2-player Azul seems like it would be intense and good.
I’m feeling 2-player, but I haven’t played it enough to see if it breaks down.
2-player Azul gets very deterministic near the end, but the first 90% of the game is definitely intense and good.
Picked up a copy of One Deck Dungeon because it seemed like my jam, and it is indeed. The central idea is neat, though it could probably be executed better and it will no doubt grow stale after a fashion. But a solo or co-op “beat the game” game definitely has a place in my cabinet.
I got to play Battletech for the first time in a while. It mostly consisted of me trying to shoot down a damaged Shadow Hawk with a hovertank.
Just found out that Dougram: Fang of the Sun is on Youtube. (Other than Macross, it’s the series where the took majority of the original Battlemech designs came from. It’s also the series that established the Mech’s being piloted from the Head, instead of the Chest.)
https://www.amazon.com/s/browse/ref=gbps_img_s-4_d724_a1ec79d0?tag=slicinc-20&ascsubtag=24340e66470c11e897976e29dea6a24e0INT&node=13580811011&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER Pretty decent sale at Amazon on board games right now.
Such an incredibly dense collection of games this week - headlined by five games of Vast in three days.
Like It: 2x Triumph & Tragedy (new), 2x The 7th Continent (new), Azul, 5x Vast: The Crystal Caverns, The Great Zimbabwe
Triumph & Tragedy is outside my experience in some ways. Not entirely outside my experience - I have 20+ plays of Eclipse to prove that. I’m enjoying the hell out of it; more rules overhead for movement and combat and supply than Eclipse or 1775: Rebellion or Quartermaster General, but it’s in service of an alternate-universe 1936 where crazy things can happen. Sure, the USSR and Axis could partition Poland, but nothing stops them from forming an alliance where Germany gets Paris and the USSR gets London.
The 7th Continent is another insane kickstarter - a cooperative exploration and survival game. The game models finding shelter, hunting, solving puzzles, exploration (we took a mulligan on Saturday after setting off in the opposite direction on a raft just to see what would happen), and it all works rather brilliantly from of a deck of multi-use cards.
Five plays of Vast was my idea - we always have trouble picking it up when we only play one game every couple months. Better to just grind through a bunch of games. Most of them were 3p, the player count works but occasionally seems lopsided. It’s hard for goblins to generate Rage before they overpopulate without a dragon to eat them. And yet… even as I’m typing this I realized that the goblins can deliberately shed population by moving through lit tiles. Vast gives you a lot to think about and none of it is obvious the first or second or third time you play.
Azul continues to be good, and I came in not-last this time. The Great Zimbabwe impressed me more than the last game I played at PAX Unplugged - it doesn’t ask players to discover the “good openings”, just toss a bunch of dangerous tools in the middle of the table and let everyone sculpt the board into what they believe is an advantageous state. Might be fragile with a new player, but so far it’s worth it.
I just got the 7th Continent in the mail last week but haven’t been able to try it yet. A couple of my friends backed it when it was originally on Kickstarter and can’t stop raving about it though. That and Gloomhaven seem to be their games of the year so far.
Played a decent little racing game called Flamme Rouge themed around cycling yesterday. It works by each player selecting a value from among a number of cards they draw, which removes the card from their deck and can’t ever get used again, plus a catch-up mechanic themed around being in the slipstream of people ahead of you. Had a player shoot out fast early while another player hung back and made use of the catch up mechanic while preserving his best cards. I tried to keep in the middle of the pack while setting up my deck to get good cards late. Unfortunately the hang-back player did better than me in that regard and beat me on the tiebreaker (though not close on that). The “go fast early” player would have come in last if not for a really bad miscalculation by the fourth player among our group, who knocked himself out of the race on the second to last turn.
Two player Azul is where it’s at. Four player still fun but more casual mode. Three player I wasn’t sure about but it is closer to two-player. Retains the tension and fuckery, but with added tension of “will you fuck them over or do I have to do it?”
Grant Rodiek is developing a game in the Rym aesthetic (https://www.instagram.com/p/Bhy6hkxBjIA/?taken-by=hyperbolegrant), that is to say not skeletons, but the other Rym aesthetic: Disney’s Robin Hood.
Jump to 5:52
After three games of Sagrada I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when I hear people ranting and raving about it. It’s a pretty simple game at the core but every card and placement rule adds complexity without making for any kind of interesting decisions.
Sounds about right to me. There are a number of games in the same general category I’d rather play; Azul, Patchwork, Alhambra, Cities, Arboretum…
People are drawn to Sagrada because it looks nice. It’s not bad, but it was too basic for me.
Translucent dice are the best thing that ever happened to that game.
Except that I can’t tell apart the purple and blue dice.
100% agree that Sagrada is not worth your time. So many better games to play. I was also stunned when I got it to the table, having seen the mountains of hype.
Even back in the 16 bit era I was the kid who was always saying “Who cares about graphics? I care about it being a good and fun game. Mario 1 is more fun than some of these fancy looking new games.”
And so it goes for board games. The masses are attracted to fancy components like metal pieces, mechanical contraptions, mirrors, and other stuff regardless of the actual game.
So you’d be fine if we played the original Glory to Rome?