What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

I got a couple of the two-player Star Wars Destiny starters when they were on sale, and between those, a couple one-player starters, and a booster box, my wife and I have been playing quite a bit--nine games in the last week and a half. She's won more often than I have, though I did get a chance to tune my deck a bit for what seemed to me (perhaps illusory) greater success. We missed the local store championships (which was probably just as well) but may try to get to the weekly organized play on Thursday. I'm not the most social fellow, but I've always sort of wanted to do that. I brushed up against it with X-wing and even talked to some Armada people in person (almost two years ago!) but never ended up doing anything. Perhaps this will be different.

repoman wrote: I got to play a face to face game of Advanced Squad Leader over the weekend. . . .

In the end, the American's succeeded at the victory condition though by a much smaller margin than I would have thought. I lost the scenario BUT I was able to ambush one of his tanks with my hidden squad equipped with a panzerschrek (a powerful German bazooka) and blew it up good! I count it a personal victory.

I'm sorry, but I've been told on several occasions that Sherman tanks blow up if you drop a blue-tip match on them. Clearly this game is broken.

What was your total play time on that scenario? Sounds like fun.

One of the things I like about wargames (at least ones like you're describing) is that there is room for a somewhat-victory. Winning is not so cut and dried and you can look at a particular action that happened as a memorable moment where you pulled something off or where something went truly sideways in the pipe. That's more satisfying for me.

On that note,

---

So, my boys have suddenly gotten fired up about Dungeons & Dragons again, and in theory I'm going to host a big campaign for them in the near future. But we've stumbled across a house we're going to buy and there's been a butt-ton of work to do getting ready for the move. They keep asking me if I've prepped, and I've had to keep saying no. Two nights ago I took a break and my one 15yo boys DM'd, and did a great job of it. Last night my 18yo boy DM'd and did a great job as well, both of them presenting a pretty traditional explore-the-cave kind of scenario but did it with just the right amount of risk and reward. Very well done. Last night they had to tag-team after the cave, as we hiked to the big city to have loot appraised and identified, and one boy was DMing the encounter, the other DMing the identities of the items he had given us the night before.

I'm playing a Cavalier who has cash flow issues. He's not poor, he's just . . . uhhhhh . . . invested in long term business propositions. Once they come through high society will be coming to me for loans, but in the meantime if you could lend me your old pair of boots it will save me the time of purchasing a proper new pair in the city. No point buying "work" boots in the local town that a poor farmer will make much better use of, almost be like stealing. And frankly, as nice as the weather is, I say we walk to the dungeon. Hate to pass up such a beautiful afternoon for no reason!

RPGs provide that same winning-moments/losing moments sort of feedback where you can look back on the narrative and see places to take pride from and others to take laughs from. I really like that aspect.

We play a mix of First and Second edition, which are more or less compatible and it gives the Magic Users and Clerics hundreds of additional spells to choose from via all the ancillary books that were published back in the early 80s. The kids are having fun just exploring the lists.

Two great posts.

Sagrilarus wrote:

I'm sorry, but I've been told on several occasions that Sherman tanks blow up if you drop a blue-tip match on them. Clearly this game is broken.

What was your total play time on that scenario? Sounds like fun.

One of the things I like about wargames (at least ones like you're describing) is that there is room for a somewhat-victory. Winning is not so cut and dried and you can look at a particular action that happened as a memorable moment where you pulled something off or where something went truly sideways in the pipe. That's more satisfying for me.

Play time was around 5 and a half hours and I was defeated on turn 6 of 10. It's a long time but the game is so engrossing I didn't mind or notice. Part of the reason it ran so long was that it was a fairly big scenario. The Americans had something like 21 full squads which is quite a bit.

I always have what I call "Win Condition B". If I'm not going to win a game, especially a long game, I will set myself a secondary objective; last until turn X, keep his units from crossing this river, keep control of this location etc. Every ASL game seems to have those memorable moments where something truly epic happens to one side or the other or sometimes both.

It such a remarkable game.

So, last night I played Mads’ prototype. I figure he will read this here so I’ll post only with this preface: KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR IT. IT’S VERY UNIQUE

X-Wing Store Championship

First...its amazing what a difference alittle organization makes for how a day goes. This wasn't my normal store, and it shows that they don't have a regular x-wing group. (late start, not enough time, no timing of rounds). Nothing terrible, it just made me appreciate the effort my local store puts into things.

I took Expertise Boba with bomblet generator and Engine upgrade. Dengar + Wired + Maul. I've never used a Jumpmaster, as I got out right as triple Jumps became a thing. So I wanted to play with it before they changed significantly in 2e.

First round was against Experimental Interface Miranda + Advanced Optics/R2D2 Poe. Yay! double Rebel Regen! I lost, but made the huge mistake of turning away from Miranda with 1 ship to chase Poe. Dengar chased poe for 4 turns, doing 1 or 2 damage a turn, which Poe kept regenning. Then the Slam/Drop Mines Miranda eventually killed off Boba. If I'd kept them both on Miranda, I would have killed the K-Wing, maybe with enough damage down to fight Poe.

2nd round, against the "non meta" list of Poe + Lonewolf Dash. (If your list is named and top 7 on meta-wing...that means it isn't non-meta). this time I focused down Poe, losing Boba in the process. His obstacle placement was on point, and I had to chase Dash through several debris fields with a weakened Dengar. Ended up with 2 hull left on Dash before he killed Dengar.

These two opponents ended up 1 & 2 overall....Rebel Regen. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Can't wait for 2e.

Last game was against a Decimator with Krennic, Rebel Captive and Ysanne Isard, and the Inquisitor. I started this one pretty well, though Rebel Captive was a big counter to most of my list. I was doing really well, chasing the decimator with both ships and mostly ignoring the inquisitor. Then Dengar had to turn right....and Boba landed on a rock and was blocked by A) the decimator the inquisitor C) the board edge. he spent 3 turns trying to get off that rock, but the inquisitor was able to move around enough to block me each time, and get shots off on me a couple. and since I was on the rock, no return fire.

I killed the decimator, but not before taking 3 crits and a hit to the face, with all three crits going through to hull. So boba is crippled, and dengar is lost trying to turn around. The inquisitor killed Boba and took Dengar down to half health before finally dying. this could have easily gone the other way...so I'm glad I didn't go 0-3.

Didn't make top 4, but did get some neat range rulers and an overall good day.

Director Krennic/advanced prototype is amazingly good. I shoulda took a Reaper list, but we don't see much advanced optics Poe in the north here. The Reaper would've shut him down pretty hard.

Dengar + Maul + Wired is great. Roll attack Dice. take 2 stress to re-roll dice. use wired to roll another maybe. Lose a stress for hitting. Roll defense dice. re-roll 1 for wired. Attack again. Reroll 1 for wired. Lose a stress. Start the next turn unstressed. Of course...if you miss 1 of those attacks, and have to turn right...Dengar does bad.

Expertise Boba is fun..but really not that good today. His built in re-rolls will be a lot better in 2e.

I enjoy your posts, makes me realize how badly needed 2nd edition is for serious players.

Been playing some games:

Santa Maria is another fairly generic point salad euro. It uses a dice mechanism to make players raise scoring tracks and fulfill shipments, just like it could use role selection or worker placement. The only thing notable about it is its whitewashing controversy, which is surprisingly minor. Basically, it's a happy game that doesn't show Columbus being the tyranous asshole he was and some people took issue with that. Personally, while I can see the criticism, I don't think it bears out in practise. Quite simply, the game makes no actual attempt to portray its theme whatsoever. It's a purely abstract, mostly meaningless game. It is like debating the thematic merits of Monopoly: Game of Thrones.

The teepees are a bit odd, though. And I wish we had big, good game about the conquest of the Americas. People don't seem to hot on the ones I've checked.

--

I introduced Cosmic Encounter to some people on my club and I'm growing certain that 6-players is a mistake and it's better with 4 or 5 than 6. And even if it's not a mistake, it's not suitable for unexperienced players.

Here's the thing: Cosmic is a very fragile game in some regards and if you invite allies you don't need, the game goes out of control. You cannot meaningfully engage in card play when every battle starts with a -8 to one side and you can't meaningfully develop a strategy or board state when half of the table jumps to four colonies in less than a round. And that's bad, but what is worse is that bad play with alliances promotes even worse play with them. That is, if everyone is giving out free points and you are not, you'll lose, even if they are the ones playing wrong.

The result is that much of the quality of the game goes out of the window and turn-order and who can join in for the last game-winning attack is the big decider. It doesn't matter if you managed your cards well or if you used your power, all that matters is if you get to the 4-colony threshold before the big pileup gets underway.

It also ruins the balance of alien powers. Aliens that rely on hand management, long-term planning or are main player only become much weaker, while aliens with alliance powers or brutal peaks of power become much stronger.

I also think that giving out yellow aliens to newbies is a mistake, even if they are experienced boardgamers. Every time I add yellow aliens into the mix I regret it. Quite simply, new players don't understand the game well enough to use powers like Philanthropist, Calculator or Antimatter and they lack the required experience to know how to fight Parasite or Warpish. I've seen too many newbies that were completely lost because they thought Seeker would be fun. I can se giving out yellow aliens to the experienced players but newbies should be green-only.

--

I also learned to play 1870, which is known to be one of the longer games in the series, by playing against myself. I can clear the whole game in under 4 hours thanks to the moderator. People regularly take from 6 to 8.

I took all of the red aliens out of the deck. I don't see a future in which I have enough experienced players to ever use them.

Played a few games today:

Colossal Arena: I wanted to try this one and someone was kind enough to bring it. Surely enough, I'll probably try to get a copy. I really like the theme of the game and the fact that it's an auction game where bids are very small. We played with the "end the game when the deck is over" rules which apparently aren't great. If I get a copy I'll try the original ruleset.

--

Then I played Argent: The Consortium. I liked it but I had fairly miserable experience because my choice of wizards and being last on the turn order meant I was doing 1-2 actions per turn less than the other two players were. In fact, I only did one action on the last round. And there are only five rounds so yeah, it was pretty damn awful.

Compounding the problem was the fact that the leading (and first) player could easily force an early round end by grabbing one of the cards that ended the round. I noticed rounds like this one:

1st) Grab best end-the-round card, quick action
2nd) Good mov
Me) Try to set up, because I'm lagging, perhaps quick-action
1st) End-the-round card, quick action.

Here, I'm boned no matter what. If Player 2 closes the round I have 1-2 moves less. If they zap me, I lose a turn and they can still close with a 1-2 move advatange. No wonder I felt so miserable.

Beyond that, the game is fun because it has tension. Some spots are simply better and you need to fight for them to win. Choices aren't hyperbalanced, either. It is, by definition, a game about looking at the board and crunching the game state until you get the optiomal move, but I didn't think about that when playing. I would like to play again, which given my miserable experience is quite a feat.

It is undeniable, though, that the game has clear development issues. There's just way too much jank that adds little to the decision space of the game. For example, you can obtain followers. Which are just like one-use items except bought in a different way. And you have spells which are just like permanent items (note the distiction) except spells can be upgraded so you can play a different action when you tap the card. Oh, and there are epic spells too. Don't ask me what they do, I never played them.

You also have a flurry of resources. You have books and scrolls, both mana and money. You also have hidden scoring and assymetrical player powers. It is one of those games were you have to check every turn to see what all the cards do and where you have to get up and check all the crap on your opponent's table and then check the guide to see what scores for the end game and what doesn't. It feels like playing a game with half a dozen expansions throw in, which is not a positive. I'm also unsure that the "cool stuff" is actually what makes you win the game, you often collect garbage just to get points because it's not worth spending actions using them.

The theming is ok. I like that the game is not another medieval merchant euro but this kind of anime designs where you make characters "cool" by giving them lots of accessories and clothing is not great. Would prefer a more consistent theme or message from the game's setting. (Tragedy Looper is a much more concious use of anime tropes, for example)

Still, I'm coming across as being very negative. I would like to try again and see how it goes.

--

I think I'm kind of a weirdo for thinking about this stuff and even more of a weirdo for thinking about this stuff just a play in.

--

Splendor is a pure "optimize your moves" game where you try to get X by turning Y into Z to turn into Y+Z until you can get X and win. This sounds like the kinds of games I hate, but I actually don't mind much when games are upfront about it and aren't long. We played it twice. The second time we used a expansion that did not change anything. Lost both times because I never made the transition into higher tier buildings.

--

Reign & Reverie is, hands down, the best big box expansion for Netrunner and Kitara might be the best cycle. Sportsmetal and The Outfit are just a riot, I'm loving playing those decks online even if I can't them to work as well as I would want to.

hotseatgames wrote: I took all of the red aliens out of the deck. I don't see a future in which I have enough experienced players to ever use them.

I think you can introduce them after 2-3 plays, no biggie.

Erik Twice wrote: It is undeniable, though, that the game has clear development issues. There's just way too much jank that adds little to the decision space of the game. For example, you can obtain followers. Which are just like one-use items except bought in a different way. And you have spells which are just like permanent items (note the distiction) except spells can be upgraded so you can play a different action when you tap the card. Oh, and there are epic spells too. Don't ask me what they do, I never played them.

You also have a flurry of resources. You have books and scrolls, both mana and money. You also have hidden scoring and assymetrical player powers. It is one of those games were you have to check every turn to see what all the cards do and where you have to get up and check all the crap on your opponent's table and then check the guide to see what scores for the end game and what doesn't. It feels like playing a game with half a dozen expansions throw in, which is not a positive. I'm also unsure that the "cool stuff" is actually what makes you win the game, you often collect garbage just to get points because it's not worth spending actions using them.

The theming is ok. I like that the game is not another medieval merchant euro but this kind of anime designs where you make characters "cool" by giving them lots of accessories and clothing is not great. Would prefer a more consistent theme or message from the game's setting. (Tragedy Looper is a much more concious use of anime tropes, for example)

Still, I'm coming across as being very negative. I would like to try again and see how it goes.

I think these are valid concerns. Argent doesn't interest me because it looks a big mess of information overload on the table, due to redundant jank. And the particular style of manga artwork on the cards is busy and contributes to the information overload.

I got THROUGH THE AGES for my birthday and played the demo game with my 6yo. The game is very pretty and has lots of nuance and balance between all the resources--very Chvatil. I am not the biggest fan of the CGE model of "read this book to learn how to play" thing, it just doesn't flow to read like seven paragraphs and subnotes and THEN draw a card and then read...

We did our best and only got a couple of things wrong. But I like this game a lot--I played online a while ago and it's nice to have the real deal.

Betrayal at House on the Hill

I played this twice recently for the first time in years. Once with my RPG group (we've been doing a Through the Breach campaign) and once with some complete board game casuals. Had a blast both times. The RPG group got into it immediately and no one got whiny about any balance issues in the game, understanding implicitly that the haunting phase wasn't meant to give both sides a fighting chance.

The casual group was mildly skeptical for the first few turns until a few particularly evocative event cards got things moving, and they were shocked when they realized that yes, the Betrayal in the title was there for a reason. It probably helped that by chance I turned out to be the traitor and my wife helped shepherd them through the haunting rules.

The setup time was minimal and the rules can be explained as the game starts. What a great design. It actually makes me mildly curious about the Baldur's Gate version.

Menat wrote: The setup time was minimal and the rules can be explained as the game starts. What a great design. It actually makes me mildly curious about the Baldur's Gate version.

I played the Balder's Gate version just once. It's mostly a lazy re-theme in terms of content. They didn't even bother re-naming the stats. I vaguely recall that there were a couple of new icons on the room tiles and a couple of additional restrictions on the placement of those tiles.

Menat wrote: Betrayal at House on the hill

The setup time was minimal and the rules can be explained as the game starts. What a great design. It actually makes me mildly curious about the Baldur's Gate version.

And then you get to explain the new Rules when the haunt starts. I hate the grinding to a halt at the haunt and the quality issues with the different haunts. I do like the cleaned up haunt explanations on BGG.