Board Games!

[Xapi]

AGoT also has some luck in the Westeros Cards, wich define when new units are placed on the board and other stuff. Although the cards affect everyone equally, you usually want a specific card to come up and your neighbour really doesn't want you to get it, or viceversa.

So there is some luck, but it is heavily dwarfed by strategy.

[cooldes]

yeah my favorite board game is wiz war

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I found those rules ended up causing more complexity in explaining the game than in executing it, myself. They make sense, and I see why they're all in there.

I mean, I get that they have to exist because there's no "priority" rules between pieces (so a draw is basically "everything bounces"), but it's really annoying to plan around, because I have to be like "okay so I can make this order and that order, but if this happens then those bounce and I have to make that order instead, but wait how does this possible combination of moves interact again?"

When there's literally something like 30 special cases at the end of the rulebook, that's kinda too many for me.

[Cikomyr]

I mean, I get that they have to exist because there's no "priority" rules between pieces (so a draw is basically "everything bounces"), but it's really annoying to plan around, because I have to be like "okay so I can make this order and that order, but if this happens then those bounce and I have to make that order instead, but wait how does this possible combination of moves interact again?"

When there's literally something like 30 special cases at the end of the rulebook, that's kinda too many for me.

Diplomacy is probably one of the few game that would benefit best from a digitalisation so that players can issue orders and have outcome resolved by a bunch of networked iPads.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Diplomacy is probably one of the few game that would benefit best from a digitalisation so that players can issue orders and have outcome resolved by a bunch of networked iPads.

That'd be pretty cool. Doubly so if they had some sort of "predictive" element where you could see what happens to your orders if certain players take particular actions. That's the bit that trips me up the most.

[Cikomyr]

That'd be pretty cool. Doubly so if they had some sort of "predictive" element where you could see what happens to your orders if certain players take particular actions. That's the bit that trips me up the most.

Oh yhea. Good point. Just put your orders, and you could simulate rival movements.

[VoxRationis]

I mean, I get that they have to exist because there's no "priority" rules between pieces (so a draw is basically "everything bounces"), but it's really annoying to plan around, because I have to be like "okay so I can make this order and that order, but if this happens then those bounce and I have to make that order instead, but wait how does this possible combination of moves interact again?"

I always thought that was part of the point of the game, part of the draw. It's like 7-way chess; a large amount of cognitive space is dedicated to planning move and countermove.

[TheEmerged]

Diplomacy is probably one of the few game that would benefit best from a digitalisation so that players can issue orders and have outcome resolved by a bunch of networked iPads.

There was one published by Avalon Hill, and then the one I was aware of by Hasbro in the 90's (Link). I seem to recall several reviewers complaining about the AI in the Hasbro one being weak, especially relative to that whole "there are known openings\strategies" thing.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I always thought that was part of the point of the game, part of the draw. It's like 7-way chess; a large amount of cognitive space is dedicated to planning move and countermove.

The move and countermove are definitely part of the draw, but for me the move/countermove stuff comes from unforgivably complex interactions. The move/countermove in Chess doesn't require you to resolve chains of dependent actions, or to plan ahead with all of those possible actions (and the ripples of those actions) kept in mind.

You don't go "well if I choose to move my pawn, and they move their rook up, I'll take priority because my pawn is supported by my knight, but if instead Player C moves their bishop up, that breaks the support of my knight and everyone bounces, unless Player D moves in with support, but if I move my knight instead, that breaks Player D's support and that bounces".

[Chen]

The move and countermove are definitely part of the draw, but for me the move/countermove stuff comes from unforgivably complex interactions. The move/countermove in Chess doesn't require you to resolve chains of dependent actions, or to plan ahead with all of those possible actions (and the ripples of those actions) kept in mind.

You don't go "well if I choose to move my pawn, and they move their rook up, I'll take priority because my pawn is supported by my knight, but if instead Player C moves their bishop up, that breaks the support of my knight and everyone bounces, unless Player D moves in with support, but if I move my knight instead, that breaks Player D's support and that bounces".

While not directly dependent, you definitely need to be thinking about what your opponent is going to be moving and how that will affect the board position in chess. The exact interactions may not be the same complexity but the overall principle is very close to the same thing.

Figuring out those odd moves to make everyone bounce is probably the most strategic element in Diplomacy. I remember a game where I kept stymieing a Turkey/Austria alliance with Italy that one of them eventually just joined me and betrayed the other out of frustration. Good times :P

[Erloas]

Which expansion of Carcassonne are good to get? I have the Inns and Cathedrals, Tower expansion, river, and Count. Though we don't play with the tower or count mechanics right now.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Which expansion of Carcassonne are good to get? I have the Inns and Cathedrals, Tower expansion, river, and Count. Though we don't play with the tower or count mechanics right now.

Traders & Builders introduces some really interesting variability to the cities. Princess & Dragon is also just plain fun, in my opinion--if a bit more player-versus-player.

[Cikomyr]

My gf just gave me the Star Wars chess game for my birthday. Pretty cool set.

But one thing on the back made me laugh: they try to sell the game of chess.

"Checkmate!
Form your strategy, make your move, outwit your opponent!"

I was like.. "Uh.. How do your sell the game of chess to someone who never heard of it/played it?"

[VoxRationis]

Has anyone played "Imperium?" The Wikipedia page makes it sound interesting.

[TheEmerged]

So, did anyone score any great board games over the holiday? Mine was Dead Of Winter, and yes I bought it for myself We've got the first game with the full group scheduled for an upcoming Saturday, but I've had some trial runs with the guys at work already.

>The Crossroad mechanic, as I'd thought, is a much better way of handling Events than I've previously seen. They're not triggering as often as I'd expected, but I've come to think of that as a good thing; as a result, they *feel* like game-shattering decisions when one does trigger. A few of them are NOT all-audience friendly, but I've only found a handful I'm going to take out for the full group (which includes a young teen & a pre-teen).

>Somewhat to my surprise, a few of the non-Betrayer objectives might as well be Betrayer objectives. The "Revenge" objective for examples requires that 3 survivor die. No really, just TRY doing that one without looking like a traitor, and yes I say that because it came up in one of the runs with the team at work. The nice thing is, everyone having their own objective keeps it from being as obvious who the traitor is \ if there is a traitor.

>The exposure dice mechanic is terrifying. You know that thing D&D 3.x people joke about that they've got a 1 in 20 chance of KO'ing Superman at the cost of a 1 in 20 chance of taking lethal damage while walking? An exaggeration of course, but the exposure dice feels like you've got the second half of that equation without the first (and a 1 in 12 chance anyway).

>On that subject, I think it does a better job of the "IF there is a traitor..." thing than some comparative games (like Saboteur). Some of these games have a far greater chance of their being a traitor than not; in DoW I'd say it gets the chance about right (43% in a 4 player game, if I recall).

>Information control is a big factor in this game. I was initially annoyed that the search decks for the different buildings have the same backs, making cleanup a bit annoying. But then, if they DID have different backs it would be easier to tell who gave the incorrect item. I've already warned the full group about the whole, "You can say anything you want about your cards, but you can't actually SHOW your cards to anyone" bit 'cause I know that could turn into an issue.

>I thought the combat against zombies in Last Night On Earth was abstract... then I played this game. It barely counts as combat, really, it's that abstract. Which is fine, I don't mean this as a criticism. I'm one of those weirdos that got into RPG's by way of wargaming, after all. But don't come into this expecting combat tactics to be a thing. This is more resource management - almost a Euro, really, just with swingier results than a typical euro-type would tolerate.

[Cikomyr]

I just realized that i have misread the rules regarding food..

I told my group we had to count ALL survivors, not just those at the colony.. -_-

No wonder we lost half the games and were constantly on the brink of starvation.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Over the holidays? Lessee...

So I got Daniel Solis' Monsoon Market as a Christmas present. Really really cool game! It feels like it's a CCG without the customizable deck aspect, but with a much more interesting core mechanic. You use objective cards as pieces of a resource engine, collecting them into a tableau and upgrading them to give you more points. You do this by using resource cards to fulfill the requirements of the objective cards, and you can fulfill them as "bulk" (you have enough resource symbols to fulfill the objective), "silver" (you have sets of symbols in the same amounts as the ones on the objective), or "gold" (you have sets of symbols which all match the ones on the objective). The coolest part is that it's not necessarily advantageous to try for the gold, because fulfilling objectives in bulk gets you few points but often bonus resource symbols that you can always use, and you can upgrade those cards later from bulk to silver or gold, for max points.

I also received Lord of the Rings: the Confrontation, which is every bit the head-to-head mindgamey Stratego that I remember it to be. And unlike Stratego, the game is firing on all cylinders out of the gate, and the board is tiny. I hope to get a lot of play out of it in the future.

Introduced my little brother to Yomi, had a really good time doing it, too.

I even spent some time with my sister and my brother in-law when I went back to hang with them. We played three matches of Innovation, and then a fourth tiebreaker when each of us won once. Such a great game, I still love it.

[ImperiousLeader]

So, did anyone score any great board games over the holiday? Mine was Dead Of Winter, and yes I bought it for myself We've got the first game with the full group scheduled for an upcoming Saturday, but I've had some trial runs with the guys at work already.

I'm glad you got one, the local games store here can't keep it in stock!

I played at a games night, and was sold on buying it almost instantly. The flavour, the neat stories, the challenge ...

I also tried Above and Below, which I also quite liked. It's DnD and city building, all in one package.

[Fri]

I got Kakerlaken Salat, and bought Duplik, which I intend to give to my brother. He's majoring in architecture now, and I bet he and his friends would love it

Me and three other friends also bought AGOT The Card Game, because we're GOT fans and is kinda tired with the board game because it plays too long, so we're thinking of it as a shorter playtime alternative.

4 side card game is pretty fun, so I'm thinking to try doomtown next.

Edit:

Oh, that remind me. Me and my friend tried someone's kickstarter funded game (apparentlty he waited 2 years for that), a really fun and really good game, about mad scientists fighting over the world with monsters, but I can't remember what it's called. Anyone know the title?

It's actually really good, and the owner said it only cost him about 30 bucks or something, which is really a bargain. Shame about the 2 years wait. Me and my friend is actually thinking to check out if someone's selling it second, so we could buy it

[Gandariel]

I got Steampark for my brother and we've had some fun with it.

Basically, you have to build rollercoasters and entertain robot citizens, while cleaning up dust.
Lots of rules and lots of (pretty) pieces, but really fun and with some pretty clever mechanics:

As an example, at the start of each turn all the players start rolling dice to determine which actions they can take during the turn.
They can set aside the dice they want and keep re-rolling the others as often as they want, but the first one to finish gets a bonus and the last one gets a malus.

The effect is that at the start of each turn everyone is frantically rolling to get what they want. (That's the only time where speed matters, the rest of the game is turn-based)

I definitely recommend it :)

[Tvtyrant]

I played the mandated once very six months game of twilight imperium over christmas break, which I tied due to time. I also played a lot of Dominion and Catan, which have replaced some of the slower go-to games we used to play.

[Starsign]

I've done very little board gaming over the winter break. My parents are either too busy or too tired, so I never get to play Saboteur or Ticket to Ride. I also tried ordering Carcassonne but it hasn't come through yet tdue to a re-order delay. So I've been in a big drought of board gaming lately.

That and everything else happening at home, and I've been really down.

[TheEmerged]

I played the mandated once very six months game of twilight imperium over christmas break, which I tied due to time. I also played a lot of Dominion and Catan, which have replaced some of the slower go-to games we used to play.

Just curious, have you had a chance to play with the latest expansion (Adventures) yet? I almost hate to play without it now. I think Amulet has made it to the supply just-about-every time we've had a "drafted" kingdom lately, and the Event mechanic does add something to the game.

Fairness in reporting: Dominion would be my #2 game right now, behind Robo Rally (my "not-entirely-rational-but-not-quite-irrational nostalgic #1"). I'm from the camp that believes "fun starts @ 3 players; 2-player Dominion is too mechanical" - heresy as far as some Dominion fans are concerned

"Twilight Imperium" is on the "Games I'd like to play someday" list. I can't justify the expense for something I'd be *lucky* to play once a year (due to a fairly-solid cap on the length of game day) and it's not something the others would even think about buying, otherwise it looks right up my alley. I understand Rexx, the reskin of a longtime member of the same list (Dune) is set in the same universe. "Cosmic Encounter" is another member of that list.

I've done very little board gaming over the winter break. My parents are either too busy or too tired, so I never get to play Saboteur or Ticket to Ride. I also tried ordering Carcassonne but it hasn't come through yet due to a re-order delay. So I've been in a big drought of board gaming lately.

Saboteur I've only played a couple of times, one of the guys at work brought it in during the end-of-year shutdown (I work a helpdesk, our main account shuts down but we get enough secondary accounts that we still have to stay fully staffed). You can definitely see that Dead Of Winter adapted its mechanic for deciding who the saboteur is.

Ticket to Ride is in an odd place for me. I've had a lot of people tell me I *should* try it, that it's a "new classic" that every gamer should have a copy of one of its versions... but I just have no desire to do so. I can be a bit of a contrarian some times, and it seems like the more people try to talk me into it the more resistant I am to do so.

Carcassonne I own a kind of "starter" set for that came with a couple of expansions. I like it well enough, but after a few games I decided not to pursue any more expansions. It looks like most of them just add a layer of complexity the game doesn't need.

[Tvtyrant]

Just curious, have you had a chance to play with the latest expansion (Adventures) yet? I almost hate to play without it now. I think Amulet has made it to the supply just-about-every time we've had a "drafted" kingdom lately, and the Event mechanic does add something to the game.

Fairness in reporting: Dominion would be my #2 game right now, behind Robo Rally (my "not-entirely-rational-but-not-quite-irrational nostalgic #1"). I'm from the camp that believes "fun starts @ 3 players; 2-player Dominion is too mechanical" - heresy as far as some Dominion fans are concerned

"Twilight Imperium" is on the "Games I'd like to play someday" list. I can't justify the expense for something I'd be *lucky* to play once a year (due to a fairly-solid cap on the length of game day) and it's not something the others would even think about buying, otherwise it looks right up my alley. I understand Rexx, the reskin of a longtime member of the same list (Dune) is set in the same universe. "Cosmic Encounter" is another member of that list.

I have not! We usually play Core + Prosperity + In*trigue now, we used to play Dark Ages and Seaside but we got burned out due to twice getting Kings Court, Embargo, Pirate Ships and having one player simply lock everyone out of the game. I will look into Adventures, sounds like fun.

Two player dominion is actually pretty fun IMO, because it is less directly adversarial than many similar games. That being said it isn't my preferred way to play.

I have been playing TI since highschool at a rate of about twice a year, which means I have gotten about 16-20 games in total. It is a very deep game which my group plays very badly, as the other two members of our stable three group insist on playing 14 victory points (which is too many to ever reach) and play very slowly. The game plays about 1 hour per victory point, so you can dial the game to whatever length you want.

[Fri]

ticket to ride is pretty good. It's... hmm how to say it.

Basically, it's a board game with pretty good mechanic that's easily explainable and doesn't look too "nerdy." Actually I think if someone try to market it as mainstream toy ala monopoly, it could easily success. And I'd rather have ticket to ride to be the default family boardgame rather than monopoly.

Also as I mentioned before, my game group used to have TI, and we love it, we had a game that lasted until 3 in the morning, and only with three people, but it feel much less tiring than AGOT The Board game, but that session also made us sell it, because we don't think we have time to play it much if we have to set aside that much time to play it.

[Cikomyr]

So i just watched Wheaton's Tabletop about Last Night on Earth.

How does it compare vs Zombicide?

[Fri]

Last Night On Earth is actually one of the first board games I played, and I don't know if it's because that, but it's also one of my personal favourite game.

IIRC (if zombicide is the thing I'm thinking), last night on earth has way less focus on fighting, and also it don't have the mechanic of the zombies getting stronger as you gain level. In fact, I don't remember Last Night On Earth have any leveling mechanic at all. Also, LNOE is a semi cooperative game, where one (or two, but it work better with one) zombie player act move all the zombies around as the antagonist of the survivor players, while Zombicide is a pure coop game.

[TheEmerged]

So i just watched Wheaton's Tabletop about Last Night on Earth.

How does it compare vs Zombicide?

Well, I can only answer to half of that equation but I'll answer that half. My understanding is that Zombicide is much more tactical and "builder" friendly. That is, it's more like a traditional RPG where you pick upgrades for your characters as you kill things \ do stuff. The "sequel" standalone to LNOE adds something like this, and you can order\buy cards for this function for the original characters.

LNOE is not built as a wargame. It's built as a "thematic" game, essentially a kind of RPG-in-a-box. You're essentially playing as a trope character in a schlock horror movie. The "trope character" thing is important, otherwise the clichés are going to get on some peoples' nerves (example: the female characters in the base game are a nurse, a farm girl, and a school girl). Of course, the expansions add a token goth girl, the token black woman, the token girl reporter... and the prom queen, who surprisingly can be one of the most dangerous human heroes (this is not a joke).

The fun is not in carefully counting your movement points to make sure you're drawing the zombies into a crossfire with your fellow players. The fun is in stacking Faith cards on the preacher, arming him with a chainsaw, and then mashing up Biblical statements with anime quotes as you go tearing through the zombies. Or otherwise acting in character to some of the absurdities that can happen in the game...

If I remember right, Wil Wheaton's Youtube video for LNOE has them doing one of the three easiest scenarios, and then they get ridiculously good luck. I wouldn't take that video as being too representative, except for the way they spend more time talking about the characters than playing the game. That part is pretty representative Unlike some of his other videos (*cough* Forbidden Desert *cough) I don't remember any glaring rules errors.

FUN VARIANT: if playing with two zombie players (4 players or 6 players), mandate that the zombie players can only use the word "Brains" when speaking to each other and can't do things like just show each other their cards. Pointing at the board and such is fine, the objective is being fun not being restrictive.

Last Night On Earth is actually one of the first board games I played, and I don't know if it's because that, but it's also one of my personal favourite game.

IIRC (if zombicide is the thing I'm thinking), last night on earth has way less focus on fighting, and also it don't have the mechanic of the zombies getting stronger as you gain level. In fact, I don't remember Last Night On Earth have any leveling mechanic at all. Also, LNOE is a semi cooperative game, where one (or two, but it work better with one) zombie player act move all the zombies around as the antagonist of the survivor players, while Zombicide is a pure coop game.

The last expansion to the original game (Survival of the Fittest) adds Grave Weapons to the zombie side, which serve as upgrades and make the zombies a fair bit more dangerous.

[Fri]

FUN VARIANT: if playing with two zombie players (4 players or 6 players), mandate that the zombie players can only use the word "Brains" when speaking to each other and can't do things like just show each other their cards. Pointing at the board and such is fine, the objective is being fun not being restrictive.

To be honest, this is actually a GREAT idea and might actually make playing with 2 zombie players fun.

[Cikomyr]

By the way

Who else is awaiting with excitation the upcoming Star Wars Rebellion?