|
Tekopo posted:currently I have Android, Panic Station and EVE Conquests. Poor fella.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 10:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
Pierzak posted:Tell me more. Chrononauts interest me. The concept is really interesting, but the implementation is just kind of frustrating. You have a mess of cards that get turned over to indicate that something different has happened in the timeline, and everyone is trying to fill their own "time conditions" to get "home" but it just ends up with people arbitrarily changing timezones and then someone wins. It didn't feel like there was any real strategy, more like a bunch of people putting cards down until someone was able to declare that they won. It basically feels too much like "Fluxx but with set rules and a confusing board" to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 11:33
|
|
|
I would have to agree entirely with that assessment, but the fun for me was in revieving what the actual timeline ended up being at the end of the game. I haven't played it in a while though so my opinion of the game would probably change if I tried it again, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 12:10
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I would have to agree entirely with that assessment, but the fun for me was in revieving what the actual timeline ended up being at the end of the game. I haven't played it in a while though so my opinion of the game would probably change if I tried it again, though. Yeah, Chrononauts has at least one way to make an opponent discard their current goal and draw a new one, potentially sending them back to square one, but in my experience, because many of the goals share 'time states' with each other, they might also end up closer to victory than they were to begin with. I like the theme as well; something that always stuck with me is how if you prevent John Lennon from being assassinated, Columbine never happens. It has that Looney Labs hippy logic in places, but it's a decent game. I haven't played the early American version, or the Back to the Future themed one, but I'd guess they're decent as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 13:20
|
|
|
I've played Early American Chrononauts and it's exactly the same as the base game, including its flaws. You do need to know about 19th century american history to make the events meaningful but it does allow you to make a mega-game where you join chrononauts and early american chrononauts together in a giant game, which can be quite fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 13:36
|
|
|
I've played Back to the Future first and then Chrononauts. They weren't immediately intuitive on what to do, and as new players we had no idea how to make progress or win. BTtF theme was more accessible to me and my movie nerd friends, but the win condition was frustrating. I think if you have all the cards right any time you attempt to make a winning move there is a 1 in 5 chance of it succeeding, which is meant to deter players from winning too fast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 13:37
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I would have to agree entirely with that assessment, but the fun for me was in reviewing what the actual timeline ended up being at the end of the game. I haven't played it in a while though so my opinion of the game would probably change if I tried it again, though. I think the best way to play Chrononauts is to play it maybe three times so that you understand what you're looking at, then only show up at tables after the game is done and see what the timelines look like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 14:40
|
|
|
I'm in the UK, looking to get rid of a copy of Agricola: I haven't got any expansions, and there is some very slight damage to one of the major improvement cards, but i've got seperately bought sheep, boar, cattle and vegetable meeples. Should I use bgg, or is ebay a better bet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 14:57
|
|
|
Anytime you sell a game (and eBay is an option) post it on eBay and link it on BGG in the marketplace for the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 15:10
|
|
|
If you do play Chrononauts, get rid of any card that manipulates hand sizes. If I remember correctly, there is at least one card that causes everyone to put their cards in a giant pile and then redistribute them evenly. This sucks because one of the winning conditions is having 10 cards in hand, and if you had 8 and someone else had 4, well, you do the math. It just feels like a Munchkin-esque "screw you" without any need for strategy or tactics or anything resembling playing a game, instead just having the luck of stumbling upon a certain card while losing. It is otherwise an okay filler game that probably plays a bit too long. I really wish someone would take the concept and make something better out of it, though. Maybe changing the timeline in certain ways introduces new rules to the game that all other players have to adapt to, as a way to signify the changing "present"? I dunno. Speaking of changing rules, I had an opportunity to play DXV's latest prototype, which is essentially crazy eights with infinite rule variations. You basically have a hand of cards, and there's a card in the middle that has a few animal symbols on it, and you have to play a card that matches one of the animal symbols. The gimmick is that there are a number of cards in the game with rules, such as "You win if all your cards have rabbits on them" or "All camels are crazy." It is obviously a casual sort of game that seems like it would play pretty well on a family vacation, but like most of DXV's designs, are just too simple for me to really care about playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 15:23
|
|
|
nelson posted:I played Descent 2nd Edition last night and I must say it was a lot of fun. It's not really like 1st edition in the sense that I kind of vaguely remember 1st edition as a slow grind fest and this is anything but. We did First Blood and the first half of Fat Goblin. First Blood was closer than I thought it would be, since it looked stacked in the Heroes favor, given that new goblins spawn at the end of the OL turn, and the heroes have their turn to just murder them before they can act. But it came down to the wire due to me using my ettins to block off half the board. I picked Morridans for my open group in Fat Goblin encounter 1, but placed them poorly. I was trying to block the heroes in their starting tile for a turn, to buy time for the goblins, but forgot my guys had reach, and basically just invited double attacks, so they both died before I could even use them to immobilize the heroes. I ended up with only one crop, so encounter 2 will probably be harder for me. One thing I didn't like is that heroes can basically just dick around to collect all the search tokens, while the OL has no equivalent actions he can take that have longterm benefit the way finding treasure and gold does. I also always realize my poor plays seconds after making them, but hopefully more play will let me recognize them before.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
Stumiester posted:I'm in the UK, looking to get rid of a copy of Agricola: I haven't got any expansions, and there is some very slight damage to one of the major improvement cards, but i've got seperately bought sheep, boar, cattle and vegetable meeples. Should I use bgg, or is ebay a better bet? There is also a weekly / monthly "flea market" list for sellers in the forums on BGG. Post a link when you are trying to sell it there and you should get offers, the forums and ebay link posted on BGG will get you a lot of traffic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:I had an opportunity to play DXV's latest prototype Oh, were you at BBG?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
VoodooXT posted:Oh, were you at BBG? Someone from BBG brought it over to another boardgaming group and offered it to me and my friends because we "looked bored" just socializing with each other. On another note, the bay area has a ridiculous number of different groups.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Someone from BBG brought it over to another boardgaming group and offered it to me and my friends because we "looked bored" just socializing with each other. On another note, the bay area has a ridiculous number of different groups. Yeah, besides BBG, there's around 5 other groups in my general vicinity. Anyway, I wasn't aware other people bring Donald's prototypes to game groups.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
A Strange Aeon posted:I actually played Descent 2 last night for the first time as well. I was Overlord as well, but didn't do as well as you did. Well, the OL kind of does, what with the fact that you have no hand limit and you can reenforce your monsters in most encounters. What I've noticed is if the heroes don't loving book it to the main objective the OL will get a huge advantage. I've only played one First Blood and The Cardinal's Plight Encounter 1 so far, and the heroes lost First Blood because they waited to do anything. I was also able to get 3 of the 4 zombies into the cathedral (spoiler just in case someone is planning on getting it and doesn't want the quests revealed to them yet) and that was just because I failed my check 4-5 times in a row. Were it not for bad luck, I would have fully succeeded in that scenario. Reading a few of the other quests it seems that the OL is almost meant to "lose" the first encounter. The OL should use the time in the 1 part of the quest to build card advantage, inflict as much damage as possible without spending cards, and fulfill the parameters of the encounter, in that order. Going into the 2nd part of the quest you should have a ton of cards in your hand and the heroes should be hurting and needing to stop and heal or use the potions and poo poo they found in the last encounter. Every expenditure of resources you can force on the heroes is a step toward victory for the OL. Kamikaze Raider fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Aug 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
VoodooXT posted:Yeah, besides BBG, there's around 5 other groups in my general vicinity. Anyway, I wasn't aware other people bring Donald's prototypes to game groups. This was the first time he brought a prototype, but I suppose since it was just a card game, it was highly portable. He has invited me multiple times to BBG but I can't/don't really want to go all the way out to Berkeley on a weekday night to play boardgames. That's what Friday nights...are...for... 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 21:26
|
|
|
I got to play 1989:Dawn of Freedom today and I felt like a complete moron. I've self taught Twilight Struggle to myself and a buddy and played 3 games I believe. I somehow missed the exceedingly important core rule that opposing event cards played as operations still trigger the event for that player. Holy crap. I have no idea how I missed that as it's bolded in the rule book. On the plus side I'm now excited to play Twilight Struggle for what should technically be the first time. Anyway I think I can still compare the two a bit and I'd like to try 1989 another time. I enjoy how the neighboring cities support each other, makes the interaction between them more interesting. I liked the extra dimension to scoring with the power struggle phase but my first time through it didn't seem very fair...the player with the lead seemed to just get a bigger bonus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
I actually wasn't a huge fan of the power struggle mechanism in 1989 at first but you do sort of understand how it works later on. FIrst of all, it makes all those unimportant non-battleground areas actually important, because even those get you extra cards. Second, it makes the writers/student spaces absolutely essential. Whoever controls those spaces once the power struggle comes around has a big advantage since there are quite a few intellectual/student leaders. Usually the Democrats have the church leader tied up, and the elite leaders are usually taken over by the Soviets, which means that students/intellectuals are always fought over. This is, of course, before Helsinki Final Act is played (the cards that gives one VP per support check in intellectual/student spaces that the Communist does). Anyway, it's also about learning when to quit. If your enemy has a big advantage, just try to win with petitions and if you lose initiative, immediately lose: you never want to lose on a Rally in the Square. If you don't have enough petitions, use your leaders: you can play them as an attacking card and assign whichever suit you want to them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 09:10
|
|
|
Good day of gaming today, played 1880 once again, this time three player rather than four: I did alright, coming second, although the leader was way ahead. The Rocket of China is rather broken, even more than two times its actual price isn't paying enough for what it gives you. Then I tried Factory Fun for the first time since buying it! It played really quick so we managed to get two games in, there weren't any major questions either and everyone picked it up really easily. I came second by one point in the first game and first in the second game thanks to this factory (note that the tokens showing extra income are missing, but I had tons of points in the end):  Everyone really liked it and I'm really glad I picked it up, since it manages to scratch that "something from nothing" itch without taking absolutely hours to play. Finally, I played Last Will for the first time. It's an interesting game and I appreciate how there seem to be several different ways to lose your money. It was moderately fun although losing money isn't that much different to gaining money in terms of what you actually do, but it was fun buying expensive houses, making them fall in disrepair and then selling them for a loss. All in all a pretty good day of gaming.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 19:16
|
|
|
Shut Up & Sit Down is back, and with a new podcast! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
Indeed, and they discuss why Munchkin sucks, in case the jury was still out on that for anybody.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 01:00
|
|
|
My wife was out of town and so I spent the entire weekend with a few friends knocking out my backlog (plus a few others from friends). These are all games I had never played before: First up was Deadwood. I bought this game because I found a good deal on it and I generally have good luck with Fantasy Flight Games. Played it twice, once with 2 players and once with 3. It plays like a worker placement game, with "shootouts" (dice rolling) thrown in. Each area of town does a different thing and help you in different ways, and the game ends once a railroad is built to the town. In general, I found the game to be pretty unbalanced and not very exciting. 1/3 of the buildings seemed almost pointless and were never really occupied by gunmen (unlike more popular worker placement games where each activity has its own advantages and disadvantages and are all roughly equal). The Sheriff protects the buildings, but it almost felt more like he was cockblocking them, keeping the game from progressing. All in all this was the only game of all the games I played on the weekend that is going in the sell/trade pile. Next up was Munchkin Quest. Now I know this thread hates Munchkin, and I understand why, but the reasons people hate it (random winner, etc.) don't bother me. That being said, on to the review: I was mildly interested in this game, but I saw a great deal on it, so I got it. First thing I noticed was the sheer amount of pieces the game comes with (quite different from regular Munchkin). Not only that, they come in a giant unsorted bag. So if you buy this game, look forward to 10 minutes of sorting before you even start. This game is like Munchkin with regards to battles and inventory, but like Order of the Stick in most other respects. You move around the dungeon, each dungeon tile has a witty advantage/disadvantage, and each time you move into a new room you fight a new monster. Each monster gets its own stand and the monsters wander around the dungeon if you don't defeat them. The biggest complaint is the game is really harsh in the start, because you can find a hard enemy just as easy as an easy one. In the end, if I wanted a humorous battle game, I would just play Munchkin, and if I wanted a humorous dungeon crawler, I would just play Order of the Stick. I'm going to hold on to this one, however, because I will probably give it another try. We played several games of Drakon third edition. This is quickly going to become my new warm-up favorite. Each game takes about 15-20 minutes. It's similar to games DungeonQuest, but it doesn't take 10 minutes to set up, and the rules are ridiculously simple and fun. Each turn you either play a dungeon tile, or move. First to 10 gold wins. When you move, you follow the directions of that room type from a cheat sheet. The strategy is in getting a good "loop" going (like take gold room -> steal gold room -> teleport). Of course as soon as you make a good loop, someone will rotate or destroy one of your rooms, or throw Drakon at you and send you back to the start a little poorer. I'm filing this one under "games my wife would play." It's a shame it's out of print, because I'd like to recommend it to others. And finally got around to playing my $2.99 Goodwill Copy of Battlestar Gallactica. This has been reviewed enough in this thread I won't go into too much detail, but I did have fun playing it. In the end, the undiscovered Cylon was the admiral and overshot our goal, wasting all our fuel, winning the game. I felt like it was a little to easy to jump out of battle's way, but upon posting my experience on BGG, I found out that 3 players is not a very good number to play the game, and that 5 is ideal. Another problem, I think, is that our group wasn't in the "find the traitor!" mindset, thinking that game strategy was more important. I'll definitely be trying it again with 5, with a different mindset. A friend brought over Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer, which is a deck building game. Now I don't really like Dominion, but my only experience playing it was with strangers who spent the entire game telling me how my play wasn't efficient. That being said, I liked the simplicity of Ascension. You have two types of cards, basically: those that get you buying power, and those that get you combat power. Each turn you get a fresh hand of 5 cards, which you can use to buy and/or combat. Buying and combat get you honor (among other special abilities) and the most honor at the end wins. I ended up going a combat-heavy route (buying mostly combat cards), which paid off in the end. My deck had the least amount of honor in it, but I had more than enough honor from combat to push me over the top. I liked this game a lot and I've added this game to my wishlist. Also played a game of Wiz-war eighth edition. This is a PVP game from 2-4 players, where each player is a wizard, trying to steal the other player's treasure and bring it back to his starting position. You have a hand of cards that you can play spells on yourself and others, but each spell you want to keep out on the board counts toward your hand limit, so the more active cards you have, the fewer options you have from your hand. We played a three-player game, which I don't recommend. I ended up casting a mist form for 4 turns (meaning I can't attack or be attacked), so the other two players ended up fighting it out (with me, of course, egging them on), and I walked away with the win. I think if you play this game, it really needs to be with 2 or 4 players. I look forward to trying it again. After Wiz-War was Days of Steam, a 50% B&N clearance buy. I figured I liked tile-placement games, and I liked train games, so I'd like Days of Steam. In this game, your turn consists of either placing a rail/city tile or moving. When you place rail tiles, you build up steam, and your goal is to take colored cubes from city A and deliver them to city B that matches the same color. The game felt a little weird, like we were playing it wrong, but afterward it was just kind of an awkward game. Your steam bank can never get below 1 and never above 6. However, if you go more than 2 tiles in a turn including a curve, you have to roll a dice to see if you derail for breaking the speed limit, making you lose your entire turn. So in the end, most people just moved 2-3 spaces. The other thing that felt awkward is the "never get below 1 steam" rule. It made it feel like the cost of getting steam wasn't worth it. You could move 1 space this turn and 1 space next turn (for a total of 2), or you could play a tile to get 1 or 2 steam, then move 2 or 3 steam next turn. There just wasn't much incentive to play tiles, and we ended up not even building out all the cities. It's simple enough that I want to get my wife's verdict before I throw it in the sell/trade pile, but I have a feeling that's where it's going. Next up was Dungeon Lords (friend's game), which is another worker-placement game. This game had soooo many rules. I understand that worker-placement games tend to have a lot of rules because each option to place your worker has a different effect, but this game throws in taxes, digging dungeons, special rooms in your dungeons, all with unique abilities, a battle system (humans are trying to take over your dungeon) with each human and each monster has special abilities as well. We spent a good 2 1/2 hours playing this game and I still can't remember everything. That being said, now that I mostly know what I'm doing, I'd give the other game a try. But this game has so many nuances that I would find it hard to believe that a new player would ever be able to beat an experienced player. We ended with a lighter game of Munchkin Cthulu, with Munchkin Blender, Munchkin and Munchkin Fairy Dust mixed in. I know the Munchkin debate has been beaten to death, so I'll keep it short. Cthulu adds dungeon rooms into the mix, which are basically global bonuses and penalties that affect everyone. They also add a Cultist class, which can change the game-winning conditions. I liked the Munchkin Fairy Dust expansion: it gives you a special card every time you help another player out. Kind of loosens up some of the tighter players. Our game ended in the typical way: the first player to have a game-winning run got slaughtered, the second player to have a game-winning run lost by a little, then the third player to have a game-winning run walked away with it. So that was my weekend 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 16:21
|
|
|
Gilgamesh posted:My wife was out of town and so I spent the entire weekend with a few friends knocking out my backlog (plus a few others from friends). Sounds like a sweet weekend. Drakon is a fun little game--I should track down a copy of that, since I always remember having a pretty good time with it. Wiz-War is one of my new favorite games. I think it plays just alright with 3, but it's obviously best with 4. I'm not sure if you were using the optional rules, but most people I've played with recommend having one huge spell deck that contains all of the schools, rather than just a few. This makes it more crazy, but that's sort of the whole point of the game, and we always do it that way. e. Removed apparently controversial statement. A Strange Aeon fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Aug 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 16:54
|
|
|
I don't think it's actually a rarity to have people with broad tastes: for my own personal experiences, the group of people that I tend to play heavy, advanced games with are also the same kind of people that play things like Hey that's my fish!, Get Bit, King of Tokyo and various other fillers. I think it is a bit disengenous to say that someone that is unwilling to play Munchkin doesn't have broad tastes in games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 16:59
|
|
|
^^^ Oh god please not this again. A Strange Aeon posted:Wiz-War is one of my new favorite games. I think it plays just alright with 3, but it's obviously best with 4. I'm not sure if you were using the optional rules, but most people I've played with recommend having one huge spell deck that contains all of the schools, rather than just a few. This makes it more crazy, but that's sort of the whole point of the game, and we always do it that way. We just used the "recommended for new players" deck in the rules. I'll have to give your suggestion a try next time. Gilgamesh fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Aug 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:03
|
|
|
I wasn't going to start an argument on the merit of Munchkin, since I think that's pretty much a done discussion on this board, I'm just curious at that comment, since it doesn't reflect with my own experiences with playing games with people that are mainly interested in wargames, which tends to be one of the more insular niches of boardgames.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind. I'm doing exactly what I was trying to avoid.
Gilgamesh fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Aug 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:13
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I don't think it's actually a rarity to have people with broad tastes: for my own personal experiences, the group of people that I tend to play heavy, advanced games with are also the same kind of people that play things like Hey that's my fish!, Get Bit, King of Tokyo and various other fillers. I think it is a bit disengenous to say that someone that is unwilling to play Munchkin doesn't have broad tastes in games. Yes, this. I mean doesn't every group start and or end a gaming session with something lighter? In fact, Dungeon Lords and Munchkin are thematically in very similar universes although I feel dirty mentioning them in the same sentence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
We played Britannia, Conflict of Heroes, and Eclipse this Saturday at our meetup. Then we finished up with 4 rounds of Dixit: Odyssey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
Also, it did sound like a fun weekend, there are things I wouldn't be interested in but each to their own tastes. I would suggest giving Dungeon Lords another go if you can, though, since although it can be difficult to get in to, the reward once you get to grips with it is pretty large. Dungeon Petz suffers from a bit of the same problem, since all the rules are frontloaded and thus it is extremely hard for newbies to do well the first time, but I've had occassions when newbies managed to beat me because I either got unlucky/they managed to understand the strategy quickly/etc. In that, I do think Dungeon Petz is a bit more forgiving and newbie-friendly, although both games will be a struggle for anyone that has just started dabbling within the hobby. As for deadwood, is that the one that is like a worker-placement but you can have gun duels in order to take someone off a spot he took originally? It sounds interesting (I almost bought the game based on the name alone, I love the series), but I wasn't sure about the whole mechanism of being to claim actions that have already been used: it seems to be a pretty big derivation from the crucial worker placement mechanism of limited slots, although a breath of fresh air might be nice in order to re-invigorate the genre. And yeah, BSG is better with 5, since 3 player games really don't do the game justice. Five is the perfect number for the game, anything higher or lower and usually the experience isn't as good and at least one player will have to suffer with a crappy alignment or make the game unbalanced.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
Admin Understudy posted:Yes, this. I mean doesn't every group start and or end a gaming session with something lighter? In fact, Dungeon Lords and Munchkin are thematically in very similar universes although I feel dirty mentioning them in the same sentence. I hate fun more than just about anyone you'll ever meet but two of my favorite games are Liar's Dice and Can't Stop!, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:38
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:As for deadwood, is that the one that is like a worker-placement but you can have gun duels in order to take someone off a spot he took originally? It sounds interesting (I almost bought the game based on the name alone, I love the series), but I wasn't sure about the whole mechanism of being to claim actions that have already been used: it seems to be a pretty big derivation from the crucial worker placement mechanism of limited slots, although a breath of fresh air might be nice in order to re-invigorate the genre. Yeah that's the one. I really wanted to like it, but it felt really unbalanced. Mostly it was the buildings that felt that way. Some of them were amazing and hotly contested, and some of them were so worthless nobody ever played on them. The problem is if someone puts a Sheriff right in the middle of the hotly contested area, all contests stop until someone can take over the sheriff's office, which can be difficult to do if someone is blocking it with a high-level gunslinger. Then all you're left with is crap for the rest of the game. YMMV, but I would play another person's copy or a demo before you go out and buy it yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Speaking of front-loaded rules nightmares, I got roped into trying Vinhos on Saturday, with 2 other first time players. I don't know how truly complicated that game is but the main board + player boards were dense enough, and when he started talking about the wine-tasting subgame and three hour playtime I just bowed out. I'm no stranger to complicated or long-playing games but I don't think I've seen a game look less appealing based on first impressions. Of course, I really do not like going into complex games without having read the rulebook up front, but I guess I'm in the minority there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:50
|
|
|
I just looked up Vinhos in BGG and within its description it has a 'How to teach how to play Vinhos' tutorial video linked. I think that pretty much says it all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:53
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I just looked up Vinhos in BGG and within its description it has a 'How to teach how to play Vinhos' tutorial video linked. I think that pretty much says it all. Yeah, the other link ("how to play") leads to a 21 part series by some guy. Also, I just saw Payback Jack's review of it from the last thread and it pretty much confirmed my suspicions about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:57
|
|
|
Link to the review? I'd be interested to read his thoughts. I actually want to try the game for some reason, both because I'm a fan of portuguese wines and that it looks needlessly overcomplex, which is a plus in my book.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
Payback Jack posted:Vinhos Looking through the lower-end reviews on BGG come up with the same criticism - there's far too many mechanics stuffed into the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Link to the review? I'd be interested to read his thoughts. I actually want to try the game for some reason, both because I'm a fan of portuguese wines and that it looks needlessly overcomplex, which is a plus in my book. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3386208&pagenumber=46&perpage=40#post389729547 I read (or at least tried) the rulebook for it and I really couldn't make anything of it.  e;fb
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
Vinhos is a 'best in show' game and yes there are probably too many mechanics thrown into the game, but I like it, as long as I've reviewed the rules before playing it. In the end though, I'd rather play Dominant Species for the same amount of time, so it may be going on the sell stack soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2012 18:35
|
|