Four Corners of Gaming

This week's theme was "Connect Four"; games which work well with four players. Agent Easy had informed us in advance he would not be attending, so we were prepared. We began the evening somewhat late with Blokus, a game that really doesn't work well with any other number than four. While we were waiting for the inestimable Bharmer to tear himself away from work, we tried the three-player variant of Blokus, which requires three players to take turns placing the fourth colour's shapes.

As seems to be the case in many games we play where there is an "automated" or "group controlled" extra player, the red "bot" won. Shemp came in second, so I suppose technically he won. Bharmer tried to argue that since we were playing his seat until he showed up, he won. I don't think this would stand up in a court of law.

At this point, the suitably four-cornered vegetarian lasagna was ready. We dug in over an actual four player game. Ouch (or Luch, or Hapi, or whatever he's calling himself these days) tried an innovative but ultimately unsuccessful compressed strategy of ignoring the usual dash for the centre area and concentrating instead on placing his own pieces largely in his own corner. Bharmer did quite well for his maiden foray into the game, catching on quite quickly as is usual for him. It came down to a relatively close match between Shemp and I - I squeaked through to win by finding a way to place my pieces which I don't think many people saw until the endgame. I put down all of my pieces. I believe Shemp was second with something like 7 or 8 squares remaining. I usually do middling well in this game, so I was pleased to take the laurel.

We moved on to Vegas Showdown. This game continues to improve with additional plays, at least for me. The bidding is competitive without being overly frustrating or overlong, the mat tile-placement strategy is challenging without being convoluted, and there are definitely several strategies for success. I think that four players is probably a sweet spot for this game because with five you might have a lot more "thwarting" due to being outbid in auctions (there isn't an additional premier tile slot in a five player game). I don't recall playing this with five players yet, though we might have when Jaywowzer came by, so it's hard to say.

I won by a margin of 8 fame (I believe), taking something like 64 total (?), with Shemp giving me a definite run for my money. I often ignore income (revenue) early in the game, concentrating on quick fame grabs. Since the restaurants and lounges often give quick fame boosts from events, building them early on is one definite strategy which helped me out. I often fall behind in revenue, but this game I managed to have a fairly substantial income by the end of the game. Also unusual for me was my achievement of filling both Hotel and Casino sections and connecting the two entrances, something I haven't been able to do in all but one of my sessions with this game. I usually come in second or third in this game lately, so it was satisfying to win it as well. Four points from three-quarter finished red corners and the bonus points from the Famous Chef card probably put me over the top, but I did quite well in all categories.

Due to my incorrect reading of the rules, we played with the renovation rule incorrectly - forcing players to take one renovation action to remove tiles and a second to place previously removed tiles. This affected Shemp and Ouch adversely. We will review this rule again next time we play - I believe the correct reading is "remove 0, 1 or 2 tiles, then place 0, 1 or 2 tiles" with no limitations on replacing tiles which had just been removed.

This game has become one of the long-term favourites in my collection. Definite top 10 material, and quite possibly top 5.

We've taken to using 11.5 gram clay composite chips to substitute for the plastic chips provided with the game. It definitely improves the feel. If I could mount the player mats on more sturdy material, I think the overall impression of the game would improve even more.

My winning streak ended with a horrendous crash as we finished the night with TransEuropa - the version of TransAmerica set in Europe. I am not very good at this game at all - I have consistently played poorly with it, and last night was no exception. I was the "game ender" in both sessions. I think Ouch won the second game and Shemp won the first. I enjoy the simplicity and speed of this game, but I do feel that the random card draw can have a significant affect on one's odds of winning, even over three deals. For instance, in the first game, I was dealt Oslo twice. As far as I can make out, aside from Madrid and Bilbao, it's one of the most inaccesible locations, especially if no one else is dealt Stockholm or Malmo. Bharmer decided to leave a little early so as to catch up on rest, so we were playing with only three, which is not optimal for the game system (or so I gather).

I am getting better with additional plays and I do enjoy the game, but I am not good at this one.

The Bloggening.

Blogger just forced itself on me.

So, I've upgraded to "The New Blogger" -- for the other authors, I think this means y'all must upgrade, also. Seems relatively painless, but my apologies for any pain that may occur.

The one interesting thing I've found so far is the ability to tag posts. I think that to start, game names and perhaps authors would be relevant tags to use. I'm sure we'll get the feel for it as we go along.

Hm. So as to keep all the non-game garbage in one post, how about we address some other things, as well. Shall we? Good, let's continue.

1) You're not hallucinating, I've been messing with the background again. Less ugly? Let me know in comments.

2) I've been neglecting the blog, but Easy posts consistently and well, thankfully. Would the blog be a better reading experience if others posted more often? Others like me, or Kozure? (Not saying we will, just wondering.) Would y'all prefer that I don't post? Could Tili add a second post? Should we offer the keys to Bharmer again? Any other nominees? Input from readers we don't know would be valued most highly, in the comments.

3) I'm thinking about adding other game blogs to the sidebar; I started this a while ago and got bogged down. Any nominees? Preferably of the sort that update regularly. Let me know. In the comments.

4) The official tag for these kind of non-game related posts will be "Bloggening" Love it, use it.

5) Apropos of nothing: my browser's spell checker wants Kozure to be either "azure" or "seizure", while it would prefer that LUCH be named "lute", "lunch", "lurch", "such" or "ouch". Bharmer could be a "harmer" or a "charmer"; evil twin style! It doesn't like Shemp, either, but offers only "hemp" as an alternative. Disappointing, if not surprising.

Agent Easy is perfectly acceptable, apparently.

6) Any other ideas, suggestions, recipes, links to stuff nsfw, drag racing tips, spam, or further miscellany: in the comments!

Lucrative Shizzle Coming Up!

This week LUCH! was the dictator; this week he also was on crack. Well, he definitely was the dictator -- the being on crack part is an assumption, albeit a well-founded one.

Our beloved dictator decreed that we would play RA, Wildlife, and Railroad Tycoon, in untried, previously undisclosed variant versions. Seeing as our typical game session is 4 hours, and the named games would not be playable in that period of time, we were all intrigued. Easy waggishly suggested that the Railroad Tycoon variant must be to not play it at all. I hypothesized that LUCH! was going to bring 20 giant eggtimers to the session, to better realize his mad variants! THEN, our dictator was late, further compressing things - how would this work?

Well, Agent Easy was correct. The Railroad Tycoon variant was, indeed, to not play it at all. Having said that, we still got a couple of rounds of Ra in, as well as a nice session of Wildlife.

The first round of Ra was 4 player, Bharmer/Easy/Tilli/Shemp, and did not vary from the standard rules of the game in any way. It was a fairly uneventful play; I had decided to call Ra everytime play came around to me and there were more than 3 tiles on the board before play started, and it payed off. In the first epoch I was the only one that was able to use all three of my sun tiles, and built up a fair lead. Tilli had a monster 3rd epoch, but it wasn't quite enough to catch up. I ended up winning w/ 59 points, which I only note for the purposes of comparison with the next game of Ra we played.

The next game of Ra we played was (drumroll ...) LUCH's variant. Players were Bharmer/Easy/Kozure/LUCH/Shemp. It was very confusing, and someone else will need to recap in comments. I didn't understand it. This is most assuredly because of my own lack of brainpower, but there it is. (Alternate explanation: LUCH IS ON CRACK.) The variant involved mummies and upkeep. Ra tiles were repeatedly drawn. In the whole first Epoch, I think a total of all players scores was less than ten. We were thinking that was OK - surely, a cruddy first age would result in even better subsequent ages, right? Of course! We were hyped for some LUCRATIVE SHIZZLE COMING UP!!. Only, it didn't. Not in the second epoch. Not in the third epoch. Somehow, nothing good was ever on the board when Ra was called. It seems impossible, but there it was. Wholly disappointing. Bharmer and I raced to the bottom, but disappointingly, neither of us finished at zero. Final scores were 12 for Bharmer and I, with LUCH! winning his own variant, with a score of something or other that was higher. Easy and Kozure had less than that, but more than 12. While we were packing up the game, the board attacked Bharmer. I think that may have tipped this over into the category of Most Farcical Session of Ra, EVAR. [ PLEASE NOTE: I don't think that necessarily condemns LUCH's variant. It was too weird to tell if it works out or not. Might need more crack. Or less. ]

On to a game of Wildlife, which we've played before. Second play of this for Human Easy and Eagle Bharmer; Third for Crocodile LUCH and Snake Shemp; Bear Kozure has played more frequently. I'm enjoying this game a lot - it feels very open ended, as if there are many possible strategies and tactics to pursue; as a group, we are clearly still crawling at this point. I don't think I'll get too much into the play by play, other than to note that the Snakes quickly evolved and were able to quickly create a large herd across four regions, opening up a large lead in the first scoring round. The other players remembered that there is no tunnel and took steps to prevent serpentine hegemony from winning out, while keeping a close eye on each other. End result? A three way tie for first until the final points for remaining food were scored, handing a narrow victory to the snakes, with eagles and humans close behind, and the crocodiles only a couple of additional points back. Very close!

I think the balancing mechanisms incorporated into the game are extremely clever, particularly the way that it becomes quite difficult for the player in the lead to hold on to advancements, which not only confer advantages in gameplay, but are also potentially worth points during scoring rounds. Some numbered points to ponder, hopefully to further our own evolution as players:

1. The Movement Ability: What would be an effective way to use this? What strategies need to be implemented?

2. How practical is it to co-ordinate actions between players to negate certain advantages? What level of "table talk" is acceptable? [ example: Player A holds a Defense ability. Player B steals the Defense ability. This is only useful if Player C, D, or E then attack A. ]

3. Roughly how many actions, total, occur before the game is completed? Does this vary to a greater or lesser degree? Would this information be useful in formulating a strategy?

4. To what extent would a strategy be useful in this game? Is it largely strategic or largely tactical?

5. Is this an area control game, or do the other methods of scoring turn this into something else? Rephrased, is there any real value in holding areas? Monopolies are worth only slightly more than leads, remember.

6. Should we change LUCH!'s name to Lucrative? I say yes.

7. What other factors in Wildlife could bear fruit if analyzed?

DISCUSS.

2 Knizias (Tigris and Euphrates, Modern Art)

We played a couple of excellent Knizias which rarely seem to get table time this week: Tigris and Euphrates and ModernArt.

It was Bharmer's pick, and he chose these classics which he had never played before. Shemp was not in attendance this week.

Tigris and Euphrates

Tigris and Euphrates is a game I've played pretty much constantly online at BGG since I was introduced to it 2 years ago (which probably translates to +/- 20 games). The rest of the group, however, have only played (at most) a handful of times. I should have crushed them, right? Yeah, no.

Bharmer, very early on, committed a very common newbie mistake: he built a monument he couldn't defend (of course, it's a common newbie mistake for a reason... when you first learn this game, you mostly just want to see how things tick, and building a monument is an important part of that initial understanding of the game). Since I was in the best position to take advantage of this, I swept in and grabbed it. I actually scored a few points in external conflict on the way, so it was even better than it could have been. Yet again, I had an unfair advantage, which should have made winning the game easy. Clearly, despite my experience I'm not that good at this game. Over the course of the game, a large monument laden Western empire grew quite powerful (and attracted many leaders). The East saw smaller northern and southern civilizations develop, fragment and morph into three smaller territories after a series of bloody external conflicts.

It was an exciting game. Despite a general unfamiliarity with the game, players didn't keep to themselves (often a problem with less experienced players). As the tile bag dwindled, I was really struggling to catch up in blue. I took a gamble on an exterior conflict against Luch which didn't pan out, leaving me further behind. I did manage to hook up to a blue monument, but it seemed like it would be my lsat turn. Despite all my advantages, my score wasn't giving me much confidence. Surprisingly, I did get one last turn as the tile bag was passed back to me with a single tile in it! I snagged 2 more blues that round, putting me back in the running.

Final scores put me and Kozure in a tie for the win. We had to go to our third least colour to break it... I won. That was close! Bharmer continues to prove that he's exceptionally quick at picking up games by playing very well in his first time out.

Modern Art

Modern Art is a game we don't play nearly often enough. 4 players is, in my opinion, the best number for the game (3 is not satisfying, 5 is too chaotic). Modern Art has the odd quality of being a game that is easy to play, but hard to "get". Strategy is not evident. Understanding the economics of each individual sale is simple enough, but manipulating the market to your advantage is harder. If an artist is already on the table, is it to your advantage to play another card by the same artist and bring in more interested buyers, or is it better to bring in a new artist and devalue the other player's investments? The answer involves many factors, including the amounts the other players have committed to the purchases, how many more are on the table, what is in your hand, etc. Like Tower of Babel, I play this game and enjoy it, but never feel like we are catching on to the strategy.

Again, bharmer played very well for his first time. There were no blown deals or gross overpayments. He actually spent a couple seasons without buying any paintings at all (deciding to maximize sales instead). It didn't work for him, but it was interesting.

Scores were unbelievably close. Luch won the game with 520, Kozure came in second with 514, and I came third with 510 (those numbers are approximate). It was good to get play that again.

Here's to revisiting older games! And Knizias.