|
Just dropped a ton of money on Arkham Horror + expansions even though I have no local group. Why  e: oh god, not the snipe. Can't be too hard to find chill board game players in NYC, I hope!
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
Moogs posted:I'm into the more serious games (Robo Rally, Space Alert, etc.) but I also like a light game, maybe a card game like Loot to warm up the night or wrap it up. What other easily learned, relatively short (30 minute range) games would you guys recommend? One of my favorite light games is For Sale. 25 minutes at most, really easy rules anyone can learn in a minute.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
Pit and Jungle Speed are great for the lighter games  There's also a Bean trading game that escapes me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 05:10
|
|
|
Subparr posted:Pit and Jungle Speed are great for the lighter games Bohnanza. God I hate that game. If you give me a hand of cards, I will rearrange it however the drat hell I want. You're not better than me, game.  (this is literally my only objection to Bohnanza, I don't have much of an opinion of it otherwise except that I don't like "draw the top card and maybe it's the one you need!" style games)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 05:23
|
|
|
Moogs posted:I'm into the more serious games (Robo Rally, Space Alert, etc.) but I also like a light game, maybe a card game like Loot to warm up the night or wrap it up. What other easily learned, relatively short (30 minute range) games would you guys recommend? 7 Wonders or Travel Blog would probably work. 7W is in the OP, Travel Blog is like a Euro take on the geography trivia genre.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
Moogs posted:I'm into the more serious games (Robo Rally, Space Alert, etc.) but I also like a light game, maybe a card game like Loot to warm up the night or wrap it up. What other easily learned, relatively short (30 minute range) games would you guys recommend? I've been playing The Boss on board game arena lately, and that runs about 25-30 minutes and is extremely simple to teach. It's a bluffing heavy game where you have a limited amount of information about what cards everyone else has(and more info as the turn continues). You can check it out at BGA for free. Unfortunately, the game has been out of print for two years, but you can do what my group did and buy a bunch of different color deck protectors (you'll need 9 different colors/designs), rip up some scrap paper, and make your own set. It's extremely simple and will only take you half an hour some day when you're bored. e: Here's the rules, it should give you a decent idea if it's a game you want to dedicate the small amount of time/money to recreate. Countblanc fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:There aren't really any rules you could have missed. It's probably some elements of strategy that you're missing. For one, Resistance members should be voting things down, a lot. Use those votes to look at what people voted and the missions that were proposed to give you clues as to their loyalty; don't rely on just looking at failed/passed missions. Absolutely. We kind of figured out early that in a seven player game Resistance members should never really approve a mission they're not a part of. Four resistance members and three spies means that if a Resistance member is not going, a spy is. One guy didn't quite get it though and we ended up losing because someone voted to approve a team with spies in it. quote:Always propose missions that have yourself on them - you know your own loyalty is good. That's actually a really solid point. That way you're not trying to figure out which of three players (or four or whatever) is a spy, you'll have it down to two. I mean I did that anyway when I was picking teams, but maybe it's worth stressing as a solid strategy to other players as well. quote:Once you've figured out one spy, think back to what missions that person has proposed; there probably aren't any other spies on them, since spies don't like to go on missions together and risk double-sabotaging (that's not foolproof, though, 'cause some spies have the balls to propose missions and then hope they get voted down). Also a good point. I guess I may be thinking too much in a Galactica mindset where nobody really knows who anyone else is, but the spies do in fact know and might not always manage to disguise this fact perfectly. What about the plot cards? Are they any good?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 06:17
|
|
|
Der Shovel posted:Absolutely. We kind of figured out early that in a seven player game Resistance members should never really approve a mission they're not a part of. Four resistance members and three spies means that if a Resistance member is not going, a spy is. One guy didn't quite get it though and we ended up losing because someone voted to approve a team with spies in it. Well, you've gotta vote something up, sooner or later, just try to make sure it's "later." Except of course for the missions, usually just the last one, that are perfect shots - obviously don't vote for one that you know for certain has a spy on it. quote:What about the plot cards? Are they any good? They're alright. I think they skew the game ever so slightly towards resistance, but they don't add much and they're not worth the trouble in my opinion. But they're not bad, either, so try them out a couple times and see if you like them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:Well, you've gotta vote something up, sooner or later, just try to make sure it's "later." Except of course for the missions, usually just the last one, that are perfect shots - obviously don't vote for one that you know for certain has a spy on it. Sure. However (and I didn't really explain this in my sleep-deprived state, played Galactica until 4 in the morning two times over the weekend), this WAS the last mission and would've only been the third team suggestion. How a Resistance member can vote for a team that doesn't include them at that point is beyond me because it's simple math. Four guys go on mission, four Resistance members in the game. If I am a Resistance member and not on the team, I know for a fact a spy will be. Of course it's also kind of academic because if it gets to that point and the Resistance doesn't know who they are yet, that mission is PROBABLY going to go off and the spies will win (let's say two Resistance members get voted in, they'll probably vote yes. The two other members will probably vote no, the spies can then swing the vote). Man, I did not expect the game to be so steeped in this weird metagame. I could see it being really cool with a relatively stable group of players who would over time get really into it. At the same time I really do think at least with newer players it is heavily in favor of the spies. I'm not sure if that's necessarily a bad thing, though. quote:They're alright. I think they skew the game ever so slightly towards resistance, but they don't add much and they're not worth the trouble in my opinion. But they're not bad, either, so try them out a couple times and see if you like them. No harm done, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 08:23
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Just dropped a ton of money on Arkham Horror + expansions even though I have no local group. Why Because Arkham Horror is an almost pure cooperative game with no hidden information, so it plays excellently solo? Just use four investigators and decide in advance whether Joining the Winning Team is cheesy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 12:58
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:One of my personal favourites is Pit, which is a classic realtime trading game with potentially lots of yelling. A single round lasts 5-10 minutes and scales great for 3-8 players, but my love for this game is not shared by my current group Are you my roommate David?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 13:02
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:Bohnanza. But that's one of the best parts of the game. It encourages you to trade away the cards you don't want and forces you to decide whether to help others or hurt yourself. There wouldn't be nearly as much player interaction or strategy if you could rearrange your hand however you want, as you could just keep playing cards that benefited you while hoarding the ones that help others. By limiting what you can do, it forces you to work with others to help yourself gain points while making it riskier to screw over others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 13:49
|
|
|
Mega64 got it right: it's the reason why the trading aspect doesn't work very well in Catan while Bohnanza gets you in situation where you willingly give away cards for free, leading to much more interesting negotiation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 13:52
|
|
|
So my friends and I are getting into table topping together. We're already big fans of Arkham Horror, Pandemic, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Shadows over Camelot, and Settlers. Which of these games would you recommend for our next purchase? Space Alert, Infiltration, Last Night on Earth, 7 Wonders, or Fiasco? We also DnD together, so I feel we can do the RP aspect of Fiasco. 7 Wonders is also a good choice because we tend to take forever setting up and games end later than they should. I think Last Night would be good since we all love Betrayal, but I haven't heard a lot of people talking about it, same with Infiltration. So what's your top recommendation? Big Grunty Secret fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 15:21
|
|
|
Everyone will say Space Alert and honestly, if you have a group of regular players, it is an awesome game. I dislike Infiltration quite a lot: it's a push your luck game and it offers very limited choices that rely mostly on what you get at the start of the game. Victory of defeat feels completely out of your hands so I don't rate this game highly. Last Night on Earth is alright, the best way to play it is always to have only a single zombie player (and making humans play more than one character if necessary). It is very ameritrashy in design but since that seems like what your group plays it might be a good fit. On similar lines (and actually more appropriate since you mentioned AH and Betrayal), you might be interested in A Touch of Evil by the same company. It handles villans better than Arkham Horror/Betrayal, with monsters such as a living scarecrow, werewolves, headless horsemen etc. Another game that you might be interested in is Mansions of Madness, which is a mishmash of Betrayal and Arkham Horror but superior to the former, in my opinion. 7 Wonders is a pretty good game, especially if you have a large group, although it does take more to set up than you would think, since you have to seperate out the cards according to the number of players you have. Still, it's a very good game although can get boring unless you have the expansions. Fiasco is more of a roleplaying game so if your group is into that anyway you'll probably have fun playing it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 15:32
|
|
|
Big Grunty Secret posted:So my friends and I are getting into table topping together. We're already big fans of Arkham Horror, Pandemic, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Shadows of Camelot, and Settlers. Everybody is gaga about Space Alert. I've not heard anything particularly postive about Infiltration. Last Night on Earth is fun but very Ameritrashy/Dice Heavy, but I'd say it's far better than Betrayal, which has some serious flaws. If you like Shadows of Camelot then I'd also recommend looking at The Resistance or Battlestar Galactica. Both are better games than SoC; The Resistance goes much simpler and BSG is more complicated. 7 Wonders is a solid game but a lot different than what you've got now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 15:32
|
|
|
Fiasco is great to play about once every few months, but probably not any more frequently than that. It is an amazing storytelling tool with the right group - I played it recently, and at one stage we had a triangle of people who had arranged to purchase helicopter fuel from each other so that they could sell it to the next person - relying on the former to provide the goods so they could sell it to the latter, despite nobody actually having helicopter fuel at any stage. And that came up completely organically, which was hilarious. Though I can see it getting a bit too samey with repeated playings in a short period. From your list, you seem to be a bunch of guys who are okay with crazy bullshit happening all around you which makes Space Alert a perfect fit. Just make sure everyone goes through the tutorial blind together (okay maybe one person can read it beforehand. Maybe.), and you'll have the most amazing boardgaming session you'll ever have.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
bobvonunheil posted:...and you'll have the most amazing boardgaming session you'll ever have. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:02
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:If you like Shadows of Camelot then I'd also recommend looking at The Resistance or Battlestar Galactica. Both are better games than SoC; The Resistance goes much simpler and BSG is more complicated. This is good advice. SoC is actually a bad game in my eyes after having played The Resistance and BSG. The problem with SoC is that the traitor can never do anything without actually revealing himself, whereas there are plenty of opportunities to actually be cunning in both The Resistance and BSG. I would also say that Infiltration is a bad game. It is just so aggressively boring and lacking in any sort of tension that it is not at all surprising that it is a Donald X Vaccarino design  . I guess it is "light" but if you are playing stuff like Arkham Horror, you will probably not care too much about it.If you like Arkham Horror in all its bloated glory (I say this endearingly), you might want to check out Android, which I believe is by the same designer. It is also a game where you will probably miss a rule or ten, but it is ridiculous in its thematic quality and should appeal a lot to role-players. Make sure you read the flavor text of all the cards you play and all the events and such. It's fun weaving this narrative where everything is going okay with your psychic clone and her boyfriend, until oops, she was in the head of someone who shot himself in the head and is now sorta hosed. However, reactions to Android are very mixed. For a game with actual tight design AND a strong theme, check out Chaos in the Old World, but note that this plays with exactly 4. No more, no less. Exactly 4 (I guess 5 with the expansion).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:18
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:Just dropped a ton of money on Arkham Horror + expansions even though I have no local group. Why I host a board game get-together for goons once a month or so in Manhattan. Keep tabs on the LAN thread, that's generally where I let people know. Arkham Horror is kind of a bad game, though  Anyway, I played Yggdrasil for the first time last week and it's really pretty great. Lots of opportunity for different strategies and teamwork, and very elegant mechanisms for scaling difficulty and number of players.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
I don't know how you people manage to strategize in The Resistance with all the screaming, profanity, and profane screaming. In our group, the working title for the game is "You're a goddamn idiot, and in a minute, I'll tell you why."
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
Deviant posted:I don't know how you people manage to strategize in The Resistance with all the screaming, profanity, and profane screaming. All according to plan 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
Big Grunty Secret posted:So my friends and I are getting into table topping together. We're already big fans of Arkham Horror, Pandemic, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Shadows of Camelot, and Settlers. 7 Wonders has more of a deliberate pacing that allows for some strategy in a maelstrom of chance. It's as much a solo game as it is a group game, as your opponents most often affect you indirectly. It has incredible replay value, and is varied enough between games (especially with the 2 expansions) and works equally well with any number of players (2-8) to ensure you can almost always pull it out. Takes about 2-10 minutes to set up (depending on if it's already configured for your # of players, whether you use the expansions or not), 30-40 minutes to play, 5 minutes to clean up. My enjoyment of Space Alert has been limited primarily because my group's enjoyment of Space Alert has been limited. My g/f really doesn't enjoy the frenetic pace (she's a much more methodical player, much prefers the pace of Settlers/Caracassone/7 Wonders), and we have another regular member who doesn't really get all energized by the deadline/tension. It ends up being me and another guy acting as co-captains, while a third friend works to sync the last two with our demands. Somehow it works (we've never gotten blown up), but when half your group doesn't really get into the chaotic spirit, it feels hollow. I think it can be a good game, but you need motivated participants. Another problem is that it takes 4 or 5, no more, and not recommended for less. So if your group is like mine (typically 6 to 8 people) it becomes a no-go. Takes about 6-10 minutes to set up (CD player is often the most annoying part, although the odd parts are annoying to pass out (the pieces don't fit in the box worth a poo poo). 10 minutes to play, 15 minutes to review wtf happened, 5 minutes to put away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
Subparr posted:Pit and Jungle Speed are great for the lighter games Warning: Do not play Jungle Speed if you like your hands un-mashed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:50
|
|
|
Food Court Druid posted:Warning: Do not play Jungle Speed if you like your hands un-mashed. Play it as a drinking game. If you have to take cards, also take a drink! Be sure to put away any fragile things in the room and close your curtains so the totem doesn't go flying through the windows.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
My friends and I love Civilization, is the expansion worth it and does playing with five players actually work?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
Dr. Gene Dango MD posted:My friends and I love Civilization, is the expansion worth it and does playing with five players actually work? Huh. I dunno how I kept not looking up the civ board game. Does it play well with 2P at all?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
Deviant posted:I don't know how you people manage to strategize in The Resistance with all the screaming, profanity, and profane screaming.  Seriously, if you see people "playing Resistance" and they aren't shouting and arguing, they're not playing Resistance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
Pierzak posted:Working as intended Corollary: the person who doesn't like Resistance much because she "isn't a very good liar" will inevitably draw zero suspicion as she easily sabotages two missions in a row to sink the town despite my fervent protests.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:I - I've sort of been thinking about - picking up Arkham Horror. If I get platinum can we / would you want to discuss a deal on private messages? I dunno if you'd need platinum too or what. If you decide you're interested of course. I'm unloading it because so many of my friends have it now that my set is quite superfluous! EDIT Oh oops nevermind then. Good luck plumbing the depths of insanity with your new copy dude!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:51
|
|
My girlfriend hates it and I don't even particularly like it but there's just this weird mad need, some kind of itch I could scratch if I just kept it in my cupboard alongside Twilight Imperium and the other big box FFGs I own but never play, tekeli-li, tekeli-li, ia, ia
|
SuperKlaus posted:If I get platinum can we / would you want to discuss a deal on private messages? I dunno if you'd need platinum too or what. If you decide you're interested of course. I'm unloading it because so many of my friends have it now that my set is quite superfluous! Yeah, sorry. I assumed you had some kind of hyper-efficient system and had already priced and posted them for sale.  I feel awful for leading you on, and I hope it hasn't caused any problems. By coincidence, we spent a while in lab today reviewing those classic psychological studies about delayed gratification, where a kid's ability to resist eating a marshmallow predicted later educational and career performance. Things are looking good over here 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 19:09
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:...Betrayal, which has some serious flaws. So I just played Betrayal for the first time a few nights ago with some friends and really, really enjoyed it, as did they. We hadn't played anything quite like it to date (a lot of our gaming consists of DBGs, TCGs, and random other card-based games). I'd be curious to hear more about people's thoughts on what its flaws are, or what else people recommend for a better experience and specifics as to why. We're considering buying Betrayal here soon after the very positive first impression, so more info from experienced players for comparison's sake would be great.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 19:18
|
|
|
Merauder posted:So I just played Betrayal for the first time a few nights ago with some friends and really, really enjoyed it, as did they. We hadn't played anything quite like it to date (a lot of our gaming consists of DBGs, TCGs, and random other card-based games). I'd be curious to hear more about people's thoughts on what its flaws are, or what else people recommend for a better experience and specifics as to why. We're considering buying Betrayal here soon after the very positive first impression, so more info from experienced players for comparison's sake would be great. I don't think there's any reason to play Betrayal when you could play The Resistance (lighter, faster, easier) or BSG (heavier, better designed, makes much better use of the traitor mechanic.) One of Betrayal's big issues, as far as I can recall, is that it's possible and not unlikely for the game to enter a no-win-possible state fairly early.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
Merauder posted:So I just played Betrayal for the first time a few nights ago with some friends and really, really enjoyed it, as did they. We hadn't played anything quite like it to date (a lot of our gaming consists of DBGs, TCGs, and random other card-based games). I'd be curious to hear more about people's thoughts on what its flaws are, or what else people recommend for a better experience and specifics as to why. We're considering buying Betrayal here soon after the very positive first impression, so more info from experienced players for comparison's sake would be great. Betrayal has a fun theme and creates an "experience" - but that's really the extent of its good points. The underlying game does a lot of poo poo that modern game design frowns upon: - The exploration phase is mostly pointless since the "game" only really starts when the haunt is revealed. It's neat to build the map the first few games but after a while the novelty wears off and you're basically doing a very long and boring setup phase. You could automate the map building & character placement with some dice rolls and lose very little. - The exploration phase is also filled with lots of random poo poo which could be good or horrible for your character. There's not really anything you can do to mitigate it either. - The haunts are horribly, terribly unbalanced. There are so many variables between the mansion setup and where the characters are when the haunt starts, there's no way to truly balance it. This leads to a lot of anti-climatic games where one side had no chance based off of factors out of their control. Basically, the game is highly random, player skill has little to no effect on the outcome, and the first half of the game is mostly pointless. Combine that with its relatively long playing time and it's just kind of janky. It's a neat idea but just not well executed. Last Night on Earth has some of the same flaws, but tends to have a shorter play length, and you're actually playing the game from turn one. If you like Betrayal, that's fine. However, in our experience if you try some better-designed games (like most of what's in the OP), you'll lose interest in stuff that's badly designed. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Your description of Betrayal is dead on. I think I played the game about four times total, and then the setup became a long and involved chore. Fantasy Flight did release a significant amount of errata to make the game slightly more balanced, but the game is still very much luck based and most of the haunts still are not very balanced. While I might not outright refuse to play the game, I'd probably have more fun making a beer run for the group.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
Betrayal 1 in 4 games are a good deal of fun. The haunt's interesting, it's a close game that can go either way, and it's a pleasant time all around. 1 in 4 games will result in the haunt occurring early, and the haunter has an easy time winning, since the heroes are generally under-prepared. 1 in 4 games will result in a late haunt (and likely survivor stomp). And 1 in 4 games will be that special kind of hell wherein neither side can achieve their victory condition without an inane number of die rolls, backtracks, and hours of time spent meandering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
Appreciate the responses. I can see where the game could definitely clash with certain groups based on the points made. For us, the theme alone was enough to want to spend more time with it I think, and about half our regular gaming group is wives/girlfriends who generally prefer the less aggressively strategic/skill-based games and enjoy the random elements more. The exploration phase and building the mansion at random was actually really well received as well, though I can see how perhaps it would lose it's novelty as you said. That said we're always looking into trying more games, and I spend anywhere from 1-3 nights a week hanging out down at a FLGS (TCG player, as mentioned), so I'm sure I'll find other things to compare it to and have better contrast over time. Mansions of Madness and Arkham Horror were both mentioned earlier as possible alternatives to 'Betrayal'; how do they stack up in "accessibility" department? How long do average games last? Betrayal took us about an hour, maybe hour and a half from start to finish with 2 experienced players and 3 first timers, which is good for us. Arkham in particular appears incredibly large/daunting with lots and lots of stuff to it, as is FFG's reputation of course, so it has immediately made me shy away from considering it in the past. Merauder fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
I hated Mansions of Madness. It felt worse than Betrayal to me. You'd have more fun watching a bad horror movie with friends than playing it. There's only a few scenarios, the mechanics are crap, there are plenty of rule issues, and it's not fun. Arkham was 'pleasant' yet boring. It's not a BAD game, it's just not very deep. There's a limited number of things you can do, so despite the seemingly endless number of things that can happen it remains boring. The theme is good, though, that counts for a bit. I still wouldn't play it unless I grew absolutely bored with everything else I owned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
Merauder posted:Mansions of Madness and Arkham Horror were both mentioned earlier as possible alternatives to 'Betrayal'; how do they stack up in "accessibility" department? Once you get Arkham's rhythm down, it takes about 2 hours with 4 players. Adjust as necessary for number of players and amount of thinking they need (there should not be much in the way of thinking). Although the claims of its complexity are sorta exaggerated, I wouldn't exactly say it is "accessible" the way Ticket to Ride or Carcassonne are. The rulebook is pretty lovely, but the actual flow of the game is simple.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
Merauder posted:Appreciate the responses. I can see where the game could definitely clash with certain groups based on the points made. Neither is particularly accessible, both of them suffer from Fantasy Flight Games syndrome. Both of them have terribly laid out rulebooks (which you'll have in your lap all game to look things up), too many tokens and cards, and they go on long enough that people lose interest or stop having fun long before the games are over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:28
|
|
