As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Board Games] - Running all your nets and winging all your exes

12467108

Posts

  • blahmcblahblahmcblah You pick your side and you stick - you don't cut and run when things get ugly. Registered User regular
    I wouldn't call Mage Knight a mashup. It's like Core Worlds in that the deckbuilding aspect just supports the dungeon crawl. You really don't add a ton of cards to your deck in each game, nor do you go through your deck that many times (maybe - and at most - once per round of play; games typically go 5 or 6 rounds). Also, adding new cards to your deck is almost always a good thing, but leveling up and gaining new skills/extra unit command slots/better stats can be just as or more important.

  • blahmcblahblahmcblah You pick your side and you stick - you don't cut and run when things get ugly. Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    cpugeek:

    I love both Mage Knight and Castles of Burgundy for very different reasons.

    I'm an admitted Vlaada fanboy, and Feld is very hit or miss for me. CoB and Notre Dame are great, but I might die happy if I never have to play Macao or Trajan again.

    blahmcblah on
  • jergarmarjergarmar hollow man crew goes pew pew pewRegistered User regular
    Namrok wrote: »
    jergarmar wrote: »
    Namrok wrote: »
    Trying to read the rules for Mage Knight taught me this. I don't think I like games that are mashups. I don't like games that are "Deck building plus dungeon crawling and worker placement!" or "Role selection with area control and card battles!" or other nonsense. I like games that do role selection, and do it better than any other game. I like games that do deck building, and have polished it, and only it, to a blinding shine.

    I have a few games that combine two mechanics that I enjoy. But mostly because they have a primary mechanic, and an auxiliary mechanic. Core Worlds has deck building, but it plays second fiddle to the tableau building. After all, you only cycle your deck 3 or 4 times tops. But I don't have a single game that attempts to combine three. It just seems too much like throwing shit together for the sake of it, and frequently the multiple systems buck against each other like a poorly maintained machine. I swear sometimes I even hear gears grinding in my head when I try to play those games.

    Then again, I also own and enjoy Runewars so maybe I'm a huge hypocrite.

    I read this, and at first I really resonated with it. I prefer games that are more "stripped down" like El Grande and Dominion. But then, even C&C:A has a huge amount of hand management AND unit placement AND dice rolling. And what about games like Steam? Even if you play by the basic rules (i.e. no auctions), you have an economic system for income, plus tile placement in the the buying and building of tracks, and goods delivery. Maybe you don't like Eclipse, but it does a whole bunch of things; it certainly seems to be a stretch to say that it's primarily a worker placement game.

    So what IS a "mashup" game, anyway? There are some games that more-or-less deliberately have a whole RANGE of unrelated mechanics. One good example is Tribune, where you have a pile of mini-mechanics to get cards, like worker placement and blind bidding and drafting, that don't necessarily interrelate in any meaningful way. Is that the idea?

    All good points. I guess what rubs me the wrong way is games that feel too much like separate games wrapped together in duct tape. Obviously a lot of games have to combine multiple mechanics. But some games do that better than others, usually be placing certain mechanics subordinate to others. For example, I would say Tribune is primarily a worker placement game. All the other mechanics are subordinate to that, and facilitate it. But that could just be my read on the game.

    Ha! It's funny you say that, because I almost added, "Certainly we can agree that Tribune is primarily a set-collection game".

    But yeah, I certainly like games that integrate mechanics well, like Steam or C&C:A (and Eclipse, though some people disagree). In fact, one of my complaints of Power Grid is that the resource market is a fun mechanic, but the refilling of it (that is, the adding of different fixed quantities of different resources based on # of players) feels very artificial and arbitrary. In other words, it follows rules that have nothing to do with the rest of the game, making it (in my mind) a poorly-integrated mechanic.

    When I was a child, I had a fever...
    jswidget.php?username=jergarmar&numitems=7&text=none&images=small&show=hot10&imagesonly=1&imagepos=right&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
    My BoardGameGeek profile
    Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    Almost backwards to that, I love the bidding portion of Cyclades, but the game beyond that is rather mundane to me. Would love to see something similar created.

  • tzeentchlingtzeentchling Doctor of Rocks OaklandRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Game night last night! Played a local designer's Time Travel game, which is apparently soon to be published. Also played a 5-player Puerto Rico. Given I hadn't played it in years and I was teaching it to 3 of the other 5 players, it went surprisingly well, and everyone enjoyed it. Not knowing the strategy is nice in these cases.

    Finished off the night with a few rounds of We Haven't Playtested This At All. It's an excellent starter/finisher game. Very reminiscent of Fluxx, but much faster and games end quickly. For instance, in our first game, 4 out of the 6 players lost in rapid succession thanks to the "You" card - anyone saying "you", "your", or "yours" immediately loses. Not a game you can take seriously at all, but good fun.

    tzeentchling on
  • admanbadmanb unionize your workplace Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Namrok wrote: »
    So Small World for iOS is on sale this weekend. Except I know they are doing Small World 2. I keep trying to figure out if Small World 2 is a free upgrade for Small World, or a different app entirely. The kickstarter campaign had this blurb about it...
    I already own Small World iPad, how can I get Small World 2?

    You're in luck. Not only did you only play $ 6.99 for the base game (the price on the app store will increase to $ 9.99 once Small World 2 ships), you will also automatically receive a free upgrade to Small World 2 for iPad, when it ships later this summer. Yes - you will be getting the 3-5 player maps, online gaming, retina support and much more all for free.
    Our newest digital expansion, Be Not Afraid, will be available as an in-app purchase. But you will not have to repurchase Cursed! and Grand Dames if you already own those; they will automatically transfer. And if you wish to receive our Kickstarter Backers digital Bonus Pack, pledge $ 8 at the Tritons level.

    Which sounds pretty conclusive, but on further examination seems vague somehow. Does anybody know anything at all about this?

    Seems clear to me that Small World 2 is going to be an upgraded version of the original that current owners will get for free.

  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    blahmcblah wrote: »
    Feld is very hit or miss for me. CoB and Notre Dame are great, but I might die happy if I never have to play Macao or Trajan again.

    Those are my exact feelings as well (minus never actually having played Trajan to form an opinion on it). In addition: Strasburg was ok, but The Year of the Dragon failed to grab me on my only play of it.

    nedhf8b6a4rj.jpgsig.gif
    AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
  • blahmcblahblahmcblah You pick your side and you stick - you don't cut and run when things get ugly. Registered User regular
    Huh, I somehow hadn't realized Strasbourg was one of Feld's. I weirdly enjoyed my one play of that. I liked managing the bidding cards, and I'm a huge sucker for secret agendas (pretty much the only thing I like about Gonzaga). I wasn't blown away enough to run out and buy it, but I'd definitely play it again. I like In the Year of the Dragon, but it is pretty dry and very brutal. There's something strangely enjoyable about introducing a game by saying something like, "A lot of terrible shit is going to happen to you. This game is mostly about mitigating disaster," and the group still enjoying it. I guess it takes a certain crowd to have fun with that. I'm also a sucker for drafting, clearly.

  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    blahmcblah wrote: »
    There's something strangely enjoyable about introducing a game by saying something like, "A lot of terrible shit is going to happen to you. This game is mostly about mitigating disaster," and the group still enjoying it.

    This is essentially the thinking behind all co-op games.

    nedhf8b6a4rj.jpgsig.gif
    AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
  • alqadimalqadim Registered User regular
    Random Question: Anyone Game in the Des Moines , IA area? If so where/when are the best places to get board games going?

  • NamrokNamrok Registered User regular
    So, holy crap is Summoner Wars great on iOS when every faction and reinforcement pack isn't stuck behind individual pay walls. 99 cents for everything basically turned it into a stupid nickel and diming scheme into an amazing fucking game. I wish it had just been $5 for everything all along, without even the option to buy factions and reinforcements individually.

  • FaranguFarangu I am a beardy man With a beardy planRegistered User regular
    alqadim wrote: »
    Random Question: Anyone Game in the Des Moines , IA area? If so where/when are the best places to get board games going?

    From what I've heard, probably the best bet around that area is Mayhem. I know they have a storefront in Ames, and I'm fairly certain they have something in Des Moines proper. Been a few years since I've lived in the area, though.

  • EndaroEndaro Registered User regular
    Hey Posh, I see that Yedo is now available for preorder through CoolStuffInc, did you ever get to play a copy? I remember you were looking in to it.

  • tzeentchlingtzeentchling Doctor of Rocks OaklandRegistered User regular
    If any X-Wing players here happen to be in the Bay Area, I know that D20 Games in Alameda has at least one A-Wing on their shelves. At least, they did when I was in there this afternoon. Thought I'd mention it since everyone seems to be complaining about their rarity.

  • nathanaelnathanael Registered User regular
    I was at my FLGS today, and found a copy of Seasons used. With the small trade-in credit I had, it only put me back $8. It was held together with a rubber band, so while I trusted that all the bits were inside, I didn't think they'd be in that great of shape.

    Got it home, popped the lid... brand new game. None of the cardboard pieces had been punched, none of the plastic bags had been opened. Essentially, the prior owner had removed the shrink-wrap and returned it. Amazing. I couldn't be happier. Now to play it...

    This my Gamertag— NathanaelPM
    This is my PSN ID— Radthanael
  • EndaroEndaro Registered User regular
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    Endaro wrote: »
    Hey Posh, I see that Yedo is now available for preorder through CoolStuffInc, did you ever get to play a copy? I remember you were looking in to it.

    Not yet, thanks. I bought Archipelago, King of Tokyo, and The Hobbit card game, so I am going to stop buying for a while....except for the Legendary expansions.

    It's on the list, though.

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    Namrok wrote: »
    So, holy crap is Summoner Wars great on iOS when every faction and reinforcement pack isn't stuck behind individual pay walls. 99 cents for everything basically turned it into a stupid nickel and diming scheme into an amazing fucking game. I wish it had just been $5 for everything all along, without even the option to buy factions and reinforcements individually.

    There was always the one with everything pack. I wasted 85 yen on one faction and then picked up that ages ago.

    I just wish I could play my favourite factions from the physical game.

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • poshnialloposhniallo Registered User regular
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    I haven't seen that review yet, but I can imagine agreeing with it a lot. I hate the LCG and CCG system, but those games both look great.

    I figure I could take a bear.
  • cpugeek13cpugeek13 Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Has anyone played Keyflower? I read a couple reviews of that yesterday, but don't know what to make of it. It looks fun, but it seems like it might fall into that trap of "games where you think you're doing well the whole time, but end up losing dramatically at the last minute." Also, how fiddly is it compared to something like Castles of Burgundy? Of all the euro games I've looked at lately, those two seem to peak my interest the most.

    cpugeek13 on
  • InkSplatInkSplat 100%ed Bad Rats. Registered User regular
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
  • NamrokNamrok Registered User regular
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    All that plus I really didn't appreciate the cheap snark he threw at the theming, or his percieved lack of it.

  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    The base mechanics of Netrunner are good enough to stand alone and make the base set worthwhile, and then some. From the asymmetric defense v offense roles to the bluffing mind games, the mechanics are slick and amazing. Plus the base set comes with 3 completely different runner styles and 4 sorta different corporation styles.

    Star Wars is fun, but I feel like I need expansions to make it as engaging as the base set of Netrunner.

    ObiFett on
  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Oh, and I got a "defective" (the tiles were a millimeter off center) copy of Mage Knight today for $50. I asked if they had a copy and their only one was in the back because a customer returned it. Nothing was open except for the tiles and it had all the pieces.

    Gonna read the rules and try to play a solo session tonight. Kind of excited.

    We'll see if I still feel that way after reading the rules.

    ObiFett on
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    I don't think that was quite his complaint from watching the review myself.

    It's basically that you are given too little information about the true state of your opponent and of your own future turns, each turn allows you to do too much (play to many cards, take too many actions, etc) and the game state swings too wildly and meaninglessly.

    The fact that you always draw back up to six cards and that you seem to have plenty of resources from even the very start seem to be the real culprit. It seems like any sort of narrative or logical flow goes right out the window and the game is just this crazy back and forth.

    The example he gave pretty much turned me off of ever being interested in the game, personally. Like, you can start a turn with strong military with your enemy having weak military. And in one turn your enemy can deploy a substantial force and wipe yours off the table without you being able to do anything about it, really. The only way to really have any idea what could be coming would be to memorize the cards in your opponent deck and card count and keep track of all the percentages and that just sounds miserable.

  • EndaroEndaro Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Namrok wrote: »
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    All that plus I really didn't appreciate the cheap snark he threw at the theming, or his percieved lack of it.

    Though I haven't played the game, I don't think it was out of line. I think he's got a point about a 35 year old IP that tends to get by simply on existing. Would the Star Wars LCG sell as well if it was stripped of the theme? I think the power of iconography is pretty evident in this hobby. When an A-Wing gets released for the Star Wars miniature game, there's a lot of excitement. Is that entirely due to an expectation of great new mechanics from that ship, or is it partly due to the fact that its iconic, its the A-wing.

    Speaking as someone who leans towards American style themed board games over European machines, I think what a lot of board game designers get wrong is the assumption they can simply rely upon theme to make a game cool. If it's not tied to the mechanics right, if it doesn't feel cool, it's worthless. I don't know if it's enough anymore to have a Luke Skywalker card that you get to play against a Stormtrooper card. I don't know if that's strong enough to ignore quirks like flipping sides on a Force counter or spinning Death Star countdown dials. I'm sure they work as great and necessary mechanics, but they do seem a bit silly as attempts to tie in theme. I think we can expect and demand more, both of themed games with better tied in mechanics and of orchestrated machines with exciting themes. I think you could even make the argument that the conceptual dichotomy of Ameritrash/Eurogame isn't even relevant anymore.

    Again, I haven't played the game so maybe it works great tying you in to the theme, but I can see his perspective.

    Endaro on
  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    I don't think that was quite his complaint from watching the review myself.

    It's basically that you are given too little information about the true state of your opponent and of your own future turns, each turn allows you to do too much (play to many cards, take too many actions, etc) and the game state swings too wildly and meaninglessly.

    The fact that you always draw back up to six cards and that you seem to have plenty of resources from even the very start seem to be the real culprit. It seems like any sort of narrative or logical flow goes right out the window and the game is just this crazy back and forth.

    The example he gave pretty much turned me off of ever being interested in the game, personally. Like, you can start a turn with strong military with your enemy having weak military. And in one turn your enemy can deploy a substantial force and wipe yours off the table without you being able to do anything about it, really. The only way to really have any idea what could be coming would be to memorize the cards in your opponent deck and card count and keep track of all the percentages and that just sounds miserable.

    This is patently false.

    That being said, I do think the mechanics are subpar and the theme is tacked on. It is still fun to play, though. But I am a huge Star Wars nerd, so I'm a bit biased.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    ObiFett wrote: »
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    I don't think that was quite his complaint from watching the review myself.

    It's basically that you are given too little information about the true state of your opponent and of your own future turns, each turn allows you to do too much (play to many cards, take too many actions, etc) and the game state swings too wildly and meaninglessly.

    The fact that you always draw back up to six cards and that you seem to have plenty of resources from even the very start seem to be the real culprit. It seems like any sort of narrative or logical flow goes right out the window and the game is just this crazy back and forth.

    The example he gave pretty much turned me off of ever being interested in the game, personally. Like, you can start a turn with strong military with your enemy having weak military. And in one turn your enemy can deploy a substantial force and wipe yours off the table without you being able to do anything about it, really. The only way to really have any idea what could be coming would be to memorize the cards in your opponent deck and card count and keep track of all the percentages and that just sounds miserable.

    This is patently false.

    That being said, I do think the mechanics are subpar and the theme is tacked on. It is still fun to play, though. But I am a huge Star Wars nerd, so I'm a bit biased.

    So, you are saying that the review lied then?

  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    ObiFett wrote: »
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    I don't think that was quite his complaint from watching the review myself.

    It's basically that you are given too little information about the true state of your opponent and of your own future turns, each turn allows you to do too much (play to many cards, take too many actions, etc) and the game state swings too wildly and meaninglessly.

    The fact that you always draw back up to six cards and that you seem to have plenty of resources from even the very start seem to be the real culprit. It seems like any sort of narrative or logical flow goes right out the window and the game is just this crazy back and forth.

    The example he gave pretty much turned me off of ever being interested in the game, personally. Like, you can start a turn with strong military with your enemy having weak military. And in one turn your enemy can deploy a substantial force and wipe yours off the table without you being able to do anything about it, really. The only way to really have any idea what could be coming would be to memorize the cards in your opponent deck and card count and keep track of all the percentages and that just sounds miserable.

    This is patently false.

    That being said, I do think the mechanics are subpar and the theme is tacked on. It is still fun to play, though. But I am a huge Star Wars nerd, so I'm a bit biased.

    So, you are saying that the review lied then?

    Well. At no point can you have a large military, the opponent lay down a huge military, and then wipe yours off the map without you being able to do anything about it, really. I mean, you choose if you want to defend. So if you walk your military into a situation where its gonna get killed, that's your own fault. Additionally, attack and defense with units goes back and forth one unit at a time, and each unit can only kill one other unit. So more than likely if you have 5 units start of turn, the opponent lays down so that he has 6 and then attacks, its doubtful he is gonna wipe your entire army off the table because you are gonna kill a couple of his before he can kill all of yours. ALSO, if he played a ton of units on his turn, then his hand is empty, he is gonna lose the edge battle and have no effects to play during the fight. Essentially meaning you are gonna go first, kill his units and play annoying effects that will more than likely even the battle out.

    The battle part of the game, while disconnected from the theme, is actually pretty fun, balanced, and well thought out.

    ObiFett on
  • EndaroEndaro Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    ObiFett wrote: »
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    InkSplat wrote: »
    Endaro wrote: »
    Shut Up and Sit Downs review of the Star Wars:LCG is worth posting, if only for the ending. Bit surprised by their/his opinion, I wonder how the final review of Netrunner will go. They've seemed to have pretty positive opinions of it in their podcasts, and I know Quinns has been buying up packs, but at the same time this review kinda felt like a negative review of the whole LCG system. Are the mechanics of any, even Netrunner, good enough to stand alone and make just the base set worthwhile? Or if it's all about the deck customiziation, wouldn't you be better off without just Netrunner if you have X other games in its place at the same cost?

    Having just watched it, I definitely don't agree with his conclusions, but my biggest issue is him attacking Star Wars for taking a few plays to really grasp, and talking about how not knowing the card pool makes it weaker, while praising Netrunner, which is twice as bad in both of those aspects.

    And Star Wars is definitely more entertaining when you don't understand it than Netrunner is. Netrunner just feels like a beating, whereas in Star Wars you at least get the thrill of constant new hands while getting to send Luke out to cut down a group of Stormtroopers.

    I don't think that was quite his complaint from watching the review myself.

    It's basically that you are given too little information about the true state of your opponent and of your own future turns, each turn allows you to do too much (play to many cards, take too many actions, etc) and the game state swings too wildly and meaninglessly.

    The fact that you always draw back up to six cards and that you seem to have plenty of resources from even the very start seem to be the real culprit. It seems like any sort of narrative or logical flow goes right out the window and the game is just this crazy back and forth.

    The example he gave pretty much turned me off of ever being interested in the game, personally. Like, you can start a turn with strong military with your enemy having weak military. And in one turn your enemy can deploy a substantial force and wipe yours off the table without you being able to do anything about it, really. The only way to really have any idea what could be coming would be to memorize the cards in your opponent deck and card count and keep track of all the percentages and that just sounds miserable.

    This is patently false.

    That being said, I do think the mechanics are subpar and the theme is tacked on. It is still fun to play, though. But I am a huge Star Wars nerd, so I'm a bit biased.

    Man, I would have saved a lot of time if I had just waited for ObiFett to say it better with a fraction of the words. I even went through the trouble of digging up this quote!
    "It's not the size of the box that matters, it's the ludographic intent and the degree to which the author actualizes this with an economy of rules that resonate with the theme!"

    Endaro on
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    Well I guess to be fair in the example given in the review the enemy wiped out your forces before the battle phase proper commenced.

    I will say that the battle phase sounds interesting, as you describe it. I would have liked to see the review get into it with a little more detail.

    That said, the game isn't my personal cup of tea. Being an LCG is enough to DQ it for myself, personally. Enough of the mechanics don't seem to be to my liking either. And unfortunately I have become rather soured on Star Wars stuff over the years.

  • ObiFettObiFett Use the Force As You WishRegistered User regular
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Well I guess to be fair in the example given in the review the enemy wiped out your forces before the battle phase proper commenced.

    I will say that the battle phase sounds interesting, as you describe it. I would have liked to see the review get into it with a little more detail.

    That said, the game isn't my personal cup of tea. Being an LCG is enough to DQ it for myself, personally. Enough of the mechanics don't seem to be to my liking either. And unfortunately I have become rather soured on Star Wars stuff over the years.

    I don't know of any way to blow up a decent defense force (2+ units) before the battle phase even commences. Huh.

    And yeah, I was really opposed to the game initially and it took like 6 months before I bought it. I like playing it because its Star Wars, but sadly will always try to get Netrunner to the table before it because the latter is just more fun, pure and simple.

  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    I think part of his example was hyperbole, but he does show a play that would result in 2-3 units being destroyed before the battle phase, on the notion that you had 4/5 units yourself. That means half your force was wiped out, and he won the edge battle (apparently) to kill another.

    Overall, I'm pretty okay with their conclusions. I guess I'm at least somewhat biased in this next part because I play Netrunner a lot, but I don't think the 'sussing out the game' they complain about is equal in Netrunner at all. Once you get the rules down, it tends to be interesting and meaningful out of the box, but the additional nature to this is that due to the different factions and identities, you automatically have some clues as to what your opponent's deck should be doing. This won't exactly happen in the first game, but that game will also probably last long enough for you to understand what the hell was going on (unlike all of my friends' first games to Star Wars, which were over in 3-5 turns and left them going, "Uh, okay ...").


    In other news, played Terra Mystica again last night. It's still wonderful, although I think I'm bad at it. More time will tell, naturally, but yeah ... <3

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    It's admittedly my first excursion into LCGs, but I really like the Star Wars LCG. I'm coming from a long-time Magic background, and getting that deckbuilding experience without having to buy into a new set at $100 or so every couple of months is great.

    And I love the edge battle mechanic. I also think the dial vs 3 objectives works really well in play, even if it seems wildly unfair on paper.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    nathanael wrote: »
    I was at my FLGS today, and found a copy of Seasons used. With the small trade-in credit I had, it only put me back $8. It was held together with a rubber band, so while I trusted that all the bits were inside, I didn't think they'd be in that great of shape.

    Got it home, popped the lid... brand new game. None of the cardboard pieces had been punched, none of the plastic bags had been opened. Essentially, the prior owner had removed the shrink-wrap and returned it. Amazing. I couldn't be happier. Now to play it...

    Not a huge fan of Seasons (only played twice, both with recommended starter decks), but it's not actively offensive and I'd definitely pick it up if it ran me under $10.

    nedhf8b6a4rj.jpgsig.gif
    AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
  • cpugeek13cpugeek13 Registered User regular
    Man, why is buying board games so hard? There are so many great games out there, but I can never seem to decide which one to buy next. With my gf buying me a board game next month, I have an opportunity to pick up something thats outside of my normal price range (she insists), but that has just made it even harder. Luckily, playing games with her these past months has given me a better idea of what she likes. So heres what I'm thinking-- she likes thematic games (she yawned when I showed her the Felds I was looking at), especially science fiction games. Both of us really want to get BSG, but we're afraid that our friends won't enjoy it nearly as much as we do. Here are the games that are topping my maybe list so far:

    Star Wars minis (a starter, plus an x-wing, y-wing, tie figher, and tie advance; plus maybe another starter set that I buy myself)
    Galaxy Trucker Anniversary (looks great, but I've heard that its kind of gimmicky, also heard the two player isn't the best)
    Keyflower (a fairly thematic euro that she said "looked cute")
    Tzolkin (gears! crystal skulls! corn!)

    What do you guys think?

  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    If you think you'd like X-Wing, there's a good chance that's a fine investment for the two of you.
    Galaxy Trucker is pretty good, and I suppose it gets better with 3-4, but I didn't find it terrible with 2.

    No idea about the other two games, but Space Alert came to mind (playable with 2, although probably not amazing), as well as maybe Core Worlds. Of course, I'm biased towards the latter, so ...

  • cpugeek13cpugeek13 Registered User regular
    Just finished watching Rahdo's walkthrough of Myrmes. Add another sexy thematic euro to the list. :-)

  • nathanaelnathanael Registered User regular
    cpugeek13 wrote: »
    Man, why is buying board games so hard? There are so many great games out there, but I can never seem to decide which one to buy next. With my gf buying me a board game next month, I have an opportunity to pick up something thats outside of my normal price range (she insists), but that has just made it even harder. Luckily, playing games with her these past months has given me a better idea of what she likes. So heres what I'm thinking-- she likes thematic games (she yawned when I showed her the Felds I was looking at), especially science fiction games. Both of us really want to get BSG, but we're afraid that our friends won't enjoy it nearly as much as we do. Here are the games that are topping my maybe list so far:

    Star Wars minis (a starter, plus an x-wing, y-wing, tie figher, and tie advance; plus maybe another starter set that I buy myself)
    Galaxy Trucker Anniversary (looks great, but I've heard that its kind of gimmicky, also heard the two player isn't the best)
    Keyflower (a fairly thematic euro that she said "looked cute")
    Tzolkin (gears! crystal skulls! corn!)

    What do you guys think?

    Just picked up Tzolk'in myself, and it's beautiful and fun and joyous and fiddly in all the best ways. But it's also worker placement, and everything is wooden cubes. If that kind of thing turns her off, you may be better off with Galaxy Trucker or Star Wars.

    This my Gamertag— NathanaelPM
    This is my PSN ID— Radthanael
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    Denizens of the Board Game Thread, I have two questions;

    1. Has anyone played Tokaido yet? I saw that in the store today and damn near bought it on the spot because the theme is really novel and the art is amazing. I would like to get some input from people who have actually played it, though.

    2. I need a recommendation for my first big, complex timesink game. I've padded out my lineup of 30 min - 1 hour games, and I'm looking for something more involved. Probably civ building, but anything could fit the bill if it was big and engaging enough. Suggestions?

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
This discussion has been closed.