I like the idea of solo board gaming. I’ve played a lot of Arkham Horror on my own, but it’s a bitch to set up and takes several hours to play. So with a small kid in the house it doesn’t get much table time these days. But sometime before christmas last year I bought Nemo’s War from Victory Point Games, and just a few weeks ago I finally gave in and purchased Ghost Stories. The former is a pure solo game based on Jules Verne’s famous novel, the latter a game for 1-4 players based on … well, kung-fu movies?

I'm coming up on the part of the year when I'll be traveling a lot, and that means a lot of time alone in hotels or waiting in airports or on airplanes.  So I play solo games sometimes to pass the time, and I have some typical standbys for solo games that I've always liked, including Arkham Horror, Pandemic, Ghost Stories, Space Hulk: Death Angel and Lord of the Rings.  In some cases, those would be hard copies but for others like Arkham Horror it's using a custom Vassal module... there just isn't really enough room on an airplane to setup and play Arkham Horror, ya know? 

I've been jonesing lately for some new games that might work well solo (and if they're also good or better as multiplayer then of course that's great, too).  I passed through Spokane the other day, and couldn't resist dropping by the Boards & bits warehouse there to grab a few things, so I picked up Mousquetaires du Roy, D&D: Wrath of Ashardalon and Conquest of Planet Earth.  All have been highly recommended on F:AT recently, all seem to have a good thematic core, and all can be played solo.  So here are my very initial impressions of each...

D&D: Wrath of Ashardalon:  I had never played Castle Ravenloft, so this was a brand new experience, and I definitely loved it.  Yes, it's simple and a bit repetitive, and the choices are minimal, but there are several choices throughout, and for being a relatively quick playing dungeon crawl, I think it provides a good amount of tension and fun.  I don't typically like playing multiplayer cooperative games solo using just one character... the interaction between the different characters is what makes some games like Pandemic and Ghost Stories particularly good... but I did enjoy the first solo adventure with one Hero quite a lot.  That being said, I liked playing the 3rd adventure, controlling two characters, even better.  They didn't really interact much, but it still seemed to be more fun to be taking a party (even a party of 2) through the dungeon together.  I can see this being very unwieldy, though, with more than 2 Heroes... they each have a lot of cards and as the game goes on they can have several Treasure cards and monsters lined up.  So I'll probably play this solo with just 2 Heroes.

Conquest of Planet Earth:  I had been interested in this, initially, then balked on getting it after reading the rules.  It just didn't seem like it would be too much fun to play, based on the description of the gameplay. But then Steve Avery and Richard Launius both gave glowing recommendations, so I figured I'd give it a chance after all. I should have followed my initial hunch.  Thematically, it's fun, but the gameplay just doesn't seem interesting at all to me. It's very repetitive and you're just rolling the dice over and over to fight the resistance of each location.  Avery said this is better than Last Night on Earth, and I have to say a huge, "NO WAY" to that.  LNOE has much more depth and character and plays very differently from scenario to scenario, and gives a very different challenge every time.  This, just... nah.  It seems to be the same thing over and over; move your aliens around and fight at the locations.  I guess it has sort of a vague "Risk with some character abilities" feel to it, but this just seems bland to me.  Even A Touch of Evil, which I thought was only okay compared to LNOE, seems to be more fun than this.  Granted, this is a first impression based on a partial playthrough (I didn't even want to finish after a few turns) of the solo version of the cooperative game.  I can see the competitive version of this being amusing a few times with the right group of people, but I don't think it's gonna work for me and so it's going up for sale or trade.

Mousquetaires du Roy: As Ken described in his recent review, this is terrific. A different theme, and there's a lot of character development, direct conflict and some clever ideas throughout.  It seems to blend some elements of games like Ghost Stories, Lord of the Rings and Shadows Over Camelot, but is also unique.  Very surprising for a Ystari game.  In the solo game, you miss out on the human Milady player's choices, so I'm sure this is better as a multiplayer all-vs.-one game, or even as a 1 vs. 1 game, with one player as Milady and the other controlling all 4 mustkateers, but the solo version does feature most of the elements of the normal game, and gives you the flavor and the tension and the same essential challenge. This is definitely a keeper.

One of the disadvantages of writing articles for magazines, such as “Against the Odds,” is that it can be literally years from the time it is submitted to the time it is published.  I recently sent ATO an article about different kinds of war related games, and I’m going to briefly categorize its 4,000 words in 400. 
I will not respond to any comments here, sooner or later the full article will be published.

Joe Angiolillo’s taxonomy of war related games:
?    Games about war
?    Wargames
?    Simulations

Games about war ?    no connection with reality
?    symmetric
?    no variation in terrain and units
?    no representation of actual or even fictional events
?    no attempt to tell a story
Games such as Conflict, Risk and Chess fall into this category.

Wargames
?    asymmetric
?    variation in terrain and units
?    real or fictional event is depicted
?    there is an explicit story involved (remember "story" is part of hisSTORY)

Simulations ?    wargames taken to an extreme ?    term papers with board and pieces and no concern for play balance
?    more or less forces particular outcomes in order to match history


Now a different distinction, between war game (two words) and battle game:

War game
?    the heart is economy
?    ultimate objective is to improve your economic capacity and destroy the enemy's
?    for two players, occasionally for more than two
?    cover years or even centuries
?    territory usually equates to additional forces, following the age-old principle that land equals wealth
?    more likely to use areas (like a normal map)
?    generally large-scale and strategic

Battle game
?    no economy, instead an order of appearance
?    ultimate objective is to destroy opposing units because they cannot get more
?    intermediate objective (e.g. territorial, or even “capture the king”) as a victory avoids much of the tedium of destroying units
?    almost always for two players
?    usually cover a few days to a year or so
?    territory is only useful for the terrain and geopolitical implications
?    usually maneuver-focused, and often use a hex or square grid
?    generally smaller scale and tactical/grand tactical

Finally another category:
Conquest games (Risk, History of the World, Vinci/Smallworld)
?    can be either war or battle game, usually war ?    are usually in Joe’s “Games about war” category
?    very few "realistic" or real world restrictions on what you can do--"freedom to do whatever you want"
?    attacker can always get the upper hand (odds favor those who attack-attack-attack), so it’s not strategically wise to play defensively
?    usually symmetrical
?    typically large scale
?    combat typically very simple
?    particularly attractive type of game related to war for those who aren’t hobby gamers

Take it as it is, please, I am not at liberty to discuss it further.

Some Game Playing Styles, and How Games Match One Style or Another

(Parts of this were originally published in Dragon magazine, September 1982, and in revised form in The Games Journal, February 2005, revised again on GameCareerGuide, 26 November 2009, and yet further revised on GameDev.net in 2010)

A big obstacle for beginning game designers is the common assumption that everyone likes the same kinds of games, and plays the same way, that they do.If they love shooters, they think EVERYone loves shooters.If they like strategic games, they assume EVERYone likes them.If they love puzzles, they suppose EVERYone does.They may say they understand the diversity, but emotionally they don’t.

I'd been looking for a while for a "Video Game Geek" type site that would let me track my video game collection as well as my board game one is managed at BGG . Say what you will about the forums there--Lord knows we say plenty--but there's no denying the utility of the database they maintain. I think I've found what I'm after--low effort game tracking, with room for comments and condition, and Have/Want lists to allow for easy trade searches.

 Moby Games

 Here's an image of the Have List page, with me adding a game (anticipatory search), noting Tradability, &c. If you click an entry, a submenu pops up that lets you quickly enter the condition of box, manual, media, &c. 

The games go waaaay back, too. Here's a link to Nord & Bert . The only issue I have is that the moderators can be realy picky about accepting submissions, so some games just aren't there because they haven't yet received a decent enough write-up. I confronted this when trying to add Etrian Odyssey 2: Heroes of Lagaard to my collection--there's no database entry for it.  Anyone using anything different?

On another topic, Costco is kicking my wallet's ass.  Right out there where even CHILDREN CAN SEE, they have Mario Kart DS for $30, Peggle Dual Shot for $23 and Puzzle Quest Galactrix for $24.Not only that, but they are stocking the "New Play Control" versions of Mario Power Tennis and Pikmin--this means they'll have NPC Metroid Primefor about $25 soon. I haven't bought any of them yet, but I could walk out of there $100 lighter without even a barrel of peanut butter to show for it!

I knew this day would come, but I didn't think so soon. Rather than reach out to his brethren first, one of our own has merely posted a link to his eBayed wares and tossed us in with the sharks . I think Mr. Skeletor captured some of the angst with his ALL CAPZ RANT. I know the guy wants his money maximized, and God knows, eBay will do that for you--but we can also assume he doesn't want the games played. Space Hulk? All the expansions? STILL SPRUED? These are going to a collector.

I like convenient labels, so Ameritrash vs. Eurogame serves me well. Another one I use often is Players vs. Collectors. I am a Player through and through. I consider these things we talk about here games, and games should be played. It's clear that other folks consider them art or fetishes or something and feel they should be displayed (or hoarded). If you have an item that could draw the collectors--as the poster above does, the Players have NO chance at it. Our obsession is not as deep.

 In January I wrote 2 blog entries about movement.  This month I'm going tackle combat.  For me a great combat system needs the following things:

  #1. The player has to have some kind of control or a way to influence the combat. I want to be able to add extra troops, take the higher ground or play a card to increase my chance of success in combat.

 #2. I want a general understanding of the probability of success or failure. However, there should always be some chance of failure.

#3.  I prefer rolling a handful of dice over just 1 dice or picking a card or something. A handful of dice (2-6) is the right amount more than a handful is just a waste. 

#4.  I want to know the results immediately or quickly after the dice are rolled. There is nothing that kills the excitement of combat more than having to look up 4 combat tables or do a lot of math to figure out the results.

  #5. I think it is best when the attacker and defender get to roll dice or play cards at the same time.

  So here is my favorite combat systems in order from best to crap:

  #1. Risk. The simple combat system is so simple yet so brilliant. Attacker can roll up to 3 dice the defender can only roll up to 2 dice but the defender wins ties.   I love Risk but how come Risk is the hardest game to get on the table with niche gamers?

  #2. Battleball. Attacker and defender both roll a dice. Who ever rolls the lowest number wins. The strength of a player is control by which type of dice they roll. The strongest player rolls a 6 sided dice the weakest player will roll a 20 sided dice.

  #3. 5 and 6 are hits. Many Ameritrash and wargames use this simple but effective combat system. For this the unit strength determines the number of dice rolled. The nice thing about this system is that it is easy to count up hits. The bad thing about it is counting up how many dice you will roll and trying to roll 10 or more dice.

#4. Fancy combat dice like Battlelore, Doom, Age of Conan, Ghost Stories, etc.

#5. Nexus Ops, Ti3, Battlestar Galactica. Units hit when the dice roll is greater than some number.  

  #6. Hannibal. This is a very innovated combat system. Players will get tactic cards and play them against each other if you can’t counter the other players tactic card you lose the battle.  

  #7. Dune and Cosmic Encounters. Troop strength gets added to secretive cards that make a huge difference on combat.

  #8. Fury of Dracula, Talisman and others. Attacker and defender roll 1 dice add in modifiers. High number wins.

  #9. Struggle of Empires and Shadow Hunters. Roll 2 dice. Damage is the difference between the 2 dice.

  #10. Combat Resolution Tables. Used more in old school war games. In most CRT to players will compare the ratio of the attacker strength to the defender’s strength. Than a dice is rolled.

  #11. Starcraft. Attacker and defender compare combat cards that they selected. Technological advance let players use more powerful cards.

  #12. Shogun, Wallenstein and the End of the Triumpharant. The big tower and cube thing is ok but there's no dice.

   #13. Warrior Knights. Pick some cards and play some cards.  

  #14. Diplomacy. No armies are eliminated. If one side has more units attacking or supporting the other side must retreat.

  #15. Imperial. Each side eliminates equal number of units. Who ever has units left wins.

  Last. Euros. Who ever has the most donkey’s shit wins.

A look at a mound of games tormenting my table and a brief indulgence of Fury Road.

Discussion of Force Awakens, X-Wing, Imperial Assault, Luchador!, and more.

Small Box Games Rides Again

Thanks to fellow FA:Ttie Dysjunct, I was able to get my hands on a copy of SPACE HULK this late in the game. He generously offered to send me a copy if I paid for the game and shipping and it finally arrived yesterday.

 Once I found some time to relax and open the game yesterday evening, I punched out all the cardboard and assembled the marines. I was utterly amazed at how heavy and packed full the box was. The minis were nearly poking through the front of the box, and the floor tiles underneath the sprues were a bit scratched and slightly torn from the genestealer claws and stuff. The largest part of the librarian was actually punched right out of the sprue from all the pressure. Nothing was broken, though (unless you count the librarian, which was actually broken in the RIGHT places).

 Prepared for the pieces to shatter at the slightest touch by all the winging threads on BGG, I grabbed my trusty toe-nail clippers and went to work clipping the minis from the sprues. I got them out and clipped off the little stubs where some sprue was hanging on and then stuck them together. I need to glue one of the marine's arm on because I jammed his arm on the wrong way and ended up breaking the rod, but besides that, all the marines stuck together without glue just fine.

Since our budget is really tight right now, I had to sell some stuff to make up for the cost of Space Hulk. Mostly my old Warhammer 40k stuff, which has gotten me a surprising amount of money. Some dude in France bought my old Land Raider for $74 ($61 bid + $13 shipping)!!!

Anyway, I'm excited and ready to play it! (I'm in no rush to punch out the genestealer, because I already have a bunch from my WH40k days)

Currently, I'm sitting in the office staring at all the inventory getting grumpy at the idea of actually doing a stock-count.  It's one of those things that I know has to be done, but I hate doing. It's one of the most boring, detail-oriented pieces of work that I have to do as a business.  The only thing worst is bookeeping, which thankfully Alison does.

 While doing this, I come back to the other frustrating side of  the business that is a leftover when we stopped taking funds for pre-orders and instead special ordered games in for cusotmers.

Yes! This was a good year to be at Spiel in Essen. Even if there wasn't a great game to swoon about, and even if we had a last minute cancelation (with Douwe as a great substitution) and others were experiencing distractions form real world troubles.

Well, if you say so...

The new layout in the three halls and galleria was an improvement. It felt more spacious even though there were more people than in previous years (according to the Spiel website).

I must say I was also pleasantly surprised this year with effort made by most demo people. The Poles have made a great effort over the past years, but there were more examples of passionate people trying to win you over. For example the guy at the La Mame booth who really knew how to sell Coupto me. Rare to see such enthusiasm. Small designers tend to take all of that burden upon themselves, but demo people can be worth gold, if only to relieve the pressure.

So, what about the games?I´ll start my Essen report with impressions of the games I didn´t get to play. Next will follow my experiences of the games we did play. The Polish games will be in a third and last post.

Some neat balancing mechanisms in the deck management of Kampen om Norgewere explained to me by one of the designers, who hung around the Spielbär stand. The Germans have to win 6 victory positions before their deck runs out, while the Norwegians can reshuffle if they want. The Anglo/French also have a limited deck.

It is only because I can’t be fooled into buying another 2 player wargame that I didn’t buy it, but this game genuinely seemed to tackle the most difficult campaign to wargame: Norway 1940. It combines sea, air and ground troops, in a very big area. It is probably hideously expensive to order it from Norway. So it will probably never gain a wider audience. I think that’s a shame.

Conceptfrom Repos is in the line of guessing games such as Pictionary, but here you have a board of images that helps you to describe your subject. There are hardly any rules in the box and very little stuff. It’s just that I am fascinated by communication between different cultures and the problems of translating abstract concepts, so I bought it anyway.

My friends tried Uwe Rosenberg's new game Caverna, and it is mostly an easier, fantasy version of Agricola. Resources are not so tight.

Canalisfrom AEG continues the Tempest series. It is a tactical tile laying game.

Northwest Passage from Matagot looked interesting, with the retreat and advance of frozen ice driving the players on... or back. It’s tile laying and action taking. I would have liked to try this.

Russian Railroadslacks armoured trains to make it interesting. But then again, I don’t like train games. If you want armoured trains: buy Corto!

The guy at the Asyncron stand did a great job explaining l'Aeropostale to me. You run one of the first airline companies to encompass the world in your network of postal and passenger services. Nice theme & artwork, but would have liked to try it. That might have clinched a buy.

Hard to figure out why Madeira was making such an impact. It looked like the next ‘trade to impress the prince’ game. We couldn't fit into a table to try it. Probably for the better.

I only had a quick look at Ace Detectiveby Richard Launius. The investigation issue is dealt with by you putting the most clues on the suspect with the most clues at the end of the game, a mechanism we also saw in Android. The story-telling aspect is just the optional addition of players rewarding each other for story telling and this is also a well known mechanism. But both mechanisms have their weaknesses and didn’t fire me up to come back and find out more.

Had Suburban Dispute explained to me, and the background story is interesting enough, but I just couldn’t see it being fun for the full length of the game (2-3 hours)

Seven Swords(based on the classic Kurosawa movie Seven Samurai) by Xenos looks good and sounds good. The mechanics are interesting and seem to create a nice dynamic and tactical options. However, I just fear that the rulebook will be as badly written as Luna Llena and others from this company. Guys, get your ffing act together! You have interesting themes in the Ameritrash genre, but if you can’t write a decent rulebook I just can’t bring myself to recommend you to others. Bloody shame!

Here's the second part of my Essen experiences, consisting of the games I played, so with a little more hard info on the games. Look here for Part 1 and the Polish section is coming up.

Nate Hayden after a long day explaining his game which sold out quickly

I don’t play a lot of sports games. I have Pizza Box Football (and like it) and I would love to try Moto Grand Prix and maybe a cycling game, but that’s about it. And then there’s one sports game which I don’t own as such, but really like to play: Knizia’s Decathlon.

I recently played it again, and it’s a brilliant push your luck dice game. And whats's better is: you only need a handful of dice, a piece of paper to track scores, and maybe a print of the rules in order to play it. Each discipline – from 100 meter dash over shot put to long jump and so on – is a mini game requiring nerves of steel and a fair bit of luck. And just like each classic discipline is in its essence fast and simple, so are the mini games.

In long jump, for instance – on of my favourites – you roll five dice for the run-up. Every time you roll you have to freeze a minimum of one die. The dice you freeze will later be rolled for your jump. However, should your frozen dice ever equal nine or more, you are disqualified. Add in that you get three jumps, and suddenly you don’t just have to think about making a good jump, but also about the metagame.. Do you play it safe for your first jump, hoping that your opponents screw up? Or do you gamble, hoping to force them into taking a stupid chance?

I just designed a new free print and play game for a contest on BGG. The contest is about designing a game that needs special dice and no other components (except for pen and paper to note scores or other stuff).

 I wanted to create a game that built on the basic mechanic of rolling a bunch of dice, setting one or more aside and re-rolling, but instead of just getting points for the result, this result could be used as another element of the game, in this case, the available goods on each planet.

 I'm not sure how much AT appeal this game may have, after all, it is pretty abstract, and although the universal theme of buying and selling goods trying to get the best profit is there, there are no mechanics that are specific to the science fiction theme other than maybe the fact that each world is very much its own different "unit" isolated from the other worlds... I keep thinking of possible ways to expand and introduce more sci-fi elements, but I'm not sure it would be a good idea, as right now it is a very quick playing, basic dice game...

 Still, I'm not too fond of euros in general and the game does have randomness and dice rolling, so for those that enjoy this kinds of games, maybe you'll enjoy this one...

 The rules are here: http://george.makasoft.net/StarTradersLuck-Rules.pdf

I was fortunate enough to get to attend a free screening of the new Star Trek movie, and I'm glad to say that I'm pleasantry surprised at how much fun it was, and must say that it was quite good.

 I'm a long time Star Trek fan, having watched basically every series (excluding Voyager)  and enjoy it in all its forms; campy or serious, I enjoy it either way.

 The new film strikes a good balance between the old film and doesn't make any attempt to "darken" everything, which seems to be the biggest trend in remakes and reboots these days. The references to the old show are pretty common, but not totally distracting. The new cast does an excellent job without simply imitating the old cast. 

It is an action adventure first and foremost, so if you're expecting anything else, this is not the film to see. It's not weighed down by a heavy-handed message nor a particularly deep plot. It is what it is - a new adaptation of a 1960's science fiction tv show. People fight, joke and go on an improbable adventure. 

I think the film will break new ground for a broader audience. The showing was packed, and not only with Star Trek fans. It seemed to have a pretty wide audience. Everybody was excited and enjoying themselves, clapping and cheering, although this is a group of college students. 

The story is completely new, and not a retread of an earlier episode as I had feared. The crew were not imitating 60's acting. The biggest nod to the original show is the uniforms and the character names - other than that, it is pretty fresh and new. I'm usually the first to criticize, but I think everyone will be able to enjoy this one. 

I don't give stars or grades, but coming from a fan of the old show, I can say I really enjoyed it. 

All this talk about variants to games we love being welcome on F:AT has got me around to posting this. 

I sure do love StarCraft: the board game. I sure do love StarCraft: the PC game, as well. I also enjoy tinkering and making stuff for the games I love; the end result is these maps. They are an attempt to make the board game feel more like the PC game, without really changing the game at all. The scale has obviously been reduced from interplanetary to a single battlefield. The main thing, though, is that the map is balanced, without one starting area having tons of CP and the other with a bunch of gas or something like that. I always felt that unbalanced planet placement had a bit of a negative impact on my enjoyment of the game, especially 2 player games. Some thought that galaxy setup in TI3 could end up giving one player an advantage over another, but that was nothing compared to StarCraft; in TI3, each player gets a big handful of systems to place and their home system is always good. In StarCraft each player gets only 2 systems to put down, and one of them will be their starting planet!

Anyway, the maps. They all use the same special rules, which are:
-When removing phase I cards from the deck before play begins, remove the two "navigation error" cards, first.
-The green bordered regions divided into areas are "planets" for all game purposes.
-The green and blue paths between regions are navigation routes between the regions. Place newly built transports on these paths.
-Races do not start with a transport. You may not build transports unless you have at least a level I stardock/stargate/spire.
-Flying units may use navigation routes without a transport.
-Because there are no resource cards, place workers directly on the spaces they are mining.

-The green paths connecting some of the regions are "ground routes"
*Ground routes are like navigation routes, but they may be used without a transport.
*Units in a region may only leave the region by ground route if the area (in the current region) touching the ground route is empty or friendly.
*Units mobilizing to a region through a ground route may only mobilize to the area the ground route touches, unless the area the ground route touches is empty or friendly. If that area is empty or friendly, units may mobilize to any area in the region (as if they came by a transport).
*If you have a transport on a ground route, you may use it like a normal navigation route.

For victory conditions, you could try playing with only CP, or try Brood War's "Survival" variant:
"In this game mode, a player is eliminated from the game if
at any time he does not have any bases in play. In addition,
when a player's base is destroyed, the token is removed
from the game and returned to the game box.
Conquest points are not accumulated when playing this
variant. Instead, each time a player would receive a
conquest point, he receives a resource token of his choice."
If you don't want to use resource tokens, treat Conquest Points as a "wild" resource that you can mine with workers.

Each map has a thread on BGG which includes any other map special rules.

Lost Temple - www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1970131

Space Madness - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/351040

Volcanis - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/384272

I've also got a halfway finished map of "The Hunters" on my hard drive at home, so maybe that'll get done someday. Sadly, I don't own Brood War, so I'm not really familiar with the new-fangled map icons in the expansion, or the new scenario format.

Some folks have started making other maps using the same general idea. Here are the links to them, if you're interested in checking them out:

Cape of Plenty - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/393189

Space Debris - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/393826

Double Jeopardy - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/399002

Ice Madness - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/399032

Triumvirate - www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/404474