It allows you to search the
messageboards, send and receive private messages, give yourself a
custom usertitle, turn ads on or off, create a custom style for your
profile, get a nifty badge under your username, and gives you a special
warm glowy feeling! Oh, and it gets rid of this annoying message, too!
I think that if we play board games in two weeks, I would like to play some war games. I am thinking Attack!, Tide of Iron, Imperial, Diplomacy, Age of Imperialism, and Tigris and Euphrates.
I think I am just a little tired of math based games coupled with the "Magic the Gathering Effect" as I like to call it. I am even tired of St. Petersburg!
If anyone wants to play Attack, I will be willing to borrow and read the rules prior to play. Also, I would love to give Diplomacy another try. I would also count Illuminati in the group above. It is a war game too, really, and though most war games possess numbers, they are not the true focus.
__________________ The natural unintended meaning of any abstract, symbolic language is rhubarb.
I have noticed that there is a category of games that is defined by one particular game dynamic that I call the "Magic the Gathering Effect". This dynamic is characterized by building and increasing points through discovering and making symbiotic connections between cards or buildings/units that act much like cards. Games like Puerto Rico fall into this category. A player must discover the synergy that exists between certain builds to be an effective player, else he is floundering without much hope.
This type of game is appealing to people who enjoy Munchkin-ing out a character, finding all the fiddly little things that go together to create an über-character or game position.
I find no fault with this style. I am just not drawn to it. I enjoy more tactical games, games that have to do with martial strategies and movement. I am slowly discovering, I fear, that I have played way too many of the former game and am slowly beginning to feel as though I don't really want to play them anymore. And, unfortunately, I am unsure how many people in our group enjoy the second variety as much as I do! We'll see...
__________________ The natural unintended meaning of any abstract, symbolic language is rhubarb.
Last edited by Grimhelm; 24th August 2008 at 05:13 PM..
Yes, I mentioned Age of Imperialism. I would definitely play that one again. Twilight Imperium I would be willing to give another chance, though I think the game has some flaws. As for Starcraft, I will have to look at your link!
__________________ The natural unintended meaning of any abstract, symbolic language is rhubarb.
And, unfortunately, I am unsure how many people in our group enjoy the second variety as much as I do! We'll see...
I am with you. I think I have mentioned before how I hate that many of the games you guys play favor the experienced player to a nearly insane degree over a beginning (albeit intelligent) player, games where knowing the nuances of that particular game trumps simple knowledge of the basic rules - whereby an idiot in possession of these nuances can always defeat a genius who has not had time to put together the puzzle. Of course, experience should benefit a player, but it should be the experience born of a hundred games, not just knowing some of the synergistic tricks of the game gleaned from reading the message boards about that game.
Although simple in comparison to the games you guys play, games like Othello, Stratego, Wings of War, and Clue are my preference, as there is little of these symbiotic nuances (and only the merest hint of chance in what is otherwise purely tactical play).
I also dislike waiting around in games where the turns take forever, and there is nothing to do when it isn't my turn. Even games like Risk (again, simplistic compared to the games you guys play) give the off player something to do - they can roll dice when they are attacked!
I've have never had a chance to play Diplomacy and have always wanted to. I have heard it is my type of game from several persons.
I also dislike waiting around in games where the turns take forever, and there is nothing to do when it isn't my turn. Even games like Risk (again, simplistic compared to the games you guys play) give the off player something to do - they can roll dice when they are attacked!
I've have never had a chance to play Diplomacy and have always wanted to. I have heard it is my type of game from several persons.
Yes, waiting around is a huge pain in the booty, especially when it is a game that is boring to start with. As for Diplomacy, I do think you would enjoy it. Maybe we can start with that one on the 6th. We might be able to count on at least 5-6 players. It would be great if we could fill the table with 7, though!
Of course, your comments about knowing a game are somewhat off, I think, though I do understand your point. Still, a person who knows a game better than another person typically stands a better chance, regardless of the type of game. I think, like me, you simply take issue with that particular style of strategy. In such games it is more about discovering symbiotic relationships than allowing the moves of another to dictate tactical play. In such games it is not so much about being out-maneuvered as it is about being out-discovered.
Wings of War is a tactical game. This is why we enjoy it so much. I think we are just more tactically minded, where the other guys are probably more "relationship" oriented. Even in D&D it is easy to see that I do not enjoy finding the right feat to compliment the right class or skill. I like out-maneuvering someone in the game with whatever talents I happen to have. You are much the same in this respect.
__________________ The natural unintended meaning of any abstract, symbolic language is rhubarb.
Of course, your comments about knowing a game are somewhat off, I think, though I do understand your point. Still, a person who knows a game better than another person typically stands a better chance, regardless of the type of game. I think, like me, you simply take issue with that particular style of strategy. In such games it is more about discovering symbiotic relationships than allowing the moves of another to dictate tactical play. In such games it is not so much about being out-maneuvered as it is about being out-discovered.
Quite so. I tried to say that. Of course experience should impact a game favorably (otherwise the game would be completely random, which I hate), but I was trying say that some of the games they enjoy favor the experienced player to an extreme degree. Someone who has played 50 games of chess is probably (but not necessarily) going to beat the person who has played twice (I won my first game of chess because I out-maneuvered my teacher, who had played for years). But having played chess three or four times does not necessarily confer much of an advantage over the guy playing his second game. But with some of the games played there, the game favors the guy who has played four times to the point of almost guaranteeing the win over the guy who is on his second game - especially if the experienced guy knows something of those discoveries of relationships - or loves to read message boards sharing these insights. They remind me of people who play the collectible card games in order to create these "engines" of victory that chew up the game regardless of the skill of their opponent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimhelm
Wings of War is a tactical game. This is why we enjoy it so much. I think we are just more tactically minded, where the other guys are probably more "relationship" oriented. Even in D&D it is easy to see that I do not enjoy finding the right feat to compliment the right class or skill. I like out-maneuvering someone in the game with whatever talents I happen to have. You are much the same in this respect.
I agree.
Speaking of types of games - we prefer tactical games, they prefer relationship-synergy games - Amanda prefers random games where the entire playing field is levelled via the dictatorship of the chance, such as Sorry! or Trouble or Uno. Those games frustrate me as well.
They remind me of people who play the collectible card games in order to create these "engines" of victory.
Thus the term "Magic the Gathering Effect".
Quote:
Speaking of types of games - we prefer tactical games, they prefer relationship-synergy games - Amanda prefers random games where the entire playing field is levelled via the dictatorship of the chance, such as Sorry! or Trouble or Uno. Those games frustrate me as well.
These games don't frustrate me. I just find them intensely boring. Ultimately, what is the point? Why not flip a coin to decide who wins? It's just as random and just as meaningless! Such games are like playing craps for no money. There is nothing to lose. It is also why gambling goes so well with these types of games. It gives the players something to lose or gain by playing.
__________________ The natural unintended meaning of any abstract, symbolic language is rhubarb.
Ah! You are an excellent teacher, who teaches the student by arranging the argument so the student arrives at the same conclusion as the teacher, thus guaranteeing the student really understands the point!
Linear Mode
