The Politics of Competitive Board Gaming Amongst Friend

vimeo.com/40503001

You have to see this if you ever want to understand the Euro mentality.

I've been seeing this for a while but I hadn't yet watched it. Pretty fascinating.

We had one guy who used to play a lot of games with us (back in my Euro-playing days) who always took FOREVER to take his turn. We would pester him a lot about it, and eventually he just lost any interest at playing board games at all, since he felt like he was always under pressure to hurry up. We're still good friends with him, but when we get together we don't play games now. It's fine and better for both of us.

I simply can't understand people who view every move like it's life and death. I always play to win, but more importantly I play to have fun. I can't have fun if I'm killing the game by taking forever. Just play, dammit.

What I find funniest is that the guys who take the long AP-prone turns are the ones who think they're the smartest, but honestly, the fact that they take so long means they lack the analytical skills or brainpower to do so more quickly.

So, long turns = lack of brain horsepower, IMO. Unless they're Japanese. The Japanese culture is such that the fuckers take 20 miuntes to decide if they're going to take a shit. I'm so glad I don't have to deal with them in business regularly anymore, because sitting silently at a boardroom table, for 15 minutes at a time, is incredibly grating on your nerves.

The video I thought was well done and fairly entertaining. It left me with a strong desire to drink a Coke though.

It made me start thinking about long-term strategies, and not just during the course of one game or one night, but spread out over the course of weeks or months. Maybe not planned, but the constant dogging about how long the dude takes for his turn eventually will get that player out of his game - In this case he blew up (and I can't imagine he won that night). In other cases constant badgering might make him rush his play and in a way the long-term badgering has gotten the guy out of his normal gameplay. Aware of it or not, the group was manipulating that dude's gameplay, which alters the guy's chance of winning (could be for good or for bad though).

I know I do long term strategies like this...I will bring up past games or past nights, former alliances that were broken, rush players who are prone to take a long time at key points...etc. Basically bring in whatever I can to manipulate the game into my favor (usually getting players to think about the others at the table and not noticing what I'm doing).

I'm really noticing how much I do that with our group playing Risk: Legacy. I've been plotting things from game one that are just now coming into fruition entering game seven. Do others do that? Are you aware that you're doing it? Is it fair or foul? Should the "meta-game" be isolated to the game at hand? Or is the entire history of the group open and on the table for use?

That's one dynamic that I think isn't talked about or looked at enough, which this video touches on - The long term variables of playing with a constant group of individuals and how things can be brought into the game as a factor which never would have been considered by the designer when compared to a pickup game with total strangers or tournament scene.

VT, from what I've heard about Risk: Legacy, it is entirely appropriate to meta-game that game.

As for AP, that's a deal-breaker for me. Somebody pulls some extreme AP shit even once with me now, and I will never play a game with that person again. Life is too short to waste time on some selfish asshole who is ruining the game with slow gameplay.

stormseeker75 wrote: I simply can't understand people who view every move like it's life and death. I always play to win, but more importantly I play to have fun. I can't have fun if I'm killing the game by taking forever. Just play, dammit.

There's a balance between playing well and having fun that most people seem to grasp intuitively based on the group they're in. Some folks seem to lean towards one extreme or the other at first, which can be a bit annoying but it comes with the territory.

Dude in this video seemed like one of the guys who thinks playing a game is some sort of public IQ test. There's lots of people like this, but they tend to adapt and chill out over time. I wonder if these types are naturally shy people and the game acts as a bit of a mask in a social situation. Or maybe they think that the other players are judging them and they'll face ostracism if they don't perform well. Either way, eventually the ice is broken, the group settles into a happy medium, and they often reveal themselves as awesome people just like anyone else.

SuperflyTNT wrote: sitting silently at a boardroom table, for 15 minutes at a time, is incredibly grating on your nerves.

They win! Dudes know how to work that metagame!

Catan can actually take a while on each players turn, especially if you're playing with Cities & Knights. Just the trading aspect of it and how it ties in with what you're trying to get done. I need a sheep and have a brick, Phil has a sheep but wants ore, is there anyone who wants a brick for ore..etc... To say nothing of the meta-game, deciding what to do with your development cards, sweetening the deal. And the game state can change pretty rapidly depending on the rolls. I'm all for staying engaged during others turns so that I can make a relatively quick decision, but in Catan it's hard to remember all of the rolls of the dice and who got what resource from them and what they might need. One of the things that's great about Catan is the ability to get creative with your cards to achieve your goals, but it also means that you might have to take some time to work out how you can do it. I don't think it's necessarily a pissing contest for people who take a long time on their turns, maybe they just enjoy the process of working out a deal.

Frankly, my least favorite people to play Catan with are the ones who just take their resource cards and see what they can buy. Nothing? Pass the dice. They don't try to DO anything with them. Makes for a boring game.

MattLoter wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: sitting silently at a boardroom table, for 15 minutes at a time, is incredibly grating on your nerves.

They win! Dudes know how to work that metagame!

You ain't shitting, man. They always worked me for discounts, and I think I gave up 50,000$ in commission over 10 years dealing with this one company alone. Always like "So, uh, Pe-tuh....how you think about dis price...." to which I'd respond, "Well I can do that, but you'll have to decide if you want X option or Y option cut out...we don't have the margin to give both at this price..." Then the wait. Whoever spoke first lost.

And you know me all to well. So you can guess who lost.

Shellhead wrote: VT, from what I've heard about Risk: Legacy, it is entirely appropriate to meta-game that game.

As for AP, that's a deal-breaker for me. Somebody pulls some extreme AP shit even once with me now, and I will never play a game with that person again. Life is too short to waste time on some selfish asshole who is ruining the game with slow gameplay.

Absofuckinglutely. Over the years I have learned who to avoid at various cons like WBC. One tourney has a slow fucker who keeps advancing to the semis or the finals - its because people avoid him like the fucking plague since he takes so long .