Short one this week:
With JayWowser with us for another visit, we played a few games he hadn't yet tried... Traders of Genoa and Pirate's Cove.
Traders was good fun... the stinginess of our last game wasn't quite as apparent and the session felt more fun for it (in my opinion). It lasted a bit longer than most... 2 1/2 hours. Not sure why, other than we didn't lose a single round to the market place, whereas we normally lose at least one (and, to be fair, it WAS a 5 player game). I tried to go for a "Privilege" strategy, with a plan to collect 1 for 1 tokens and random goods and then trade them in one shot for a pile of privilege cards (since I knew that no one would ever give me any once they knew I was going for it). It didn't quite work out because the five player game left very few privileges on the board, and the ones I did manage to get didn't work togehter that well. I think I played okay, but in the end Luch's ownership tokens brought hima pile of money which no one could touch.
Alas, I came in last!
One thing which frustrates me a little about this game is the limitations put on trading. I bought this one because it was described as "the german answer to negotiation/ trading games such as monopoly". In this game, Shemp was trying to get a few privileges in order to extort a pile of money out of me. this should have been a good move (and in Monopoly, it might have worked), but in ToG, the trading is forced into revolving around small immediate trades (who wants THIS action). There is no opportunity to shift things around by trading outside those confines. There is no real opportunity for a move like Shemp was attempting, and that is a shortcoming in my book. Any suggestions on how to fix this?
In the end, we only had time for a half game of Pirate's Cove. Not sure what Jeff thought of this one, but if he didn't like it, I would hope he'd give it another chance... we were really rushing through it and much of the flavour didn't come through.
Still, I had a great time as usual. Until next time...
Easy
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Attaching a Rating to Fun?
Sooner or later, as a collector or as an afficianado, you start to make the inevitable "lists".
Best game, worst game, top 10, top 50, etc., etc.
I just finished the exercise of rating all the games we've played as a group over at BGG. It's pretty hard - you realize how relative a lot of your preferences are and how souless a simple 1-10 rating can feel.
Some games are good for quick, silly rounds, others are good for long, brain-burning sessions. How do you attach a rating to fun?
I noticed while rating games at BGG that they use a system based on how often you are willing to play a game - which might skew the ratings if you're generally an enthusiastic player or otherwise quite jaded.
There are a few games in our repetoire that, while I appreciate their technical artistry and execution, I don't feel like playing all that often. In at least two major cases (Tigris and Euphrates and El Grande) I rated games a full point lower than the majority of BGG ratings just because I don't really enjoy them as much as others seem to do. In other cases, I've rated games higher than they probably deserve from a technical standpoint, just because they have sentimental or personal elements to them which evoke a more emotional rating.
So, my ratings are a combination of technical appreciation with gut feeling like/dislikes.
What's your personal system?
Best game, worst game, top 10, top 50, etc., etc.
I just finished the exercise of rating all the games we've played as a group over at BGG. It's pretty hard - you realize how relative a lot of your preferences are and how souless a simple 1-10 rating can feel.
Some games are good for quick, silly rounds, others are good for long, brain-burning sessions. How do you attach a rating to fun?
I noticed while rating games at BGG that they use a system based on how often you are willing to play a game - which might skew the ratings if you're generally an enthusiastic player or otherwise quite jaded.
There are a few games in our repetoire that, while I appreciate their technical artistry and execution, I don't feel like playing all that often. In at least two major cases (Tigris and Euphrates and El Grande) I rated games a full point lower than the majority of BGG ratings just because I don't really enjoy them as much as others seem to do. In other cases, I've rated games higher than they probably deserve from a technical standpoint, just because they have sentimental or personal elements to them which evoke a more emotional rating.
So, my ratings are a combination of technical appreciation with gut feeling like/dislikes.
What's your personal system?
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Get out of Town you Yellow-Bellied Galoot!
‘Chinaman’ Choy narrowed his already squinty eyes and spoke in gravely tones.
“Get out of my town,” he said evenly, without fear.
The notorious Baker gang stood unflinching, hands poised over Colt Peacemakers and Winchester triggers.
“This here’s our turf now, Chinaman. Best you go on back to San Antonia and take up laundrywarshing.”
Choy surveyed the quartet of gunslingers arrayed against him, “Abilene’s mine, Baker. You and your kin ain’t welcome.”
“Then I reckon this comes to shootin’ irons,” Jeb Baker growled. He went for his gun.
A fusillade of pistol fire rang out. At the end, only the Chinaman still stood, short-shadowed in the noon-day sun.
“I told you to get out of my town,” he spat.
* * *
This week’s theme was “Cowboys and Cutthroats: 19th Century American Capitalism”. In keeping with the theme, dinner was beef burritos and pork and beans, supplemented by jalapeno chips and gummy worms (worms – tequila – get it?). The game for the evening was Way out West. A session of US Patent Number 1 had also been planned, but a late start and enthusiasm for our first game put the nix on that idea.
Way out West is typically described as a tile placement game. It is, in a sense, but it also has a strong wargame-lite element to it which gives it a bit more kick than your average session of Puerto Rico or Tigris and Euphrates. The concept is that the players are robber barons / gang leaders / venture capitalists in the gunslinging, cattle-rustling Wild West. The board depicts five old west towns (San Antonia, Kansas City, Abilene, Dodge City, and Deadwood) of various maximum sizes, each with a upper limit on the number of ranches and buildings that can be placed there. The players begin with $25 and three cowboys. The cowboys are placed one at a time in turn order determined randomly at the beginning, and then the game begins.
The game mechanics seem dense at first, but after an initial hump, they come across (to me, at least) as rather elegantly refined to allow for interesting strategies but also reflect the theme very well.
There are 12 turns (9 in 5 or 6 player games), and every third turn is a money-making turn. The round begins with a short bidding round, beginning with the first player of the last round. The bids proceed until a player does not bid, at which point the player puts in any money already bid (if any) and places his turn order marker on the turn order track. Bidding continues until all the players drop out and the turn order for the turn is determined.
In turn order, each player selects one of several actions: build, hire a cowboy, buy cattle, move cowboys, start a gunfight, drive cattle, or place a farmer. After one round of selecting actions, in turn order, the players select again in turn order for their second action.
Building involves placing one of several types of building, all of which either earn money/VP, multiply money/VP earned, or provide additional security (Jail). Hotels earn $1 for every cowboy belonging to an opponent in the town during a money making turn. Stores earn $1 for each cow belonging to an opponent and $2 for each farmer. Stagecoaches earn $1 each time a cowboy comes into town from out East or leaves the town. Banks earn $2 for every other building or transport belonging to an opponent in the town. Trains double the income from all cattle in the town, not just those belonging to the player. Jails provide a sheriff which can fight for or against inhabitants of a town during a gunfight.
Hiring a cowboy brings in one or two cowboys at a cost of $1 each. Each player has a limited number of cowboys (and buildings, for that matter). Buying cattle works similarly, save that there are restrictions on where cattle can be placed – the towns are numbered 1 to 5, and lower numbered-towns must be more than half full before cattle can be placed in the next higher numbered town.
Moving cowboys involves moving cowboys already on a map, and is usually a precursor (or a result) of a gunfight.
Gunfights involve a simple dice-combat, with the side with the lower number of cowboys firing first, each die roll of 5 or 6 killing an opponent cowboy. When numbers are equal, combat is simultaneous. Cowboys have the option to retreat after the first round of combat, losing the round. This is the principle random / tactical element of the game; everything else is pure strategy. Winners of gunfights steal cattle, take over businesses, burn down jails, rob banks or kill farmers, depending on the target of the showdown.
Driving cattle involves moving a cow from one corral to any other empty corral on a map (useful to get your cattle out of a town with a farmer, or if your control needs shoring up elsewhere).
Placing a farmer is essentially a “screw your neighbour” mechanic. Farmers reduce income (and VP) from cattle in the same town. They also have the ability to displace a cow from the corral they are placed in.
The game is won by a tally of victory points. Buildings count for VP equal to the total number of buildings in town, as do cattle (1 VP) and the special “train” transport, which adds one VP to each cow. Players also earn 5 VP for the most money and 4 VP for being the most notorious. There is also a town bonus (equal to the size of the town) given to the player who “controls” a town by having the highest total of buildings and cattle in a town. Farmers subtract 1 VP per cow in the same town.
I find the theme of this game irresistible, and the integration of theme with game mechanic is very well done. Theme aside, however, this is also a clever little game of strategy and tactics, with a dollop of diplomacy and alliances thrown in for good measure. The only dodgy element of the game is the sometimes frustratingly random results of combat. Despite comments from other reviewers on BGG, I found that most combats, with one or two exceptions, resolved about how one would expect – the outnumbered cowboys usually lost, and when numbers were close or equal, it could go either way. I really enjoyed both games, and felt that despite a serious strategic blunder in the first game, I was having fun throughout.
I did note that Easy suffered what amounted to a two turn dearth of actions due to a daring bank robbery by the Shemp clan. I suppose one could blame Easy for leaving such a juicy target undefended, but we’re still learning. Hopefully that dry spell was not too painful for Easy.
As always, in re-reading the rules after a play through, I did discover two minor things which we did wrong – fortunately, I don’t believe that in either case that it had much effect on our game. First, all cowboys involved in a bank robbery must leave town and disperse to different towns (max one each) if there is a jail in the town that was robbed. I think the bank robbery only happened once, and I don’t think the dispersal of Shemp’s cowboys would have had much effect on the remainder of the game. It’s possible that there was no jail in the robbed town, so the issue may be moot. Second, you must have MORE than half of the corrals full before you can place in the next higher town - we played with if there IS half, you can place them in the next higher town (always when you have a cowboy there). That might have had a larger effect. We'll have to remember that rule for next time.
I thought after playing that I had gotten the “you always roll at least one die in defence” rule incorrect, but after a careful re-reading, it seems we had it right. This seems a little strange to me in that it’s just as safe to leave cattle undefended as to have a cowboy in the same town, but if you had a bank or a jail in town as well, it would be safer to have cowboys rather than depend on the intrinsic defence.
One thing that was not covered in the rules, FAQ or errata as far as I can tell, is what happens when all of the cowboys are killed in a simultaneous combat. We played it as if the defender won in this case. I will check on BGG for confirmation.
This is not a perfect game by any means, but I do find it very successful in a number of areas in which I rate “The Perfect Game”. I also found it fun, which is a key factor for me, at least. Another interesting twist in this game is that it is not economically smart to have a stranglehold on a town - you have to let the other hombres in to get a piece of their action. The various things that can happen in a turn do technically make this a little more dense than would be understandable for most non-gamers, but for me, I found this to be just the right combination of simplicity with diversity of options.
Hapi ran away with the first game (due in no small part to some spectacular gunplay by some of his cowboys) and Easy won the second. I suspect additional games will be closer, and I look forward to paying another visit to the Wild West very soon.
“Get out of my town,” he said evenly, without fear.
The notorious Baker gang stood unflinching, hands poised over Colt Peacemakers and Winchester triggers.
“This here’s our turf now, Chinaman. Best you go on back to San Antonia and take up laundrywarshing.”
Choy surveyed the quartet of gunslingers arrayed against him, “Abilene’s mine, Baker. You and your kin ain’t welcome.”
“Then I reckon this comes to shootin’ irons,” Jeb Baker growled. He went for his gun.
A fusillade of pistol fire rang out. At the end, only the Chinaman still stood, short-shadowed in the noon-day sun.
“I told you to get out of my town,” he spat.
* * *
This week’s theme was “Cowboys and Cutthroats: 19th Century American Capitalism”. In keeping with the theme, dinner was beef burritos and pork and beans, supplemented by jalapeno chips and gummy worms (worms – tequila – get it?). The game for the evening was Way out West. A session of US Patent Number 1 had also been planned, but a late start and enthusiasm for our first game put the nix on that idea.
Way out West is typically described as a tile placement game. It is, in a sense, but it also has a strong wargame-lite element to it which gives it a bit more kick than your average session of Puerto Rico or Tigris and Euphrates. The concept is that the players are robber barons / gang leaders / venture capitalists in the gunslinging, cattle-rustling Wild West. The board depicts five old west towns (San Antonia, Kansas City, Abilene, Dodge City, and Deadwood) of various maximum sizes, each with a upper limit on the number of ranches and buildings that can be placed there. The players begin with $25 and three cowboys. The cowboys are placed one at a time in turn order determined randomly at the beginning, and then the game begins.
The game mechanics seem dense at first, but after an initial hump, they come across (to me, at least) as rather elegantly refined to allow for interesting strategies but also reflect the theme very well.
There are 12 turns (9 in 5 or 6 player games), and every third turn is a money-making turn. The round begins with a short bidding round, beginning with the first player of the last round. The bids proceed until a player does not bid, at which point the player puts in any money already bid (if any) and places his turn order marker on the turn order track. Bidding continues until all the players drop out and the turn order for the turn is determined.
In turn order, each player selects one of several actions: build, hire a cowboy, buy cattle, move cowboys, start a gunfight, drive cattle, or place a farmer. After one round of selecting actions, in turn order, the players select again in turn order for their second action.
Building involves placing one of several types of building, all of which either earn money/VP, multiply money/VP earned, or provide additional security (Jail). Hotels earn $1 for every cowboy belonging to an opponent in the town during a money making turn. Stores earn $1 for each cow belonging to an opponent and $2 for each farmer. Stagecoaches earn $1 each time a cowboy comes into town from out East or leaves the town. Banks earn $2 for every other building or transport belonging to an opponent in the town. Trains double the income from all cattle in the town, not just those belonging to the player. Jails provide a sheriff which can fight for or against inhabitants of a town during a gunfight.
Hiring a cowboy brings in one or two cowboys at a cost of $1 each. Each player has a limited number of cowboys (and buildings, for that matter). Buying cattle works similarly, save that there are restrictions on where cattle can be placed – the towns are numbered 1 to 5, and lower numbered-towns must be more than half full before cattle can be placed in the next higher numbered town.
Moving cowboys involves moving cowboys already on a map, and is usually a precursor (or a result) of a gunfight.
Gunfights involve a simple dice-combat, with the side with the lower number of cowboys firing first, each die roll of 5 or 6 killing an opponent cowboy. When numbers are equal, combat is simultaneous. Cowboys have the option to retreat after the first round of combat, losing the round. This is the principle random / tactical element of the game; everything else is pure strategy. Winners of gunfights steal cattle, take over businesses, burn down jails, rob banks or kill farmers, depending on the target of the showdown.
Driving cattle involves moving a cow from one corral to any other empty corral on a map (useful to get your cattle out of a town with a farmer, or if your control needs shoring up elsewhere).
Placing a farmer is essentially a “screw your neighbour” mechanic. Farmers reduce income (and VP) from cattle in the same town. They also have the ability to displace a cow from the corral they are placed in.
The game is won by a tally of victory points. Buildings count for VP equal to the total number of buildings in town, as do cattle (1 VP) and the special “train” transport, which adds one VP to each cow. Players also earn 5 VP for the most money and 4 VP for being the most notorious. There is also a town bonus (equal to the size of the town) given to the player who “controls” a town by having the highest total of buildings and cattle in a town. Farmers subtract 1 VP per cow in the same town.
I find the theme of this game irresistible, and the integration of theme with game mechanic is very well done. Theme aside, however, this is also a clever little game of strategy and tactics, with a dollop of diplomacy and alliances thrown in for good measure. The only dodgy element of the game is the sometimes frustratingly random results of combat. Despite comments from other reviewers on BGG, I found that most combats, with one or two exceptions, resolved about how one would expect – the outnumbered cowboys usually lost, and when numbers were close or equal, it could go either way. I really enjoyed both games, and felt that despite a serious strategic blunder in the first game, I was having fun throughout.
I did note that Easy suffered what amounted to a two turn dearth of actions due to a daring bank robbery by the Shemp clan. I suppose one could blame Easy for leaving such a juicy target undefended, but we’re still learning. Hopefully that dry spell was not too painful for Easy.
As always, in re-reading the rules after a play through, I did discover two minor things which we did wrong – fortunately, I don’t believe that in either case that it had much effect on our game. First, all cowboys involved in a bank robbery must leave town and disperse to different towns (max one each) if there is a jail in the town that was robbed. I think the bank robbery only happened once, and I don’t think the dispersal of Shemp’s cowboys would have had much effect on the remainder of the game. It’s possible that there was no jail in the robbed town, so the issue may be moot. Second, you must have MORE than half of the corrals full before you can place in the next higher town - we played with if there IS half, you can place them in the next higher town (always when you have a cowboy there). That might have had a larger effect. We'll have to remember that rule for next time.
I thought after playing that I had gotten the “you always roll at least one die in defence” rule incorrect, but after a careful re-reading, it seems we had it right. This seems a little strange to me in that it’s just as safe to leave cattle undefended as to have a cowboy in the same town, but if you had a bank or a jail in town as well, it would be safer to have cowboys rather than depend on the intrinsic defence.
One thing that was not covered in the rules, FAQ or errata as far as I can tell, is what happens when all of the cowboys are killed in a simultaneous combat. We played it as if the defender won in this case. I will check on BGG for confirmation.
This is not a perfect game by any means, but I do find it very successful in a number of areas in which I rate “The Perfect Game”. I also found it fun, which is a key factor for me, at least. Another interesting twist in this game is that it is not economically smart to have a stranglehold on a town - you have to let the other hombres in to get a piece of their action. The various things that can happen in a turn do technically make this a little more dense than would be understandable for most non-gamers, but for me, I found this to be just the right combination of simplicity with diversity of options.
Hapi ran away with the first game (due in no small part to some spectacular gunplay by some of his cowboys) and Easy won the second. I suspect additional games will be closer, and I look forward to paying another visit to the Wild West very soon.
Saturday, June 04, 2005
Darth Y'all
This week, we were able to discuss Revenge of the Sith fully, which natuarally lead to a couple of rounds of Star Wars: Epic Duels! Also on tap were a giant pizza from Pizzaville, and two rounds of Löwenherz - I don't believe either of those were related to Lucasfilm, but I can't be positive about it, either.
We started out with a round of Epic Duels, playing teams of two against two - Easy and I played the dark side, while Kozure and Luch were the light side. Everyone selects their characters, which come in sets of two or three, and have (in theory?) been balanced. A setting also needs to be selected - there are several included in the game, which represent locations from the Star Wars films, and are gridded off into squares. Each major character has a pre-designated starting spot on each board - secondary characters must be placed in immediate proximity to their major character. From here, the goal is simply to destroy the other side of the force.
Movement around the board is achieved by rolling a custom dice, which allows you to move either one of your characters, or all, depending on the outcome of the roll. After movement, a player may play cards from their character's custom deck, usually to harm another player's character, which would be allowed to play a card to defend. Some characters use close range attacks; others are line-of-sight. Characters attuned to "The Force" can sometimes attack in other ways, as well. Damage is counted on special cards that come with the game - some characters can withstand more than others.
I've probably played this game a five or six times now, but Wednesday was the first time that it has 'clicked' for me. I think the key to keeping this one fun is to keep gameplay quick, make sure you are fully awake, and don't take any losses too personally. Gaining some familiarity with the various characters helps things out as well, since all have different "special" cards that can affect your play tactics. I had a lot of fun with the first round and also a later one, where Luch and I were the dark side against Kozure and Easy's light side.
The experience of playing Löwenherz was quite interesting - it seemed that players' opinions shifted over the course of the night. We had played this game once previously, but had unfortunately made some errors, undermining our attempt to get a real feel for what it is all about. This night was a triumph for us in one respect - I think that we managed to play Löwenherz by the actual rules, a first in our experience with both it and it's cousin, Domaine.
The first game was a narrow victory for me, while Easy destroyed the field in our second round by pursuing a strategy for monopolizing silver mines - I personally don't think that strategy would work with the same group a second time, but who knows, really? I think that we started out the evening preferring Domaine, after one game preferred Löwenherz, and by the end of the evening preferred Domaine again - if that recollection isn't correct, I'm sure we'll all read about it in the comments!
Luch felt that Domaine plays quicker, with fewer options to consider. I'm not so sure about that, but thought it was interesting to see how two games with such similar concepts and rules can be changed by a mechanical tweak - in this case, replacing the auction of Löwenherz with the purchase mechanic of Domaine. All in all, I found the evening to very interesting, revealing new aspects of some games that we have played before.
A great success!
We started out with a round of Epic Duels, playing teams of two against two - Easy and I played the dark side, while Kozure and Luch were the light side. Everyone selects their characters, which come in sets of two or three, and have (in theory?) been balanced. A setting also needs to be selected - there are several included in the game, which represent locations from the Star Wars films, and are gridded off into squares. Each major character has a pre-designated starting spot on each board - secondary characters must be placed in immediate proximity to their major character. From here, the goal is simply to destroy the other side of the force.
Movement around the board is achieved by rolling a custom dice, which allows you to move either one of your characters, or all, depending on the outcome of the roll. After movement, a player may play cards from their character's custom deck, usually to harm another player's character, which would be allowed to play a card to defend. Some characters use close range attacks; others are line-of-sight. Characters attuned to "The Force" can sometimes attack in other ways, as well. Damage is counted on special cards that come with the game - some characters can withstand more than others.
I've probably played this game a five or six times now, but Wednesday was the first time that it has 'clicked' for me. I think the key to keeping this one fun is to keep gameplay quick, make sure you are fully awake, and don't take any losses too personally. Gaining some familiarity with the various characters helps things out as well, since all have different "special" cards that can affect your play tactics. I had a lot of fun with the first round and also a later one, where Luch and I were the dark side against Kozure and Easy's light side.
The experience of playing Löwenherz was quite interesting - it seemed that players' opinions shifted over the course of the night. We had played this game once previously, but had unfortunately made some errors, undermining our attempt to get a real feel for what it is all about. This night was a triumph for us in one respect - I think that we managed to play Löwenherz by the actual rules, a first in our experience with both it and it's cousin, Domaine.
The first game was a narrow victory for me, while Easy destroyed the field in our second round by pursuing a strategy for monopolizing silver mines - I personally don't think that strategy would work with the same group a second time, but who knows, really? I think that we started out the evening preferring Domaine, after one game preferred Löwenherz, and by the end of the evening preferred Domaine again - if that recollection isn't correct, I'm sure we'll all read about it in the comments!
Luch felt that Domaine plays quicker, with fewer options to consider. I'm not so sure about that, but thought it was interesting to see how two games with such similar concepts and rules can be changed by a mechanical tweak - in this case, replacing the auction of Löwenherz with the purchase mechanic of Domaine. All in all, I found the evening to very interesting, revealing new aspects of some games that we have played before.
A great success!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
