Dust?

Has anyone played this one yet? What is the scoop?

-M

It's damned pretty, I'll give it that. Malloc, you should bite the bullet, get a copy, and churn out a F:AT review. We're countin' on you, man!

It's pretty good. It's not great, but pretty good. It is to boardgaming what the film Commando is to motion pictures- good, dumb fun. Here's some random thoughts about it:

It's extremely straightforward, sort of a somewhat simplified rendition of the Gamemaster-style game with a kind of cool role selection/iniative/player powers thing on top of it. Every turn you play a card that dictates how many non-combat moves you can make, how many attacks, how many production points you get on top of what you've got on the board, and then a special power (including a nuke). It also sets up the turn order.

It's pretty basic all around. Units get a certain number of dice and you roll them- binary system, it's hit or miss. There's a simple order of battle wherein tanks have to get killed before mechs, fighters before bombers. There's also a tactical superiority thing where you can sometimes wipe somebody out before a counterattack.

The production system is basically a function of claiming power sources on the map and feeding them into your factories. So there's clear objectives on the board at all times.

It's VP system- you get VPs based on a few different things like any capitals you control, power sources, and so on but there's also majorities- you get points for having the most land units or most sea units for example. It works out pretty well because it keeps the game from going on too long since it's only got about 2.5 hours before it gets kind of dull.

The weird thing to me is that it's really very abstract. The backstory doesn't really inform the proceedings at all, no matter how many tanktopped ladies there are on the box. It feels strangely generic.

My pal Frank Branham believes that the game is a reworking of an older game called CONQUEST, and I believe he's right. Same designer- who, incidentally, designs Italian party games like KALEIDOS.

In all, it's fun but I think it's pretty expensive for what it is ($60 MSRP). It's very light and it's a good shoot-em-up that you could probably talk non-gamers into playing. It's not as innovative and smartly designed as NEXUS OPS and it's sort of old fashioned in a way. the first time I played it I kind of had a lower opinion of it, but playing it a few more times I realized that it's a good example of how a fun game doesn't necessarily have to be a brilliantly designed one. Just don't take it too seriously and make sure to roll the dice in the lid of the box and you'll have a good time.

Side note- there's two rulebooks, one for an "Epic" Version and one for a "Premium" Version. The Epic version is longer without any justifiable additions to gameplay- it really just kind of tweaks how you move and score points. The Premium version is the one to go with- it's a little over 2 hours with six players and packs pretty much everything you want out of it into a reasonable package.

I was wondering about that game. My first thought was that the game should have been called "Bust" based on the cover artwork. My next thought was whether those busty chicks are actually integral to any part of the game or not, because it looked like a cheesecake version of the old Axis and Allies box cover. At least the A&A cover had recognizable WW2 personalities on it.

--Mike L.

DUST does too...that's Lexus Stalin and Bunny Hitler on the box. Don't you recognize them?

What's wrong with big tits?

According to Milquetoast: The Quarterly Journal of Board Game Morality, September 13 2001:

"...breasts of any size, depicted on board game components, boxes, or in internet discussions cause far too much excitation of the bodily humours and could interfere with proper strategic reasoning in the minds of boardgamers and cause concern in the minds of those seeking to play games with the elderly or the very young...cranky old men are far more appropriate to the interests of the rank-and-file spieler, and as such depictions of "sexy" women should be avoided at all costs for fear that they may see, with their illustrated eyes, the board gamer's lackadaisical approach toward style, hygiene, and personal grooming and cause an embarassment."

That sum it up for you?

Michael Barnes wrote:

According to Milquetoast: The Quarterly Journal of Board Game Morality, September 13 2001:

"...breasts of any size, depicted on board game components, boxes, or in internet discussions cause far too much excitation of the bodily humours and could interfere with proper strategic reasoning in the minds of boardgamers and cause concern in the minds of those seeking to play games with the elderly or the very young...cranky old men are far more appropriate to the interests of the rank-and-file spieler, and as such depictions of "sexy" women should be avoided at all costs for fear that they may see, with their illustrated eyes, the board gamer's lackadaisical approach toward style, hygiene, and personal grooming and cause an embarassment."

That sum it up for you?

Goddammit, I can't believe you got banned from BGG. I need this sort of thing to get posted over there. Fuck a duck. I think plenty of folks crave this sort of talk about games and gaming (and things gamine) but they won't be finding it over there any time soon. If someone reviewed Dust and mentioned that there are a lot more titties on the box than there are in the gameplay; there'd be a riot or something.

Thanks for the mini review--this game looked too pretty to be any good.

But it is pretty good!

Jeb has been on BGG too long, you know where 99 good things get trumped by 1 bad thing.

Mr Skeletor wrote:

What's wrong with big tits?

Actually, nothing. And I don't mind if my wife reads this, either; she'd agree that I have no problem with them.

--Mike L.

Michael Barnes wrote:

According to Milquetoast: The Quarterly Journal of Board Game Morality, September 13 2001:

"...breasts of any size, depicted on board game components, boxes, or in internet discussions cause far too much excitation of the bodily humours and could interfere with proper strategic reasoning in the minds of boardgamers and cause concern in the minds of those seeking to play games with the elderly or the very young...cranky old men are far more appropriate to the interests of the rank-and-file spieler, and as such depictions of "sexy" women should be avoided at all costs for fear that they may see, with their illustrated eyes, the board gamer's lackadaisical approach toward style, hygiene, and personal grooming and cause an embarassment."

That sum it up for you?

::applause::

Of course, Dungeon Twister and the old Mayfair Settlers box cover probably caused much titilation, but oh well.

--Mike L.

I have some pretty limited entertainment hours--I need some cream of the crop stuff. This one won't cut it, given the "more of the same, except for more $$$".

jeb wrote:

I have some pretty limited entertainment hours--I need some cream of the crop stuff. This one won't cut it, given the "more of the same, except for more $$$".

You know what someone needs to do? Make a game titled "Attack of the 50ft Woman: Busen Memo Edition".

--Mike L.

ok I played it last night and I think Barnes is being kind.... Dust did absolutely nothing for me. It as much of an AT re-hash as pillars of the Earth is a Euro re-hash. I would pay for the game and I might play it again but only if other games were not available. It fills poorly the same whole as Nexus ops fills so well. It doesn't even strike me as any better then the many new versions of risk floating around out there and I totally do not feel like the theme is in there at all. I was playing with some Sci-fi 1930's looking units on a generic map of the globe....been there and had more fun with other games...

The game looked good, units were nice artwork was pretty good... i dig the puzzle map but game play just was average.

-M