Board games anyone?

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Thadlerian
Posts: 336
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:58 pm UTC
Location: Norway

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Thadlerian » Wed May 29, 2013 11:50 pm UTC

Kexizzoc wrote:Curious what people here might recommend: I'm looking for a board game experience that's fun with 2 players. I recently got my girlfriend into Magic the Gathering, and we're looking to spend our (limited) money on something new that maybe has a bit more than just cards to it; though I won't rule out a good card game, I'm curious about Netrunner, and I can't seem to get a confirmation on whether Citadel has a good 2-player mode or not. The catch is that we're abroad currently, so whatever we get has to fit into our suitcases on the return flight. Any advice?

I would recommend Lords of Waterdeep as a decent two-player, but if room is an issue then Race for the Galaxy is a very neat card game that scales down to two players without losing any play value.

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1070
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby BoomFrog » Thu May 30, 2013 12:04 am UTC

FYI, citadel 2 player is absolutely awful. Assassin becomes a first pick and than either you have to pick randomly to throw off the assassin's guess or you just pick king and accept the kill and you get to assassinate the king next round.

Netrunner is wonderful game, if you do play make sure you both play each side. Many new players stick to corp or runner "until the learn it well" but playing corp makes you a better runner and vice versa.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Dark567 » Thu May 30, 2013 12:34 am UTC

BoomFrog wrote:Netrunner is wonderful game, if you do play make sure you both play each side. Many new players stick to corp or runner "until the learn it well" but playing corp makes you a better runner and vice versa.
Came here to say that. Android:Netrunner is designed for two, so it doesn't suffer from the many player games that lose value with only two. Its also asymmetric, so each player(the corp and the runner), play by a different set of rules, unlike say Magic:The Gathering where everybody plays by the same rules. So for example the corp loses when it has no cards left in his deck, while the runner loses when his hand is empty. Also unlike Magic, all the expansions are preset, so you always know what cards you are buying, no more buying 20 boosters to get one rare card.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1247 ... -netrunner
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu May 30, 2013 4:37 am UTC

Just want to second that Netrunner is fun. Wholly unreasonable box size given that it's just a card game, but whatever.

In addition to the Hacker and Corp playing differently, there are four decks provided for each (four hackers and four corps, I mean) that each play significantly differently from one another. You get a lot of variety for your buck.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
clockworkmonk
I'm on a horse!
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:53 am UTC
Location: Austin

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby clockworkmonk » Thu May 30, 2013 3:33 pm UTC

for two player games, I will also recommend Android: Netrunner. The core set has the ability to build several different decks, and is really fun.

For other small two-player games there is cold war cia vs kgb, a game where each person takes the role of the respective organizations trying to influence events in other countries. One of the best 2 player bluffing games I've ever played.

for a little larger in size there is Dungeon Twister, which is a very deep strategy game that sometimes feels like chess in the style of play.
418 I'm a teapot

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5426
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Xanthir » Thu May 30, 2013 4:42 pm UTC

Kexizzoc wrote:Curious what people here might recommend: I'm looking for a board game experience that's fun with 2 players. I recently got my girlfriend into Magic the Gathering, and we're looking to spend our (limited) money on something new that maybe has a bit more than just cards to it; though I won't rule out a good card game, I'm curious about Netrunner, and I can't seem to get a confirmation on whether Citadel has a good 2-player mode or not. The catch is that we're abroad currently, so whatever we get has to fit into our suitcases on the return flight. Any advice?

Coop games are great for this - try Forbidden Island, for example.

Innovation is fun with 2 players. I can also highly recommend Level 99's Minigame Library - the 2-player games there are *great*, especially Noir.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Fri May 31, 2013 4:50 pm UTC

I've seen a lot of praise for Forbidden Island but me and my GF got it as a gift and it seems quite easy. And frankly kind of boring. Am I missing something to this? I seem people recommend it over pandemic, but pandemic seems much more involved and seems more engaging (note I'm talking about only playing it as 2 players).

rmsgrey
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby rmsgrey » Fri May 31, 2013 5:52 pm UTC

Chen wrote:I've seen a lot of praise for Forbidden Island but me and my GF got it as a gift and it seems quite easy. And frankly kind of boring. Am I missing something to this? I seem people recommend it over pandemic, but pandemic seems much more involved and seems more engaging (note I'm talking about only playing it as 2 players).


Both games have ways of varying the difficulty (playing with Wil Wheaton seems to be a major handicap!) - if you're finding it too easy, try raising the difficulty, and check that you've not misread the rules. If it's too easy playing on the hardest difficulty, and you've checked the rules forward and backward and are sure you're doing it right, it's possible you've been hit by a statistical anomaly (if there's a 50:50 chance of winning and a thousand games sold, then there's a good chance someone will win their first ten games straight). Or it could just be that the game isn't for you after all...

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5426
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Xanthir » Fri May 31, 2013 7:46 pm UTC

My wife and I are good players, and we don't win about 2/3 of our basic-difficulty Forbidden Island games. It's very possible you're playing it wrong?

Pandemic is basically just a more complicated version of Forbidden Island. If you like the extra size and complexity, great, play that. I slightly prefer the quick set-up and simplicity of FI.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby ConMan » Sun Jun 02, 2013 11:01 pm UTC

I agree that there's a decent chance you've missed something in the rules, but also it tends to be easier playing with fewer people as it doesn't take as many moves to transfer the necessary cards. Check the rules again to see whether you really have made a mistake, then try playing at top difficulty, and if that fails maybe take a few cards out of the deck to up the difficulty again.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:39 am UTC

ConMan wrote:I agree that there's a decent chance you've missed something in the rules, but also it tends to be easier playing with fewer people as it doesn't take as many moves to transfer the necessary cards. Check the rules again to see whether you really have made a mistake, then try playing at top difficulty, and if that fails maybe take a few cards out of the deck to up the difficulty again.


I guess I'll re-look at them, but we played on everything but the hardest difficulty and both times worked very easily. I guess it can depend on the setup too though. If the key island parts are close to each other, there's little risk in losing them which makes things easier. Maybe we did the setup wrong or something?

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby emceng » Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:34 pm UTC

Ok, what the crap is a 'Living Card Game'. I've seen this description on a few things on amazon. Is it a new buzzword for games like Dominion? Or an alternate to CCG?
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:47 pm UTC

emceng wrote:Ok, what the crap is a 'Living Card Game'. I've seen this description on a few things on amazon. Is it a new buzzword for games like Dominion? Or an alternate to CCG?


I don't think Dominion qualifies. I think its games like Android Netrunner, or Game of Thrones or other Fantasy Flight Games card games. I think the distinction is that you can buy a core set and possibly boosters which all contain FIXED cards (not random like a CCG) but you still build your decks before the game and then play against others who have also built their own decks.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Jun 03, 2013 9:52 pm UTC

emceng wrote:Ok, what the crap is a 'Living Card Game'. I've seen this description on a few things on amazon. Is it a new buzzword for games like Dominion? Or an alternate to CCG?


Fantasy Flight Games invented the term to describe their variation on the CCG model - if you can parse marketingese, their official description is here.

Short version: It's a CCG without the rare-chasing "gotta-buy-em-all" side - instead of random packs, you get fixed contents (at least for the expansion packs - it's not entirely clear from the description whether the starters are fixed or semi-random) - basically, you lose the "collectible" part in exchange for a much lower financial barrier to entry - no single card can realistically be sold for more than the cost of a single booster...

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby ConMan » Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:44 pm UTC

Technically pretty much any card-based game with expansions could be considered an LCG, but FF jumped in an trademarked the term (and protect it fairly strongly, I hear) so it only refers to their stuff.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Dark567 » Mon Jun 03, 2013 11:49 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:Short version: It's a CCG without the rare-chasing "gotta-buy-em-all" side - instead of random packs, you get fixed contents (at least for the expansion packs - it's not entirely clear from the description whether the starters are fixed or semi-random) - basically, you lose the "collectible" part in exchange for a much lower financial barrier to entry - no single card can realistically be sold for more than the cost of a single booster...
The starter packs are fixed too. Basically, it ends up being that there is no second hand market for cards, because the value of second hand cards is low. Ideally this encourages strategic deck building instead of collecting a specific card.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby emceng » Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:53 pm UTC

Seems like a nice way to prevent the money printing(and customer bleeding) Wizards is doing with Magic.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby setzer777 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:50 pm UTC

Just got Agricola on iPad (first exposure to the game), and it's crazy how many hours I've already sunk into the game. The tough and interesting choices you have to are just so compelling.

I have one complaint though, which could just be my inexperience - early family expansion seems a little too crucial to success. If you aren't the first or second player to get a new family member, you're at a pretty big disadvantage, which seems particularly annoying in games with 4 or more players. Having two of the players be clearly ahead of the rest by the end of stage 2 seems a little too fast.
Last edited by setzer777 on Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:12 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:09 pm UTC

Early family growth is quite important. In a large game you want to make sure you build that first room early and take starting player in such a way that you can get that family growth when it comes out. Cards that help you build rooms/grow without rooms are very valuable for the same reason as are cards that can get you reed/wood early. You don't want to wait too late to grow your family since those extra actions add up, but remember that people are probably taking sub-optimal choices in some cases so that they can grow first, so its there you need to try to make up the tempo loss at growing later.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:32 pm UTC

The availability of actions also changes with how many players; I think at 4 players there are two 'make babies' actions. Maybe 5 though.

But yeah, the game isn't terribly well balanced; it vastly favors a diverse setup instead of a deep one, and the advantage of expanding your family early is extreme.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby setzer777 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 7:53 pm UTC

Yeah, for almost everything else you get diminishing returns, but with family the only penalty is a flat 2 food cost per member per harvest. I think maybe they should have made the food cost per member grow the more you have.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:09 pm UTC

setzer777 wrote:Yeah, for almost everything else you get diminishing returns, but with family the only penalty is a flat 2 food cost per member per harvest. I think maybe they should have made the food cost per member grow the more you have.
Or place a higher value on food end game. Or even increase the pt value of same category things; I don't see why it's better for me to have 2 sheep, 2 cows, 2 boars, 2 veggies, 2 wheat, and a bunch of pastures and rooms, as opposed to, say, 20 cows and 4 billion food. While it's easier to continue building more of stuff once you've passed a critical threshold, it could also provide more points for player-player interaction, in terms of making actions to the effect of 'steal 1/5th of target players x'.

But meh, the games still fun.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:49 am UTC

Diversity is key to why the game works. Blocking actions is the main source of interaction you have in the game. Everyone trying to get everything makes blocking attractive and strategic. If each person could just amass one thing it becomes more solitaire and see who comes up with the most at the end.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Izawwlgood » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:33 pm UTC

But because the end goal is just 'amass everything', it doesn't matter if someone blocks you from grabbing sheep this turn or next turn; you'll probably get it eventually.

I think the problem is that food is worth too little end game, and in some cases to easily produced. For example, a butchery or a bread baking oven (forget what the two advances are called) can have you positively SWIMMING in food and little reason to diversify, but end game aren't worth as much as 3 boar, 3 cows, 3 sheep, 3 vegetables, 3 wheat etc. I think that the game punishes winning strategies is ultimately a bad thing. That said, swimming in food means you're more able to focus on other things, like diversifying or making stone homes.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:09 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:But because the end goal is just 'amass everything', it doesn't matter if someone blocks you from grabbing sheep this turn or next turn; you'll probably get it eventually.

I think the problem is that food is worth too little end game, and in some cases to easily produced. For example, a butchery or a bread baking oven (forget what the two advances are called) can have you positively SWIMMING in food and little reason to diversify, but end game aren't worth as much as 3 boar, 3 cows, 3 sheep, 3 vegetables, 3 wheat etc. I think that the game punishes winning strategies is ultimately a bad thing. That said, swimming in food means you're more able to focus on other things, like diversifying or making stone homes.


Im confused what you mean by "punishes a winning strategy". The goal of the game isn't to make food. Its to make as well rounded a farm as possible. Ideally you'd end the game with 0 leftover food. Any extra food you have at the end of the game (barring some cards that can grant a bonus for it) is just the result of wasted or inefficient actions.

Most games I play are 2 player, and I can tell you its fairly easy to block resources in that. You might not be able to block the sheep/boar/cows themselves at all times, but you can block the wood or the fence building that lets them save said animals. Blocking fence building and forcing someone to make stables to house their animals is still a way to force inefficiency on them, which is pretty much what the name of the game is. I've played against people who play it more like multiplayer solitaire, and without that blocking aspect the game loses a lot of strategy.

User avatar
sparkyb
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:30 pm UTC
Location: Camberville proper!
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby sparkyb » Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:36 pm UTC

setzer777 wrote:I have one complaint though, which could just be my inexperience - early family expansion seems a little too crucial to success.


This is why I hate Agricola. I always come in spectacularly last. It's not even funny my inability to compete with my friends. By not growing my family fast enough, I don't even get to focus on other areas of the game because I just don't get enough turns. The game becomes ridiculously short on turns yet later in the game it takes forever between turns because other people have so many more people and turns to take. By that point I know I've lost but I still have to sit there bored for a long time. Even though I figured out after a few games how important growing your family is, after a few more games I realized that even that knowledge is not enough to change my desired play patterns to accomplish it. I prefer games that allow for exploring alternate strategies and could have different ways to achieve different goals for equal points (7 Wonders is really good at this). With Agricola you are severely punished if you don't do every action in the exact right order. One time I saw that clay was abundant early in the game. With everyone else clamoring for wood, I thought an interesting alternate strategy might be to try to upgrade my house to clay early, even though you usually add rooms and grow family before upgrading your house. Too bad, if you want to try a different order you will just fail.

sigsfried
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:28 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby sigsfried » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:37 pm UTC

Xanthir wrote:My wife and I are good players, and we don't win about 2/3 of our basic-difficulty Forbidden Island games. It's very possible you're playing it wrong?

Pandemic is basically just a more complicated version of Forbidden Island. If you like the extra size and complexity, great, play that. I slightly prefer the quick set-up and simplicity of FI.


I have heard lots of positive things about FI, how hard is it to win? I have somewhat got fed up of always winning at Pandemic (even with 6 or even 7, thanks to the expansion) Epidemics. Similarly the expansion in general doesn't provide a sane challenge, occasionally we get a game that we appear doomed to lose (3 outbreaks after turn one being an example) but otherwise it is just the same thing. Get the disease under control, prioritise pyramids then with 2-3 turms each left plan exactly how to get the remaining cure(s).

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:33 pm UTC

sparkyb wrote:
setzer777 wrote:I have one complaint though, which could just be my inexperience - early family expansion seems a little too crucial to success.


This is why I hate Agricola. I always come in spectacularly last. It's not even funny my inability to compete with my friends. By not growing my family fast enough, I don't even get to focus on other areas of the game because I just don't get enough turns. The game becomes ridiculously short on turns yet later in the game it takes forever between turns because other people have so many more people and turns to take. By that point I know I've lost but I still have to sit there bored for a long time. Even though I figured out after a few games how important growing your family is, after a few more games I realized that even that knowledge is not enough to change my desired play patterns to accomplish it. I prefer games that allow for exploring alternate strategies and could have different ways to achieve different goals for equal points (7 Wonders is really good at this). With Agricola you are severely punished if you don't do every action in the exact right order. One time I saw that clay was abundant early in the game. With everyone else clamoring for wood, I thought an interesting alternate strategy might be to try to upgrade my house to clay early, even though you usually add rooms and grow family before upgrading your house. Too bad, if you want to try a different order you will just fail.


http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/835672/ ... win/page/1

That shows a 4 player win with 28 actions taken (i.e., 2 per round). Especially in cases where you draft the cards you're going to use, you can construct very strong alternative strategies that can allow family growth to take less of a priority. I you're playing the family game or just random assigned cards, yes family growth ends up taking on more importance. Once you can start to use the cards to create more strategy though, that flaw tends to get more and more washed out.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Vaniver » Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:57 pm UTC

Chen wrote:Especially in cases where you draft the cards you're going to use, you can construct very strong alternative strategies that can allow family growth to take less of a priority.
I think you mean "only," not "especially." To quote another post in that thread (referring to 28-action victories):

Since the start of 2011, there have been 7 such victories, out of 16,500 games. So yeah, it is a very rare feat.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Jul 18, 2013 5:02 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:But because the end goal is just 'amass everything', it doesn't matter if someone blocks you from grabbing sheep this turn or next turn; you'll probably get it eventually.

I think the problem is that food is worth too little end game, and in some cases to easily produced. For example, a butchery or a bread baking oven (forget what the two advances are called) can have you positively SWIMMING in food and little reason to diversify, but end game aren't worth as much as 3 boar, 3 cows, 3 sheep, 3 vegetables, 3 wheat etc. I think that the game punishes winning strategies is ultimately a bad thing. That said, swimming in food means you're more able to focus on other things, like diversifying or making stone homes.


Im confused what you mean by "punishes a winning strategy". The goal of the game isn't to make food. Its to make as well rounded a farm as possible. Ideally you'd end the game with 0 leftover food. Any extra food you have at the end of the game (barring some cards that can grant a bonus for it) is just the result of wasted or inefficient actions.

Most games I play are 2 player, and I can tell you its fairly easy to block resources in that. You might not be able to block the sheep/boar/cows themselves at all times, but you can block the wood or the fence building that lets them save said animals. Blocking fence building and forcing someone to make stables to house their animals is still a way to force inefficiency on them, which is pretty much what the name of the game is. I've played against people who play it more like multiplayer solitaire, and without that blocking aspect the game loses a lot of strategy.
Because 'winning strategy' is, as you and I have both stated, 'develop a highly diversified farm'. Not 'have a metric fuck ton of sustainably produced food' or 'grow the largest family'.

The only way to really know that is to play the game and see the scoring mechanic, which, given the theme of the game (compete for resources so you can feed your family), doesn't really line up.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby setzer777 » Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:22 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:
Chen wrote:Especially in cases where you draft the cards you're going to use, you can construct very strong alternative strategies that can allow family growth to take less of a priority.
I think you mean "only," not "especially." To quote another post in that thread (referring to 28-action victories):

Since the start of 2011, there have been 7 such victories, out of 16,500 games. So yeah, it is a very rare feat.


I wonder if there are any more general stats about tournament match winners and when they grew their family. 28 actions is extreme, but if I can delay family growth for a few rounds and still be competitive, that would open up more strategies beyond "rush for the resources needed to build a room"* in the early game.

Off the top of my head the only really competitive alternative I can think of is getting some method of fast plowing and get fields going earlier than everyone else. Since there's a multiplicative effect (you can use your harvest to plant more), I could see that giving an advantage comparable to extra turns. Using cards to get two cattle really early would probably be pretty powerful as well.

Also, is baking ever worth it? It seems like too much setup just to get lots of food, when food is usually easy enough to handle with an oven.

*Though I suppose strategy comes in when others grab all the wood or reed before you and you have to have a fallback plan. Now that I think of it, perhaps one of the most important strategies in the game is always having a plan B for when you get denied.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

Chen
Posts: 5582
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Chen » Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:46 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:
Chen wrote:Especially in cases where you draft the cards you're going to use, you can construct very strong alternative strategies that can allow family growth to take less of a priority.
I think you mean "only," not "especially." To quote another post in that thread (referring to 28-action victories):

Since the start of 2011, there have been 7 such victories, out of 16,500 games. So yeah, it is a very rare feat.


No I meant especially. Only would mean that a random selection of cards (7 or 10 drop 3 depending on the method you use) would never give a stronger strategy. This is strictly untrue. In addition, if you're playing with experienced other players, the draft method may in fact limit your power even more because people won't necessarily let you get all the combo pieces you need, whereas you might be randomly dealt them using the other method.

Furthermore those 7 victories are the 28 action ones and are the most extreme version of putting off family growth as a priority (i.e., no family growth until the last turn for points). Significantly less powerful strategies can be built that will allow you to reduce the need to rush to family growth right out of the gate, though you'll still probably end up growing your family far before the last turn of the game. I simply posted that one as an extreme example of how family growth is not NECESSARY to win.

Extra actions in the vast majority of games is one of the easiest ways to gain advantages. So in seeing what family growth did, I immediately went for it first and at HIGH priority when first playing. And as two newbies (GF and I) it worked quite well the first few games and I won fairly decisively. But as we learned more you can realize sometimes letting the other person grow first so you can sneak out another Occupation or so that you can grab a big herd of boar or something is advantageous. Similarly if the opponent does grow first, you may have the opportunity to block them heavily and screw their next turn (or even force begging cards). Family growth is very important, no doubt. But there is still a fair bit a strategic depth beyond just having to always do this right away.

User avatar
emceng
Posts: 3167
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: State of Hockey
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby emceng » Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:26 pm UTC

So someone suggested Condado for Andriod, which is apparently just San Juan the board game, which I've heard is good. Finally tried it last night. It's interesting and I like it. Only thing is I can't freaking win. Played 5 games, and three of them I lost by exactly 1 victory point :( I got crushed by like 20 in one of the other two, but considering it was my second game or so, I'm not worried.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. - CS Lewis

User avatar
clockworkmonk
I'm on a horse!
Posts: 649
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:53 am UTC
Location: Austin

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby clockworkmonk » Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:02 pm UTC

So, on August 2-4, Board Game Bash is occurring in Austin Texas. It is three days, nonstop, of board games, along with organized events, a flea market of sorts, and a large amount of free open play.
418 I'm a teapot

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Adacore » Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:02 am UTC

I'm looking to pick up some new games when I go back to the UK in a couple of weeks (again). Most of the games we have already are of the strategic German board game style, which I love, but I think we could maybe use some variety. Maybe wordgames, or something else that still requires some mental engagement but isn't all about tactical planning. I'm not entirely sold on wordgames because sometimes we have Koreans play, and they get turned off coming to our game nights if we play language games too much, because the native English speakers have a big, obvious advantage, and I think it's a lot of effort to play wordgames in a second language.

I guess it'll be hard to find a good game with even most of these qualities, but the ideal 'to have' list on games I want to buy is: suitable for 2 players and/or 6+ players; not too much language skill required; not too much tactical thought; not entirely luck-based; either easy for people to join part way through, or shorter than 30 minutes; shorter than 2 hours in total.

There are a couple of games that fulfil these criteria I guess, for example Set works fairly well in that it's not luck based and is mentally involving, but not at all tactical or linguistic once you've explained the rules.

Our current selection is:
Spoiler:
- Settlers of Catan (with 6 player expansion)
- Settlers of Catan (in Korean, with Cities and Knights)
- Ticket to Ride Europe (I've already ordered the 1912 expansion)
- Bohnanza
- Carcassonne (with Inns and Cathedrals expansion)
- Dominion
- Power Grid
- Dixit (with 2nd card set expansion)
- Loaded Questions
- Set
- Yahtzee
- Several packs of cards (both Western and Korean)
- Rummikub
- Game of Thrones
- Munchkin (a few different versions)
- Arkham Horror (with Dunwich Horror expansion)*
- Battlestar Galactica*
- Fluxx*

The ones marked * belong to someone who's going to leave the country at the end of the year. Probably doesn't matter now, but I might pick up at least Arkham myself come Christmas.


So, err, yeah. Anyone have any great ideas/recommendations? In addition to the above, I'd also be cool with picking up basically any game that people think is a fundemental gap in our collection, or any expansions to the games listed that you think are must-have.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby Vaniver » Tue Jul 23, 2013 12:33 am UTC

setzer777 wrote:Also, is baking ever worth it? It seems like too much setup just to get lots of food, when food is usually easy enough to handle with an oven.
I find baking to be very useful, since grain is easy to come by and it generally takes me only an action to feed the family for the year, but it becomes much better with a few occupation / improvement cards targeted for it.

clockworkmonk wrote:So, on August 2-4, Board Game Bash is occurring in Austin Texas. It is three days, nonstop, of board games, along with organized events, a flea market of sorts, and a large amount of free open play.
Of all the times for me to be out of town! Argh.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1691
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby ConMan » Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:43 am UTC

Adacore wrote:I'm looking to pick up some new games when I go back to the UK in a couple of weeks (again). Most of the games we have already are of the strategic German board game style, which I love, but I think we could maybe use some variety. Maybe wordgames, or something else that still requires some mental engagement but isn't all about tactical planning. I'm not entirely sold on wordgames because sometimes we have Koreans play, and they get turned off coming to our game nights if we play language games too much, because the native English speakers have a big, obvious advantage, and I think it's a lot of effort to play wordgames in a second language.

This year's Spiel des Jahres winner was Hanabi, which is an interesting and light-in-appearances co-op card game that can handle 2-5. I haven't played it myself (got a copy, but my girlfriend's been sucked into Animal Crossing recently) but it definitely looks like one that is easy to explain and has just a nice amount of thinking involved.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

User avatar
faranim
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm UTC
Location: Maryland, USA

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby faranim » Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:14 pm UTC

Adacore wrote:I guess it'll be hard to find a good game with even most of these qualities, but the ideal 'to have' list on games I want to buy is: suitable for 2 players and/or 6+ players; not too much language skill required; not too much tactical thought; not entirely luck-based; either easy for people to join part way through, or shorter than 30 minutes; shorter than 2 hours in total.

...

So, err, yeah. Anyone have any great ideas/recommendations? In addition to the above, I'd also be cool with picking up basically any game that people think is a fundemental gap in our collection, or any expansions to the games listed that you think are must-have.


When you say "tactical thought" do you really mean "long-term strategy / planning"? Strategy games are ones where you can plan for what you will be doing on future turns. These tend to be difficult for non-gamers since they won't understand the strategy until they have played the game a few times. Tactical games are more about heat-of-the-moment "that action is really good right now" without much thought to future turns.

Missing Archetypes in your collection: Worker Placement, Trick Taking Games, Press-your-luck, Cooperative Games, Pick-up and Deliver, Bluffing/Deception.

Here's some filler games (30 minutes or less, mostly press-your-luck):
Circus Flohcati
No Thanks!
For Sale
Incan Gold
Can't Stop

Slightly more than filler:
Ingenious
Wizard (listed as "Fantasy Wizard" sometimes - Trick Taking game)
Tichu
Elder Sign (dice version of Arkham Horror)

Accessible Euro:
Castles of Burgundy
Lords of Waterdeep (worker placement)
Pandemic or Forbidden Island (cooperative game)
Valdora (pick up and deliver)

rmsgrey
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:07 pm UTC

I'd suggest:

Pandemic/Forbidden Island (2-4 player co-op) - these are very similar games mechanically, with Forbidden Island being a little more forgiving - move and/or do useful actions to buy time, draw some mostly-useful cards, then turn over cards to tell you where bad things happen. When you draw a bad card from the mostly-useful deck, the bad things discards are shuffled and put back on top of the bad things deck, and drawing the same place before you've dealt with the effects of bad things happening there before means really bad things happen. Assemble and cash-in 4 different sets of mostly-useful cards before getting overwhelmed by bad things, and you win.

The Resistance: Avalon (5-10 player hidden traitor) - the "guess the Cylon" bit of Galactica pared down to its core

King of Tokyo (2-6 player press-your-luck dice game) - created by Richard Garfield, inventor of Magic: the Gathering (and, by extension, the entire CCG genre).

Love Letter (2-4 player light filler) - sixteen cards, several of them duplicates and some simple rules (draw a card, discard a card, apply the effect of your discard. highest card at the end of the round wins) producing a surprisingly replayable game.

Galaxy Trucker (2-4 players; 5 with expansions) - grab simultaneously for parts to build a spaceship, then race it through a gauntlet of adventure cards, then do it twice more with bigger ships. Spatial awareness and pattern recognition are the skills that will let you build a winning ship (along with luck in which tiles you get the first chance at) then luck and a little strategic thought will let you get the best out of it during the race.



Dominant Species (2-6 player worker placement) probably runs a bit long for you (I allow 4 hours) due to analysis paralysis but when I do have time and opponents for it, it keeps everyone engaged the whole time.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Board games anyone?

Postby EvanED » Tue Jul 23, 2013 10:12 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:When you draw a bad card from the mostly-useful deck, the bad things discards are shuffled and put back on top of the bad things deck, and drawing the same place before you've dealt with the effects of bad things happening there before means really bad things happen.
I've only played a couple of Pandemic games (I just bought a copy but don't really have time to play right now), but the mechanics of the bad card (epidemic cards in Pandemic) are brilliantly sadistic.

I've also heard good things about Flash Point as another co-op game that works similarly, but I can't comment intelligently. There are definitely similarities between Flash Point and Pandemic/Forbidden Island, but the latter are definitely way closer together.


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: EdgarJPublius and 7 guests