I guess Caylus 1303 is a thing.
1 Like
Jesus Christ what a week, finally have some downtime to do a PAX recap.
Picked up QE and Carnival of Monsters but haven’t had a chance to play yet. QE’s been on my short list for a while now, always been a fan of auction games. Carnival of Monsters drew me in solely on Richard Garfield’s pedigree, looks like a rather light drafting game, but that means it will be easier to break out among my less game literate friends.
Got to demo Dragon Dice, I’ve had a full starter set sitting in my junk bin for years, I had always figured the game was defunct. Was nice to get a play in and learn the rules. At first blush the game has a daunting amount of depth that is eased into with the simplicity of the mechanics. there are three hills, you need to take 2 to win. Each player has an army of dice at each hill, on your turn you attempt to maneuver to edge the terrain to your advantage, roll your army and see what happens, then do it one more time. For a game that runs entirely on dice there is a surprising amount of stall, which will probably put off a lot of players. I think we were playing with 3x armies of around 15-20 hp each and most attack rolls end up with about 1-3 damage punching through defenses. The actual tactics and resolution was fairly basic, the strategy looks like it lies in the “deckbuilding” aspect of the game. Each race has 2 of 5 elements (color coded by their dice), a race specific passive, and a slew of unique units, each one being a die with different breakdowns of magic/ranged/melee/maneuver pips. Each element has ~5 spells that can be cast (plus 2 colorless spells) and each player brings 2 “terrain die” to try and tip the king of the hill aspects in their favor.There are also dragons. The dragon dice work as pressure valves to the game rather than elite units for your army. When you summon a dragon it attacks both armies on whatever terrain you place it, making it a gigantic pushback option if you happen to get routed from one of the three territories. Although I probably won’t invest in the game, my sell would be if you like the idea of Netrunner but are put off by the complexity, Dragon Dice offers the army list crafting of a wargame/CCG without the usual rules investment. Plus, fancy dice a cooler than cards.
Also got to play Gruff with you guys. I think it will be a keeper in my collection, probably won’t be pulled out a lot, but it will earn its mileage over the years. You play as rival wizards/shepherds. You have a bunch of genetically/mechanically/magically modified goats. You slam them against each other until somebody dies. Think Privateer Press’ Hordes but with goats. The game plays out like a diet version of hacker vs. hacker Net runner, if that makes any sense. On your turn you activate a goat, you add its “weird” stat to your shepherd’s “crazy” (mana), casts cards from your hand, then either evolve, charge, or move that goat. Charging goats don’t resolve their attack until the beginning of your next turn so your opponent gets a chance to to respond. The game is designed for 1 v 1, but we played the 3 player free-for-all variant at PAX and that worked out pretty well. There is also a 2 v 2 but it looks like a severely stripped down of 2HG with much less fun factor. I say the game is diet Netrunner because you do some very light deckbuilding in your choice of shepherd, goats, and goat spells (from each goat you pull 8 of 15 unique cards and shuffle them all together to make your spell deck). With something like ~25 shepherds and ~35 goats there are a lot of potential builds, but the fact the fact that deckbuilding is gated based on your goat choice means it’s much easier to teach a new player and play a one off game.
The true gem I found this year was Illimat. I won’t lie, I love this game (it’s probably my current favorite game, we’ll see how long the honeymoon stage lasts) and my thoughts are obscenely biased. Sometimes you just find games that feel like they were made exclusively for you. Illimat started as an actual fake game used on the cover art of a Decemberists album, and then they hired Keith Baker to make it into an actual game. Gameplay is simple but deep. The game’s base DNA is the card game Casino, but there have been a number of mutations mixed in that make it play towards modern sensibilities. The game board is divided into four “fields” with the box in the center determining what season a field is in (each season has a passive effect that modifies how that field can be used). On your turn you do one of 3 actions (sow, harvest, stockpile) that are simple in concept but outrageously strategic in their flexibility. I am not joking when I say that looking at the game board and formulating a plan feels exactly like the expanding brain meme. Clearing fields lets you collect an Okus, which are worth points, and turns up that field’s luminary which adds another passive effect to the game and can also be collected for more points. Your aim is to get points by collecting the most cards, the most summer suit cards, the least winter suit cards, and the most okus/luminaries. The game supports up to 4 players, either as a free-for-all or 2v2, but I was only able to get 1v1 games in at PAX. Illimat was an excellent time killer while we waited in line for panels, and throughout the weekend against the same opponent we perfectly tied (score of 1-1-1).
I am also a total plebian who can be sold on a game based entirely on the style. It’s why I picked up Epic Spell Wars of the Battle Wizards and it’s why I picked up Illimat. This game oozes so much style it soaks the table. The rules are just arcane enough and the game pieces just obscure enough that you can play the game in complete silence so that passersby will think they’ve stumbled on an Illuminati meetup. I adore American occultism, and this game is like a weird folk tale manifested from the aether.
1 Like
This is a pretty decent list. Quite a number of games that I’ve never even heard of:
1 Like
Never realized how recent the birth of the tabletop Renaissance actually was
1 Like
My only complaint about this list is that it’s so broad and sprawling and unfocused. I guess that’s a bit of the point, but it’s not really a list of “recommended” games.
The most important point is that High Frontier snuck onto the list at 70.
1 Like
Played Star Trek Ascendancy, which is GF9’s stab at the Star Trek license as a 4X game. I think Eclipse handles large numbers of players better. The exploration mechanic was interesting, but I spent a good time in the game in combat. I didn’t win, but I also didn’t let anyone take my Homeworld, which is necessary for a Supremacy victory.
1 Like
I don’t think it’s trying to be a list of the best games of the last 10 years. The list is 100 most important games. It’s not a list of recommended games.
Nobody asked for this.
3 Likes
I mean If it’s good I’m for it!
Although there is a thread full of people with OG Dune avatars in the Dune subforum of BGG expressing approval: Expansion | Dune
… two days after someone else posted their own Bene Tleilaxu variant.
1 Like
Yes but see those people aren’t Scott Rubin so their opinions don’t count.
1 Like
If it raises the player limit. I asked for this. I asked for this in the following way:
I wish I could have 7 people in a game of Dune
Got to play one of my PAX Unplugged 2019 board games last week.
It really is a JackBox style game IRL. First few rounds took a little as all the players figured out the best practices to win based on your position.
There is a GM, 1 Fake artist, and the rest are real artists. GM says a category out loud (animals) for the topic of the drawing. On little whiteboard tiles they write the actual specific thing (lion).
The tiles are dealt out randomly. One by one each player with a specific colored marker adds a line to the drawing to try to draw the subject.
The Fake Artist is trying to not get caught out on not knowing the drawing. Everyone draws 1 line (any length) at a time and it goes around twice. At the end there is a voting to pick who the fake artist was. If the most votes or tied for most votes goes toward the fake artist they have to reveal themselves. They then get a last minute chance to win by guessing the subject correctly (in which case they win).
The GM wins when the Fake artist Wins. The Fake Artist wins if they are not guessed to be the fake artist OR if they are but were still able to guess the subject of the drawing. Normal artists win for guessing the fake artist and him not knowing what the drawing was supposed to be of.
Was pretty fun the last few rounds where the heuristics of play started to be formed. People realized as GM you want a broad but specific category (fruit, animals, beverages) and a subject word that is distinctive that the fake artist could figure it out and go along. As an Artist you want to draw distinctive enough lines that you communicate to the other real artists you know what the drawing is so you don’t get voted but not so distinctive that the fake artist can easily figure it out. Fake Artist is trying to be reserved but look like they are doing the helpful lines as much as possible to blend in.
The best part is unlike a JackBox game you have this physical drawing you all did that looks stupid that you can save if you want or chuck.
2 Likes
So no shit there I was, browsing TTS entries in the Steam Workshop, when I found this one called TINYforming Mars.
Huh?
Turns out, a small contingent in the BGG community have set about making extremely miniaturized versions of big box games. All free print-and-play games.
Utter madness.
I think I’m going to build a few of these and see what they’re like!
1 Like
Managed to play a couple of games of Outer Rim. Definitely a less bloated/abusive version of Firefly. Jobs are less important in this game and the overall goal it to get to 10 Fame points so you don’t have one path to victory.
Has anyone played Q.E.?
Is the new more complicated ruleset better? I liked how simple the original was, though I haven’t played either.
1 Like
afaik the rules did not change in the mass-produced version. There was a 5p expansion that is included in that version (I think?) which has slightly different rules, however.
There was also a change between 1st edition (the first run of wooden copies - about 50 of them?) and subsequent editions that has country tiles turned face up and the industry goals face down. I have a 2nd edition wooden copy from the second kickstarter, so I’ve only ever seen this particular set of rules. https://boardgamegeek.com/article/27724391#27724391
The 5p version adds more tiles (for the 5th player), and a fifth industry (government). Although I can’t speak for the original ruleset, I haven’t run into any hiccups with the newest version.
I printed and played two of these:
Sickle - a 1-2 player compression of Scythe
TINYforming Mars - a 1-2 player compression of Terraforming Mars
Impressions:
To start with, obviously, both of these games like the depth and scope of their inspirations. The goal of the contest from which these emerged was to reduce size, component count, and gameplay while still capturing the basic essence of each game. So, this isn’t exactly a problem because it was expected, but it definitely colors the review. These are intended to be compact experiences rather than full games, so I approached them from that angle.
Each game has a “solo” mode - Mars has you play with a somewhat different goal against a static setup, and Sickle adapts the rules of Scythe Automa to create a semi-intelligent opponent. I have only played the solo modes and diddled around slightly with playing both sides of two players, so these are early impressions.
Both are pretty good overall, and I’d recommend trying them out.
Tinyforming has the better-designed components, hands down. It’s a very graphically appealing game, and that goes a long way towards satisfaction. It’s a territory control/resource management game at heart. Similar to TM, you develop the landscape of Mars by completing various projects using resources. Instead of a hand of cards, each round is played as a sort of draft - you draw 3 cards from a deck, one at a time, and players alternate deciding which side of the card they get to use - you decide what’s available to you, and in doing so what is available to your opponent. The different sides are different projects that have different effects and give you access to different resources.
The majority of decisions rest in this draft. You score points based on the placement of 3 types of Parameter cube (Greenery, Water, and Heat), but most of the placement of those is pretty obvious, so it’s more about trying to manipulate the timing of placement than it is about being clever.
The solitaire game is pretty easy played as-written, but one modification makes it into a solid challenge.
The biggest knock I have against the game is that it takes longer to play than you’d think, but doesn’t quite have the strategic depth to justify that. It’s slightly beefier than a typical filler game (which is the space I expected it to occupy), but can take as long as some more in-depth games.
It’s not bad, but I don’t really know what place it occupies in the game cabinet. I think it would probably be more interesting against a human opponent, because the card drafting bit is really the meat of this one.
Sickle has, honestly, uninspired artwork and component design. Definitely needs a facelift to up its appeal, doubly considering that the flavor of Scythe is a significant part of its appeal (well, at least for me).
However, of these two games, I think it’s the more compelling design, and possibly more true to the original. It’s removed quite a lot of extra bits that really made Scythe feel full, but has managed to distill it down to a very tight core of careful building balanced with territory expansion. You can push the game to end very quickly, but there’s a lot to manage in order to turn that into an actual victory.
You have a board with 3 action columns, and each column has a top and bottom action. You can’t use the same column twice, and the bottom action is generally used to improve your game state in some fashion. You only have workers and Mechs, and there are no resources - instead, there’s a single global resource type (gold) that you get by “taxing” workers as an action. It’s honestly a clever little way to abstract out a resource production/consumption cycle, though it does sacrifice some flavor and complexity in doing so.
Points generation works almost exactly as it does in Scythe - territory you control and stars you’ve earned can each be multiplied by your Fame, while leftover gold (resources) add more points.
I think the Automa needs some tweaking, but it also kicked my ass the two times I played it so maybe not? It’s basically designed to push very hard at a pretty constant rate, but not to necessarily succeed in that pushing - so sort of a constant wave of token resistance that you need to overcome gradually.
The main praise I have for this one is that it actually seems to fit the compressed timeframe of a filler game - you can probably knock this out in 20 minutes once you’re used to it. Still, that’s more investment than I look for in most filler, so this might occupy the “light fun” gamespace more than the “filler” gamespace.
It’s easier to see this one actually getting used as a portable game - I’ve often had to kill like half an hour at a con with one other person, and this could occupy that niche. I wouldn’t make a night of playing it, but a couple of times in a day is probably conceivable.
1 Like
My memory is that the old, wooden version was:
- bid on 16 companies worth N victory points each
- highest total spender loses. Person remaining with the most victory points wins
And that was pretty much the whole game. Now there’s a lot more going on. I like the (imagined?) simplicity of the old version. Does all the scoring complexity improve the game?