I'm finding myself hearing the siren call of Food Chain Magnate
I've never played anything like it though so for 100 bucks I'm very wary of giving it a go
One of the Splotter games was recently picked up by a proper publisher. so there's hope that Food Chain Magnate and Roads & Boats may get proper editions soon
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
+1
Options
Powerpuppiesdrinking coffee in themountain cabinRegistered Userregular
I'm finding myself hearing the siren call of Food Chain Magnate
I've never played anything like it though so for 100 bucks I'm very wary of giving it a go
One of the Splotter games was recently picked up by a proper publisher. so there's hope that Food Chain Magnate and Roads & Boats may get proper editions soon
FCM is in-stock right now at CSI, so it is available.
But I hear ya, Mr. G, I kind of agonized over the decision to get it, and if at all possible try before you buy, but it rocketed to the top of my collection.
EDIT: Oh dang, FCM: The Ketchup Mechanism is available for preorder (for Oct to Dec, pre-pre-preorder?) on MM... for $98. Hnnnnngggghh.
I'm finding myself hearing the siren call of Food Chain Magnate
I've never played anything like it though so for 100 bucks I'm very wary of giving it a go
One of the Splotter games was recently picked up by a proper publisher. so there's hope that Food Chain Magnate and Roads & Boats may get proper editions soon
That was Bus, which is either their oldest or second oldest game, and hadn't been reprinted since 2001. The same cannot be said of any other Splotter title - especially FCM which has been reprinted regularly since 2015 and is about to get an expansion.
Someone would have to give them a hell of a deal to have them give up their unquestionably most popular and successful game. :P
It ain't one of the top of page categories because it's a pretty chunky chunky, but I have to word some words about Caverna: The Forgotten Folk. If you liked Caverna but you didn't like how it was always the same Caverna, this one's got eight variant game modes for one player apiece!
It sounds nuts, but everything has kind of held together across plays so far. One thing to keep in mind if you pick it up yourself is that, in addition to always adventuring vs. never adventuring being a balance that it's never good to be on the popular side of, tons of weaker actions vs. fewer stronger actions is also one of those balances. This is especially true of Dark Elves and their adventure goblins.
Holy crap I forgot to buy this!
Lykouragh on
0
Options
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
I'm finding myself hearing the siren call of Food Chain Magnate
I've never played anything like it though so for 100 bucks I'm very wary of giving it a go
One of the Splotter games was recently picked up by a proper publisher. so there's hope that Food Chain Magnate and Roads & Boats may get proper editions soon
That was Bus, which is either their oldest or second oldest game, and hadn't been reprinted since 2001. The same cannot be said of any other Splotter title - especially FCM which has been reprinted regularly since 2015 and is about to get an expansion.
Someone would have to give them a hell of a deal to have them give up their unquestionably most popular and successful game. :P
I'd have thought it would be an easier sell on both sides given the popularity
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
It ain't one of the top of page categories because it's a pretty chunky chunky, but I have to word some words about Caverna: The Forgotten Folk. If you liked Caverna but you didn't like how it was always the same Caverna, this one's got eight variant game modes for one player apiece!
It sounds nuts, but everything has kind of held together across plays so far. One thing to keep in mind if you pick it up yourself is that, in addition to always adventuring vs. never adventuring being a balance that it's never good to be on the popular side of, tons of weaker actions vs. fewer stronger actions is also one of those balances. This is especially true of Dark Elves and their adventure goblins.
Holy crap I forgot to buy this!
Yeah, it and The Norwegians (A Feast For Odin) came out with like zero fanfare, but they're both outstanding expansions.
Ya we've enjoyed it quite a bit. I feel a bit bad about missing this rule as it's helped me the most. I saw the value of cities early, along with marks, and found a way to pigeon hole myself in australia being the only person being able to start there. I expand into asia, and due to cities, get quite a few troops early. I shouldn't be able to expand as quick in any of these games. I possibly still win, as I've played quite well, dice have gone well, and me being over by myself my family usually starts fighting while I'm slowly expanding. I also happen to have
taking a city gets you a card on the people I've been able to pick most games. So I get out to a coin lead early. By taking australlia like I did I always get 4th placement as it doesn't matter. Only I can start in australlia with all of them being cities/scarred and one being a major city I placed down.
We're having a lot of fun though and I almost want to buy another copy to start again when we're done. We know how certain things play out, but the game would play out totally different.
0
Options
mysticjuicer[he/him] I'm a muscle wizardand I cast P U N C HRegistered Userregular
They are business management games that are always about trains. They have an 18xx naming scheme - so entries include 1848, 18CZ, etc. They are long, quite complicated, can be crashed by inexperienced players due to the economic simulation and generally produced by publishers with awful graphic design, no art direction and component quality around the level of reusing cereal boxes.
18XX is the generic term for a series of board games that, with a few exceptions, recreate the building of railroad corporations during the 19th century; individual games within the series use particular years in the 19th century as their title (usually the date of the start of railway development in the area of the world they cover), or "18" plus a two-letter geographical designator (such as 18EU for a game set in the European Union). With few exceptions (such as 2038), 18XX titles are multiplayer board games without random variables in their game mechanics.
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
+5
Options
mysticjuicer[he/him] I'm a muscle wizardand I cast P U N C HRegistered Userregular
Computing payouts by spreadsheet speeds the game up immensely, which is nice since the one I played (1846) still took 5 hours. I appreciate them conceptually but I don't think I would ever play another one.
I used to play 1856 semi-regularly. The art was maybe slightly better than the above, but the rated 300 minute playtime for that one is about right (maybe short). When you start playing at 9pm trying to run the longer routes in the wee hours was just mind numbing
Not really my thing these days, but I had fun with it.
I played Reykholt the other day, which is a new Uwe Rosenberg worker placement game about running greenhouses in Iceland if memory serves. The hook is that there's no points. Each round during scoring you can pay vegetables to advance up the victory track. There are 5 vegetable types of ascending rarity, and the first 5 spaces on the track are 1 of each in ascending order of rarity. Then 2 of each etc. So the entire thing is getting vegetables, and managing your greenhouses to get you the right vegetables in the future. We ended up at the beginning of the 6per section of the victory track, and man the game gets hard as those numbers go up. It was quick, easy to learn, and satisfyingly crunchy. Would recommend it if you like that kind of thing.
I used to play 1856 semi-regularly. The art was maybe slightly better than the above, but the rated 300 minute playtime for that one is about right (maybe short). When you start playing at 9pm trying to run the longer routes in the wee hours was just mind numbing
Not really my thing these days, but I had fun with it.
If anyone wants a digital economic warfare game I highly recommend Offworld Trading Company. Its an enthralling experience.
Cantido on
3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
0
Options
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
edited April 2019
Arkham LCG Carcosa stuff.
So my Minh/Mark campaign finally got around to Dim Carcosa. They have been doing a good job through the campaign except for the aforementioned time when we cheated.
Dim Carcosa was a nightmare. Hastur doesn't fuck. I have the one that has nine health per investigator and turns all Elder Signs, +1s, 0s, and -1s, to autofails. It's fuckin bruuuuutal. We drew too many monsters and it was just curtains for everyone.
I think I'm taking a mulligan on the scenario though. This was my first play through of the scenario even though it's my second time through the campaign since Ashcan failed on the scenario prior. Part of me is like "I should just go through again and then maybe I'll triumph and it'll be more earned" but I kinda want to move onto TFA and I never got a facecheck of the scenario to kind of know what's going on so I think it's fair.
Game continues to be super good. There's just not enough time in the day to try all the investigators and combos I want.
The first time I played was a perfect storm of how not to introduce somebody to an 18xx. The last turn was skipped and computed by spreadsheet
The first time i played an 18xx i never managed to own a railroad and didn't make a single interesting decision all game.
It was also the only time i played an 18xx.
i'm not wholly convinced I dislike FCM or 18xx games, but boy howdy is there a big responsibility to introduce people to them appropriately and both of my introducers failed (FCM a little, 18xx the max possible failure)
The 18xx guy I now avoid games with, trying to pick my table at meetups after he does if possible
also yes the component design is bad for both, and the art is bad for both
0
Options
ArcticLancerBest served chilled.Registered Userregular
edited April 2019
Lies and slander. The art for FCM is great. Look at the art for Antiquity if you want to see Splotter at its worst. :P
Not familiar with Lords of Vegas, what sounds similar?
Lords has a similar idea with its points system, whereby the amount you have to score each time you do goes up the higher up on the victory track you go.
So for instance, in the beginning if a casino scores you 1 point, you will get that point. But there comes a threshold on the track when you now have to score at least 2 points to move forward. So those 1-point casinos won't do it for you anymore. Then there is a threshold where you now need 3 points at a time, then 4 points.
This Uwe game seems to have done something similar, just with taking the actual numbers away. But the idea is the same - the further on you are, the more you will need to produce in order to keep going.
Cluck cluck, gibber gibber, my old man's a mushroom, etc.
+1
Options
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
I don't think I would go so far as to say the art for FCM is good, but it fits the game and the overall graphic design is quite solid. Which is a lot better than Antiquity.
Also, all of the components look like they belong to the same game. Which is a lot better than Indonesia.
I don't think I would go so far as to say the art for FCM is good, but it fits the game and the overall graphic design is quite solid. Which is a lot better than Antiquity.
Also, all of the components look like they belong to the same game. Which is a lot better than Indonesia.
Agree. I think FCM has a kind of "plain, simple, and chunky" vibe. The cards are clear and simple, the board and food items are solid and bright and plain and obvious, and so on. It's not a pretty game, but there's not a lot of clutter, nor things to squint over, the board state is pretty clear at a glance.
18XX games are fantastic with the right group of people after they have played a game or two and know the rules. No actions are done in a vacuum, every single thing from buying stocks to laying tracks, to whether a train pays out dividends or not affects everyone at the table. If you watch carefully you can see players buying up stocks to try and take control of your train company, or maybe they are actively sabotaging their own company's future because they are planning to dump it in the next round, leaving their next highest shareholder holding a company with several obsolete trains. You can start up a train company with a fantastic amount of starting capitol only to not run trains but use it to finance your other lines and hope the game ends before you're forced to actually start running trains. Someone's doing really well but isn't protecting their stock, buy some stock up and then instantly sell it to tank their value, in fact collude with everyone not in the company and work together to sabotage them! Or maybe do something really crazy like simply run one successful train company for the entire game while everyone else attempts to lie, cheat and deceive their way to the poor house. You can't do anything by yourself, but there is always the threat that whoever you work with will see an opportunity to backstab you for their own profit. On the other hand, if you always betray people, you'll never be able to make any deals so its a fine balancing act, when does the money get too good?
They are very math heavy and rule's lawyery games (the rules are clear but there are a LOT of important fine points to how things happen) and while it seems like a train building game it really does sit heavier on the business side of the things mechanically, with the trains as an interesting back drop. They are not friendly games, there is a very real possibility a new or unaware player could have a rotten time or go unexpectedly bankrupt early. One of my main issues is there is always the "pile on the leader" mentality since (most) everything is public information and if you don't then they could get to a point where they cannot be brought down. Art and components are low quality, though I'd argue that does force the focus on the game mechanics and the player interaction rather than the board. They are also very variable lengths as bankruptcy is generally the end condition and dependent on how game progresses and how people do. Generally on the longer side of several hours though I have played some that were drastically shorter.
My favorite of the lot I have tried is 1830 and is the cruelest of the rules I've seen, with bankruptcy and forced purchasing a likely problem. It is very META heavy (First round NYNH and BO start up each by a pair of people, BO buys a second train, goes to these certain cities) but then somebody does something different. Sometimes it works and the META changes, most of the time it doesn't and everything quickly gets thrown into Chaos. Each 18XX plays radically different with seemingly minor changes to how the stocks can be bought or sold or the way the maps are set up. Each game has a delightful narrative and most of the fun was talking about What Ifs after the game.
I used to play 1856 semi-regularly. The art was maybe slightly better than the above, but the rated 300 minute playtime for that one is about right (maybe short). When you start playing at 9pm trying to run the longer routes in the wee hours was just mind numbing
Not really my thing these days, but I had fun with it.
If anyone wants a digital economic warfare game I highly recommend Offworld Trading Company. Its an enthralling experience.
I’ll give that a look, thanks!
I backed City of the Big Shoulders as a board game with some promise in the 18xx ‘style’ but a more doable playtime for me these days. I do miss the core gameplay sometimes, just not the length.
Oh, come and shake me 'till I'm dry
0
Options
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
My favorite of the lot I have tried is 1830 and is the cruelest of the rules I've seen, with bankruptcy and forced purchasing a likely problem
I did a PbP of 18Ireland and only three players finished the game as the other two went bankrupt. It's the rare 18xx that both has no loan/bankruptcy escape mechanic, because it hates you, but also doesn't end on bankruptcy, because it usually would.
The player elimination in 18xx is just a hard pass for me, I have no desire to start a long heavy game with 4 friends and have 2 people knocked out midway.
0
Options
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
The player elimination in 18xx is just a hard pass for me, I have no desire to start a long heavy game with 4 friends and have 2 people knocked out midway.
Most don't have actual player elimination -- if someone bankrupts the game ends.
However, 18xx doesn't have catch up mechanics so they all have virtual elimination.
Hating hard elimination is a pretty understandable take.
I think as time goes on, I've decided I'm OK with it -- for certain implementations. Some of the old-school games were super long and you could just randomly get kicked out early on if unlucky. No amount of skill kept you safe. That's a type of hard elimination I hate.
I don't mind hard elimination in short games, if it adds tension. I also prefer hard elimination to a soft elimination where you have no chance to affect the game and you're just there so the game keeps working for players that actually can win.
Maybe it's because it was there for so much of my early board gaming, but I do sometimes miss the kind of hard elimination from just not being good enough. Like say, going bankrupt in Age of Steam because you have no idea what you're doing when you bid. I'll agree that there are all kinds of problems with that in a game design -- for one, it tends to be really unforgiving for new players -- but I can also remember the feeling of really 'getting' a game and finally becoming competitive.
Posts
I've never played anything like it though so for 100 bucks I'm very wary of giving it a go
One of the Splotter games was recently picked up by a proper publisher. so there's hope that Food Chain Magnate and Roads & Boats may get proper editions soon
What attracts you to it over an 18xx? You can get an 18xx for less than a hundo right?
That I know what FCM is and don’t know what that is
FCM is in-stock right now at CSI, so it is available.
But I hear ya, Mr. G, I kind of agonized over the decision to get it, and if at all possible try before you buy, but it rocketed to the top of my collection.
EDIT: Oh dang, FCM: The Ketchup Mechanism is available for preorder (for Oct to Dec, pre-pre-preorder?) on MM... for $98. Hnnnnngggghh.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
Someone would have to give them a hell of a deal to have them give up their unquestionably most popular and successful game. :P
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
Holy crap I forgot to buy this!
I'd have thought it would be an easier sell on both sides given the popularity
Yeah, it and The Norwegians (A Feast For Odin) came out with like zero fanfare, but they're both outstanding expansions.
hmmm, very fair. A cautious response!
It would probably help if they were generally prettier
Ya we've enjoyed it quite a bit. I feel a bit bad about missing this rule as it's helped me the most. I saw the value of cities early, along with marks, and found a way to pigeon hole myself in australia being the only person being able to start there. I expand into asia, and due to cities, get quite a few troops early. I shouldn't be able to expand as quick in any of these games. I possibly still win, as I've played quite well, dice have gone well, and me being over by myself my family usually starts fighting while I'm slowly expanding. I also happen to have
We're having a lot of fun though and I almost want to buy another copy to start again when we're done. We know how certain things play out, but the game would play out totally different.
They are business management games that are always about trains. They have an 18xx naming scheme - so entries include 1848, 18CZ, etc. They are long, quite complicated, can be crashed by inexperienced players due to the economic simulation and generally produced by publishers with awful graphic design, no art direction and component quality around the level of reusing cereal boxes.
The first time I played was a perfect storm of how not to introduce somebody to an 18xx. The last turn was skipped and computed by spreadsheet
Not really my thing these days, but I had fun with it.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/pablocampy
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
If anyone wants a digital economic warfare game I highly recommend Offworld Trading Company. Its an enthralling experience.
Dim Carcosa was a nightmare. Hastur doesn't fuck. I have the one that has nine health per investigator and turns all Elder Signs, +1s, 0s, and -1s, to autofails. It's fuckin bruuuuutal. We drew too many monsters and it was just curtains for everyone.
I think I'm taking a mulligan on the scenario though. This was my first play through of the scenario even though it's my second time through the campaign since Ashcan failed on the scenario prior. Part of me is like "I should just go through again and then maybe I'll triumph and it'll be more earned" but I kinda want to move onto TFA and I never got a facecheck of the scenario to kind of know what's going on so I think it's fair.
The first time i played an 18xx i never managed to own a railroad and didn't make a single interesting decision all game.
It was also the only time i played an 18xx.
Nintendo ID: Pastalonius
Smite\LoL:Gremlidin \ WoW & Overwatch & Hots: Gremlidin#1734
3ds: 3282-2248-0453
i'm not wholly convinced I dislike FCM or 18xx games, but boy howdy is there a big responsibility to introduce people to them appropriately and both of my introducers failed (FCM a little, 18xx the max possible failure)
The 18xx guy I now avoid games with, trying to pick my table at meetups after he does if possible
also yes the component design is bad for both, and the art is bad for both
[Edit]
MMMM, GRAPHIC DESIGN.
Perhaps I can interest you in my meager selection of pins?
Lords has a similar idea with its points system, whereby the amount you have to score each time you do goes up the higher up on the victory track you go.
So for instance, in the beginning if a casino scores you 1 point, you will get that point. But there comes a threshold on the track when you now have to score at least 2 points to move forward. So those 1-point casinos won't do it for you anymore. Then there is a threshold where you now need 3 points at a time, then 4 points.
This Uwe game seems to have done something similar, just with taking the actual numbers away. But the idea is the same - the further on you are, the more you will need to produce in order to keep going.
Also, all of the components look like they belong to the same game. Which is a lot better than Indonesia.
Agree. I think FCM has a kind of "plain, simple, and chunky" vibe. The cards are clear and simple, the board and food items are solid and bright and plain and obvious, and so on. It's not a pretty game, but there's not a lot of clutter, nor things to squint over, the board state is pretty clear at a glance.
My BoardGameGeek profile
Battle.net: TheGerm#1430 (Hearthstone, Destiny 2)
They are very math heavy and rule's lawyery games (the rules are clear but there are a LOT of important fine points to how things happen) and while it seems like a train building game it really does sit heavier on the business side of the things mechanically, with the trains as an interesting back drop. They are not friendly games, there is a very real possibility a new or unaware player could have a rotten time or go unexpectedly bankrupt early. One of my main issues is there is always the "pile on the leader" mentality since (most) everything is public information and if you don't then they could get to a point where they cannot be brought down. Art and components are low quality, though I'd argue that does force the focus on the game mechanics and the player interaction rather than the board. They are also very variable lengths as bankruptcy is generally the end condition and dependent on how game progresses and how people do. Generally on the longer side of several hours though I have played some that were drastically shorter.
My favorite of the lot I have tried is 1830 and is the cruelest of the rules I've seen, with bankruptcy and forced purchasing a likely problem. It is very META heavy (First round NYNH and BO start up each by a pair of people, BO buys a second train, goes to these certain cities) but then somebody does something different. Sometimes it works and the META changes, most of the time it doesn't and everything quickly gets thrown into Chaos. Each 18XX plays radically different with seemingly minor changes to how the stocks can be bought or sold or the way the maps are set up. Each game has a delightful narrative and most of the fun was talking about What Ifs after the game.
I backed City of the Big Shoulders as a board game with some promise in the 18xx ‘style’ but a more doable playtime for me these days. I do miss the core gameplay sometimes, just not the length.
I did a PbP of 18Ireland and only three players finished the game as the other two went bankrupt. It's the rare 18xx that both has no loan/bankruptcy escape mechanic, because it hates you, but also doesn't end on bankruptcy, because it usually would.
Most don't have actual player elimination -- if someone bankrupts the game ends.
However, 18xx doesn't have catch up mechanics so they all have virtual elimination.
I think as time goes on, I've decided I'm OK with it -- for certain implementations. Some of the old-school games were super long and you could just randomly get kicked out early on if unlucky. No amount of skill kept you safe. That's a type of hard elimination I hate.
I don't mind hard elimination in short games, if it adds tension. I also prefer hard elimination to a soft elimination where you have no chance to affect the game and you're just there so the game keeps working for players that actually can win.
Maybe it's because it was there for so much of my early board gaming, but I do sometimes miss the kind of hard elimination from just not being good enough. Like say, going bankrupt in Age of Steam because you have no idea what you're doing when you bid. I'll agree that there are all kinds of problems with that in a game design -- for one, it tends to be really unforgiving for new players -- but I can also remember the feeling of really 'getting' a game and finally becoming competitive.