The Board Game thread.

[Changston]

I'm not a big fan of Race for the Galaxy. It felt like multiplayer solitaire.

[Dexter345]

I'm not a big fan of Race for the Galaxy. It felt like multiplayer solitaire.

It is, and I wouldn't be surprised if I eventually got to that point as well. I'm not a big fan of 7 Wonders, which operates in a similar fashion. You have people you're playing against, but you're not actually interacting with them very much. The extent of it in Race for the Galaxy is that you will look at their tableau and see which phase you expect them to play, so you don't have to play that phase, or you could look at their tableau and determine whether a particular phase would help them or not. I do like getting production up more quickly than my opponents so an early Consume phase benefits me and me alone.

[Flamoctapus]

Get out.

So Clue then?

[Twonunpackmule]

I had a fun time! Thanks for the invite. I'll try and stay later next time.

[Changston]

Holy shit, you live in Baltimore? We're in the midst of planning a NARP soon in Northern MD, about an hour away. You should totally go.

[Godstar]

It is, and I wouldn't be surprised if I eventually got to that point as well. I'm not a big fan of 7 Wonders, which operates in a similar fashion. You have people you're playing against, but you're not actually interacting with them very much. The extent of it in Race for the Galaxy is that you will look at their tableau and see which phase you expect them to play, so you don't have to play that phase, or you could look at their tableau and determine whether a particular phase would help them or not. I do like getting production up more quickly than my opponents so an early Consume phase benefits me and me alone.

One thing I don't like about it so far is that the bar for winning the game is set so very low for at least the very core rules. For instance the game says the first player to use all their VP's or put down 12 cards wins. Well, it's really not that hard to put down 12 cards if you're given the right set of cards and discards. It seemed more of a hassle to do the production consume method to get VP's on conversion than just putting down planets ironically. Maybe I'm just misreading the rules and how the VP's and cards down play out.

Holy shit, you live in Baltimore? We're in the midst of planning a NARP soon in Northern MD, about an hour away. You should totally go.

Who is planning the NARP?

[Changston]

Procyon in Northern MD. I know you can't do the googly group thing, so once we finalize a date, I'll make a post in the events section of the forum.

[Twonunpackmule]

What's a NARP?

[ZombiePlatypus]

No Apparent Reason Party

[Twonunpackmule]

No Apparent Reason Party

THANK YOU!

My internet vocabulary is lacking.

[Dexter345]

One thing I don't like about it so far is that the bar for winning the game is set so very low for at least the very core rules. For instance the game says the first player to use all their VP's or put down 12 cards wins. Well, it's really not that hard to put down 12 cards if you're given the right set of cards and discards. It seemed more of a hassle to do the production consume method to get VP's on conversion than just putting down planets ironically. Maybe I'm just misreading the rules and how the VP's and cards down play out.

It sounds like you are misreading the rules. It's not that the person who plays 12 cards into his tableau is the winner, it's just that the game ends once that happens. Also, the Victory Points are a shared pool, and once that pool is depleted, then that's the other way the game can end. But even if you're the person who ended the game, you may not be the winner, if somebody else has more Victory Points than you. Those can come from the collected VP chips, but mostly they come from the settlements and developments that you have played. (They are the number in the hexagon on the cards.)

[Godstar]

It sounds like you are misreading the rules. It's not that the person who plays 12 cards into his tableau is the winner, it's just that the game ends once that happens. Also, the Victory Points are a shared pool, and once that pool is depleted, then that's the other way the game can end. But even if you're the person who ended the game, you may not be the winner, if somebody else has more Victory Points than you. Those can come from the collected VP chips, but mostly they come from the settlements and developments that you have played. (They are the number in the hexagon on the cards.)

Yeah, I'm almost positive we were playing it wrong somewhat (we weren't pooling VP's), but at the same time it seemed advantageous to just drop planets ASAP rather than creating up create/consume relationships with your cards that seems to eat up a lot of time doing. Mainly because you have to find the right pairing of cards, where the other guy is just pulling up as many cards as he can on Explore, and plopping them down as soon as he can afford to do so.

[Dexter345]

That's the thing though. You can only afford the more valuable planets/developments if you have enough cards to spend, and Explore special effects notwithstanding, one of the best ways to draw more cards is by doing Produce on a high value good (Genes or Alien) and then doing Trade next round. Sure, you can make it a race to see who puts down the planets the quickest, but they'll all be low VP value planets if you go that route.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think there is more depth to the game than you believe there to be. That said, I still agree on the "multiplayer solitaire" assertion about it.

[Godstar]

That's the thing though. You can only afford the more valuable planets/developments if you have enough cards to spend, and Explore special effects notwithstanding, one of the best ways to draw more cards is by doing Produce on a high value good (Genes or Alien) and then doing Trade next round. Sure, you can make it a race to see who puts down the planets the quickest, but they'll all be low VP value planets if you go that route.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think there is more depth to the game than you believe there to be. That said, I still agree on the "multiplayer solitaire" assertion about it.

Oh I agree that it can be deep, I'm just saying that the whole '12 cards down' aspect of it cheapens it. If it were about eating up the pool without the 12 card restriction, I could see it being a deeper game, mainly because you'd be rewarded for creating the produce/consume card setups.

[Changston]

Temporary derailing of the thread since I don't know where else Godstar pops up these days.

BaltiNARP info is in the community events forum.

[Godstar]

Temporary derailing of the thread since I don't know where else Godstar pops up these days.

BaltiNARP info is in the community events forum.

I stop by every now and then but lately I haven't been able to pop in as much. Thanks for the heads up change, I got your number in my cell so I can give you a call about it once you get in the area.

[Dexter345]

Speaking of derailing, what's the deal with all of the train-themed board games amirite?

[Godstar]

Speaking of derailing, what's the deal with all of the train-themed board games amirite?

They all want to be as good as 1830: Railways and Robber Barons.

[Dexter345]

We've got Mystery Express. It's like Clue, except it has more interesting deduction mechanics and it doesn't have an arbitrary movement system.

And it's set on a train. Choo choo!

[Godstar]

We've got Mystery Express. It's like Clue, except it has more interesting deduction mechanics and it doesn't have an arbitrary movement system.

And it's set on a train. Choo choo!

Yeah, that seemed to be more of a detective game than a train system management type of game. I liked the figurines too, it's fun to paint stuff.