I might add Black Orchestra to my regrets. I have a hard "no kickstarter" rule, but I thought this one was safe because it was a 2nd edition re-reprint of a product that had already been produced.
Released date got pushed back and now there hasn't been a single update since April.
The art is nice, the theme is great (most games either ignore the bronze age or get is badly wrong like C&C ancients). But the couple times we tried to play it just wasn't working. I think with a full table it might work but the scenarios for fewer players ended up being kind of lame.
I might add Black Orchestra to my regrets. I have a hard "no kickstarter" rule, but I thought this one was safe because it was a 2nd edition re-reprint of a product that had already been produced.
Released date got pushed back and now there hasn't been a single update since April.
From their Facebook:
Production is continuing as expected so no real news to report there (sometimes that's a good thing!) We are still scheduled for delivery in October. Thanks for your interest in Black Orchestra!
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.
Hmm, I've my own thoughts about this, mostly from the way the Chess analogy was made.The thing about VPs from Secret Objectives in Twilight Imperium is that it will probably only represent one objective of perhaps six or so that will make up a winning player's final tableau. It's not an end-all goal like replacing Chess's checkmate with a single, hidden objective, it's a supplement to the overall goal. Then again, it's pretty hard to come up with a winning amount of VPs without one's Secret Objective: those 2 VPs are quite a lot. It'smore impactful than a secret objective like in something like Scythe, despite the fact that the achievement star in Scythe is one sixth the endgame trigger, similar to in Twilight Imperium. That is because in Scythe, every achievement is equally weighted, rather than the secret objective being twice as valuable as most other public objectives in Twilight Imperium. It looks like Twilight Imperium 4e is taking some steps to decrease the swinginess of victory based on tough Secret Objectives by making them 1 VP each instead (assumed from images from FFG). More work will be needed to make a significant impact through Secret Objectives here, but the random drawn Objective could still be a nice edge to have. And in any game with secret objectives for VPs (and not as a total win condition), you can know if it's something you want to go after early on, and then build your game plan around that decision.
Going back to Chess for a moment, if you want to have a more appropriate analogy for a two-player abstract where secret objectives could be a consideration, let's think about what happens to Tash-Kalar if each player started the game with a secret 1- or 2-point Task from a special deck? OK, yeah, it would probably make the game a bit weaker strategically since a Secret Task would be much more impactful than the hidden Flares (caveat: I've never played Tash-Kalar), but it would provide some additional spice. The same conclusions as Chess with hidden goals, but we actually have a better analogy since we started with a VP-based game. Sometimes secret objectives provide that variability and surprise that feeds into a game well, and other times they don't. Personally, I like the idea of the hidden objective as a supplement to public objectives, but I can see now how hard they can be worked into a design and still feel fair and fun.
The SO in Twilight Imperium is theoretically not the end all like a checkmate, but the fact of the matter is that I've never seen anyone win TI without scoring their secret objective (if it does happen I'm willing to bet it's 10% of the time or less). Doesn't that make them de facto mandatory victory conditions? If you get impossible SOs (capture wormholes/planets on the opposite end of the map, control 8 systems when your area has an asteroid field and supernova), then you've already lost.
Being able to draw new SOs in TI4 is a step in the right direction, but that reminds me of the routes in Ticket to Ride; you can try to draw better routes if you start out with crap ones, but you're still going to be left behind people who drew the good routes from the start and can concentrate their turns on drawing trains instead of more tickets.
I was actually thinking about the Scythe objectives when I was typing that. I'm not crazy about them, but they don't bother me as much. Probably because like you said they're not worth more than the other star-giving goals, with straight up combat victories being potentially worth twice as much. Getting impossible ones is more rare (the one where you have to control 3 territories next to the factory without having a factory card is probably the worst) and it's easier to write the objectives off and focus on getting stars in other areas. PLUS....the game isn't ultimately decided by how many stars you have! You could win with 5, or 4, or even 3. It's possible to say nuts to getting 6 stars and focus on popularity and other ways to score coins. You can't say "fuck VP" in TI because that's the one and only way to determine victory.
I've seen someone win without scoring their secret objective in TI3. I've done it myself. I didn't keep stats, but I'd guess it happened at least 25% of the time with my usual group. Possibly even more often as we all got more experienced with the game and better at reading and predicting each other's actions, leading to much greater recognition of what SOs people were going for and agreements with other players to stop the top 1 or 2 in any particular game from achieving theirs. So some members of the group started getting pretty good at feinting towards an SO that wasn't theirs that might actually make it easier to achieve their own when people tried to stop the false SO. The mind games between us in TI3 were fantastic after a couple of years of periodic play, helping to make some of the best gaming experiences I've ever had.
I wouldn't think of it as de facto mandatory at all. It makes it easier, absolutely, but it's far from impossible to win without completing your secret objective. They add a great deal to the game when you start playing at a higher level.
I almost never see "stop the leader" work out in TI, Scythe, or Game of Thrones, the 3 games I see that quoted a lot on. Singling out a specific player to go after usually comes at the expense of your own advancement. The player with the most overpowered race + best map position in TI, the yellow/red factions in Scythe, and Greyjoy while they're attacking Lannester in GoT. The person who moves to cut them off is going to lose to the person who concentrated on his own advancement instead. Sort of like a Mexican standoff.
Started 7th Continent with Mrs. Jam. Just the base game and the suggested first curse (The Voracious Goddess).
In the way of these things it was all going swimmingly well until suddenly it was all going very badly... A few bad draws giving conditions can really lay on the hurt and we're at about 50% health already having just made our way to the west edge of what I assume is tutorial island.
We swam in the shark infested waters which is a sharp lesson in looking closely at the cards and not every action being worth pursuing!
I still love the sheer madness of it as a physical product and Mrs Jam was having good fun as well. I'd almost rather be playing it solo but I guess we're committed now. It does take great effort of will to play it honestly and not peek at what other cards might have come up when there are multiple options! Looking forward to hopefully carrying on very soon.
+1
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
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.
Hmm, I've my own thoughts about this, mostly from the way the Chess analogy was made.The thing about VPs from Secret Objectives in Twilight Imperium is that it will probably only represent one objective of perhaps six or so that will make up a winning player's final tableau. It's not an end-all goal like replacing Chess's checkmate with a single, hidden objective, it's a supplement to the overall goal. Then again, it's pretty hard to come up with a winning amount of VPs without one's Secret Objective: those 2 VPs are quite a lot. It'smore impactful than a secret objective like in something like Scythe, despite the fact that the achievement star in Scythe is one sixth the endgame trigger, similar to in Twilight Imperium. That is because in Scythe, every achievement is equally weighted, rather than the secret objective being twice as valuable as most other public objectives in Twilight Imperium. It looks like Twilight Imperium 4e is taking some steps to decrease the swinginess of victory based on tough Secret Objectives by making them 1 VP each instead (assumed from images from FFG). More work will be needed to make a significant impact through Secret Objectives here, but the random drawn Objective could still be a nice edge to have. And in any game with secret objectives for VPs (and not as a total win condition), you can know if it's something you want to go after early on, and then build your game plan around that decision.
Going back to Chess for a moment, if you want to have a more appropriate analogy for a two-player abstract where secret objectives could be a consideration, let's think about what happens to Tash-Kalar if each player started the game with a secret 1- or 2-point Task from a special deck? OK, yeah, it would probably make the game a bit weaker strategically since a Secret Task would be much more impactful than the hidden Flares (caveat: I've never played Tash-Kalar), but it would provide some additional spice. The same conclusions as Chess with hidden goals, but we actually have a better analogy since we started with a VP-based game. Sometimes secret objectives provide that variability and surprise that feeds into a game well, and other times they don't. Personally, I like the idea of the hidden objective as a supplement to public objectives, but I can see now how hard they can be worked into a design and still feel fair and fun.
The SO in Twilight Imperium is theoretically not the end all like a checkmate, but the fact of the matter is that I've never seen anyone win TI without scoring their secret objective (if it does happen I'm willing to bet it's 10% of the time or less). Doesn't that make them de facto mandatory victory conditions? If you get impossible SOs (capture wormholes/planets on the opposite end of the map, control 8 systems when your area has an asteroid field and supernova), then you've already lost.
Being able to draw new SOs in TI4 is a step in the right direction, but that reminds me of the routes in Ticket to Ride; you can try to draw better routes if you start out with crap ones, but you're still going to be left behind people who drew the good routes from the start and can concentrate their turns on drawing trains instead of more tickets.
I was actually thinking about the Scythe objectives when I was typing that. I'm not crazy about them, but they don't bother me as much. Probably because like you said they're not worth more than the other star-giving goals, with straight up combat victories being potentially worth twice as much. Getting impossible ones is more rare (the one where you have to control 3 territories next to the factory without having a factory card is probably the worst) and it's easier to write the objectives off and focus on getting stars in other areas. PLUS....the game isn't ultimately decided by how many stars you have! You could win with 5, or 4, or even 3. It's possible to say nuts to getting 6 stars and focus on popularity and other ways to score coins. You can't say "fuck VP" in TI because that's the one and only way to determine victory.
I've seen someone win without scoring their secret objective in TI3. I've done it myself. I didn't keep stats, but I'd guess it happened at least 25% of the time with my usual group. Possibly even more often as we all got more experienced with the game and better at reading and predicting each other's actions, leading to much greater recognition of what SOs people were going for and agreements with other players to stop the top 1 or 2 in any particular game from achieving theirs. So some members of the group started getting pretty good at feinting towards an SO that wasn't theirs that might actually make it easier to achieve their own when people tried to stop the false SO. The mind games between us in TI3 were fantastic after a couple of years of periodic play, helping to make some of the best gaming experiences I've ever had.
I wouldn't think of it as de facto mandatory at all. It makes it easier, absolutely, but it's far from impossible to win without completing your secret objective. They add a great deal to the game when you start playing at a higher level.
I almost never see "stop the leader" work out in TI, Scythe, or Game of Thrones, the 3 games I see that quoted a lot on. Singling out a specific player to go after usually comes at the expense of your own advancement. The player with the most overpowered race + best map position in TI, the yellow/red factions in Scythe, and Greyjoy while they're attacking Lannester in GoT. The person who moves to cut them off is going to lose to the person who concentrated on his own advancement instead. Sort of like a Mexican standoff.
Not necessarily, in my experience. Particularly not if well-negotiated with your fellow players. It wasn't uncommon at all to see a player in 2nd or 3rd offering a player in 5th what amounted to free VP (by leaving something undefended, or as lightly defended as possible, for example) in exchange for taking part in blocking the player in first from achieving an obvious goal that would win the game for them.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited August 2017
Oh shit. This is a big change - commodities.
Basically commodities are resources with no value to you, but value to other players. They convert to trade goods when you..well.. trade them. So in essence, you can't use them for yourself.
That is... huh. That is really strongly encouraging trade!
Edit: Shit! Trading happens once per turn, and requires adjacency!
Yesss, force more player interaction.
Yesssssssssssssssssssssss.
(Also since you can still trade trade goods, you can make deals like, Hey, I'll trade you 5 commodities and you trade by back 2 goods, making it a 3-2 gain, and things like that.)
Hmm, I don't know if I have time in my life (or space in my apartment) for Twilight Imperium 4e. But I really want to run a Play-by-Post of the game once it releases. Maybe I will find someone generous enough to provide me with the materials to get such a game set up and running?
MrBlarney on
+3
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
At a glance the big ti4 rule change that jumps out at me is the game has a fixed length regardless of player actions now.
14 hours was the perfect length for a game!
I'm morbidly curious about what horrible alignment of rules error, expansion modules and player traits led to a really long game taking over twice it's usual time.
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
Judging by the rules, the phone app is superior because the rules require a fuckton of reshuffling.
3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
+2
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
So anybody backing the latest Reaper Bones thing should probably look into this current thing with their COO bring some kind of ultraright Nazi sympathiser and think about whether they want to support that or not
At a glance the big ti4 rule change that jumps out at me is the game has a fixed length regardless of player actions now.
14 hours was the perfect length for a game!
I'm morbidly curious about what horrible alignment of rules error, expansion modules and player traits led to a really long game taking over twice it's usual time.
Judging by the rules, the phone app is superior because the rules require a fuckton of reshuffling.
Eh, the deck isn't that big and shuffling isn't the worst part of the game. I do like the app reminding me that I can sacrifice keys to nightmares, which I always forget when playing IRL.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
So anybody backing the latest Reaper Bones thing should probably look into this current thing with their COO bring some kind of ultraright Nazi sympathiser and think about whether they want to support that or not
Reaper haven't fired him and from their statement they seem to be trying to ignore it
What was the statement Reaper gave? Trying to google this and all I get is pro-nazi sites I would rather not go to. The google summary text all refer to Reaper firing someone, but I'm not willing to soil my browser history to see where that info comes from.
So anybody backing the latest Reaper Bones thing should probably look into this current thing with their COO bring some kind of ultraright Nazi sympathiser and think about whether they want to support that or not
Reaper haven't fired him and from their statement they seem to be trying to ignore it
Fuck, of course this comes out when they have Baba Yaga's Hut up for grabs. God dammit. I can live without it but.. god dammit. I think I'll give it a few days before cancelling to see what they do. But if they do keep him and I cancel, I'll be sure to let them know why I'm doing so.
From Ed Pugh, CEO Reaper Miniatures
It has come to our attention that one of our employees became involved in a series of controversial posts on social media. We are deeply embarrassed that our company name has been associated with these statements. Reaper’s culture values diversity and equality, and we do not support, condone or agree in any way with the views the employee expressed in that discussion. We are reviewing the matter and taking appropriate action.
Best wishes,
Ed Pugh, CEO
Yeah, I'm not backing because I have no need for Reaper miniatures, but all of this company takes blame for posts by their employees is getting annoying. I don't care what the COO believes or chooses to post about, I don't have time to research every single store I shop at, and frankly, one person isn't a reason to not support the tens, hundreds, or thousands of other employees that are part of a company.
If I stopped buying things because of actions of employees of companies I would have to start a farm in the middle of nowhere and live an Amish life.
Now, on the flipside of that, if you're in a public company and have a very nice position in said company, participating in social media, especially on a controversial topic, is stupid. So he's very stupid.
I don't have time to research every single store I shop at, and frankly, one person isn't a reason to not support the tens, hundreds, or thousands of other employees that are part of a company.
You don;t need to have time when stuff is pointed out for you. No one is asking anyone to researche everyone at a copany to make sure their views fit with yours.
But when the head of the company is advocating racial pogroms and nazi superiority you can bet I'm not fucking giving them money until they get rid of him. This isn't a matter of he likes different food than me, he's using his position and influence to encourage violence against people. That's absolutely a reason, and a damn good one, for many many people to stop supporting everyone at the company.
If I worked there, I would quit in a heartbeat.
+9
Custom SpecialI know I am, I'm sure I am,I'm Sounders 'til I die!Registered Userregular
We ran a 4 player game of Food Chain Magnate last night, finished in a little under 3 hours (only the owner had played it before).
Felt behind pretty much from turn 2. I eventually got a decent engine with the $20 Salary milestone to multi-train, got the last Exec VP and just spewed out Waitresses and Trainers each turn with a few other employees. But by the time I really got going, the game was almost done (Bank refill was $600).
One friend had a monopoly on Burgers in one corner of the map with two houses, so he could pretty freely play Luxury Manager to cash in on his sales. The final turn of the game, he made $180 from selling four burgers and a beer (this single turn was more than my final score...). Pretty fun game, just having a single play gives you so much understanding of what options there are and the competition you need to keep track of.
Played Flash Point: Fire Rescue for the first time in ages last night as one of my friends had somehow never done so and was curious.
In teaching him the game, I came across the rule that says "you may not fire the Engine's hose at a quadrant where a Firefighter is present."
I am reasonably sure I have never seen that rule before. I don't think any of my friends have. It would actually surprise me less to learn that this rule spontaneously added itself to the instructions as a bizarre sort of living errata than it would to know it was always there.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
+4
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
We recently discovered about 4 games deep into Eldritch Horror that when you spawn a gate, a monster spawns with it. To say that it changed the difficulty of the game a little would most certainly be an understatement...
We recently discovered about 4 games deep into Eldritch Horror that when you spawn a gate, a monster spawns with it. To say that it changed the difficulty of the game a little would most certainly be an understatement...
Holdover rule from the original Arkham. Happened any time the rules said "A gate appears!"
We recently discovered about 4 games deep into Eldritch Horror that when you spawn a gate, a monster spawns with it. To say that it changed the difficulty of the game a little would most certainly be an understatement...
Holdover rule from the original Arkham. Happened any time the rules said "A gate appears!"
Played Flash Point: Fire Rescue for the first time in ages last night as one of my friends had somehow never done so and was curious.
In teaching him the game, I came across the rule that says "you may not fire the Engine's hose at a quadrant where a Firefighter is present."
I am reasonably sure I have never seen that rule before. I don't think any of my friends have. It would actually surprise me less to learn that this rule spontaneously added itself to the instructions as a bizarre sort of living errata than it would to know it was always there.
I remember reading that once, but I don't think we've ever remembered to follow it during a game. In general though the deck gun is used at the beginning to stop initial fire or if things get really bad in which case there probably isn't a firefighter in that area.
Played Flash Point: Fire Rescue for the first time in ages last night as one of my friends had somehow never done so and was curious.
In teaching him the game, I came across the rule that says "you may not fire the Engine's hose at a quadrant where a Firefighter is present."
I am reasonably sure I have never seen that rule before. I don't think any of my friends have. It would actually surprise me less to learn that this rule spontaneously added itself to the instructions as a bizarre sort of living errata than it would to know it was always there.
I remember reading that once, but I don't think we've ever remembered to follow it during a game. In general though the deck gun is used at the beginning to stop initial fire or if things get really bad in which case there probably isn't a firefighter in that area.
In our 3P game last night the deck gun was basically doing all the work while the other fighter and I took care of hazmats and/or POIs.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
0
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
We recently discovered about 4 games deep into Eldritch Horror that when you spawn a gate, a monster spawns with it. To say that it changed the difficulty of the game a little would most certainly be an understatement...
If you're not mostly ignoring all the monsters, you're playing wrong anyway.
Played Flash Point: Fire Rescue for the first time in ages last night as one of my friends had somehow never done so and was curious.
In teaching him the game, I came across the rule that says "you may not fire the Engine's hose at a quadrant where a Firefighter is present."
I am reasonably sure I have never seen that rule before. I don't think any of my friends have. It would actually surprise me less to learn that this rule spontaneously added itself to the instructions as a bizarre sort of living errata than it would to know it was always there.
I remember reading that once, but I don't think we've ever remembered to follow it during a game. In general though the deck gun is used at the beginning to stop initial fire or if things get really bad in which case there probably isn't a firefighter in that area.
In our 3P game last night the deck gun was basically doing all the work while the other fighter and I took care of hazmats and/or POIs.
I've never had the luck of getting the rolls I need. Except for a few wonderful moments that get celebrated. Surprised you had the AP to get those people out if only two people were in the building.
Posts
Released date got pushed back and now there hasn't been a single update since April.
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/38923/god-kings-warfare-dawn-civilization-1500-1260bc
The art is nice, the theme is great (most games either ignore the bronze age or get is badly wrong like C&C ancients). But the couple times we tried to play it just wasn't working. I think with a full table it might work but the scenarios for fewer players ended up being kind of lame.
From their Facebook:
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
I almost never see "stop the leader" work out in TI, Scythe, or Game of Thrones, the 3 games I see that quoted a lot on. Singling out a specific player to go after usually comes at the expense of your own advancement. The player with the most overpowered race + best map position in TI, the yellow/red factions in Scythe, and Greyjoy while they're attacking Lannester in GoT. The person who moves to cut them off is going to lose to the person who concentrated on his own advancement instead. Sort of like a Mexican standoff.
In the way of these things it was all going swimmingly well until suddenly it was all going very badly... A few bad draws giving conditions can really lay on the hurt and we're at about 50% health already having just made our way to the west edge of what I assume is tutorial island.
I still love the sheer madness of it as a physical product and Mrs Jam was having good fun as well. I'd almost rather be playing it solo but I guess we're committed now. It does take great effort of will to play it honestly and not peek at what other cards might have come up when there are multiple options! Looking forward to hopefully carrying on very soon.
Not necessarily, in my experience. Particularly not if well-negotiated with your fellow players. It wasn't uncommon at all to see a player in 2nd or 3rd offering a player in 5th what amounted to free VP (by leaving something undefended, or as lightly defended as possible, for example) in exchange for taking part in blocking the player in first from achieving an obvious goal that would win the game for them.
Part of me thinks they REALLY wanted this to be the surprise launch like Mansions of Madness was last year.
14 hours was the perfect length for a game!
Selling Board Games for Medical Bills
Basically commodities are resources with no value to you, but value to other players. They convert to trade goods when you..well.. trade them. So in essence, you can't use them for yourself.
That is... huh. That is really strongly encouraging trade!
Edit: Shit! Trading happens once per turn, and requires adjacency!
Yesssssssssssssssssssssss.
(Also since you can still trade trade goods, you can make deals like, Hey, I'll trade you 5 commodities and you trade by back 2 goods, making it a 3-2 gain, and things like that.)
I'm morbidly curious about what horrible alignment of rules error, expansion modules and player traits led to a really long game taking over twice it's usual time.
Judging by the rules, the phone app is superior because the rules require a fuckton of reshuffling.
http://imgur.com/a/LjxGH
Reaper haven't fired him and from their statement they seem to be trying to ignore it
A joke?
Selling Board Games for Medical Bills
Eh, the deck isn't that big and shuffling isn't the worst part of the game. I do like the app reminding me that I can sacrifice keys to nightmares, which I always forget when playing IRL.
What was the statement Reaper gave? Trying to google this and all I get is pro-nazi sites I would rather not go to. The google summary text all refer to Reaper firing someone, but I'm not willing to soil my browser history to see where that info comes from.
Fuck, of course this comes out when they have Baba Yaga's Hut up for grabs. God dammit. I can live without it but.. god dammit. I think I'll give it a few days before cancelling to see what they do. But if they do keep him and I cancel, I'll be sure to let them know why I'm doing so.
From Ed Pugh, CEO Reaper Miniatures
It has come to our attention that one of our employees became involved in a series of controversial posts on social media. We are deeply embarrassed that our company name has been associated with these statements. Reaper’s culture values diversity and equality, and we do not support, condone or agree in any way with the views the employee expressed in that discussion. We are reviewing the matter and taking appropriate action.
Best wishes,
Ed Pugh, CEO
Comics, Games, Booze
If I stopped buying things because of actions of employees of companies I would have to start a farm in the middle of nowhere and live an Amish life.
Now, on the flipside of that, if you're in a public company and have a very nice position in said company, participating in social media, especially on a controversial topic, is stupid. So he's very stupid.
You don;t need to have time when stuff is pointed out for you. No one is asking anyone to researche everyone at a copany to make sure their views fit with yours.
But when the head of the company is advocating racial pogroms and nazi superiority you can bet I'm not fucking giving them money until they get rid of him. This isn't a matter of he likes different food than me, he's using his position and influence to encourage violence against people. That's absolutely a reason, and a damn good one, for many many people to stop supporting everyone at the company.
If I worked there, I would quit in a heartbeat.
Felt behind pretty much from turn 2. I eventually got a decent engine with the $20 Salary milestone to multi-train, got the last Exec VP and just spewed out Waitresses and Trainers each turn with a few other employees. But by the time I really got going, the game was almost done (Bank refill was $600).
One friend had a monopoly on Burgers in one corner of the map with two houses, so he could pretty freely play Luxury Manager to cash in on his sales. The final turn of the game, he made $180 from selling four burgers and a beer (this single turn was more than my final score...). Pretty fun game, just having a single play gives you so much understanding of what options there are and the competition you need to keep track of.
Speaking of which...
(Clicking through to the Instagram page shows a picture of stacks of copies of TI 4e.)
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
In teaching him the game, I came across the rule that says "you may not fire the Engine's hose at a quadrant where a Firefighter is present."
I am reasonably sure I have never seen that rule before. I don't think any of my friends have. It would actually surprise me less to learn that this rule spontaneously added itself to the instructions as a bizarre sort of living errata than it would to know it was always there.
We recently discovered about 4 games deep into Eldritch Horror that when you spawn a gate, a monster spawns with it. To say that it changed the difficulty of the game a little would most certainly be an understatement...
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
Fuck fuck fuck. I already asked my local FLGS to pre-order it so I could get the sweet hardcover rulebook.
Holdover rule from the original Arkham. Happened any time the rules said "A gate appears!"
This is why I compulsively reread rulebooks!
Also, I enjoy reading rulebooks.
I may have a problem.
I remember reading that once, but I don't think we've ever remembered to follow it during a game. In general though the deck gun is used at the beginning to stop initial fire or if things get really bad in which case there probably isn't a firefighter in that area.
In our 3P game last night the deck gun was basically doing all the work while the other fighter and I took care of hazmats and/or POIs.
If you're not mostly ignoring all the monsters, you're playing wrong anyway.
I've never had the luck of getting the rolls I need. Except for a few wonderful moments that get celebrated. Surprised you had the AP to get those people out if only two people were in the building.