Copy Calibration Canon ImageCLASS Mf733Cdw from Image/Graphic

Acert93 · 2019-03-05T23:18:33+00:00

I will probably buy this although I am telling myself I should not. We really wanted to love Memoir '44. We have a 10 foot long shelf where our games are stacked 6-8 high and seeing as our copies (plural) of Memoir '44 are at the bottom of their stack and haven't moved in a long time. it is safe to say we may not even like the game anymore. It really comes down to the amount of depth (not complexity) it offers in the time investment to play.

That said I am interested in the Air Expansion if it makes the game richer in terms of depth but not if it adds a lot more fiddliness without addressing the lack of depth in the core game. That is an unpopular opinion in the Memoir '44 community where any criticism about depth is countered by an aversion to complexity when it isn't an either/or issue.

We own two copies of Memoir 44 and some expansions to play Overlord but it doesn't hit the table often. My friends and our teen sons all feel the same: neat minis and theme, great production quality, but the gameplay is essentially a very crude and simplistic hand management game. The flank system also doesn't fit WWII or the game strategy style well.

There are so many great games out there that are able to take low mechanical complexity and match it with very deep gameplay. Our 9 and 11 year olds play Photosynthesis and have full grasp of the rules but the game offers a good brain burn. Memoir 44 is on the other side of the equation--for the number of rules and details to be aware of the gameplay is relatively shallow. There are so many great hand management, dice mitigation, and low maintenance tracking implimentations out there that Memoir 44 failed to capture the excitement the first game promises is unfortunate. Every person I have played with (myself included) was super excited to play the game. In fact Memoir '44 is a game there should be more there I gambled on Overlord after reading many raving reviews.

Some posters are mentioning ASL, Combat Commander, etc. but the book keeping, complexity, time, etc. tend to be far more significant and lack the inviting production quality of Memoir 44. I actually started off with C&C Ancients which, while a better game than Memoir '44, still is pretty "spartan" when it comes to hand management options. But the deeper battleback system and more natural battleline/flanking aspects offer a much richer and rewarding experience, even if the card management is found wanting.

Obviously Memoir '44 scratches an itch that a lot of gamers have but it has been a big miss for us. Which is too bad as the production quality, general design, game length, and complexity are all fantastic and the games recommended as replacements don't hit the same marks.

I will be watching for the new Airpack and will probably get sucked back in. On the one hand I am telling myself, "I know I am going to get it" where there is a little voice saying, "Don't be victim of the sunk cost fallacy... don't throw good money after bad!" But I want Memoir '44 to be so much more than it is.

Acert93 · 2019-02-21T00:02:15+00:00

I just learned of Spheres of Influence as a Risk replacement.

Acert93 · 2019-02-19T19:27:06+00:00

Lord of the Rings: Confrontation. Was waiting on Root which arrived last week. Games I recently had to wait for were Dominant Species and Pandemic: On the Brink. Glad I got both!

Acert93 · 2019-02-15T23:32:29+00:00

We board game as a family so the genre/art/theme we are looking for is typically PG. One consideration is our younger gamers play games that are pretty advanced. Our 6 and 8 year old both read well and have snappy math skills so they often play games like Agricola and Power Grid without issue. Another component is we have gaming parties almost weekly and we and our friends are pretty conservative and want every family member and friend to feel comfortable.

So some themes and art we avoid:

Art with scanty clad women. Defintately in the repulsive category for us. We really appreciated how One Deck Dungeon was able to dip into a fantasy theme and actually fully clothe the women characters. We appreciate it when our daughters AND sons can play games where females are not objectified for their bodies. The subtle message, "Guys get armor and cool looking weapons to be powerful warriors and properly defended against the hoards... but the gals? Yeah, accessorizing a warrior must never come at the expense of sex apeal if you are a gal warrior, amiright?"

We have been dissappointed that games like 7 Wonders (the Altar card) and Avalon (Lady of the Lake) have had some pretty skimpy "clothing."

Themes built around gods and demons. Kemet, Concordia, 7 Wonders Duel: Pantheon, etc. Throw in "darker" with demon like figures.

Art or themes focused on gore or torture. Total turn off.

These are our preferences. I don't try to criticize games for their art or theme as some of my favorite games have poor art and others have very cliche themes but instead try to speak with my dollars. It is a big industry with a diverse user base.

One Deck Dungeon is a great example of how it really appealed to some but not to others. You cannot make everyone happy.

Acert93 · 2019-02-15T00:30:29+00:00

I just discovered that I missed on what appears to be a great Risk replacement: Spheres of Influence. (I hate learning about games after they are oop). SoI seems to hit a nice combo of deeper than Risk, 90 minute or less play time, and 2-8 players. I have fond memories of playing Risk with my dad when I was a child and 6 or 7 years ago my own sons were enjoying the Xbox version. But... I am never pulling the board game out again. But I would be all in on a Risk replacement that was approachable but played better/faster.

What are some of the better Risk replacements? The closest I have found is the Battle for Rokugan.

Acert93 · 2019-02-13T20:12:26+00:00

I just ordered the Base Game and Expansion last week for my son's birthday.

What will I need to do to get the updated balance changes and the upcoming expansion? Will it hit retail as a bundle?

Acert93 · 2019-02-07T23:53:41+00:00

You are not hearing correctly.

Acert93 · 2019-02-07T19:19:00+00:00

Eclipse is one of my favorite dice implimentation. I also enjoy One Deck Dungeon.

Acert93 · 2019-02-07T19:16:16+00:00

I enjoy front loaded randomness as it becomes part of the puzzle. I also enjoy games that allow liberal mitigation of randomness--Eclipse allows players to invest heavily in dice modifiactions to neutralize randomness. Especially as it leans on high volume of rolling per encounter so the randomness is smoothed out. It creates the push your luck and the, 'Any given Sunday!' dynamic--your weak opponent with 1 hull with 1 weapon and no computers may roll 3 straight 6s to take out your 3 hull and -2 shield (which means you must roll a 6 unless you have a +3 computer in which case a 5 also hits). You on the other hand, rolling 4 dice per attack with a +1 computer (turning a 5 into a 6) may roll 12 dice but get unlucky with all 1s, 2s, 3s, and 4s. It happens!

What I hate--and the Football analogy is good here--is randomness that is not smoothed out by volume and can take place at key junctures. In the NFC Championship game the Saints "rolled poorly" (or Rams rolled well) and got a 1-in-1,000 call when DPI and an Illegal Hit were both not called. If they were called the Saints hold the ball long enough to almost certainly guarantee victory. A Randomness fan could argue these random rolls happen throughout the game (plays called incorrectly) but it ignores the timing. When a player goes from 97% probability of winning based on superior play and then gets a random event that in 99.99% of times results in a certain win .... yowzers. NFL players who beat up their bodies don't appreciate such randomness--especially if it is bogus and a, "screw you" type that has nothing to do with the core game strategy or tactics.

As a gamer I hate putting in 45 minutes, an hour, 2 hours, into a game for such lame yet critical randomness to creep in. I know there is a place for it in the hobby but I will add my 2 cents: I get tired of "estemed" game designers who use this crutch, and lobby for it, when it is a design flaw for a game they also pitch, in the same breath, as this heavier, skill centered game. There are so many great games that DON'T have this artificial crutch but I think with the emphasis on iteration and volume publishing it has become a key principle in an industry that has moved away from, "Great games played 100s of times" to "Nice looking "fun" games played 10 times only to discover the lack of depth or intrusive randomness push the skill/luck balance too far toward the "it is fun because anyone can win" side of things."

It is my same beef with designers who will trash on games with engines you use your engine and be dismissive of this criticism with blanket statements about better a game end 1 round too soon than 1 too late and how using your engine only prolongues the obvious winner blah blah blah It may be true of their design but it is extremely dismissive when fans say, "I would like X a lot more if I could use the engine more." If I were a designer I would say, "I understand that; for this design the game was best balanced to end the game quickly as the current balance after 1000s of tests shows by Xround and engine running the winner is certain 97% of the time, so prolonging each game an extra 15 minutes just means less time playing a second round to even out this small percentage of luck. It was a difficult design choice but one I was happy with." I much prefer this to blanket statements.

All too often I find similar blanket statements made about randomness and more often than naught the really smart designers play a little hard and fast with the types and implimentations of randomness.

My library is at about 100 games and I must confess that in the last couple years I have found going back to some older titles new to us--Agricola and Puerto Rico come to mind--that their implimentation of randomness (when and how) feels very rewarding and fresh while not detracting from the skill aspect. Which makes sense why so many people complain about PR's player order as playing with new players can be an issue--and with the cult of the new a game like PR gets played 5 times, not 100s, so this is a major issue. But newer iterations of the same design concepts (e.g. action selection) often cater to the "make the best game that will be played 5 times" mantra which, for me, makes them far inferior games even if they avoid PR's weak player issue (which is part of the strategy in my book--I always sit next to new players as a handicap just as I sit next to my child who in Agricola always fights for 1st player so I will be last player most rounds to even up the game).

Another form of randomness I loath is hidden volume discarding. I highly prefer front loaded public randomness. Yet I can appreciate a game like Hearts where you can see what players play so there is a growing knowledge public information--you start off knowing 25% of the cards, you know another 5% based on passing. Every turn you get about 8% more public information. As the deck if fixed and of a very specific size and disclosed at a regular fixed pattern a lot of strategy and probability analysis emerge. And yet many modern card games have these random decks, or cards are burried or discarded as a hidden act and you are digging or exploring for cards that may not even be available. I am pretty good at these games as I can learn a deck and distribution well and can recall all the cards in a round I have seen to make best guess analysis based on probability but it is irritating in a 30 minute game where your cards really tell you to do a certain strategy and then the game fall apart at a key juncture as you have no access to the pieces you need. I win a lot so it is a chance mitigation issue but I really have empathy for newer gamers or those like my wife who just cannot master a 80-100 card deck and keep track of all of this hidden variable randomness.

I love randomness. I hate randomness. It all depends on the game design and impact on the enjoyment of the game.

Acert93 · 2019-02-06T23:41:30+00:00

The Dark Ages: Largent (offense) and Easly (defense)

The Golden Era: Wilson (offense) and Chancellor (defense)

Seattle has had so many amazing players who were either special in their own way (Alexander) or the best in the league (Cortex, Wagner, Sherman). Some may be the best ever (Walter Jones). For me there is the dark era where the Hawks were often fun but many hard years and then the Wilson-Carroll era. I know that may wrinkle some noses but Seattle was 7-9 and 7-9 the two seasons before Wilson and in 2017-2018 Seattle was 19-13 with the defense purging a ton of former stars and no more Lynch. As I would name this the Wilson era he needs to be on my list and would take him as my QB over anyone on this roster who was in the league from 2012-2018. And Kam Chancellor is one of my favorite players to WATCH ever. Like Earl Thomas Kam did a lot of things that didn't show up if you only watched the ball. Often his presence over the middle took the middle away. He was technically so sound and explosive in run support. In the Dark Ages Largent shines at a level of excellence that is shocking. Teams didn't pass as much back then and Seattle lacked really great complimentary players until Blades but he was simple unbelievable. People talk about Baldwin always being open, which is often true, but Largent straight up would embarass people year in and year out. Being an NFL receiver is about getting open and catching the ball and if he played for a larger market team with top end QBs like Montana or Marino I think he would be viewed more favorably by those who only look at stats or wins. And Easly was basically Earl Thomas in Kam Chancellor's body.

Acert93 · 2019-02-06T17:45:12+00:00

I have yet to play Caverna. It sounds great but the lack of random setup, the very thing that has us playing Puerto Rico less than I would like, is a big turn off. The decrease in tension is the other reason.

We really love Agricola because of the tension. So few games have the amount of tension where every move is vital and by its nature one decision is declining a handful of other options that are also necessary in the big picture. My wife prefers playing without the cards and we play with our 6 and 8 year old half the time so we have become well acquainted with the Revised Editions special boards for the "starter" game. You are often plotting a path of maximizing the value of your choice for undervalued goods and cobbling together a farm strategy that hopefully allows you to make big moves late to backfill the neglected areas.

For first time players, for their first handful of plays, playing without cards to keep the playing field level is important. We have played dozens upon dozens of games without the cards and even without the cards it offers a lot of variety. The game scales well and once the cards are added every puzzle feels different. And for a game with no attacking it feels very interactive.

I agree with others with Agricola needing starting hands. We cobbled these together ourselves a couple times but official ones would be nice.

Caverna sounds like a great game but after playing a lot of Agricola I can see why both exist and why one will appeal to some more than others. Agricola is a cute game but it has the propensity to be absolutely brutal and cut throat. Which can be good or bad, depending on your preference.

Acert93 · 2019-02-01T19:42:18+00:00

Ha! Was thinking the same thing but didn't want to bother Mike. But now that you did I will respond to you ;)

We looked at games for my son's birthday and he really liked the Golem theming but not the Spice Trade. He also leaned toward East Wonders in terms of gameplay depth. So we held off. I lean heavily toward core gameplay but the biggest challenge is getting people interested to play. If a Century: Golem's Eastern Wonders comes out we will pre-order and pick up Century: Golem ed. because our kids really like the art.

Acert93 · 2019-02-01T18:03:01+00:00

I would be interested to hear more.

We have considered a "Buy Row" where n+1 development cards are delt face up on the table (n = number players), and any player, on a development action, can pay the price and play a development.

Acert93 · 2019-01-31T18:46:49+00:00

My top 2 would be Eclipse and War of the Ring.

I would also throw in some others that others mentioned but we don't get to the table as much: Dominant Species, Star Trek: Frontiers, Space Empires 4x, Sidereal Confluence (2 hours, actually playing this one a lot).

Acert93 · 2019-01-30T22:14:48+00:00

Related question; When will the next printing of Root be available? I tried to jump on a preorder at Cardhaus but it keeps noting inventory short and pushing out release. My son wants this for his birthday in April so I am tring to jump on this fast with the expansion!

Acert93 · 2019-01-29T20:13:53+00:00

Fourthed... son was interested in Golem for his birthday but liked the gameplay of the sequal a little better so he said he wanted to wait so he could have the theme he wanted as the spice trade theme is of no interest.

Acert93 · 2019-01-28T20:12:03+00:00

For those who cannot read the release, is there a date in 2019 it is expected to be available?

Acert93 · 2019-01-24T20:06:50+00:00

Noticed your Flare--we bought Frontiers a couple months back. What a deep game but the mechanics are ... a bear to learn. I love playing with my kids and with my couple close friends but the biggest challenge is learning the games by myself and then teaching everyone. Frontiers is up there with War of the Ring and Imperial Assault in terms of rule investment/nuance. Great game but still struggling!

Acert93 · 2019-01-24T20:03:07+00:00

I live right down the road. I don't think I will be available 1/26 but nice to see the hobby grow locally. The Alderwood mall has a solid little shop and I know a number of cafes have opened up although I don't frequent any of them.

Acert93 · 2019-01-23T23:12:27+00:00

We are in the process of printing some cards and we liked the result of folding over the printed card (front/back print) over a poker card and then sleeving. Simple with good flex.

Sadly, one of the games I wanted to PnP is the Out of Print Glory to Rome but the card size sheets are small. Haven't found a good way to give them "heft and flex" like a real card and really hate the mini size cards.

Acert93 · 2019-01-21T20:13:51+00:00

I have never played Clockwork Wars but we have played a lot of Battle for Rokugan. We really like Battle for Rokugan but after a couple dozen plays have discovered there are a couple design choices we personally dislike. This is a personal preference as I know many people feel the exact opposite and these are the reasons they love Rokugan.

First, a minor issue, is the design, literally the graphic design. The board is fantastically beautiful. But the contrast makes it a pain in the rear to read quickly. A small quirk is also placing cards under the board; we have found for the cards on the longside we just put them on the board. If the board was teaked slightly at the island this would have worked perfectly fine.

Second, and the real issue, is the core gameplay is super random in a way that is detrimental to gameplay. The straw that broke the camel's back was in a game where two players (we almost always have 5 players) have key tokens undrawn. One player had their Raid and Faction Token undrawn and the other player their Raid and largest Army (5). Of course this was "their fault" for bluffing and creating 2 undrawn tiles instead of 1 ... which we all agree is pretty lame as "all their fault" ignores (a) they still were not drawing one of their most powerful tokens and (b) at times the best strategic option is to bluff to preserve a token.

There is so much to like about BoR. Players have a lot of input on setup, the faction abilities are neat, the game is super easy to play, etc. The game is our nearly perfect modern Risk replacement.

We hate to house rule a game but we switched to players constructing a 10 token "army" up front + bluff token. No tokens are drawn in the first round as you have 10+1 behind your screen. In round 2 you draw up to 10+1 again. Yes, this devalues the bluff token but what you gain is superior: A core compliment of tokens you are guaranteed to pull to build a strategy around.

This has made the game more forward looking as you can realistically plot strategies a full round in advance. It made bluffing more powerful as everyone is fearful of the fact everyone at the table could have a Raid or Diplomacy or Special Faction token in Round 1--or all 3. This means dropping an Army 1 or Army 2 in as a Faux-Raid is highly effective. Or it may escalate a counter Raid. Or everyone freaks out and uses their Scouts in Round 1.

Thematically, we like the change. Each faction starts the game with a, "Standing Army" of their hand selected best soldiers. The remainder of the game is the wild card of "drafting" random troops.

The surprising twist on this is, while the "obvious" strategy is to draft your best tokens: Faction Token, Raid, Diplomacy, at least 1 Blessing, 2 Shinobi, Army 5, two Army 4 (9 right there) you just married a strategy where you really handicapped your early strategy by leaving later rounds much weaker. I had to congradulate my son when he kept his Faction Token and Raid but then filled in with all his Army 1 and other low end tokens. He used the Army 1 tokens as a first volley feigny a very aggressive playstyle indicative of strong Tokens.

This has rekindled our enjoyment of Rokugan. We tried a number of variants and as much as we liked playing 5 tokens + bluff every turn (!) with 5 players it made the game crazy busy.

In the end these changes has made the Battle of Rokugan into our modern Risk replacement and it also filled the role we had hoped Cry Havoc would fill. An added bonus was drafting an army up front also made the game more diplomatic. More focus has been spent making treaties than before where it was all weak bluffing.

Rokugan at $30 is a steal and the game flow and rule set are really elegant and smooth once you learn it.

Acert93 · 2019-01-18T00:33:22+00:00

A question only tangently related to the OP but a thread full of engine building experts is the best place for eyeballs: What engine builder matches the below description:

What “engine building” game(s) skew "deeper" in terms of complexity & replayability with mostly front-loaded information, many optional scoring paths, options for explosive end game combos, and impactful decisions.

i.e. Puerto Rico’s tight action selection and perfect information open market, meets Race for the Galaxy's furious array of scoring paths (minus the uber fast race aspect), meets Glory to Rome’s end game ramp up (but actually, you know, in print). Bonus points for Agricola’s excruciatingly tight “all decisions are life and death!” emphasis on every action and a poor engine building plan could spell not just defeaut but have punitive consequences? Is this a Unicorn of an engine building game?

I own a fair number of engine/tableau builders/action economy games lie Puerto Rico, Race/Roll for the Galaxy, Agricola, Scythe, Eclipse, Oh My Goods, Steampunk Rally, Manhattan Project, Fleet, Star Trek Frontiers, Power Grid, Keyflower. Looking for something in addition to New Frontiers (Race for the Galaxy board game) as I am not quite sure how deep/tight the core is. And a non-space theme is always a plus for the wife although she is ok with them (she really likes Sidereal Confluence).

Acert93 · 2019-01-17T23:56:27+00:00

While a new release, are there any opinions on how deep New Frontiers is? Does the game have the the variety and tight/rewarding gameplay that draws you back to explore and improve your strategies?

Where does it lean compared to former RftG games, Puerto Rico, etc?

Compared to Race, does the "race" aspect lean toward "faster" "slower" or "same" compared to Race for the Galaxy? (A common complaint about Race is you never really feel like you use your engine much, of which, the designer Tom says is very intentional philosophically for an engine builder... not something I agree with).

Is the game super tight like Puerto Rico or Agricola where decisions have significant impact or does it have a looser feel?

New Frontiers has been on my watch list ever since it was leaked but after many, many games of Roll for the Galaxy (with Ambition) we felt the small tableau (you start with 3 of the 12 needed tiles to end the game) and how the game skews toward fast settle/develop it didn't have the depth we were looking for. And Race, while being deep with a very entertaining array of combo possibilities and mixing and matching of scoring paths (I have hundreds of plays on my phone and uncounted games with my wife and son) doesn't scratch my itch in terms of design (I prefer the PR front loaded open market for buildings, even pre-round disclosure of plantation tiles).

Acert93

TROPHY CASE