Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Board Games] aren't worth playing until you add at least five expansions

1222325272897

Posts

  • MNC DoverMNC Dover Game Designer/Stay-at-home Dad Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Cantido wrote: »
    Man San Antonio is nothing but Warhammer and tanks and planes and minis. Where da Eurogamers and Social Deduction at?!

    'Merica!

    Twitch Page
    Hearthstone: mncdover#1994
    Nintendo Network ID: MNC.Dover
    3DS: 1934-0659-5183
    Steam ID
    Cantido
  • KetarKetar My autocomplete is a tad agressive today.Registered User regular
    Cantido wrote: »
    Man San Antonio is nothing but Warhammer and tanks and planes and minis. Where da Eurogamers and Social Deduction at?!

    There will be plenty of both for a weekend in January!

    Take solace in bbq and the Alamo Drafthouse in the meantime, or something.

    Virgil_Leads_You
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    MNC Dover wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Man San Antonio is nothing but Warhammer and tanks and planes and minis. Where da Eurogamers and Social Deduction at?!

    'Merica!

    For the Emperor!

    I actually found a place: Dragon's Lair, which has open house board gaming on Monday and Thursday. Its just a matter of me dragging my carcass there after work on a weekday.

    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
    Armoroc
  • Ah_PookAh_Pook Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Okay so I may have broken down and pre-ordered Teotihuacan today even after swearing I would be strong and not. I'm weak. But it looks like exactly targeted at what I like in a game.

    Ah_Pook on
    Pancho needs your prayers it's true
    But save a few for Lefty too
  • Lord PalingtonLord Palington Registered User regular
    Cantido wrote: »
    MNC Dover wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Man San Antonio is nothing but Warhammer and tanks and planes and minis. Where da Eurogamers and Social Deduction at?!

    'Merica!

    For the Emperor!

    I actually found a place: Dragon's Lair, which has open house board gaming on Monday and Thursday. Its just a matter of me dragging my carcass there after work on a weekday.

    I was just there last weekend! They have a ton of space for playing games, good find.

    SrUxdlb.jpg
  • Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    Played Root again last night, have now realized how boxed-in the Vagabond can be if they can't get their hands on any tea

    Turns out only being able to do a max of 3 things a turn suuuuuucks!

    6F32U1X.png
  • PowerpuppiesPowerpuppies Registered User regular
    Played Inis twice, pretty fun, then played Machi Koro with two relatively serious gamers

    It was really funny

    One guy got Business Officed a second demolition company after building his airport and immediately rolled a 4, destroying his harbor and his airport for $16

    sig.gif
    Elvenshae
  • A Half Eaten OreoA Half Eaten Oreo Registered User regular
    Mr. G wrote: »
    Played Root again last night, have now realized how boxed-in the Vagabond can be if they can't get their hands on any tea

    Turns out only being able to do a max of 3 things a turn suuuuuucks!

    Lack of swords got me last time. I was the thief and the most experienced player so the other players were trying to avoid crafting.

    Overall I think everyone enjoyed that game. They found it weird that when a structure it destroyed the owner doesn't lose points, and gets points for building it again. A quick google says this is correct, but wanted to confirm.

  • DarricDarric Santa MonicaRegistered User regular
    Ah_Pook wrote: »
    Okay so I may have broken down and pre-ordered Teotihuacan today even after swearing I would be strong and not. I'm weak. But it looks like exactly targeted at what I like in a game.


    They had my preorder at "the next game by the Tzolk'in designers".

    ChaosHat
  • NyhtNyht Registered User regular
    Cantido wrote: »
    MNC Dover wrote: »
    Cantido wrote: »
    Man San Antonio is nothing but Warhammer and tanks and planes and minis. Where da Eurogamers and Social Deduction at?!

    'Merica!

    For the Emperor!

    I actually found a place: Dragon's Lair, which has open house board gaming on Monday and Thursday. Its just a matter of me dragging my carcass there after work on a weekday.

    Austin, TX one?

  • Ah_PookAh_Pook Registered User regular
    Darric wrote: »
    Ah_Pook wrote: »
    Okay so I may have broken down and pre-ordered Teotihuacan today even after swearing I would be strong and not. I'm weak. But it looks like exactly targeted at what I like in a game.


    They had my preorder at "the next game by the Tzolk'in designers".

    Yeah tzolkin and Marco Polo are both top tier games. Council of 4 looks good too but I haven't tried it.

    Pancho needs your prayers it's true
    But save a few for Lefty too
  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    Mr. G wrote: »
    Played Root again last night, have now realized how boxed-in the Vagabond can be if they can't get their hands on any tea

    Turns out only being able to do a max of 3 things a turn suuuuuucks!

    Lack of swords got me last time. I was the thief and the most experienced player so the other players were trying to avoid crafting.

    Overall I think everyone enjoyed that game. They found it weird that when a structure it destroyed the owner doesn't lose points, and gets points for building it again. A quick google says this is correct, but wanted to confirm.

    The group I played with also found this weird, though I don't find it that counter-intuitive. Did the same search because I was the only person at the table who thought the game would be upside-down backwards if buildings were put back in the box when destroyed. :P

  • admanbadmanb the bored genie Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    In a sense you do lose points, because getting a building destroyed often means the next time you build one you'll score one less point.

    I think the fact that you effectively never lose points as a result of other player's actions is a clever and vital part of Root's game design. It makes it feel far less vicious than most (including Cole's) direct conflict games.

    ArcticLancer
  • A Half Eaten OreoA Half Eaten Oreo Registered User regular
    admanb wrote: »
    In a sense you do lose points, because getting a building destroyed often means the next time you build one you'll score one less point.

    I think the fact that you effectively never lose points as a result of other player's actions is a clever and vital part of Root's game design. It makes it feel far less vicious than most (including Cole's) direct conflict games.

    We messed up an important rule, so at the time the other players were looking for a way to prevent a Cat victory.

    We didn’t follow the rule we’re the cat player needs a wood supply line to build, because of it and no negative points a cat victory felt inevitable once they got to 20 something points.

    And even with that the cats did not win, the alliance pulled it off at the end.

  • admanbadmanb the bored genie Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    admanb wrote: »
    In a sense you do lose points, because getting a building destroyed often means the next time you build one you'll score one less point.

    I think the fact that you effectively never lose points as a result of other player's actions is a clever and vital part of Root's game design. It makes it feel far less vicious than most (including Cole's) direct conflict games.

    We messed up an important rule, so at the time the other players were looking for a way to prevent a Cat victory.

    We didn’t follow the rule we’re the cat player needs a wood supply line to build, because of it and no negative points a cat victory felt inevitable once they got to 20 something points.

    And even with that the cats did not win, the alliance pulled it off at the end.

    There are very few cases where a faction has over 20 points and isn't within a single turn of winning tbh. The unimpeded point gain in Root is an exponential curve.

  • DarricDarric Santa MonicaRegistered User regular
    Ah_Pook wrote: »
    Darric wrote: »
    Ah_Pook wrote: »
    Okay so I may have broken down and pre-ordered Teotihuacan today even after swearing I would be strong and not. I'm weak. But it looks like exactly targeted at what I like in a game.


    They had my preorder at "the next game by the Tzolk'in designers".

    Yeah tzolkin and Marco Polo are both top tier games. Council of 4 looks good too but I haven't tried it.

    Council of 4 is good, but I was mostly over it after a few plays. I had the new CMON version which is pretty nice. It's certainly not in the same ballpark as either of those two.

  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist Registered User regular
    We're finally getting back into the swing of Pandemic Legacy S2 after many months.

    ... We lost before I got to take a 3rd turn.

    When the game decides it wants to deliver a beatdown, it does so with extreme prejudice. Luckily I think we can recover next game.

    Official member of the Grilling Gentry
    "Brevity is the soul of getting your shit read." - Tube
    Rarely-updated Collecting blog
    He/Him
    ArcSynMNC DoverVyolynceIvellius
  • WearingglassesWearingglasses Of the friendly neighborhood variety Registered User regular
    I have only played the following worker placement games:

    - Viticulture
    - Lords of Waterdeep
    - Champions of Midgard
    - Keyflower (?)

    Is the "Action space to take first player next round" the standard in determining first player every round of worker placement games? I was thinking Viticulture was the outlier. Of the few others I've read about, Manhattan Project's different way of worker placement (and therefore no per-round-first-player) is also unusual.

  • admanbadmanb the bored genie Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    I have only played the following worker placement games:

    - Viticulture
    - Lords of Waterdeep
    - Champions of Midgard
    - Keyflower (?)

    Is the "Action space to take first player next round" the standard in determining first player every round of worker placement games? I was thinking Viticulture was the outlier. Of the few others I've read about, Manhattan Project's different way of worker placement (and therefore no per-round-first-player) is also unusual.

    It's pretty common, but not universal. Agricola, Caverna, and Caylus all do that, but A Feast For Odin doesn't.

  • initiatefailureinitiatefailure Registered User regular
    Raiders of the north sea doesn't have turn order being fought over like that but it also doesn't have distinct rounds. But what It does have is the smoothest worker placement mechanics I've played.

    Everyone has one worker. Your turn is place your worker on a town space or raiding space, perform the action, remove a different worker already on a town space and perform that action or remove the new worker from the space you raided.

    It's just so fluid and quick and it's immediately obvious if you missed a step because you should always have 1 worker.

    I Do Design | I PSN- Subtle_Ties | 3DS: 3840-5210-2008 (Subtle)
    FishmanArcticLancerA Half Eaten OreoIvellius
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    Several games use a separate bidding system for first player—Alchemists, for instance, where players balance primacy with getting extra cards.

    ACsTqqK.jpg
  • MrBodyMrBody Registered User regular
    Caylus is a bit different. There's a spot to claim the earliest available place. First person to put a worker there during the turn gets 1st player, 2nd gets 2nd, 3rd gets 3rd. Whoever had that place previously gets bumped down one spot.

    I think that's a lot more fair than "clockwise from 1st player turn order", where you're fucked by chance if the guy to the right of you grabs first player.

    RiemannLives
  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    Mint works uses the “take first player for next round” space, as well.

    omgbfz5lzi1s.png
    Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
    The Disappearance of Inigo Sharpe: Tomas à Dunsanin
    MNC Dover
  • AmarylAmaryl Registered User regular
    MrBody wrote: »
    Caylus is a bit different. There's a spot to claim the earliest available place. First person to put a worker there during the turn gets 1st player, 2nd gets 2nd, 3rd gets 3rd. Whoever had that place previously gets bumped down one spot.

    I think that's a lot more fair than "clockwise from 1st player turn order", where you're fucked by chance if the guy to the right of you grabs first player.

    Does the "Fairer system" outweigh the memory issues introduced?

  • Ah_PookAh_Pook Registered User regular
    Amaryl wrote: »
    MrBody wrote: »
    Caylus is a bit different. There's a spot to claim the earliest available place. First person to put a worker there during the turn gets 1st player, 2nd gets 2nd, 3rd gets 3rd. Whoever had that place previously gets bumped down one spot.

    I think that's a lot more fair than "clockwise from 1st player turn order", where you're fucked by chance if the guy to the right of you grabs first player.

    Does the "Fairer system" outweigh the memory issues introduced?

    There's a turn order track, you don't have to remember it. I wouldn't say it's "fairer", it's just different. In Agricola if the guy to your left grabs first player you didn't get screwed by chance, you are going last because that guy valued going first more than you valued not going last. If it's that important for you to not go last you can take first player before someone else does.

    Pancho needs your prayers it's true
    But save a few for Lefty too
  • A Half Eaten OreoA Half Eaten Oreo Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Raiders of the north sea doesn't have turn order being fought over like that but it also doesn't have distinct rounds. But what It does have is the smoothest worker placement mechanics I've played.

    Everyone has one worker. Your turn is place your worker on a town space or raiding space, perform the action, remove a different worker already on a town space and perform that action or remove the new worker from the space you raided.

    It's just so fluid and quick and it's immediately obvious if you missed a step because you should always have 1 worker.

    BTW there’s currently a KS for a raider’s playmat that includes the boards for both expansions. The KS is technically for an RPG in the setting, but one of the rewards is just the playmat.

    I’m undecided on it. I quite like the playmat for Champions of Midgard, and I like raiders more. But I have the collector’s box, and the mat won’t fit in it.

    A Half Eaten Oreo on
  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Ah_Pook wrote: »
    Amaryl wrote: »
    MrBody wrote: »
    Caylus is a bit different. There's a spot to claim the earliest available place. First person to put a worker there during the turn gets 1st player, 2nd gets 2nd, 3rd gets 3rd. Whoever had that place previously gets bumped down one spot.

    I think that's a lot more fair than "clockwise from 1st player turn order", where you're fucked by chance if the guy to the right of you grabs first player.

    Does the "Fairer system" outweigh the memory issues introduced?

    There's a turn order track, you don't have to remember it. I wouldn't say it's "fairer", it's just different. In Agricola if the guy to your left grabs first player you didn't get screwed by chance, you are going last because that guy valued going first more than you valued not going last. If it's that important for you to not go last you can take first player before someone else does.

    The thing I don't like about this idea or assessment is that it means where you sit at the table can matter too much. Two players of roughly equal skill can have dramatically different games because of the people sitting between them. If someone overvalues turn order and goes out of their way to take it, the person to their left will get a boon while the person to their right will get hammered.
    Like, the most odd case I've ever seen of not understanding turn order is in Dominant Species. The person who was at the beginning of the turn track would always take turn order as a first action. In effect, this meant they actually always went last and the game's turn order was fixed. Great for the people already near the front, bad for anyone who wanted to try and move around at the back, and actually awful for the player doing it, but they couldn't be talked out of it.

    "Become first player, all other things stay relative" definitely is not the best way to handle turn order in most of these games. I agree with the idea that Caylus having more than one space and only affecting the relative order being a solid, interesting take on the idea with little additional complexity or overhead. I wish we saw more like it.

    ArcticLancer on
    RiemannLives
  • CaptainPeacockCaptainPeacock Board Game Hoarder Top o' the LakeRegistered User regular
    I'm rather partial to systems like what Fresco and Five Tribes use - whereby turn order is not dictated by position at table.

    Cluck cluck, gibber gibber, my old man's a mushroom, etc.
    Hedgethorn
  • Ah_PookAh_Pook Registered User regular
    In Agricola if someone takes all the wood every round even though they don't need it you'll have a bad time too, I don't know that poor play is a knock against a turn order mechanic. If the people at the table are consistently overvaluing first player them you need to adjust your gameplan to either take first before them when it's important for you to have it, or work around being later in the turn order...

    Pancho needs your prayers it's true
    But save a few for Lefty too
    Gvzbgul
  • CampyCampy Registered User regular
    I'm rather partial to systems like what Fresco and Five Tribes use - whereby turn order is not dictated by position at table.

    Powergrid also completely ignores where you're sitting regarding turn order decision. It's a distinct part of the balance of the game in fact.

    KetarCaptainPeacockAetherIvellius
  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    Arguing how bad overvaluing any given action is is a bit semantic, I think. Yeah, someone can play atrociously, but it's harder to do (valuing having choices is much easier to do than valuing having an unholy supply of wood you probably can't use?), and I suspect in most cases it has a more even messing up of everyone else around the table.
    At the end of the day, having turn order tied to the seating arrangement at the table is just inferior. At best it doesn't matter, at worst it has a direct impact on how effectively you can play the game. Why would I want that over something like (as a random example I'm making up right now) bid for turn order, starting with the player in 1st? It's simple, but that's really the only upshot. I'd rather have turn order be a more active and thoughtful part of the game (like how it's done so nicely in Viticulture, being a great duality of choice!) than a game of chicken around how badly I think my opponents will play.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    I don’t like first player action spots.

    They are never that exciting to take and usually sucks real bad for one person at they table. Net fun loss.

    I like rotating first player.

  • FryFry Registered User regular
    Player seating also matters a lot for drafting games, which can be frustrating for me when people want to play multiple games of 7 Wonders but don't want to rearrange seating in between. Or even randomize seating before the first game, for that matter.

    Gvzbgul
  • ArcticLancerArcticLancer Best served chilled. Registered User regular
    Fry wrote: »
    Player seating also matters a lot for drafting games, which can be frustrating for me when people want to play multiple games of 7 Wonders but don't want to rearrange seating in between. Or even randomize seating before the first game, for that matter.
    That's an entirely fair criticism/frustration.
    Campy wrote: »
    I'm rather partial to systems like what Fresco and Five Tribes use - whereby turn order is not dictated by position at table.

    Powergrid also completely ignores where you're sitting regarding turn order decision. It's a distinct part of the balance of the game in fact.
    There are lots of games with great first player systems. Most of those games aren't worker placement games, which is where this discussion really began.

    Vyolynce
  • LykouraghLykouragh Registered User regular
    My favorite is definitely the Alchemists bidding, but Feast for Odin's mechanic is also really fun; the player who manages to take the last action gets to go first next round, which in Feast for Odin means jockeying for high-value but low worker-cost action spaces to try to take several small actions instead of fewer large actions.

    DarricCaptainPeacock
  • ChaosHatChaosHat Registered User regular
    Fry wrote: »
    Player seating also matters a lot for drafting games, which can be frustrating for me when people want to play multiple games of 7 Wonders but don't want to rearrange seating in between. Or even randomize seating before the first game, for that matter.

    I mean randomizing seating every couple hands seems like a lot of effort to play 7 Wonders. Granted I don't think I'd want to play multiple 3+ games of 7 Wonders anyways.

    ChaosHat.com - Twitter - Twitch Stream - Steam: ChaosHat - 3DS: 5215-0009-1949
    SC2: ChaosHat.444 ggtracker
  • JonBobJonBob Registered User regular
    It's simple, but that's really the only upshot.
    I think this is probably objectively true, but you might be underestimating the value of simplicity in game design.

    Agricola is a complex enough game that its target audience would probably not balk at a non-clockwise turn order, and it would indeed solve some potential problems with the game. But if you think that gamers generally find an arbitrary turn order to be easy, you haven't observed enough games.

    I recently finished development on a game that involves bidding on turn order, and in recording stats I saw that people attempted to play clockwise instead of the stated order on average twice per game. This despite the turn order mechanism being the central part of the game. I was able to add enough ergonomic touches to reduce this to an acceptable error rate, but it's astonishing how deeply-set a clockwise turn order is to people of all levels of exposure to games. If you are violating it in a design, it should be a damn good reason. I think left-hand binding like in Agricola is one of the good reasons, but it is totally reasonable to opt for simplicity here too.

    jswidget.php?username=JonBob&numitems=10&header=1&text=none&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=right&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    I can academically see that player order being unrelated to seating position makes for a more fair/tactical game.

    I also practically know that any game that doesn’t proceed clockwise around the table will inevitably lose significant amounts of game time to mix ups about whose turn it is and people staring blankly at the game not realising it is their go.

    Rarely worth the hassle.

    TingleSigBar.gif
    Hahnsoo1ChaosHatElvenshaeFry
  • ArcSynArcSyn Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    I can academically see that player order being unrelated to seating position makes for a more fair/tactical game.

    I also practically know that any game that doesn’t proceed clockwise around the table will inevitably lose significant amounts of game time to mix ups about whose turn it is and people staring blankly at the game not realising it is their go.

    Rarely worth the hassle.

    This is one of the things that works when they use turn order markers. Covert and Galaxy Trucker (and I'm sure many others) have bits that you grab with your order marker on them. This makes it easy to follow and reset.

    It's actually one of the things I find most interesting about the game. You can grab that first turn marker, but it ends your current phase. So you lose out on further actions or options in order to grab it. It doesn't hurt anyone else as much, if at all, and they can still grab number 2, but with the benefit of perhaps gaining more while you are sitting out.

    Covert also plays that whoever went last the previous round, places first the next round. This gives them the opportunity to grab first turn, or place more, than the other players if they choose.

    ArcSyn on
    OSvv7zs.pngjswidget.php?username=ArcSyn&numitems=5&header=0&text=none&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=center&inline=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
  • ChaosHatChaosHat Registered User regular
    I just think it's rarely worth the upside. Sometimes turn order stays pretty static and then someone does whatever changes it and then I start to proceed with my turn in that regular order and someone goes "oh no wait it changed" and then I go "fuck." It's not a big deal either way so why not break towards less complexity.

    ChaosHat.com - Twitter - Twitch Stream - Steam: ChaosHat - 3DS: 5215-0009-1949
    SC2: ChaosHat.444 ggtracker
Sign In or Register to comment.