[Board Games] THIS THREAD IS DEAD! POST IN THE NEW ONE!

1457910100

Posts

  • ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    Vyolynce wrote: »
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    February spoilers
    Blue was eradicated twice? Or just March? I ask because you have two upgrades on it, but iirc you can only give it one per month you eradicate it.

    Did you mention which is CoDA? Black or yellow?

    Good to see things went better for you.
    You get two end-of-game upgrades per session. They can both be virus mutations if you eradicate something on that play.
    If you've eradicated a disease during this game, you may give that disease a positive mutation to make it easier to find a cure in future games. Put the positive mutation sticker on the disease tracking area of the board.

    The rule says "a" but that means "one mutation per upgrade". You can choose the same upgrade twice. Stacking up mutations is incredibly handy and pretty much always the option my group went with if we qualified for it.

    Yup, I stand corrected. We thought it was the other.

    mHn29NG.png
    Custom Special
  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    So. This is the big week. Any hotness to keep an eye out for? That climbers game looks fun.

    Official member of the Grilling Gentry
    "Brevity is the soul of getting your shit read." - Tube
    Rarely-updated Collecting blog
    He/Him
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Interesting, usually after a handful of turns in we have multiple people shooting out for 2-3 victory conditions in a single turn, and when you throw in the Brenn wins on ties, well, essentially someone is winning that turn, and it's up to you to make sure that person is you. As the game goes on it just becomes easier and easier to hit multiple conditions. The board just gets bigger, more densely packed with objectives, and people start amassing deeds to be able to rapidly swap goals or achieve multiple goals more easily.

    Our group passes and thinks about our turns. I mean, it's a bit rude to imply that my play group apparently doesn't think about things? But, passing is the quickest turn of all, after all, so that hardly slows down gameplay. And if people pass too aggressively you can get some hilarious turns where you get 1-2 free actions to everyone else's 0 or 1.

    man you asked, twice

    Obviously it's relative and your play experience is different from mine is different from AhPook's. Maybe what feels snappy to you is what feels slow to us, and we were so much worse at the game than you that our first few games were super ultra snappy. Could be! What I meant to convey is that some games of Inis have been way snappier than others in my group and more passing and more calculation seemed to play a part in that.

    sig.gif
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Anybody in the thread played Dice Forge? I was eyeing the box at the FLGS but I'm always a bit hesitant on games that have some kind of mechanical gimmick at their center. I was also somewhat concerned about how well said mechanic would actually work in practice. Modular dice seem like they'd be pretty iffy in terms of actually rolling.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
  • Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    Anybody in the thread played Dice Forge? I was eyeing the box at the FLGS but I'm always a bit hesitant on games that have some kind of mechanical gimmick at their center. I was also somewhat concerned about how well said mechanic would actually work in practice. Modular dice seem like they'd be pretty iffy in terms of actually rolling.

    I've heard nothing but good things but I admittedly wasn't looking hard. Plus it's Asmodee and I don't like giving them money.

  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    Magic Pink wrote: »
    Anybody in the thread played Dice Forge? I was eyeing the box at the FLGS but I'm always a bit hesitant on games that have some kind of mechanical gimmick at their center. I was also somewhat concerned about how well said mechanic would actually work in practice. Modular dice seem like they'd be pretty iffy in terms of actually rolling.

    I've heard nothing but good things but I admittedly wasn't looking hard. Plus it's Asmodee and I don't like giving them money.

    Its a Dice Builder rather than a Deck builder.

    You roll two customizable dice, and earn what you roll on every turn, so players are rolling and earning a lot. Players dump their gold into buying new die faces early, then work their way to the middle of the board to spend Sun and Moon Shards on augments to their character sheet, passives, and cards that give you points or mess with your opponents.

    The game is not complex, but its up to you to mix in some of the advanced cards to make things more interesting. Its a simple game but I enjoy it.

    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
  • PMAversPMAvers Registered User regular
    Dice Forge also has one of the best trays I've seen in ages. I do appreciate if you put it away correctly, you're almost set up for the next game.

    persona4celestia.jpg
    COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
  • MrBodyMrBody Registered User regular
    I think Eclipse is straight up a bad game. It's built to encourage non-interaction, and to make it exceptionally difficult to force interaction, and so the victory almost always seems to boil down to simple tile draws. We played it a dozen times and the person with the best tile draws almost always won. It might have been literally every time. If an isolationist species got good tiles and was able to close themselves off, it was essentially pointless. It's a bad engine builder with a thin veneer of theme.

    I think TI is far, far too long and bloated, but it had more worthwhile decision making, at least. Though I still feel that BOTH are games that are, in many plays, basically fake. They make you feel like you're making relevant decisions but the real machinery that determines victory is either random or unknowable and largely unguessable hidden information.

    Yup. I maintain that the main thing holding TI back were those dumb secret objectives. Even putting aside how wildly imbalanced they are, they were dumb pointless things. There's no reason that all the VP couldn't come from public objectives alone. Secret objectives didn't add "intrigue" and "mystery", just hidden arbitrary crap that suddenly catapulted someone into the lead. The one thing that should not be hidden in a strategy game is the win condition. It's the difference between a standard victory in Battlestar Galactica (Cylons win if humans lose) and those dumb Cylon leader agendas (Cylon leader wins if humans win with less than 4 food, 4 morale, and 2 locations damaged).

    Imagine if Chess replaced the checkmate the king win condition with dozens of arbitrary conditions like "get 4 pawns to the other half of the board" or "capture both enemy rooks without losing any of your bishops", and you never knew which one your opponent had every match.

  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    Re: Eclipse being a turtle-fest. Not in my experience. The way Eclipse hands out vp for fights nicely incentivises everyone to do some fighting and to get it in sooner rather than later. The way the economy works, turtling off is a very limited deal as a large empire of poor outer rim hexes is going to paralyse itself with upkeep costs and completely stall out.

    My main memories are of three player games where the winner and loser of the big last turn battles come first and third while billy Switzerland who stayed out of it comes a dull second.

    MhCw7nZ.gif
    JustTeeHedgethornFishman
  • tzeentchlingtzeentchling Doctor of Rocks San DiegoRegistered User regular
    Re: Eclipse being a turtle-fest. Not in my experience. The way Eclipse hands out vp for fights nicely incentivises everyone to do some fighting and to get it in sooner rather than later. The way the economy works, turtling off is a very limited deal as a large empire of poor outer rim hexes is going to paralyse itself with upkeep costs and completely stall out.

    My main memories are of three player games where the winner and loser of the big last turn battles come first and third while billy Switzerland who stayed out of it comes a dull second.

    This has also been my experience, with just a few exceptions. If someone is playing Planta, for instance, and the other players don't act aggressively enough to make them spend at least some of their time and resources protecting themselves, then they're very easily going to run away with the game just by exploring and colonizing. Eclipse is definitely a game where a player with experience can easily take advantage of a newer player or two.

  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    Dice Forge is fun! The dice faces are plastic, so they stay on very snugly (it looks like they borrowed ideas from Lego's dice construction). It took me a bit to realize there are a few ways to pry off the sides - eventually I just got out my multitool.

    But.. yeah. Very fun, cool engine builds, and lots of customizability in how you set up the board. You'll need a decent amount of space, though.

    Official member of the Grilling Gentry
    "Brevity is the soul of getting your shit read." - Tube
    Rarely-updated Collecting blog
    He/Him
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    Eclipse:

    They do recommend humans only in the game for first time players, but yup, the the race with bonuses for expansion but penalties for combat pretty much needs aggressive containment by design.

    Man, now I want to play Eclipse real bad. It's been aaaages.

    MhCw7nZ.gif
    JustTee
  • OatsOats Registered User regular
    ArcSyn wrote: »
    February spoilers
    Blue was eradicated twice? Or just March? I ask because you have two upgrades on it, but iirc you can only give it one per month you eradicate it.

    Did you mention which is CoDA? Black or yellow?

    Good to see things went better for you.

    More Pandemic Legacy February Talk
    CoDA is black.

    We've eradicated red three times, and I think blue twice but I'm not sure. Yellow has never been eradicated.

    Blue is named Mushy Peas, representing the scourge of English cuisine.
    Red is Glitter!, with the bang being not optional.

    Our total upgrades so far, from memory are:

    Medic upgraded with: 1/turn treat an adjacent city as an action (SO GOOD)
    Scientist upgraded with: +1 hand size
    Red has upgrades 1-3, so it can be cured in the field, for no action cost, with one card fewer (turn 1 cure on the scientist is a definite possibility)
    Blue has upgrades 1-2, so cured in the field for no actions
    Unfunded event on a red card (one at level 2 panic I think), discard up to 3 city cards to remove a disease cube of the same colour for each

    ArcSynCantide
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    MrBody wrote: »
    I think Eclipse is straight up a bad game. It's built to encourage non-interaction, and to make it exceptionally difficult to force interaction, and so the victory almost always seems to boil down to simple tile draws. We played it a dozen times and the person with the best tile draws almost always won. It might have been literally every time. If an isolationist species got good tiles and was able to close themselves off, it was essentially pointless. It's a bad engine builder with a thin veneer of theme.

    I think TI is far, far too long and bloated, but it had more worthwhile decision making, at least. Though I still feel that BOTH are games that are, in many plays, basically fake. They make you feel like you're making relevant decisions but the real machinery that determines victory is either random or unknowable and largely unguessable hidden information.

    Yup. I maintain that the main thing holding TI back were those dumb secret objectives. Even putting aside how wildly imbalanced they are, they were dumb pointless things. There's no reason that all the VP couldn't come from public objectives alone. Secret objectives didn't add "intrigue" and "mystery", just hidden arbitrary crap that suddenly catapulted someone into the lead. The one thing that should not be hidden in a strategy game is the win condition. It's the difference between a standard victory in Battlestar Galactica (Cylons win if humans lose) and those dumb Cylon leader agendas (Cylon leader wins if humans win with less than 4 food, 4 morale, and 2 locations damaged).

    Imagine if Chess replaced the checkmate the king win condition with dozens of arbitrary conditions like "get 4 pawns to the other half of the board" or "capture both enemy rooks without losing any of your bishops", and you never knew which one your opponent had every match.

    I disagree. TI strategy is basically a straight line deal--you go for a certain kind of play and then 9 hours later you get to see if it worked. If everybody knew everybody else's motivations those 9 hours would be very different and probably a lot less interesting.

    Also part of the game is figuring out your opponent's goals from their behavior (or convincing them to show you through diplomacy/scheming). The aspects of the game that go beyond the mechanics of econ and combat are greatly emhanced by hidden goals.

    ACsTqqK.jpg
    KetarMojo_Jojo
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo Like a bad lobster in a dark cellar Registered User regular
    Yeah the secret objectives are essential in TI3 to give diversity on what people are doing. It's similar to why the public objective modes that slowly deal them are better than the one that lays them all out to start, it makes a dynamic game as things shift and adds an element of trying to bluff and reason what your opponents are going for

    The lack of balance is an issue but the "deal two, only ever claim one" thing is a fairly simple solution. If you want to go fancier out all the metacol rex cards in one deck (diluted with some others) and the rest in another and deal one of each to ensure 0-1 metacol rex objectives each

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • PMAversPMAvers Registered User regular
    Huh, weird. FFG's got a new Civilization game coming.

    persona4celestia.jpg
    COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
    Elvenshae
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    They must have decided this is their year to publish games which will mostly get purchased but never played to completion by their customers.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
    ArcSynCantido
  • DarricDarric Santa MonicaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2017
    PMAvers wrote: »
    Huh, weird. FFG's got a new Civilization game coming.

    Most importantly (for me) their store lists 1-2 hours versus the original's 2-4 hours. I've never actually played the original, but I'm way down for a Civilization board game that plays in under 2 hours.

    Darric on
    CantidoElvenshaediscrider
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo Like a bad lobster in a dark cellar Registered User regular
    PMAvers wrote: »
    Huh, weird. FFG's got a new Civilization game coming.

    The old civilisation game is one of my biggest boardgame purchasing regrets

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    9 hours.

    I don't think there's any board game I want to play for nine hours straight.

    I feel like that kind of long term experience is best done in the form of campaigns, with multiple shorter games with persistent or partially persistent board states.

    Evil Multifarious on
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
    BedlamCptHamiltonElvenshaeMaguano
  • VyolynceVyolynce Registered User regular
    9 hours.

    I don't think there's any board game I want to play for nine hours straight.

    I feel like that kind of long term experience is best done in the form of campaigns, with multiple shorter games with persistent or partially persistent board states.

    Yeah I think I have a hard limit of 4 (mostly just Android) and even that demands serious planning in advance.

    Auralynx
  • LykouraghLykouragh Registered User regular
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

  • Magic PinkMagic Pink Tur-Boner-Fed Registered User regular
    It was Descent 2nd since I had so much and never used it but it's swiftly becoming Cthulhu Wars. I'm very disappointed I gave those assholes money.

    MYTH is pretty high on that list too.

  • ChiselphaneChiselphane Registered User regular
    7th Continent showed up 2 days early!

    Man, when they said miniatures they weren't kidding, I think these are the smallest I've seen. Not a complaint, just surprised. One thing I'm immediately impressed with is that the rulebook isn't glossy. I can actually read it at the table without glare, wonder of wonders.

    Magic Pink
  • MrBodyMrBody Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    Zombicide. All that wasted $$$$ and giant box I don't have room for.


    (holy shit TI4 is going to be $150!!)

    MrBody on
  • CaptainPeacockCaptainPeacock Board Game Hoarder Top o' the LakeRegistered User regular
    CSI just listed First Martians preorder for half of what it's going for on Amazon.

    Cluck cluck, gibber gibber, my old man's a mushroom, etc.
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    MrBody wrote: »
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    Zombicide. All that wasted $$$$ and giant box I don't have room for.

    Dark Souls. The kickstarter is the reason I ended up in this thread. This thing breaks my heart.

    Unknown is up there. Its an RNG shitshow.

    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
  • BedlamBedlam Registered User regular
    Dungeon Roll From the kickstarter description I thought it would be more strategic.



    CptHamilton
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    I don't think I regret any of the big-game purchases I've made which I never get to play. Descent 2E, Zombicide, or TI 3E may never make it to the table but the one or two times I've gotten to play them I enjoyed them and I'm okay with supporting the companies who make them.

    Game purchases I've legit regretted most are Fearsome Floors and Killer Bunnies. Neither were expensive but in both cases I played the game once and immediately knew I was never going to willingly play those games again and hadn't even gotten a single game's worth of enjoyment from them because they were fucking awful games.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
  • FairchildFairchild Rabbit used short words that were easy to understand, like "Hello Pooh, how about Lunch ?" Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    In terms of games which I did not purchase when I had the chance ? Many of SPI's titles from the late 70's/early 80's-- Empires of the Middle Ages, Bloody April, Highway to the Reich. I've acquired some of them over the years, but those three remain elusive.

    In terms of biggest boardgame disappointment ? That's a tough one, there are very few games which I don't appreciate in one form or another.

    Fairchild on
  • admanbadmanb unionize your workplace Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    I don't think I have one big regret. Technically my biggest waste of money was the Catacombs Kickstarter, as while we played a bunch of the original Catacombs we've never actually played the KS version. I don't regret it, yet. It could also be the five boxes of Command and Colors: Ancients that I have played nowhere near enough of, but I love it.

    Realistically my biggest regret are all the wargames I've bought. Paths of Glory, Tunisia, April's Harvest, Fire in the Sky, Great Battles of Alexander, Here Come the Rebels, Stonewall's Last Battle, Roads to Leningrad... I have maybe half a dozen plays of all of those combined and some show no sign of ever making it to the table.

    Also Rex. Rex sucks.

  • KetarKetar Come on upstairs we're having a partyRegistered User regular
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    Betrayal at House on the Hill

    Loads of fun as long as you luck into a good scenario, with a good group, and only play occasionally.

    Then I bought it, my group ran it into the ground wanting to play again and again, and we had two really awful haunts with one mediocre one in between. Now whenever someone suggests it my entire body shudders the same way it does when faced with drinking tequila.

    mysticjuicerantherem
  • ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    Hm, that's a tough question.

    I could say Fief: France 1492, simply because it's such a rare play and I dropped over $100 on it. But I do enjoy playing it. So it's probably my worst in regards to the amount I spent compared to play time.

    The other I would say perhaps is Formula D because it seems like no one really ever enjoys playing it when I bring it out. Not sure how to make it more interesting for others so it gets played more often.

    Every other game was either cheap enough that play time has "balanced" out to make them worth it, or at least they were enjoyed when they are played, even if not favorites.

    mHn29NG.png
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    Game of Thrones, probably. What a waste of potential.

  • ChiselphaneChiselphane Registered User regular
    Lykouragh wrote: »
    There's a fun topic, what is everyone's biggest boardgame purchasing regret?

    I'm going to go for the unpopular opinion of Dominant Species, which I really just don't enjoy.

    Descent 2nd Edition, I just hadn't done enough research and assumed it was going to be something other than what it is.

  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo Like a bad lobster in a dark cellar Registered User regular
    9 hours.

    I don't think there's any board game I want to play for nine hours straight.

    I feel like that kind of long term experience is best done in the form of campaigns, with multiple shorter games with persistent or partially persistent board states.

    9 hours is a full 6 player with brand new players. It's the extreme upper end of times

    Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
  • PMAversPMAvers Registered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Biggest regret? Probably those single Yomi decks I picked up when the game first came out.

    Boy did I not like that game. And they were vastly over-priced poker decks.

    PMAvers on
    persona4celestia.jpg
    COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
  • AuralynxAuralynx Darkness is a perspective Watching the ego workRegistered User regular
    edited August 2017
    Exalted: Legacy of the Unconquered Sun. By a wide margin, with the caveats being that it was at least memorably difficult to figure out what was going on and I think the central mechanic of allocating variable amounts of time to actions is a clever idea I haven't seen elsewhere.

    E: Kind of in Tokaido come to think of it, but it's a pretty different take on a similar idea.

    Auralynx on
    kshu0oba7xnr.png

  • MrBodyMrBody Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    MrBody wrote: »
    I think Eclipse is straight up a bad game. It's built to encourage non-interaction, and to make it exceptionally difficult to force interaction, and so the victory almost always seems to boil down to simple tile draws. We played it a dozen times and the person with the best tile draws almost always won. It might have been literally every time. If an isolationist species got good tiles and was able to close themselves off, it was essentially pointless. It's a bad engine builder with a thin veneer of theme.

    I think TI is far, far too long and bloated, but it had more worthwhile decision making, at least. Though I still feel that BOTH are games that are, in many plays, basically fake. They make you feel like you're making relevant decisions but the real machinery that determines victory is either random or unknowable and largely unguessable hidden information.

    Yup. I maintain that the main thing holding TI back were those dumb secret objectives. Even putting aside how wildly imbalanced they are, they were dumb pointless things. There's no reason that all the VP couldn't come from public objectives alone. Secret objectives didn't add "intrigue" and "mystery", just hidden arbitrary crap that suddenly catapulted someone into the lead. The one thing that should not be hidden in a strategy game is the win condition. It's the difference between a standard victory in Battlestar Galactica (Cylons win if humans lose) and those dumb Cylon leader agendas (Cylon leader wins if humans win with less than 4 food, 4 morale, and 2 locations damaged).

    Imagine if Chess replaced the checkmate the king win condition with dozens of arbitrary conditions like "get 4 pawns to the other half of the board" or "capture both enemy rooks without losing any of your bishops", and you never knew which one your opponent had every match.

    I disagree. TI strategy is basically a straight line deal--you go for a certain kind of play and then 9 hours later you get to see if it worked. If everybody knew everybody else's motivations those 9 hours would be very different and probably a lot less interesting.

    Also part of the game is figuring out your opponent's goals from their behavior (or convincing them to show you through diplomacy/scheming). The aspects of the game that go beyond the mechanics of econ and combat are greatly emhanced by hidden goals.

    I really don't think it would affect player strategy. How much TI3 strategizing does everyone really do thinking about stopping the secret objective of others? (beyond the obvious mecatol rex ones). I've never seen a game where someone's strategy for the secret objectives of others went beyond "keep them from directly hindering me, then do my own thing and just cross my fingers and hope they don't pop one".

    The only thing removing SOs would do is prevent people getting eliminated right at setup and sudden surprise 2 VP swings that you couldn't see coming. I really do think it's like having hidden goals in Chess. Would that give a great variety of outcomes in Chess? Technically, yes, but it would make a much weaker strategy game.

    Hidden goals work when there's a very small number of them in a short game like Werewolf. Not a 9 hour investment. At the very least I'd like to see how a variant works out where you remove SOs and lower the victory threshold by 2 VP.


    For TI4:

    The political agenda changes look like a step in the right direction. They were more a pointless distraction than anything in TI3, where 90% of the time you just burned them for a trade good.

    Tech tree change certainly makes it easier to suss out prerequisites, but it looks like they're keeping the same basic progression so I'm not sure if the old issues will be sorted out where all the worthwhile techs are in tiers 1-2.

  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Auralynx wrote: »
    Exalted: Legacy of the Unconquered Sun. By a wide margin, with the caveats being that it was at least memorably difficult to figure out what was going on and I think the central mechanic of allocating variable amounts of time to actions is a clever idea I haven't seen elsewhere.

    E: Kind of in Tokaido come to think of it, but it's a pretty different take on a similar idea.

    Having never played Exalted I don't actually know if it's the same but Jenseits von Theben (possibly my all-time favorite boardgame) uses a time track for determining turn order and when going on an expedition (thematically you're an archaeologist going around the world preparing for, executing, and then bragging about digs) you allocate a number of weeks at your discretion, with the number picked and the amount of research you did ahead of time determining how many chances you have at pulling VP tokens out of a bag.

    PSN,Steam,Live | CptHamiltonian
Sign In or Register to comment.