Patters

Non-video games

Recommended Posts

Cards Against Telestrations is pretty great, yeah. Turns out Cards Against Humanity gets much better when you combine it with other games. I'm sure I've done it with other ones, but I can't remember which.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also "Dix Against Humanity", where you replace the black CAH cards with Dixit cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friends and I played some RoboRally during our summer cottage visit. It was excellent choice for our group and for this kind of trip because it could be played simultaneously, because it was random enough that no one took it too seriously, and because it was really fun to see everyone's plans crash and burn when one of the other robots fucked up with the program execution. I loved it basically for the same reasons why I love Cosmic Encounter so much. RoboRally has the added benefit that the rules are much simpler.

 

I wish Wizards of the Coast would give the game a Chromecast / Game Show video game treatment where the players could program the sequence using their phone, tablet or computer, and watch the thing unfold on the TV screen. This way of playing would not have been suitable for our summer cottage setting but I imagine that it would make it much easier for some groups to get into the game, because they could just sit on the sofa and not worry about the movement of the robots and conveyor belts and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be so down with that. It would definitely help with people doing their moves wrong and accidentally cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if Jackbox Games applied their phone+TV model/tech to some more strategic games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm cool with some tech stuff in games (Space Alert) but generally I really prefer a boardgame to be a boardgame and not a video game. When you add a screen, why bother with the tactile stuff at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if Jackbox Games applied their phone+TV model/tech to some more strategic games.

Yeah, I'd like to see some board game type games get that treatment. Although I don't think it has to be Jackbox Games, I mean, aside from a couple of pearls their games aren't even that great and the concept of phone+TV could easily have a more solid implementation than what they have (where if you want to change the number of players for next game, everyone has to enter their names again and a new room code as well -- this is not necessary in a good implementation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm cool with some tech stuff in games (Space Alert) but generally I really prefer a boardgame to be a boardgame and not a video game. When you add a screen, why bother with the tactile stuff at all?

On the other hand I agree with this as well. XCom the board game works really great (without the tablet app, you would probably have some complex and boring bookkeeping to do before each round), but I don't know any other examples where tech makes a board game better. But I would like to see some experiments. To get really cool mixes of physical and digital, I think we need a tech something like the Microsoft Surface the way it was initially advertised, where the whole table becomes a touch screen and can recognize physical items put on top of it. And we'd need some big publishers taking it seriously for people to actually buy such a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One Night Ultimate Werewolf would not work nearly as well without the app that reads out the roles to you. Alchemists also relies on an app to combine ingredients to potions without letting you know how exactly they resulted in the potion you end up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, Alchemists sounds like a cool game, and is pretty highly rated on BGG as well, I should find someone who has it or maybe even buy it for myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious if any of you folks have played the Battlestar Galactica game, because, it's one of BGG's top rated games (#29 last I looked), it's wonderfully thematic, but in the half dozen games I've played I am seeing a major flaw in the game. Specifically, the way that the game progresses via the Crisis Deck, is just too random, or put another way, too predetermined based on the shuffle. Given that the Crisis Deck is the sole factor to deploy Cylons and advance your jump track, the randomness in the order and amount of either of those two events occurring has made my plays of this game feel preordained, almost deterministic. If anyone else has played it, I wonder if you had the same impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and my partner had a great time playing Twilight Struggle at our local game shop yesterday. Question to those who have played it: If events trigger whether or not a card is played as an event, why is there the option to play cards as events? What advantage would there ever be to not playing cards as operations? I feel like we're misunderstanding some fundamental rule of the game somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious if any of you folks have played the Battlestar Galactica game, because, it's one of BGG's top rated games (#29 last I looked), it's wonderfully thematic, but in the half dozen games I've played I am seeing a major flaw in the game. Specifically, the way that the game progresses via the Crisis Deck, is just too random, or put another way, too predetermined based on the shuffle. Given that the Crisis Deck is the sole factor to deploy Cylons and advance your jump track, the randomness in the order and amount of either of those two events occurring has made my plays of this game feel preordained, almost deterministic. If anyone else has played it, I wonder if you had the same impression.

This was one of my favorite games for many years and I have many opinions about it and about what you can do to handle this issue, which is an issue to be sure. So, some options:

The last expansion, Daybreak, adds a Cylon fleet board and a Pursuit track, so when you get Cylon ship activations off Crisis cards with an empty board, they advance on the Pursuit track and eventually catch up and jump back in. Then when you jump the ships on the board just move back to the Cylon fleet board. This replaces completely the Cylon attack set-up cards in the Crisis deck, and means that there's actual value to destroying Cylon ships. (In the basic game, jumping the fleet is equivalent to pressing a button that says "Destroy all Cylon ships and also get closer to winning" since they don't persist in any way.)

I have some issues with this expansion that come out after playing with it a while, which I'll put in spoiler tags because you may be able to play for a long time without finding them yourselves if you choose to pick it up. There are not any spoilers for the actual show in here.

With the pursuit board, there's a new somewhat degenerate strategy available to the humans, which is that leaving a single Cylon raider alive and kiting it around Galactica will hugely reduce the rate at which new Cylon ships spawn, so it's kind of the easiest way to progress as humans.

This kind of relates to the more general issue I have with the game recently, which is that my group recognizes "correct" human play very readily, so that it's extremely difficult to make any interesting plays as a concealed Cylon. That being the most interesting aspect of the game means I don't play it as much as I used to, but obviously we only got to that point because we played it an awful lot, because it's very good.

Another option you can try is treating the Cylon setup cards like Pandemic's Epidemic cards, if you've ever played that game. Essentially you divide the Crisis deck into equally sized chunks, shuffle a single setup card into each chunk, and then stack the chunks up. This means that you can still be surprised somewhat by a setup card or have two come relatively close together and mess up your day, but you'll always have them arrive eventually. I don't recall how often I played with this houserule because once the expansion came out we started doing it that way, but I think it would probably work fairly well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and my partner had a great time playing Twilight Struggle at our local game shop yesterday. Question to those who have played it: If events trigger whether or not a card is played as an event, why is there the option to play cards as events? What advantage would there ever be to not playing cards as operations? I feel like we're misunderstanding some fundamental rule of the game somewhere.

 

If I recall from the half-dozen games I've played, events only trigger if a card is played for points by the player who does not benefit from the event. As a player, you have a choice between sacrificing your own events for points or dealing with benefiting the other player while giving yourself points.

 

I'm curious if any of you folks have played the Battlestar Galactica game, because, it's one of BGG's top rated games (#29 last I looked), it's wonderfully thematic, but in the half dozen games I've played I am seeing a major flaw in the game. Specifically, the way that the game progresses via the Crisis Deck, is just too random, or put another way, too predetermined based on the shuffle. Given that the Crisis Deck is the sole factor to deploy Cylons and advance your jump track, the randomness in the order and amount of either of those two events occurring has made my plays of this game feel preordained, almost deterministic. If anyone else has played it, I wonder if you had the same impression.

 

I'm not entirely sure if your complaint is that there are not enough crisis-driven confrontations or that there are too many. I've heard both, and my answer varies depending on that.

 

I've played with all the expansions in various combinations and, generally speaking, I think that the base game has the most purity in its thematic/mechanic divide. The fact that, in my experience, truly dangerous crises tend to cluster, leaving long periods of doldrums elsewhere, emphasizes the social aspect of the game. An experienced team of players can overcome almost any combination of crisis cards, if they assess the appropriate response to them correctly and spend their cards wisely, but of course, there's at least one player who's not playing optimally, and that's where the interesting interactions come in a game of advanced players and knowledge. Overcommitting cards to crises, lying about whether you have Executive Order or Strategic Planning in your hand, and generally undermining any examples of strong leadership in the crew through fear and doubt are the tools that come to a Cylon over time. Also, the long periods where nothing happens leave the game open to witch hunts, usually led by bored pilots or engineers, and that's something I treasure whether human or Cylon.

 

As far as managing randomness in the crisis deck, that's something about which the players have to be proactive. There are only a limited number of card types in the deck, so once you've played the game a little, it becomes more clear that the jump track advances roughly every two or three turns and that there's a major Cylon fleet action every eight to ten turns. Players can then use the purple scouting card, I can't remember its name, to prioritize better crisis cards, they can deploy fighter screens and reroute civilian ships, they can use quorum cards to replenish supplies, and if the jump track allows, they can jump early, using cards to mitigate the risk there. The interesting thing with Battlestar, to me, is that the game is a crushingly easy experience, in terms of making a plan and then managing setbacks, except that there's one or two people who deliberately aren't playing optimally, so the question is whether to purge them from the group or trick them into cooperating enough just to succeed. Really, the biggest flaw in the base game for me is when the sleeper mechanic goes awry and you get two fully active Cylons in round one. I've never seen a ship recover from that.

 

Sorry if that was rambling, but this is a game that I've played fourteen times and been a Cylon for eleven, so it's something that I've thought about a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and my partner had a great time playing Twilight Struggle at our local game shop yesterday. Question to those who have played it: If events trigger whether or not a card is played as an event, why is there the option to play cards as events? What advantage would there ever be to not playing cards as operations? I feel like we're misunderstanding some fundamental rule of the game somewhere.

Oh no now I'm double posting!

I'm not a Twilight Struggle expert and it's been many years, but I think the rule you're missing is this:

Your opponent's events always trigger, but you also get to play them for points. Your events, you have to choose one or the other. Events that can be played for either side, I think you also have to choose.

edit: ninja'd but at least I didn't double post :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll confirm Gormongous and Gerretic here: If the card belongs to you or is shared, you choose to either play it for the event or for points. Opponent's cards always trigger the event along with the points.

 

So if I'm the US and I play Panama Canal Returned, I either get 1 Ops Point (or whatever their called) or I add 2 influence in Panama, Costa Rica and Venezuela. If I'm the USSR and I play that card, I get 1 Ops Point and the US player gets 2 influence in Panama, Costa Rica, and Venezuela. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

 

This would explain why our games kept ending right at the start of turn 4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another option you can try is treating the Cylon setup cards like Pandemic's Epidemic cards, if you've ever played that game. Essentially you divide the Crisis deck into equally sized chunks, shuffle a single setup card into each chunk, and then stack the chunks up. This means that you can still be surprised somewhat by a setup card or have two come relatively close together and mess up your day, but you'll always have them arrive eventually. I don't recall how often I played with this houserule because once the expansion came out we started doing it that way, but I think it would probably work fairly well.

 

All great thoughts, but this especially seems like an immediate solution. I had thoughts of using a dungeon master type role, and this will do that!

 

Me and my partner had a great time playing Twilight Struggle at our local game shop yesterday. Question to those who have played it: If events trigger whether or not a card is played as an event, why is there the option to play cards as events? What advantage would there ever be to not playing cards as operations? I feel like we're misunderstanding some fundamental rule of the game somewhere.

 

Well you've had 3 different people explain this rule to you now, but I wanted to chime in and say I played Twilight Struggle yesterday as well. The first couple games, us palyers screwed up at least 1 rule, and still had a great time. I'd encourage you to play again, it keeps getting better! 

Last night I actually lost by going into defcon 1, I played Missile Envy, my opponent gave me Duck and Cover in return, ending the game instantly! It's weird how many of these very specific insta-loss conditions the game has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BSG was a big hit in my playgroup for a brief period but it also faded away quickly because a significant portion found it both too stressy and too boring. There's a large amount of rules/component fiddling, there's a traitor mechanic, there's unwinnable and unlosable situations - just too many things most of us don't like.

 

I'll say in its favour that it definitely does replicate the feeling of despair/tension well at times. That's not really something I'm too interested in feeling from a game though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BSG was a big hit in my playgroup for a brief period but it also faded away quickly because a significant portion found it both too stressy and too boring. There's a large amount of rules/component fiddling, there's a traitor mechanic, there's unwinnable and unlosable situations - just too many things most of us don't like.

 

I'll say in its favour that it definitely does replicate the feeling of despair/tension well at times. That's not really something I'm too interested in feeling from a game though.

 

There is a game called Dark Moon which used to be a game called BSG express. It takes mechanics from BSG and makes it a much faster game.

 

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/111124/dark-moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finally got to play the copy of Funemployed that was given to me for my birthday. Basically, if you've heard anything good about this game, particularly from SUSD, I can confirm it. It's the Apples to Apples derivative that should completely replace Cards Against Humanity, wiping the latter off the face of the earth, if there's any justice anywhere.

 

Let me put it this way... In Cards Against Humanity, if you've got a poor hand and no ideas, the game's writing pushes you very hard to pick something so random and horrifying that it'll stand out among other choices that are less nonsensical. In Funemployed, if you've got a poor hand and no ideas, the game's writing pushes you very hard to play your cards as a pathetic person who desperately needs the job despite being totally unqualified, because... I don't know, it's just what the cards seem to say if there's no stronger narrative. The former situation might go over like a riot or offend everyone, which isn't the best odds with a party game, whereas the latter situation is something that anyone who's ever had or needed a job understands and knows how to find the humor therein, so it's much harder to cross anyone's boundaries. Basically, instead of the Hail Mary that is "dickfingers," I apply to be a parade float as a drunken sadsack with nothing left to lose.

 

It certainly doesn't hurt that every player has a chance to discard some cards, drawing new ones from a public pool, and then sell what they've chosen to the round's judge in a make-believe interview, forcing people to own any gross decisions that they might make while giving weaker hands a chance to shine with some acting talent. Overall, it's just a much better game, because it encourages people to actually interact rather than trade cards that tell half-intelligible madlib jokes.

 

Really, my only complaint is that the Seasonal Help expansion pack is of noticeably poorer quality in the writing department, making me wish that we could call a mulligan when someone pulls up a dumb holiday-themed job like "Father Time" or a dumb qualification like "Mistletoe." Skip that one, save yourself $14.99, and enjoy the base game, which has more than enough cards already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, it's just a much better game, because it encourages people to actually interact rather than trade cards that tell half-intelligible madlib jokes.

 

 

I still haven't gotten a chance to play my copy of Funemployed, but Snake Oil and Metagame are the two games that led me to this same conclusion. This style of game is much more fun if you're encouraged to be creative and forced to own your plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Wait, There's More! is also a good take on the genre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife bought my  Imperial Assault for my bday, it seems rather fiddly but the minis are gorgeous!

 

Qwn2JIy.jpg

 

We also have brought out Dead of Winter twice now, I caved and bought the expensive box insert. I love the game (again a bit fiddly) but keeping the game organized and setting it up quickly kind of sucked. We have only played co-op on hardcore (and lost) we will probably add the betrayer in next time to up the ante now that we get the rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played Monikers here at Cafe Mox, a local gaming bar/cafe. It was a lot of fun. I enjoyed how the rounds built on each other.

I backed the stand alone expansion, but unfortunately the original is out of print until October or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now