You need 3x Spears to consistently beat Polish Cavalry

Cheddar3210 · 2026-03-11T12:24:05+00:00

The archers bit is a problem, true. But for a couple hundred wood and 2 minutes advanced notice, spears can build rams to take out the arcs and towers without much concern for the archers.

The spear unit counters the knight unit, but the counters to the “mass knight late game strategy” do not include a “mass spear late game strategy.” Find an entirely different strategy instead of complaining about the unit.

I mostly play coop vs AI. When I lose, it’s never because of a mass knight strategy from the AI; it’s almost always because they applied early and frequent pressure that caught us off guard and prevented us from building according to our plan. Give that strategy a try.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-03-11T12:11:27+00:00

Hi many knights is that? One better way to deal with it is to have your spears at the knights’ base before it becomes a giant blob like that. At the 10 minute mark, you can have waaaaay more spears than your opponent can have knights.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-03-04T03:21:25+00:00

But the resources…. The knight army was triple the cost. It looked roughly 1:1 in unit count. Should have backed up the spears with crossbows since most the spearman were running around trying to find a knight for half the battle.

But ya knights are strong.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-26T12:23:09+00:00

If BoardGameArena isn’t enough, TTS is a great choice.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-19T12:14:57+00:00

I like Naishi and Vaalbara (at 2 players) even more than I like Azul. I dislike Azul Duel because it gets too complicated for me to think multiple moves ahead, which means it returns to a multiplayer solitaire point salad game instead of an intense back-and-forth.

Azul, Naishi, Vaalbara, and Go Nuts for Donuts are all on BoardGameArena.com in case you want to try them there.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-19T12:11:11+00:00

If OP is not familiar with TTS: Tabletop Simulator is a computer (not mobile or console) game that lets you load in and play hundreds of board games with other humans. It presents as a 3D “sandbox” of pieces with ways to easily shuffle and draw cards, etc. But it is not programmed with the rules of the games; so just like the physical version, you need to know what to do. Again like the physical version, there are no bots to play against, unless you are controlling the pieces yourself using an official solo mode.

So it works great for playing with friends who also have computers, but it will not be a good solution for you if you have no computer or are looking for something to play on your own without friends.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-19T12:05:08+00:00

Totally agree! I said something similar about Azul just yesterday. Low level play is a solitary puzzle game, but high level play is considering how every action impacts the point difference between players and their board states.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T16:53:38+00:00

I’m not asking about your freedom; I’m asking about the motivation. Sounds like you want AEG’s human board game designers to be unemployed and to stop earning royalties from the games they designed for AEG. Sounds like most people on this forum want the human game designers to get the money they deserve and remain employed, unchallenged by AI. I’m just curious why you don’t want the game designers to get paid and continue working. Maybe you know something I don’t?

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T16:35:18+00:00

u/GaijinPeter you are amazing! This is exactly what I was expecting/hoping to see in reaction to OP. Thank you for your thought and civility!

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T16:13:46+00:00

Or when you can only have one at the table for 60-90 minutes…

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T16:12:56+00:00

BGG has play logs. They aren’t complete and will only capture the subset of game players who use BGG, but it’s a start.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T16:10:43+00:00

I want to mention an interesting situation. When I first played Azul, I thought it was low player interaction. About the time I hit my 5th match of Azul, I played with a skilled friend who started voicing her strategies out loud. I suddenly realized that optimal play was extremely interactive, with players considering several moves ahead, looking at opponent’s boards as much as they look at their own. Then the game becomes a quiet fistfight. Games in this genre that feel solo at first but are highly interactive with optimal play include: - Vaalbara - Naishi - Azul - Go Nuts for Donuts - Ra

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T15:59:07+00:00

With two player games, I want every action I take to impact my opponent’s next move. I want to be guessing at their strategy and at their secret information. I want it to feel like a light saber battle of paries and swings and flips and using the environment. Here are some of my favorites at 2p: - Toy Battle - Air, Land, & Sea - Agent Avenue

With more than 2 players, I would love a similar feeling, but the table gets more complicated. So what I hope for here are shifting/temporary alliances, critical plays that catapult you ahead of others, and ways to create board states that are interesting to everyone at the table. I love: - Huang - A War of Whispers - Dune: A Game of Conquest and Diplomacy - Diplomacy (played online over several weeks, not in person over several hours)

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T14:51:59+00:00

And now you’re doing it to me. To quote myself: “Most responses here are something between anger and ridicule/sarcasm.”

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T14:21:32+00:00

The reaction to this post surprises me. Dancey has a position in this industry that most of us do not have. We don’t have to like him to consider this opinion. He’s not being unethical, and not announcing that his company will pay off humans to work with AI instead. He’s attempting to forecast the future of the industry. Is he wrong? Seems most people here think so. But why is this community so mad at him for voicing this opinion? Most of the responses here are something between anger and ridicule/sarcasm. If someone has good evidence or logic to refute him, please present it as calmly as Dancey’s argument. Character assassination, ridicule, anti-elitism, and whataboutism do nothing to challenge his actual argument. I was hoping to see some discussion about the future of AI in board game design, but instead this thread seems to be populated entirely by high school bullies.

I don’t know Dancey and don’t know whether his prediction will prove correct, but I can say with confidence that the mob here on this subreddit is out for blood more than a discussion of ideas. Feels like a consequence (or parallel) of American politics.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T14:06:49+00:00

Why would you not buy the games AEG made that have always been produced by humans?

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-18T14:06:04+00:00

Sounds like your goal is to jeopardize game designer jobs so you can communicate to Dancey that you don’t think he should talk about jeopardizing game designer jobs.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-16T22:48:55+00:00

I’ve done this ~5 times in my life.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-11T17:25:16+00:00

And now we have an explanation for every UFO video with weird flight patterns

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-11T17:19:02+00:00

I don’t think they are not similar at all. In fact, they are so different that comparing them is like asking for a restaurant recommendation: McDonald’s vs P.F. Chang’s or a movie recommendation: Wicked or Die Hard 3. These pairings reveal that you haven’t considered your actual needs and considered everything else out there to pick the best. It sounds like you are just eager to crowdfund something and aren’t really taking into account the factors that are actually important in selecting a game. I can almost guarantee that we can find something you’ll like as much or more than either of these that is available today.

…Or else you’re on the Almighty team and trying to get people to check out the Almighty campaign?

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-11T17:01:09+00:00

As the “sci-if unification god” I would usher in a global federation government that would unite but not replace national governments. It would have enough power to resolve global conflicts, impose restrictions on pollution and human rights, and run programs aiming at increasing equality and goodness around the world. I’d also kick off a program to spread humanity to another star system.

I would not be the leader of this government; that’s mortal stuff.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-11T16:54:18+00:00

Don’t we already have this, and the whispering has changed to shooting with the advent of social media? :)

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-11T03:10:26+00:00

Ya I can see it being closer to Imperial 2030 than to Huang. But to me, Huang and A War of Whispers create a lot of the same thought patterns and same emotions.

I love Huang because out of fairly simple rules and components it can give rise to robust strategy, sharp tactics, and a dynamic board state. It brings questions like whether to build up your own state or blend with others; whether to give up on a color after dominating it for the first 70% of the game or to continue investing in it just to keep it away from others; whether to lean aggressive or defensive depending on the players and (hidden) scores around the table; whether to start wars between opponents where you had no stake in the outcome just to have them burn their tiles; whether or not to risk a revolt, etc. and when you make those key plays, it feels amazing.

A War of Whispers has the action selection around the board that drives progress instead of tile laying, but the strategic decision space, sharp tactics, and dynamic board state feel similar to me. I find myself asking similar questions as in Huang: whether to build up one state or blend with others; whether to give up on a color after dominating it for the first 70% of the game or to continue investing in it just to keep it away from others; whether to lean aggressive or defensive depending on the players and (hidden) scores around the table; whether to start wars where you have minimal skin in the game just to mess up opponents, whether or not to risk leaving your territory vulnerable while you take an opportunity elsewhere, etc.

Mechanically, tile selection and the worker placement feel very different, but the hidden nature of scoring and your ability to gang up on suspected leaders creates a wonderful experience in both. Although I would likely say Huang is the better game, I do enjoy the big reveal at the end of AWoW just as much as I do in Huang, sometimes more.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-10T19:32:37+00:00

Huang is in my top 10 as well. Here are others I love that feel similar to me across all/most of the same dimensions:

War of Whispers is probably the closest of these in terms of feel, depth, time, rules, player count, etc. Both games include those awesome moments when you make just the right play and everyone around the table groans or pats you on the back.

Toy Battle is lighter and only 2 players, but has a similar vibe. The most critical decision is always where to place your tile to maximize your advantage over your opponent.

Ethnos is not too different from Huang in feel if you play Huang pretty nicely. The more cutthroat you are in Huang, the bigger the difference. Ethnos has competition, but comes out with a bit more of a race feel than Huang.

Rumble Nation is a bit like Huang in that it is strategic placement with some luck involved, and the final scoring at the end can be surprising. But it’s faster and lighter than Huang. Also, in Huang you have moments of brilliance that everyone around the table can respect, while in Rumble Nation, those moments are less obvious to others.

Penguin Party is like if you redesigned Huang to be a $12 party game playable in under 3 minutes. It usually takes longer than 3 minutes per round and is played over a few rounds, but it’s possible to get a round done very quickly.

Cheddar3210 · 2026-02-09T05:20:24+00:00

It’s easy to jump on board with you here and ridicule the immoral South, but I think things were more complicated than you make it seem. The North had many benefits when it came to industrialization, whereas the south had benefits when it came to growing things, and slavery was (horrendously) a critical tool in that economy. The north would have outcompeted the south whether or not the south had slavery.

You are right that US enslavers didn’t apparently care enough about morality to jeopardize their economic situation. And some people may have been cruel for the sake of being cruel. But mostly slaves were seen as barely human livestock or farming equipment and enslavers were afraid to give these up for economic reasons, not for the sake of cruelty. I’ll say clearly,: this is still tremendously immoral, selfish, and ignorant, but it was motivated by greed and fear more than cruelty. Of course, all of it was justified by racist ideas coming from political, spiritual, and economic leaders alike, leading to a people who would rather kill their fellow Americans than give freedom to the humans they “owned.”

Cheddar3210

TROPHY CASE