What BOARD GAME(s) have you been playing?

We are moving from the Philippines soon, and so we spent this last week at a lake house with a couple other families as something of a last Filipino hurrah. There were a lot of kids there, and so I played a lot of games with them. This was mostly with a group of boys that included my older son, between the ages of 10 and 15. I ended up playing lots of games with them.

Cosmic Encounter - I went several years without really finding adults to play my favorite game with, but in the last several months I've learned that it works really well with preteens, around my son's age (almost 11). This week I got two games of this in, both of them with five people. I won the first one, and shared the win on the second one. These were pretty full games, including flares, space stations, stuff like that. It worked really well, and I think kids intuitively understand better the social nature of the game. They were also totally fine with its goofy qualities. It worked really well, and it did my heart good to see the next generation connecting with it, without all the more boring hang-ups that adults have.

Clank! - I recently found a discounted version of the Mummy's Curse expansion in a mall here, so I've been playing this one quite a bit. Clank's biggest strength is that it's been so reliable for me, so I got in a couple games of this one with younger audiences. Pretty fun!

Mascarade - After many years of trying other hidden role games both big and small, I have landed on Mascarade as being the only one I really need. It's an equally interesting game with 5 people as it is with 10, and it does such a good job at generating ambiguity while still being trackable. I also like that it allows you to play mind games that don't require outright lying, since the switching of powers is a sneaky trick that doesn't require you to say anything. We played several games of this.

Ticket to Ride: Africa - I've been one something of a TTR kick lately, since the app has really shown me what a great piece of minimalist design the original is. Some of the alternate versions are just gorgeous (Europe is my favorite) but this one didn't impress me as much. First of all I think its "bonus card" mechanic might be just one thing too many. It almost feels like gilding the lily a bit, since the original "should I draw this card" question was already plenty interesting for me. More abstractly, having spent some time in Africa the late 19th Century aesthetic doesn't play as cute for me like it does on the US or Europe maps. Africa in that time period is not something I am nostalgic for. Also, it's missing the whole of West Africa, which is where I spent all my time, so I can't even do that "ha I've been there" thing. I would need more plays to really nail down my feeling on the game mechanically, but that part didn't sit super well with me.

Up to 7 straight losses against the same list and opponent in X-Wing. Still enjoying it. I just like the maneuvering and thinking involved on a turn by turn basis. Starting to think that one or more of the following is true:

1. We have stumbled across a good list.
2. My other lists I’m trying are bad.
3. I am bad (comparatively).

My ego is resting on 2, heh. So far we’ve just got a Galactic Empire conversion kit and not enough of any other factions to try them out. Her list is Countess Ryad and an Onyx Squadron Ace (tie defenders) each with Heavy Laser Cannons, and then Mauler Mithel (named Tie Fighter) rounding it out. I’ve had Soontir Fel with Elusive and a Stealth device in all my lists; it reminds me of something I liked in 1.0. The rest has been 4 Tie fighters in one list and another interceptor plus a phantom in the other...

On Vysetron's suggestion, I picked up Battle for Biternia, a MOBA-style board game with a SNES graphics aesthetic.

While I don't give a shit about MOBA video games, I have a strong affinity for Guards of Atlantis (and am eagerly awaiting the sequel to be delivered later this year). While I generally thought I didn't need two MOBA board games, I stumbled upon an ebay auction for a new copy of Biternia and jumped.

I'm glad I did... this game is fantastic. We only played once, and used the suggested "first game" setup, but you can quickly see how there are a lot of strategic choices. The game is FAR less complex than Guards, so it's more accessible and perhaps even a good entry point to something like Guards or even team games in general, like Duel of Ages.

Each team has 4 heroes running around the board, farming gold, attacking enemy heroes, or trying to penetrate the "Bit" defenses. This is essentially destroying the enemy base, which is the end game condition. You have to learn how to cleverly use your heroes, judge when to attack, when to pull back and heal up, etc. Early on in the game I suspected I would lose, but once I was able to execute on a plan, I started gaining ground and won. We will surely be playing again, and with 19 heroes in the box, there are a lot of potential match-ups.

Tonight I took a solo run at my other recent acquisition, Core Space. I kickstarted the recent "second set" of this game, having not jumped in on the original. I had no intention of buying the original, but again saw a decent deal on ebay and bought it.

I set up the "starter" mission and a default crew. This mission charges you with raiding as many supply containers as you can, and downloading some data off of a computer in the center of the map.

The longer you take, the more likely that the board will become infested with the Purge, which are basically asshole robots. There were also 3 civilians spread around the map.

The main problem with a mission involving grabbing loot is that your characters can barely hold any.... loot. This is like Skyrim if your inventory only had room for 3 cheese wheels. Still, I managed to find some weapons that were better than my starter gear, and I grabbed the data from the computer just as some nasty robots started showing up.

The civilians act based on a d6, and in general this leads to some erratic behavior. They were, as a rule, hostile to me, so I ended up stabbing and / or shooting 2 of the 3. I also killed one of the Purge, but you don't really get anything for that, so it's not really something you strive for. At least in this mission.

I recorded my progress (you use dry erase crew boards that are pretty slick), and degraded the hull integrity on my meager ship, The Beavis. More to come.

Side note- I hope the newer KS set makes good on its promise of being more co-op friendly... it is kind of obvious that this game intends you to have at least 2 rival crews acting. It was a bit boring with just my crew prowling around.

Solo gets much better with more neutrals like Gangers and Law Enforcement. But yeah, I think it's a much better semi-cooperative game with two crews.

There's also some harder and more interesting missions in the Perseus campaign in the core rules

I actually really love the limited inventory, it does a lot to curb money bloat in the game and forces hard decisions such as dedicating inventory space to utility or items worth more.

My wife and I played Dominant Species: Marine, which showed up the other day. We like the original DS at two-player, even with just one animal apiece, so we thought we would probably like this new game, which plays to a max of 4. The main difference, I think, from DS is that DS:M has players take the action immediately after placing an action pawn on the action display. My initial impression is that this is sort of a lateral move rather than a clear improvement. In DS, players collectively plan out their moves before any actions are taken. This means you have to frontload your strategy, and some planned moves may not really pan out at all or the way you wanted them. In DS:M, there really shouldn't be any "wasted" placement, because you're playing more tactically a move at a time, but it feels like about the same amount of thinking, and, for me and at least after this one play, it seemed actually like a bit *more* thinking because you have to reassess after each player turn. Also, players can only play their "normal" action pawns (there are some special ones that players can tug-of-war over that can break this rule) to the right of and/or below their "lowest" previously placed pawn, so if you reach "down" early on to an action low on the action display, it's more likely that you'll be "retrieving" (picking up) your action pawns from the display sooner than later (and this is the only thing you can do on a given turn). "Resetting" (reseeding) occurs once all players have retrieved their pawns at least once. This is basically a cleanup, but it means pulling off old elements as well as (with DS:M) also terrain type tokens from the display and replacing them.

I think Chad's goal here was to make DS:M more interactive relative to DS. It seems the main effect has been to reduce the strategic planning and move the emphasis to more turn-by-turn tactical decision making (which action to pick; whether to retrieve). This is probably more "interactive." What it doesn't do, I don't think, is reduce the amount of thinking. In fact, by moving from a strategic to a more tactical footing, it may have actually increased the total amount of thinking by requiring consideration of each action as it comes up. This means that you don't generally hose yourself with a long-ago planned move that doesn't make sense now, but it does mean that you have to reweigh options each time.

This all probably comes down to taste. DS:M is at least a solid variant on DS that manages to shift some things around (and some others I didn't mention, such as the setting and the fact that animals don't have fixed special powers but rather one of three "traits" drawn at random at the start of the game) without serious compromise to the basic concept of DS. I actually do like how more of "earth" is built out at the outset, how all the animals basically start out on the same footing (three species in the center tile), how the wanderlust (tile-adding) action seems a little more fluid and desirable now, and how the hydrothermic vents (think DS's glaciation tiles, but basically spreading from both the top and bottom of "earth" toward the center) work. There's probably room for both games if you really like DS. If you don't like DS, I don't think DS:M will change minds.

Started the campaign in Core Space, and Charlie is right, it already is way better than the starter mission. You get assaulted pretty fast and often by the Purge. I barely made it back to the ship with the objective achieved.

This game is very cool, and very painful when the dice don't go your way.

Looking forward to my sight unseen Kickstarter, thanks for the write up!

One additional component insight that occurred to me after reminding myself that the new KS featured dedicated Ship dashboards... in the original core box, you get a dry erase ship board that has two purposes. One side is where you track your ship's stats. Systems can deteriorate after every mission.

The other side is your airlock, which you place up against the board as your ingress / egress point.

I have only played twice, and each time, after the mission is over and I flip that board back to the ship side, some / a lot of my writing has wiped off. The dashboards in the new set will be much appreciated.

I track all of the campaign stuff on paper like an RPG, but you're right that wasn't well thought out originally.

Recently completed my first playthrough of Kingdom of Heaven, the Crusades CDG from MMP (made a thread about that). Has more potential now that I have the hang of it. On my table, I'm getting my arms around Oceans.

Our Wednesday night TTS crew continues to play Root over multiple sessions (we have one AP player), but tonight we're taking a first crack at Ortus Regni. Last week saw a few plays of The King is Dead (2nd Edition). I pretty quickly decided I'm happy to play it but also quite content to not own it.

On VASSAL Discord I have an ongoing game of Wilderness War in which my French are nicely positioned in the late season of 1758, but the British have gotten all the regulars they need to push north up the Hudson and out west and make things competitive before the end of 1759 (when the scenario ends). Just starting another game of Virgin Queen today.

Multiple session Root would give me a heart attack.

I have so many ideas for multi-session games I want to do when people can gather again. I want to do a Root Day, a Cosmic Encounter Day, a Funkoverse Day, a Rising Sun day, a Cyclades day, a The Others day, a Cthulhu Wars day...

Gary Sax wrote: Multiple session Root would give me a heart attack.

It's not my preference, but we have one person on the East Coast, we generally can't get started due to kids until 9 pm Central, and there's drinking and banter, so we struggle to stay on task and can't really go last longer than 2 hours most of the time.

JoelCFC25 wrote: Recently completed my first playthrough of Kingdom of Heaven, the Crusades CDG from MMP (made a thread about that). Has more potential now that I have the hang of it. On my table, I'm getting my arms around Oceans.

Our Wednesday night TTS crew continues to play Root over multiple sessions (we have one AP player), but tonight we're taking a first crack at Ortus Regni. Last week saw a few plays of The King is Dead (2nd Edition). I pretty quickly decided I'm happy to play it but also quite content to not own it.

On VASSAL Discord I have an ongoing game of Wilderness War in which my French are nicely positioned in the late season of 1758, but the British have gotten all the regulars they need to push north up the Hudson and out west and make things competitive before the end of 1759 (when the scenario ends). Just starting another game of Virgin Queen today.

Despite its age, I consider Wilderness War to be one of , if not the best CDGs out there. Tight rules - no errata that I can recall. The tournament scenario is about as well balanced as it gets. Plays in a very reasonable amount of time . And after reading CRUCIBLE OF WAR, the game delivers a good dose of history with pretty low rules overhead.