I re-boxed Eldritch Horror and all of its expansions into a decorative storage box from Michaels, designed after luggage.
Pretty much exactly like this one:
Except black with ivory illustrations of geography and constellations, rather than Paris stuff. I even went the extra step and painted Elder Signs and whatnot on the outside.
Inside I have everything divided up with plastic storage containers and baggies. It's pretty tightly packed; it's almost lucky for me that it doesn't seem EH is going to get any more love from FFG!
I re-boxed Eldritch Horror and all of its expansions into a decorative storage box from Michaels, designed after luggage.
Pretty much exactly like this one:
Except black with ivory illustrations of geography and constellations, rather than Paris stuff. I even went the extra step and painted Elder Signs and whatnot on the outside.
Inside I have everything divided up with plastic storage containers and baggies. It's pretty tightly packed; it's almost lucky for me that it doesn't seem EH is going to get any more love from FFG!
Oh hey. I have a box very similar to that for storing Magic cards:
I just glued in a square box card divider, and it makes 5 neat rows.
I re-boxed Eldritch Horror and all of its expansions into a decorative storage box from Michaels, designed after luggage.
Pretty much exactly like this one:
Except black with ivory illustrations of geography and constellations, rather than Paris stuff. I even went the extra step and painted Elder Signs and whatnot on the outside.
Inside I have everything divided up with plastic storage containers and baggies. It's pretty tightly packed; it's almost lucky for me that it doesn't seem EH is going to get any more love from FFG!
Aside from the map boards, obviously, it stores everything really well. Tokens and small cards go in the top compartment, and the regular cards all fit in the bottom. I saw this guy's post and was like, yep, I should get that: https://imgur.com/a/bYdJg
The downside is that thing is freaking huge. But it does have a nice carrying handle!
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
I was 0 for 2 on Butcher fights before this, but we only went a bloody beat him! Not only that but these Clan of Death-Survival of the Fittest-Badass-Mofos beat him really quite handily. And killed him on the special hit location that leaves him decapitated and gives everyone a permanent bonus. And we got his cleaver.
We had an amusing bit of luck where he managed to knock over our entire team with reaction attacks and collisions during our turn, and then it turns out he doesn't lower himself to attacking non-threats so for his go he just stood around glowering for a turn.
He still killed someone because he has an attack which if it lands automatically causes a critical head injury (40% chance of instant death) which is insane.
Then our settlement event gave us +2 on endeavour rolls for the round which allowed us to squeeze out another berserker baby.
We've now got quite a stable of survivors with permanent bonuses to choose from. This game is going far too well.
Jam Warrior on
+4
jergarmarhollow man crewgoes pew pew pewRegistered Userregular
Just got Fog of Love in the mail, squee! Quick question: it's not clear to me whether each scenario is completely expended after one playthrough, or expended after a couple plays.
Even if it's one-and-done, I'm still inclined to follow SU&SD's suggestion, to set up the game for a different "couple", and just spectate and gossip about the events and characters. Dang, that was a good review.
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
0
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
They're very much not "expended." You can always return to any scenario, and might even come back to old ones after having opened some new cards and bringing new things into the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks.
They're very much not "expended." You can always return to any scenario, and might even come back to old ones after having opened some new cards and bringing new things into the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks.
So then, what do the sealed packs in the base game represent? I'm trying to figure out how to explain the game to my wife, so that she knows what to expect.
And yes, I'm fully aware that I'm negotiating my relationship in order to play a game about negotiating relationships.
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
0
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
edited February 2019
They're different scenarios that will introduce more elements into the game, and are meant to be opened in a linear order. Some of the contents will work backwards and some won't. For example, when you first open the box you'll have a very limited set of 4 Destiny cards. Each of the other packs you open will add more of those cards to the game, but every scenario also tells you which ones it uses. So the original scenario will never have breakups (I mean, you could probably do so, but it's definitely not designed as such) as a possibility. However you'll also get more cards to go into the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks, as well as special events (like the cards required to get married), which you can use in any scenario even if they aren't required.
Otherwise, different scenarios still have good reasons to be played - chief among them is the play time. Sunday Afternoon Date is really quite short all-in-all (and deceptively, that can make it rather challenging to "win" for your characters), but the later scenarios will have more cards played in each act, giving you a longer game. They also see you drawing from the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks differently, which means that different scenarios have more or less capacity for more naturally progressive or more erratic relationships.
Like, honestly, there's not a ton that is different about the scenarios other than the tone they set and how they lay out the rules for your particular game, but those things make a rather large impact, so ... trust me, there might well be a point when you feel like just being high-school sweethearts again. ;P
They're different scenarios that will introduce more elements into the game, and are meant to be opened in a linear order. Some of the contents will work backwards and some won't. For example, when you first open the box you'll have a very limited set of 4 Destiny cards. Each of the other packs you open will add more of those cards to the game, but every scenario also tells you which ones it uses. So the original scenario will never have breakups (I mean, you could probably do so, but it's definitely not designed as such) as a possibility. However you'll also get more cards to go into the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks, as well as special events (like the cards required to get married), which you can use in any scenario even if they aren't required.
Otherwise, different scenarios still have good reasons to be played - chief among them is the play time. Sunday Afternoon Date is really quite short all-in-all (and deceptively, that can make it rather challenging to "win" for your characters), but the later scenarios will have more cards played in each act, giving you a longer game. They also see you drawing from the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks differently, which means that different scenarios have more or less capacity for more naturally progressive or more erratic relationships.
Like, honestly, there's not a ton that is different about the scenarios other than the tone they set and how they lay out the rules for your particular game, but those things make a rather large impact, so ... trust me, there might well be a point when you feel like just being high-school sweethearts again. ;P
Since I have you "on the line", and since the expansions are still on sale, any expansions you think are particularly good? I did pick up "Trouble With the Inlaws", because, ummmm... art meets reality?
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
+3
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
I bought all 3 because we love Fog Of Love, but it's a very slow burn (my partner, for her many great qualities, is not actually much for board games, so we only play once every couple of months). I can tell you that of the 3, Paranormal is the most fascinating since it's played in 2 parts and comes with a second deck that is quite clearly labeled to "NOT OPEN UNTIL YOU'VE FINISHED PART 1." :P
I would buy them while they're on sale, because at best you want them and at worst they give you a more complete game to unload that cost you less. But that's just me - it's the sort of game that I think is worth doing that with. I'm not so much for buying every expansion otherwise.
Race for the Galaxy seems pretty neat? It very badly needs a second edition to redesign all of the cards and the way the playercards provide you info, but I liked it
and I was way into Dice Forge? That's a nice short game where you're constantly making interesting decisions, it's all about mitigating RNG, and customizing dice feels really neat
as far as I can tell I don't even think there's really any player interaction, it's just who can build the best engine
+2
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
Race for the Galaxy seems pretty neat? It very badly needs a second edition to redesign all of the cards and the way the playercards provide you info, but I liked it
Do you just mean the poor iconography or is it something else?
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
the explanations of what all the symbols mean is downright labyrinthian, and it doesn't even explain all of them
it groups them by phase when by icon would be significantly easier to navigate, like you don't need to include multiple explanations that the card with hand icon means you draw
0
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
The player aid for the game is indeed still shit. A few of the icons could, overall, be designed better. But the way they actually put it all together on the cards themselves is quite good, at the very least.
At this point in time, it's hard to say if it could justify a graphical redesign. "It's a classic" only goes so far with the fast-moving cult-of-the-new world we live in.
Race for the Galaxy seems pretty neat? It very badly needs a second edition to redesign all of the cards and the way the playercards provide you info, but I liked it
and I was way into Dice Forge? That's a nice short game where you're constantly making interesting decisions, it's all about mitigating RNG, and customizing dice feels really neat
as far as I can tell I don't even think there's really any player interaction, it's just who can build the best engine
It simultaneously is hard for new players, but once you get it, it becomes really hard to see how to improve it. They cover a LOT of game design space using a tiny area, and are surprisingly good at it, it just has the fundamental problem of it is a LOT of design space. But hey, I'd love to be proven wrong and there really are some more elegant and clear solutions, because getting more people playing Race is always good. I'm only talking about the iconography on the cards btw, the way it's laid out for the players in the manual and reference could be improved a lot.
Race for the Galaxy seems pretty neat? It very badly needs a second edition to redesign all of the cards and the way the playercards provide you info, but I liked it
and I was way into Dice Forge? That's a nice short game where you're constantly making interesting decisions, it's all about mitigating RNG, and customizing dice feels really neat
as far as I can tell I don't even think there's really any player interaction, it's just who can build the best engine
Dice Forge has some very minor player interaction depending on what Heroic Feats are available. Like... making them roll and losing their stuff or copying their die face(s). When you bounce someone from a feat island they get a bonus!
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
Yeah the race for the galaxy cards are ass to learn but amazing once you do, everyone finds the first game of it hard but once you have some reps it in works great.
There may be a better way to do it but the system is not without merit.
+2
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
It's tough to think of games that do iconography well
When I think about it it's just the bad examples that spring to mind. The winners there end up being more like a lookup table than actual icons explaining anything. Trickerion was pretty bad for it as I remember, as was 7 Wonders.
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
Yeah the race for the galaxy cards are ass to learn but amazing once you do, everyone finds the first game of it hard but once you have some reps it in works great.
There may be a better way to do it but the system is not without merit.
The wife cannot wrap her head around the icons in Race for the Galaxy. Of course we don’t play it enough to learn the symbols, which means we don’t remember them...and the cycle repeats endlessly.
Need a voice actor? Hire me at bengrayVO.com
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051 Steam ID Twitch Page
I guess while the best iconography would be totally self explanatory, a more reasonable measure is just how well the iconography reinforces and reminds you of the rules. Lots of game design is itself good but doesn't lend itself to clear iconographic depiction, so it's more about helping you keep the rules without the manual vs teaching you them the first time.
jergarmarhollow man crewgoes pew pew pewRegistered Userregular
edited February 2019
Race for the Galaxy still has a prominent place in my collection (Xeno Invasion is a fantastic expansion), and I've needed to teach it many times. I actually think the great failure in the game, the area where it shows its age, is NOT the simple fact of having a tricky iconography. Shoot, I think that a lot of recent games have equally baffling icons and symbols.
So rather, I've come to the strong opinion that these oft-mentioned criticisms actually hide a deeper criticism of the game, that it's impossible to see where the game is going at first. Oh, the major paths to victory are X, Y, Z? Great! But how would I ever know, without actually seeing them played out? For example, there's a card that lets you discard other cards for points... it would be totally reasonable to guess that maybe there's a whole system built around that, though you would be wrong. A more-recent game of this type would absolutely do more to show new players what's possible and important. Better player aids would absolutely help with that, as would some kind of tutorial or simplified ruleset.
And it's not even that the materials don't exist! In the 2nd expansion, there are goal tiles, that give points for "first to" and "the most" of something. These are not really my favorite way to play... except when teaching new players, where they are incredibly helpful. These cards provide exactly the kind of "intermediate goals" that new players desperately need, and most of them naturally lead to valid strategies, like focusing on military or amassing production worlds. The "most of" goals, furthermore, are a bit of a mini-game, because you need to keep track of what other players have played. Obviously a good thing to learn. This doesn't solve the difficulty in learning the game, but it's a long way along the right track. I wish that they had been integrated into some kind of "recommended configuration for newer players".
Another provocative statement: ultimately, the original game had the grand idea of having the entire complicated game be just a deck of cards. And then every expansion that has come out has been, to a greater or lesser extent, an admission that the game can be improved by adding additional elements, to make it less of a "pure card game". The most recent Xeno Invasion, in fact, does a lot to make RftG feel like a more modern game. It integrates the original ideas with a "persistent board state" in a compelling way (succeeding exactly where Alien Artifacts drew a lot of valid criticism). And it makes the game easier to learn and play, even considering that there's additional things to keep track of. So yeah, that's my take.
(As an aside, I almost always try to shorten tricky/long games with new players, so in this case I change the ending conditions to 10 cards in a tableau (instead of 12), and create the VP bank with 10 VP per player (instead of 12). Might be worth a try but YMMV.)
jergarmar on
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
+2
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Race already is on its second edition. I picked up the changed cards off bgg a couple weeks ago.
I don't have much trouble with the iconography, but it helps that I own and play Race, Roll, Jumpdrive, and New Frontiers...
Splendor has good iconography. Everything is straightforward with what it does.
Orleans and Altiplano are pretty good as well.
The more complex the game gets the worse having iconography without text to explain it gets. I wish more games with icons would just have simple reminder text on them so you don't have to look everything up.
Race for the Galaxy still has a prominent place in my collection (Xeno Invasion is a fantastic expansion), and I've needed to teach it many times. I actually think the great failure in the game, the area where it shows its age, is NOT the simple fact of having a tricky iconography. Shoot, I think that a lot of recent games have equally baffling icons and symbols.
So rather, I've come to the strong opinion that these oft-mentioned criticisms actually hide a deeper criticism of the game, that it's impossible to see where the game is going at first. Oh, the major paths to victory are X, Y, Z? Great! But how would I ever know, without actually seeing them played out? For example, there's a card that lets you discard other cards for points... it would be totally reasonable to guess that maybe there's a whole system built around that, though you would be wrong. A more-recent game of this type would absolutely do more to show new players what's possible and important. Better player aids would absolutely help with that, as would some kind of tutorial or simplified ruleset.
And it's not even that the materials don't exist! In the 2nd expansion, there are goal tiles, that give points for "first to" and "the most" of something. These are not really my favorite way to play... except when teaching new players, where they are incredibly helpful. These cards provide exactly the kind of "intermediate goals" that new players desperately need, and most of them naturally lead to valid strategies, like focusing on military or amassing production worlds. The "most of" goals, furthermore, are a bit of a mini-game, because you need to keep track of what other players have played. Obviously a good thing to learn. This doesn't solve the difficulty in learning the game, but it's a long way along the right track. I wish that they had been integrated into some kind of "recommended configuration for newer players".
Another provocative statement: ultimately, the original game had the grand idea of having the entire complicated game be just a deck of cards. And then every expansion that has come out has been, to a greater or lesser extent, an admission that the game can be improved by adding additional elements, to make it less of a "pure card game". The most recent Xeno Invasion, in fact, does a lot to make RftG feel like a more modern game. It integrates the original ideas with a "persistent board state" in a compelling way (succeeding exactly where Alien Artifacts drew a lot of valid criticism). And it makes the game easier to learn and play, even considering that there's additional things to keep track of. So yeah, that's my take.
(As an aside, I almost always try to shorten tricky/long games with new players, so in this case I change the ending conditions to 10 cards in a tableau (instead of 12), and create the VP bank with 10 VP per player (instead of 12). Might be worth a try but YMMV.)
I don't think a game having a learning curve is an inherent flaw...
Splendor has good iconography. Everything is straightforward with what it does.
Orleans and Altiplano are pretty good as well.
The more complex the game gets the worse having iconography without text to explain it gets. I wish more games with icons would just have simple reminder text on them so you don't have to look everything up.
The entire point of iconography is language independence.
The entire point of iconography is language independence.
No. That is one benefit of iconography.
However, icons are incredibly useful even if you use text as well. Nicely-designed icons are quicker to parse than text, and put people in a mindset where a symbol has a specific, technical meaning; regular language is prone to misinterpretation simply because language is fluid and words have multiple meanings.
Since we're talking Race for the Galaxy here, look no further than Roll for the Galaxy. This game uses largely the same symbols as Race, but I find that first-time players just don't have any problem at all understanding what's happening. Why? Because all the tiles are redundantly-coded with symbols and with text. New players can consult the text, while seasoned players see the symbols and never have to read the text.
I don't think a game having a learning curve is an inherent flaw...
I might not have fully set up the context, that Race for the Galaxy has been one of my favorite games since I started getting into the hobby. But it's hard to teach, and part of that is fixable without making a variant (i.e. better player aids or goals from the 1st expansion).
I have similar feelings about Food Chain Magnate, that it's way more "general audience" than even Splotter seems to realize (SU&SD make a similar point in their review, as well), judging by the "serious gamers only" blurb in game info and on the box, and the poorly-thought-out "beginner game" recommended in the rules, that removes Milestone cards.
Self-indulgent rant follows... you have been warned
I've been a bit obsessed recently with, to use a deliberately overwrought phrase, "ludological pedagogy". How various games, especially the critically-acclaimed "elite" ones, have wildly different ways to deal with the "learning curve", and that includes both the struggle for rule mastery, and the struggle for strategic mastery. Some really really care about it, some don't at all, and the line between those extremes are often defined by genre or even specific designers and publishers.
So from that, I think that game design is currently in a phase of "mastery manipulation", where the act of becoming "comfortable" with a game is more and more becoming part of the game experience itself. So think of all the legacy games, which keep very familiar games fresh by adding new rules and components at regular intervals. Just as you say, "Oh, I understand how this changes the game", then the rules are tweaked and you learn anew how to play. Think of expandable card games, which almost certainly spawned this idea of refamiliarization, whether it's a collectible format or a short-cycle expansion format. Think of all the RPG boardgames, with each mission and each level-up tweaking the underlying ruleset. Think of episodic gaming like Time Stories.
I'm not saying that this idea is brand new, but holy cow it seems popular right now. These types of games certainly seem to be transforming the top 50 on BGG, for example, even over 5 short years. Also, it might sounds like I'm complaining, one more person talking about the "consumerism of disposable gaming", but overall I think it's good for the hobby. Pandemic Legacy is currently #2 on BGG, and you could absolutely show it to new gamers. But the "old boys" like Brass or Through The Ages or even Power Grid might be a tougher sell. Maybe this is a necessary shift, as the hobby expands.
On the other hand, and this will vary wildly depending on the person, but perhaps it's hard for you to think of the last game you played that was genuinely new. That made you say, "Oh, I haven't played a game like that before". Perhaps these trends tend to marginalize games with innovate gameplay. And to come back around, take a game like Food Chain Magnate (and Splotter generally), which is perhaps reacting against this trend? Why else take such pains to repeatedly say that it's a "heavy strategy game", for "serious gamers"? There are certainly games that are tougher to learn, that don't feel like they need to put "SRS BSNS" all over their games.
jergarmar on
When I was a child, I had a fever... My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
The thing about RftG and it being difficult to see the game state as a beginner was that it was designed and released when Puerto Rico was the most popular game in the world for like 4 years in a row.
It was almost implied that anyone playing Race had already played Puerto Rico. And that does a lot of heavy lifting in learning the game.
On the other hand, and this will vary wildly depending on the person, but perhaps it's hard for you to think of the last game you played that was genuinely new. That made you say, "Oh, I haven't played a game like that before". Perhaps these trends tend to marginalize games with innovate gameplay. And to come back around, take a game like Food Chain Magnate (and Splotter generally), which is perhaps reacting against this trend? Why else take such pains to repeatedly say that it's a "heavy strategy game", for "serious gamers"? There are certainly games that are tougher to learn, that don't feel like they need to put "SRS BSNS" all over their games.
I think it's more that you can effectively be "out" of Food Chain Magnate after the first couple turns if you get outplayed badly enough.
That's not something you really want to toss at a newbie.
You sail around the world in the Nautilus, sinking ships, exploring, gathering treasure, inciting colonial uprisings with one of four random motives that acts as a score multiplier at the end for different objectives. It feels like FTL and Strange Adventures in Infinite Space had a boardgame baby.
You sail around the world in the Nautilus, sinking ships, exploring, gathering treasure, inciting colonial uprisings with one of four random motives that acts as a score multiplier at the end for different objectives. It feels like FTL and Strange Adventures in Infinite Space had a boardgame baby.
Yeah that description was definitely enough to get me to look into the game. After a quick glance, though, I'm not sure if there's space in my life for an expensive game that has a lot of bits and bobs, but is only designed for one player.
Posts
Pretty much exactly like this one:
Except black with ivory illustrations of geography and constellations, rather than Paris stuff. I even went the extra step and painted Elder Signs and whatnot on the outside.
Inside I have everything divided up with plastic storage containers and baggies. It's pretty tightly packed; it's almost lucky for me that it doesn't seem EH is going to get any more love from FFG!
I just glued in a square box card divider, and it makes 5 neat rows.
You can order blank standard boardgame size boxes also
I stored all of Eldritch Horror in one of these:
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Husky-22-in-22-Compartment-Connect-Cantilever-Organizer-for-Small-Parts-Organizer-230379/207138779
Aside from the map boards, obviously, it stores everything really well. Tokens and small cards go in the top compartment, and the regular cards all fit in the bottom. I saw this guy's post and was like, yep, I should get that: https://imgur.com/a/bYdJg
The downside is that thing is freaking huge. But it does have a nice carrying handle!
I was 0 for 2 on Butcher fights before this, but we only went a bloody beat him! Not only that but these Clan of Death-Survival of the Fittest-Badass-Mofos beat him really quite handily. And killed him on the special hit location that leaves him decapitated and gives everyone a permanent bonus. And we got his cleaver.
We had an amusing bit of luck where he managed to knock over our entire team with reaction attacks and collisions during our turn, and then it turns out he doesn't lower himself to attacking non-threats so for his go he just stood around glowering for a turn.
He still killed someone because he has an attack which if it lands automatically causes a critical head injury (40% chance of instant death) which is insane.
Then our settlement event gave us +2 on endeavour rolls for the round which allowed us to squeeze out another berserker baby.
We've now got quite a stable of survivors with permanent bonuses to choose from. This game is going far too well.
Even if it's one-and-done, I'm still inclined to follow SU&SD's suggestion, to set up the game for a different "couple", and just spectate and gossip about the events and characters. Dang, that was a good review.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
So then, what do the sealed packs in the base game represent? I'm trying to figure out how to explain the game to my wife, so that she knows what to expect.
And yes, I'm fully aware that I'm negotiating my relationship in order to play a game about negotiating relationships.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
Otherwise, different scenarios still have good reasons to be played - chief among them is the play time. Sunday Afternoon Date is really quite short all-in-all (and deceptively, that can make it rather challenging to "win" for your characters), but the later scenarios will have more cards played in each act, giving you a longer game. They also see you drawing from the Sweet/Serious/Drama decks differently, which means that different scenarios have more or less capacity for more naturally progressive or more erratic relationships.
Like, honestly, there's not a ton that is different about the scenarios other than the tone they set and how they lay out the rules for your particular game, but those things make a rather large impact, so ... trust me, there might well be a point when you feel like just being high-school sweethearts again. ;P
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
Since I have you "on the line", and since the expansions are still on sale, any expansions you think are particularly good? I did pick up "Trouble With the Inlaws", because, ummmm... art meets reality?
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
I would buy them while they're on sale, because at best you want them and at worst they give you a more complete game to unload that cost you less. But that's just me - it's the sort of game that I think is worth doing that with. I'm not so much for buying every expansion otherwise.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
Race for the Galaxy seems pretty neat? It very badly needs a second edition to redesign all of the cards and the way the playercards provide you info, but I liked it
and I was way into Dice Forge? That's a nice short game where you're constantly making interesting decisions, it's all about mitigating RNG, and customizing dice feels really neat
as far as I can tell I don't even think there's really any player interaction, it's just who can build the best engine
Do you just mean the poor iconography or is it something else?
it groups them by phase when by icon would be significantly easier to navigate, like you don't need to include multiple explanations that the card with hand icon means you draw
At this point in time, it's hard to say if it could justify a graphical redesign. "It's a classic" only goes so far with the fast-moving cult-of-the-new world we live in.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
It simultaneously is hard for new players, but once you get it, it becomes really hard to see how to improve it. They cover a LOT of game design space using a tiny area, and are surprisingly good at it, it just has the fundamental problem of it is a LOT of design space. But hey, I'd love to be proven wrong and there really are some more elegant and clear solutions, because getting more people playing Race is always good. I'm only talking about the iconography on the cards btw, the way it's laid out for the players in the manual and reference could be improved a lot.
Dice Forge has some very minor player interaction depending on what Heroic Feats are available. Like... making them roll and losing their stuff or copying their die face(s). When you bounce someone from a feat island they get a bonus!
There may be a better way to do it but the system is not without merit.
When I think about it it's just the bad examples that spring to mind. The winners there end up being more like a lookup table than actual icons explaining anything. Trickerion was pretty bad for it as I remember, as was 7 Wonders.
The wife cannot wrap her head around the icons in Race for the Galaxy. Of course we don’t play it enough to learn the symbols, which means we don’t remember them...and the cycle repeats endlessly.
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
So rather, I've come to the strong opinion that these oft-mentioned criticisms actually hide a deeper criticism of the game, that it's impossible to see where the game is going at first. Oh, the major paths to victory are X, Y, Z? Great! But how would I ever know, without actually seeing them played out? For example, there's a card that lets you discard other cards for points... it would be totally reasonable to guess that maybe there's a whole system built around that, though you would be wrong. A more-recent game of this type would absolutely do more to show new players what's possible and important. Better player aids would absolutely help with that, as would some kind of tutorial or simplified ruleset.
And it's not even that the materials don't exist! In the 2nd expansion, there are goal tiles, that give points for "first to" and "the most" of something. These are not really my favorite way to play... except when teaching new players, where they are incredibly helpful. These cards provide exactly the kind of "intermediate goals" that new players desperately need, and most of them naturally lead to valid strategies, like focusing on military or amassing production worlds. The "most of" goals, furthermore, are a bit of a mini-game, because you need to keep track of what other players have played. Obviously a good thing to learn. This doesn't solve the difficulty in learning the game, but it's a long way along the right track. I wish that they had been integrated into some kind of "recommended configuration for newer players".
Another provocative statement: ultimately, the original game had the grand idea of having the entire complicated game be just a deck of cards. And then every expansion that has come out has been, to a greater or lesser extent, an admission that the game can be improved by adding additional elements, to make it less of a "pure card game". The most recent Xeno Invasion, in fact, does a lot to make RftG feel like a more modern game. It integrates the original ideas with a "persistent board state" in a compelling way (succeeding exactly where Alien Artifacts drew a lot of valid criticism). And it makes the game easier to learn and play, even considering that there's additional things to keep track of. So yeah, that's my take.
(As an aside, I almost always try to shorten tricky/long games with new players, so in this case I change the ending conditions to 10 cards in a tableau (instead of 12), and create the VP bank with 10 VP per player (instead of 12). Might be worth a try but YMMV.)
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
I don't have much trouble with the iconography, but it helps that I own and play Race, Roll, Jumpdrive, and New Frontiers...
Orleans and Altiplano are pretty good as well.
The more complex the game gets the worse having iconography without text to explain it gets. I wish more games with icons would just have simple reminder text on them so you don't have to look everything up.
I don't think a game having a learning curve is an inherent flaw...
The entire point of iconography is language independence.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
However, icons are incredibly useful even if you use text as well. Nicely-designed icons are quicker to parse than text, and put people in a mindset where a symbol has a specific, technical meaning; regular language is prone to misinterpretation simply because language is fluid and words have multiple meanings.
Since we're talking Race for the Galaxy here, look no further than Roll for the Galaxy. This game uses largely the same symbols as Race, but I find that first-time players just don't have any problem at all understanding what's happening. Why? Because all the tiles are redundantly-coded with symbols and with text. New players can consult the text, while seasoned players see the symbols and never have to read the text.
I might not have fully set up the context, that Race for the Galaxy has been one of my favorite games since I started getting into the hobby. But it's hard to teach, and part of that is fixable without making a variant (i.e. better player aids or goals from the 1st expansion).
I have similar feelings about Food Chain Magnate, that it's way more "general audience" than even Splotter seems to realize (SU&SD make a similar point in their review, as well), judging by the "serious gamers only" blurb in game info and on the box, and the poorly-thought-out "beginner game" recommended in the rules, that removes Milestone cards.
Self-indulgent rant follows... you have been warned
I've been a bit obsessed recently with, to use a deliberately overwrought phrase, "ludological pedagogy". How various games, especially the critically-acclaimed "elite" ones, have wildly different ways to deal with the "learning curve", and that includes both the struggle for rule mastery, and the struggle for strategic mastery. Some really really care about it, some don't at all, and the line between those extremes are often defined by genre or even specific designers and publishers.
So from that, I think that game design is currently in a phase of "mastery manipulation", where the act of becoming "comfortable" with a game is more and more becoming part of the game experience itself. So think of all the legacy games, which keep very familiar games fresh by adding new rules and components at regular intervals. Just as you say, "Oh, I understand how this changes the game", then the rules are tweaked and you learn anew how to play. Think of expandable card games, which almost certainly spawned this idea of refamiliarization, whether it's a collectible format or a short-cycle expansion format. Think of all the RPG boardgames, with each mission and each level-up tweaking the underlying ruleset. Think of episodic gaming like Time Stories.
I'm not saying that this idea is brand new, but holy cow it seems popular right now. These types of games certainly seem to be transforming the top 50 on BGG, for example, even over 5 short years. Also, it might sounds like I'm complaining, one more person talking about the "consumerism of disposable gaming", but overall I think it's good for the hobby. Pandemic Legacy is currently #2 on BGG, and you could absolutely show it to new gamers. But the "old boys" like Brass or Through The Ages or even Power Grid might be a tougher sell. Maybe this is a necessary shift, as the hobby expands.
On the other hand, and this will vary wildly depending on the person, but perhaps it's hard for you to think of the last game you played that was genuinely new. That made you say, "Oh, I haven't played a game like that before". Perhaps these trends tend to marginalize games with innovate gameplay. And to come back around, take a game like Food Chain Magnate (and Splotter generally), which is perhaps reacting against this trend? Why else take such pains to repeatedly say that it's a "heavy strategy game", for "serious gamers"? There are certainly games that are tougher to learn, that don't feel like they need to put "SRS BSNS" all over their games.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
It was almost implied that anyone playing Race had already played Puerto Rico. And that does a lot of heavy lifting in learning the game.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
I think it's more that you can effectively be "out" of Food Chain Magnate after the first couple turns if you get outplayed badly enough.
That's not something you really want to toss at a newbie.
You sail around the world in the Nautilus, sinking ships, exploring, gathering treasure, inciting colonial uprisings with one of four random motives that acts as a score multiplier at the end for different objectives. It feels like FTL and Strange Adventures in Infinite Space had a boardgame baby.
Go on...
It's a solitaire game (with some extremely weak multiplayer mode tacked on) if you're looking for a good one.
Would recommend.