Need boardgame recommendation

[torpid]

Yet every review out there loves it and recommends it.

The seafarer was probably one of the worst I have tried as it does to the game what you described, you spend half of the game simply trying to reach another island and you spend a lot of time setting it up and taking it down for very little reward since half of the tiles become water tiles usually.

Catan is a great family game because it's simple, turns are quick, games are quick, it's rarely "mean," and though there is a lot of luck, it's not as perceptible as other games. Cities and Knights basically eliminates all of those positives of the original game and turns it into a much more geeky game that is less accessible to a wide audience. Seafarers keeps the basics relatively similar, adding only minor complexity, while adding something novel and interesting to the game. I honestly can't recommend any expansion for Catan - not even the 5-6 player one. For the price, you are better off buying another game. The only good thing that I've seen in expansions is the deck of cards as a replacement for the dice to somewhat level out randomness. But if forced to choose one, I'd recommend Seafarers because it's a good companion to the original and not a completely different game wearing Catan's skin.

What you describe above is, perhaps, the total game duration being longer. I'm referring to turn duration. Cities and Knights extends turns significantly for the worse. Players get disengaged. C&K also extends total duration since the total number of points required increases. Additionally, C&K has a lot of "mean" / "cheap" cards that make the game less enjoyable in many groups since the base Catan game generally does not feature those types of things. And luck is a lot more obvious and annoying in the game.

I've played it with a few different groups and no one felt like it was worth playing again after a few games.

Seafarers, you have a variety of board layouts and scenarios, but ultimately it's still "Catan" - which is either a good thing or a bad thing. I've not had the same experience as you have with the painfully long process to get to an island. It didn't seem any worse to me than getting a new settlement on land-only. Obviously this would depend on which set-up / scenario you used.

 

[GotIssues]

L4D boardgame basically?

We've played that, I can't remember the exact reason why we stopped, but it had some majorly fatal flaw to it that I can't recall.

Thought of and read a couple others we've played:

Acquire: Fun hotel chain game. Good strategy, a bit of luck, and gives a very simplistic idea of stocks and value (read: very simplistic).
Small World: Simple race advance->decline game. Quite fun, expansions are, for the most part, quite good.
Munchkin: It's fun, but not much actual strategy, which is what I think you are looking for
Illuminati: Card game. Basically building a mob-like organization that generated money and power. I enjoyed it, and it's reasonably quick.
Caracassone: Didn't play it a lot. I remember thinking it was a good game, but don't remember much about it anymore.
Runebound: was ok, but it tended to be more of a single player and didn't involve a lot of interaction
Descent: Was fun the one time I played it. Could be good for you 3, but I'd consult someone who played it more.

 

[CPA]

It's a card game, yes. But it's also a sort of unit-building game. You start with the same 10 cards each game, and using those cards, you buy other cards (without losing the cards you used to buy them). The other cards can do a variety of things, including attacking other players to force them to discard, etc. Each game you can randomize the 10 "action cards" used so the game is highly varied.

Agricola's tokens are all basic geometric shapes and not very interesting compared to Axis and Allies or the like.

So if what you are looking for is cool tokens and meeple, neither game is for you.

Got it. Thanks.

 

[Jaepheth]

Go is fun. And it's so open-ended it can be a real mindfuck sometimes. Better than chess IMO.

 

[SunnyD]

The following are good games:

Diplomacy
Supremacy
Merchant of Venus
Viceroys
Titan

 

[mugs]

Acquire: Fun hotel chain game. Good strategy, a bit of luck, and gives a very simplistic idea of stocks and value (read: very simplistic).

Great game. A distant relative of that game was just released - Airlines Europe. So much has changed that it's hard to see the relationship, but it definitely traces its roots to Acquire. Airlines Europe is a very good game, and the theme may be more appealing to kids than the relative lack of theme in Acquire (yeah you're buying stock in hotel chains, but it's pretty abstract in its implementation).

 

[JTsyo]

Great game. A distant relative of that game was just released - Airlines Europe. So much has changed that it's hard to see the relationship, but it definitely traces its roots to Acquire. Airlines Europe is a very good game, and the theme may be more appealing to kids than the relative lack of theme in Acquire (yeah you're buying stock in hotel chains, but it's pretty abstract in its implementation).

Only problem I have with Acquire is once in a while you get a game where nothing happens. All the merge tiles are held by those that don't own the hotels. Then towards the end someone finally gets lucky and gets a merger, he then uses that money to buy out the winning chain.
Usually though you have a few mergers and it's hard to tell who's pulling ahead. It's a great feeling when you get the perfect tile and then make a power move to grab a hotel.

 

[mugs]

Only problem I have with Acquire is once in a while you get a game where nothing happens. All the merge tiles are held by those that don't own the hotels. Then towards the end someone finally gets lucky and gets a merger, he then uses that money to buy out the winning chain.
Usually though you have a few mergers and it's hard to tell who's pulling ahead. It's a great feeling when you get the perfect tile and then make a power move to grab a hotel.

Yeah, being involved in the first merger is a pretty good advantage, especially if the second merger (in the entire game) doesn't happen until you've had time to spend the money you earned from the first. One rule I forgot about once is that you can't place a tile that would create a new company (i.e. can't place a tile adjacent to another tile that is not part of a company) UNLESS there is a company that is not currently on the board. So every tile that someone plays away from existing companies in an effort to delay playing a disadvantageous merger tile has the effect of eliminating several locations where tiles can't be played until a merger happens. Eventually someone is forced to create a merger, even if they don't want to. Forgetting about that rule kind of screwed up our game. The first merger happened about 30% of the way through, and the second merger happened about 70% of the way through. One of the guys involved in that first merger won the game, the other finished last (they had equal shares, so they benefitted equally). That's not to discount the impact of that merger - the one guy was just an idiot.

 

[Possessed Freak]

Great game. A distant relative of that game was just released - Airlines Europe. So much has changed that it's hard to see the relationship, but it definitely traces its roots to Acquire. Airlines Europe is a very good game, and the theme may be more appealing to kids than the relative lack of theme in Acquire (yeah you're buying stock in hotel chains, but it's pretty abstract in its implementation).

I absolutely love Acquire. At the WBC last year I scored the highest single game recorded that year. However they were running multiple heats and totaling scores to make the semi/finals. I didn't know about that and only played in the third heat. So even my awesome score of godliness was not good enough to make the cut.

I have been on a Monopoly kick lately. It is all about the deal making... and risking all (twice I have been completely out of money and I have won).

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Go is fun. And it's so open-ended it can be a real mindfuck sometimes. Better than chess IMO.

I love Go. The nice thing about it is it's very hard to program AI for. The best AI's around now can be beaten by mediocre players. I'm pretty sure I've played some online chess games vs people who loaded up a chess program and copied the moves over to the game >.<

 

[mugs]

I absolutely love Acquire. At the WBC last year I scored the highest single game recorded that year. However they were running multiple heats and totaling scores to make the semi/finals. I didn't know about that and only played in the third heat. So even my awesome score of godliness was not good enough to make the cut.

I have been on a Monopoly kick lately. It is all about the deal making... and risking all (twice I have been completely out of money and I have won).

If you like the dealmaking and risk in Monopoly, check out Chinatown. That's my favorite negotiation game ever. It has its share of luck, but I think it evens out over the course of a game. What it doesn't have is silly roll and move like Monopoly.

 

[CPA]

Okay, I ended up getting:

Dominion
Ticket to Ride
Carcassone
Conquest of the Empire. Biggest gameboard I think I've ever seen.

Will be getting Memoir 44 soon.

 

[mugs]

Okay, I ended up getting:

Dominion
Ticket to Ride
Carcassone
Conquest of the Empire. Biggest gameboard I think I've ever seen.

Will be getting Memoir 44 soon.

Good choices. :thumbsup: I assume the Conquest of the Empire board is similar to Railroad Tycoon's board (~3'x4'). That one took up our entire kitchen table at our old house, we had to keep everything else on chairs. Fortunately we have a dining room table now. I was at a game convention last weekend, and some guys were playing Case Blue (a wargame). The "board" (cardstock map) took up two large tables. It was huuuuuuuge. And the pieces were small.

Before you buy Memoir 44, at least read up on Tide of Iron. Some people don't care for the cards in Memoir 44, because they can prevent you from attacking where you really need to attack. It's a great game though. I have M44, pretty much all of the expansions (except the pre-printed maps), and Battle Cry which is a Civil War game that uses the same system. I ant the Napoleonics game that recently came out using the same system. If you get into Memoir 44 you can spend a lot of money on it, but you will also get a lot of value out of it.

 

[HydroSqueegee]

well shoot. I should have mentioned ticket to ride: europe is a better over all game than the regular game.

great choices though!

 

[Possessed Freak]

If you like the dealmaking and risk in Monopoly, check out Chinatown. That's my favorite negotiation game ever. It has its share of luck, but I think it evens out over the course of a game. What it doesn't have is silly roll and move like Monopoly.

Done. Must purchase now.

 

[CPA]

Good choices. :thumbsup: I assume the Conquest of the Empire board is similar to Railroad Tycoon's board (~3'x4'). That one took up our entire kitchen table at our old house, we had to keep everything else on chairs. Fortunately we have a dining room table now. I was at a game convention last weekend, and some guys were playing Case Blue (a wargame). The "board" (cardstock map) took up two large tables. It was huuuuuuuge. And the pieces were small.

Before you buy Memoir 44, at least read up on Tide of Iron. Some people don't care for the cards in Memoir 44, because they can prevent you from attacking where you really need to attack. It's a great game though. I have M44, pretty much all of the expansions (except the pre-printed maps), and Battle Cry which is a Civil War game that uses the same system. I ant the Napoleonics game that recently came out using the same system. If you get into Memoir 44 you can spend a lot of money on it, but you will also get a lot of value out of it.

Question: If I read correctly, M44 out of the box is a two player game, but if I buy an expansion, it can be a 3-player game. Is that correct? is there a specific expansion I need to make it a 3-player game?

 

[sao123]

Question: If I read correctly, M44 out of the box is a two player game, but if I buy an expansion, it can be a 3-player game. Is that correct? is there a specific expansion I need to make it a 3-player game?

I havent personally played it, but supposedly OPERATION OVERLORD is the multiplayer expansion to memoir 44.

 

[GotIssues]

If you like the dealmaking and risk in Monopoly, check out Chinatown. That's my favorite negotiation game ever. It has its share of luck, but I think it evens out over the course of a game. What it doesn't have is silly roll and move like Monopoly.

I love Monopoly, too, but my wife refuses to play with me, so it eliminates the only time we'd ever be able to play Monopoly. She gets mad because my negotiating tactics "aren't nice." I like to give the more expensive monopoly to someone in exchange for a cheap monopoly and nearly all their cash just before they reach the cheap monopoly I am getting, effectively crippling them financially and putting them at bankruptcy risk immediately (if they hit my houses/hotels on the first go). As long as they don't go around the board a couple times and miss my properties, I'll get what I traded back (mortgaged, of course).

She calls it taking advantage of them, I call it teaching them a lesson on negotiations (these are adults I'm playing with and taking advantage of, not children).

 

[zebano]

My favorite games are:

A&A
Risk
Flux
Dominion (house rule: no gardens)
Chess
Chinese Chess
Go
Settlers of Catan (with Cities and Knights)
Carcassone
Betrayal at the house on the hill

 

[mugs]

Question: If I read correctly, M44 out of the box is a two player game, but if I buy an expansion, it can be a 3-player game. Is that correct? is there a specific expansion I need to make it a 3-player game?

You can play with up to eight players using the Operation Overlord rules (available here: http://www.daysofwonder.com/memoir44/en/content/rules/). I've only ever played with 2 players, but I believe the Overlord format is ideally suited for 6-8 players. It works with 3 though. To play you either need two copies of the base game (it uses twice as many army pieces and two boards). But honestly, with 3 players you're going to have one player playing one entire side and two players making joint decisions on the other side. There's no reason you can't do that with just the base game.

The base game and every expansion comes with one or more Overlord scenarios, but all of the expansions only come with enough pieces to play a single-board game. To play Overlord with expansions some people buy every expansion twice, some people just substitute pieces. There's no reason why you can't use an American army in place of a British army, or a snowy hill in place of a regular hill, etc.

My favorite games are:

Dominion (house rule: no gardens)

Curious about why you use that house rule. Most people use Chapel or some other card to trash a lot of cards to get down to a small, efficient deck. I like that Gardens make a fat deck more viable, I've always found it anti-thematic to destroy victory points or money.

 

[zebano]

Curious about why you use that house rule. Most people use Chapel or some other card to trash a lot of cards to get down to a small, efficient deck. I like that Gardens make a fat deck more viable, I've always found it anti-thematic to destroy victory points or money.

After a number of games with Gardens they are simply too powerful. Not all games feature a remodel or chapel (remodel is also much much slower than a chapel) to trash cards and even if they do there are always enough cheap +1 buy /gain cards (i.e. woodcutter/bureaucrat/thief) that gardens decks tend to win about 80% of the time. I've also picked up two expansions (prosperity and intrigue) and neither change the basic winning formula that a garden strategy offers.

 

[torpid]

After a number of games with Gardens they are simply too powerful. Not all games feature a remodel or chapel (remodel is also much much slower than a chapel) to trash cards and even if they do there are always enough cheap +1 buy /gain cards (i.e. woodcutter/bureaucrat/thief) that gardens decks tend to win about 80% of the time. I've also picked up two expansions (prosperity and intrigue) and neither change the basic winning formula that a garden strategy offers.

What is the winning strategy that is unbeatable? I assume it's deplete gardens + 2 other piles. That strategy can be countered - the other player just buys a few gardens to prevent the gardens-getter from having them all, and buys a province or two using a relatively quick and high-money strategy.

 

[zebano]

What is the winning strategy that is unbeatable? I assume it's deplete gardens + 2 other piles. That strategy can be countered - the other player just buys a few gardens to prevent the gardens-getter from having them all, and buys a province or two using a relatively quick and high-money strategy.

The problem is that you can't just grab a garden then grab a province. The "quick - money" strat requires a very sparse deck and very specific cards which a garden or two usually interferes with. It is also considerably slower than just buying gardens and +buy/gain cards. The only way for quick money to have a chance is there must be a chapel as remodel, and the money upgrade card are simply too slow unless you get really luck and get a very early gold.

 

[trigun500]

Nuns on a Run
Small World
Munchkin (not a board game but still fun)

 

[torpid]

The problem is that you can't just grab a garden then grab a province. The "quick - money" strat requires a very sparse deck and very specific cards which a garden or two usually interferes with. It is also considerably slower than just buying gardens and +buy/gain cards. The only way for quick money to have a chance is there must be a chapel as remodel, and the money upgrade card are simply too slow unless you get really luck and get a very early gold.

I don't know what cards you are playing with typically, but this is not my experience with gardens. With some sets of cards, this will be the dominant strategy (Ironworks+Gardens is a beast; workshop+gardens is fairly good as well), but with others (no "gain a card" cards), not really. You don't need a sparse deck or trash-heavy cards to counter gardens. A gardens player will tend to have way less purchasing power and a lot more clutter than a non-gardens player. If you can make it so that they don't get to the 40 card mark, you have some of the gardens, and you focus on duchies or provinces quickly, you should be able to win.

Now that you have prosperity, there is one killer counter to most garden sets available: Bishop. http://dominionstrategy.com/2011/02/23/counter-of-the-day-10-bishop-v-gardens/

There's some additional tips for countering it here, though the article mostly focuses on when gardens works: http://dominionstrategy.com/2010/12/16/dominion-gardens/