What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

We played King of New York last night and having only played it a few times I'm still not sure what to make of it. Analyzing the board ("Do I want to destroy this or that unit? Where do I want to move?") means that the game doesn't feel as dynamic as KoT and I suspect that I got fewer turns per game, as well. I like the fact that it feels different from KoT with different strategies but I wish it moved faster.

We also got in a game of Core Worlds with the Galactic Orders expansion. I always have fun playing this, even when I lose (which is basically every time); and I love how the theme of invading and conquering worlds is expressed through the mechanics. One of my favorite little touches is how, instead of "trashing" a card to remove it from the game, after invading a world you can thin your deck by placing one of your invading units under the conquered world to "garrison" it. It was one of my friends' first time playing but he's a gaming savant and he won easily by scoring 18 points on the Galactic Order cards alone. I was rusty and a combination of a bad play and turn order screwed me out of conquering a world early on so I spent the rest of the game playing catch-up. On the last round I had a couple of firsts for me in this game where not only did I conquer two Core Worlds in one turn, but those worlds were the 14 Fleet Strength and the 14 Ground Strength worlds (I've never conquered one of the 14 Strength worlds, let alone both). It proved to be enough to catapult me into 3rd place out of the 4 of us. Even though it plays long for a deckbuilder it never feels long to me, which is one of the best things I can say about it, and I plan on picking up the Core Worlds: Revolutions expansion.

We've also been playing a lot of Star Realms lately and I think 4 players is the way to go. I could see how 2 player would be repetitive whereas 4 player injects enough conflict and chaos to keep things interesting. Unfortunately that means buying two base sets but it's nice that it even supports 4 players out of the box without dicking around with some fan-made variant. 4 player Free for All is a little too chaotic but fun enough, but I really like the Two Headed Hydra (2 vs. 2) team mode. It's a nice touch that playing a base lets you pool money with your partner, and it's great fun to destroy your opponents' bases to screw with their buying strategies. The 4 player version of this game is what I imagine a grown up, more complicated version of Mag Blast would be, and I mean that in the best possible way.

I've played Jamaica twice now, with four and with six. It's a cute, pirate-themed race game with some take-that aspects in the battles. I like it quite a bit, but I don't love it. I've had fun both times, and the randomness of the die rolls and card draws keeps it unique, but for some reason it just doesn't click for me. However, I'd have no trouble recommending it to someone else. The cartoony artwork really helps keep it light, so you don't have too much AP over what should be a simple game (my group is notorious for overthinking things).

On the other hand, I hated Merkator. The poster-child for dry, soulless Euro. Acquire cubes, deliver cubes for money and contracts, buy buildings for points, repeat ad nauseum. Obviously, the game felt too long for me from the beginning due to the repetitiveness, but objectively I think it's too long by any standard (and it wasn't even that long-- maybe 90 minutes?). The essence of this game could be done in 30 minutes, and I really don't think you'd lose anything. Long-term strategy isn't really an option in this game, so why have so many rounds? Ugh.

I pulled out the old Knizia Beowulf over the weekend and had a blast. I really had to blow off a lot of dust and cobwebs, but I was glad I did. What a tragically forgotten (or under-appreciated) gem this one is. Classic Knizia design that has some similarity toTaj Mahal. I just wish the icons on the board were a bit larger for better playability.

I played a two player game of Hyperborea last night and enjoyed it. I taught my wife the rules, which means she won, but it was still pretty fun to play. At two players there's a lot more emphasis on attacking each other, which normally doesn't work with my wife, but it was fine here because it's so deterministic here. We also liked the "bag building" and cube drawing parts of the game. If anything, I don't feel like I have a handle on how to play best, so all of this sounds a bit wishy-washy, but it's definitely one I'd like to play again.

I've been playing Quantum online with my co-workers and that game has shown itself to be a much better and much tighter game than I initially thought. We've had some hits and misses and awesome take that plays of cards like Sabotage. It's a game that elicits groans and shouts and one that I reacquired, hopefully to stick around for a while now. It's been decided that red is overpowered and needs to be nerfed.

Last, we've also been playing Carson City online with my co-workers and mostly losing. It's a game I had and sold when it was slightly easier to find, but still hard to come by. At this point, I wish I still owned it because it's a simple worker placement game with teeth. I've been told there will be a deluxe reprint later this year and I'll likely pick it up then.

played out the first five turns of Reluctant Enemies OCS against a friend of mine i'm schooling in the art of war gaming. I managed to roll 7 or 8 3-5s in a row and had a rubbish 5th turn but I did manage to cut his supply for all his forces in the desert. We called it for time then though. This really is a great game but I wouldn't recommend it to OCS vets as it is more limited than other OCS titles.

today I played more games....

Bunny Bunny Moose Moose was probably the best game I've played and possibly my favourite Vlaada game. Its awesome, and its eccentric which is what I like about it most. One player reads the lines of a poem whistl playing cards with pictures of bunnys or moose with their ears/antlers in various positions with points + or -. You then switch your hands around to form ears or antlers to try and maximize your score until a hunter is played. Very childish, innocent, funny, and very different. Great game.

Kemet with 5. I thought this was alright. Its greatest asset is probably its short play time and streamlined ruleset. I like that it strongly encourages pure aggression. I wonder if it will devolve to the usual table politics after the upgrade tiles are well known.

Ascension: Rise of Vigil is a pretty standard deck builder but I quite like it strangely. Its mystico-machine game world and art style appeal to me and there is something relaxing about playing it. I won one and lost one but it was a breeze to play.

Betrayal at the House on the Hill: Also new to me, like all these other games. I thought this was a decent story experience but i'm not fussed about playing it again. I ran around the house as one of the small kids until i ended up in the basement. We hatched a convoluted plan to lure Frankenstein's monster onto a rope bridge then i was to beat it in a strength check using an angel feather i'd found. Didn't work, we all died.

Just finished Cuba Libre/Vassal last week. I won the game. This is an odd game. It's sometimes so opaque. You have limited options, like, Player A can punch B, B can punch C, and D can screw with A, B & C's wives (ok, I'm exaggerating) so that the interaction should be artificial. Only, it doesn't feel so. It probably works, but there's a problem with it being a zero sum game. Anyway, I catch up quickly, and my turns rarely lasted for more than 30 secs except for the first few turns. I won the game to boot.

And this weekend a group of friends is opening a co-gaming space. Played a lot of stuff such as Survive (seems like a staple after I introduced the game), Carcassonne, Kingdom Builder, Imperial Settlers, Concept, Tsuro and taught myself Machi Koro.

Machi Koro is very simple, but I yet to find the predetermined paths usually exist in board game.

But the highlight of the day was playing 3 hours on Band of Brothers. There's a friend who's attracted to board game (bought SL at age 6, but never played it), and I taught the game in 10 minutes. I just give him a few pointer on the core concepts (like OpFire, FInal OpFire, command range & how the German/Russia in comparison). I then asked him what he wants to do and taught him on the fly. Very logical game, things just work. We played the infantry training scenario, and then we went on a full scenario with 6 maps, tanks, guns, halftracks and artillery. Lots of fun toys.

I ran a game of Maria and taught it to the other two players. I took Austria. The game took about 2 hours total and France won by going balls out offensive; had it lasted another round France would be in a world of trouble for at least the next year. Ended on turn 5, so a very short game. Neither player pursued peace with Austria and I was on the defensive for most of the game. The French player plays wargames and liked it alot, the Prussian player normally goes for deckbuilders and fantasy themes but still enjoyed the game. Maria is in the top 5 games for me, definitely need to play it more.

I've never found Kemet to devolve into table politics in the 10 or so games I've played, but maybe thats because almost every time I play there is a different mix of players. Some games devolve into kingmaking situations in the last round, but with a DOAM type of game I don't think there is another way around that. And I really appreciate the lack of dice in this one, too many games like this rely on dice combat that takes away the planning/strategic elements. Really looking forward to the expansion and the addition of some much needed Black Power tiles.

Last night I played the first 3 scenarios of a 6 scenario campaign of Arcadia Quest. This was my first time playing. Production quality is top notch. Upgrading your character with new gear in between scenarios is the funnest part, which is a bit of a shame since that isn't technically playing the game. Still, combat is nice and the scenarios are interesting. One thing I didn't care for is the death penalty mechanic. Each time one of your heroes dies during a scenario (they can come back) you get a skull token for that character. At the end of the scenario you draw a death penalty card for each skull token, and that penalty affects you for the next scenario. Sometimes the penalty is literally "no penalty", but sometimes you lose your unique ability, lose a health, etc.

My issue with this is that the fun of having your diverse party is those unique abilities. Having the game take them away is basically taunting the player, "Hey, remember that cool thing you do? You can't do it!" In a game that demands PvP, I think it's a bit much. I'd rather suffer a gold penalty or something like that.

some dice masters stuff showed up friday night at the house, so of course I played my first game the next day prior to entering a tournament at the FLGS. I went 2-1 at the tournament with a Power Bolt + Human Torch + Dr. Strange Combo direct damage thing. I lost to a black widow card that damaged me whenever it attacked, even if I was able to block ti.

Played a two-player game of City of Remnants. This was our first game so we're getting to know the cards, factions, and strategies. It was quite enjoyable. I didn't think that I'd like this one, but, the time just flew as we played. The combination of all of the different game mechanics somehow work. My only comment after only one play is that with the two-player game, you probably could reduce the number of renound tokens (VP tokens) for the end game because the two-player game lasts a bit too long with all of the tokens; with a three-player or four-player game this doesn't seem as if it would be a problem.

stoic wrote: Played a two-player game of City of Remnants. My only comment after only one play is that with the two-player game, you probably could reduce the number of renound tokens (VP tokens) for the end game because the two-player game lasts a bit too long with all of the tokens.

So what you are saying is.... In a solo, one player game with all the tokens included it could last forever?

You play City of Remnants until you runout of the Renound Tokens--then you finish the round and count up the token amounts to see who won. In the two-player game, I think that I'm going to reduce the amount of tokens. When only two of the four possible players are competing for the tokens, it makes the game longer.

hotseatgames wrote: Each time one of your heroes dies during a scenario (they can come back) you get a skull token for that character. At the end of the scenario you draw a death penalty card for each skull token, and that penalty affects you for the next scenario. Sometimes the penalty is literally "no penalty", but sometimes you lose your unique ability, lose a health, etc.

Were you keeping all the Death Curses you received? You're only supposed to keep one, the highest level of all that you are dealt.

VonTush wrote:

hotseatgames wrote: Each time one of your heroes dies during a scenario (they can come back) you get a skull token for that character. At the end of the scenario you draw a death penalty card for each skull token, and that penalty affects you for the next scenario. Sometimes the penalty is literally "no penalty", but sometimes you lose your unique ability, lose a health, etc.

Were you keeping all the Death Curses you received? You're only supposed to keep one, the highest level of all that you are dealt.

I never had a character die more than once in a scenario so it didn't come up. I just felt that they didn't make the game more fun, so they should have been dealt with differently.

stoic wrote: Played a two-player game of City of Remnants. This was our first game so we're getting to know the cards, factions, and strategies. It was quite enjoyable. I didn't think that I'd like this one, but, the time just flew as we played. The combination of all of the different game mechanics somehow work. My only comment after only one play is that with the two-player game, you probably could reduce the number of renound tokens (VP tokens) for the end game because the two-player game lasts a bit too long with all of the tokens; with a three-player or four-player game this doesn't seem as if it would be a problem.

I've always dialed it back to 150 for 2 player games and found that to be the sweet spot.

Stick with it. It's one of the best games of the past 3-4 years. Tragically underrated.