Main Menu

The Board Game Thread

Started by radiator, 21 February, 2014, 03:13:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Keef Monkey

We took your advice radiator, played Carcassonne without the farmers or the rivers rules. Meant we could get up and running and get to grips with it fast which was great. Was a lot of fun, particularly liked how quick it is to set-up and get through a game as it means it'll see a lot more use than some of the (still great but) more long-winded games we have.

Satanist

Didn't manage Ticket to ride at the weekend as was stuck on DIY but am gonna play on Wednesday (family game night) so will update then. Did however watch the Wil Wheaton Youtube playthrough to get a feel for it and Mrs seems hyped even more for it.

Had my eye on a game "Betrayal at house on the Hill" for a wee while now, anyone played this?

Also quite fancy "Colt Express".

Just so many good boardgames nowdays.
Hmm, just pretend I wrote something witty eh?

sheridan

Quote from: Keef Monkey on 07 March, 2016, 11:05:46 AM
We took your advice radiator, played Carcassonne without the farmers or the rivers rules. Meant we could get up and running and get to grips with it fast which was great. Was a lot of fun, particularly liked how quick it is to set-up and get through a game as it means it'll see a lot more use than some of the (still great but) more long-winded games we have.
Next time I play I'll have to try it without the river tiles or the farmers.  Wondering what it'll be like.  In further games, I imagine things like the princess and dragon would lose a lot of their point without farmers.

I, Cosh

Quote from: Keef Monkey on 07 March, 2016, 11:05:46 AM
We took your advice radiator, played Carcassonne without the farmers or the rivers rules. Meant we could get up and running and get to grips with it fast which was great. Was a lot of fun, particularly liked how quick it is to set-up and get through a game as it means it'll see a lot more use than some of the (still great but) more long-winded games we have.
Did you just play with two people? While it does work, it becomes much more interesting with the addition of a third.
We never really die.

Dark Jimbo

Quote from: Satanist on 07 March, 2016, 11:58:28 AM
Had my eye on a game "Betrayal at house on the Hill" for a wee while now, anyone played this?

Also quite fancy "Colt Express".

Colt Express is amazing! Really great fun and quite easy to get to grips with.

Betrayal isn't really like any other game I've played. Starts very simply with the players using their movement to explore a creepy old mansion, laying down room tiles as you go, and occassionally picking up cards for items you find or events that occur. Nice and easy to get to grips with, this bit, and always quite fun - there are trapdoors and booby traps and all sorts to keep you on your toes.

Then at some point the 'haunt' kicks in, and you all find out what you're meant to be doing - what conditions you need to achieve to win and which of you has actually been the baddie all along. This is when the house gets filled with monsters and things really kick off in earnest. There about 50 different haunt scenarios, so it's rare that you'll play the same one too often as they're randomly generated. How much fun the game is usually depends on which scenario you end up playing - the first game we ever played was a horrendously complicated one that nobody quite understood, and left us feeling a bit underwhelmed all round, and frankly a little bit glad when the game ended. The second one, though, was easy to understand and huge fun; and the pattern's continued since. Our fourth game made us all laugh more than I ever have at a board game, and then the fifth was an unenjoyable, overlong trudge to the finish (we saw almost straight away that there was virtually nothing we could do the stop the traitor winning, and had to play out the whole 40-min scenario anyway - it just wasn't very much fun). Some scenarios are weighted very heavily in favour of the players, some in favour of the traitor, while most are fairly equally balanced.

So as I say - on the whole really good fun, but a lot depends on the scenarios you get dealt. I suppose that's all part of the expierience, though...!
@jamesfeistdraws

Keef Monkey

Quote from: The Cosh on 07 March, 2016, 12:54:07 PM
Quote from: Keef Monkey on 07 March, 2016, 11:05:46 AM
We took your advice radiator, played Carcassonne without the farmers or the rivers rules. Meant we could get up and running and get to grips with it fast which was great. Was a lot of fun, particularly liked how quick it is to set-up and get through a game as it means it'll see a lot more use than some of the (still great but) more long-winded games we have.
Did you just play with two people? While it does work, it becomes much more interesting with the addition of a third.

Only two players yeah, now that we know what we're doing it'll be fun to break out with a bigger group. Would imagine the scoring gets way more interesting the more players you have.

radiator

Boardgamegeek.com actually rates Carcassonne as 'best with 2 players', and while I wouldn't go that far, I do agree that its fine with just two.

I, Cosh

Quote from: radiator on 07 March, 2016, 04:35:40 PM
Boardgamegeek.com actually rates Carcassonne as 'best with 2 players', and while I wouldn't go that far, I do agree that its fine with just two.
Fair enough. It's perfectly playable with two but I just felt that it lost a lot in only being head to head where just one extra player adds a whole extra level of who will fuck who over.
We never really die.

Pyroxian

Quote from: The Cosh on 07 March, 2016, 04:40:11 PM
Quote from: radiator on 07 March, 2016, 04:35:40 PM
Boardgamegeek.com actually rates Carcassonne as 'best with 2 players', and while I wouldn't go that far, I do agree that its fine with just two.
Fair enough. It's perfectly playable with two but I just felt that it lost a lot in only being head to head where just one extra player adds a whole extra level of who will fuck who over.

It becomes more strategic with 2 players. The more players you add, means the more chance that someone will render your city uncompletable, or block your move to have more meeples in a mega-city, which makes planning ahead much harder.

I, Cosh

Quote from: Pyroxian on 07 March, 2016, 04:48:27 PM
Quote from: The Cosh on 07 March, 2016, 04:40:11 PM
Quote from: radiator on 07 March, 2016, 04:35:40 PM
Boardgamegeek.com actually rates Carcassonne as 'best with 2 players', and while I wouldn't go that far, I do agree that its fine with just two.
Fair enough. It's perfectly playable with two but I just felt that it lost a lot in only being head to head where just one extra player adds a whole extra level of who will fuck who over.
It becomes more strategic with 2 players. The more players you add, means the more chance that someone will render your city uncompletable, or block your move to have more meeples in a mega-city, which makes planning ahead much harder.
Yeah. That's pretty much what I meant by "better."
We never really die.

radiator

Yeah, its a different experience. I'd always choose to play the game (ideally with one or two expansions thrown in) with 3 or 4, but it definitely scales well. A lot of board games aren't much cop with only 2 players.

TordelBack

Good to see Radiator's 'no farmers' rule worked well. Carcassonne is grreat with two-player, and definitely my default two-player game, but I've really enjoyed it with 3 and 4.  It does seem that the more tiles you have for more players the better though, to prevent the aesthetic frustration of too many incomplete elements.

Could anyone please elaborate on the suitability of Colt Express for player number, age and duration?

Dark Jimbo

Quote from: Tordelback on 07 March, 2016, 05:26:59 PM
Could anyone please elaborate on the suitability of Colt Express for player number, age and duration?

Only played it once myself - but we did play three games in a row, which should say something in itself! Easy to get to grips with, if you're thinking of playing with the Tordelbrood; shouldn't think they'd have any problems. We played with five people, and that worked really well - I imagine it'd work just as well with 2 or 3, although perhaps not be quite as fun. The more the better, on the whole, I would say. I think each game averaged 30 mins or so - it didn't outstay its welcome.

@jamesfeistdraws

sheridan

Tonight (well, Monday night) we played The Battle at Kemble's Cascade - a boardgame which emulated side-scrolling space shoot-em-up computer games from the 16-bit era (or was it 8-bit - I never had enough money to have whatever kind of computer those things were played on).  We had to cut it short as the bar closed and at least some of us have work in the morning, but it was good while it lasted (I ended up in second place, though may have lost that position if we'd continued playing).

Satanist

Played Ticket to Ride last night. Simple rules and quick set up plus the fact we all enjoyed it will probably make this a family favourite. I particularly liked that even though you track the score during the game the fact there are secret bonus/deductions at the end means you're unsure of the winner right up to the wire.

As it was our first game we all basically concentrated on trying to complete our routes meaning my eldest ran away with it in the end. I can see once we get used to it much nastiness with blocking others routes.

On Wednesday I plan on finally getting a game of X-wing as we've had them so long now and not played a single game.
Hmm, just pretend I wrote something witty eh?