tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-154089212024-03-13T22:16:37.552-05:00Gamer's MindWelcome to my mind. All visitors get a free piece of it.ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.comBlogger259125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-64968183186048966072011-01-01T16:21:00.002-05:002011-01-01T18:52:42.994-05:002010 In ReviewI played about 1000 games in 2010. Overall, it was good year for playing games, but a bad year for new games...<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Most Played</span><br /><br />Ignoring lighter games and fillers--yes, I think Race for the Galaxy is a filler--my most played games were Go (74x), Loyang (32x), Through the Ages (18x), Shogi (11x), Magic Realm (9x), Tigris & Euphrates (9x), Arkham Horror (8x), Tinners' Trail (7x), War of the Ring CE (7x), Lord of the Rings (6x), Notre Dame (6x), Space Alert (6x), and Age of Industry (5x).<br /><br />Of these, only War of the Ring and Age of Industry were 2010, although it's kind of a stretch in both cases since they are basically "remakes".<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Most Fun</span><br /><br />Go: An addictive gem. Despite its obvious abstract physical and mechanical design, Go is a rich game, and probably the deepest game I can imagine.<br /><br />Shogi: Certainly this gets a bump because I am on the leading edge of the learning curve. If you have ignored Shogi because you think it's just a variant on Chess, take another look.<br /><br />Through the Ages: Although it's lost most of its learning-curve luster, I play often and enjoy it every time.<br /><br />Tigris & Euphrates: This game went from an early 10, down to an 8, and is now back up to a 9. For an abstract, it looks nice, it has a lot of tricky plays, and a good dose of bluffing.<br /><br />ASL Starter Kit: I'm still in the intro stages of full ASL, even after all this time. It's more an issue of getting players together than it is a lack of my own interest. I've tried other tactical wargames (CoH, CC:E, ToI), but they just don't feel right.<br /><br />Liberté: What can I say that I haven't <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/515676/well-always-have-languedoc">said before</a>? Not much. If you don't own it already, one of your only options is to pick up the <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/767948/liberte">embarrassing new Valley Games version</a>.<br /><br />Napoleon's Triumph: An unintuitive, yet brilliant design in grand tactics (no line-of-sight or defensive fire, but also no supply). The old adage that it's a cross between chess and poker is right on the money.<br /><br />Here I Stand: My only play--a 13 hour marathon--was fascinating. It's not a "game night" game, but I'd play again any time.<br /><br />Paths of Glory: It's been highly rated on BGG since its release, but I've never even looked at it until recently. My first and only play took about 6 hours to get through only 4 turns out of 20. A very clever CDG system that feels so much more open than Twilight Struggle, for example.<br /><br />Again, nothing from 2010.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2010 Releases</span><br /><br />7 Wonders: Everyone around me already owns it and has played it, yet I haven't even seen a copy yet. Everyone is way too excited about it. I've read the rules. I can't see rating this game other than a 7.<br /><br />London: A very convoluted system for gaining income and losing poverty. The board feels like an afterthought. It feels like a game would feel half way through development, before the chaff was discarded.<br /><br />Merkator: No theme, high chaos. The little cube boxes are a gimmick. They do not serve their purpose. They are a failed reaction to the physical disaster that is Le Havre.<br /><br />Haggis: A very good replacement for Tichu when you only have 3.<br /><br />There are a few that I want to try that I haven't, but there are no "must tries". I think the problem is that the "professional designers" are selling out to the mass market and making video versions of the simpler games, and that there are a lot more small (self-)publishers pumping out crap.<br /><br />Look at Small World. Vinci is a very good game that's been around for 11 years. It has a rank of 168 on BGG. Repackage it with horrendous graphics, give it a fantasy makeover, and it jumps up 128 points. This is where the industry is going. It's great to get more exposure of games for the general public, but pandering to the least common denominator is destructive to the core.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2010 Flops</span><br /><br />Dominant Species: This is a great design, but a terrible game. If I wanted 5 hours of complete chaos with absolutely no control or planning, I would play 2 games of Agricola instead. It also doesn't help that a game with an evolution theme is really about "intelligent design".<br /><br />Founding Fathers: A really good idea for a game, but approached from the wrong direction. As a player, you never care if you are on the "right side" of an issue (which would make the game interesting and historical). You only care if you are on the winning side. And if you lose, you get points for losing so you don't fall too far behind. All the worst sort of euro mechanisms.<br /><br />Thunderstone/Ascension: Broken and boring.<br /><p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com25tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-3816215218254572222010-09-13T16:48:00.002-05:002010-09-13T17:09:07.295-05:00Implementations of ThemeWhat is it that makes a game have theme? Is it the bits? The box? The images and graphics? If you answered "yes" to any of these, then the theme is in your head. There's nothing wrong with this. I'm sure many gamers would enjoy the most abstract games (eg Risk) even more if the bits were in the shapes of their favorite themes (eg fantasy armies, spaceships, Jedi, etc.).<br /><br />So when, in fact, is the theme realized in the game play?<br /><br />You are designing a fantasy-themed game of conflict with fighters and thieves. Fighters deal 4 damage, and thieves deal 2 damage. Thematic, right? Now let's make it about space combat. Heavy starships deal 4 damage, and light deal 2. How about Jedi? Masters deal 4, and apprentices deal 2.<br /><br />My point is that taking a theme and "abstracting out the numbers" is not really implementing that theme. You are--at best--creating a system that uses <a href="http://www.boardgamestogo.com/2010/05/bgtg-104-boardgame-themes-with-greg.html">theme as metaphor</a>. The systems in the game map to some fictional or real world theme in a way that helps you learn and remember them. The abstracted core could to mapped onto any number of other themes. This leads to the inevitable "pasted on theme" comments. Again, there's nothing wrong with games of this kind.<br /><br />So what does it really mean to implement a theme? Is it possible to be taught a game using no metaphor, using only abstracted bits, yet have the game play be still unmistakably linked to something so strongly that most players immediately spot the connection? And if so, what designs do this the best?<br /><p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-6528406345778671162010-07-04T00:16:00.003-05:002010-07-04T00:43:31.940-05:00Magic Realm<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/TDAfLWij-wI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/WCNOgLYQJHk/s1600/mr.jpg"><img style="float: right; margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; cursor: pointer; width: 156px; height: 200px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/TDAfLWij-wI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/WCNOgLYQJHk/s200/mr.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5489922225654201090" border="0" /></a>I remember a college friend buying <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/22/magic-realm">Magic Realm</a> back in 1983. All of us D&D folks were thoroughly impressed, but completely baffled. I don't think anyone even attempted to understand this beast. I recently stumbled across it again on BGG, and have decided to make at least a minimal effort to understand it, despite the game being 24 years old (as of the 1986 second edition), obviously out of print, and used copies going for high prices (ripped boxes, missing pieces, $90).<br /><br />The unofficial <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/14379/mr-31-complete-pdf">third edition rules</a>--rewritten by dedicated fans--are only 122 pages long. There are some <a href="http://www.bookshelfgames.com/permalink/ep016.html">excellent teaching videos</a> at Book Shelf Games, along with many <a href="http://www.bookshelfgames.com/mr/mrchardir.html">full examples</a> of the various characters playing solo games.<br /><br />I don't even understand a tenth of what I need to know in order to play the simplest game of Magic Realm, but I am still amazed by it. I tend to think of my hobby as being in its heyday, but perhaps that is just a reflection of my own sense of discovery within it. The 70's and 80's also seem to be brimming with gaming design creativity.<br /><br />Take this one example. Many rolls in Magic Realm are 2d6, taking the higher of the 2. Think about what this simple mechanism does. Out of the 36 possible rolls: 1 results in a 1, 3 result in a 2, 5 in a 3, 7 in a 4, 9 in a 5, and 11 in a 6. If you want something to occur very infrequently, set it to the 1 result on the table (1/36 = 2.78%). If you want something to occur half the time, set it to the 4 and 6 results (7 + 11 = 18, 18/36 = 50%). You can get just about any rough statistical breakdown using this method provided you have, at most, 6 outcomes. Brilliant!<br /><br />I've never played any game that uses this system, yet it is 32 years old. Maybe it's time for a reincarnation.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-56145696397567463702010-05-19T11:51:00.002-05:002010-05-19T12:05:15.887-05:00Rules 4: Use Your WordsMany innocent words and phrases may be interpreted differently by different people. Even within a given context, meaning may not be clear. It's virtually impossible to avoid this completely, but at least be aware of your words, and learn to see all possible meanings.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >If condition A occurred in the last round, score 2 bonus points.</span><br /><br />Does "last" mean "previous" or "final"?<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >If there's a token at either end of the road, score it.</span><br /><br />Does "either" mean "one or the other", or "both"?<br /><br />In software, programmers are acutely aware of the difference between inclusive and exclusive "or". "A inclusive or B" means A or B or (A and B). "A exclusive or B" means A or B, but not both. So what does the simple use of the word "or" mean in game rules without further qualification? Do you think you could come up with a rule to its interpretation? Try it, then try to apply it to these two sentences:<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >On his turn, a player takes action A or action B.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >The game ends if condition A or condition B occurs.</span><br /><br />Instinctively, you will likely assume the first "or" is exclusive, and the second inclusive.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-44204348771741686182010-05-10T11:51:00.003-05:002010-05-10T12:12:35.411-05:00Rules 3: TerminologyThis topic is closely related to the previous one. Using consistent language in your descriptions of game components, actions, and processes can mean the difference between clarity and confusion.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >The game takes place over 5 turns. Each turn, players will take turns selecting a single action until everyone passes. A player may not move a piece more than once per turn.</span><br /><br />How often have you seen rules like this? Define the hierarchy of sequence carefully, and stick with it.<br /><br />Another example. Say we have some kind of wargame with the following phases:<br /><blockquote style="font-family: courier new; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">Reinforcement<br />Movement<br />Combat<br />Retreat</blockquote>Now say some rule or card allows an action "before combat". Taken literally, this could be during the Movement Phase, but obviously that is not the intent. In effect, there's an unwritten phase where certain things can occur. It would be much better to break down phases where this sort of issue may occur, adding new terminology as necessary:<br /><blockquote style="font-family: courier new; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">Reinforcement<br />Movement<br />Battle<br />---before combat<br />---combat<br />---after combat<br />Retreat</blockquote>Even with this, there's the possibility of ambiguous order or multiple "before combat" effects. But that is not the subject of this post.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-46428006254354102332010-04-23T13:41:00.003-05:002010-04-23T13:55:26.512-05:00Rules 2: Under/Over SpecificationAs we see from the previous post, induction leads to elegance. However, games often require special cases beyond a simple set of base rules. This can provide a certain amount of texture or theme.<br /><br />State the general rules first. Then enumerate the exceptions using an amount of detail so as not to imply anything more or less than intended.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >A player may choose one the following actions: A, B, or C. A player may never take action B followed by action A.</span><br /><br />Huh? What is the meaning of the second sentence? Is it extraneous? Is it an example? Is it implying that a player may take action A followed by action B? Even though it isn't technically in conflict with the first sentence, its presence makes the reader wonder what they are missing. Exceptions imply things. At a minimum, players will make logical inferences.<br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);font-family:courier new;" >Roll a die and move that many spaces. However, if you roll a 3, you must move exactly 3 spaces.</span><br /><br />Again, huh? Does the second sentence imply that you may move other than your roll when you don't roll a 3? This is another example of a rules writer perhaps thinking they are being specific, but only confusing the reader.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-39127248939643448352010-04-08T18:33:00.002-05:002010-04-08T19:02:04.443-05:00Rules 1: Induction<span style="font-style: italic;">This is the first in a potential series of shorter posts discussing rules writing. An appropriate subtitle might be "How Not To Confuse Your Customers". Each designer, editor, publisher has their own strengths and weaknesses. Clearly a great deal of time is spent on various aspects of many rulebooks (eg detail, examples, art, images, component list, sequence of play, index, etc). However, ignoring some of the most fundamental aspects of rules is like spending all of your time and effort on the paint job of a building that is going to collapse. The best service you can do for your customers with regards to the rules is to makes them clear, concise, unambiguous, and elegant.</span><br /><br />Today's topic is induction. In the most general sense, induction is the process of finding a pattern or general rule that describes a set of data. It can make a complex aspect of a set of rules an order of magnitude easier to understand and remember. Consider this generic example of a game:<br /><br />We have a basic wargame. There are 3 different nations represented by the colors red, green, and blue. Within each nation, there are 3 different unit types A, B, and C. The rulebook lists their respective attack values as follows:<br /><blockquote style="font-family: courier new;">red A 5<br />red B 6<br />red C 7<br />green A 6<br />green B 7<br />green C 8<br />blue A 7<br />blue B 8<br />blue C 9</blockquote>Obviously, there's a pattern here, but presented like this, would you not try to remember it like this? How long would you consult the chart before memorizing the numbers? How would you go about teaching this part of the game? Would you list all 9 elements? Would you just show the chart?<br /><br />Now consider the following description of the above chart: The base attack value is 7. Red units are -1, and Blue are +1. A units are -1, and C units are +1.<br /><br />Now you are able to state the attack value of every unit without the chart. The nations now have a "thematic" sense, as do the units. You could also add a new nation or unit type to the system simply by describing how it fits in (eg unit type D is +2, nation yellow is also -1).<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-32455871469518773742010-03-22T19:06:00.003-05:002010-03-22T22:06:01.745-05:00Moving TargetsI bought into Magic: The Gathering in a big way back in the early 90's some time after the release of the Revised edition. I was fairly impressed, not only by the game itself, but also by the marketing possibilities. The sheer number of cards, combined with the rarity model, was very compelling, and provided virtually infinite possibilities for play.<br /><br />However, as Magic became even more popular, new expansions appeared with new rules. This meant that, even if you were happy with your older decks, if you happened to see a new card in play with some unknown property (eg landwalk), you were now at a huge disadvantage: you had new rules to learn, and new combos to grok. At first I thought, "Fine. They are making this one update. I'll learn this, and then I'll be okay from now on." And we all know where this went. The game became a moving target. At this point I bailed out.<br /><br />I'm starting to feel this way about other games as well, such as Race for the Galaxy and Dominion. I understand that popular games are going to get expansions because they will sell. And I also understand the notion that "you only need to play the expansions you want". But this isn't always true. Someone drops Race on the table. It's already got all the cards for the first expansion shuffled into the deck. No one wants to pull out all those cards. With Dominion, it's more the case that those who have the first two expansions will want to "mix it up". So you have to know them all, or you are out of luck. I feel like the expansions have actually affected my ability and desire to play the games at all.<br /><br />That being said, I love Pandemic: On the Brink and would play the base game no other way. I also have expansions for Carcassonne, Keythedral, Lord of the Rings, and Arkham Horror. But these cases don't feel like moving targets at all. At some point, a series of expansions starts to get out of hand, and the moving target transition occurs.<br /><br />This is one of those rare posts where I prescribe no solution. I understand gamers who want more of what they love, and I understand publishers that want to sell more of what gamers are buying. But it certainly makes me feel left behind.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-72616633605116638302010-02-15T18:56:00.002-05:002010-02-15T19:26:51.336-05:00New 10'sI've been playing quite a few games lately. This has prompted me to reevaluate some of my ratings. The following games--which used to be 9's---are now 10's for me:<br /><br /><a style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);" href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2507/liberte"></a><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">Liberté:</span> On the surface, it may seem like a simple area majority game (El Grande) using cards to determine where you can play (China). There's so much going on in this game, I would need multiple posts in order to do it justice. You can plonk down a big pile of influence in order to make it last or spread it out to gain more success with that faction in the short term. You can go all out for one faction, or do a little in each. You can try to manufacture a Radical Landslide or a Counter-Revolution. The card management is complex, and the action decisions (play a card or draw a card) are agonizing.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">ASL Starter Kit #1:</span> Advanced Squad Leader has made inroads in my gaming circles. While I have yet to discover the joy/torture of Guns and Tanks, I have been able to teach and play more Starter Kit scenarios. The ASL system is simply the best WWII tactical game system I've seen. Everything else I've played--from Memoir '44, to Tide of Iron, to Conflict of Heroes, to Combat Commander--seems like a cheap knockoff. There are many excellent sources of information out there, including <a href="http://www.russgifford.net/asl_training.htm">Russ Gifford's ASL training sessions</a> and <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/493217/asl-primer-video">Joe Steadman's recent video series</a>.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">Tichu:</span> I play Tichu all the time, and I always want to play it. There's no better 4-player team game. It is a card game, so there's always the element of chance that can throw a hand one way or the other. It is unlike my other top games in this respect. But it's so fun to try to make a desperate Tichu, or to set a solid one.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(51, 51, 255);">Napoleon's Triumph:</span> I had played Bonapart at Marengo a few times before buying Napoleon's Triumph. I liked the system, but I wasn't too fond of the small map and limited options. NT blows that out of the water with its huge board, more than double the number of units, and more ambiguous goals that are somewhat under control of the French player. The mechanics are certainly very abstract for a Napoleonic grand tactical game, but the position-and-maneuver-focused choices are awesome. The uncertainty of the unit strengths and types, as well as the threat of breaking through the lines and/or flanking, keeps the tension very high and your plans very flexible.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-63309556456185444722009-09-27T21:58:00.006-05:002009-09-28T00:31:40.220-05:00Game Day HumorI went to a game session today at a game store. We were playing board games in the back while a wild pack of kids was playing Magic out front. During a game of Mexica, one of them was wandering around, stopped at our table, and asked what the game was about...<br /><br />Us: Players are trying to form regions of various sizes using water tiles, then compete for control of them by placing buildings of various sizes.<br />Kid: Oh, so it's like Risk. [And proceeds to walk away]<br /><br />Later on, there was a huge commotion out front, with everyone "gathering" around one table shouting. I asked the game store owner what was going on...<br /><br />Owner: It's the draft for Magic.<br />Me: [Loudly] Oh, so it's like Risk.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-81586328743266890022009-09-10T20:21:00.003-05:002009-09-10T20:25:52.223-05:00On Twitter<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://a0.twimg.com/a/1252620925/images/twitter_logo_header.png"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 155px; height: 36px;" src="http://a0.twimg.com/a/1252620925/images/twitter_logo_header.png" alt="" border="0" /></a>Some games rules posted by <a href="http://twitter.com/BoardgameNews">BGN</a> were not available without a Twitter account. I signed up, and now I guess <a href="http://twitter.com/ekted">I'm on Twitter too</a>.ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-39201647115044719602009-04-25T21:41:00.003-05:002009-04-25T21:52:46.588-05:00Mike Doyle: Form Follows Function Fallacy FailSince he doesn't allow comments any more, consider this a public place to respond to this <a href="http://mdoyle.blogspot.com/2009/04/supplemental-notes-on-functions-of.html">steaming pile of crap</a>. Rather than rip it to shreds one paragraph at a time, I'll simply say: Mike just doesn't get it. His erudition may work on a bunch of ignorant suits in a boardroom, but in the context of responding to feedback from the consumer it's meaningless.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-87004106229756800962008-11-04T03:02:00.003-05:002008-11-04T03:23:48.902-05:00100,000 hits!<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SRAFXdRwwRI/AAAAAAAAAFs/-y-jqJH1am0/s1600-h/100000.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px; height: 84px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SRAFXdRwwRI/AAAAAAAAAFs/-y-jqJH1am0/s200/100000.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5264713864950366482" border="0" /></a>Today this blog officially reached 100,000 hits. With all possible access methods (eg feeds), I'm not sure if this means anything any more, but it's still a fun statistic to watch. Thanks to all my readers. I know I haven't been posting much lately. Other than being kinda busy for a while, what else have I been up to lately?<br /><br />Today I played my 100th game of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/36218">Dominion</a> on BSW. It's a great game, and I'll have a lot to say on it in my next blog post.<br /><br /><a href="http://themetagamers.com/">The Metagamers</a> (Mark and I) challenged <a href="http://www.thegamescape.co.uk/">Into the Gamescape</a> (Mike and Si, sans Paul) to a game of <a href="http://www.spielbyweb.com/game.php?games_id=56686">Amun-Re on SBW</a>. It just started.<br /><br />I've accepted <a href="http://boardgamestogo.com/">Mark Johnson's recent public invitation</a> to play <a href="http://zocktempel.dyndns.org/vinci/">Vinci on Online-Vinci</a>. This is a great game that I don't get to play face-to-face very often.<br /><br />LobsterTrap--basically a smaller Gathering of Friends, east--starts in 9 days. Looking forward to checking out a lot of Essen (and other) games: After the Flood, Battlestar Galactica, Cavum, Chicago Express, Confucius, Ghost Stories, Le Havre, Master of Rules, Middle Kingdom, Name of the Rose, Powerboats, Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm, Steel Driver, and Sylla.<br /><br />If any of my readers are going to LobsterTrap, I'd love to play the following games: Container, Dune, Eketorp, Mordred, Neuland, Pizarro & Co, Scripts and Scribes, The Circle, and Through the Ages.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-57564938441079100102008-08-20T17:57:00.003-05:002008-08-20T19:47:23.347-05:00I'm The Best Friend You've GotLet's make no pretenses; board games are a business. Although most people involved do what they do out of passion for the hobby, most cannot do so for free, or worse, at a loss. And being a consumer business, the evaluation of the "quality" of the product is not up to "the professionals" to decide. It is up to the consumers.<br /><br />The problem is that we are all different. We all have different requirements, different tastes, different degrees of tolerance for choices made by the publisher, the designer, the graphic designer, etc. Do these creative people really want us to "quit whining"? If they only sell half as many copies of XYZ as expected, don't they really want to know why? It's not just about the one game; it's about their future.<br /><br />W Eric Martin did an <a href="http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/w_eric_martin_publishers_cant_win/">excellent job</a> listing many of the tough decisions that publishers must weigh when producing a game. But by what criteria are they to make these decisions? It should be based on customer feedback. If you lean towards higher quality bits, then, yes, some customers are going to complain about the cost. The only way to handle the situation is to take all feedback, and use it to make future choices. As long as customers know that the publishers are listening, they will understand. This does not mean they should "quit whining".<br /><br />Let's put something in perspective. If player A doesn't like something about a board game, and player B doesn't mind, then player A is a whiner. If player A wants a clarification on an ambiguous rule, and player B "knows" what it means, then player A is a rules lawyer. Everyone is a "whiner" or a "rules lawyer" when put into the proper circumstances. Stop being hypocrites.<br /><br />What about the common "vote with your wallet" attitude? I don't think anyone wants that, certainly not the publishers. There are games that are too awful for me to buy, and games that are within my tolerances. I assume the publisher would rather that I buy the game and give them feedback, than not buy it at all.<br /><br />I want all publishers to succeed. When I make negative comments about their games, it is with the intention of helping them to improve (this time or next time).<br /><br />So who the hell am I? I'm no one in particular. I am not a trend-setter. I am often in the minority in my opinions. But I am always honest, straight, and speak in good faith. I am not out to harm or even disrespect publishers, designers, or others. And, no, telling someone you don't like something they spent months working on is <span style="font-weight: bold;">not</span> disrespectful. Lying about how you feel--or equivocating--is.<br /><br />Knizia said, "When playing a game, the goal is to win. But it is the goal that is important, not the winning." This is true of publishing as well. The goal is perfection. Is it important that you strive for perfection, not that you reach it. That's what I want to see more of.<br /><br />So who the hell am I? I'm the best friend you've got.<br /><br />I don't care who you are, I will always tell you what I think. I want you to succeed. I want your games to get better and better. And I want to buy them. If I stop caring about you, I will stop talking to you. Don't get too comfy with your fanboys; they will be the ones standing on your shoulders as you sink into the mud.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-83990030609804406382008-06-05T13:24:00.002-05:002008-12-11T17:37:11.649-05:00Too Much Theme?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SEg_wVK4ZKI/AAAAAAAAAFk/XTQgJoZjZcs/s1600-h/rftg.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SEg_wVK4ZKI/AAAAAAAAAFk/XTQgJoZjZcs/s200/rftg.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5208483068603032738" border="0" /></a>To me, the purpose of theme in rulebooks and game design is to provide a context for the actions you are taking. This makes learning and playing the game easier, and, hopefully, more enjoyable. When mechanics and theme mesh well, you get immersion; what you are doing at the table is somehow analogous to what you are doing in the game's world.<br /><br />My initial reactions to <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/28143">Race for the Galaxy</a> were not positive. My best explanation was that the game was too complicated for what it was. I like San Juan quite a bit--even more than Puerto Rico--but Race somehow crossed a line. My attempts to explain my attitude in more detail to other gamers were not satisfactory--to them or to myself. Something wasn't right, but I wasn't all that interested in working it out.<br /><br />One thing I've learned, though, is not to give up on a game too easily. If only one out of five games that I think I dislike is a hidden gem, then it's worth the effort. Did I learn/play it incorrectly? Did I play with the wrong number of players to fully appreciate it? Did some critical aspect of play go unnoticed?<br /><br />After my first few plays, Maharaja was at the bottom of my game pile, possibly never to be played again. Fortunately, I was in a position years later to really see this game shine. It's now a 10.<br /><br />So what do I mean by "too much theme"? In this case, I'm referring solely to the game's rules. For me, there was a big disconnect in my ability to associate verb with action, and my mind would not allow me to work just a little harder to get over the hump. Race was supposed to be a light game, after all.<br /><br />Thematically, exploration is about adding new tiles/areas to the board (eg Lost Valley, Entdecker). Settling is about building villages/bases on already-explored places (eg Settlers of Catan, Carcassonne: Hunters & Gatherers). Trading is about exchanging resources with other players (eg Settlers of Catan, Traders of Genoa).<br /><br />In Race, exploration and production are about drawing cards, development and settling are about playing cards, and consumption is about discarding cards for more cards and/or VP's. The complex iconography that supports these actions just added to my mental block. I think the game would be better served by rules that were a little more "mechanical in theme". Reef Encounter could use a similar treatment; its rules read like a marine biology textbook.<br /><br />After a last-ditch re-read of the rules, I was able to internalize the mental associations between theme and mechanics. From a game play point of view, the theme works well. I just think it doesn't promote a good understanding of the mechanics. The iconography is, in fact, pretty well thought out. The only thing I would change would be to remove the gray background for non-producing worlds, as it serves no purpose. I might also print the titles on the action cards in a much larger size so they can be seen more easily from across the table.<br /><br />Race is now on my want list. So, a special thanks to all my GeekBuddies, who seem to know me better than I know myself.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Race for the Galaxy image by Rokkr.</span><br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-54641070952966708712008-05-12T20:34:00.002-05:002008-05-12T20:42:12.279-05:00Game Spotting 106 - Board Warp<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://images.boardgamegeek.com/images/pic331816.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 200px;" src="http://images.boardgamegeek.com/images/pic331816.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a>Check out this <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/31378">GeekList</a>. How many game boards can you recognize once they've been passed through a crazy Photoshop filter? Some you might be able to guess by color, by shape, or by patterns. Some are easier to see at high resolution, and some at low. I had fun with this. A few I had to stare at a while trying to twist my brain into different thinking modes. I might have gotten 20. One I figured out after submitting my answers.<br /><br />How many can you get?<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-52334579820364809112008-05-04T13:07:00.002-05:002008-05-04T14:34:33.966-05:00From My Radar to Yours?I've been watching the following lesser-known games with great interest. I'll pass them along to my readers in case you might have missed any of them.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/33759">Ascendancy</a>:</span> I'm not a huge fan of 4X games, but this one has grabbed my attention. It claims to be playable in an hour. It has a variable phase order, asymmetric races, and secret "focuses". Some of the <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/306638">playtest images</a> look very striking. Are those glass beads filled with colored sand?<br /><br /><a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24800"></a><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24800">Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942</a>:</span> The first of the Conflict of Heroes series, this may be the most accessible and gorgeous hex-and-counter wargame ever made. In a mere 12 pages (including cover, index, and unit/card description page), the stunning rulebook includes infantry, machine guns, mortars, artillery, trucks, tanks, hidden units, close combat, spotters, mines, smoke, fortifications, barbed wire, arcs of fire and unit/vehicle facing, elevation, opportunity fire, and unit/vehicle hit counters (eg suppressed, pinned, stunned, immobilized). Almost everything you need to know is printed on the ¾" counters. This is the game that might bring all the wargame-curious folks into meatier wargaming in a way that even <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/9823">ASLSK #1</a> could not. The designer has solved the IGOUGO problem without over-simplifying the system (<a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/10630">Memoir '44</a>) or abstracting opportunity fire into something unrealistic (<a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/22825">Tide of Iron</a>).<br /><br /><a style="font-weight: bold;" href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8059"></a><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8059">Ideology: The War of Ideas</a>:</span> This is far from new, but its upcoming reprint prompted me to check out the rules. Each player controls a nation with a different ideology (Capitalism, Imperialism, Fascism, Communism, and Fundamentalism) and appropriately different advantages and disadvantages. Each home nation competes to control other independent nations through cultural, economic, and military means. The amount of conflict in a nation determines its value. Players can attack and/or withdraw from nations, which might result in loss of control and subsequent changes in value. Players can also develop advances including WMD (worth a VP, unless you use them against another player).<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/29410">Municipium</a>:</span> If it was only the terrible Valley Games rules and the suspiciously poor Mike Doyle board, I would have no interest in this game. The fact that it's a Reiner Knizia design and that there has been some interesting feedback are the only things keeping me on the hook. I'll probably end up re-writing the rules from scratch.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12681">Neuland</a>:</span> I'm not a fan of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/875">Roads and Boats</a>, but this one sounds fun. I <span style="font-style: italic;">did</span> <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/download/32568/Neuland_2_Rules.pdf">re-write the rules</a> for this one already. The original rules were confusing and described the game's systems incredibly poorly. I feel bad for the average person who might buy this game and have to learn it from the rules in the box.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/33107">Senji</a>:</span> 6-player <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/483">Diplomacy</a> in 90 minutes? I have a feeling that most people who play this game will choose not to use the 4-minute sand timer to limit the negotiation phase, particularly since you might want to talk to several opponents and that you can do it in secret. The interesting twist of this game is that each player has cards for family, military support, and trade. You can offer cards--even those you have acquired from other players--as collateral for your deals. You can hire various samurai each of which has a special ability. A lot of potential here.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24827">The Traders of Carthage</a>:</span> A light card game (with a board) with some planning and a little bit of screwage. Could be a good filler for our group.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/32666">Wealth of Nations</a>:</span> Another gorgeous game and rulebook. This is a raw no-luck commodity game. Players build industries to produce commodities, which are used to build other industries and to produce other commodities. Players can buy and sell commodities from the markets, or buy, sell, and trade with each other. Buying from the markets increases the price (a la <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/2651">Power Grid</a>). Selling to the markets decreases the price. Competition for industries is spatial.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-59189738339720845442008-05-02T12:53:00.001-05:002008-05-02T12:55:50.309-05:00Hit PointsWhile the concept of hit points is typically associated with role-playing games, they are very common in other game genres, particularly adventure/dungeon-crawl games and collectible card games. Hit points are supposed to represent the amount of damage you can take before you die, but the abstraction is a poor one.<br /><br />Let's look at D&D. There are 3 different standard game elements that affect hit points: class, level, and constitution.<br /><br />Your class (or profession) determines the type of die used to roll for hit points. For example, wizards use a 4-sided die, thieves use a 6-sided die, and fighters use a 10-sided die. This represents how good each class is at fighting.<br /><br />Your level (or experience) determines how many of those dice you roll, one additional die at each level. This represents your character getting better at fighting.<br /><br />Your constitution is a measure of your physical endurance, giving you extra hit points per level. This represents how innately tough your body is.<br /><br />Putting these into practice makes for some pretty comical results. A 10th-level wizard is as good at "taking damage" as a 4th-level fighter. A character with a high constitution (+4 hit points per level) gains enough additional hit points at 10th level (40) to equal a maxed-out 4th level fighter. An average 10th-level fighter (55 hit points, no constitution bonus) can stand still and take 16 successful average hits from a short sword before dying, while a 1st-level wizard would drop after a single blow. It requires more healing to bring a fighter to full hit points than it does a wizard. And why is it that class and level determine how good a character is at "taking damage", but have no effect at all on how easy they are to hit in the first place?<br /><br />For 30 years, I've accepted all this knowing it was fundamentally silly.<br /><br />In reality--or as close to reality as a fantasy world can get--any 2 humans, for example, are roughly equal in the amount of actual physical damage they can take. Having a more rugged body (constitution) would improve this, but would have minimal or no effect as you gain more experience. Being better at fighting should result in taking less damage in similar circumstances as long as you are able to use your abilities.<br /><br />This last point is very important. A devastating blow against a wizard might be fatal, while only scratching a fighter. However, if both were just standing there, the same blow should have similar effects. In the case of most magic, your class should be negligible. Why should a fighter be hurt less than a thief by a fireball or a magic missile?<br /><br />We've come to accept the classical hit point system, but would it really be that much harder to adopt something that makes a little more sense? I'm not proposing that the D&D system be revamped; TSR does that often enough as it is. I am suggesting that [board] game designers should consider new paradigms.<br /><br />For example, the current system involves rolling a d20 to attack, adding any class, level, weapon, and feat modifiers. If you match or exceed the target's armor class, you hit. Then you roll the weapon's damage--which might be a d6 in the case of a short sword--and add any strength and weapon modifiers.<br /><br />I think that the better the target is at fighting, the lower the chances of doing high damage. The current system relies on the lower probability of a hit, but uses the same damage system. If we build the damage into the roll, it almost comes out naturally. For example, if you exceed the target's armor class by 0/1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8, the base damage might be 1/1/1/2/2/3/4/5/6. This has the effect of decreasing the damage amount as well as the chance to hit as armor class increases. Of course, such a system would require each weapon to have its own table, but with modern role-playing, character sheets are already computerized and auto-filled-in. Such tables would also allow various weapons to have non-linear damages, such as my short sword table above.<br /><br />Should a wizard in chain mail take damage identical to a fighter in chain mail? Of course not. Your class and level should affect your armor class. The abilities of a fighter to not be hit and to turn potentially nasty hits into minor ones is a skill that comes with the profession and experience. A 5th-level wizard in chain mail might have an AC of 15, while an equivalent 5th-level fighter might have an AC of, say, 20! Using the above short sword example, an attack roll of 21 would do 4 HP to the wizard and 1 HP to the fighter.<br /><br />What if they are both just standing there? In this case their combat skill is not factored into their AC. They would both have an AC of 15, and would take equal damage from equal attacks. Other things could also affect AC: what weapon(s) you are using, the directions various enemies are attacking from (eg flanking), being slowed or stuck in something (eg mud, web, entanglement), using the environment for cover (eg doors, pillars).<br /><br />And what about spell damage? In the current system, a character with more hit points is less affected. But if fire, for example, should affect all humans equally, then class and level should not be a factor, although some characters may have special protection and/or special abilities to avoid/resist it. A group of characters with different classes and levels that fails a saving throw against a fireball should all be equally hurt by it.<br /><br />In summary, what I am suggesting in this D&D example is that all characters have approximately the same number of hit points, and that they do not go up in large increments with experience. Some people are frail and others are tough, but not enough to justify 4 HP versus 80 HP. I would perhaps start each character with 20 HP, and allow them to assign "slots" to make themselves tougher, both at creation time and as they gain experience. This should be a difficult choice, equivalent to increasing an ability score or gaining a feat, and should be 1 or 2 HP maximum (ie dedicating a large amount of time to working out or whatever). I would cap hit points at about 30. Of course, this would require changing the entire weapon and spell systems.<br /><br />Think about how silly the current hit point system is, and dare to challenge it in your designs.<p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-85856184681073629332008-05-01T09:29:00.004-05:002008-12-11T17:37:11.848-05:00Pandemic Marathon<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SBnaVGWlhAI/AAAAAAAAAFc/0SuPrMjaAYg/s1600-h/Pandemic.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/SBnaVGWlhAI/AAAAAAAAAFc/0SuPrMjaAYg/s200/Pandemic.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5195423701166031874" border="0" /></a>On Tuesday night, we played five 2-player games of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/30549">Pandemic</a> in 3½ hours. The only meta-rule we allow is that no player is required to play the same role twice in a row. This just helps mix things up a bit.<br /><br />Each game was played with 5 epidemics. We won four of the five games. I'm not sure if this means that we should be playing with 6 epidemics or not. Our previous two games using all 6 epidemics were crazy.<br /><br />I absolutely love the distribution of the special powers in the various roles. Every time I think that a given role--or combination of roles--is best, another gets its chance to shine. The Researcher/Scientist combo is an obvious one: pass cards easily, cure diseases easily. However, this combo is weak on navigation, so you have to work fast to beat the explosion. The Medic/Dispatcher combo is just pure fun: keep the diseases under control, get to cities where cards can be passed.<br /><br />Our one loss was using the Dispatcher/Operations Expert combo. These guys have super navigation skills, and little else. They have to use their flexibility both to pass cards, and to keep things under control. In most games I play, it seems there's a point where you think you are close to winning, and you simply decide to stop putting out fires and go for the final cure. This decision is particularly tough to make with this combo.<br /><br />After 34 games of Pandemic, it's still not getting old.<br /><br />Some say the decisions are obvious. So far, we have found lots of different creative ideas come up in our discussions of plans. I've rarely felt that there was only one best move.<br /><br />Some say the game is too random. The setup is random, all the infection cards drawn up until the first epidemic are random (but known not to be any of the already infected cities), and every epidemic city is random. However, the fact that the discard pile is shuffled and placed on top of the draw pile is the brilliant stroke that gives semi-predictability. The one thing I dislike about <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/15987">Arkham Horror</a> is that everything in the game (gates, monsters, encounters, items, events) is random.<br /><br />If you haven't seen it yet, check out this excellent <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdTVcFo2EQw">GoogleTalk</a> given by Matt Leacock, Pandemic's designer.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-24859930947350270372008-04-27T10:55:00.004-05:002008-04-28T13:47:26.490-05:00Bob DayI finally got to go to Bob Day again. It only happens once a month. In February, it coincided with ASL. In March, it coincided with D&D. Well, at least I skipped playing games in order to play games.<br /><br />The quote of the day: One particularly quiet moment was punctuated by, "You can't kill your babies!" from over at the <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/31260">Agricola</a> table.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Hanging Gardens</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Rick Thornquist--a surprise guest--for teaching <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/34707">Hanging Gardens</a>. I had previously <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/download/32400/HangingGardens_Rules.doc">translated</a> the German rules for BGG, and it played out exactly as I imagined. The cards work very well, even when placed several layers deep. I was all caught up making lots of space to plant, as well as nice shapes to grow, but the game seemed to end too quickly to take advantage of it. I think this means that you must play with much less long-term planning, going for the tiles as quickly as possible. Not a bad game, but it's not going on my want list.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Stone Age</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Tery Noseworthy for teaching <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/34635">Stone Age</a>. Again, I had previously translated the German rules for BGG. In this case, however, I made a subtle but very important error which confused a lot of players. Sorry about that! The file has since been deleted, as the <a href="http://riograndegames.com/uploads/Game/Game_254_gameRules.pdf">official rules</a> are now available. It's a light resource/economic game that, again, is a little light for my tastes, though I'd play it again.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/35293"></a><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Im Reich der Wüstensöhne</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Bob Scherer-Hoock for teaching <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/35293">Im Reich der Wüstensöhne</a>, which I believe means "In the Land of the Desert Sun". It's a derivative of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/200">Entdecker</a>. Players travel the desert building oases and claiming water, camels, rumors, and goods. The rumors affect the prices of the goods, giving the game some of the flavor of a stock game. Again, just ok.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Game X - Dominion</span></span><br /><br />Everyone's favorite game [not] to talk about. Thanks to Eric Martin for teaching this. After the first couple of turns, it wasn't grabbing me at all. By the end it really grew on me; I wanted to play again. In fact, I would have purchased a few copies right then and there if it had been for sale. Valerie Putman has recently released <a href="http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/valerie_putman_game_x_dominion/">some information</a>. It’s simpler than Race for the Galaxy, and as addictive as Pandemic. It’s sure to be a hit with anyone who enjoys CCG-like games. This was my favorite game of the day.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Kingsburg</span></span><br /><br />I had previously played a handful of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/27162">Kingsburg</a> games using <a href="http://mitglied.lycos.de/thunderfall/">this excellent Java application</a>. It was just about as quick face-to-face. I like everything about the game, except the fact that, when a player blocks you, most of the time it's only because he wants that space for himself. In other words, the player interaction (ie screwage) is serendipitous or unintentional, depending on your point of view.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Game Y</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Emanuele Ornella (<a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/13551">Oltremare</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19650">Il Principe</a>) for teaching Game Y, another prototype. Like his previous titles, this game has some unexpectedly inter-connected mechanisms, forcing you to think in multiple dimensions while making choices. It might be a little heavier than it seems. I'm not sure yet.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Felix: The Cat in the Sack</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Evan Tannheimer for teaching <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/32125">Felix: The Cat in the Sack</a>. It feels a little like an auction version of Nobody But Us Chickens. A reasonable light filler.<a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/user/Yakuzaboss"></a><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Huang Di</span></span><br /><br />Thanks to Bryan Johnson for teaching <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/27574">Huang Di</a>, yet another prototype, although this one is being published shortly. It's a resource/economy game with players trying to build up sections of the Great Wall. Building patterns of your own walls, represented by cards in your hand, earn you bonuses. Having majorities in wall row sections, entire rows, and building the top wall piece at each section end earn you victory points. There are only 4 action cards, 3 of which you can play each round. But each has multiple action types. Optimizing your own economy, while dealing with the ever-changing public resources and wall configuration, is quite a challenge.<br /><br /><br />Edit: I forgot that I also played Kingsburg. Added above.<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-59434418777589651062008-03-15T18:42:00.003-05:002008-03-16T10:57:41.932-05:00Anatomy of a Score TrackNo game requires a score track, but we all know that pictures speak louder than words...and numbers. Score tracks are basically bar graphs showing each player's victory points in such a way that you can easily see the relative positions. This can play an important part of the decision-making process.<br /><br />You are behind. Is it the proper time to take a risk in order to catch up? You have a choice of 2 good actions. Is your choice going to be partly based on on which player(s) it adversely affects, and their current victory point status?<br /><br />While most games with score tracks implement them reasonably well, none get good marks in all my categories. Some games use tracks to manage non-scoring information (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/25613">Through the Ages</a>). Everything below still applies to these.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Zero</span></span><br /><br />In almost every game with victory points, all players start out with 0. If the score track doesn't have a 0 space, then all the scoring markers have to start off the board (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19999">Aton</a>). This is really lame.<br /><br />If you don't start at 0, and can never have a score of 0, then this rule does not apply.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Length</span></span><br /><br />Score tracks should typically have 50 (0-49) or 100 (0-99) spaces. Stopping at 65 or 80 creates that awkward situation where you have to do modulus math. For example, you have 75 points and just scored 22. 75 plus 22 is 97. 97 minus 80 is 17, so you place your scoring marker on 17. Maybe...<br /><br />Did your score track end at 79 and start at 0? If so, then your calculations are correct. If they ended at 80 or (exclusive) started at 1, then you are in trouble.<br /><br />Wrapping the score track more than once is unacceptable (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/822">Carcassonne</a>) even if the game includes indicators for such states. Make the track longer than a typical game requires.<br /><br />Odd-length score tracks are only valid when the highest position (potentially with a little slop to break ties) is a winning condition (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12005">Around the World in 80 Days</a>).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Size</span></span><br /><br />Each space on the score track should be able to comfortably hold a number of scoring markers that you would reasonably expect to be there. They should not have to be packed together on such a small space that you can't tell which space they are on.<br /><br />In some games, players cannot co-exist on the score track (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/88">Torres</a>) so it doesn't matter as much. In some games, the scoring markers are meant to stack (see Markers) to save space (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/60">Vinci</a>), or for turn order purposes (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/30869">Thebes</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/31594">In the Year of the Dragon</a> people track).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Pitch</span></span><br /><br />Pitch is the distance from the center of one space on the score track to the center of the next. Pitch should be constant across the entire score track. You may wonder why I don't say that each scoring space should be the same <span style="font-style: italic;">size</span>. That's because size can change while still keeping pitch (see 5's and 10's).<br /><br />Score tracks are most beneficial in games where players score small numbers of points over many, many turns. Score tracks should provide as many cues as possible to help with this process. One of these is pitch. Every time you score 3 points, you should be moving your scoring marker the same distance. Games that have varying pitch--even if done for other good reasons--take away this cue (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/475">Taj Mahal</a>).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Obvious</span></span><br /><br />It should be obvious what is and what is not a space on the score track. There should not be "spaces" that are not spaces (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1041">San Marco</a>). There should not be strange artistic distortions at the start, end, or corners of the score track (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/93">El Grande</a>).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Art</span></span><br /><br />As I've always said, form should enhance function, not hinder it. Many games go way too far trying to be artsy. This can even infect the score track. Spaces contain dark, rich patterns that only serve to obscure the numbers, if they exist (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/29934">Amyitis</a>).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Numbers</span></span><br /><br />Every space should be numbered. I can't say this enough. Every space should be numbered. Not everyone scores in the same way. Some players just count off their points: 1, 2, 3, 4. Some pick up their scoring marker, look at the current value, add the new points, and replace the marker. If the current space has no number, and the spaces around it are crowded with other scoring markers, then you have to either look farther and count it out, or move things around.<br /><br />Additionally, the numbers should be highly readable. Fancy and thin (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12761">Ys</a>) typefaces don't get the job done, nor do colors that don't stand out against the background (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18602">Caylus</a>).<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">5's and 10's</span></span><br /><br />Every space that is a multiple of 5 should stand out. Depending on the length of the score track, multiples of 10 should stand out as well.<br /><br />There are many ways to do this, some of which can be used in combination for good effect: larger text, bolder text, brighter text, different-colored text, different-colored background, different-patterned background, larger space (see Pitch).<br /><br />In this way, even when a space on the score track has one or more scoring markers on it, you can still easily make scoring adjustments without having to see the numbers.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Straight</span></span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: left;">Ideally, a score track should be straight. This works fine when the game requires few spaces (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/2507">Liberté</a>), but is impractical for most games. A reasonable compromise is to wrap the score track around the outside of the board. The brain can easily "unwrap" this shape to see the 1-dimensional bar graph.<br /></div><br />Winding (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/6249">Alhambra</a>) and wiggly (eg <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/88">Torres</a>) score tracks are bad. They disrupt the linear flow of the 1-dimensional space, and make it more difficult to tell in which direction to move each scoring marker.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Markers</span></span><br /><br />Scoring markers are manipulated often. The must be easy to pick up, must fit well on the scoring spaces with other scoring markers as the game requires, and preferably should stack. Alhambra-style scoring markers are about the best size and shape I can think of. The worst scoring markers ever conceived are those in <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/17133">Railroad Tycoon</a>.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">My Dream Score Track</span></span><br /><br />I'd like to see a score track designed so that the scoring markers do not cover the numeric text. The spaces themselves would just be empty boxes with appropriate colors and patterns. The numbers would appear on tabs that stuck out from each space toward the center of the board. These tabs, of course, would be properly differentiated on the 5's and 10's.<p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-42677573088019155782008-03-06T01:40:00.003-05:002008-12-11T17:37:12.138-05:00Pandemic<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R8-oUub29-I/AAAAAAAAAFU/r4ux0HTHPzI/s1600-h/Pandemic.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R8-oUub29-I/AAAAAAAAAFU/r4ux0HTHPzI/s200/Pandemic.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5174539570887718882" border="0" /></a><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/30549">Pandemic</a> has been on my want list since the day the blurb for it was posted. It's one of those games--like <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/121">Dune</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/25674">Khronos</a>, or <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/29937">King of Siam</a>--whose concept alone is enough to get me excited. And that excitement continues after 3 plays.<br /><br />The components are top notch. The box is super sturdy, perhaps the thickness of <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/18258">Mission: Red Planet</a>, but made of the same materials as more standard boardgames. The cards are thick and coated, but not sticky. They aren't cut as perfectly as playing cards, but they shuffle well enough. The board is smooth, almost glossy, but not plastic feeling. The bits are nice, if a little chunky for the playing surface. But other than setup (all players and a research station in Atlanta), there's rarely too much to handle in one location. I didn't get a look at the insert; it had been discarded before I arrived. I'll try my best to salvage it when I get my copy of the game. My only minor gripe is with the role cards. They all have a dark purple background with a small colored pawn making it a little difficult to tell who's who from across the table.<br /><br />The system for the spread of diseases and Epidemics is inspired. One card per city in the player deck and the Infection deck: My intuition would have been that this wasn't enough. Putting the discard pile on top of the draw deck after each Epidemic: My intuition would have said this was too likely to leave much of the world untouched. But it all works very well, and keeps the tension high all the way through.<br /><br />I would describe the infection system as semi-random. Cards are drawn from a shuffled deck, each causing a new disease cube to appear. If a 4th cube of a given color is to be placed, then a cube of that color is placed on each adjacent city instead. This is called an Outbreak and can potentially cause a chain reaction of Outbreaks.<br /><br />However, at any given time, you do know things. There are 9 cards in the discard pile from the setup. As each card appears, it cannot be drawn again until after the next Epidemic. Once an Epidemic occurs, you know you will be drawing all the cards that were in the discard pile before you draw any new cards. Each Epidemic can only occur in a city whose card has never been drawn before (from the bottom of the deck). So it's a constrained kind of random. You can make plans, even beyond dealing with the current situation.<br /><br />The 5 player roles (Medic, Scientist, Operations Expert, Researcher, Dispatcher) are all fun to play. In my 3rd game, I was the Dispatcher. His special ability is that he can move other players, and can also move any player to another player. My first thought was that it wouldn't be as fun because you are essentially letting other players do the important and/or fun stuff (treating/curing diseases). So very wrong! Being able to continually put people exactly where they need to be in order to use their respective abilities is a very fun part of the game. In fact, the Dispatcher role may be the one with the most cooperative nature since his use requires the most planning and agreement. I would play that role any time.<br /><br />I would recommend Pandemic to anyone who doesn't vomit at the sight of wooden cubes. The copy I played tonight had already been played 9 times in its first week. In fact, <a href="http://www.zmangames.com/">Z-man</a> sold out the first print run in less than a month! How often does that happen?<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Pandemic image by clloyd09</span><br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-11624688305976520682008-02-29T21:30:00.002-05:002008-12-11T17:37:12.288-05:00Happy Leap Day!<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R8jDyYeF2LI/AAAAAAAAAFM/1ldpw3geckY/s1600-h/frog.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R8jDyYeF2LI/AAAAAAAAAFM/1ldpw3geckY/s200/frog.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5172599442364553394" border="0" /></a>Sincerely. Happy Leap Day! If you know me at all, you might think I am being disingenuous, sarcastic, or hypocritical by saying this. Not at all. Leap Day is the only day in popular culture that is an acknowledgement of our intellectual progress rather than of our stupidity. It is the only day that, while arbitrarily placed, does not exist arbitrarily.<br /><br />The Earth rotates on its axis once a day, and travels around the Sun once every 365.256366 days. A year does not divide evenly into days. Therefore, if we held to a firm 365 days in a "human" year, our seasons would flip about every 700 years. To keep things stable, we insert an extra day every 4 years. But because the fractional portion is slightly larger than 0.25, we need to remove a few leap days once in a while. Every 400 years, we remove 3 leap days. 1700, 1800, and 1900 did not have leap days, and 2100, 2200, and 2300 will not. 1600 and 2000 did.<br /><br />As humans, we have known about the day/year problem for thousands of years. How many people today do you think could explain the meaning of February 29th?<br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-14437782135299195272008-02-22T15:16:00.004-05:002008-12-11T17:37:12.692-05:00Die Macher<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R79DhIEhQvI/AAAAAAAAAFE/nsTI4HUUo1U/s1600-h/DieMacher.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R79DhIEhQvI/AAAAAAAAAFE/nsTI4HUUo1U/s200/DieMacher.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5169925133625803506" border="0" /></a>For the last three weeks I was determined to get <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1">Die Macher</a> to the table on a normal game night. My first and only other time playing it was over a year ago. The 5-player game took about 7 hours. This fact gave some pause to try it in a 4- to 5-hour block of time. I figured so what? We could always play it over two sessions if necessary. So three of us--Josh, Mike, and myself--dove in head first.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span>Setup was a little involved. There are many things to sort, stack, shuffle, deal, and organize. I had to consult the rules a few times: one meeting marker per region, €25,000 starting cash, 5 party membership. During the preliminaries where players secretly select their starting positions in meetings, media, trend, etc. there were the obvious questions about what each thing was good for. We had all watched <a href="http://www.boardgameswithscott.com/?p=40">Scott Nicholson's excellent video</a>, but Die Macher is intricate enough that it's difficult to put any sort of plan together the first time you play.<br /><br />Our first round took over an hour. This was partly our unfamiliarity with the process, and partly not knowing what were reasonable decisions. One of the minor pains is that some phases do regions in order, and some in reverse order. Our player aids didn't show this. Subsequent rounds played faster and faster.<br /><br />After the first two rounds, Mike had won both elections, gaining huge VP's in mandate, national media, and party membership as well. He was literally ahead of Josh and I by more than 100 points. I felt like the game was already over. What wasn't obvious to me at the time was that Mike had ignored all else to get this lead, and had spent a lot of money.<br /><br />I kept buying media and using Shadow Cabinet to replace media. I cashed in votes even when the conversion factor wasn't particularly high. This allowed me to control Coincidence quite well. Mike and Josh had some platform overlaps, and I was determined to oppose that when possible, preferring instead to tweak the regions in those issues instead of my party. Although I still felt behind, I did feel in control.<br /><br />There were only 2 opportunities for Coalitions. One failed due to insufficient Coincidence, and the other due to lack of interest. More than two thirds of the Opinion Polls were unfavorable to the high bidder, so we were often rolling to increase party membership.<br /><br />I think I only won 2 elections. One was in round 6. I was able to make my platform coincide with the national opinion 100%! This was undone after the 7th election, but of course the effect was small. Jim - 295, Mike - 281, Josh - 275.<br /><br />I was very surprised at the close ending given our different styles of play. Mike played big money, big party. Josh played a tighter economy, avoiding big bids for anything, perhaps opportunistic. I played the media control and vote majority game.<br /><br />Not counting setup, we played in less than four hours. We have now established Die Macher as a "game night game". I suspect it will come out much more often. The three of us could probably play again in about 3 hours. Even with five players, it would not take 4 hours.<br /><br /><u>Note</u>: I think we played one rule wrong. During the Media Phase, you can keep buying Media markers one at a time until everyone passes. We played each player could only buy one.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Essence of the Game</span></span><br /><br />The first thing new players need to understand is how the game is scored. Forget about all the terms and the phases. Focus on the Victory Points! Your score at the end of the game is the sum of the Seats won from the 7 elections (votes converted into VP), the values of your media markers on the National Board, your party membership, your coincidence with the National Opinion, and a few small bonuses.<br /><br />The second thing new players need to understand is where money comes from. You start the game with €25,000. After each election you collect €1,000 for each Seat won. After elections 1, 3, and 5 you collect €1,000 for each party membership. At the end of each round, you can accept contributions from €10,000 to €50,000.<br /><br />The last thing is winning elections...or at least doing well in them. Players hold party meetings in the regions. Each round they may be converted into votes, each meeting being worth so many votes based on a multiplier. This multiplier is the sum of the Trend and Coincidence. Trend is simply a value shown on a scale the board (-3, -2, 0, +2, +3) representing how well your party is liked. Coincidence is the total number of issues where your party matches a region minus the total number of issues where your party opposes the region (non-matching issues count as zero). Every round, until the regional election is held, you can change Trend using Shadow Cabinet cards and Opinion Polls, and Coincidence by adjusting your party's platform or by adjusting the region's opinion. Changing your platform to improve your Coincidence in one region may adversely affect it in others. Changing a region's opinion to match your platform (when you are able) may also help your opponents. These are all very interesting decisions.<br /><br />The trick is not simply to wait until your multiplier is at its maximum to cash in your votes. One, since you may only have 10 meetings at a time, cashing in votes allows you to hold more meetings. Two, if a player has more votes than all the other players combined in a region, they can change one opinion. It's all about timing.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Exchange Pool</span></span><br /><br />This is the name for a set of spaces on the Organization Board where a number of Opinion Cards are placed with which players can exchange regional Opinion Cards. The rules have changed from edition to edition. We played using the <a href="http://www.valleygames.ca/">Valley Games</a> rule where there's always six cards there. I found this to be a poor choice. Six is not enough to provide a good decision space. The official 2nd edition rules, as far as I can tell, are that all swapped regional opinions, and all leftover opinions (after the election) go there. Swapped out national opinions do not. This would have the effect of increasing the Exchange Pool by 1 or 2 cards each round. There would be between 11 and 16 cards to choose from during the 6th (final) round. Is this too many? Does the system break down if every side of every issue can be swapped in by the end of the game?<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Physical Design</span></span><br /><br />Die Macher is certainly striking. But is it functional or gimmick? I think a little of both. I could take or leave the 4 spiraling boards with circular layout. It could be so much better as a single board. My main issue is with what I call "decoding the game" (future in-depth blog post about decoding games in general).<br /><br />You spend a lot of time in Die Macher calculating Coincidence--players to regions, players to players, and players to national. In a 5-player game, there are 5 sets of 5 platform cards, 4 sets of 4 regional opinion cards, and 1 set of up to five national opinion cards. These are laid out all over the place, and are in essentially random order. Change one region card, and you have to recalculate Coincidence for every player.<br /><br />Considering playability alone, Die Macher could be played much more easily on a single 24x24" board (61x61 cm). The national opinion, regional opinions, and player platforms would all be a single table. For each row there would be 7 columns, one for each issue. A black cube means no/less, and a white cube means yes/more. Looking across the table, you could instantly see Coincidence between players, players/regions, and players/national. The Exchange Pool would also be a row on the table where multiple cubes could sit in each cell. This idea would eliminate 5 of the 6 boards, cut required table space in half, and probably reduce game time by an hour. The way cards are used (if at all) would need to be changed slightly, but it would have minimal affect on probabilities.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Die Macher image by marioaguila</span><br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15408921.post-22479705907275839712008-01-29T10:17:00.000-05:002008-12-11T17:37:12.931-05:00Recent Acquisitions<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R59KO6lQJ_I/AAAAAAAAAE8/v8lhMgrBr0U/s1600-h/Pueblo.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V9fUPsoXBhM/R59KO6lQJ_I/AAAAAAAAAE8/v8lhMgrBr0U/s200/Pueblo.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5160925318094006258" border="0" /></a>I got into the <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/27558">Math Trade</a> for <a href="http://www.unitygames.org/ugxiv/ugxiv.htm">Unity Games</a>, managing to swap 5 games, and subsequently purchase a 6th. The ease of this process has made me less reluctant to balk at questionable games. Giving up 5 games I would never play again for 5 that I either wanted or was interested in was a no-brainer once I put it to myself that way.<br /><br />I traded away <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/26">Age of Renaissance</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/5">Acquire</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1309">Die Magier von Pangea</a>, <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/122">Quo Vadis?</a>, and <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/551">Battle Cry</a>. And I received...<br /><br /><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/3228">Pueblo</a> is one of those out-of-print and generally unavailable games. I looked far and wide. I found a single copy in Halifax for $50 celsius + shipping + any customs cost and destruction. No thanks. It is unlike any other game in my collection, and I think the spatial nature of the game will be appealing to a wide range of players. Thanks, Michael.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/8190">The Bridges of Shangri-La</a> has been on my radar for a long time. I like Colovini games in general. Thanks, Richard.<br /><br />I was going to order <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/29839">Key Harvest</a> in my next game order anyways. This came in shrink, yet was missing an orange piece. This is the second time I emailed Jay (<a href="http://riograndegames.com/">RGG</a>) late on a Sunday night and got an instant reply that my piece is on the way. Thanks, Richard.<br /><br />I've played <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/19989">Robber Knights</a> once before and liked it. Unfortunately, this was actually the German version, Raub Ritter. The game is language independent, but I'm picky enough that I would not have put in the request if I had bothered to look at the version info clearly specified in the math trade. My fault. Thanks, Adam.<br /><br />Thanks to a random late-night game on <a href="http://www.brettspielwelt.de/gate/jsp/base/index.jsp?nation=en">BSW</a> with melissa, my interest in <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21790">Thurn & Taxis</a> was rekindled. It's not a typical game for me, but I think it will get some play, if only at home. Thanks, Jay.<br /><br />I also purchased <a href="http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/21892">Augsburg 1520</a>, which I've been reading about with fairly high interest. Thanks, Bob.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Pueblo image by Toynan</span><br /><p></p>ektedhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.com0