News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

New boardgames

Started by The Brain, April 07, 2009, 12:34:48 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 46
User actions

The Larch

#660
April 19, 2010, 10:07:17 AM
Played Twilight Struggle yesterday for the first time. I really liked it, although knowing the card stack well is essential.

Berkut

#661
April 19, 2010, 10:17:44 AM
Yeah, TS is a game that is a lot of fun when you have no idea what the cards are, but requires you to know the cards well to play the game well.

Playing it blind those first couple of times is amusing though.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

The Larch

#662
April 19, 2010, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 19, 2010, 10:17:44 AM
Yeah, TS is a game that is a lot of fun when you have no idea what the cards are, but requires you to know the cards well to play the game well.

Playing it blind those first couple of times is amusing though.

Hehe, yeah, the way I infected Africa with the red virus was amusing (I played the USSR) and left my buddy, who already played a few times open mouthed at the easiness with which I claimed the continent. Then I pushed the envelope too far by not knowing well the cards and ended up declaring nuclear war by accident after a summit and lost the game accordingly.  :blush:

The Brain

#663
April 19, 2010, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 19, 2010, 11:18:29 AM
ended up declaring nuclear war by accident after a summit and lost the game accordingly.  :blush:

You mean won?
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

The Larch

#664
April 19, 2010, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 19, 2010, 11:21:08 AM
Quote from: The Larch on April 19, 2010, 11:18:29 AM
ended up declaring nuclear war by accident after a summit and lost the game accordingly.  :blush:

You mean won?

In TS the player in whose turn nuclear war is declared loses the game, as he's considered to be the one responsible for it.

Kleves

#665
April 23, 2010, 01:14:04 AM
Anyone played Clash of Monarchs? It any good with two players?
My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom.

Habbaku

#666
April 23, 2010, 01:17:59 AM
I've played it a good deal and enjoyed it quite a bit.  I would say that two players is not ideal, but it is a good game with them.  The "best" version of the game is the 3-player version, in my opinion, because it removes the perfect coordination of the Austrians and their Franco-Russian allies while sweeping the somewhat less-playable Anglos into the Prussian player's control.
The medievals were only too right in taking nolo episcopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers.

Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people.
-J. R. R. Tolkien

Delirium

#667
April 23, 2010, 08:07:55 AM
After four or five games (that admittedly were not completed) I agree with Habs, it's a good game, and probably best with three players.

However, none of us folks here have enjoyed it ftf, I think it's because it's way too complicated for what people expect of a cdg (and somewhat repetitive), but too simple for the effort people want to place in a real wargame. It's an admirable effort with some cool design features but falls short of both marks, I don't think I could find two players down at the club who would be ready to give it another shot.

It may be more suited as a convention game using a one-year scenario though.
Come writers and critics who prophesize with your pen, and keep your eyes wide the chance won't come again; but don't speak too soon for the wheel's still in spin, and there's no telling who that it's naming. For the loser now will be later to win, cause the times they are a-changin'. -- B Dylan

Kleves

#668
April 23, 2010, 06:38:10 PM
Thanks, guys. I'll definitely take a look, but usually complex + best with more than 2 means that I won't be playing it.  <_<

What about Maria, or Espana 1936? Any good?
My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom.

Habbaku

#669
April 23, 2010, 09:38:09 PM
 :lol: Maria was designed, at the outset, as a 3-player game, so I don't think you'll be okay with that one.

I can highly recommend Espana 1936, however, as a 2-player game.  It's not a heavy simulation but has enough sim-elements to be very fun and catch the flavor of the war.  Of course, with both GMT and MMP releasing SCW games in the future, it will probably become outdated as both of them are supposed to be "heavier" treatments.
The medievals were only too right in taking nolo episcopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers.

Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people.
-J. R. R. Tolkien

Delirium

#670
April 26, 2010, 09:18:20 AM
Is there any interest in a Languish CB game of anything? I have some extra time on my hands.
Come writers and critics who prophesize with your pen, and keep your eyes wide the chance won't come again; but don't speak too soon for the wheel's still in spin, and there's no telling who that it's naming. For the loser now will be later to win, cause the times they are a-changin'. -- B Dylan

Habbaku

#671
April 26, 2010, 10:18:53 AM
I would play something.  I've not got anything on my plate at the moment other than a few PBEM games of Pursuit of Glory.

Suggestions?
The medievals were only too right in taking nolo episcopari as the best reason a man could give to others for making him a bishop. Give me a king whose chief interest in life is stamps, railways, or race-horses; and who has the power to sack his Vizier (or whatever you care to call him) if he does not like the cut of his trousers.

Government is an abstract noun meaning the art and process of governing and it should be an offence to write it with a capital G or so as to refer to people.
-J. R. R. Tolkien

Berkut

#672
April 26, 2010, 08:09:38 PM
Del, are you thinking something MP, or just a 2 player game?
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Delirium

#673
April 27, 2010, 02:57:16 AM
Me and Habs talked it over, he'll present our findings to you shortly. :smarty:
Come writers and critics who prophesize with your pen, and keep your eyes wide the chance won't come again; but don't speak too soon for the wheel's still in spin, and there's no telling who that it's naming. For the loser now will be later to win, cause the times they are a-changin'. -- B Dylan

The Larch

#674
April 27, 2010, 03:55:23 AM
Quote from: Habbaku on April 26, 2010, 10:18:53 AM
I would play something.  I've not got anything on my plate at the moment other than a few PBEM games of Pursuit of Glory.

Suggestions?

What about the "Republic of Rome" game that you mentioned a while ago?
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 41 42 43 44 45 46
User actions