The NEW New Boardgames Thread

[Habbaku]

I'm imagining a Euro themed plantation game now. Compete to grow the most cotton or indigo with your, er, workers.

I'll name it Ruerto Pico.

[Valmy]

I'm imagining a Euro themed plantation game now. Compete to grow the most cotton or indigo with your, er, workers.

I'll name it Ruerto Pico.

Definitely the most fun problematic game I have played.

[Syt]

https://thehardtimes.net/harddrive/friend-group-meets-weekly-for-board-game-rules-explanation-night/

Friend Group Meets Weekly for Board Game Rules Explanation Night

MISSISSAUGA, Ontario — After last week's successful breakdown of the rules of Scotland Yard, a local group of friends met up once again for a rousing night of having overly elaborate board game rules explained to them.

"We spend so much time staring at screens nowadays, so sometimes it's really fun to just gather together around a table and have every grueling aspect of an unnecessarily complicated game laid out in front of us," said Andrea McNaughton, a regular attendee at the events.

The group spent a five-hour evening attempting to collectively understand the popular board game Lovecraftian Terrors, reading the entire manual aloud and arguing over where the game pieces were supposed to go.

"So when we activate the 'Truth' cards in the third round and turn back the flow of time, we have to roll seven Reversal Dice, and at that point the order of the turns becomes counter-clockwise, starting from the person whose half-birthday is furthest away," explained host Greg Ni to his closest friends, all of whom were checking Facebook throughout his explanation. "Got all that?"

Ni, McNaughton, and their friends eventually resorted to viewing a 45-minute long YouTube video in an effort to understand the game. At this point, the group reportedly began to eye various Vine compilations in the recommended videos as the explanation continued.

"Sometimes we go back to basics and review all of the rules of the Monopoly together," said McNaughton. "But most of the time we like to try something new, and I'm really digging how ridiculously elaborate the Lovecraftian Terrors rules are. Trying to understand why the fuck I'm supposed to flip over my character card as we skip over two players' turns with our remaining "Deceit" cards is a really thrilling experience."

The group dispersed around midnight, having fully reviewed every detail of how to play the game without ever actually beginning it.

"I'm really happy with how this evening went," said Ni. "Sure, we didn't end up playing the game, but I'm fairly certain everyone knows how to play it in theory at this point, which is what these evenings are really all about."

At press time, the group was reportedly planning on starting a campaign of reading and explaining the full Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook to one another in excruciating detail.

[Habbaku]

Stop attacking me.

[The Brain]

I agree in general. But this new game was going to be a Euro.

Euros are insensitive hellholes. Cree with totem poles? Etc etc etc.

[Tamas]

I'm imagining a Euro themed plantation game now. Compete to grow the most cotton or indigo with your, er, workers.

I'll name it Ruerto Pico.

Your "colonists" could also be of dark brown colour meeples, too.

[Delirium]

Some observations on Scramble:

First of all I think GMT messed up on this one. Games get dropped from p500 all the time without special announcement and no one gives it a second thought. Had they just said the usual in the newsletter, "after consulting the designer we have decided to pull this game from our p500 but we wish him the best with another company" no one would have cared. Now, everyone became aware of something that only a select few were being part of on BGG (75% of thread material of which is now deleted).

I also think that they could have realized this beforehand - people are very touchy about Africa, moreso than WW2 - this game should never have been entered on p500 in the first place. Seeing "the light" all of a sudden sounds a bit hollow to me. What it does is give the impression that if you scream loud enough you can stop whatever you want from being produced. That is probably true but I wonder if you want to give that impression as a company?

I think this is just another of GMT's problems as they are growing bigger. They want to still have the hardcore wargaming nucleus around but they also want to attract a euro fanbase. I am not sure it is possible to achieve both.

Finally I agree with what was said about this being a dangerous area. I know one thing for sure, if people had a look at my gaming collection without knowing me, they would assume I was a fascist. As wargamers we can never win a debate about what is morally appropriate to game with outsiders. I think we should just hunker down and hope for this politically hypersensitive era to pass, it did in the 70's.

[Oexmelin]

As wargamers we can never win a debate about what is morally appropriate to game with outsiders. I think we should just hunker down and hope for this politically hypersensitive era to pass, it did in the 70's.

As someone who has used board games as pedagogical devices, I strongly disagree. First, because maybe, perhaps, it would actually be a good idea to have those ethical debates within the wargaming community. About what wargames do, and produce, with regards to the general understanding of war. About the sort of assumptions that are made, and conveyed about conflicts, about the abstractions required, about the narratives of battle. Many wargames, for instance, start from designers, and players, entertaining the idea of what plausible alternate scenarios could be. After all, opponents must have one chance to win, and presumably to write history differently. Which historical actors, then, are deemed incapable of turning the tide, so that they never are represented?

Second, because this politically hypersensitive era is tied to new people gaining voice. In that, there is the possibility of opening a lot of new areas which could offer great potential for wargaming. That such wargaming needs to be done differently (i.e., maybe it would be a good idea to learn about India from Indian sources before making it a theatre for a game) should be seen as an opportunity, rather than caving in to the PC/SJW/C*u*c*ks, which - frankly - seem to reinforce all the worse stereotypes about wargamers. If wargamers insist that their fascination for Rommel, or Guderian, or PT Beauregard ought to be distinguished from their political stance, they should offer the same courtesy to people who want to vary the points of view to non-white, non-nazi historical actors.

Third, there is of course a lot of misconceptions about wargames - but much of the outrage about some of them stems from within the hobby. These are people who are both knowledgeable and willing to listen. Attempts to paint outrage as somehow the product of outsiders, whose short attention span will lead them elsewhere, makes it into a form of gatekeeping that doesn't make it especially appealing. Of course, if the point of "winning" a debate is just to continue to do things as if these questions had no relevance, then, yes - I am sure a certain form of wargaming will continue to attract predominantly right-of-center dudes, who will no doubt find niche publishers for their favorite battles.

[Delirium]

You really did not understand my point and have a dismissive tone I do not like. Please go somewhere else with your strawman.

[Sophie Scholl]

You really did not understand my point and have a dismissive tone I do not like. Please go somewhere else with your strawman.

[Oexmelin]

You really did not understand my point and have a dismissive tone I do not like. Please go somewhere else with your strawman.

I am sorry if I misunderstood your point (what was it, then? that one cannot derive political affiliation from the games one owns? that GMT mismanaged the debate? I agree on both count, which is why I did not comment on this)

As for my tone, and your invitation to go elsewhere, I can certainly return the compliment. How was my intervention more dismissive than your own "hypersensitive era" comment? You wanted to express your politics, and your annoyance, and you did. I expressed mine, and my annoyance. I thought there was at least the matter for a discussion.

[Syt]

From Twitter:

[celedhring]

Also applies to regular boardgames and videogames.

[Tamas]

Guys, I need your advice.

In about a month or so we'll be attending a wedding where the bride and groom asked relatives to give boardgames as present. I thought: challlenge accepted!


Now, they live in Poland and I've barely met them so I have no idea how hardcore gamers they are, but I'll go with not really. However, it seems like Poland has a growing boardgamer hobby, at least they seem to be publishing better and better stuff.

So, I want to find something that is a) reasonably new so the chances of them having it is minimal, b) good enough so that they'll know it has come from a connoisseur, and c) not TOO complicated.

Any ideas? My only real candidate so far is Root, but as I understand that is very much borderline hardcore.

[frunk]

There's Wingspan, which is definitely a new hotness, isn't that easy to get and seems to appeal to many people.  It's not a complicated game and is very easy to pick up.  For me there isn't enough meat but a lot of people love it.  The theme is unique and it's so intuitive that I'm pretty sure I'll remember the rules 10 years from now without playing it at all.

Res Arcana also just came out and is a fantastic game from Tom Lehmann with a lot of replayability.

New Frontiers is another new game from Tom Lehmann.  It's a better version of Puerto Rico with a Race for the Galaxy theme. 

Concordia Venus is a redo of an older game (Concordia) but adds enough new that it's worth having.  There's also an expansion version for those who have Concordia (if you know they have Concordia).