[billw55]

Fluffy, on 2014-December-14, 04:43, said:

I am talking just about what I have heard, on ticket to ride 1 vs 1, you do only pick cards from the beginning, all your turns you pick 2 cards (never wildcard as it only allows 1 card), untill the end, the board is empty except for maybe the key cheap passages that cost 1 or 2 cards. And it is your task to read what is the opponent doing so you can block him on time while you can achieve your objectives.

This Core worlds, how long does it take for a game to be played?

Not sure how you can read what the opponent is doing if the board is empty? Well anyway, I certainly can't say I am an expert, so likely I am missing some things.

Core Worlds took us over 2 hours first game (2 players, learning rules). After that it takes about 1-1.5 hour + 0.5 hour per additional player.

cherdano, on 2014-December-14, 07:48, said:

Ken, if your grandson has inherited some interest in math/logical thinking, he will love Hanabi - my new favourite card game.
(Note - it's not mathematical at all, so the above interests are a sufficient but not necessary condition for liking the game.)

I tried Hanabi once, it seems really hard. Everybody has to be really alert and thinking logically.

[hrothgar]

FWIW, the following games are probably a bit dated, but lord did we spend a lot of time playing them

Illuminati
Cosmic Encounter
Axis and Allies

[gwnn]

A new game that I enjoyed very much was Ground Floor. A bit of a learning curve but worth it.

[Fluffy]

Chess players should also love Hive

[kenberg]

After some family discussion,we have decided not to go with the game idea for Christmas for my grandson. However! I am still finding all of this provocative. Maybe for ourselves, or maybe I just buy a game for the kid for the hack of it later on.

I really am only dimly aware of any of this but I think I will give it a try.

[blackshoe]

Some shipmates of mine back in the day played a marathon game of War in the Pacific over two or three days many years ago. IIRC it took them several hours just to set up the map and the pieces, and they had to do it on the floor of the gym.

[billw55]

blackshoe, on 2014-December-15, 14:04, said:

Some shipmates of mine back in the day played a marathon game of War in the Pacific over two or three days many years ago. IIRC it took them several hours just to set up the map and the pieces, and they had to do it on the floor of the gym.

Some of the old Avalon Hill wargames are real marathons too. It's really a different genre, today's custom or "German style" games are mostly designed to play in under three hours, often under two.

Ken, I hope you take the plunge and try one or two of the games here. You just need a few like minded friends for victims opponents.

[gwnn]

I can't believe no one's mentioned Dixit yet! It's really a game that I've never failed to enjoy despite playing it tens of times with the same deck! It's quite verbal in nature and there's no long-term strategy involved at all but the drawings are amazing and lend themselves to seemingly endless interpretations.

Another game I inexplicably enjoy is HeckMeck (Pickomino). A lot of luck but still a bunch of risk/reward scenarios to evaluate. It feels somehow more concrete than a lot of other games.

[kuhchung]

Hanabi is great. Lots of inferences to be drawn!

[cherdano]

Three logicians walk into a bare. "A beer for everyone?" the bartender asks.
1st logician: "I don't know" 2nd logician: "I don't know" 3rd logician: "Yes, please."

If you like this joke (or liked it back when it wasn't very old yet), you will love Hanabi.

[billw55]

kuhchung, on 2014-December-16, 18:16, said:

Hanabi is great. Lots of inferences to be drawn!

Indeed. It really struck me as being kind of like bridge bidding, in way. You assume that the other players did what they did for a reason, and also that they did not do some other thing for a reason. Perhaps you could even have agreements about meanings of certain actions.

[kuhchung]

I've only played a few times, but the meta rules I came up with were "if you can't figure out the hint, assume it's playable" and "if you have to discard, discard your oldest card" stuff like that

[kuhchung]

Fluffy, on 2014-December-13, 03:34, said:

My current best recomendation for 3-4 player games is Agricola. The game is fun for novices, and still challenging for experts, can be played in so many ways, even the 1 player game is fun.

Agricola is currently my favorite game

[mycroft]

billw55, on 2014-December-15, 15:14, said:

Some of the old Avalon Hill wargames are real marathons too. It's really a different genre, today's custom or "German style" games are mostly designed to play in under three hours, often under two.

Heh, "some". And not just AH (note, I am an ASL'er, but have never tried any of the killers like RB or Tarawa full campaign); I have one game, "Vietnam 1965-1975" (Victory Games), where the campaign game expects to run 200-500 hours. I'm told that effectively that means "carrier deployments".

[PhantomSac]

cherdano, on 2014-December-17, 03:18, said:

Three logicians walk into a bare. "A beer for everyone?" the bartender asks.
1st logician: "I don't know" 2nd logician: "I don't know" 3rd logician: "Yes, please."

If you like this joke (or liked it back when it wasn't very old yet), you will love Hanabi.

Pfft cooperative games?!

[kuhchung]

To make it competitive... duplicate Hanabi!

[mycroft]

Cooperative games are a very good way to handle different levels of competitiveness in one's gaming community. Players like you (and me) get frustrated at the games that are effectively roll-the-dice and see-who-wins; other players lose it very quickly if it's "okay, I show up, JLall wins" (especially if money's involved), or give up very quickly if there are "serious fun" players at the table ("I just agreed to play games because it was a fun time. If you're going to take it so seriously, it's not worth it"; as opposed to most here, where it's "it's not fun if we just push cards"). Also sometimes it's nice to do stupid game to get the mind off (see the popularity, at least in the TO junior area, of "Kent" waiting for the bridge game to start. Sure, that's competitive, but anybody who takes the game seriously needs to have their head examined).

I really like Pandemic - serious enough that I can get my "want to win, how do we do it" on, while still having "we win or we lose", not "I win and you lose". Slightly less "cooperative", I like Scotland Yard, or Princess Ryan's Space Marines, where it's "one versus the rest" - if there's a specific "winner", somehow, they get to be the "one" next time.

I'm as competitive as the next person (unless money is involved, in which case, I'm quite certain that the best players will eat my dead money, so I might as well spend it on lottery tickets (which I don't do)), but not against the "it's important that I beat you at this game and all others to demonstrate my superiority over you" people or the "If you attack me in this game, I'll make my sole job taking you out of any future game we ever play, and that's why I always win" people (I set one of those up lo, those many years ago, with Titan. I was about to attack him right at the beginning of the game (which is stupid), and he went into his spiel, which I had of course heard before. Then the next person attacked his other stack, effectively putting him so far behind he'd never catch up (as would the two of us). Then someone else attacked his remnants. Then he realized that *everyone* in the game had as goal 1 "take this guy out, then let's play", and...) If someone has to take something out of the game and into either another game or real life, I don't see why I should play games with that someone. No, I'm not pointing that at anybody here (although I will aim "why should I pay more to give you my money? It pays to the top 8, and I expect to be 30th on a good day" at those who say "oh you should offer money prizes, that brings in the younger players")

[PassedOut]

Just saw this: The Green Bay Packers Keep Playing Settlers of Catan Off-Field

Quote

“We’re always looking for something to do, it’s cold. No one wants to go outside, better find something.” said Packers backup quarterback Matt Flynn. “I was just trying to play some music — some Pearl Jam, and Bakhtiari wouldn’t let me. He wanted to hear the players talk and strategize. He was very serious. They take it to a different level.”

[billw55]

We had a game night a couple weeks ago. Some bridge friends brought Puerto Rico and it got played at one table. My wife really liked it so we got it, but I haven't played yet.

Also got the expansion to Core Worlds and played that. More complexity! It is really intricate.

[Fluffy]

mycroft, on 2014-December-22, 14:37, said:

I'm as competitive as the next person (unless money is involved, in which case, I'm quite certain that the best players will eat my dead money, so I might as well spend it on lottery tickets (which I don't do)), but not against the "it's important that I beat you at this game and all others to demonstrate my superiority over you" people or the "If you attack me in this game, I'll make my sole job taking you out of any future game we ever play, and that's why I always win" people (I set one of those up lo, those many years ago, with Titan. I was about to attack him right at the beginning of the game (which is stupid), and he went into his spiel, which I had of course heard before. Then the next person attacked his other stack, effectively putting him so far behind he'd never catch up (as would the two of us). Then someone else attacked his remnants. Then he realized that *everyone* in the game had as goal 1 "take this guy out, then let's play", and...) If someone has to take something out of the game and into either another game or real life, I don't see why I should play games with that someone. No, I'm not pointing that at anybody here (although I will aim "why should I pay more to give you my money? It pays to the top 8, and I expect to be 30th on a good day" at those who say "oh you should offer money prizes, that brings in the younger players")

Moving revenges from one game to another is really pointless IMO and against the spirit of any game. However I always follow the rule that if someone destroys all my chances of winning I will do my best for him not to win either. This might not look so bad, but actually it can be when I punnish someone for doing something legitimate like destroying my combo that would bring me back into comptemption.