blackshoe Posted December 15, 2014 Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 Some shipmates of mine back in the day played a marathon game of War in the Pacific over two or three days many years ago. IIRC it took them several hours just to set up the map and the pieces, and they had to do it on the floor of the gym. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted December 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 15, 2014 Some shipmates of mine back in the day played a marathon game of War in the Pacific over two or three days many years ago. IIRC it took them several hours just to set up the map and the pieces, and they had to do it on the floor of the gym.Some of the old Avalon Hill wargames are real marathons too. It's really a different genre, today's custom or "German style" games are mostly designed to play in under three hours, often under two. Ken, I hope you take the plunge and try one or two of the games here. You just need a few like minded friends for victims opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted December 16, 2014 Report Share Posted December 16, 2014 I can't believe no one's mentioned Dixit yet! It's really a game that I've never failed to enjoy despite playing it tens of times with the same deck! It's quite verbal in nature and there's no long-term strategy involved at all but the drawings are amazing and lend themselves to seemingly endless interpretations. Another game I inexplicably enjoy is HeckMeck (Pickomino). A lot of luck but still a bunch of risk/reward scenarios to evaluate. It feels somehow more concrete than a lot of other games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Hanabi is great. Lots of inferences to be drawn! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Three logicians walk into a bare. "A beer for everyone?" the bartender asks.1st logician: "I don't know" 2nd logician: "I don't know" 3rd logician: "Yes, please." If you like this joke (or liked it back when it wasn't very old yet), you will love Hanabi. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted December 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Hanabi is great. Lots of inferences to be drawn!Indeed. It really struck me as being kind of like bridge bidding, in way. You assume that the other players did what they did for a reason, and also that they did not do some other thing for a reason. Perhaps you could even have agreements about meanings of certain actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 I've only played a few times, but the meta rules I came up with were "if you can't figure out the hint, assume it's playable" and "if you have to discard, discard your oldest card" stuff like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 My current best recomendation for 3-4 player games is Agricola. The game is fun for novices, and still challenging for experts, can be played in so many ways, even the 1 player game is fun. Agricola is currently my favorite game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Some of the old Avalon Hill wargames are real marathons too. It's really a different genre, today's custom or "German style" games are mostly designed to play in under three hours, often under two.Heh, "some". And not just AH (note, I am an ASL'er, but have never tried any of the killers like RB or Tarawa full campaign); I have one game, "Vietnam 1965-1975" (Victory Games), where the campaign game expects to run 200-500 hours. I'm told that effectively that means "carrier deployments". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 Three logicians walk into a bare. "A beer for everyone?" the bartender asks.1st logician: "I don't know" 2nd logician: "I don't know" 3rd logician: "Yes, please." If you like this joke (or liked it back when it wasn't very old yet), you will love Hanabi. Pfft cooperative games?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted December 22, 2014 Report Share Posted December 22, 2014 To make it competitive... duplicate Hanabi! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted December 22, 2014 Report Share Posted December 22, 2014 Cooperative games are a very good way to handle different levels of competitiveness in one's gaming community. Players like you (and me) get frustrated at the games that are effectively roll-the-dice and see-who-wins; other players lose it very quickly if it's "okay, I show up, JLall wins" (especially if money's involved), or give up very quickly if there are "serious fun" players at the table ("I just agreed to play games because it was a fun time. If you're going to take it so seriously, it's not worth it"; as opposed to most here, where it's "it's not fun if we just push cards"). Also sometimes it's nice to do stupid game to get the mind off (see the popularity, at least in the TO junior area, of "Kent" waiting for the bridge game to start. Sure, that's competitive, but anybody who takes the game seriously needs to have their head examined). I really like Pandemic - serious enough that I can get my "want to win, how do we do it" on, while still having "we win or we lose", not "I win and you lose". Slightly less "cooperative", I like Scotland Yard, or Princess Ryan's Space Marines, where it's "one versus the rest" - if there's a specific "winner", somehow, they get to be the "one" next time. I'm as competitive as the next person (unless money is involved, in which case, I'm quite certain that the best players will eat my dead money, so I might as well spend it on lottery tickets (which I don't do)), but not against the "it's important that I beat you at this game and all others to demonstrate my superiority over you" people or the "If you attack me in this game, I'll make my sole job taking you out of any future game we ever play, and that's why I always win" people (I set one of those up lo, those many years ago, with Titan. I was about to attack him right at the beginning of the game (which is stupid), and he went into his spiel, which I had of course heard before. Then the next person attacked his other stack, effectively putting him so far behind he'd never catch up (as would the two of us). Then someone else attacked his remnants. Then he realized that *everyone* in the game had as goal 1 "take this guy out, then let's play", and...) If someone has to take something out of the game and into either another game or real life, I don't see why I should play games with that someone. No, I'm not pointing that at anybody here (although I will aim "why should I pay more to give you my money? It pays to the top 8, and I expect to be 30th on a good day" at those who say "oh you should offer money prizes, that brings in the younger players") Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassedOut Posted January 18, 2015 Report Share Posted January 18, 2015 Just saw this: The Green Bay Packers Keep Playing Settlers of Catan Off-Field “We’re always looking for something to do, it’s cold. No one wants to go outside, better find something.” said Packers backup quarterback Matt Flynn. “I was just trying to play some music — some Pearl Jam, and Bakhtiari wouldn’t let me. He wanted to hear the players talk and strategize. He was very serious. They take it to a different level.” :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2015 We had a game night a couple weeks ago. Some bridge friends brought Puerto Rico and it got played at one table. My wife really liked it so we got it, but I haven't played yet. Also got the expansion to Core Worlds and played that. More complexity! It is really intricate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 21, 2015 Report Share Posted January 21, 2015 I'm as competitive as the next person (unless money is involved, in which case, I'm quite certain that the best players will eat my dead money, so I might as well spend it on lottery tickets (which I don't do)), but not against the "it's important that I beat you at this game and all others to demonstrate my superiority over you" people or the "If you attack me in this game, I'll make my sole job taking you out of any future game we ever play, and that's why I always win" people (I set one of those up lo, those many years ago, with Titan. I was about to attack him right at the beginning of the game (which is stupid), and he went into his spiel, which I had of course heard before. Then the next person attacked his other stack, effectively putting him so far behind he'd never catch up (as would the two of us). Then someone else attacked his remnants. Then he realized that *everyone* in the game had as goal 1 "take this guy out, then let's play", and...) If someone has to take something out of the game and into either another game or real life, I don't see why I should play games with that someone. No, I'm not pointing that at anybody here (although I will aim "why should I pay more to give you my money? It pays to the top 8, and I expect to be 30th on a good day" at those who say "oh you should offer money prizes, that brings in the younger players") Moving revenges from one game to another is really pointless IMO and against the spirit of any game. However I always follow the rule that if someone destroys all my chances of winning I will do my best for him not to win either. This might not look so bad, but actually it can be when I punnish someone for doing something legitimate like destroying my combo that would bring me back into comptemption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted January 21, 2015 Report Share Posted January 21, 2015 Hmm, I go the other way. If I have no chance of winning, I tend to go after the leader. Frequently that boils down to the same person, though. Hopefully when "someone destroys all my chances of winning", we're playing the sort of game where that's expected and applauded behaviour (Illuminati, I'm thinking of you; or Diplomacy, for people who swing that way). I'm even willing, in that case, to cheer along with the rest the amazing, crippling, and totally correct move - and then I'll take my crippled position and run the leader. Every once in a while I've managed to recover to get another chance to win, even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 22, 2015 Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 I am talking about games where you invest resources in order to damage one certain opponent. I don't like that people dismish their own chances of winning (Reducing your resources) in order to dismish the chances of someone who is not going ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted January 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 Indeed, targeted attacks can lead to arguments and sometimes hard feelings. Compare Dominion and Settlers of Catan. In Dominion, any attack card played affects all other players. Now, this may harm one player more or less than others, depending on circumstances, but the attack itself is non-targeted. Whereas in Settlers, there is the robber, who can be placed at the discretion of the player. I have rarely played a game of Settlers in which there was no arguing about the robber. In Dominion, people may groan, but nobody feels singled out, and there is no means to express personal grudges. In fairness, the robber is necessary to prevent a worse flaw, the victory march. In some games, the player who gains an advantage can leverage that to gain further advantage. Thus one player can gain an insurmountable lead, turning the later parts of the game into a playout of an obvious result. One of the worst offenders is Monopoly. This would also be a problem in Settlers, and this is why the robber exists - to slow down the leader. Of course, targeted attacks are integral to some (most?) wargames. Personally I don't mind this, and never get bothered by it. But it is not always easy to gather a gaming group where everyone shares this attitude. So games without them have an extra appeal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted January 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Played Puerto Rico this weekend with wife and brother. A fun, well balanced game, with a new-to-me mechanic (player action performed by all). I look forward to more plays of this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted January 27, 2015 Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 San Juan is the baby version of Puerto Rico which also has that mechanic. I prefer Race for the Galaxy, which not only has all players taking the action, it has all players simultaneously and secretly selecting an action too. It goes a lot faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted January 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2015 I prefer Race for the Galaxy, which not only has all players taking the action, it has all players simultaneously and secretly selecting an action too. It goes a lot faster.I have read that in reviews. Apparently multiple players can choose the same action - correct? This would be interesting, as players could not rely on other players taking the actions they themselves also need. I may have to try this game too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted January 28, 2015 Report Share Posted January 28, 2015 I have read that in reviews. Apparently multiple players can choose the same action - correct? This would be interesting, as players could not rely on other players taking the actions they themselves also need. I may have to try this game too. Yeah, players can take the same action. The action is only performed once, but all players who actually chose it get the bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted January 29, 2015 Report Share Posted January 29, 2015 In Twilight Imperium III one player took an action, and everybody else took a "secondary" action related. This maintained everyone active while it was someone else's turn (turns were very long). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billw55 Posted February 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2015 A few more plays of Puerto Rico, and we are really liking it. Almost a "play every time" game now. We also got San Juan and Race for the Galaxy. Of these two, I prefer Race. We got Kingdom Builder, a more recent game by the designer of Dominion. It is basically worker placement with variable start conditions and variable victory conditions; seems to be designed with an eye on replayability. We liked it, it is pretty fast once you know what you are doing, which doesn't take long. Temporum turned out to be the worst game we have tried yet. It just seems pointless and dumb. We're going to see if the FLGS will trade it. Yes, we are buying a lot of games lately! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuhchung Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 Just curious, how big are your gaming groups and how often do you play? I wish I had more friends to regularly play with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.