• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Boardgame-Age

Status
Not open for further replies.
AstroLad said:
I think this was discussed earlier
Click to expand...
Haha, you're probably right. I have a tendency to tell the same stories multiple times. My memory is not always my strong point.

AstroLad said:
Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium
Click to expand...
Hell yes!

Do we know for sure that this is going to be out next month? Not sure I'll believe it until we actually see the box on shelves.
 
Cyan said:
Do we know for sure that this is going to be out next month? Not sure I'll believe it until we actually see the box on shelves.
Click to expand...
Apparently it might be delayed :/. I'll have so much to tide me over it'll be aight.

ps awesome custom twilight struggle map from the freaks over at bgg
vqrzvn.jpg
 
NEWS FLASH
Lawyer Wins Monopoly Championship; Plans to Use Winnings to Pay Student Loans
Posted 3 hours, 6 minutes ago
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A 26-year-old lawyer from the Buffalo area has won $20,580—the total funds available in Monopoly—for winning the game’s national championship in Washington, D.C.

Richard Marinaccio, assistant counsel at medical-claims administration company Meritain Health, plans to use the money to pay off student loans, the Washington Post reports. Marinaccio also gets an all-expenses-paid trip to Las Vegas to play in the world championships this October, according to a press release.

Marinaccio was one of 28 finalists who got to the championships by passing a test on Monopoly trivia and an exam on Monopoly theory. He also made it through a qualifying round of the game on the Internet. The final four included Marinaccio, a college student, a nonprofit employee and a sixth-grade teacher.

“Marinaccio stunned the crowd with his risky decision to purchase Pacific Avenue early in the game and dedicate his resources to building up the green property group (typically seen as a low priority group by tournament players),” the press release says.

Marinaccio is new to tournament play. He decided to enter the competition after seeing a notice on MONOPOLY.com, and prepared by playing games with his family.

A former world champion who failed to make the finals, Lee Bayrd, complained that the essay questions were ludicrous. "The questions they ask can't be answered," Bayrd told the Post. "Would I rather have all the reds or all the yellows? The real answer is, well, how much time is left? How much money does my opponent have? Where is their current position on the board?"
Click to expand...

MONOPOLY LOL. Setting board gaming back any time some naive person drags it out and subjects his friends to hours and hours and roll-and-move torment (add another five hours to that if the game is being house-ruled with Free Parking and other popular variants).

Which leads me to my point: How terrible are mainstream board games? And how much have they set back the acceptance of board games that are actually, you know, good? While board games might not have quite as much of the "kiddie" stigma that video games still have, they definitely have the "boring" stigma (especially among the younger generation). And look at any board-game shelf at Target or Toys 'R Us and you can certainly understand why. Most of the games that aren't made for five year olds take well over two hours if played properly and to completion, often twice that. Games of Risk (there are far worse examples than risk, but I'll include it for its popularity and particular relevance to this point) and Monopoly don't have a satisfying quick endgame coming after an exciting 45-60 minutes of play, they either end in "ok you win, I/we quit, this is boring now" or for the more masochistic they go through their 2+ hour death throes. I still like Scrabble a bit, but its endgame is absolutely dreadful too.
 
Wow, what a rip. I don't even think $20,000 is adequate compensation for enduring that many games of Monopoly. I'm sure any reasonable jury would give him much more in damages for emotional distress.
 
AstroLad said:
Which leads me to my point: How terrible are mainstream board games? And how much have they set back the acceptance of board games that are actually, you know, good? While board games might not have quite as much of the "kiddie" stigma that video games still have, they definitely have the "boring" stigma (especially among the younger generation). And look at any board-game shelf at Target or Toys 'R Us and you can certainly understand why. Most of the games that aren't made for five year olds take well over two hours if played properly and to completion, often twice that. Games of Risk (there are far worse examples than risk, but I'll include it for its popularity and particular relevance to this point) and Monopoly don't have a satisfying quick endgame coming after an exciting 45-60 minutes of play, they either end in "ok you win, I/we quit, this is boring now" or for the more masochistic they go through their 2+ hour death throes. I still like Scrabble a bit, but its endgame is absolutely dreadful too.
Click to expand...
Hmm... I think the problem with board gaming is that it's not cheap and doesn't offer the flash appeal of something like video games. Couple that with the complete lack of availability, and you have where they're at. They've been relegated to being available only at 'hobby' shops (or all-purpose nerd shops as I refer to them as). Do you want comic books, Magic cards, Warhammer accessories, D & D rulebooks, or these obscure board games in your collection? Great! Come to our all-purpose store for furnishing your parent's basement!

Games still have a place, but they tend to skew more towards stuff like Battle of the Sexes, Scene It, and other so-called party games. Sadly, those games tend to be more accessible both in rulesets and concept.
 
Hey Astro,
Have you ever checked out The Compleat Strategist in Midtown? It's supposed to be pretty great. I'm trying to decide if I want to schlep up there after work to check it out.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Hmm... I think the problem with board gaming is that it's not cheap and doesn't offer the flash appeal of something like video games. Couple that with the complete lack of availability, and you have where they're at. They've been relegated to being available only at 'hobby' shops (or all-purpose nerd shops as I refer to them as).

Games still have a place, but they tend to skew more towards stuff like Battle of the Sexes, Scene It, and other so-called party games. Sadly, those games tend to be more accessible both in rulesets and concept.
Click to expand...
Sadly, most of those games are pretty bad too. I mean they may have good questions (Trivial Pursuit, at least the older editions) or activities (Cranium), but their mechanics are just awful, Trivial Pursuit being the most egregious example off the top of my head. As long as they keep the experience relatively short (Cranium), they can be good in the right setting though. But I wouldn't really lump in party games with the board games discussed in this thread, or games like Monopoly, Risk, Scrabble, etc. It's really its own genre.

Clearly most of the popular board games are popular because of a long-established brand or merely licensing. But since most of these games are absolutely terrible, it's just a shame that they're all most people know (that old saw). And unlike a fair amount of big video-game publishers, the big board-game publishers hardly care to leverage their popular titles to either improve upon them or to invest in new experiences:
Elam says America's biggest producer of board games, Hasbro, hasn't shown much interest in new titles. Hasbro's board games, several now in DVD editions for TV play (Monopoly, Clue, Trivial Pursuit), are fixtures at large retailers such as Wal-Mart.

"Hasbro republishes new versions of the same old games," Elam laments. Those include Operation Spider-Man 3 (yes, operate on Spidey), Monopoly Spongebob and Clue Simpsons Board Game, all old games with updated themes.
Click to expand...
While I agree on the "flash" point, I don't agree on the relative expense. Most video games, particularly next-gen story-based experienced have a fairly short finite lifespan, that is generally halved in practice. A good board game can be played forever, without any need to rely on nostalgia or irony to justify them (chess being the classic example, though I'm actually not the biggest chess enthusiast).

I discussed some other points re board games v. video games in my Board Games as Video Games: Why they suck, but are still good. thread, which points I'll repost here just for fun (this is actually board games v. video board games, but the points still stand mostly):

Losing the aesthetic appeal of the board game. There is something to be said for the appearance and literal feel of a board game. It engages you in a way no controller can. This problem is compounded by the fact that most board games are translated very awkwardly to consoles, neither going with a pure "video game" or a pure "board game" look, and usually winding up somewhere in the middle with what looks like a cheap mish-mash of the two. A game like Eye of Judgment does its best to actually add aesthetic value in the conversion (e.g., animations), the counterpoints being (1) who watches the animations more than once anyway?; (2) there isn't much of a tactile element to card games regardless (contrast to games with intricate pieces, like Warhammer). Usually there is a net loss here, if just for the tactile loss.

The social element. Obviously online play is great for many, as it opens up a world of players. You can play your friend in Idaho or the best player in the world without traveling to some dorky convention. Power of the Information Supherhighway. But beyond this clear benefit, the social aspects in general are completely lost online. To use a terrible analogy, playing Catan online is about as similar to playing Catan with friends around a table as playing Rock Band is to playing in a real rock band. No one has a mic. You can't see anyone. Or you can see people but it's through some Creepsville Central grainy webcam. You can't flip the board when you're about to lose. All the good stuff. Of course, there is also the simple issue that actual local multiplayer in games with hidden elements is often impossible or clunky, and leaves you wishing you just had the board.

Exploits, imbalances, and being "played out." What most people would view as a positive to video board games--the ability to cycle through play sessions 10x faster than tabletop sessions--is perhaps a negative to me. I can go on my PC and play 5+ sessions of Ticket to Ride in an hour, whereas the tabletop version takes me about an hour for a single session, and is something that's far more difficult to "get together." This is even truer for 3+ player games, where I can usually only play the tabletop when you have friends over. The issue I have with this is that it just whittles the game down to its barest play mechanics in no time. To be corny, the "magic" of discovering a game's strategies and imbalances over months or years of play sessions can be exhausted in one night at the computer. This is one of the big reasons I've stayed away from recent XBLA releases.
Winning the game is important when I sit down with friends or my wife, but to go back to the first point the social experience and everything that goes along with it is often more important. When you go online, it doesn't feel like you're diabolically plotting to ruin your another player's plans, or you're in whatever universe the game has created--it feels like you're playing math against each other.
Click to expand...
 
El_TigroX said:
Hey Astro,
Have you ever checked out The Compleat Strategist in Midtown? It's supposed to be pretty great. I'm trying to decide if I want to schlep up there after work to check it out.
Click to expand...
I have not. I hadn't heard of it before, but I've always ordered my stuff online, mainly due to a general fear of the "all-purpose nerd shops" described by SY above. Seems like they have it all though.
 
AstroLad said:
While I agree on the "flash" point, I don't agree on the relative expense. Most video games, particularly next-gen story-based experienced have a fairly short finite lifespan, that is generally halved in practice. A good board game can be played forever, without any need to rely on nostalgia or irony to justify them (chess being the classic example, though I'm actually not the biggest chess enthusiast).
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, though, the replayability is completely contingent on having other enthusiasts around who will partake. If you know people who are in to board games, then it's a fantastic hobby. Me? I wish I had more time for them, but even if I find some time, I now must find a group who is also willing to play. It's really, really tough assembling this. Some people, if they're bored enough, might go for one of the games we deem crappy (Monopoly, Risk, etc.), but it's an even tougher sell when you're pitching something like, say, Agricola.

Board games, at least the ones we're talking about here, just have a kind of 'nerd' stigma about them. Furthermore, when you're trying to scout out some potentials, the numbers tend to not be overly scalable.

If I'm going to have poker night, I can just start calling people. Only five people show up? That's enough. 10 people? All right! That's a full hold 'em table! 20 people? All right, two table tournament! And so on. When I'm trying to find people for Puerto Rico -- a game most people like when I get them to play -- I recruit one couple and we're already at four. I round up a fifth, then the first couple call me back and say they can't make it. Now I'm scrambling for more players, as there was nobody on the sidelines -- I'm not going to invite 10 people over to play a five player game.
 
I've pitched Agricola to five people so far, only one of them even moderately interested in board games. All of them have liked it enough to ask to play it again.

I think learning new rules and figuring out new strategies is a big negative for a lot of people. (Certainly not for me and other board enthusiasts, but that's why we are boardgame enthusiasts.) Once you push or pull them over that barrier, though, they'll see the same difference in quality most enthusiasts see between the best stuff and the most popular crud like Monopoly.

What I'm saying is Agricola and such aren't just good for enthusiasts. They are good for most players if they'll just give it a try. Monopoly's only advantage is that everyone learned the rules as a child, for some mystifying reason.
Losing the aesthetic appeal of the board game. There is something to be said for the appearance and literal feel of a board game. It engages you in a way no controller can. This problem is compounded by the fact that most board games are translated very awkwardly to consoles, neither going with a pure "video game" or a pure "board game" look, and usually winding up somewhere in the middle with what looks like a cheap mish-mash of the two. A game like Eye of Judgment does its best to actually add aesthetic value in the conversion (e.g., animations), the counterpoints being (1) who watches the animations more than once anyway?; (2) there isn't much of a tactile element to card games regardless (contrast to games with intricate pieces, like Warhammer). Usually there is a net loss here, if just for the tactile loss.
Click to expand...
This part is really important to me. I enjoy colorful boards, piles and piles of little wooden bits, interesting card design, egg timers, and so forth. If I'm honest I keep buying Days of Wonder games because I like their art so much.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Board games, at least the ones we're talking about here, just have a kind of 'nerd' stigma about them. Furthermore, when you're trying to scout out some potentials, the numbers tend to not be overly scalable.
Click to expand...
I kind of disagree with that. RoboRally or fantasy-themed games sure. But modern-themed games or eurogames much less. I frankly don't think they're well-known enough to have any image attached to them, much less the "stigma" that video games/comic books/sci-fi have. Adult "Board Gaming" doesn't really mean anything to mainstream'ers other than Risk and the like. I don't think there is any general awareness of eurogames and the like among the mainstream. Unless you're talking about conflating boardgaming with D&D, but I've never really run into that, Risk/Monopoly/Scrabble is much more of a touchstone than D&D unless you've got orcs and dragons on the cover or something.

I've had similar experiences to Evlar above, people always seem to be up for playing a board game (at least people in their mid- to late-twenties, so maybe age is a part of it), and one that's even better than the crap they're used to? Great! Now I do take care to cater to my audience, but that's not an issue at all. Super-casuals absolutely love Ticket to Ride and even RoboRally (despite its goofy theme, which you just make fun of). Both those games take literally ten minutes to learn from someone who knows how to play. If I have people around who are ready for something a bit deeper, I'll bring out San Juan or Race for the Galaxy, which take maybe 15m (20 or so for RftG) + 1 playthrough to learn.

As far as scalability, most games scale great 3-5 (all those above). Only issues are when you have 2 vs. 3 and 6+, you do need to consider your game a bit more carefully.

I agree that (most of) the games are only as good as the people you can find to play with you, but I really have never encountered this pushback your seem to be referencing.
 
AstroLad said:
I agree that (most of) the games are only as good as the people you can find to play with you, but I really have never encountered this pushback your seem to be referencing.
Click to expand...
Different crowds, I suppose. I'm 25, here, and my wildest years have long since passed. But even now, I find that it's much, much easier to round up people for an evening out to have dinner and drinks than it is to convince people that a night in with board games is the way to go. Even my fiancee has to really be in the right mood to want to play something, which makes it more difficult for me to get the ball rolling.

Edit: As for scalability, I meant it's difficult to plan when you're not sure of exact attendance. Again, for a poker night, I can just start calling anyone and everyone who might be interested and not really care about whether or not they really intend to come. With the previously mentioned party games, again, it doesn't really matter since you just divide into teams anyway. But for these games, I need to know if the people I'm calling really are interested or not. If players 3 and 4 are really coming for this 4 player game, it doesn't behoove me to call in some backups. And I have encountered this dilemma before.
 
Man, I guess I'm lucky.

I have a tough time selling my girlfriend on some of the more "out-there" stuff like Arkham Horror or Warrior Knights, but she's generally chomping at the bit to play the stuff she KNOWS she likes. (That being said, if a game is genuinely good, she'll get over the "that looks boring" thing once I force her to play it.)

Thankfully, R4tG is one of those!



Edit: one more thing, that kinda ties into the hobby shop point made above....

I went by my local "FLGS". How the HELL are these places still in business?

Memoir Air Pack: 50 bucks (thats 15(!!) more bucks than I paid for the base game!)
Formula D: 60 Bucks

Honestly, in this internet age, I'm simply baffled they can charge MSRP. I'd be HAPPY to pay a FEW bucks more than the online sites in order to forgo the shipping wait, but at some point.....its highway robbery.
 
Neverfade said:
Honestly, in this internet age, I'm simply baffled they can charge MSRP. I'd be HAPPY to pay a FEW bucks more than the online sites in order to forgo the shipping wait, but at some point.....its highway robbery.
Click to expand...
I think it's the same way that book stores get away with charging full price for books: they build a loyalty, and furthermore, they're the only game in town as far as being able to hold the item and walk home with it that day.

It seems that if an item isn't also available at a big box retailer, then the specialty stores feel no incentive to charge anything but MSRP. Also, I wonder if they get decent sales from people who just happen to wonder in and ask for advice? It's not like they're going to point this individual towards BoardGameGeek where they'll find links to the cheaper online options.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Edit: As for scalability, I meant it's difficult to plan when you're not sure of exact attendance. Again, for a poker night, I can just start calling anyone and everyone who might be interested and not really care about whether or not they really intend to come. With the previously mentioned party games, again, it doesn't really matter since you just divide into teams anyway. But for these games, I need to know if the people I'm calling really are interested or not. If players 3 and 4 are really coming for this 4 player game, it doesn't behoove me to call in some backups. And I have encountered this dilemma before.
Click to expand...
But there are so many games that scale great 3-5. I don't really have any games in my collection that allow for >2 and that are just that much better at 3 than at 5 (maybe Formula D). Also, I'm not quite sure I understand the dilemma--are you promising these people you'll play a specific game and they'll be upset if you play any other, even if that one is better suited to the amount of players you have? If so, you have very demanding friends. But then again I have a pretty big collection so I pretty much have a game for every mood and every number. But if scalability at 3-5 casuals is a concern, Catan, San Juan, and Ticket to Ride are all great, and take 5-15 minutes to learn from someone who knows how to play. Not that I'm trying to convince you or anything, clearly board games just don't fit in with your situation.
 
AstroLad said:
But if scalability at 3-5 casuals is a concern, Catan, San Juan, and Ticket to Ride are all great, and take 5-15 minutes to learn from someone who knows how to play. Not that I'm trying to convince you or anything, clearly board games just don't fit in with your situation.
Click to expand...
I don't think I'm properly explaining myself. What I'm suggesting is that if I want to play a board game, 3 - 6 people is probably what I'm looking at. However, it's tough for me to get firm commitments from people. "Yeah, sounds cool, let me call you back in a couple of hours because there's something else we may or may not have to do." This is an okay response. I understand their situation, but it makes it hard for me to plan for whether or not they'll be able to make it. If I assume they can't make it, and now call in some other people who assure me they're in, well, those other people are now out. If 20 people show up to play Cranium, that's fine. If 20 people show up to play Ticket to Ride, we're out of luck.

I still get some board games in. Just not frequently enough to justify buying all these cool-looking games I see in this thread.
 
Other than getting games that scale to 6+ (Formula D, RoboRally, Wits & Wagers), if you have more than 6 just give the stragglers Monopoly. Serves them right.
 
Steve, you may want to try to establish a weekly or bi-weekly game night with your friends. Find a space where you can have at least two tables going, invite everyone you think might be interested who can squeeze in, and have a variety of board games on hand. Ideally you and at least one other friend will be ready to teach and from there you're off and running. A dozen show up? Great, run two or three games. Six show up? You're still fine, depending on what you've got in your collection. Have some filler games available to help folks with downtime or to get things going while you're waiting for folks to arrive; Bang, Guillotine, Transamerica, and Hex Hex are popular locally. Then keep doing it. Pretty soon it's a regular event and then you can go completely insane buying cool games to introduce to your group.

FnordChan
 
I've played a fair amount of RoboRally at gametableonline, but since I finally found a real copy, I got a chance for some 5 player face-to-face action tonight.

I didn't know I could love it MORE.

It's not perfect, but its fucking perfect. That makes so much sense, right?
 
Dear Formula D pro(s): I have a couple of nitpicky questions about gameplay; scanned the BGG Rules boards (one of my favorite pastimes btw) for answers, but nada:
-Regarding the special tire rules:
Provided at least one space included in the move lies within the limits of a corner." and "Providing at least one space included in the move lies within the confines of a corner." So, if any part of your move is within a Corner, +3, be it your first entry into the Corner after leaving a Straight, a move entirely within the Corner, or a move that began in a Corner but ended in a straight. Correct?

-Regarding the pits:
Does the garage count as a space? Do you have to reach the arrow or the garage? When leaving the garage, does the arrow count as a space? Or is the garage just a free space and you move from the arrow (second arrow?)?
 
I can't help you AstroLad, but I've actually got a synergy question for Race to the Galaxy.

It took three cards (two really), and I'm not sure if it was legal, though the table let it go:

- Diplomacy Specialist (or whatever it's called).... this is the one that lets you settle military worlds, for 1 cheaper military cost, but also reduces your military by 1.
- Rebel Homeworld (7 cost military world, now 6 cost for me to settle... I know that part's legal)


Here's the sketchy part:
- Colony Ship - Discard from table to settle any non-military/non-yellow world for free. Is Rebel Homeworld a valid target for this, after playing my specialist to make military worlds settle-able? We decided yes, but it seemed a little too good to be true.
 
I have little experience in boardgames (I currently play Ticket to ride and Mr. Jack) and I was wondering if you could recommend me a good game that plays for just 2 and where we could cooperate. My girlfriend says I always win, and I find it boring to let her win so I'm looking for a game where we could cooperate against game controlled "npc".

Gaf delivers? :D
 
platypotamus said:
I can't help you AstroLad, but I've actually got a synergy question for Race to the Galaxy.

It took three cards (two really), and I'm not sure if it was legal, though the table let it go:

- Diplomacy Specialist (or whatever it's called).... this is the one that lets you settle military worlds, for 1 cheaper military cost, but also reduces your military by 1.
- Rebel Homeworld (7 cost military world, now 6 cost for me to settle... I know that part's legal)


Here's the sketchy part:
- Colony Ship - Discard from table to settle any non-military/non-yellow world for free. Is Rebel Homeworld a valid target for this, after playing my specialist to make military worlds settle-able? We decided yes, but it seemed a little too good to be true.
Click to expand...
Absolutely legal.

Once the Contact Specialist is in play, (non-yellow) military worlds are valid targets for the colony ship.
 
AstroLad said:
BGG thread about it (not too much analysis though): http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/373108
Click to expand...

I totally don't understand the last post in the thread:

One of my first games, my wife, well behind in points and with a Contact Specialist down pulled the following on the last turn:

Settle/Settle

She used her Colony Ship and the rest of her hand to drop the 7 and 6 cost Rebel worlds.

It was a very impressive final turn.
Click to expand...

How is it possible to settle twice in one turn? Has my group been playing wrong?
 
Two-player advanced variant (which is actually the funnest way to play RftG). Each player selects two actions (this is why there are the extra cards in each set).
 
My parents went from never playing board games to owning a dozen of them in under three months. Things like Puerto Rico and Catan to Monopoly and Life. People would have to be incredibly narrow-minded not to be willing to play board games of some sort. My parents aren't exactly into experimenting.
 
Platy, your situation is tucked away in the rulebook too at page 5: Similarly, a Colony Ship allows a Contact Specialist to place a (non-Alien) military world at no cost.
 
FnordChan said:
Shoogoo, Arkham Horror calls to you, the sound of it's otherworldly howls driving you to the point of madness.

FnordChan
Click to expand...

Thanks, this one looks interesting :) Anything else that comes to mind?
 
I wanted to make my first post to this thread. I've recently started board gaming, and currently have/play Ticket to Ride, Memoir 44, and Lost Cities. Most games consist of my wife and I (she does not play memoir :( ) though occasionally we can get 4 or 5 players, and I like to keep the games around the 1 hour mark. I would love to go on a buying spree for a lot of new games, but time and money make me a bit more thoughtful...

I have been reading a lot of BGG and Carcassonne sounds like it would be right up my alley, can someone tell me if that sounds like a good choice?
 
homerhendrix said:
I wanted to make my first post to this thread. I've recently started board gaming, and currently have/play Ticket to Ride, Memoir 44, and Lost Cities. Most games consist of my wife and I (she does not play memoir :( ) though occasionally we can get 4 or 5 players, and I like to keep the games around the 1 hour mark. I would love to go on a buying spree for a lot of new games, but time and money make me a bit more thoughtful...

I have been reading a lot of BGG and Carcassonne sounds like it would be right up my alley, can someone tell me if that sounds like a good choice?
Click to expand...

Have an Xbox? You can try the demo on XBLA and see if you like it.
 
I searched the Internet and all the shops in my town center for Arkham Horror. Nobody has it so I guess I'll go with Ebay.

But before I dig it, I'm wondering if it really can be fun with only 2. I'll have the opportunity to play it with 6 or 7 but most of the time that will be just my girlfriend and me.

Can you take 2 investigators to spice things up?
 
Shoogoo said:
I searched the Internet and all the shops in my town center for Arkham Horror. Nobody has it so I guess I'll go with Ebay.

But before I dig it, I'm wondering if it really can be fun with only 2. I'll have the opportunity to play it with 6 or 7 but most of the time that will be just my girlfriend and me.

Can you take 2 investigators to spice things up?
Click to expand...
Exactly. Read a quick review on boardgamegeek though, it's a pretty heavy/complicated game. fwiw I've made it through a couple games with just 2, but 4 is more fun and the game is really designed with 3-4 in mind (4 is the perfect number).

Here's a nice little geeklist to give you some more ideas:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/12777

You can also just search for "cooperative" under Geeklists in the top menu. Other co-op games I've played are Pandemic, Touch of Evil, and Ghost Stories. Out of these four, the best for 2 by far is Arkham.
 
Can someone recommend me a board game. Here is what I want

- strategic war game
- Players three and up
- One game should take at least 6 hours or up... I would perfer even longer games.

And that's about it.
 
AstroLad said:
Exactly. Read a quick review on boardgamegeek though, it's a pretty heavy/complicated game. fwiw I've made it through a couple games with just 2, but 4 is more fun and the game is really designed with 3-4 in mind (4 is the perfect number).

Here's a nice little geeklist to give you some more ideas:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/12777

You can also just search for "cooperative" under Geeklists in the top menu. Other co-op games I've played are Pandemic, Touch of Evil, and Ghost Stories. Out of these four, the best for 2 by far is Arkham.
Click to expand...

Hail to you, Brother.
 
CiSTM said:
Can someone recommend me a board game. Here is what I want

- strategic war game
- Players three and up
- One game should take at least 6 hours or up... I would perfer even longer games.

And that's about it.
Click to expand...

Twilight Imperium?

Oh, and Diplomacy.
 
That looks so much better than the shops around me.

They're dark, dirty, unfriendly, and the selection is garbage compared to what that place has in its photos.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

cologne-age 2.0: Recommend and share fragrances here.
2
74
2K
IDKFA replied
Utah becomes first state to target VPN use in age-verification law
News 
24
464
ReBurn replied
Catherine O’Hara has passed away at 71 years of age
2
96
2K
TerribleAtThisGame replied
Collective Shout celebrates Age Verification for porn in Australia: 'For the Children'
Social 
4
380
Banjo64 replied
Brigitte Bardot, French cinema’s glamorous icon, dies at age 91
13
499
BennyBlanco replied
Top Bottom