What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

Great post, thanks!

Michael Barnes wrote: So it's a *shrug* on this one...it's definitely good, definitely compelling...but I wish the designers had trusted their concept more and didn't feel like they had to add on so much "game" to make it feel legit. If it had been just moving, shooting, energy management, dodging and scrolling it would have gotten by just fine without getting glory points for dumb things like getting scroll-pushed.

To be honest, that was my thought on it after I watched Zev explaining the rules on a video. It looked interesting, but it also looked like there was a lot that should have been trimmed.

I bought Kemble's Crusade at GenCon. In fact, I made a beeline for it as soon as the hall opened because I expected it would sell out immediately. I assumed it was going to be a big deal of the con, since it had a great look to it, was a somewhat original theme, and traded on 80s nostalgia. The reality was that I don't think it sold out, I didn't see too many people playing it, and it didn't feature on many pre- or post-GC geeklists.

I played the game two player after my friend and I got back from the Con. Neither of us loved it, but we found it intriguing. Since then, my copy hasn't gotten any plays, and I'm really not sure when it will. I think it requires at least three players to really open it up, so the guy I know who will try just about anything (Matt, the one I do most 2p games with) isn't enough. I have two groups and a fair number of players in them but I still don't know how interested any of them would be in it.

Here's the problem: it inhabits some kind of weird nether region. If you're brought in by the theme and surface description, you're probably going to be disappointed at how puzzly it is. It seems like it would be kind of fast and frenetic, but it's a lot of action point optimization and threat containment. If, on the other hand, action point optimization and threat containment sounds like a beard-stroking good time to you, the randomness and the weird achievements and other fluff is probably going to be a turn-off.

I agree with Barnes in that it really seemed like a lack of conviction. They took a Ramones song and slowed it down to a waltz, and I don't think Ramones or waltz fans are too thrilled with the results. But I still think there's a solid game there -- perhaps not what's implied is there -- and I want to get it played more. This is going to be a weird case where I may have to downplay the theme in order to adjust the expectations.

I'm going to paraphrase that Ramones comment. I was thinking along the lines of a Van Halen solo stuck in the middle of "Blitzkrieg Bop".

I'm thinking about taking out some of the clutter the next time I play it. No achievments, no missions,no shopping. Point system change, no "glory" points. Instead of money you get points for each crystal icon on the stuff you blow up. Boss fight, the boss stays up at the top, you don't smush into him for no reason. No PVP. Power-up spots give you one choice of upgrade, not the "power up" cards. Thinking about maybe regarding ALL threat icons as the "long range" ones.

It's really weird, it feels like you can take out a lot of the rules/content and there'd still be a good game- maybe a better one- there. Without feeling like there's any kind of loss.

On scenario 3 of Galaxy Defenders...man, it's gooooood. The solo game is tops, the AI works really well. As others have suggested, it is very much like an evolution of the D&DAS system- the triaging works sort of the same, but the aliens have very distinct attack/movement strategies and it works sort of on an "if-then" system where you do the first thing that they're able to do.

I keep thinking "do we really need another game like this", but...I just really like this one so it makes a case for itself. I like it better than Omega Protocol, I think. It feels cleaner and smoother. But it also has that pervading sense of genericisim. I really wish that they had gone all in on the 1980s cult movie thing and done it all in an 80s comic style or something.

How rulesy is GD? I'm interested because I loved Ravenloft. Is this one a lot more complex?

Not really more complex. They have a dumb rule for allocating alien control. Ignore it and just give each player a specific type of alien and he controls all of that type.

As to 80s feel, when we play we imagine it has a cheesy 8os cartoon theme song....

Aliens are on the block
They're gonna get a shock
Galaxy Defenders!

Maybe made a mistake: I had the game but was bored by it visually - hated the matte look and feel and the bubblegum figures reminded me of Doom but more blobby. Sold it, but at least not at a loss. Sounds like the system is really good... but for some reason, the whole layout, millions of chits, made me yawn.

The graphic design is the one major flaw of the game. We counted like 7 different fonts on the hero cards and the maps, while of good quality, can be confusing to the eye during play.

But the system is cool and it's a worthy cousin of Ashardelon and the rest.

Here are the things about GD:
1. Set up is at least as complex as or more complex than Descent. I remember having to construct 2 decks.
2. It's visually uneven.
3. Even with tons of tokens and counter you still have to deal with double sided 1/2 and 3/4 wound counters.
4. Mechanics are lifted from Doom, with exception of range. You have hits, surges, and spent ammo.
5. AI is wonky, it can be unpredictable (good) or random (bad). The activation is based on a deck of card saying activate all blue aliens, wounded aliens, race x aliens, etc.
6. You need to play the AI to trigger the least damaging alien response (prevent an alien to make area attack or attacking twice). You also need to shuffle your guys to prevent the alien from focus firing since the alien usually attacks the nearest (by hex) and the most wounded.

For those of you as lost as I was, GD = Galaxy Defenders.