What did you learn from the "The Group of Ten" article?

Sounds like it achieved its purpose of making people aware of games they don't have that they now need to own!

duckgoatwombat wrote: Not a lot but I do the 10/25 game list regularly. It's a deplorable habit and the end result looks like a variant of Bull's list. People's priorities, as should be obvious from the nature of the site, seem to be variety and social interaction, whether trading, negotiating, trashtalking or just shooting the breeze.

The game it reminded me I should try is Lords of Vegas for a mix of trading, trash talking, and gambling and some light euro action. I'm worried about the length of the game.

Absolutely check this out, it's like Settlers with no rules. I love it. It doesn't take long, depending on how much time is spent trading maybe 90-120.

As retaliation towards cult of the new, I'm glad to be a long standing member of the cult of the few.

I learned that Nate is a traitor to Wiz-War. But he made an excellent choice for its place, none the less.

That I really have to try Cosmic Encounter more.

I learned you all like Acquire A LOT. I had no idea it was so popular around here.

yeah Acquire stood the test of time
also, to the guy asking about Lords of Vegas, game length isnt really an issue. If there is an issue its that towards the end, games often focus very directly on getting control of that one big key casino with the big point hump to get up the score track and it can be a bit gamey as everyone throws all their cash into attempts to squeeze into there or realign it. Thats not necessarily (in fact, it isn't at all) a bad thing per se, just that it can lead to a slightly samey feeling at the ends of games.

The end game of LoV (Lords of Vegas) are usually similar, but I wouldn't call them samey. If you let someone build an 8 or 9 tile casino, yep, everyone's going to want a piece of that, but you should just never let anyone (else) do that. Usually we have a few 5-7 tile casinos around and folks are going mad trying to overtake them. I think it's a really fun climax to the game arc, you started with mostly nothing, worked with other players in somewhat mutually beneficial ways to build up, and then spend every penny you've got trying to grab control.

I already knew that I couldn't put together a meaningful top-10. Still, looking at some of the lists I realized I could probably be happy forever playing the hell out of those 10 games if that's all I ever had. I'm honestly never going to get down to 10 games though, as much as I admire the effort.

For example I'd never put The Great Dalmuti on a top-10 list, but damn if I haven't had a great time playing a ton of it over beers.

I shouldn't be surprised, but I seem to always expect someone to put Citadels in their top-10. It's such a clean bluffing and building game design, but tends to get overlooked for games that do basically the same thing with a lot more overhead but very little extra return.

As I mentioned in the thread, putting it down like that actually brought home to me how narrow my taste in games is these days. (Narrower then most people here I think).

But, on reflection, I'm absolutely fine with that. Which is a useful thing to know when looking at buying games in the future.

I learned that a little thought experiment I put together ended up being one of the more resonant articles I've ever done. When I posted the link to the Dallas Nerd Night Facebook group it spawned a laundry list of responses, a blog post from one of the admins, and a Youtube video.

It's not like some huge wave of support, but I'm definitely gratified that a lot of people are thinking in terms of what they really love, not what's needs buying.