joeyjoejoeshabadoo
Member
Queen's Gambit reprint please.fenners said:
EDIT: X-Wing looks awesome. They can keep their Co-OP LCG.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The New Board Game Thread (Newcomer Friendly)
- Thread starter AstroLad
- Start date
- Status
EDIT: X-Wing looks awesome. They can keep their Co-OP LCG.
Thunderstone has been a big hit in my group and we already loved Dominion and Ascension.
The only way to play though is Epic Thunderstone variant which really ramps up the theme to feel more like a real RPG.
Read more about it here http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/614361/anybody-know-about-the-variant-created-by-richard
and watch the video where Tom Vasel explains it here: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/8154
The only way to play though is Epic Thunderstone variant which really ramps up the theme to feel more like a real RPG.
Read more about it here http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/614361/anybody-know-about-the-variant-created-by-richard
and watch the video where Tom Vasel explains it here: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/8154
BattleMonkey
Member
FFG and STAR WARS!!!! FUCCKKKK YEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
fenners said:
Kill it with fire. Tired of hearing about these more than deck building games.
joeyjoejoeshabadoo said:
Fuck yes. please.
EDIT: GUUUUUhhhhhh, they should make that Star Wars re-themed Twilight Imperium a REAL THING. HNNGGGGG
Edit 2: Clarified the quote so panties can stop being wadded.
mrkgoo said:
Luck gives me a chance against chaps like AstroLad in Carcassonne and Ascension, like 1/100.
fenners said:It's worth it
Anyone in the Austin area going to the Board Game Bash in a couple of weeks? Stooge?
$20/person entry fee? That's a little steep...maybe that's standard?
Captain_Spanky
Member
Neverfade said:
BattleMonkey
Member
Neverfade said:
Those aren't all coop games, and only FFG is doing the LCG thing really, everyone though is doing deck building games.
What does it matter? LCG means nothing, it's just their name for card games basically that they coined
joeyjoejoeshabadoo
Member
Oh, God yes. Death Star in place of a War Sun.....MMMMMMMM.Neverfade said:
BattleMonkey
Member
Neverfade said:
Your original post was quoting "coop LCG", which is actually pretty unique.
Don't see how it's stupid, as the format works perfectly fine as stand alone. The coop versions especially since you are not actively competing with other players. In competitive LCG you have the need to purchase more to keep up, but with the coop games it doesn't matter, buying more expansions just adds to the experience, but not required. Even the competitive ones work well stand alone, one person buys and everyone enjoys the main set, it's all about how your group approaches it.
And I would gladly take more LCG's as long as it keeps us away from a CCG.
This isn't going to stop them from making other games either, when FFG gets a license, they use it. They already said a Roleplaying game is also basically on the way
BattleMonkey
Member
Neverfade said:
That's it
NERD RAGE
D you guys get frustrated at other players for 'playing wrong'? I know it's a flaw on my part, that I have a tendency to want to show people better strategies, perhaps to up their game to make them better opponents, but I know it can scare off people from games, and just make them want to play less. Otherwise, does it annoy you that people aren't playing well? Or insist that a particular strategy is good, when yo feel it isn't?
I guess that's all part of the fun of boardgames, where everyone has their own style. Funnyy thi is, i'm not even much of a competitive player. I should shut up more.
I guess that's all part of the fun of boardgames, where everyone has their own style. Funnyy thi is, i'm not even much of a competitive player. I should shut up more.
If there's a critical strategy that's maybe not so obvious immediately, I'll make that part of the rules discussion. Like telling people in Dominion that Coppers and Estates are actually bad cards in most cases, and explaining why. After that I'll generally let people go it on their own, because I don't really play a single game enough to just rule out novel strategies that may be effective, even if accidentally so.
AstroLad said:
Actually, your example helps me greatly, because it is Dominion and the concept of coppers tha ti was particularly thinking of.
I've played all of 4 sessions of Dominion, and as is true for beginners, we played the base kingdom cards as recommended for the first game many times. It wasn,t apparent to me at first, but it became clear when I started branching out to other kingdom cards, that cards like copper were really bad.I nearly always wanted the other cards in my deck, be it the actions,or the better money. I found that pitching the coppers to my cellars was a better idea most of the time. So it was clear that you would never want t buy coppers (generally speaking, for example gardens brings up an inrwting situation).
Anyway, it just frustrated me when my brother started buying up coppers when he played multiple markets (like 3 coppers at once). His idea was that he needed more money in the deck, without realising that adding coppers doesn't really add money in your deck, just money card 'ratio'. I then felt like I was being a twat for telling him 'how to play', when maybe he could be right, and my idea was out of whack. At a certain point, Im sure I should just let go, and let people find out themselves. I just know he has a real analytical mind and tries to play to high strategy, so it frustrates me a little. My sister , on the other hand, doesn't play games often, so I understand that she will need more time to learn that level of statistics. For example, she would use the thief n me, and trash my coppers, which I felt were helping my deck (as a side note, if you reveal two non-treasure cards, do both just get discarded?).
Anyway, I don't want to ruin the game for others with my analytical ramblings, s I gues I should shut up and play (especially since I,m all talk and don't win any more than anyone else as well).
I have a couple more questions about Dominion. When you need to reveal more cards, and thus required to 'shuffle', after the revealing action, do you just leave the shuffled library as thhe new deck? For example, if you have one card left in your library, and you get attacked with the thief, you reveal the last card, and then just reshuffle the discard into the library, then reveal another, Nd the cards go into the new discard?
Similarly, if I play cellar with no cards in my library, do I choose and discard my cards FIRST, thus going back into my library when I draw?
And I really like the mechanic of the kingdom cards changing every game - there seems a real trategy to surveying the board of each game, and adjusting your own strategy depending on what others are doing as well. Do players here like to change up the board EVERY time, or do you play good variations again? I feel there's mostly no need to leave it unchanged, as good combos will come up invariably, and I really want to build up skill in the surveying part.
Hmmm, maybe i'll suggest a house rule where the winner decides up to two piles that can remain, while the person who came second can fix a third.
platypotamus
Member
The only "playing wrong" that really irks me is when people don't take ideal moves because it screws over someone else in the game that they have a soft spot for. Like when playing with a couple, and the husband has a clear superior move, knows he has it, but deliberately does something less ideal so his wife has a better outlook in the game. Hate hate hate hate hate that sort of thing.
Gryphter said:
This was our first time playing. We started around 9:30 and ended at around midnight. I would say that it took at least an hour for us to get through the first two monsters (out of 9) because we were reading the rule book and learning how to play. After that, unless there was a special type of card, we were flying through the game.
I could see our next game taking a max of an hour to play. Also, I was playing with two friends so we just had three of us. Once you know the rules, the gameplay is quick and fun. Our problem is we didn't start backstabbing until it was too late and one of us got too powerful. I am definitely going to pick up the expansions that add new monsters after we play a few more games. There is a ton of replay value since the monster encounters are randomized every game, which is awesome. If anyone has any other questions about this game let me know. It was my first board game purchase and I can't recommend it enough. Next time we are going to try to get a bigger group together.
platypotamus said:
I kind of hate this too. I always feel people should play optimally, though I admit my idea of optimal mayb differ!
That said, I know I can get hard core. Some people are not as hard core, and just want to join in for fun - to keep it fun, you can have people play less than optimally to have them enjoy it. Personally, though, if I get 'helped' in that way, i'd get annoyed.
You know now that I think of it, whenever I play a game, I do get targeted a lot.by friends, family, everyone, be it a new game or otherwise. Maybe I'm really arrogant, and people hate it.
*cry*
BomberMouse
Member
platypotamus said:
It's a very grey area and depends on the game but yeah, it sucks when a couple is kingmaking. Once I played Tikal with 4 people, two of them were a couple and she basically blocked everyone but him. I wouldn't mind if she just played sub optimally though.
I generally try to stay away from games that allow blatant kingmaking. Even in Citadels I swap out the Warlord card because it is quite Kingmakery (though none of the other cards really are). It's often unavoidable but in most good games I find it's quite mitigated.
HAd to look up "kingmaker".
I hate that too, but sometimes you just have to deal with it.
It's actually a weak spot in Monopoly. Selling something to someone for a dollar, for example.
It's much less important in Dominion, because it's so fast, it's more of a case of "who cares, let's just play another game". And generally, the game is still fun and stimulating even when you're losing.
I hate that too, but sometimes you just have to deal with it.
It's actually a weak spot in Monopoly. Selling something to someone for a dollar, for example.
It's much less important in Dominion, because it's so fast, it's more of a case of "who cares, let's just play another game". And generally, the game is still fun and stimulating even when you're losing.
Neverfade said:
No no, absolutely no.
Start with the 4th edition Red Box and Essentials line. It's basically 4th edition revised.
Start with Red Box: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/244660000
Then if that goes over well and you're really ready to invest in DnD, get the following:
Rules Compendium: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/247530000
Dungeon Master's Kit: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/244640000
Monster Vault: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/244650000
and then after these three if you want more player options go with:
Heroes of the Fallen Lands http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/247520000
and
Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/247510000
Most importantly: If the Red Box goes over well, also get a subscription to DnD insider http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Subscription.aspx
It has some pretty great tools that will make your group's life easier like a character builder and online database of all the 4th ed. content. Your whole group can share the account (this isn't publicized...but they don't frown upon it).
If you like boardgames (which I know you do) you'll really like 4th edition DnD because its much more like a boardgame than previous versions are. Don't let anyone try and talk you into Pathfinder or one of those other side systems. 4e is the way to go.
Got my CSI order in today with a bunch of games (okay, expansions mostly). Looked through the Innovation: Echoes rules and cards and I'm super stoked. Love the new mechanics and inventions. Think I'll play a few more weeks with the base game though as it's hardly worn out its welcome.
Ah no worries. Yes actually very good and BGG has it as Best with 2. Didn't expect that myself but it does feel like a "fuller" experience from the perspective of being able to focus on a single opponent and really explore lots of strategies rather than being pigeonholed.Yaboosh said:
UpperCaseN
Member
Philly crew is driving to Gencon today, was supposed to wake up at 5am to meet and depart at 6, somehow I naturally woke up on my own right now at 4am. Yep
So.. I played Killer Bunnies last night.
First: It really isn't that bad. Really. It isn't a "good" game by any means, but there really is a *lot* more going on than say Munchkin. It's super random, but there is some form of strategy on who to attack, what cards to keep in hand, and the mechanic of "queing" up your cards so you are stuck with a strategy even after it blows up is kind of nice. Makes you guess to some extent what is going to happen. Kind of like the registers in Roborally. You screw up the first card in your register and you are stuck watching the aftermath for 4 more turns. In this case, the "queue" is only two cards deep and you can always play a special card out of hand instead of your queued up cards, so you have a little wiggle room.
Second: The game lasts far too long, especially when you throw in the extra carrots from the expansion decks. We wound up yanking the expansion carrots out, letting everyone exchange their expansion carrots for base game carrots just to speed things up. The game took nearly 2.5 hours and probably had at least another good hour to go. The game ends when all the carrots are purchased, then you find out what the winning carrot was from the get go (there are 12 carrots, so having the most carrots gives you the best chance of winning, but someone with a single carrot can win).
Third: There are a few cards I would yank out of the game entirely. Namely ones that can force players to discard *all* of their carrots. I'm totally cool with players losing a carrot or two, but one player had to put 8 carrots back in the carrot deck. Which essentially reset a game that was about to end back to the near start of the game. There is another card that has the possibilty of litterally resetting the game (everyone loses all their bunnies and carrots). The cards that close the store are awful. They make it impossible to buy food and water to feed your rabbits (that's fun) but also means no one can buy carrots so the game comes to a grinding stop until the store reopens (not fun). I would house rule this card to allow for the purchase of carrots even when the store is closed.
Fourth: The whole "random carrot wins" thing is actually sort of fun. It forces you to not take the game too seriously simply because anyone can win at the end no matter who is playing better. Normally that would be really awful, but playing "better" in this game isn't typically a matter of all that much skill anyway. It also works well, because I had the lions share of the carrots, but no bunny when the game ended. I would have won the game, but without a living bunny we had to keep drawing carrots from the bottom of the pile until someone else had the winning carrot.
It's a goofy, stupid game that involves minimal strategy and a ton of randomness, but for the first hour it was really fun. Especially when everyone got into the spirit of the game (talking crap, drinking). That said, it *really* overstayed it's welcome. At 30-60 minutes it's a fun little filler game. At 2.5+ hours it really started to grate on me. Especially when I realized we wouldn't be playing TTR after Killer Bunnies.
I'm guessing it has a lot of the same problems Munchkin does with too many plays.. but the fact that there is a bit more to the games mechanics makes it feel like I'm actually playing a game instead of just drawing cards and calling it a game. That said, my girlfriends sister is really wanting more expansions, so I can expect the game to get even longer...
First: It really isn't that bad. Really. It isn't a "good" game by any means, but there really is a *lot* more going on than say Munchkin. It's super random, but there is some form of strategy on who to attack, what cards to keep in hand, and the mechanic of "queing" up your cards so you are stuck with a strategy even after it blows up is kind of nice. Makes you guess to some extent what is going to happen. Kind of like the registers in Roborally. You screw up the first card in your register and you are stuck watching the aftermath for 4 more turns. In this case, the "queue" is only two cards deep and you can always play a special card out of hand instead of your queued up cards, so you have a little wiggle room.
Second: The game lasts far too long, especially when you throw in the extra carrots from the expansion decks. We wound up yanking the expansion carrots out, letting everyone exchange their expansion carrots for base game carrots just to speed things up. The game took nearly 2.5 hours and probably had at least another good hour to go. The game ends when all the carrots are purchased, then you find out what the winning carrot was from the get go (there are 12 carrots, so having the most carrots gives you the best chance of winning, but someone with a single carrot can win).
Third: There are a few cards I would yank out of the game entirely. Namely ones that can force players to discard *all* of their carrots. I'm totally cool with players losing a carrot or two, but one player had to put 8 carrots back in the carrot deck. Which essentially reset a game that was about to end back to the near start of the game. There is another card that has the possibilty of litterally resetting the game (everyone loses all their bunnies and carrots). The cards that close the store are awful. They make it impossible to buy food and water to feed your rabbits (that's fun) but also means no one can buy carrots so the game comes to a grinding stop until the store reopens (not fun). I would house rule this card to allow for the purchase of carrots even when the store is closed.
Fourth: The whole "random carrot wins" thing is actually sort of fun. It forces you to not take the game too seriously simply because anyone can win at the end no matter who is playing better. Normally that would be really awful, but playing "better" in this game isn't typically a matter of all that much skill anyway. It also works well, because I had the lions share of the carrots, but no bunny when the game ended. I would have won the game, but without a living bunny we had to keep drawing carrots from the bottom of the pile until someone else had the winning carrot.
It's a goofy, stupid game that involves minimal strategy and a ton of randomness, but for the first hour it was really fun. Especially when everyone got into the spirit of the game (talking crap, drinking). That said, it *really* overstayed it's welcome. At 30-60 minutes it's a fun little filler game. At 2.5+ hours it really started to grate on me. Especially when I realized we wouldn't be playing TTR after Killer Bunnies.
I'm guessing it has a lot of the same problems Munchkin does with too many plays.. but the fact that there is a bit more to the games mechanics makes it feel like I'm actually playing a game instead of just drawing cards and calling it a game. That said, my girlfriends sister is really wanting more expansions, so I can expect the game to get even longer...
Oh, any opinions on the LOTR co-op card thing? I'm trying to decide between that or the Star Wars one coming out. I like both themes, though LOTR seems to lend itself better to the theme of questing.
In any case, I'd like to get in on the ground floor so I can grab the boosters as they come out rather than having a backlog of them to get.
In any case, I'd like to get in on the ground floor so I can grab the boosters as they come out rather than having a backlog of them to get.
BattleMonkey
Member
Star Wars wont be out till next year so hard to say how that will turn out. Opinions I've seen of the LOTR coop card game weren't too hot though, but I have no real idea
BattleMonkey said:
Well, it's up to number 50 on BGG already. Granted that is probably largely HYPE!.. but I've seen some really mixed stuff on it. Some say it's a really fun solo or co-op game with others saying it's the worst thing ever.
Wanted to see if someone I trust here had played it.
Captain_Spanky
Member
StoOgE said:
I've heard nothing but good about it to be honest.
Deadstar said:
the extra card is for the randomizer deck so that you can "randomize" which 10 kingdom cards to use. They have different colored backs.
So you shuffle the stack that has 1 of earch card and then select 10, and those are the 10 cards you use. Or you cuold just use an iphone/droid app like the rest of us.
But yeah, you use 10 of each kingdom card while actually playing the game (with the exception of the kingdom cards that give you VP, those vary based on the number of players.. like gardens).
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked