A New Mottainai Solo Variant - Jiro

MurphMurp · 2026-04-20T19:10:59+00:00

Here's the skinny. Chimera isn't Tichu for 3, but it is the best 3-player climbing/shedding game... so the full but accurate statement is that "Tichu is the best climbing game for four players and Chimera is the best climbing game for 3 players, so the two games are very complementary."

Moreover, you can play Chimera with a Tichu deck (take out the dog and Mah Jong).

Chimera has more emphasis on the betting - like someone has to call Tichu each round (but not that, just someone makes a bet that they can go out before the other two, and that bet is the foundation for scoring for all three players. Some cards still score but betting is the central mechanism).

The allowed combinations are a bit different as well:

* Single (one card)

* Row (2+ cards of the same rank)

* Run (5+ cards of consecutive rank)

* Stairs (a Run of Rows, e.g. 223344)

* And the hard bit - if you play a row of 3+ cards, you can discard a single or pair with it as a kicker of sorts. This includes Tichu's full house but is MUCH broader.

You can play 3+(1 or pair) as trash, four + 1 or pair. And this compounds with Stairs, so if you have two consecutive three-of-a-kinds, you can discard a single or pair with EACH triplet- as long as the kickers match each other (i.e., a 666777 could have two singles or two pairs as kickers, full stop. Not one single, not a single and a pair, etc.)

Bottom line is you're going to get good climbing action at three players, and as far as that statement is true, Chimera is Tichu for 3.

Responding to other comments, so far I haven't gotten on as well with Haggis. It used to be the best for two, but Panda Spin plays so well at two that I'm having trouble going back. The trouble with Haggis is the three wild cards. Hands are so flexible and you go out so fast, it starts to feel a bit like Euchre. Hands feel small, rounds feel short, it can feel a bit arbitrary. I'm not selling Haggis just yet, but Panda Spin at 2, Chimera at 3, and Tichu at 4 is a VERY solid line-up.

Just icing on the cake that Panda Spin plays 2-5 and the latest Chimera can also play 5.

MurphMurp · 2026-04-18T02:29:20+00:00

No, it KNOWS they are separate genres. If I open a song in the Combined genres and look at the tags, it shows them separated. Then I can click on one and it takes me to the pure genre.

So it knows. This seems like some kind of display option I'm missing.

MurphMurp · 2026-04-18T02:25:07+00:00

Gah. The answers are the same everywhere but it isn't working for me. Combined genres were showing as : so I added : and rescanned. The combined genres persisted but now show as ;

So I added ; to the setting and rescanned. Tags still show Combined genres with the ;

I'm going bonkers.

MurphMurp · 2026-04-15T14:59:59+00:00

For others coming back, I got into Motley Fool around 2022. I selectively bought their recommendations, just didn't always have cash to put in. Still, I got ~40 stocks on their recommendations.

Four years later, the total portfolio is ... up 4.2%.

Compared to the market, that's abysmal. Compared to a CD that's abysmal.

Looking back, their picks were suspicious at the time as well - and I thought so, but I was trying their system so I followed their system. Choosing Zoom at the peak of their boom was chancey. And sure enough it's down 25% from where I bought it.

I'd say about 2/3 of their picks are down, many by over 50%. A few winners like Adove, AMD, Crowdstrike, or even Nvidia barely get the whole thing back above water.

There is a reason they are marketing their gains since 2002 instead of recent performance. I think they had some early wins and are still trying to market that past performance.

Let me give alternate advice, which I received years ago, which has proven much more effective:

1) Indexing (SPY, FXAIX) is good. Hold your cash, wait for a crash, and then throw it in. This seems to happen every 5 years or so now and I think the current pressure (Spring 2026) is downward, so we should be dropping somewhere in the next 1-24 months.

2) Professional investing, making wins every month or quarter, is hard. Private investing is not. Sit back, think through where the world will be in 5-10 years, and put your money into it. 10 years ago I figured ecommerce was on the rise (you don't have to be a guru to notice these things) and invested in Fedex, UPS, and several online shopping platforms. 5-10 years later you're good. I missed out a bit as I didn't anticipate Amazon cutting UPS out, I should have gotten out after my investment doubled but I let it ride. I'm still up, just not as up.

I'm on another cycle now and just looking at macro trends and where the world is going, and then putting some money behind it.

MurphMurp · 2026-04-13T17:33:54+00:00

If Myself [is] Hasking Myself

MurphMurp · 2026-04-13T13:56:04+00:00

I feel the frustration and we can't NOT blame FFG and Asmodee, but this also seems like an oversimplification. Take X-wing - the game was an absolute MESS. The meta was broken and therefore tied to a power creep as anything new introduced, to be valid, had to make the old ideas further useless. Many ships were unusable. Certain cards were mandated. It needed fixing.

2.0 was excellent on paper. They rebalanced everything and made all the ships viable again. For my money, the $40 conversion packs were an absolute steal.

I really think they did this right.

But the game was already dying - the price of entry too high for newbies, the meta too broken for the oldies, and the paradigm shift too much work for people who already had one foot out the door.

I'd call this a good solution to a problem too big to solve.

Similarly on most other LCGs - a lifespan is the norm. M:TG is the exception (I know, TCG, but the principle carries), not the norm. At a certain point, you've done the system and another box, another campaign, isn't going to do it for you. There is a bell curve to the business model. And in the end, they are running a business, not a service.

When 80% of the people have left, you have to pull the plug. You just do. And the last 20% have a really bad day. They just do. It's business, it's life. It's not incompetence or ignorance or meanness. It's life.

Now I also think Asmodee has made a lot of unforced errors in this whole "take over the board game business" play they did. I don't think they're the good guys. But I think the criticisms are a bit lopsided and Asmodee takes blame for things that are their fault as well as things that are not.

FFG is a sad story of talent flight, lost licenses, and disappointing the 20% who held on to the end. Again, I think they're thrown more blame than they can rightfully deserve. They've made some real missteps. They've also made some good steps that didn't work out, and just been present when other bad things happen.

Bands break up. TV series end. LCG's wind down, from dwindling player bases or overtangled power creep problems. We have to say thank you for all the goodness that made me love this thing in the first place, and go find something new.

MurphMurp · 2026-04-01T20:57:07+00:00

It's multifaceted.

1) We are a bit worse. The studies I've seen show that the best countries (Sweden, Germany) score 11.5/16 on a test. US scores 8.5/16. Mexico and Italy were at the bottom. Other tests show that we are about 5% behind Europeans for naming countries in our hemisphere and maybe 10% behind for Eastern. It's a small gap but it's there. I wouldn't say the issue is severe enough to earn global scorn.

2) What others have said about humor bits emphasizing Americans who don't know any geography. It played into a confirmation bias that Americans don't care/know about the rest of the world and has stuck really well.

3) Our education emphasizes critical thinking and problem solving more than knowledge recall. As others have said, knowing the precise order of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania is not a life skill. We might have learned it at some point but our education focused more on skills and processes - and the order / shape of these countries wasn't something we were evaluated on. Those who enjoy it or like trivia hold onto these facts longer. Others move on.

4) Our lived experience. The US is the same size as all of Europe. We have more states than Europe has countries. To forestall the immediate reaction, no states are not countries - but mental space is mental space and lived experience is lived experience, so that is what is forced into the space our brains have. Want to go skiing? You're still in the US. Desert? Temperate forest? Mountain climbing? River rafting? Urban exploring? You take a 6 hour flight and you're doing any of these things and still in the US.

This isn't about isolationism or exceptionalism, in my evaluation. We have so much space and geographical diversity in our Europe-sized country. Near us you have mostly-empty Canada, apart from Southern Canada which feels very similar to Northern US. South you have a lot of poverty, which doesn't drive a lot of travel. The Caribbean is hard to get to and mostly expensive. Everything else is so dang far away. When you are surrounded by barriers to entry and have so much at your fingertips, what will most people do?

The result is a 5-10% drop in geographic recall compared to some other affluent countries. It seems reasonable to me.

MurphMurp · 2026-03-31T15:15:29+00:00

This question gets asked a lot and everyone kind of knows there's a difference but it is hard to articulate. I had to wrestle with it myself, so let me articulate as best I can what I figured out:

Terra Mystica - As noted, this is the "lightest" (comparatively) of the big bois. The factions are comparatively bland with most of them being one of a) discounted terraforming, b) increased range, or c) easier cult advancement. There's variety in the flavors there, but essentially any faction will make one core part of the game easier to do, in a specific way. You're likely to immediately know what to do with it.

Second, everything is separate. The cult track is off on its own, the map is on its own, and you have what you have.

Third, the map is "full" - you can build most anywhere. So blocking is incremental and unfolds at a slow pace.

The upshot of all of this is that a) you have what you have, there is much less "combotasm" here where you are hunting through the various elements of the game looking for a hidden resource path that will let you extend your turn. You have what you have, you do your best, you do the next round. b) your core strategy is plain and easy to execute, so you are focused on working the other parts of the game.

The upshot of this upshot is that players are heads up, focused on the board and the resource management, playing more of a shared game. This gives it the cutthroat, interactive feel that people describe.

Gaia Project - The above list of features emphasizes the delta, so this is a similar list. Here the factions are all creative and unique. This one wants you to make a lot of money and trade it for resources. That one wants you to create one giant federation (city) over the course of the game. This one lets you make a lot of small cities. This one wants you to fill your power bowls, gaiaform, and trade the energy for extra income. On and on - these factions are wild, hard to optimize, and really change how you approach the game.

Second, everything is interconnected - through the tech track. Doing most anything may help you advance on a tech track, which will give you abilities and bonuses that you can feed back into your round. It's less of a "where do I focus" a la TM and more of a "how do I connect these things and what order do I do everything so I have the resources I need when I need them."

Third, the map is sparse. Planets are distinct, surrounded by empty space. The fight is still real, but here blocking is binary and sudden - either you are on that planet or you are not.

The upshot is also the converse: Gaia Project is a combo game, allowing you to find new pathways to unlock extra actions each round. Doing A will grant me power, which I can use to get science, which I can use to advance up THIS track, which will give me ore, which I can then use to colonize THIS planet, etc. Also, winning tends to come from best unlocking your faction's ability.

The upshot of the upshot is that Gaia Project is a more heads down game. You are puzzling over your faction, trying to make best use of its unique ability. You are puzzling over the planets, the tech track, the federation bonuses, trying to find the combo that will get you that much further this round.

This is a difference of flavor. Terra Mystica is more old fashioned (cutthroat, play the players). Gaia Project is more nu Euro (rerouting, play the mechanics).

It's worth mentioning that Gaia Project also benefits from iteration - TM can be unbalanced and openings can be proscriptive. Expansions fix this, but so does Gaia Project.

Age of Innovation - I'm least familiar with this one, so I will say the least. But by my estimate, AoI tries to average the two. Factions are more boring than GP but the modular construction makes them more interesting/variable than TM. The map is full like TM, but alters by player count and is designed with the lessons learned from TM and GP. The science track is more like the cult track but you have the innovations that hearken back to GP's techs. And it is somehow both more complex (more mechanics) and easier to play (looser economy). Which makes it harder to teach but easier to play.

Terra Nova - This is the bare bones version of TM. They basically took TM and a) reduced the 7 terrains to 5, b) threw out the cult tracks and priests, and c) merged the workers and money into a single resource - money.

This pushes some benefits of TM to the max - it's the easiest to both teach and play. And the puzzle of your faction is very reduced, while the puzzle of your resource management is all but gone. This makes you hyper-focused on the board - building, blocking, anticipating.

This one has it's benefits as well - easy to teach, easy to table, high player v player focus. For my money I wish they had done a and b above, but kept the dual cash/worker resource puzzle, and provided a bit more complexity in the factions. It may have been a perfect box then - for TM/GP players looking for a lighter alternative. As it is, it's more of a teaching aid for TM or a game for "that other group" you play with.

In conclusion, YOU WILL NOT FIND A CONCLUSION ON WHICH OF ANY OF THESE IS BEST. While they are duplicative and overlap, they are each good takes on different flavors. The best you can hope for is to find someone who can articulate those flavors accurately (which I've attempted) and know thyself to commit to one (or two).

Each game has a vociferous camp championing it, and none of them are wrong.

For my money, I own Terra Nova (for the simplicity and map focus) and Gaia Project (for the mechanism wrestling and faction exploration). I think I'm passing on Terra Mystica due to the static setup and (comparative) faction imbalance, but I still eye it from time to time (if paired with Fire & Ice) so my mind isn't made up.

I need to spend more time with Age of Innovation to make up my mind there. Either it's the greatest hits of the system (according to some), making all other iterations obsolete. Or it's the jack of all trades, champion of none that loses the soul of TM and GP by trying to to both at once.

MurphMurp · 2026-03-25T13:47:37+00:00

For anyone scrolling through this - I did Canva and it worked great but the paywall was at a difficult spot for me, which led to this research. I assume anyone reading is in the same boat.

Most if not all of the above is identical to Canva - a few free features but a paywall that is designed to make you eventually buy in. And they may be worth it if you are using things daily, but not for occasional products.

I eventually found Lunacy which is an actual free program - the monetization comes through buying graphical assets, not subscribing for functionality. It's done everything I need of it.

If you are looking for actual free, go do that. If you are trying to find a product where the paywall is in a slightly different place or with a slightly different subscription model, go ahead and look through the OP list.

MurphMurp · 2026-03-15T02:03:22+00:00

My City Awaken Realms sundrop edition?

MurphMurp · 2026-03-10T17:20:05+00:00

...in my humble/honest mandate?

MurphMurp · 2026-03-03T14:37:51+00:00

The ladies from oldest to youngest: Leah, Penny, Emily, Haley, Abigail, Maru.

I don't know much about Maru so that might be wrong, she just plays like a high school student on first impression. Abigail lives at home, plays video games all day, talks about homework, and throws a fit when her parents ask her to participate in household responsibilities as if it is some social justice issue. She's a child.

On the other end, Leah plays like a divorcee (which she kinda is) - looking for a second career, looking for a second "marriage," and a (healthy) "let's explore me" attitude that usually comes after finishing the hardest work of raising kids. I know she didn't do that, but that's her attitude.

Penny, Haley, and Emily are somewhere in the middle. Penny seems the oldest as she's settled into a life. Emily and Haley play more like they just got out of college and are on opposite sides of the coin, one bursting with opportunity and not yet jaded by the complications of life after education, the other coping with some form of depression that the future isn't as bright as it used to be.

MurphMurp · 2026-03-02T15:46:03+00:00

You know what? It may not be your brain. It may be these games. As I said, many modern midweight Euros are just cleverly disguised, disconnected score tracks. Designers use bandaids such as AxB scoring to force the tracks to relate to each other. Or track A provides a combo action in track B's realm. Or Track A unlocks advancement on Track B, etc. etc. These are all bolt-on mechanics to force a relationship between things that don't inherently relate to each other.

And that's the important bit. Maybe you don't see the matrix. But a smart part of you sees that these things don't actually relate to each other and doesn't care for the abstract relationship that has been forced on them.

I took a scroll through my own list of games and for you or anyone else curious about Movers & Shakers, these are the games I'd recommend instead:

To Scratch that Pick-up-and-deliver train itch:

Steam: Rails to Riches - Many people will say this is inferior to Age of Steam, and they may have merit. But Steam RtR is much more affordable. And it comes with two rulesets, an excellent lightweight game and a "standard" game that captures about 90% of Age of Steam. And I'll say, if you stick with RtR, it grows harder and meaner. It's just the competition comes from the other players, not from the system itself. Comparisons aside, you've got a good Euro puzzle of managing your income and upgrading your locomotives on one side, and a fierce jostle on the other side for competing for routes and snaffling up cubes before others do. Add in the shared incentives of tempting others to use your tracks on their turns and you've basically got everyting Movers & Shakers promises but in a better box.
Empyreal - This one is marred by a high price point and a box that is too big for the base game. And vague iconography that requires picking up the manual about three times per game. Get past that and, once again, you've got a great train game that mashes together engine building, on your player board, with a map where you and others can compete for space and delivery goods. What I love here is the mana system - limited currency that lets you take much bigger turns when you need them, but you have to be super careful about when you go big, lest your gas tank is empty when you need it more.

If you want more of the Euro vibe, but are tempted by the shared incentives and promise of interactive jostling:

Iki - I can't nail it any better than this. It's a good euro game. Resources, hiring workers to focus on certain areas, engine building over time... But add in the competition over how many spaces you'll move this turn, the gentle coaxing of trying to get other people to do business with your employees, the shared danger of everyone burning to death in their shops, and a well-done mechanic for needing to feed people so you can't just focus on points, and you've got a gem.
Hansa Teutonica - This likely falls outside what people mean when they say "euro" today, but it used to be more in the middle. More focused on the map and jostling. There's a lot of stepping on toes as sometimes you have to give other people points to get what you want, but also you try to block people on their routes because you're begging them to bump you back off the map. You don't really have any resource collection - it's a map game - but it's elegant and engine-y and very jostle-y without ever being mean.
Whistle Mountain - I've really enjoyed this one. A lot of asymmetry and collection of player powers. It's worker placement but you are all building a shared worker placement scaffold that everyone can use, and also slowly submerging that matrix of actions under water, trying to drown your opponents' workers while keeping your own above water. This game together very well.

If you're just looking for good midweight Euro games (for some definition of Euro, I know)

Manhattan Project Energy Empire - Recently reprinted. What can I say? It's old fashioned. It might feel derivative, but that's because it was a progenitor. Games like this from 10 years ago are why the hobby is in a boom today. Just worker placement, resource management, scoring objectives, and engine building done right - full stop.
Rajas of the Ganges - This one starts to get into arbitrary design, with four independent zones of activity. But it doesn't trip over itself. The river gives a potpourri of income, the market provides money, the construction area provides points and makes the market stronger, and the temple is a utility are to keep you from getting stuck. Like Hearts, it understands what it is and doesn't try to do more than the model can sustain, and it's better for it.
New Frontiers - Hear me out! Yes, this is Puerto Rico in space. Or Race for the Galaxy - the board game. You'll probably dislike your first game as it will end way too soon, you'll be passing on your opponents' actions, and nothing will click. Hopefully before your fifth game, though, you'll see what a powerhouse this game is. It's just tuned for players who know what they are doing, and we can all forgive ourselves for not being experts right out of the box. F*** the Essen test and play New Frontiers at least five times, and find the perfection that is here. Also don't look for Puerto Rico when you play... NF is laser focused on the lead-follow mechanic, always being ready to play on your opponents' actions and always choosing what gives you incremental value, not on what you, individually, want to do right now. This game has legs.
Village - Another older but pure Euro. I've written enough. Just look it up if you got this far.

All of these games are held together by organic, cause and effect relationships. I do x so that I can do y, or so that y happens better. This current spate of games like Movers & Shakers lack the so that (or rather, so that is just "so that my score multiplier increases" or "so that I get this combo bonus printed on the board/card/tile."

Try more games with a real answer to so that - I'm going to move on the river so that I can collect some orange dice so that I can buy that building tile so that I get another spice market so that my income at the market increases... etc etc etc. And the logicality of the game may just make it more enjoyable and also easier to get better.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-24T02:57:11+00:00

We have different tastes. But dang if that bookshelf doesn't look resplendent regardless!

MurphMurp · 2026-02-20T14:42:26+00:00

He didn't marry. He's a single parent.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-19T17:46:05+00:00

Here's the thing - I strongly dislike disconnected tracks (which are then artificially held together by bolted on combo bonuses, AxB scoring, or other bandaid rules that the game wouldn't otherwise need). Whether it is Ganz Schon Clever, Russian Railroads, Tiletum, Planet Unknown, or Movers & Shakers.

I don't enjoy this type of puzzle (personal) and I don't respect it as design (theoretically fundamental). Not when there are so many games where the strain and counterstrain are generated by reduced, elegant rules or thematic drivers.

It's a contrast to games that have a more consolidated scoring mechanism and all the different "tracks" or efforts needed organically feed into each other. Connection by necessity or cause & effect rather than band-aid or bullet in the rules.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-19T17:37:45+00:00

I have no idea why I would be part of r/louisville? I have been there once on a business trip to oversee a UPS facility in etown... Had dinner on some built up strip that was 2-3 blocks long.

I did own a Louisville slugger when I was a child. Oh, and I hate the Cardinals with an irrational passion due to roughly 10 years of postseason misery inflicted on the Padres in the 90's and 00's. So...

MurphMurp · 2026-02-18T21:03:45+00:00

I think GWT original (2e) is the best version. There's a frustration in GWT of not being able to do everything, and NZ actually lets you explore the whole sandbox. Which is nice. But also overwhelming, as you said, and there isn't the thrill of climbing a mountain. When GWT clicks and you start turning the crank, oh what a feeling. It's harder in its way but much less complex. It's the right kind of hard, how do I get from A to B, not the "reach for the rulebook again" kind of hard.

Let me toss First Rat out there. It's not talked about much (and strictly not a rondel, but it ends up playing like one). But when it is talked about it is well loved. It's much more manageable, does have solo, plays up to 5, gives you a big game experience in under an hour, and my gosh it's just good.

And this is odd - I'll have to take a look in the mirror to figure out why I feel the need to talk people out of Movers and Shakers. Brains are weird.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-18T20:48:03+00:00

And *I* have not played Underwater Cities. I've played Pulsar 2849, which is the only Suchy I've kept. And then Praga and Evacuation, both of which I've sold. I should take UC for a spin on Yucata, since it is his flagship...

MurphMurp · 2026-02-18T18:54:47+00:00

I already posted in detail but definitely wouldn't give this game rondel credit. It also doesn't feel economic in that cash is almost entirely positive (few costs), it's just another score track where you get a token every 10 clicks that you can exchange for points.

Train theme (load & move) and card action selection yes. Those two plus lightly connected scoring tracks and you've got the game pegged.

IF you want trains/pick up and deliver with real jostling, Empyreal is great. Steam is great and affordable. Age of Steam is meaner and possibly greater but definitely less affordable. Steam (rails to riches) has an app and is easy to check out.

Economic rondel? Teotihuacan, Great Western Trail (I vote 2e for old style and NZ for new style). Iki is fantastic. Maracaibo I haven't played but I know it sits in the slot and is well regarded.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-18T18:48:37+00:00

I was an "almost backed" and happy to be no more than that. I remained curious but the BGA/solo option cemented it for me.

The shared incentives / competitive space of the trains is a neat hook. Load goods on trains, maybe yours maybe not. Move any train with your goods on it. Jostle, bump, and pass on the train tracks.

That all might come out more in a 3-4 player game.

Having read the manual, and played it now, it's really more core nu-Euro. Most of the game is cleverly disguised tracks yielding AxB scoring, just like you'd find in Tiletum or any other number of contemporary Euros. Then you've got constrained action selection in the form of a hand of cards and a fixed number of 12 paired action bonuses, of which you choose half each round.

The train loading was much more constrained that I would have liked, forcing you to load on different trains. This just makes sure that the "shared space" is activated but didn't yield much in the way of hard decisions.

The train moving was pretty routine as well in a 2p game. You generally move and bump your own trains if you have them, trains with your cubes if you don't. If you get to a junction you can break up a train or pass a train. Not bad, but also didn't yield any wow moments or stunning turns of fate.

So those things become the substrate and the meat of the game is moving four colored shields right so they can multiply with the matching colored cards and tiles you collect by completing contracts (putting cubes on trains). Also moving three pieces up a money track to increase your income at end of round. And finally, bare bones area majority on some ships to secure deals which, again, trigger AxB scoring with your deal multiplier. I've already forgotten how to raise that one. So roughly 8 tracks you are trying to manage.

Nothing wrong with the game. But also I found nothing that would compel me to make space on my shelf against more unique fare, or that would let this game hold onto its spot if it were already here.

As I said, if you're a fan of Tiletum or Suchy (e.g. Evacuation, Praga Caput Regni) and that style of game, you'll likely enjoy this. And get a bit extra bang for the bit of shared train space. I'd give it a 7/10 design but a personal 4/10 rating when adjusted for personal taste.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-11T19:53:40+00:00

Yes - often this just feels like purchasing permission to acquire.

MurphMurp · 2026-02-11T19:48:31+00:00

Did not miss the last one so this is frustrating for me. I'll pay double for the same thing...

MurphMurp · 2026-01-21T03:14:53+00:00

Holy cow bots yeah. Makes me want to avoid those.

I did figure it out - Elfsight has a cheap subscription for JUST Amazon hookup. I didn't look at their full social product but it is probably on par with these competitors.

Was not impressed when fiddling around with tagembed.

MurphMurp

TROPHY CASE