Octopus Overlords

I was on vacation this last week and we played a ton of Zombie Dice - it was the surprise hit. Very casual and a great game to sit and have an adult beverage with. It really seems simple, but you really have to pay attention if you want brains.

We also played a bunch of Zombie Fluxx, Bananagrams and Scrabble Slam.

Go Away Monsters! was a big hit during a summer weekend with a group of 3-5 year old kids. It's funny, they all wanted to draw the monsters and giggle about how cute they would be sleeping in the beds.

We also tried Chicken Cha-Cha but the kids were too young to do anything other than enjoy the pictures. It's basically Memory with chickens chasing each other around in circles. Jump the other player and you grab their tail feather. Perhaps the kids were too tired, but everyone kept choosing the tiles for someone else. I'll have to pull it out again next year, they should be better able to concentrate.

I played Ad Astra on Wednesday, and it was much more entertaining than I expected. It seems like it had some of the best exploration/gathering/turn position elements from Twilight Imperium (but no combat) and a few other favorites.

Castle Panic was also fun, and I see how it's a coperative alternative to Shadows over Camelot. It just doesn't let you plan too far ahead, which provides some tradeoffs.

Smoove_B wrote:I was on vacation this last week and we played a ton of Zombie Dice - it was the surprise hit.

I've enjoyed this on the iPhone/iTouch. The easy solo version is free, and I'm tempted to get the expanded version even though they warn that the AI isn't that advanced -- you're playing against a zombie, after all.

We played:

A LOOOOOOOOONG 5-player game of Arkham Horror with the new Lurker at the Threshold mini-expansion. We very much like the Lurker herald - actually makes the game a bit easier but still adds some tension. We faced Yog-Sothoth and it was not pretty at all (with the Lurker, gates were a -2 to close!). Still we all had fun!

We followed Arkham Horror with a couple of games of Defenders of the Realm. It was a HUGE hit! My group like Pandemic, but they much preferred Defenders. I think DotR is a bit harder, but you feel like there is an actual story and not that you are just putting wood cubes on the board. We lost one game and barely won the other, due to a "Deus ex Machina" of a special card.

Today we played a five player Imperial 2030 and had a great time here too. The new player, who hasn't gotten to play games in a good while, really liked the game and you could see the wheels turning. It's a bit of a brain burner, but in a good way!

Have played lots of Warhammer Invasion since Gencon. The dwarf core deck has had a rough time of it against just about everybody but it's been pretty fun. Compared to the Cthulhu and Game of Thrones LCGs W:I feels a bit more random and luck-driven, so I expect it's only gonna come out when I'm in the mood for less meaty stuff.

We've had a couple of really deep games of Game of Thrones LCG the last couple of weeks, and with four players who know the game it's amazingly good. It goes a bit long, but I think it's mostly because there's so much careful maneuvering and thought. I managed to get a huge cast of Lannister cards out during my last play, which is rare since they lack military strength. I was within 1 power of winning when Targaryen managed to get Viserys as the only King in play, and reduced his power need to only 14 and snatched the victory from me. Awesome game.

This past weekend I introduced family to Dominion and also got in a couple more games of Innovation. I'm still getting to know the latter, but the games we had were pretty good. Late game cards can be unbelievably powerful, it's almost impossible to stop them at certain points if a player gets lucky. We did a three player game, and each of us only had 2-3 Achievements, so the game was far from won. One player had over 45 points in his Score pile, and seemed to have the game won. That is, until I played an Age 10 card that set off a huge chain of card plays that ultimately set me up to end the game immediately as the winner. It was somewhat disappointing in that there was no reasonable way for the other two to have anticipated and prevented it, but I'm hopeful that knowing the deck a little better will help this. Sort of like events in Twilight Struggle that can blindside you if you're unaware.

Game of Thrones is ridiculous with people who either know the game or are at least familiar with CCG-style play. I had one game (Baratheon-Stark-Targaryen) where I trailed as Baratheon the entire game but made a huge push near the end with 3 or 4 Renown characters. Unfortunately, the plot decks recycled and the Stark played pulled Valar Morghulis out of his ass and wiped the table... except for Melisandre, who was saved by Lightbringer. That allowed me to survive the holocaust better than the other players and I pulled out the win.

Shame W:I doesn't have a compelling multiplayer mode like GoT does.

Played Magic EDH, and then tried out the new Archenemy scheme decks. Wow, expect to lose alot as the allied players, those schemes are wicked. But it makes for fast and furious games!

Jow wrote:Game of Thrones is ridiculous with people who either know the game or are at least familiar with CCG-style play. I had one game (Baratheon-Stark-Targaryen) where I trailed as Baratheon the entire game but made a huge push near the end with 3 or 4 Renown characters. Unfortunately, the plot decks recycled and the Stark played pulled Valar Morghulis out of his ass and wiped the table... except for Melisandre, who was saved by Lightbringer. That allowed me to survive the holocaust better than the other players and I pulled out the win.

The guy whose copy of Game of Thrones we've been playing lately removed Valar Morghulis from the plot deck, he thought it was too detrimental to Stark's gameplay. Since the Stark deck is focused primarily on getting characters out and building a military, having a plot card that destroys all that seemed backward to him. The last few games there has been no Valar Morghulis, and it certainly helps Lannister, who now has the only mass killing plot card (Wildfire Assault). I don't know if it's better or worse, it's just different.

I still think this is one of my favorite games ever, but man I really wish you could play a game in less time. Even with familiarity our 4-player games are still taking over 2 hours.

Boudreaux wrote:The guy whose copy of Game of Thrones we've been playing lately removed Valar Morghulis from the plot deck, he thought it was too detrimental to Stark's gameplay. Since the Stark deck is focused primarily on getting characters out and building a military, having a plot card that destroys all that seemed backward to him. The last few games there has been no Valar Morghulis, and it certainly helps Lannister, who now has the only mass killing plot card (Wildfire Assault). I don't know if it's better or worse, it's just different.

I still think this is one of my favorite games ever, but man I really wish you could play a game in less time. Even with familiarity our 4-player games are still taking over 2 hours.

If there's one issue I have with the core game it's that the plot sets as laid out for each house deck don't provide any real synergy with those decks at all. Valar is a problem because the core decks only contain only single copies of each card, so what it wipes out will never be seen again. However, I think Valar Morghulis is actually less of a problem than some of the others just by virtue of its power and flexibility. Martell gets the Red Viper out turn 1? Marshal lightly in turn 1 and drop Valar turn 2. Just out of curiosity, what did you replace Valar with?

I played "Who the hell stole the 'comics' part out of Chicago Comic Con?" I lost. Horribly.

Jow wrote:If there's one issue I have with the core game it's that the plot sets as laid out for each house deck don't provide any real synergy with those decks at all. Valar is a problem because the core decks only contain only single copies of each card, so what it wipes out will never be seen again. However, I think Valar Morghulis is actually less of a problem than some of the others just by virtue of its power and flexibility. Martell gets the Red Viper out turn 1? Marshal lightly in turn 1 and drop Valar turn 2. Just out of curiosity, what did you replace Valar with?

That was a big reason why he switched some of the plot cards around. He got the Martell and Greyjoy expansion decks, and I think he pulled a few plots from there and swapped them into the core deck. There was a Lannister plot he took out as well that he replaced with the Siege of Riverrun. I forget what he replaced Valar Morghulis with (I typically play Lannister). He also added in some of the King cards so there were multiple copies of Robert Baratheon, Robb Stark, Viserys, and Joffrey.

I played:

Blokus and 3D Blokus

Which were pretty interesting, geometric puzzley based games (everyone has pieces of their colors and they're trying to build in an area with others with some constraints)

Shadows over Camelot

I ended up being the traitor, and was pretty subtle about being evil (I mostly just threw out good cards in my hand) and almost won (the good guys were going to end up with 8 white swords and 4 black swords on the table, with me undetected at the end, which causes two of the white sword to turn black, making it a tie and gives victory to evil) but I didnt realize that they had played a card on a quest to make it worth more, which means they ended 9 white swords.

Are you the Traitor

Doesn't work so well with 4 people, but works fairly well with much more.

Pit

Crazy loud fun.

and Cash n Guns Live

Which was pretty fun, although we didnt quite completely understand all the rules.

boudreaux:

I did something similar to beef up the core decks a bit, with the help of feedback from some veteran players over on Boardgamegeek. Since they had some room to grow to get to the 60-card limit, I added things like the 8-cost Host cards for each house (from the 'War of the Five Kings' pack), the 'Fury' plots (from 'Ancient Enemies' - apparently still staples in competitive decks), and a few other things. My next goal is to make Greyjoy and Martell decks that are competitive with those from the Core set but don't blow them out of the water. Easier said than done, I'm thinking.

Jow wrote:boudreaux:

I did something similar to beef up the core decks a bit, with the help of feedback from some veteran players over on Boardgamegeek. Since they had some room to grow to get to the 60-card limit, I added things like the 8-cost Host cards for each house (from the 'War of the Five Kings' pack), the 'Fury' plots (from 'Ancient Enemies' - apparently still staples in competitive decks), and a few other things. My next goal is to make Greyjoy and Martell decks that are competitive with those from the Core set but don't blow them out of the water. Easier said than done, I'm thinking.

We just met for some games tonight, and he's now increased the core decks to 70 cards and thrown in several new characters, the 8-cost Host cards, every house now has an "epic battle" event card, and he's added in Shadow cards. Most of the new character cards are duplicates of previous ones (if slightly different) to keep the decks balanced. I was looking through the Lannister and Stark decks and there are some really interesting additions he's put in there. I'm looking forward to playing with them. He said he increased the deck size to make the games more random, since now we'll probably only get through about half the deck in a single game.

I played Dominion:Prosperity with proxies, since I wasn't able to get a copy of the real game at Gencon. I then played a 6 player game of Wildlife, one of my all time favorites, and a game I rarely get to play with 6 players. After that it was Euphrates and Tigris, a game where I remembered how to play but forgot how to win Played Pillars of the Earth, another long time favorite. It was a great day of gaming!!!

Last night I got in a 2 player game of Le Havre with Tommy20. Way different game than with 3 or 4 players, the food requirements are brutal in the beginning. Plus, we were able to complete the game in 2.5 hours

2.5 hours! Even in our 2 player games, that is a good number! I've never played with more people (I think Le Havre has a 2 person sweet spot) but I can't even imagine how long it would take.

That being said, I'm planning on Twilight Imperium 3rd this weekend. And the people shall rejoice. I'll probably bring along the new DungeonQuest and Glory to Rome, for some shorter fun before or after TI.

Our first game, which included explaining the rules took us 4 hours for a 3 player game.

I have a friend that I can't imagine playing this game with. He gets totally locked up if he has too many decisions to make. Games of Empire Builder were torture.

We did Arkam Asylum again this weekend. I am now 3 for 3 with the people I've played with. I am surprised at how much I like this game. It seems like the kind of game I'd "meh." The coordination of players in a social environment works really well for me. I guess that's why I'll try any game at least once. It will time to talk remus in to get expansions soon. I assume they will make the game more difficult because I hear winning is supposed to be fairly difficult. I will say that the last two games we won were very close in their own ways. The last game we stopped an event from doubling the portals opened for the rest of the game by one turn. The game before that we were one turn away from losing in virtue of having all of our potential allies destroyed. Again the coordination required to stop these things while concurrently coordinating toward your ultimate goal is a lot of fun for me.

Played a 4-player game of Shogun last night. Seems like a game that ought to take about 45 minutes, but it was well over 2 hours. I had a brilliant invasion planned that was completely putzed in the final season by a "no attacking provinces with temples" event card, but I managed to pull out a win anyway. So much great room for deception and maneuvering in that game. I think in the entire two years I only attacked and conquered two provinces, but they were the right two provinces.

hentzau wrote:I have a friend that I can't imagine playing this game with. He gets totally locked up if he has too many decisions to make. Games of Empire Builder were torture.

I like how Le Havre gives you several good moves. Perhaps one might be "optimal" but it seemed like the decisions were easier.

Boudreaux wrote:Played a 4-player game of Shogun last night. Seems like a game that ought to take about 45 minutes, but it was well over 2 hours. I had a brilliant invasion planned that was completely putzed in the final season by a "no attacking provinces with temples" event card, but I managed to pull out a win anyway. So much great room for deception and maneuvering in that game. I think in the entire two years I only attacked and conquered two provinces, but they were the right two provinces.

I have Wallenstein (exact same game, different map and theme), and one of the things I love about it is that the play time is pretty reliably two hours every single time, any number of players. The thing that you learn pretty fast about it is that attacking is something you want to do extremely sparingly. Yeah, you can attack, what 12 times per game, but you absolutely don't want to. Attacking will only leave you weakened, win or lose. As you saw, best bet is to gear up for attacks in a few key places at a few key times.

I love this game so, so much. Best combat mechanic ever, and everything else is gravy on top. Tasty, tasty gravy.

Yeah Le Havre is a more "laid back" brain-burner as you always feel like you are accomplishing SOMETHING with every move. Unless you forget to feed your people and don't plan ahead for that. But this is different that Agricola, which I feel has some "useless" moves that you occasionally have to make.

I played Arkham Horror two weekends ago and had a good time. What I need to do is catalog all the rules and FAQs and make my own little "cheat sheet" reference paper. AH would be the perfect game if not for all the fiddly, obscure, and sometime unintuitive rules. As is, the game is great, and I tend to run it like I am the "Dungeon Master" - when people have a question, I look it up and if I have to, I make a ruling and people go with it. Typically I side with the players, because the game is hard enough. The new Lurker at the Threshold mini-box expansion is quite good though, and I suggest everyone pick it up!

2 years ago I bought my father Tide of Iron, and while he liked it, only now have we been able to finally play a complete game. He enjoyed it a lot, but the very long setup time and somewhat complex rules will mean this game won't hit the table often. His birthday is coming up again, and I'm thinking of getting another (quicker, easier, but equally strategically interesting) game for him. Other than Tide of Iron, he's a boardgame newbie.

I was thinking of Dominion, but now Shogun has sparked my interest. Any advice?

The Rocketman wrote:2 years ago I bought my father Tide of Iron, and while he liked it, only now have we been able to finally play a complete game. He enjoyed it a lot, but the very long setup time and somewhat complex rules will mean this game won't hit the table often. His birthday is coming up again, and I'm thinking of getting another (quicker, easier, but equally strategically interesting) game for him. Other than Tide of Iron, he's a boardgame newbie.

I was thinking of Dominion, but now Shogun has sparked my interest. Any advice?

If he enjoyed the theme and idea of Tide of Iron, I would recommend Memoir '44. Set up time is way shorter than ToI, games last about an hour, and I have had a ball with every single game I've played, including the ones where I got my ass handed to me.

Memoir '44 is good, if he's really into the WWII theme.

Another idea if he's interested in history or world conflict would be Twilight Struggle, another two-player boardgame. It's a recreation of the Cold War from the late 1940s through the 1980s, one player is the USA and the other is the USSR. The rules are fairly straightforward, there are only a handful of different actions to choose from each turn, but the strategic depth is amazingly good. The game comes down to an attempt to control the various countries of the world, build up your influence in the different regions (Europe, Middle East, Asia, etc.) and the "score" those regions at the right time. Everything is done with a hand of cards, which determine the actions you can take or the events you can cause to take place. When familiar with the rules games take 90-120 minutes. Highly recommended, I think it's one of the best games ever made.

Yeah, I realised some time ago that I SHOULD have bought him memoir 44 instead of Tide of Iron, but seeing that I didn't and he's not a complete WO2-nut, I'm not gonna buy him this. Twilight Struggle seems very interesting, and should be right up his alley. Only downside is that it seems to be strictly a 2-player game.

I've heard a lot of good things about Dominion (quickly set up, quick games, scalable for more players), so I'm still keeping it in mind.

Another vote for Memoir 44. It really is a great, streamlined WWII game. I own and love ToI, but it doesn't hit the table that much due to the set up time.

Twilight Struggle is in my top 5 games list, as well. Absolutely love it, but it is strictly two player. It kicked off my current GMT CDG craze and I now have Washington's War and the Successors. WW is also a two player game, but The Successors (based on the time period after Alexander the Great's death) is up to 4 players and shares a lot with WW (which is similar to TS, as well) in gameplay.

We played Dominion at Gencon and for some reason I think I'm out of love with it. I just couldn't get into it. I found myself enjoying Thunderstone more when I played it earlier that weekend.

Dominion is a great BG newbie game that scales well with 2-4 players and it plays relatively quickly. My only caveat is, you really HAVE to sleeve your Dominion cards, you shuffle your deck nearly constantly - so if you don't sleeve the almost 400 cards, you will end up with some pretty frayed cards after not so many plays.

If you regularly have 3+ I would say Settlers of Catan is an excellent introductory board game. Lots of player interaction, good speed and low downtime, lots of wheeling and dealing. It has always been a favorite of mine and it is the game that got my wife into boardgaming! The theme is light and the game is euro-abstract (no warfare, only building) so those are some downsides if he likes more confrontation. There are several expansions once you get board with the stock game, and some of them (Cities and Knights) are quite good. If he likes Rome or US History they have a Catan Histories series now, one called "The Struggle for Rome" and the other "Settlers of America." I've never played them but Tom Vasel, really liked the Rome one.

Speaking of Rome, I just ordered a fast paced card game called Glory to Rome that is getting a LOT of good buzz on BoardgameGeek.com. The art style is cartoony and low quality, but the game is supposed to be fun, quick, crazy, and a tad cut-throat. You might check it out.

If your Dad would like co-op games, my friends, wife, and father currently really LOVE the new Defenders of the Realm co-op fantasy game. It plays a tad like Pandemic, and the rules are a little weird at first, but once you get into it - the game is easy to understand and tons of fun. It scales well with 2-4 players (and can actually be played solo VERY well if one person controls 4 heroes). We like the game because it really feels like you are fighting these evil forces in a battle to save the land. Your goal is to kill these four generals for the Dark Lord, an Undead general, and Orc General, a Demon General and a Blue Dragon. They slowly move toward the center of the board and if they reach it, you lose (and there are several other ways to lose as well) It is a tad expensive, but the pieces are all cool plastic and the board is attractive. We have a lot of fun with it.

Lastly, I would suggest Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game. It plays fast, and is a light, tactics-base game of survival in the zombie apocalypse. One group of players plays the Zombies, the others the heroes. We like it as a two-player game, but it can be played well with up to six players. You have all sorts of scenarios to play and they are all very fun. I suggest buying it with one expansion - Survival of the Fittest, as it adds a bit more strategy for the Zombie players, then getting Growing Hunger as the next expansion.

My parents really love Carcassonne, even my mom, but I played it so much I can't stand it. It is a light tile based game, but it is very fast to learn and very fast to play.

Thanks for the help guys. I think I'll be looking for Dominion first, and if they don't have it I'll go for Pandemic.

I'll also mention Memoir 44 to him, maybe he'll be more interested in that one than Tide of Iron, and he'll buy it for himself
I have Battlelore myself, which I believe is very much the same game, but with magic thrown in, right? I could suggest we try a game of it, but I don't think he'll like to play with little goblins and knights and such, I think he'll feel too silly for that.

This is also why I won't see myself getting "Defenders of the Realm", even though it looks like a lot of fun: The miniatures and the art are a bit too cute I think for my gaming group. I could sell them on Doom, Space Hulk and Chaos in the Old World because the miniatures are a tad more adult.

Yes, if you know the game Battlelore, you know the game Memoir '44 (well, the basic mechanic. There are a few differences like the way you handle ranges and the like.) And you can play Battlelore like a straight-up medieval battle game without the goblins and dwarfs magic if you think that would put your dad off.

If Defenders of the Realm is too "cute" for your group, I can't imagine Pandemic going over well. I used to like Pandemic, but after playing Defenders the game just feels like you are "fighting the deadly WOODEN CUBE epidemic." There just isn't a story or sense of "theme" compared to Defenders very present theme of fighting demons, orcs, dragonkin, and undead. I don't think the game is "cute" at all - it is vintage fantasy art (Larry Elmore, who was famous for his late 80s and early 90s Dragonlance art).

My wife and I didn't care for Battlelore as much as Memoir 44. It was far more fiddly and the magic system turned us off. Also, it has that same 2-player restriction that Memoir has.

What about Castle Ravenloft, due out next week? It looks like it has potential to be a really interesting and fun co-op Dungeon crawl that is over in an hour or so.

I wasn't a big fan of Pandemic either, though admittedly we only played once. I generally like coop games, but while the others I've played (Arkham Horror foremost in my mind) have great pacing, Pandemic felt like it just started rolling when the game ended.

Jow wrote:I wasn't a big fan of Pandemic either, though admittedly we only played once. I generally like coop games, but while the others I've played (Arkham Horror foremost in my mind) have great pacing, Pandemic felt like it just started rolling when the game ended.

I disagree. Pandemic is a nice, tight game. Arkham Horror always strikes me as too long (though not as bad as Android). Battlestar Galactica, now there's a game with great pacing.

Defiant wrote:

Jow wrote:I wasn't a big fan of Pandemic either, though admittedly we only played once. I generally like coop games, but while the others I've played (Arkham Horror foremost in my mind) have great pacing, Pandemic felt like it just started rolling when the game ended.

I disagree. Pandemic is a nice, tight game. Arkham Horror always strikes me as too long (though not as bad as Android). Battlestar Galactica, now there's a game with great pacing.

I think when he refers to pacing, he's talking more about a consistent level of player interaction and interest and not the actual length of the game.

But I loves me both some Pandemic and Arkham. And while Arkham IS usually a long game night...I tend to enjoy every minute of it.

...and kiddo...you ain't SEEN long until you're hitting the 14 hour mark in a game of Twilight Imperium III.

We used to have a member of this board called Snow who used to play board games with us. Now we don't. I think that's directly attributable to Twilight Imperium III.

I'm going to be putting my copy of TI III up for auction at RockCon this year. I've never had the guts to actually put it on the board.

Allegedly there are quicker-play rules for TI III where you put all of the public objectives face up so everyone can focus their strategy starting on Turn 1. They still become available as they would be drawn, however.

Ok, it was my day off, but I am working 12hr shifts this weekend. Played Stratego (regular and the special Powers version), broke out the Car Wars compendium and taught 3 of the kids and kenetickid how to play, played edh magic (and they hate my Sliver Overlord deck every bit as much as they hated Teferi, went 2-1 versus 3 other players) and then played Dominion until dawn. Good times.

Zarathud wrote:Allegedly there are quicker-play rules for TI III where you put all of the public objectives face up so everyone can focus their strategy starting on Turn 1. They still become available as they would be drawn, however.

There's also a mod for it, which replaces the objective cards and uses a 5-step progression chart. Basically, you win by expanding your empire, leading to a more combat-heavy game (which some may not like). It does become easier for new players to visually see how you're doing, because you simply count the number of systems under your control. It works quite nicely if the original game is a bit too daunting for you, because your goals become quite clear: conquer as many systems as possible.