game was badly designed.
Star realms expansions coming in December.
"Coming in December: CRISIS expansion for Star Realms! This 48-card expansion comes in four NON-RANDOM 12-card packs. Events introduces game-changing event cards. Heroes adds character cards to the game. Bases & Battleships and Fleets & Fortresses are two collections of powerful new ships and bases."
I've ... never actually heard anyone say that. It's always been forty-kay to me.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
And I bet it'll still be a massive ball-ache to track down in the UK.
We came back to my house and played some Love Letter, a game of Vineta, two quick games of Avalon, and two games of Skulls.
We all really liked Love Letter, which is good. My group is pretty heavily against any kind of player elimination, but you are back in so fast that it didn't seem to bother anyone. We could have played more but we were leaving some people out by playing a max 4-player game so we pulled out Vineta.
Vineta is a game I don't really hear much about, we played it for the first time at PAXE two years ago or so on a whim, and really liked it. Basically everyone is a Norse God and you are sinking an island. The island is made out of different districts, and has many colored houses on it. Each player is secretly trying to save a color and a district. You also get points for houses on districts that you sink. The district saving goal is really tough, since only one survives till the end. Mainly we try to grab houses of our color and/or get your houses onto the last district to survive. On your turn you play one card, but everyone selects their card at the same time, and then you play it so you may have to settle for doing something other than what you originally intended. The cards are either flood cards or action cards which mostly move houses around but can also block house movement in one district, lengthen, or shorten the round by one hand. It has all the hallmarks of a great game for me, easy to learn, quick to play, and fun.
I'm not sure if we were playing Avalon wrong, but the games were done in a few minutes. 2 good people on team, pass, same people, pass, last good person on team, pass. evil loses. Second game, 1 evil person on a team and one good, pass, rest of the teams had only good people on them so obviously game completed. We didn't play with the special characters.
Skulls is a coaster based bluffing game similar to Liar's Dice (Maybe. The only thing I actually know about Liar's Dice is that it was in one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies). You have four coasters, one with a skull and three with a rose. Everyone puts one coaster facedown and then the first player either bids on how many roses he can flip on the table or puts a coaster down on top of the original. The trick is that you have to flip all of your own before you can flip another persons, and if you flip a skull you lose a coaster. You can still bid while you have a skull down to try and bluff someone. Fun game that you can probably play with 3 red playing cards and a black playing card or the reverse.
I have some sacred cows of my own (CitOW, TI3, Cyclades, etc) but if someone wants to call them badly designed in good faith then we still coo' yo. They're wrong, but they're not a goose.
hAmmONd IsnT A mAin TAnk
I second this. I adamantly suggest never playing that game with 5, especially with people you want to show the game off to. It can end up fun with five, but you're likely to have a lot of games decided by sheer good or bad luck blind picking teams. There isn't a lot of meaningful discussion or lying available when the three person team passes the second mission.
The table can mitigate this by playing quick rouns like it's Love Letter. As long as each round is reasonably quick (but not cutting out some table talk) then everyone can get over the occasional botched game as they cruise into the next one.
Also, Oberon. He makes 5 player games wacky.
hAmmONd IsnT A mAin TAnk
Also jegus my second wave of Rivet Wars stuff came today. That... is a lot of stuff.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Also played Caverna for the first time yesterday, I am pretty much in love. Kind of just feels like Agricola: Bigger and Better edition to me. Only possible concern is the lack of variability in game set up but maybe they will put out an expansion or something down the line that gives you the option for setting up the buildings randomly. Still, I think it would take a lot of plays for the lack of variability to grate anyway.
And lastly, a question. I have been playing and learning Twilight Struggle with my brother and a friend. So far, in none of our games has anyone even attempted a realignment roll. When is doing so a good idea? Given that it is one of the three ways to spend operations cards I imagine that there is some use to it, even if I am just not seeing it as a new player.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
I've not used re-alignment rolls much either, but I'm not a particularly strong player. One nice thing about them is you get one roll per ops point, and can spend those rolls in different countries. Don't use them in places where you have influence and it's baically risk free (apart from opportunity cost). Also, they don't lower defcon, so they're a way of attacking battlegrounds without blowing up the world.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
the way everything feeds into the final battles looks really neat.
Is it still the best co-operative "panic" like game, or has it been surpassed by newer games like Escape and Space Cadets?
I ask because I plan to visit the FLGS on Saturday and spend a good amount of my birthday money on a few games. And they have a cheap copy of Space Alert in stock, but I currently have so many games on my wishlist that I have no idea which ones to get first.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
...I think I actually like it better than Space Alert. I mean, things can still go really bad fast, but you generally know what you're doing when you actually make your moves since the other players (read: your accountant) actually might have a chance to help fact-check your moves.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Asgard is cool because like the other What's Your Game? published titles, it only lasts 5 turns. Five excruciatingly brain-burning turns, but still the ratio of heavy-euro to speed-of-play is nice here. The cool mechanics to me are the couple of steps you take before executing actions. First players must reveal which Norse god they will interact with (giving them various actions), then place their workers round robin, THEN execute those worker actions. This leads to a lot of build up of "what will he do if's he's there?" type-stuff. Good game; I wish I could bring it it to the table more often. Unfortunately a good bit of other heavy-euros compete for the same space
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
I'm really happy you're playing ASL; I've found it to be a challenge to really get to the table just because of its playtime (2-3 hours on scenarios if you're quick'ish) and its, well, Jenga moments. Also I'm in the process of clipping the edges of all the ASL pieces in my collection. Still. So many boxes
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
Yeah, I picked it up on sale as well. If you get a group around it, please give a report. It looks neat, but if it's not worth keeping, I can probably sell/trade it at BGG Con by November.
There is NO way to directly compare Escape with Space Alert, even though they both have timers. In Space Alert, you have to juggle a million things and coordinate everyone's actions. In Escape, the rolling of the dice is nearly the whole game, so it's more of a timed dexterity puzzle than anything else. I really like Escape, and I think it's a game that most people can play and enjoy, but Space Alert is the game that will leave you with epic stories.
Space Cadets... hm. It's still more like Escape than Space Alert. Most people are still just doing their own thing as fast as they can.
If you like Space Alert, I seriously doubt that those other games will satisfy.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
It's all very clever and puzzle-y and very much a well-designed game. But it doesn't feel particularly interesting to play. Which isn't the same as saying it's boring. There are interesting decisions to make, options to consider. And strategy-wise there's enough going on to keep you engaged as you try to keep up with the other players scoring points in one way or another.
But what it all comes down to is that you are just moving a bunch of coloured meeples around the board, and removing others. That is literally 80% of what you do. And all the pretty colours can't really hide the fact, that you're practically playing an abstract game with coloured meeples.
Playing it I was actually reminded of Kingdom Builder. Although there, the minimalism of actions really kills any enjoyment I might have pursuing any strategy. Kingdom Builder just feels so mind-numbingly dull, when all you do is place houses on a coloured space that is randomly determined for you. Five Tribes is far more interesting in that regard. But it still doesn't feel particularly substantial somehow. I recognize the competent design work and tactical/strategic scope it offers, yet afterwards I didn't really feel... satisfied, I guess.
I think it's a good game. Just oddly unfulfilling.
Good luck!
I am still doing SK stuff but I am having a blast. Just got Decision at Elst because all the other SK stuff is out of print and I am slowly digesting all the new rules. Really, really excited to try one of those multiple day campaign games.
I am really lucky that the friend I play ASL with is also my roommate so we just have a coffee table set up with a game of ASL on it and take turns here and there throughout the day when we find the time and inclination.