What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

rocketkiwi wrote: Sounds like Argent?

haha, jesus christ. Yes, edited, sorry!

Played Escape from Colditz Wednesday night. This has been a grail game for a number of F:AT people because of it's cool theme of escaping from a Nazi prison camp and limited number of games from it's 1973 production. However, there is a new 75th anniversary addition is out and this is the edition we played. The production is great. The map looks awesome and there was a few people at game night that were looking at there phone to see if how much it would be to pick up a copy of Escape from Coldtiz. However, game play was another story. We played with 6 which was a mistake. 3-4 is probably a sweet spot for Escape from Coldtiz. But I rated a TOS = 4. "Wow, old school and not in the good ways.." Malloc was more harsh TOS=2 "Unmitigated piece of fucking shit" He ended up spending most of the game trying to roll doubles to get out of solitary confinement. So I'm glad I finally played Colditz but I'm glad I held out and didn't buy Colditz which would have ended up a shelf toad.

KingPut wrote: Played Escape from Colditz Wednesday night. This has been a grail game for a number of F:AT people because of it's cool theme of escaping from a Nazi prison camp and limited number of games from it's 1973 production. However, there is a new 75th anniversary addition is out and this is the edition we played. The production is great. The map looks awesome and there was a few people at game night that were looking at there phone to see if how much it would be to pick up a copy of Escape from Coldtiz. However, game play was another story. We played with 6 which was a mistake. 3-4 is probably a sweet spot for Escape from Coldtiz. But I rated a TOS = 4. "Wow, old school and not in the good ways.." Malloc was more harsh TOS=2 "Unmitigated piece of fucking shit" He ended up spending most of the game trying to roll doubles to get out of solitary confinement. So I'm glad I finally played Colditz but I'm glad I held out and didn't buy Colditz which would have ended up a shelf toad.

When we used to play this (last time about 5 years ago when we had enough people) we used to play over a timed period and see how many escapes could be made, it didn't go down too badly with us - we all took it pretty lightly but still competitive - but rules 'discussions' were interesting. Even wit all the updated answers around there were still a couple of areas we didn't agree 100% on. Did anyone succeed with a 'Do or die' attempt ?
I'd love to see a copy of the new rules to see if grey areas had been filled in - possible you could assist ?

Cheers
Tom

I don't think they include the "do or die " in the base rules. Maybe it the optional rules. I like the idea of a timer either for the end game or for each player. The base game with 4 players and no timer is a two hour slog. When it should be a 60 minute fun game.

KingPut wrote: I don't think they include the "do or die " in the base rules. Maybe it the optional rules. I like the idea of a timer either for the end game or for each player. The base game with 4 players and no timer is a two hour slog. When it should be a 60 minute fun game.

In the original the 'Do or die' were hidden cards that all prisoner players were dealt at the start, each different. For the timed it was a case of pick a period (say 2hrs) and the allied prisoners had to get x escapes in the time to win, that then gives both sides something to aim at.

My in-laws are in town and while we can get my MIL and SIL to play games, the MIL will instantly go into "this is too hard and I have no idea what's going on" mode if we try to teach her anything she doesn't already know. It infuriates me, so I tend to just stick with the ones she already likes: Canasta, Rummikub, Phase 10. (I'll go for the first two over the third, but it's an option.) My ever-optimistic wife tried to introduce them to Marrying Mr Darcy, which is about as easy as it gets and that was too much. That was it for me for Thanksgiving gaming.

Sadly this is likely another rant on my part; seems like half of my posts are like that and its kinda depressing. Game day was today from 9-4ish with a usual group I go to every two weeks. About 8-15 people on average and I've gamed with most of them about 2 years now and know them pretty well.

First up was Tyrants of the Underdark. This is a game I am very meh on. Its an easy game, it has no real theme, and it has minimal interaction. The only saving aspect to it is the playtime of about an hour and I think the demons on the cards are neat. However, for gameplay the demons and badass Underdark cards do nothing other than get buying power or place single troops - thats it. As a first choice for games I think this is super sad for that reason. All three of the other players were excited to play this and had a great time. I win close to half the time when I play this and came in a close second today, so it isn't that I'm bad at the game. I haven't read of any other opinions on this site - is this game really fun for people? I just don't understand why I would ever be excited to play it.

Next up I forced Pax Pamir out with the recent expansion cards in play. Same group of me and three others. One guy played Pamir a couple times and likes it. The other two played Porfiriana once and were ok about it. The game ended on the second topple after one of the two British players setup the win for his partner, and no it isn't a team game. The player who setup the win complained about the game for the prior 15 minutes and said he hates it and its not a good game and he doesn't understand it. On his initial play. This is a person who always lists Study in Emerald (first edition) and Glory to Rome as his favorite games. And he got pissed that he couldn't understand Pamir after playing it for 40 minutes. What the fuck?? No you won't understand a game completely on the first play - if you want that go play fucking filler games for 15 minutes each for the next 4 hours. Its especially irritating as he constantly forces noobs to play Study in Emerald and they invariably fuck up the game for whatever side they are on. So this was a failure in my book. The expansion, Khyber Knives, is pretty great though and I think it improves your control in the game a lot.

As a concession for the guy that hated Pamir we played his copy of Study in Emerald. 5 players this time and everyone has played the game about a dozen times minimum, so no rules no explanations nothing. I was on the side of the 2 v the other 3 players and was doing poorly so the other 3 blocked a lot of my actions to keep my faction in last. Good play, I agree. Then the guy in first starts bitching about how the game is over and my partner has already won the game and its inevitable so why bother, despite the obvious fact that I am one point out of last and my partner will lose if the guy currently in last jumps me in points. So the guy currently in last scores a couple points and the bitching player won the next turn. Holy fuck this was an awful experience. I told the guy that complained how shitty it is to bitch about losing a game and then win on the next turn; he got offended and said sorry if I ruined the game for you in a sarcastic tone. I'm almost ready to give up on this game too, it depends so strongly on how intelligent the other players on your team are about reading the board in order for you to individually win. And I will make sure I never play anything complicated with the winner again.

Last up was Dogs of War, my game, that I got them to agree to instead of Cry Havoc. DoW is great, I lost by a single point and third place was 3 points behind me with the guy in last failing to understand some basic strategies despite me directly explaining it to him during the game (don't go all in on a card or nobody will ally with you; leave attractive spots open if you want allies, play for majority or take it from other players etc.). Overall though everyone liked Tyrants better and didn't say much about DoW and that is just not right.

Also about a week ago after two solo practice games I did a 2 player game of Pax Renaissance. Really really like the game a lot but I don't know who I would play it with enough that I don't know the game better than them. Its a tough game to learn solo and the rules aren't great and have obnoxiously small font to fit into a small box. But I still really liked learning it and seeing how the different actions and strategies can work. I think the game is more difficult than either Pamir or Porfiriana to learn, but I had vidoes and player aids to teach me both of them whereas Renaissance is too new to have any real support for teaching.

End rant.

The downloadable rules for Pax Renaissance: boardgamegeek.com/filepage/115717/pax-pamir-rules

My wife's parents are pretty open to simpler games, so this year I introduced them to Quadropolis. I made an interesting discovery: it turns out I like that game a lot more when it's played casually. For one thing I play better when everyone is playing kind of loosey-goosey, but more than that the game is just more fun that way. I think a lot of the struggles I've had with euros come from treating them like feats of strength. It was probably the most enjoyable game I've had of that one.

Then we played a lot of Codenames and Codenames: Pictures. My SIL got me the latter, since we exchanged gifts with my wife's family this weekend. I really like Codenames in the first place, probably one of my favorite games from 2015. The pictures version was a lot of fun too, if maybe a little more difficult at first blush. More likely it just rewards a different way of thinking, but it was a big adjustment. The pictures are all terrific, kind of weird and unsettling in a Dixit way, but less fanciful. They all lend themselves to 3-4 different interpretations, unlike the word version, where most people have just the one definition of "scuba diving." If you have played Codenames at all, the Pictures version won't surprise you really, but it's a different challenge in the same ruleset. I look forward to combining the two sets.

Family was in town. We played a learning game of Age of Sigmar and Survive four times. And then Rock Band 4 until my little cousin, who is GODLIKE on the drums, broke a stick playing "Caught in a Mosh" on the highest difficulty.

I played a couple games again:

I fancied playing Blood Rage again, and like the last few times I fancied to play it, I regreted it. On paper I think the game is great, but it goes off the rails so often that it's rare for me to actually have a good experience playing it. Basically, if any of the players makes a mistake, the game explodes because someone snowballs and the loser(s) get ganged upon. Normally, when a game is unforgiving, it means that it's easy to recover and win, but here it means "the game will stop working if someone makes a mistake". And it's very easy to make a mistake, if simply because battles use a Cosmic Encounter-like system with significantly higher stakes.

Tiny Epic Western also felt quite bad. Its claim to fame is that it's a worker placement game that fits inside a Citadels-sized box. Surprisingly enough, it's a quite complex one, perhaps even too much because there are two extra mechanics that make it less fun.

The first is the "Poker" mechanic. Basically, each group of spaces has an extra bonus of resources if the card you are given per turn builds a good hand with the cards that are adjacent to it. Since you only draw two cards and choose one, this is very hard to control, forces a lot of ties and generally adds a lot of randomness to a game that doesn't benefit from it.

The second are duels. Basically, you can "steal" an action space if you roll higher than your opponent. It's not interesting, it's not fun and is extrememely out of place in a worker placement game, IMHO.

It also has the usual Kickstarter issues that Barnes and others often complain about: Lack of development, lack of balance and so on. There are only 6-9 workers on the table but at least 20 different spaces plus buildings, which feels just wrong. Everyone on the table was dissapointed and said we should have played Lords of Waterdeep instead.

I've been quite negative with my posts lately so perhaps I should explain: Other than A Most Dangerous Time and a couple exceptions, the only games I've played recently are games bought by one guy in the group that loves: 1) Overproduced components, 2) Kickstarter Products, 3) Overproduced Kickstarter Products. Xia, Blood Rage, Tiny Epic Westerns, Secret Hitler, Adrenaline...I've played at least 3 or 4 different "family friendly" fillers with strange metalic money and awkardly-shape dice and it has all been in the last 2-3 months. My friend has really gotten the "collecting" bug and it sucks!

Because it's not really about the games being bad, even if that plays a part, what really bothers me is playing so many of them for the first time. Here's the thing: I don't like playing new games and I'm often playing 1-2 new games per session. The first play of a game is always the worst and you often need another one for the game to rise beyond "bad". My ideal game sessions are those in which you play the same 5 games over and over and only replace them when one burns out.

Erik Twice wrote:
Because it's not really about the games being bad, even if that plays a part, what really bothers me is playing so many of them for the first time. Here's the thing: I don't like playing new games and I'm often playing 1-2 new games per session. The first play of a game is always the worst and you often need another one for the game to rise beyond "bad". My ideal game sessions are those in which you play the same 5 games over and over and only replace them when one burns out.

Truth. One of the saving graces of my game situation (mostly 2 player, usually a friend or my wife) is that they don't enjoy the process of learning new games. So if it's new we generally have to plan it out and in many times they're in no mood. It seriously tempers my already relatively low "play a new game!" instinct.

Erik, I feel you. I left a group because each week it was some new Kickstarter thing that we had to learn, would be overproduced and underdeveloped, and no one would ever think about or want to play again. Two of the guys in the group would back anything and it was almost all dire and forgettable. Nerds like to haul out the old Sturgeon's Law thing to defend bad shit, but I don't feel like I have to be one of the ones who helps determine which 90% is crap. I'm really okay waiting until someone else IDs the decent 10% (and I also think 10% is overly optimistic). I don't dislike playing new games, but I don't have to play everything within arm's reach.

Nate also hit on something for me. To me, some of the funnest games are when no one really has a good idea and is playing from their gut and surprises emerge. I like light, casual play. This is partly because I'm not win motivated and not an aggressive player and don't have the desire to change that. I don't care enough to "get gud" (this goes for video games as well). Watching someone tweak an engine to perfection or crush me down to bits and then crush the bits isn't fun, not because I'm losing, but because usually nothing interesting or exciting is happening.

In the coming year I plan to really adjust my gaming habits. It's hard, given my COTN groups, but I really want to do more with what I already have instead of shuffling through yet another slightly different VP engine.

Its liberating.

Faced with either playing games I don't want to play, or not playing, the choice is easy.

Colorcrayons wrote: Its liberating.

Faced with either playing games I don't want to play, or not playing, the choice is easy.

Its scary how much you can lie to yourself and pretend you're OK with playing new games each time, and owning hundreds of games, most of which you will rarely if ever play. But if you do go through with the cull and reassess its scary that you can realise how utterly bored and uninterested in all of it you are. This isnt just boardgames, its lots of stuff you just kind of follow along via habit then when you get out of the habit, you have a hard time wondering how the fuck you were ever interested in it AT ALL. More power to those of you who do dig the endless cyle of one off games year after year, but thank god I managed to just can it all off (over 1000 games) and now play El Grande or Tigris with work friends, and Combat Commander at home with the missus. I've never been happier with games, and don't miss other stuff at all. And I certainly dont miss the cretinous merry go round of turning up each week to shuffle through some boring ass clone game that does the same old shit that games have been doing for decades and pretending that means something. Its the very definition of pointless yet its overwhelmingly the truth in what I've experienced in enough data points to be not just coincidence.