What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

hotseatgames wrote: I suffered through a couple of sessions of the 1st version of that game. I actively hate it and will never play again, 2nd edition or otherwise.

It takes forever, and is a tedious slog. That's great that it sounds like it has improved, but no thanks anyway.

This 100% was our experience as well. I played it twice, because I really wanted it to work, but it just didn't.

Gary Sax wrote: It's interesting how much the both guys from So Very Wrong About Games likes this one because I've heard nothing but mildly negative stuff about this game since it came out.

They tend to be pretty forgiving to CMON for some reason. I dunno why.

Yeah, both of them have endless appetite for minis games.

Which is interesting, because it isn't super on brand since they tend to be really critical of games mechanically in general. I don't associate that genre with tight mechanics always.

I played Bios: Megafauna (2nd Edition).

Like all Eklund games it's a solid, intriguing title that some people will just love. It has a lot of fun, interesting bits for those who like biology or evolutionary science and while I enjoyed it quite a bit, the two biologists I played it with were clearly enjoying it on another level.

The game itself is quite simple, it just has a godawful manual. Each turn you check a list of actions and do a couple of them. The general idea being that you buy cards and then, when your species seems solid enough, you drop it on the map and try to have it survive. The more guys you have at the end or the mid-game scoring round, the more points you get.

The design is fairly smart in that the cards don't have text on them. They simply get you certain cubes (bonuses) and may match with each other to create emotions (VPs, big discount on cards). The number of actions is low and the art design is very readable. It's a very

The complex part of the game are the events. Basically, the game has 3 weather tracks which impact the board. For example, discs that are removed from the Atmosphere and placed on the board represent ice. On the other hand, if you remove forests from the board, the oxygen supply in the atmosphere is reduced, which makes the survival of complex species very unlikely.

But in order to do that you have to check event cards that do 4-6 different things through symbols. You don't just get a couple new forests, you may get cosmic radiation plus forests plus wind plus the continents moving around. Having someone experienced with the game speeds the game a lot in this regard.

Sounds like it has that thing I like about Eklund where you're facing others on a wobbly board that is being tilted this way and that.

Except in his Pax games it's the players themselves who also have opportunities to tip the board, not just the system.

It is very much like that. The board is wobbly (continents move, hexes change) but what players do heavily impacts the game state for themselves and others.

For example, in my game, I pushed an aggressive slug-like species on the board. It was particularly strong in swamp and forest spaces and managed to drive away most of my opponent's animals. This led to my opponents moving towards water animals, which couldn't be attacked by the slugs.

Played 3 rounds of Spacehulk, 1 alien win two subsequent marine wins. We played an escape scenario, forget its name, about middle of the book. It was fun but we sort of solved the scenario, which can happen with some of them. Each time the Terminators did a little better. I tried a conger line of Genestealers in front of the escape point in the final game as a sort of joke strategy. It didn't work very well.

Recent games here.

Dune with 6 players. I can't add anything to the praise thats already been mentioned here. It is amazing and converted even the new players.

Millenium Blades. 3 out of the four people playing this loved it. Unfortunately I hated it. It felt very solitaire for strategy and the only interaction was during trading. Felt like you really don't care about what the opponents play on their turns. I think this game is aimed at the experiential game category rather than an actual strategy game and I had different expectations than the others playing it. Maybe if you're into a CCG experience you would enjoy it. I had to walk away after the first round I hated it so much.

Sons of Anarchy. Haven't played this one for like a year. Its fun! We had 4 players and lots of throwdowns. Not high strategy but the mechanics and the theme and even the little plastic bags of drugs and guns make it cool. Beer & pretzels worker placement game.

Tsukuyumi: Full Moon Down. I really wanted to try this. Asymmetric dudes on a map area control with crazy sounding factions. And a recent KS that just ended adding pricey minis to the game. Super happy I didn't back this. The factions were very unique but the only way to score points is to control territory at the end of the game or control the middle at the end of the round. I stole a neighbors spot. He stole my spot. We did this for 3 hours and drew random events that ranged from mediocre to amazing. Feels like a KS with maybe decent ideas but nothing unique to add to the area control category.

Cry Havoc is another one I haven't played in a year and always felt on the fence about. The number of actions each round is so limited that it feels more like a worker placement game where you have 3 workers to use each round. But the game was really fun and the factions had very different playstyles to them. The structures get to be a little much to keep track of, in a way that the special powers in Cthulhu Wars is too much to keep track of. Its easier for me to remember that this weird mini with wings does X rather than this small cardboard token does Y. That being said it isn't too bad with 3-4 buildings per faction plus 2 unique skills. I was the Machines and enjoyed murdering everyone on the board. Didn't win, but I got the moral victory.

Photosynthesis is last up. 4 players all of us new to the game. Damn is this mean. Half of our turns we did absolutely nothing but hoard sunlight so maybe we could grow a bigger tree next round. The visuals and mechanics are really cool and make sense, but I can see this game getting old after a handful of plays. There is nothing randomizing it in any way other than the players and as a result it felt a little chess like with opening moves of grabbing the corners being the obvious best play. Turns were fast too but that still doesn't make it fun to say "I pass" as your first move.

Scott_F wrote: Recent games here.

Millenium Blades. 3 out of the four people playing this loved it. Unfortunately I hated it. It felt very solitaire for strategy and the only interaction was during trading. Felt like you really don't care about what the opponents play on their turns. I think this game is aimed at the experiential game category rather than an actual strategy game and I had different expectations than the others playing it. Maybe if you're into a CCG experience you would enjoy it. I had to walk away after the first round I hated it so much.

Sorry to hear that. The various expansions and promos that are in the mix in a given game can really amp up or down the player interaction. Some of them are specifically tuned for Clashing or flipping other players' cards.

Scott_F wrote: I was the Machines and enjoyed murdering everyone on the board. Didn't win, but I got the moral victory.

That happens a lot. The Machines are difficult to play well. The expansion helps them quite a bit, skill- and building-wise.

Scott_F wrote: The visuals and mechanics are really cool and make sense, but I can see this game getting old after a handful of plays.

Had that reaction after two plays. Definitely not my type of game.

I feel like Cry Havoc and Tsukuyumi both still take a back seat to Nexus Ops at this point.

Frohike wrote: I feel like Cry Havoc and Tsukuyumi both still take a back seat to Nexus Ops at this point.

Possibly. Nexus Ops is a lighter game and has much more history (Cry Havoc came out in 2016?), but I really like CH's asymmetric aspect, as well as the really interesting combat system, which is also a kind of worker placement approach, if you look broadly at it. Despite all the chrome, it can also play really quickly with experienced players.

Where were you when I finally decided to back Tsukuyumi, Scott?

I think Millennium Blades is totally an experiential game. There's strategy to be sure, but the game doesn't pay out to that part of your brain. Those that dig it revel in the bizarre structure and what it offers as a CCG simulator in feel.

We almost never play it due to the length and one player not liking it (why is it always one person?), but I haven't gotten rid of it because it hits me in a way no other game does.

Played 1960: Making of the President for the first time in 9 years. It holds up. It's seen as a weaker baby brother to TS but honestly, I think I like it more. It delivers a similar experience without the time and necessity of learning the entire deck. And I don't mind reliving an election I didn't live through in the first place.

Legomancer wrote: Played 1960: Making of the President for the first time in 9 years. It holds up. It's seen as a weaker baby brother to TS but honestly, I think I like it more. It delivers a similar experience without the time and necessity of learning the entire deck. And I don't mind reliving an election I didn't live through in the first place.

This maybe needs a new thread - "Which of your shelf toads are still in shrink?"* I played 1960 a few times when it came out, bought a copy, and never played it again. To me, Twilight Struggle seems more unforgiving than 1960, but it might just be because I play people who have played TS 10,000 times.

*Have a copy of Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage still in shrink too. Not sure what I was thinking when I bought that.