Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Six Months of Gone Gaming

I received my first letter from Coldfoot on July 24. Gone Gaming began on August 1st.
The GG:BGIA call for nominations began on December 25, 2005, and posted results on Jan 30, 2006.


The original Gone Gaming byline, which had to be 500 characters or less:
If you look you'll never find me
I've gone gaming I'll be back
Got to finish what I started
Got a few things on my stack
Got to ship a few more barrels
Got to trade a brick or two
Got to buy some more provisions
Got to run this train on through
Got to roll a few more 6's
Got to draw a few more cards
Got to shake hands with my neighbors
'Fore I'm back in my backyard
But if you look up to the night sky
That's my spaceship passing by
Give a wave That's me inside her
It's farewell but not goodbye



A six month index, Aug '05 - Jan '06 (tags are arbitrary and inconsistent):


Coldfoot


Black Friday/Advanced Civ (strategy)
Bloglines gave me my life back. ASL threatens to take it away. (review)
Christmas in October? (report:Age of Steam)
Game Store Confidential: The Other Side of the Counter (social)
IGA nominees. (info)
It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you spin the session report. (winning, review: Mesopotamia, Star Wars Miniatures, Descent, Railroad Tycoon)
Musings, Ramblings and More Ramblings. (personal, cons)
On Spiel des Geek (awards)
Post-Season Wrap-Up (board game sites)
Powergrid. View from the rear. (report)
Searching for a tagline. (blogging)
Sound Familiar? (wizard needs games, badly)
The Candamir / Tower of Babel Conundrum (buying, blogging)
Vacation Surprises (review:game store)
Help! What's The Best Game to Introduce to a Non-Gaming Co-Worker? (hobby)
Welcome to Gone Gaming (admin)
Well, I just got up, what did you expect, brilliance? (wife's top games, blogging)
Winter in Alaska. Perfect Gaming Weather. I Mean... If You Can Keep Your Water Pipes From Freezing. (personal)

GROGnads


A time to savor graces & blessings (Katrina)
Beginning of the 'Regular' Football Season (minis)
ch-ch-ch-CHANGES! (BGG, Eurogamers)
Christmas & Hannukah are HERE and so am 'I' (happy holidays)
Guy on the "fly" (blogging, BGG.con)
Happy New Year's Day! (BGWS, dream gaming)
MOVIES that could become GAMES! (movie themes, plactic spaceships)
Must be the 'Season' of the "Twitch" (sports, edible components)
NEWS of the Day (blogging)
Playoffs and their RESULTS (sports, geekchat)
Shades of 'Grey' matters to come! (Blogging, minis)
Shape of things to become (component cost, game comboes)
So far Travels & Travails (personal)
Something I'm going to go ahead and TRY (variant:American Revolutionary War)
Speculative Gaming (Hasbro/AH, A&A minis)
Stating the case for ''state of the art'' (bits, expansions, criticism)
Stuck & Deserted without a 'CON' I can Game within (cons)
*Surprise!*Surprise!*Surprise!* (minis, BGG)
"Take 10" guest John 'Scrib' O'Haver (interview)
The Göt Nüttin Report (shopping, A&A)
The issue WITH Re-issues (re-issues, rights)
The latest in GAME expounding & expanding! (variant:the Russian Campaign)
Upon the past Week (BGG, A&A minis)
VARIANTs and their issuance (variants, rights)
WELCOME to ''the machine'' (blogging)
What the Fudgesickle? Game Considerations (designing, dice tower, conquestnw)
WHY I should ''give any 'chits'!'' (minis)

sodaklady


A Christmas Carol for Gamers (poem, review:Amun-Re)
A Miserable Week (personal)
Antidote for a Hectic Life (social, review:Rheinlander)
A Winter Game (cats)
Deal 'Em (cards, report:Ta-Yu)
Games, Games and More Games (shopping, review:Dvonn, reports:misc)
Happy Holiday (poem)
Happy New Year (5&10, review:Flandern 1302)
I've Located the Problem (game speed, review:Hacienda)
Learn History Through Games (education, shopping)
Name and Number Contest (contest, review:Fjords)
Play Me (personal, not shopping)
Print, Motrin and Play (making games)
Say Hello to: (interview)
Scary Stuff (gamers, review:Das Ende Des Triumvirats)
Stop Looking at Me Like That! (Katrina, social)
Techniques to Recruit The Non-gamer in Your Home (social, review:Architekton, personal)
The Addict (social, reviews:Robo Rally,Attika, personal)
The First Play Attitude (learning the game, review:Santorini)
The Game Psychiatrist (waiting, review:Vinci, poem)
The Teacher Gets and "F" (report:Hansa, personal)
The Yellow Brick Score Track (shopping, review:Fjordes, personal)
Today's Theme is Theme ("pasted" themes, reports:Stephenson’s Rocket,TtD,Taj Mahal)
Warning: This Blog May Cause Choking (humor, contest results, report:Ta Yu)
What Was Your Name Again? (personal, reviews:Bridges of Shangri-La,Taj Mahal)
Why Do I Need So Many Games? (personal, teaching games)
Would You Like to Play a Game? (online gaming)

Alex Rockwell


7 Player, 3 team Werewolf! (variant, strategy)
9 Player Werewolf (variant, strategy)
Better than Tichu (review and strategy:Fairy Tale)
Tichu (Passing strategy) (strategy)
Tichu: The Basics (strategy)
War of the Ring – Battles of the Third Age (review)
Werewolf! (review, variant, strategy)

Yehuda


Con-vinced (cons)
Don't sue me, Richard (CCG humor)
Encounter 1/9 (story)
Encounter 2/9 (story)
Encounter 3/9 (story)
Encounter 4/9 (story)
Er... My Turn. (personal)
Ethics in Gaming 5.0 (social)
Even More on Winning (social)
Every Day is Games Day (social)
Gaming Risks (social)
Happy New Year (personal)
I can complain too: my top ten problems with the game world (game world)
Meet Gilad Yarnitzky (interview)
Meet Haim Shafir (interview)
Meet Kadon Enterprises (interview)
Ode to the Games Journal (Internet)
Pay Attention. This Will Be On The Test. (classification)
Roll Against Your Wisdom To Post Here (poem)
Rules, Rules, Rules (variants)
Parlor Game Geek (humor, parlor games)
The Designer's Rules (variants)
The Game Hordes (social)
Winning Using Mechanics (strategy)
Whose Socks Are These? (social, cons)
You mean, like Merlot? (social)

Joe Gola


2005 (personal)
A Whole Lot of Nothing (ratings)
Cosmopolitan, Baby (personal)
Crusader Rex (report)
Dicefest (dice)
Down in the Flood (Katrina)
How to Eat a Game (humor (I hope))
How to Turn Family and Friends into Gamers Using Subterfuge, Mind Control and Violence
(social)
In Search of Lost Time, Part 1 (personal)
In Search of Lost Time, Part 2 (personal)
Old News Department: Rumble in Hekumet (review:Scarab Lords)
There's Gold in Them Thar Cards (review:Silverton)
The View from the Fifth Floor (review:Palazzo)

DWTripp


Advice For The Troubled Gamer (social)
A great year of gaming (reports)
Anti-rant Rant (Hasbro, dice, blogging)
DW's Field Guide To Gamers (social)
Euro-Snoots & Free Shipping (social, market, review:Giganten)
Fish In A Barrel (social, personal)
Funny stuff returns next week (Katrina)
Game Store Confidential (social, market)
Game Store Confidential ~ continued (social, market)
Game Store Confidential ~ Legends (social, market, MtG)
Game Store Confidential ~ Flesh Eating Hamsters & Death by Ennui (social, market, RPG)
Game Store Confidential ~ The Dice Gods Are Smiling (social, dice)
Game Store Confidential ~ The Pre-order List (social, market)
GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ The sweet smell of success (social)
GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ How dare you make money! (social, market)
GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ Dumb Gamers (social, market)
GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ Caution! Abnormal Blog Ahead (personal)
It's Showtime! (cons, personal)
The game that ate itself (CCGs)
The Highlander Effect (social)
Why Railroad Tycoon is Like a Topless Dancer (review:Railroad Tycoon, social)
Wyatt (personal)

Shannon Appelcline


Five Games I Don't Like (reviews, social)
Five Games I'm Thankful For: '05 (reviews, personal)
Games to Watch For: Essen '05 (looking forward)
It's Not if You Win or Lose ... (winning, placing)
Last Year's Top 70 Games (reviews)
Memoir '44, The Seafarers of Catan, and Other Scenarios (variants and scenarios)
My Life in Gaming (personal)
Redesigning Empire Builder, Part One (variants)
Redesigning Empire Builder, Part Two (variants)
Schools of Game Design (game design)
Shannon's List of Do's and Don't's for Game Component Design (game design)
Supporting Your Locally Owned Game Store (market)
The Collector Bug (shopping)
The Problem with Colors (game design)
The Problem with Game Boxes (game design)
The Problem with Indie Games (game design)
The Problem with Luck (luck)
The Problem with Player Numbers (game design)
The Year in Review: 2005 (looking back, game companies, reviews:Caylus,Dungeon Twister)
Three Designers: Knizia, Kramer & Teuber (game designers)

Fraser and Melissa


Holidays and Games: A tale of a car trip, a shop, a calamity and the game publisher that saved Christmas. (personal, shopping)
Gaming in 2005 (looking back, personal)
Oh I do like to be beside the seaside (personal, reviews)
Winning, Losing and the Killer instinct (winning, reiews)

Guests


Paul Sommer: Guest Post (social)
Dane Peacock: Guest Post (personal)
Dame Koldfoot: Master or Grasshopper (social)
Denise Patterson-Monroe: Boardgamers - The Next Generation (social)
Iain: The Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective series (reviews)
Ava Jarvis: The Dance of Theme and Mechanics in Games: A Fantasy (game design)
Gerald McDaniel: Gaming With a Grandson (personal)

Monday, January 30, 2006

Gone Gaming: Board Game Internet Awards: The Winners!

The Gone Gaming: Board Game Internet Awards results are in. A big thank you to the tireless staff at Gone Gaming for their work in selecting the winners, and especially to Shannon for tabulating the votes and creating the award images.

If your site has won, you may display the "Winner" image here on your site with a link to this post's URL or the main Gone Gaming URL.

Here are the results:






BEST GAME PUBLISHER SITE



Days of Wonder
http://www.daysofwonder.com
With its clean, friendly interface, online versions of its games, vast community support, buying guide, and clear navigation, Days of Wonder wins Best Game Publisher Site for 2005.





BEST GAME NEWS SITE



GameFest
http://www.GameFest.com
GameFest's GameWire was a bold initiative that raised the standards of board and card game news, regular articles, and reports to a new level, and wins Best Game News Site for 2005.





BEST GAME INFORMATION SITE



Board Game Geek
http://www.boardgamegeek.com
With over 20,000 game entries, ratings, session reports, strategy articles, pictures, links, and lists, Board Game Geek is the first stop for information on board games and wins Best Game Information Site for 2005.





BEST GAME COMMUNITY SITE



Board Game Geek
http://www.boardgamegeek.com
Board Game Geek has more than 60,000 registered users participating in general and game related forums, game ratings, geeklists, a marketplace, auctions, and even its own game convention, making it the winner for Best Game Community Site for 2005.





BEST GAME CLUB SITE



East Tennessee Gamers
http://www.easttennesseegamers.com
Nicely designed, full of information about members, games, sessions, favorites, and a marketplace, East Tennessee Gamers' website wins Best Game Club Site for 2005.





BEST ONLINE GAME JOURNAL OR MAGAZINE



The Games Journal
http://www.thegamesjournal.com
Sadly ended, The Games Journal was a monthly periodical full of the best articles about the game industry, game design, and a host of other interesting topics, and wins Best Online Game Journal/Magazine for 2005.




BEST ONLINE GAMING SITE



SpielByWeb
http://www.spielbyweb.com
Easy to use and navigate, simply but usefully designed, Spiel By Web wins Best Online Gaming Site for 2005.





BEST NEW SITE (2005)



Board Game News
http://www.boardgamenews.com
Inheriting the mantle from the defunct GameWire, Board Game News is a cleanly designed site that provides daily news from the board game world and hosts dozens of international game reporters and the Dice Tower podcast, which is why it wins Best New Site for 2005.





BEST STRATEGY ARTICLE (2005)



Board Game Geek
Princes of Florence, The: From the Library to the Laboratory (Linnaeus, 3 part article)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/79193
Gerald Cameron's clear writing style and comprehensive analysis of the game Princes of Florence wins Best Strategy Article for 2005.





BEST PROMOTIONAL OR ADVOCACY ARTICLE (2005)



HourCNY TV news show
Scott Nicholson

http://scottnicholson.com/games/hourcny.html
An exciting leap into mainstream media, Scott Nicholson explains board games to the viewing public with grace and charm and wins Best Promotional/Advocacy Article for 2005.





BEST HUMOROUS GAME ARTICLE (2005)



Gamefest/Boardgamenews
New Misadventures in Gaming

http://www.gamefest.com/news/feature_detail/2514_0_3_0_C/
or http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/the_new_misadventures_in_gaming_1

Available on either the old GameWire or the new Board Game News, Dan Bosley continues his hilarious series of articles describing the intersection between the gaming and non-gaming world, and wins Best Humorous Game Article for 2005.





BEST ARTICLE SERIES (2005)



Tom Vasel
Interviews by an Optimist

http://www.thedicetower.com/interviews/int001.htm
Tom Vasel goes one-on-one with a who's who of boardgaming, and with close to a hundred fascinating interviews wins Best Article Series for 2005.





BEST SESSION REPORT (2005)



Mikko Saari
Reports on Essen 2005

http://www.melankolia.net/gameblog/archives/session_reports/essen_2005
Mikko Saari reports extensively from Essen, including a complete picture gallery, and wins Best Session Report for 2005.




BEST GAME BLOG



Chris Farrell's blog
http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/iblog
Chris Farrell writes deep analysis about the games he plays and doesn't pull any punches. Cleanly designed and well written, he wins Best Game Blog for 2005.





BEST GAME BLOG POST (2005)



Chris Farrell
So you want to play Civilization?

http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/iblog/C2097221587/E20051116234109/index.html
Chris Farrell's analysis and enthusiasm to get a classic game back onto the game table wins Best Game Blog Post for 2005.





BEST GAME PODCAST OR VIDEOCAST



Board Game Speak
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgamespeak.php
One of the first podcasts on any subject, Derk and Aldie from Board Game Geek interview some great personalities in the game world, often humorously, and talk about their site and BGG.con, winning Best Game Podcast/Videocast for 2005.





BEST GAME PODCAST OR VIDEOCAST EPISODE (2005)



Board Game Geek
BoardGameSpeak 2005-06-05 (Knizia at KublaCon)

http://files.boardgamegeek.com/boardgamespeak.php?id=31
A story about a near catastrophic loss, two interviewers put on the spot by their famous guest, and some excellent insights from two board game luminaries, wins Best Game Podcast/Videocast Episode for 2005.





BEST NEW GAME BLOG, PODCAST, OR VIDEOCAST (2005)



Boardgames with Scott
http://www.boardgameswithscott.com
Scott' board game video log, or vlog, squeaks in at the end of the year with a unique approach to demonstrating games, and wins Best New Game Blog/Podcast/Videocast for 2005.




Congratulations to all the winners and honorable mentions. And thanks again to all of our readers for participating in the nominations.

The Gone Gaming Staff

Sunday, January 29, 2006

Guy on the "fly"

After this past week's writing up and deciding upon the upcoming "Internet Awards"(of which 'that' alone took me just under '9' consecutive hours in total), then I was looking forward to this portion of our 'blog' here. What caused 'moi' to be getting this UP so late, was that the night before, I had spent over '11' hours upon an "article" for another site's considerations, and had THAT "swept away", due to I don't KNOW 'what'!?! All that I 'did' was to click upon the "Preview" button and nothing happened. It then wouldn't 'respond' no matter what I did upon that, while it 'acted' as if it were STUCK in some sort of 'mode' or "limbo" for this. Then, when it did 'decide' to DO anything, why it just took me to the "log in" portion for this, while lo-and-behold, ALL of my "hard work" was NOT to be 'found'! Like as IF I had "parked it out back of the 'Delta House', and the next morning, it-was-'GONE'! 'D-Day' takes care of the rest, and etc., etc..." Now, before anyone accuses 'moi' of "breaking the intarwebz" with my 'postings', then I wasn't being TOO elaborate upon this particular "article", as I was just compiling a 'Listing' for that. The TIME that I had spent on 'this', had mainly included going through various other sites, and attempting to obtain additional material or whatever, to verify or confirm upon what I was 'doing' for it. As it stands now, then there is NO possible 'means' to SAVE your 'work' "in progress", when using this particular method, and THAT is within the "Yahoo" 'system'! I mention about THEM, so that maybe they will institute a manner in which to achieve such, for any others to AVOID the ultimate frustration, and consternation, that I just recently endured. At least, then I should be able to go back and start ALL over again, while having to bypass the "confirmation" process upon this stuff, since I've gone and done that NOW! It is just something that I'd like to pass onto others, so that they'll keep such in mind, for whenever they happen to be "doing something" and wish to COMPLETE that! Now, if I could ONLY 'get back' my "time lost" for THAT, then I'd be much more happier as well.

They've got this year's "BGG Con" announcement upon their 'site' now, for those who are going to be able to partake of that and attend. I wish you ALL the "very best of times" when you are there, and no, I haven't as of yet made any 'plans' upon attending such myself, as only "time will tell" for this. From the sounds what went on there of last year's "Con", then they've made allowances for even MORE 'room', so as to include as many people as they can. I only hope that they'll provide some vicarious 'experiences', for the many who could NOT "be there", with perhaps someone or another taking the time and effort in this regards. I suppose that it could & would 'interfere' with anyone's "goings on" during that, while it is just one means for considerations upon the matter. WHO couldn't "resist" getting IN just "one more game" with their fellow "Geeks" in such as those 'plush' surroundings? Well, just ONE, or a couple of YOU, ought to keep in mind about those of us less fortunate 'ones', while I do 'applaud' those folks who DID provide their "reports" on this, when they were able to 'post' them! THANK YOU to one and all then, and we look forward to hearing from you on this once again. I've seen where others who missed out on last year's "event", have deemed this as a "must do" for this year's proceedings as well. In fact, there may just 'be' some surprise "Conventioneers" such as the illustrious "Joe Steadman" et al, in attendance and sorry "ole sport", if I happened to 'ruin' any *Surprise* that you may have had in 'mind' for such. Now, just WHERE in ole "Canuckian-land" are you heading off to? Let us know either now, or perhaps in late MAY or early JUNE, if you can.

EDIT:an hour later
As I was watching a 'show' about "Flight 93" on T V tonight, I was reminded of the anniversary of the "Challenger Shuttle" event that was yesterday, and then the upcoming "Columbia Shuttle" one as well. Let us bow our heads in their remembrances, and pray BEST, for those who follow. . .

Saturday, January 28, 2006

In Search of Lost Time, Part 2

Part 1 is here.

I had always enjoyed board games and card games as a yougster, and yet if I had ever bothered to think about it, I never would have said that they were a favorite among my various pastimes. Such starry-eyed innocence could not last for long, however. My first contact with the world of grown-up gaming came in 1981 when my parents surprised us with a subscription to Games magazine. For those who are not familiar with the publication, Games is a monthly collection of puzzles and crosswords, and a rather good one at that, but what was important was its annual "Games 100" issue. The Games 100 was a fancy little list of the best available toys for adults; naturally games made up most of the entries, but the feature was also peppered with numerous Rubik's Cube wannabes, proto-electronic handheld games and Neanderthal console systems. Initially I did not make much distinction between the board games and the other forms of entertainment; in addition to 221-B Baker Street and the Blokus ancestor Sudden Death, we also asked "Santa" for the puzzle Missing Link, the programmable tank Big Trak and a beeping beige gadget called Electronic Detective. What I wanted most, however, and which I pointedly did not receive, was a pair of foam fencing swords; I believe that it was judged that my brother and I would find endless occasion for mischief with these devices in our hands and that they might have put my little sister's life in no small peril. In retrospect, my parents may have been right. Anyway, I pored through those pages for hours on end, and I couldn't help but notice and wonder at such mysterious titles as Cosmic Encounter, Diplomacy, Junta, Kingmaker, Speed Circuit, Source of the Nile and War of the Ring.

Everything changed one night in 1982 when my older brother announced at the dinner table that he had joined an after-school game of something called "Dungeons & Dragons". We were all mystified.

"How do you play?"

"You have a character and you go on adventures."

"Adventures where?"

"Wherever."

"How do you know when you've won?"

"You don't win. You just play."

"But what are you actually doing?"

He explained, somewhat sulkily, that he had spent the afternoon slaying a giant rat. We all had a good laugh about that, and yet I was chartreuse with envy. In the months that followed I pestered him daily to let me look at his D&D stuff, and, when he eventually grew bored with the game and I inherited his AD&D Player Handbook, I became obsessed with rolling up piles of little paper characters ready for the moment when I found someone to play with.

Well, I never did play D&D all that much—there were too few people interested, it was too hard to get together, and no one was willing to DM for more than two sessions in a row. However, what ended up being more significant than D&D itself was my exposure through D&D to the gaming hobby in general, particularly through the pages of Dragon magazine. I became excited by the idea of challenging play, or more precisely challenging play which did not involve sprinting. However, I soon realized that I had to scale my gaming ambitions down from a big, rollicking role-playing group to something a little less personnel-intensive, and with that in mind I made my first board game purchase, Attack of the Mutants, a cheapie loss leader that I saw advertised in Dragon. The game was a light two-player wargame about a horde of bloodthirsty and immoral mutants trying to break through the defenses of a top secret laboratory in order to reach the chewy scientist center, and it is still somewhat famous in our family mythology because I was constantly (and somewhat naïvely) trying to coax father, mother and brother into playing it with me and everyone hated it. Amusingly enough, my mother ended up being my primary opponent, as she felt sorry for me and she was at least a little amused by the fact that the mutants were all named after TV characters of the '50s and '60s. I suppose the idea of a radioactive cannibal Donna Reed is pretty funny when you think about it.

The following Christmas saw a change in focus when I scoured the Games 100, as it was now the games that began calling to me. There seemed to be more life in these complex little microcosms than then there could ever be in the wrist-sprainers and the Mongoloid LED daemons; it was as if the rules were magic incantations that would open a door to another world. I was particularly intrigued by the otherworldly Cosmic Encounter and the thoroughly taboo Grass, but in the end I settled for the aerial dogfight game Ace of Aces. This was my first taste of "serious" gaming, and it introduced me to the notion of games in which complexity and difficulty were a cachet. Even learning the game, let alone playing it, was like the indoctrination into a secret society, and this appealed to me a great deal.

The honeymoon for Ace of Aces was somewhat short, however, as my brother and I were soon frustrated by the fact that we couldn't understand why certain choices led to certain results.* Luckily, around about the same time I scored a direct hit with a pair of fantastic** two-player games, the TSR second edition of The Awful Green Things from Outer Space and Snit's Revenge. Nothing could have been a better fit; I loved the themes, I loved the artwork, and I loved the games. The unfolding of the story of the doughty crew of the Znutar and their struggle against alien infiltration and crippling Zgwortz shortage took over my imagination completely. Most importantly, for the first time ever I had a friend who was actually enthusiastic about being on the other side of the table, and I have fond memories of those first peewee gaming sessions.

Now I was hooked, and it was not long after this point—it must have been 1983 or 1984—that this same friend and I one day discovered that the funky toy store that we sometimes visited in nearby Bethel, Connecticut had little "Pocket Games" for sale. We each bought a two-player game, he Ogre and I Necromancer, but I was emboldened to aspire to a multiplayer gaming session by something really really cool, which was Illuminati. I got it home, read the rules, signed my Bavarian Illuminati membership card, and that was that: I loved it. It was the greatest thing I had ever seen or heard of, and, better still, against all odds I actually managed to organize a group of semi-regular victims to come over to my house and play the thing. The games themselves were exercises in pure Machiavellian evil; there were solemn oaths of loyalty immediately followed by vicious backstabbery; there were lies, extortion, and dealings of a low and infamous nature; sometimes there was punching. Oh man, what a blast. Not only did I buy the three following expansions but also the issue of Space Gamer that featured the Monty Python Illuminati. You know things are bad when the Spanish Inquisition controls the post office.

Our tenuous gaming group also enjoyed King of the Tabletop, a Tom Wham*** do-it-yourselfer from the pages of Dragon. This was just an out-and-out dicefest, but the little chits had a lot of personality and there was a simplistic empire-building element to it which I thoroughly enjoyed. Though it did not see as much table time as Illuminati, I loved the game to bits, so much so that in a recent fit of acute nostalgia I re-acquired the back issue of Dragon which featured the game and made myself a new, deluxe copy. Will I ever get a chance to play it? Doubtful. But you never know.

More games followed. I had three books in the Lost Worlds series, namely the fighter-mage, the cold drake and the hill giant; I acquired a ton of Car Wars stuff, and I once even hosted a free-for-all in the Armadillo Autoduel Arena, though I was eliminated in the first ten minutes and so had to sit the rest of the game out; finally I reached the pinnacle of gamerhood with the acquisition of a copy of Axis and Allies.

And then, sometime in 1985...everything stopped. Going into my sophomore year of high school, I reluctantly came to understand that cardboard counters and specialty dice were considered aggressively uncool by most of my peers, and that conflicted with my secret ambitions to attend parties, drink Budweiser and make girls with poofy hair fall in love with me. Other interests were also encroaching, and all my money was soon being immediately handed over to the local record shops. The last hurrah of my bronze age of gaming was an exciting and evocative Call of Cthulhu campaign GM'ed by my old friend Neil. Good ol' Neil; he fudged every rule in the book to keep our guys alive.

And yet I still loved gaming, and even though I had put away all of the wyverns and cabals and killer cars, I found I could still fly under the radar of draconian teenage fashion demands with a deck of playing cards. I picked up myself a copy of Hoyle's, and cribbage became my game of choice for the remainder of my high school years. I almost lapsed back into gamerism on my arrival at college when I visited the initial session of the campus gaming group, but I bolted after becoming affrighted by the profound nerdiness of the members thereof. Instead, I added gin rummy, spades, scopa, chess and darts to my repertoire, and in such pursuits spent many happy hours not-really-gaming with not-really-gamers. I would continue posing as a not-really-gamer for quite some time, even after 1995 when I got hooked on M:tG boosters. It wasn't until I had been secretly ducking in and out of game stores for two or three years that I suddenly thought, "you know, maybe it would be fun to get a new board game...you know, just for kicks. Maybe they still have that Games 100 like when I was a kid? Hey, they do! Hmmm...this 'El Grande' sounds kind of interesting...."

It's all been one long Lost Weekend ever since.

_______________________

* Interestingly, someone at the office owns the game and just recently explained the hex-map underpinnings of the system to me. Now it all makes perfect sense.

** Or so I thought at the time.

*** Author of Awful Green Things and Snit's Revenge, don'tcha know.

Friday, January 27, 2006

Gaming With a Grandson



One key to happiness – GAMES


“Gather ‘round, and you shall hear
News from a man we all revere.”
{with apologies to Longfellow}


That thought, or something like it, flashed in my mind when I saw I had a GeekMail from COLDFOOT! Okay, maybe that’s just a tiny bit over the top, but when I saw the subject of the message was Gone Gaming, well, I was intrigued, to say the least. For a fraction of a second, my thumb froze on the trackball; “Wonder what this is about?” I thought. A quick click revealed the first line: “Would you like to write an article for the Gone Gaming blog?” Are you kidding? Is it cold in Alaska in the winter? Of course I would! ---- [What Brian didn’t know was that I had toyed with the idea of volunteering an article, someday. Oops, the cat’s out of the bag, now.] Speaking of felines, now that I’ve accepted the offer, I’m about as nervous as a long-tailed cat in a roomful of rocking chairs, but I’ve always been a sucker for the spotlight. Having learned nothing from the Light Brigade, here goes………



My Oxford American Dictionary defines gaming as “to gamble for money stakes.” Well, now, this definition needs some updating. The term, as used by the game geeks I know, generally has little or nothing to do with money stakes (except considering the cost of the game). Our “gaming” around here is strictly playing boardgames and card games for fun.

Warning to Readers: Grandpa Bragging Time Ahead --- My grandson, Joel, last month became 8 years old. He is a bright, polite, popular, friendly, handsome, talented boy who has a particular knack for mathematics and games. He is definitely on the geek trail. At about age two, he was playing Chutes and Ladders with us. He soon moved up to My First Board Games and Uno, among other games. Then came a breakthrough – our family discovered Euro-games (due to clicking on a link to BoardGameGeek).

We soon were playing Pick Picknic, Vampire, and Frank’s Zoo. By this time, Joel was three, and then four years old. That’s when we realized for the first time that he was progressing well ahead of his age in the area of mathematics (or at least simple arithmetic). During a game of Vampire, he casually mentioned that he had four more points than I did. My wife and I stared at him and at each other for a moment, quite surprised at this statement. From that time on, we quizzed him during games about our relative scores, requiring him to add and subtract digits in his head. His arithmetic skill grew by leaps and bounds, as did his ability in gaming. No, we can’t really take credit for “creating” his skills, but we subtly (or not so subtly) pushed him a bit to expand his abilities. We are firmly convinced that his desire to play games and figure out scores helped him considerably to reach the point where he is today. His second-grade teacher told his parents the other day that she loves being forced to come up with ways to challenge Joel in math at school. She said she was one of two teachers at a recent area meeting who could confidently say they had a student working well above his grade level in math.

Joel’s sister (Natalia, now age 10, who beat us all at 7-player Bohnanza last Saturday) became an excellent reader at an early age. Joel developed his math skills early, but we wondered whether he would concentrate on that, rather than on learning to read. We should have had no concern about that. Joel watched his dad and me play Magic: The Gathering for a while, often sitting on his dad’s lap and asking questions. He soon wanted to play the game, but that required reading and understanding the text on all but the most simple cards. In short order, he was doing just that, primarily so he could play that game. His reading skill has progressed to the point that he is now becoming our “rules lawyer.” He discovered this week that we had not been playing Bohnanza correctly (or at least not according to the rulebook variants) when we played with three players or with seven players. We had played the regular five-player rules in both cases. Ah, yes, a true geek!

He and his dad became very interested in HeroScape when it first came out, purchasing three master sets and all the expansions that have been released. Joel studied all the data cards for the figures, and essentially memorized them. Last summer, Toys R Us stores ran a promotional competition in HeroScape, and Joel and his dad signed up at the local store. Joel, playing against teenagers, won the competition and acquired several figures free. He even caused a bit of a stir by making a move which was questioned by his opponent. Joel practically quoted the rule that allowed his movement, and a check of the rulebook confirmed his accuracy. Definitely a rules lawyer.

Soon after we began playing Carcassonne, we acquired Hunters & Gatherers. Very quickly, Joel was playing that game (and beating us), and it became one of his favorite games. He now enjoys Carcassonne with us, too.

After watching the five adults in our family group playing Settlers of Catan for several months, he (at age 7) asked whether he could play a game of it with us. We all sort of hemmed and hawed, but finally agreed. I don’t believe he won the first time out, but it wasn’t long before he did beat us all at Settlers. He observes our play of a new game carefully, asks questions, and then proceeds to beat the socks off us. About a week ago, he asked whether he could try Ticket to Ride with us, and (as usual) he did very well at it, completing all his tickets in both games he’s played.

Last week, he and his sister spent a weekday night at our house, while their parents were out of town. Joel asked whether I would play a game with him (I virtually NEVER turn him down on that request), so I offered to teach him Cartagena (a game I acquired last month, but hadn’t introduced to the family, although my son-in-law Dan and I had played it online). We played one game with our hands face-up, so Joel could learn it. In the second game, when he won by getting all six of his pirates into the escape boat, I had only one of mine in the boat. Hey, now, I’m not exactly a slouch at this game, I thought – why, I’ve even managed to beat sodaklady once at Cartagena online! Okay, we play two more games the next day; he wins one 6-3, and I win one 6-4. This kid is a natural game-player. You have to understand, and believe me when I say, that I do not “throw” games for Joel, to let him win. He is so sharp and so competitive that he pushes us all at whatever we play.

This past Saturday, our family gathered at our house, as usual, for food and games. As we got out a few games to play, I included Around the World in 80 Days, a game I am fond of these days, but had only played twice. I noticed it accommodates up to six players, so I suggested Joel might want to join us. He had watched us play last time, so he knew the general idea of it. We explained the rules for him, refreshing our own memories, and played the game. Although Joel finished last, he made no mistakes and fully comprehended the game. I expect he will soon be winning it.

Over the past few years, Joel has beaten us (all as a group or in smaller groups or one-on-one) in the following games (these are the ones I can think of, at least): Pick Picknic, Vampire, Frank’s Zoo, Zirkus Flohcati, Fill or Bust, Trumpet, Bohnanza, Royal Turf, Hunters & Gatherers, Carcassonne, Settlers of Catan, Cartagena, HeroScape, and Magic: The Gathering. I believe that is quite an accomplishment for an 8-year-old.

I have come to the conclusion that I own no game that Joel would not be able to learn and to compete well in, given a chance. After playing Cartagena last week, I told Joel that he is an excellent game-player. He responded with, “So are you, Grandpa, and you teach me these games.” Can you possibly imagine how proud of him I am and how pleased I am to think about the gaming fun we have ahead of us? ------ Okay, grandpa bragging is now concluded.

Hope this hasn’t been too boring for you. Whether it was or wasn’t, I’ll just say that I have thoroughly enjoyed sharing my good fortune with you, and I wish for you as many happy gaming hours as I’ve had over the past half-century and longer.

Until another time (perhaps), this is one grandpa who is a mile high on gaming.

--- Gerald … near Denver, Colorado; aka gamesgrandpa

Thursday, January 26, 2006

The Problem with Player Numbers

They appear so innocent, so unimportant--just a few digits hidden upon a gamebox amidst the pageantry of artwork and logos. Oh, surely, they're given a bit of prominence. Perhaps they're printed in a 24-point font, even bolded or blacked. But that doesn't give respect to their importance, to how they can make or break a game.

I'm talking about player numbers, of course, those variables which tell us who can and can't play a game.

Playing Group Size

Just as there are ideal player numbers for games, which I'll get to in due course, there's an ideal player number for gaming groups too, and I have my own opinion about exactly what that number is.

It's 5.

With 5 regular, reliable players, you can count on having 5 people at your game night 50% of the time. And you'll end up with a 4-player count, that's equally acceptable for gaming 30% of the time. Another 10% of the time you have 3 players, and I'm not very fond of that number, but it's OK a few times a year. Thus you only end up gameless 5% of the time. And who wanted to play on Thanksgiving anyways, with meeples advancing through mountains of mashed potatos, past rivers of gravy?

So, 5 players is a great foundation for personal gaming groups, and that's ultimately one of the bases I use to measure what player numbers I'd like to see in my games.

(And if you did the math, you'll see I missed 5% in my group counting. That's the time when an extra person shows up, because an old friend is in town, your wife/husband is getting pouty because they're not seeing you enough, or the homeless Vietnam vet who lives out on the street insists on crashing your game night. Then you inevitably end up with 6 players, but at least there are a few Power Grids and Medicis that support that too.)

The Magic Numbers

With a gaming group base of 5, there's no doubt that the magic player numbers for a game are 3-5.

But surely, you say, if 3-5 players is good wouldn't 2-5 be better? Or even 2-6? Not necessarily, my hypothetical friend. 3-5, you see, gives a designer some control over a game. Perhaps gameplay will vary as your group rises up from a triad to a pentium, but the designer can try to account for that. However each additional player number is exponentially more difficult to account for. Designing a game just for 4 players might be somewhat difficult. But multiply that by 2x for 3-4, then 2x for 3-5, then 2x for 3-6 and you see the ever-increasing problem.

Beyond that, 2-player games are a totally different beast than multiplayer games. Auctions pretty much don't work, nor does trading. Majority control loses a lot of its luster when it becomes an all-or-nothing proposition. Winners can more easily runaway because there's no third player to arbitrate and balance. There are plenty of good two-player games, don't get me wrong, but it's a very rare multiplayer game that can correctly arbitrate the nuances of two-player play, while at the same time managing great multiplayer play.

Of course to every rule there's an exception, and Alhambra offers a good example of this. It manages its 2-player game by introducing a third, imaginary player who gets some share of the resources every turn. It's a simple answer, and one I've seen repeated elsewhere but it doesn't work for every game. (And Alhambra has player number problems of its own, as we'll see at the top end of the scale.)

Other Weird Numbers

Player numbers of course come in many other forms. 3-4 has become my least favorite, my personal pet peeve. If I weren't a gaming junkie who always has to try the newest and the best, I'd throw the boxes boldly branded with those numbers back on the game store shelves in disgust. I can't play them with my wife, and I often can't play them with my gaming group.

What a waste of cardboard.

2-4 is surprisingly a number that I'm willing to deal with, but I just figure that I'm picking up a 2-player game, and maybe I'll get lucky and get to play it with an underattended gaming group some evening. I should know better than to like 2-4, because I'm often rudely surprised by these games; I often discover that their "2-player" gameplay is about as fascinating and strategic as playing Monopoly with one color of property, no houses, no hotels, and a one-space movement rather than a die roll. As I already said, designing 2-player games that work for multiplayers too is tough, but at least 2-4 is better than that pathetic 3-4.

3-8 is bizarre, and usually a sign that I really shouldn't try out the game unless I can't see my dining room table through the haze of chips, crackers, and sodas that usually accompany gamers in greater attendence. And 5-12, who even thought up that number? I still have an unreviewed copy of Word Jam because of that bizarre requirement. The times when I get 5 people in my house who are willing to play somewhat esoteric word games can pretty much be counted on zero hands.

As for games that support solitaire play, offering up numbers like 1-5, 1-6, or 1-8, I have to say, "Who cares?" Perhaps there was a day when this type of thing was exciting, but now I can get a much better solitaire gaming experience on the computer, so designers ... don't waste your time.

There's of course one other perfect player number, right up there on the mantle with 3-5, and that's 2. Not 2-4, and for Teuber's sake, not 2-5, just 2. It's the difference between Carcassonne: The Castle and Carcassonne. One is a half-broken all-or-nothing, pale imitation of multiplayer play when played with 2, while the other steps through its gears like clockwork.

The Problem with Variable Player Numbers

Of course if you asked any game designer, I bet they'd prefer to just release a game for a single ideal number of players. Because most games work well with one number of players and are weaker at all others. There are exceptions, surely. Better designers (and it won't surprise you that I put Reiner Knizia into that category) can make games different at better numbers, rather than just better or worse.

Ra offers a fine example, with items changing in value based on the number of players. A pharaoh is going to be differently valued in a 5-player game (than, say, 3-player) because it's easier to stay out of last place in that race by grabbing just one or two ancient rulers. Meanwhile I think the monuments become less valued in higher player games because it's harder to complete a full set with some much additional competition.

But there are some regular problems when you vary player numbers, and even Knizia succumbs to some (somtimes).

Game chaos is the worst, and here we'll return to Alhambra. In that game you collect money in the hope of buying later tiles, and with just a few players in your game you can plan this strategically. You take money on one turn with the hope that a tile which could be purchased with that money will still be available the next time your turn rolls around. But with more and more players this grows less and less likely, til the point where, at six players, you might as well not bother taking anything but the highest value bills at any time.

You see chaos in Reiner Knizia's Samurai as well (and that's been made most obvious to me thanks to the computer game, while I'll return to in a few weeks). The more players, the less control you have over winning any individual location, because the board situation can change so much before your next turn.

The other notable problem with varying player numbers is telescoping game length. I really didn't understand the initial reports I heard back on Railroad Tycoon, where players were groaning about 4-5 hour marathons, or alternatively saying it took just 2 hours. But Railroad Tycoon was a game that wasn't designed in the least to moderate game length when more players joined in; as I wrote in my review, it runs at 30-45 minutes per player.

Now a great game can accomodate these telescoping games by lowering victory conditions as player numbers increase, but there's problems there too. Eagle's Attack was a game that tried that to its deficit; if you had too many players you didn't get into the meat of the game.

And then there's downtime. A 3-5 minute turn might be frustrating in a two-player game, but in a six-player game you could play something else between each of your game turns.

The Marketing Game

I do have to wonder how many player number problems are the fault of marketers. They're a maligned class, I know, and I'll admit to doing marketing work on my own from time to time. I write copy and I design ads, so perhaps I'm blaming myself as well.

But how many marketers insisted that rules be included for 2-player play, even when the designer protested otherwise? Or, contrariwise, how many beautiful 3-5 player games were crushed into a worthless 3-4 mold by a bean-counting marketer who said that a $10 higher price point couldn't be supported, and thus the extra pieces couldn't be manufactured?

But enough fault; let me instead offer some advice. Game companies and marketers alike, let me offer up my dearest wish, after which all else would be forgiven. Tell me the ideal player number for your games. I would have been a lot happier with San Marco if I'd known from the start that it really only worked for 3-player play. And for Santiago (and so many other auction games), they should really just say, "Don't bother" if you just have three players around the table.

So give me real player numbers, ideal player numbers ...

Or don't. I guess.

Just don't be surprised if that gets me started.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ Euro-Snoots & Free Shipping

What's on my mind this week is a collection of random bits and pieces from my local gaming adventures to BGG trends and gaming thoughts in general.

For example ~

Tom Vasel did an email interview with me about a year and a half ago for his 'Interview with an Optimist" series on www.boardgamegeek.com and we went right into the whole online discounter versus local store mud pit. What I suggested to Tom was that online retailing of board games at steep discounts is a temporary thing. Given what I know about wholesale discounts and with the ever-increasing cost of doing business, it's not likely that deep-discounting will remain in place for much longer. I personally think it's an unhealthy business to be in.

Lo and behold, what occurs but Thoughthammer - the poster child for board game cheapskates - has raised it's free shipping minimum and Fairplay has as well. Gee. Too bad. Now the confirmed skinflint gamer will have to leave his online basket incomplete for several more weeks as he builds an order that can all ship at once so he's guaranteed an extra $10 or so in savings.

What's going to happen when you only get free shipping with $200 or $300 orders? Will penny-pinching gamers start building their shipping lists months or years in advance so they can still save that extra $10 or $15 dollars? I can imagine the conversation now:

"Hey Bob, did you pre-order that new Euro Game Through the Dry and Luckless Desert coming out from Alea?"

"I sure did Fred, but it'll be the end of 2007 before my order ships."

"Huh?"

"Yeah, well I want to save on shipping and since ThoughtlessHammer has the best deal, free shipping on orders totalling $350 I have to wait for a few games to be published before I get my copy of TTDALD."

"Er, Bob, TTDALD has been out now for 2 months, maybe you could pick it up locally and actually play the game."

"You gotta be kidding Fred! I'd never pay retail!!!"

"Bob. The game only costs $35 retail and Nerdsters Games, Gadgets, Goodies & Geek Gear down by the mall always gives 10% off."

"Not a prayer Fred. No way am I going to pay that guy's rent. I don't owe him squat just because he owns a store. Besides which, there are people who shop there who fail miserably at meeting my incredibly high standards for human contact. Some of them are stinky and others don't look like me or think like me so I won't lower myself to comingle with peons."

"Yeah, right Bob. Well, what's on your order with ThoughtlessHammer that's holding it up?"

"Settlers of Caylus, Princes of Foppery, the expansion to the Analytical Attenuation series of abstracts and the Settlers of Caylus: Shrimps & Coral Reef expansion."

"Er, Bob, none of those games are even released yet. In fact, Settlers of Caylus was just announced and the company that produced the Analytical Attenuation series just went bankrupt."

"I don't mind waiting."

"Wouldn't you rather just go buy a new game to tide you over until 2008?"

"What? And pay retail? I'd sooner quit gaming altogether."


If you think I'm exaggerating, then pop over to BGG and read some of the threads about what extent some people will go to in order to save $5.

Euro-Snoot Stuff

I've been doing my best to play some of the popular Euro-Snoot games and I managed to play both Modern Art and Princes of Florence. Then I posted my thoughts on BGG and sprouted a 3 page debate, spiced with political overtones and national taunting. None of which was my fault I assure you. I innocently made an unobtrusive comment and the Euro-Snoot Jackals came unpinned.

I'm still trying to get my mind wrapped around the type of gamer who can rate games like Puerto Rico and Princes of Florence higher than games that are actually fun to play...with other people.

I'm not suggesting that Puerto Rico or Princes aren't good games, they are. Or they're not enjoyable, they can be. But they aren't fun... I mean fun in the sense that they don't create a feeling or sense of mutually shared gaming experience with your fellow buddies around the table. They're games where you pick a strategy from the two or three that will almost always work, then plod along reacting to the choices others make and trying to keep your pre-programmed strategy on track. Then the game ends, points are totaled and everybody says, "Let's play a filler!!" Which lights up smiles as For Sale or Bang! or some other light and interactive game with randomness and back-stabbing and lots of oohs and ahhs and thrills and taunts and...well, fun.

I certainly hope Caylus offers something more than that because I want to like Euros more than I do. Well, I already like El Grande, but it's pretty interactive and there is lots of opportunity for screwage and bubble-busting.

Finally! Giganten

I've owned this game for at least a year, maybe even two years. Four of us sat down and played it Saturday evening and it was a gas. Essentially it's a race game, where you're struggling to find the best oil deposits and also attempting to control the three markets to build your cash. I like the game a lot because it has some nicely balanced cards wherein one benfit, say a high movement allowance, is balanced by perhaps a fewer number of licenses to sell oil, which severly effects whether you can take advantage of the fluctuating market.

Giganten also was produced in the classic Euro-Snoot format; beautiful board, high quality cards, cool looking oil derricks and trucks and colorful rules for the german-speaking amongst you. I'm going to rate this one an "8" on BGG and then re-rate after a couple more plays. If it holds up then I think it'll be a "9" for me. I like games with chance, with pressure, with money and with manipulation. Giganten has all that and more. Too bad it's out of print. Go get a copy if you want to have fun in the "fun" sense.

Fast Forward to 2008

"Hey Bob, did your ThoughtlessHammer order arrive in time for your family getogether at Christmas?"

"Grrrrr."

"Uh oh. What's up?"

"Those SOB's. They finally shipped but when it arrived, two days after the family went back to Peoria, my copy of Through the Dry and Luckless Desert was dinged and it was missing 3 of the 3200 wood meeples and cubes. Not to mention, since I had to substitute half of my order for other games, I ended up with two Monopoly clones, a SuperMarvelHeroScape expansion that I saw later for less at Walmart and they back-ordered the Shrimps & Coral Reef expansion because FairForUS Games got an exclusive on that expansion and it might only be generally available for a month next year."

"Well, if you really want it why not go buy a copy at FairForUs Games?"

"Fred... how dumb are you? FairForUs doesn't have a free shipping program and they only offer 20% off. I'd never stoop so low as to pay that much money for a game."

"Well, you don't have to tell anyone. After all, it's not really their business and the game is hot, I've been playing it for 6 weeks now."

"Gggaaakkk"

"Bob? Are you okay?"

"Ggggggaaaaaaccckkkkk"

"Are you breathing man? You're turning blue!"

"Ggggaaacckkkk....why... buy.....game.....if ..... not ..... tell other...lessers...how smart... and .... gggaaacckkk...thrifty.... I am."

Okay, okay. Maybe I'm still overdoing it a bit. But it really can get almost this bad.

So here's DW's advice:

Game Good?
Buy Game Now.
Play Game tonight.
Do not invite Bob.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Even More on Winning

Last week we talked about winning using mechanics. This week let's contradict everything I said last week and talk about what winning really means.

What is Winning?

Anyone who says winning means coming in first place is playing in a tournament. The actual victor of the game - by points, by money, etc... - is entirely secondary to winning the game in the broader sense. Unless you're in a tournament, winning means only one thing: everyone enjoyed the experience.

Enjoyment can come from a variety of different intellectual and emotional sources, some of which may be important to an individual, and some of which may not be. To name few possibilities:

  • Winning the game (as victor).
  • Playing well.
  • Someone you love winning the game.
  • Facing a challenge and succeeding.
  • Facing a challenge and doing better than previous times.
  • Not coming in last.
  • Everyone playing their best.
  • Finding the gameplay funny, interesting, clever, awesome, or meaningful.
  • Finding the conversation funny, interesting, clever, awesome, or meaningful.
  • Impressing someone.
  • Playing or doing something clever, or witnessing someone else doing that.
  • Enjoying the experience vicariously.
  • and so on ...


I'm willing to bet that for most people who read this, actual victory in the game is not enjoyable if your fellow players didn't enjoy themselves (unless your opponent was somebody obnoxious that you were trying to convince to leave the game group). If you come to the end of the game and you find yourself in first place, but surrounded by people who look entirely unhappy, frustrated, bored, or even on the verge of tears, have you won?

Enjoying the Game

With so many people having different expectations as to what makes a game enjoyable, how can you ensure that all players, in fact, "win" the game?

  • Play with well-mannered people

    I've known five year-olds who are more enjoyable to play with than forty year-olds. It is not a question of age. It is a question of manners. Well-mannered people don't get upset if they are losing because they insinctively know what winning means: having fun and doing your best. Well-mannered people don't harass other people, make fun, insult, demean, play moves for other players, ruin games by undermining hidden information, argue incessantly about the rules, or ruin the game components or places in which they are playing.

  • Play games that people like

    Games are meant to be fun, not a trial. It may be difficult to match everyone's needs with a limited selection of games, but it is better not to play at all than to play, or force someone to play, when they don't enjoy the activity.

  • Don't play to win at all costs in long multi-player games

    Sometimes a game will allow you to totally destroy another person's chances of winning. For instance, I played a game of Cities and Knights of Catan where I had a choice of where to build a settlement: either of two locations was equally good for me, but one totally eliminated the last location in which one of my three opponents could build. By all rights, the right "winning" move was to kill my opponent, which I did ... and instantly regretted. My opponent then had to suffer without a single meaningful decision to make for another hour and a half, painfully wanting to leave. He didn't blame me for the decision; it was the "right" play to win. But he also never came to the game group again. It was not the winning move, after all.

  • Play games without early-player elimination, games where players can make meaningful decisions even if they are far from winning, or play short games

    It is one thing to lose. It is another thing to be bored for two, three, or six hours with nothing to do, but not able to leave without wrecking the game for other people.

    This is less problematic in shorter games, or in two player games that allow a player to resign. In these cases, the game experience is felt over the course of a number of games; a single game becomes no worse than losing a "battle" in the main game.

  • Don't let your game life ruin your personal life

    Don't start familial or neighborhood wars because of your game playing or the members of your game group. Keep your priorities straight.

  • Cultivate some of the other sources of enjoyment

    That's a good list of ways to enjoy games up there. Maybe you can branch out as to what you consider "enjoyment".


For myself, whenever I no longer have any chance of winning, I set myself a sub-goal in the game that is similar to the original goal: achieve a certain number of points, acquire a certain number of territories. As long as I have something challenging to keep me interested.

Yehuda

Monday, January 23, 2006

Play Me


D.W. had to take an unexpected trip today so I'm filling in for him. I hope all you D.W. fans won't be too disappointed.
~~~~~~~
If I were a game, I’d be light and fun, the theme prompting lots of laughter and teasing. I believe there’s nothing in life better than a good laugh that leaves you breathless and still giggling even after the “funny” has worn off.

I’d be unpredictable, using cards to throw a bit of chance into the game. After all, life is unpredictable, forcing you to deal with whatever is thrown in your path.

I’d be tactical rather than strategic as I’ve never been good at looking at the long-term or planning life too far in advance. I’d have Action Points, forcing you to budget your turn as you would budget your income.

I’d be irreverent, poking fun at something people feel strongly about or making a point about something that is controversial. A rant disguised as a game.

My rules would be simple and straightforward, your goal clear. I would not be a gamer’s game, the path from here to there convoluted by multiple mechanics and wrapped in layers of phases, or requiring heavy analysis.

I would play with 2-4 players and the colors of my pieces would be black, Richard’s favorite color to play, orange, Cori’s favorite, and green and blue, my favorite colors depending on my mood.

Egads!! I’m the love child of Torres and Busen Memo!!
~~~~~~~~
Still on the Wagon

It’s been 7 weeks since I’ve bought a game. I WAS tempted to order the East Front expansion for Memoir ’44 but then I received an email notification of the shipment of Command and Colors: Ancients so I controlled my impulse. (applause from the assembled addicts)

This has turned out to be a good thing not only because I’ve spent enough money on games in the last 2+ years but because my husband has discovered eBay so the credit card, for the most part, has changed hands and hobbies. While I’m taking a big break from game buying, Richard is buying motorcycle parts so he can get his old motorcycles in perfect form. He’s been trying to find these parts locally but with no luck so eBay has become his addiction lately. Carburetors, gauges and side covers have replaced games on my Visa statement.
~~~~~~~~
Until next time, remember Meeples are peoples, too.

Mary

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Playoffs and their RESULTS

It's DOWN to just '2' "playings" going on right now, between Denver VS Pittsburgh and Seattle VS Carolina! I'm watching these BOTH today, while I 'do' this as well. Oh man, ole Denver is having a "BAD 'hare' day" from the looks of things. They're gonna NEED all '4' of them "rabbit's feet" to pull this 'one' out of the "dustbin". At the "halftime", then it is Pittsburgh leading at 24 to 3! It's ALMOST "all over, except for the 'crying game'!" But, they've got another "half" to go and they'd better hope that things pick up swiftly for them in THAT, and here's hoping upon the "best" for THEM too. I'd like to 'see' another "West Coast" type of "Super Bowl" this time around, since we've had PLENTY of "other kinds" before. The 3rd Quarter is about 'done', with not much going on for either "Team", oh sure, and RIGHT "after" I 'state' such, THEN Denver "scores"! YAY! for them. They'll NEED at least a couple or '3' "turn-overs"(NON-'bakery' kinds) in order to "turn-around" this GAME! Yep, it's OVER for Denver with a nice WIN for Pittsburgh! now, there's the MORE "important" GAME coming on soon. ALRIGHT! It is "halftime" at the moment, with the SEAHAWKS leading! Need I 'say' anymore? YAY! the SEAHAWKS are "Super Bowl" BOUND! While I also apologize about the "tardiness" of 'this', since I was enthralled with "the GAME"! So just '2' more weeks to SEE who's the "Champ-eens" of the 'gridiron'! I can hardly wait for that, and I'll be trying to GET some manner of 'attending' if I can.

The "Geek CHAT" is BACK! so's if anyone wishes to check into this, then by all means please DO! I know that it is truly befitting for thusly, when the "anniversary" of that is upon us, and a "shout OUT" to ole "David Greene" for his "Birthday Anniversary" as well! I won't reveal his 'age' here, so he's got THAT 'going' for HIM at least. It will be nice to "chat" with many there when they are able to be around for a while. Thank YOU to ALL that were helping to get it back on track JACK! It seemed an eternity for this, and it is quite nice to be able to access folks from ALL over the WORLD in that. For those who aren't aware of the FACT, then you can even seek out HELP upon your gaming 'needs' if you have some. It's a 'great' method to obtain some quick 'fix' or answer a "question" of some kind. We even have the occasional "celeb" pop-in from time to time like "Elvis" and "Liberace" with that looney "Bill Hicks" or "Rodney Dangerfield" and many others who 'command' some RESPECT! mind you. So...mind your 'p's & 'q's when you're amongst the "illiterati" of that, once you ARE among them.

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Oh I do like to be beside the seaside

Hello from the annual Rogerson/McHarg family beach holiday. One of the wonderful things about writing a blog is that you can do it anywhere, as long as you have access to (1) a computer and (2) the internet. Well thanks to my work, the computer comes with us when we travel – and thanks to a very delicious café (and another internet café which is less good, simply because it lacks apple crumble), we can login every couple of days to see what's up in the world.

Of course, something that is simpler than blogging is gaming – but I'm getting ahead of myself. Let me set the scene first.

We're holidaying at Lorne, on Victoria's Great Ocean Road. It's a popular holiday destination with a great surf beach and rapidly escalating property prices – the vacant block of land across the road from where we stay is for sale for a cool $1.3 million. Needless to say, we rent.

The house we stay in belongs to friends of my parents. We holidayed here every year from when I was about 7-15 - I remember many happy stays here, and my particular memory is of sneaking out of bed every night (I was the oldest of the four children of the 2 families) to join the adults in countless rounds of Oh Hell. Later, this progressed to 3-handed Bridge and even Backgammon, when my dad bought a set at the local newsagency and taught himself and the house's owner, a statistician like him. Then there was the year we were sent a strange new cube puzzle by some Hungarian friends – dad and Alison spent hours cracking a solution.

But anyway. Venue. Rickety old beach house (2 rooms don't even have windows, just flywire and shutters), beds that are probably older than me, paper-thin walls, ocean views from the living room windows, funny old stove with a power plug in the front of it and no TV.

What's that? No TV? It's probably why the house is cheap enough that we can rent it for two weeks. And funnily enough, the girls haven't even missed it (although we did bring a DVD to slip into the computer if things got sticky). But it's probably one of the reasons why, in the first ten days of our two-week holiday, I have clocked up a fairly impressive 42 games played.

No, we're not neglecting our kids. We go to the beach every day, have been to a movie, plan to go to the circus. They're enjoying the trampolines (and the ice cream) on the foreshore, reading books, and playing with the little friend who visited last weekend with his parents, our friends Amanda and Steve. We've not even "played" Biggie's Snakes & Ladders beach towel (although I confess to having been tempted).
But … 42 games!

In the interests of full disclosure, I have to confess that that's nothing. I just counted Fraser's tally and he beat that in the first 4 days. Now, he's up to 143.

One hundred and forty three!!!

I'm having a small case of game envy here.

So what have we been playing?

We brought 16 games with us, and so far nine of them have hit the table.

Pick Picknic is at the top of my list, with twelve plays logged. We bought this at Mind Games in Albury on the way to Sydney, based on 'Geek recommendations, and they didn't steer us wrong. Whether it comes to a "fox off" or a "chicken lickin'", the Bigster loves this game – and Otto loves to play with the bits, sorting the yellow cubes and cards onto the yellow tile and rolling the dice for us. (Note to self: Get a die with numerals on it instead of spots. Otto knows most of her numbers, and that's how Biggie learned to read numbers up to six). Our visiting friend is colourblind, which proved a bit of a challenge at first – we have new appreciation for this often-overlooked requirement of game design.

Next on my list is Connect Four, with ten plays logged. I don't feel quite so inferior when I realise that a whopping 97 of Fraser's games played are Connect Four – thirty seven of them on Tuesday! Biggie loves this game, which we gave her for Christmas, and we suspect she's the Connect Four shark of her school After Care program. She certainly demoralised our friend after just a few plays. When we're not playing this, Otto loves to make patterns and even 'play' with one of us (taking turns putting pieces into the frame – every so often she will exclaim triumphantly, "Me stop you 'nect Four!"). She likes to play with it by herself too – shame it's such a noisy toy!

There's a big drop to my next game – Frank's Zoo (four plays). This, like Pick Picknic, was one of my "pledge" games – I've sworn to try to get through most of my unplayed games before buying any new ones this year. We've had this for ages but been daunted by the apparently complex rules of animal precedence and by the "4-7 players" on the box (it's 3-7 in the rules). Well daunt me no longer, little beasts. I know what you do. What a great game this is! We played it with our friend, and have been playing it with the Bigster, although we're trying to find a suitable way to handicap her. We're experimenting with card distribution – 16 for her, 22 each for me and Fraser, although that may make us more likely to have those important sets and pairs. Perhaps we should just let her go out with 4 cards left in her hand, for a similar effect without the extra cards. This does suffer somewhat from seating position – coming after either the strongest or the weakest player is an advantage of sorts, particularly playing with only three. Biggie's looking forward to sharing this with some of her friends after school resumes on the 31st. Hopefully it will be when Otto's not around – she, intriguingly, has a great grasp of the rules already. Unfortunately, she doesn't have a similar grasp of secrecy, so tends to sit on my lap and announce, "You got two green dinosaurs, mummy. Needs two big elephants to beat that."

King's Breakfast has had three plays – another light, fairly quick card game. Otto likes to sit on the table and steal the King's food, especially the King's Special Cake. Fraser's sister is our family champion at this game from her last visit to us in Melbourne. I find this less exciting than some of the others on the list, so it's not usually my first choice when we sit down to play something.

Another Pledge game is Drunter und Drüber – my Secret Santa game (thanks again, Kevin!). What a fun little game this is – we played it with our friend and with Biggie as well, and it's another that she regularly asks for.

Puerto Rico was our Summer Holiday game last year – 15 games over the space of a week, almost all 2-player. It's taken a hit this year for two reasons – we brought a lot more games, firstly, so it has to share the limelight. Also, Biggie is much more determined to play with us this year, and we really don't think she's up to Puerto Rico yet. Parents have to have some mysteries!

Durch die Wüste, on the other hand, has been a big hit (three plays). This would have been another Pledge game but I played it on New Year's Day – and enjoyed it, as everyone had predicted. It was a little difficult for our colourblind friend, but he worked out what was what – and so did Biggie. She now asks for this – and Otto plays with the spare camels in the end part of the board. I asked Biggie what she thought of this one and she said, "I think it would be better if it had enough palm trees. But I like it because of the camels."

Schotten Totten, similarly, has had three plays to date. Fraser and I like this, although it tends to devolve into "who has the most convoluted logic on why their set must be better than any other". That's a different game mechanic than most of the others on this list, and it's a good one. Biggie tends to hang over the table asking for explanations when we play this, so I suspect it won't be long. Is it legal to introduce small children to poker in the hope of a happy, well-funded retirement in thirty years or so?

The last game on my list is Goa, with one play this holiday. I'm happy to have had that, as it was the first time I played with more than just me and Fraser, and the game is much more complicated with four. I lost by an embarrassing margin, but we all enjoyed it very much. I've been nagging Fraser to play with me, but he doesn't enjoy it as much 2-player and Otto has been going to bed frighteningly late so there really hasn't been time.

Not played yet are:
  • Attribut - Pledge game - needs more than 3 players – won't get a look in now we're down to 3

  • Mu & More - ditto

  • Gargon - for 3 or more, and possibly a bit much for Biggie

  • Guillotine - we are thinking of introducing this one to the Bigster

  • Circus Flohcati - will probably get played soon

  • Ticket to Ride - probably a bit long to play down here, although Biggie would like to

  • Uno - there's just so much else to choose from – although this is a traditional Lorne game...


Our gaming may drop off a little now the temperature is soaring again – but I fully expect to get at least 2 more games onto the table, and to clock up quite a few more games played.

This holiday always gets me thinking about that big lottery win that will get me my fantasy beach house. An important component of that is, of course, the game shelf. A fantasy (or even a non-fantasy) beach house needs a good permanent selection of games, ranging from gateways through to more complex games that you only really get to play if you're away for a full weekend or longer with your gaming buddies. You need to have good family games, games that play well with two and games that scale for larger numbers of players. And you can always bring more down with you – because fantasy beach houses are always within comfortable driving distance of home. (Actually, to tell the truth, mine would probably be on that vacant land across the road).

On my FBH list right now: Apples to Apples, Pick Picknic, Frank's Zoo, Carcassonne, Ticket to Ride, Pirates' Cove, Puerto Rico, Euphrat and Tigris (which I am itching to play), History of the World, Civilisation, Diplomacy, ...?

You tell me. What are the other beach house essentials? I'm thinking maybe a couple of longer Euros, too, like das Zepter von Zavandor and Caylus. And of course some kids' games like Uno – and probably even a silly fast game like Perpetual Commotion (although Fraser might be unhappy with me – he was PC'd out last year in the ConVic PC tournament and hasn't played it since).

And when I win, maybe you can come and play too.

May your holidays be as game-friendly as this one,

Melissa

Friday, January 20, 2006

It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you spin the session report.

There has been some discussion on this website lately on winning. I've been giving the subject some thought, and I've had some insights about myself. For starters I get much more enjoyment from learning a new game than I do from winning.

I don't think I can make a blanket statement about playing to win. I tend to play as the situation and my mood dictates. For example:

When playing a two player game, I always play to win (assuming I'm playing with adults). When playing as a team, in pinochle or Doom: The Boardgame for example, I always, always play to win. And my wife will tell you I usually win. (Look for her smart aleck comment to be posted later today.)

Assuming I'm playing with adults in a standard multi-player boardgame I start every game playing to win. If it becomes apparent that I am out of the running I like to think that I play to better my position, but I don't always play that way. Sometimes I work to bring down the person who was talking trash. Sometimes I play to help the newbie win. Sometimes I make a goal to regain something lost to another player. Sometimes I hang on to the fantasy that I can win and play as if I can win. Once in a great while I hate a game so much that I just push my pieces around in an effort to take no more time than I have to, and place my pieces in such a position that another player can win and end the agony (Fluxx and Monopoly come to mind. "I'll sell you Tennessee to complete your monopoly for $1. No. Wait. I'll pay you $500 to take Tennessee off my hands.")

I have played with people who always play to win, and I've noticed that they get really annoyed when you don't make what they consider to be your optimal move. Of course when they do get annoyed they are usually laying in ambush for you to make the aforementioned move. They tend to assume that you don't anticipate their ambush. This always leads to charges of king-making and the game is usually finished with flaring tempers.

I frequently play with a person who is happy to play a wargame and not attack anybody. She simply declares jihad on the first person to attack her. Destroying that person becomes her goal, not winning. We tolerate it because she is always eager and willing to play games, even wargames. How many women do you know that will play Struggle of Empires, Napoleonic Wars and Sword of Rome? Not many, I'm sure.

--------------------------

I've had a very good stretch of gaming. Since returning from vacation two and a half weeks ago I've probably gamed for 30 hours. For one thing it's been too cold to do much else. Among other games I've learned a few new ones; Descent: Journeys in the Dark, Mesopotamia, Railroad Tycoon and Star Wars Miniatures.

Mesopotamia struck my fancy as a very good optimization game. I liked it much more than I had anticipated, and I had anticipated a pretty good game. Don't know if there is enough to keep me interested for more than a half dozen plays, there might not be.

Star Wars Miniatures was a very good game. I enjoyed it immensely. Since it is a collectible game, there should be enough new figures available to keep the game interesting for a long time to come for those of you who are interested in such games. Since it is a collectible game I won't be acquiring it any time soon. I'll just play with someone else's miniatures. I figure the money spent on a collectible game could be better spent on a dozen other games. Wouldn't hesitate to invest in a case of pieces if I was a trust fund baby, though. I learned my lesson concerning collectible games when I got sucked into Magic: The Gathering.

I struggled through my first game of Descent: Journeys into the Dark. Even though I am familiar with Doom: The Boardgame, which is a predecessor of Descent, it took several hours to travel a short distance in the scenario we were playing. I thought I was familiar with the rule book prior to playing, but we spent most of our time looking up rules. The rule book is not well organized, just try to find the rules to "off hand attacks" if you don't believe me. The rule book could really, really, really use an index. I think Doom has an index, doesn't it? Apart from struggling through the rules Descent seemed like a good game, at least in the same league as Doom: The Boardgame and likely better. It is still a game I will only be playing with kids, though. Don't know many adults who will like it. That pretty much makes me the perpetual Overlord.

Railroad Tycoon. Looks like I'm in the minority on this one. It might be better with more players. So far I've only played with 3. I'll wait to give an official opinion, but right now it's not looking good.

Good Gaming
Coldfoot

(Currently reading the rules to Descent for the umpteenth time)

Thursday, January 19, 2006

My Life in Gaming

The first game that I can remember ever wanting was Dungeons & Dragons. I was 8 or 10 at the time, and I asked for it as a birthday present. My father not only got me the game, but he also ran an adventure for me a few weeks later, after he'd figured out the rules.

He carefully plotted out a dungeon on graph paper, and filled every room with encounters. It was more an adventure-style game than D&D proper. I remember that he didn't want to use the combat system, and so instead you could kill the skeletons in one room if you thought to throw rocks at them. But it was a wonderful introduction to roleplaying games. My dad's spent a lifetime doing cool things for me, but that one still stands out. (Thanks, dad.)

During my teenage years, my gaming life centered on roleplaying. One of the best Christmas presents I ever got was Traveller, from my step-dad's sister, Meg. It was totally spontaneous, and I have no idea how she sussed out so well something that I'd like. I spent ages rolling up characters using the Traveller character generation system, only to have them die in character generation accidents.

There was also Stormbringer and Hawkmoon and a game or two of a weird system called RuneQuest. I ran Top Secret/S.I. quite a lot, and its well-worn boxes and books still adorn my shelves. My Champions books are contrariwise gone, though that got played a lot too. D&D was the big one though. We played that obsessively, often on a daily basis throughout my high school years. I still have a full shelf of D&D books. Even back in those days I was a collector; as I look at my piles of D&D adventures now, I know that most of them were never played, and indeed never read.

My board gaming before I went to college wasn't very memorable. I can barely recall playing my mom's copy of Twixt, which I should really get a copy of some day. I played quite a lot of Sirocco, another game that arrived under my Christmas tree one year. We also played a couple of wargames in high school, among them Dune and Dragons of War (the latter a wargame based on the Dragonlance series of roleplaying adventures). I had a big bedroom as a kid, and at some point I set up an old dining room table there, for gaming. I can still remember how the two large paper maps for Dragons of War looked, spread out on that table, with the piles of cardboard chits stacked high, and I can still remember the thrill of playing that game, marching my armies against my friends' in an attempt to gain ascendency over Krynn.

With my families I played more traditional games. My dad was never much of a game player, but sometimes he'd give in to myself and my Chinese step-mom, and we'd play either three-handed Bridge or Mah Jongg (two games that my step-mom liked). My step-dad came from a card-playing family, and so I came to adore his family gatherings, because they'd inevitably include Hearts, Euchre, or Golf. Fictionary, a game of making up definitions for dictionary words, also came into my life through my step-dad's parents, and eventually his sister (either Jane or Meg) brought Win, Lose or Draw into our family get-togethers as well.

One of my strongest memories of card playing as a kid was tricking my step-dad into misdealing a hand of Euchre by shuffling in one of my score cards, thus costing him the deal. I was sent to my room while everyone else who was playing laughed and laughed.

So that was my life in gaming as a kid: lots of roleplaying games, lots of casual card games, some war games, and very few actual board games.

College Daze & After

I was vaguely aware of American beer & pretzels games before college. I can even remember staring jealously at Steve Jackson's mini-games, and later his Illuminati Deluxe at various game stores. It wasn't until college that I was truly introduced to them, however. Over my first couple of years in Berkeley I came to play Illuminati, Cosmic Encounter, and Wiz-War, a mighty triumvirate of American beer & pretzels if I ever heard of one.

I really enjoyed those b&p games when I played them then, but every one I've tried in the last six years or so (including Illuminati, Spammers, and a tabletop game of Cosmic Encounter) has largely disappointed me. I feel like Eurogames have corrupted me to a certain extent, that after enjoying their faster gameplay and tighter mechanics, I just can't go back.

Between 1989 and 1999 I'd certainly have said my favorite game was Wiz-War. I've still got the 4th, 5th, and 6th editions all in my closet, the former being a curio that I should really eBay and the latter two allowing for massive ten-player games. I've also got tons of self-created cards. We used to write one up every time we brought the game out. However, I'm afraid to play Wiz-War now, afraid that it can't stand up to the nolstalgia that it invokes and that I'll just be poisoning good memories.

I started really collecting games during my college years. I kicked off a small collection of Avalon Hill games, originally centering around copies of Dune and Freedom in the Galaxy that I'd gotten in high school. Source of the Nile, Wizards, Wizard's Quest, Elric, and others still sit in my closet.

In 1994 the Origins gaming convention came to San Jose, and that's when I became very excited about another American gaming company, TimJim Games. I'd eventually buy five of their games: Outpost, Mystic War, Suzerein, 2038, and Age of Exploration.

My other big boardgaming interest in that time period was Lord of the Rings-based games. ICE fed most of this hunger, with releases like The Fellowship of the Ring, Riddle of the Ring, The Battle of Five Armies, The Lonely Mountain and (much later) The Hobbit. I also revelled in discovering SPI's old War of the Rings at a new and used game store in San Francisco.

The weird thing was that I never played most of these games. My Outpost and 2038 were still unpunched a decade after I bought them. I know I've never played War of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, or The Hobbit. And for the rest, most got one or two plays at most. If I listed the board games that we actually did play more than once or twice over this ten-year period, the list would be pretty short: Mystic War, Monster Derby (my copy of which mysteriously disappeared at some point), Wiz-War, Titan: The Arena, and Riddle of the Ring. Yeah, there was one Eurogame in there, but it was an Avalon Hill release; I didn't know any better.

Really, I was more interested in other types of gaming during that period. In 1989 I discovered the Internet and for a couple of years my time was taken up by online MUDs and a 16-player space combat game called Netrek. I left these behind in 1991 or so, but they'd end up informing my future career choice, and my work at Skotos almost a decade later.

I also quickly found a roleplaying club on the Berkeley campus and was swept into a series of new games. During those first days at Cal I played my first serious game of RuneQuest and my first game ever of a little magician-based RPG called Ars Magica. They'd be mainstays of gaming for the next fifteen years, later joined by Pendragon to form my own favorite trinity of RPGs.

Chaosium & My Life in Role-Playing & CCGs

At the same time I became involved in the business side of the roleplaying industry. Around 1990 or 1991 I sold a Dragon magazine index to TSR and ended up with a check for about $1000 for my troubles, an immense amount of money for me at the time, and an amazing start to a very occasional career writing for roleplaying companies. I later revised the spell rules for the third edition of Ars Magica and wrote my own Ars Magica supplement, Tribunals of Hermes: Rome.

That was the biggest scale work that I did in roleplaying for quite a few years, but by the end of college I was becoming more interested in Chaosium, who'd been the authors of both and RuneQuest and Pendragon, as well as a few games I didn't play, foremost among them Call of Cthulhu. I started an online magazine dedicated to their games called "The Chaosium Digest". Since they were locally located, as I finished up college in 1993 I asked if they were hiring. After hearing "no" from them I went on to my expected career in computer science, first continuing for a few years at NASA, where I'd done work as an undergrad, then moving on for a year of work at Sun Microsystems as a consultant (during the ramp up to the dot-com boom).

When I was working at NASA, Magic: The Gathering was released. I was one of those people dropping a hundred bucks a box for the newest expansions as they came out. I still distinctively remember standing in line at Games of Berkeley on the first day as the staff wheeled out the cases for one of the supplements--possibly "The Dark".

A few of my fellow staff members shared my addiction, and I clearly recollect that at one point my work whiteboard was filled with a statistical analysis of Magic: The Gathering's card distribution. One of my coworkers foolishly thought that he could get a full set of something out of a box, and so I'd done the analysis to describe how many boxes he actually needed to purchase in order to have an expected value of a full set.

Over the next couple of years, I tried out many of the early CCGs, including Illuminati: New World Order, Shadowfist, Jyhad, Wyvern, and Redemption. Most were Magic ripoffs, sucked, or both. I think Jyhad was the only upstart that got much playtime. However, during this time period, from 1994-1996 or so, most of the time my local group had spent on our three or four favorite board games instead went to five-color Magic.

Around 1996 Chaosium released their own CCG, called Mythos, and it brought an immense amount of new cash into their business. They started hiring like mad, since their former RPG developers were suddenly CCG developers, and that's how I ended up on-board with what I then considered my dream job. I took a huge, 75% paycut to do so, but I was suddenly working where I wanted to be.

I spent two years at Chaosium. I mostly laid out, developed, and edited books for the Call of Cthulhu line, though I got the pleasure of doing one Pendragon reprint as well. In addition I was a developer for all the later Mythos expansions, and the Internet FAQ-guy for the game. I knew the CCG system intimately, along with every half-assed rules decision that we came up with, as the system became more and more warped as we tried to react to more and more unorthodox play. I saw it in the Magic rulings too, over the years; I suspect it's the fate of any popular CCG.

Unfortunately Chaosium wasn't able to maintain their momentum and like so many game companies in the mid-to-late 1990s, their CCG success inevitably led to a CCG crash. Chaosium's mistake was putting out a fixed, non-collectible deck, which not only dramatically undersold, but also made retailers and distributors less confident in future collectible editions.

The staff at Chaosium shrank, until my boss and I were the entire RPG department. Much of the rest of the company had been laid off. My paychecks, which actually weren't quite enough to cover all my expenses, started coming in late. I started having nightmares about the company going under. After a dozen or so of those I decided I really needed to get a new job.

That's life in the game industry.

These Last Years

1998-1999 were pivot years for me. I left Chaosium but through an unlikely set of occurrences ended up in the online game industry as a result. I met my future wife. And I ended up on the route to Eurogames.

In short sequence from 1998-2000 I worked first at a cryptography company, then at a venture capital company, and finally at Skotos, the online game company were I still work today. We were doing professional MUDs, but as we got our first few products out, we decided that we could really benefit from expanding into more types of games, and thus we purchased an online strategy game that we'd enjoyed called Space Empires (which we'd later rename Galactic Empire: Hegemony for trademark reasons).

Galactic Empire: Hegemony was my baby once we got it over to Skotos. I did my first real programming work in about ten years when I integrated it onto our site, then later began to expand it. At some point I decided that we could benefit from a sister game using the same basic mechanics but with a totally different core game system. Instead of a wargame it'd be a trading game, one which I dubbed Galactic Empire: Merchant Kings, no doubt remembering the "Merchant Princes" supplement I'd bought many years ago for the Traveller RPG. My boss suggested that if I was going to design a trading game I should try out a few tabletop trading games, and thus we began moving our way through all the iterations of The Settlers of Catan.

I'd actually owned the game previously, and played it a time or two. It was one of my three first Eurogames, along with the aforementioned Titan: The Arena and its sibling Galaxy: The Dark Ages. But, I'd never even been aware of their categorization. As far as I was aware they were good old American games, from three American strongholds of gaming: Mayfair, Avalon Hill, and GMT. And only Titan: The Arena had gotten played much out of the three.

In any case, I bought a new copy of The Settlers of Catan. I'm not sure I even remembered that I owned a copy at the time, and if I had I'd still have bought a new copy because I had one of the early editions which didn't match the current productions. After that I got and played Seafarers and Cities & Knights. And the historical supplements. And eventually all the rest, including the licenses and variant games. And, they travelled with me. I distinctly remember playing The Settlers of Canaan for the first time on a rainy day when we'd been holding a big sale at the Skotos house and The Settlers of the Stone Age at a big warehouse while we were waiting for a friend's moving van.

Perhaps more notably, besides just playing all these Catan games, I also reviewed them. If the object was to learn about trading games, then reviews seemed like a useful way to quickly analyze and disect the games.

That was late 2002. People who had been coming to my house in 2001 to play Poker once or twice a month were now doing so to play Catan games. Eventually I expanded out to more Euro-trading games, and then more Eurogames of all sorts, and my Catan group ne Poker group became my Thursday review group, which I now offer up a new game to just about every week.

I've now got 107 card game reviews and 132 board game reviews under my belt at RPGnet. They've become an end in and of themselves, and feed my desire for novelty in my gaming experience. As I saw them slowly spiralling out of control in 2003 or 2004 I decided I was going to stop writing them after I'd done a hundred. That was over a hundred reviews ago. I'm sure at some point I'll decide I've had enough, but there are no current plans for ending them.

I've never finished a design for Galactic Emperor: Merchant Kings, but I do have several notebook pages full of notes. I've also rewritten about 75% of the original Hegemony game as a much more stable database-driven game. Sometime I hope to finish the latter, then push on the former. Maybe this year, as I've got some marketing ideas to help push it more through Skotos.

I'd really like to think that my analysis and reviews will lead to some game design, and I do have three unsold game designs sitting around. The first is called Doom of the Old Ones, and it's a Cthulhu-based wargame design that a friend and I put together 10 years ago. We tabled it when the somewhat similar Cults Across America came out, and now I find it pales a little, just like those older beer & pretzel American games did. The second was a CCG design that I put together last summer for a Stargate CCG, which was subsequently turned down by the publisher because they didn't agree with the theming. The last is another Cthulhu-based design, with many more Euro-characteristics, which I'm certain is going to get worked on more this year.

I vaguely feel like I'm nearing another pivot point in life, because Eurogames have taken up a lot of my gaming attention over the last three years, to the point where I tend to play them most Wednesdays and most Thursdays, but I still maintain my RPG habits too, albeit at a much reduced five or six hours a week, rather than the all-day Saturday, plus Friday evenings that I used to do while in college.

We'll see what the next few years bring.

My Reviews

And if you're using this description of who I am to measure my game reviews, as Greg Scholesser suggested last month, let me offer the following addenda:

I like light games if they're well-designed. I continue to think that Carcassonne and Ticket to Ride are great designs, and continue to eagerly await their newest releases, though my Carcassonne-ardor was tamed a bit due to their off-system The Count, their off-topic Princess & The Dragon, and their exclusive Discovery. But I'm pretty sure I'm going to be buying The Tower if it isn't dramatically expensive.

I really enjoy tactical games with puzzle-like elements. Dungeon Twister and Torres both became quick favorites because of this design.

I can and do enjoy heavier games like El Grande as long as they meet a few other criteria.

I don't like my games to run two hours or more, and thus otherwise good games like Primordial Soup and Struggle of Empires and Age of Steam get slightly more lukewarm responses from me.

I don't like my games to be heavily analytical. If I can do some math and figure out which of several possibilities is the best or if I have to do math to avoid making a really bad move, then I probably won't play the game.

And that's the thumbnail of my gaming tastes and my life in gaming.

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

The First Play Attitude


My group, which is comprised of my husband, daughter, Mike and myself, love confrontational games where you get the chance to interfere in others’ plans. We bring out our devious, vicious nature and stomp on anyone who gets in our way, kicking butt from the Desert to the Union Pacific. Is it strange, then, that on the first play of a heavier game we tend to be very cooperative, helpful and sharing?

Richard, Mike and I sat down for the first playing of Das Ende Des Triumvirats on Sunday. This is not a particularly heavy game but there are many things to consider when planning your move and small twists in the rules that are easy to forget such as when I wanted to increase my political competence but ended my move on a military province.

There is a tendency with us to help each other out, pointing out something that was overlooked or suggesting an alternative move that someone may not have considered and giving a little leeway for re-considered moves. On the very first move, Richard, who was playing Caesar, forgot about his supplies from Rome. Mike remembered as Richard was finishing his movement/attack so we all agreed that Richard would have taken additional legions so we added them to the outcome of the battle. Do any of you find that strange? In my house, I assure you, it is not.

Mike would have won, however he forgot to take his Civil Servant with him on his previous move which would have given him enough money to buy the needed forum votes. If he’d remembered during that move, we would have let him add the Civil Servant to his move but the fact didn’t register until his next move. This is another example of our laid-back attitude on the first playing of a game. The result was that Richard managed to win with a Competence victory.

Some talk amongst my online buddies had made me desperate to play Magna Grecia again. It had been waaaayyy too long since we’ve played it and it was almost like playing for the first time. The salient points had to be gone over, the quirks in the rules emphasized. The First Play Attitude poked its head up several times during the game, most notably when Mike wanted to get a market into Cori’s ever-expanding major city. She had already sold the market in her main city and established a single-tile city next to it; the plan was clear. Mike built a market in her major city which cost him 8 points but all the while he was counting out his cost on the points track Richard was saying, “No, no, no, no…” When the counting was finished, Richard explained how Mike could pay just 2 to build in the 1-tile city, which would soon become part of the massive metropolis. This new plan replaced the old move and Mike added the 6 points back to his score.

The final outcome was that Cori kicked our butts all over a large portion of Greece and impressed all but 3 of the Oracles, giving her the win by ten points. For the record, this is still one of my favorite games and I curse all those new games I played when I could have been playing Magna Grecia.

The First Play Attitude also extends to any new players as the “old pros” help someone who hasn’t played a game before. The tricky thing about First Play Attitude is that it doesn’t just disappear with the next play, it diminishes gradually until, by unspoken agreement, we know that we’re on our own no matter what stupid move we make.
~~~~~~~~
Games

This week I tried a game called Santorini, an independently produced game by Games By Gord [http://gamesbygord.com/index.htm]. It’s totally abstract, which you may know is not my favorite kind of game but I agreed to give it a try. It plays with 2-3 players but all my games have been with 2.

The game is made up of many flat wooden tiles which are laid out in a 5 X 5 grid to use as the playing board and to be stacked to a height of 3 above the playing board. Each player has a set of 2 wooden pawns in the shape of cubes, cylinders or triangles which you place anywhere on the board to begin the game.

The rules are very simple: move one of your pawns 1 space in any direction including diagonally then place a tile on any adjacent space, including diagonally. You may move up only one level at a time but you may go down any number of levels. When a stack reaches 3 levels in height you may either move one of your pawns onto it for the win or place a dome piece on it to block an opponent from moving there and winning.

I find most totally abstract games slow to start and this was no exception but with each move the play became more interesting and the choices tougher, plans and ideas formulating in my head. I can see abstract fans planning 2 or 3 moves in advance, though I can’t do that very well myself. The first game lasted about 10 minutes so we made some lunch and played a second game. By the end of the game, it had gotten under my skin (or into my brain) and I kept thinking about it. This is a good sign for any game.

It also has some expansion cards which let you break the rules or add a twist to the game play. I haven’t tried any of them and am not really inclined to in the future since I like the game as it is although with many, many plays they may refresh the game to give you even more hours of interesting head-to-head play.

The expansion cards are in the form of Gods which grant you extra powers. Aphrodite forces an opponent to end his turn next to one of your men if he started his turn next to one of your men. This sounds like it could add an interesting twist to the basic movement. Atlas lets you place the domes as if they were tiles (on any stack, not just the third level). I’m not sure if this would be a good addition to the game or not, though I have doubts. Athena says that when you step up a level, no other player may step up until your next turn. This could be a nice change from the basic play, adding a bit of strategy to the movement. Hermes gives you the ability to move a piece twice before playing a tile or dome which also sounds to me like a good tweak to the basic rules. My least favorite God card is Pan which says you can also win if you jump down 2 levels. This sounds way too powerful to me as you’d constantly be trying to block his movement up to the 3rd level and down 2 levels with very little chance of succeeding.

I’ve enjoyed my games of Santorini and can see it being played occasionally when I want a quick game in the evening.
~~~~~~~~

The Memoir ’44 Secret Weapon

Richard and I played Memoir ’44 the other night and it was probably the closest game we’ve played, the luck (or bad luck) evenly distributed and the last medal for both of us a back and forth battle for 2 turns. But I had my secret weapon near to hand and finally captured the 4th medal for the win.

What secret weapon, you ask? My plush Penguin from the Madagascar movie!
~~~~~~~~
Until next time, keep your balloon in the air.

Mary

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Winning Using Mechanics

Following Shannon's post about winning, this week's post approaches winning from a different perspective, namely: winning by maximizing your position using the game mechanics. And by winning, I don't mean "placing the best that you can" or "having a good time" or "making the experience enjoyable for all participants"; I mean winning.

A warning: the raw principles of winning are for use in tournaments or when playing with manly-men (of which I am not). Adherence to these principles is likely to decrease your enjoyment of games unless your enjoyment comes only through striving to come in first place. They are meant to declutter the gaming experience, to "solve" the game. 'Tis a nasty business.

I should also preface by saying that some techniques that are used for winning, especially at tournaments or between manly-men, will not be considered here, these techniques being considered unethical. Aside from those techniques listed in the linked to article, I will add "rules lawyering" which is the technique of wearing down the patience of your opponents by arguing over ambiguities in the rules.

Winning

All games with win conditions are race games. Some have finish lines: first to reach this amount of points or that amount of money or this other condition. If the win conditions require you to have the most points or the most money, then you are racing around a (possibly imaginary) scoring track trying to be farthest along when the game ends. If the game is won by the last one standing, then the scoring track measures the number of rounds survived. Some games may not helpfully supply this scoring track, but this doesn't detract from the reality of how to win.

The actual ending score is almost always unimportant. A win by 10,000 is the same as a win by 1, which is the same as a win with a tied score where you win on the tie breaker. The numbers on the track are arbitrary. The units are irrelevant. All that matters is the win.

Beating your opponents

In order to win, you have to be ahead at the end. In a multiplayer game, it is usually more helpful to move forward one space around the track than to move an opponent back one space. This is because moving forward advances you against all opponents, not just one.

Nevertheless, sometimes it is helpful to neutralize one of your opponents so that you can concentrate your resources on beating your other opponents. It is preferable to do this in a way such that your opponents continue to believe that the neutralized opponent has a chance, so that they will continue to waste resources equally.

The mechanics you use to beat your opponents are also irrelevant. Ten points from this or ten points from that is ten points, period. All that matters are the resources spent. However, unless they reward you for having been acquired, be wary of gaining temporary points, such as Longest Road in Settlers of Catan. You don't care about these points until someone can win the game with them. You want to acquire them on the turn you win the game so that they can't be reacquired by someone else; or you want to make their reacquisition so hopeless that it is not worth anyone else's while to bother.

Linearity

The spaces in a scoring track, especially the imaginary kind, are not necessarily linear or equivalent for all players.

Take ASL. The win condition for one side might be to occupy a certain building by turn 8; for the other side it might be to prevent your opponent from occupying the building until at least turn 9, or kill 2/3 of his forces. What is the scoring track?

Each player has his own track in this case, and the first one to get to their finish line wins. For the first player, he keeps score by establishing a series of goals that are required to get to that line: move to this position before turn A, take out this unit by turn B, and so on. For the second player, he marks progress in his first goal by moving his opponent's piece back spaces (or holding him in position) while his own piece moves forward one step every round. His second goal is marked on a seperate track counting the number of units killed.

Now take Puerto Rico. The scoring track here is easy, just points, right? No. Well, yes, ultimately it is all about points.

However, the game ends at a particular time and all that matters is who has the most points at the end. The last few turns can give huge amounts of points, so you can't tell who is winning by looking at points in rounds five or ten. The beginning and middle part of the game are spent "fueling" your imaginary counter to make that burst of speed before the game ends, through the acquisition of buildings, colonists, and plantations. The trick is to make sure that the fuel gets used and your counter actually moves before the game ends. Another example here would be Power Grid.

Therefore you can also imagine a scoring track with milestones on the way to victory, where first to achieve certain mileposts is ahead of his competitors. Creating the right working track is a challenge. You have to be sure that your spaces represent actual progress to your goal. In Chess you can lose to a checkmate from an opponent that has only three pieces left. Taking off pieces does not represent progress unless the removal establishes real gain. Don't fool yourself as to your own progress.

Mechanics

Which brings us to the "fuel" of the game. In order to win, you need to fuel your counter to cross the finish line ahead of your opponents. The mechanics of the game are your fuel.

A good example here is Cities and Knights of Catan. The win condition is: first player to score thirteen points. You gain one point from a settlement, two from a city, two from a metropolis, two from longest road, one from certain progress cards, and one from defending the city which occurs every fourteen rounds or so.

How often do you see people playing around with the mechanics but not making progress towards winning? Building more knights, playing complicated cards, making city improvements, and other actions that can't be expected to gain them points for several or even dozens of rounds. Or opponents not counting the points on the board each round. Forgetting to count the merchant as a point. Not aware of who will win if they steal the Longest Road. Not looking at who is about to gain a Metropolis.

Forget the theme. Forget the chrome. Your counter is idling on the scoring track. If you want to win, ask yourself: how am I going to win this game before anyone else? Calculate what you need to win and then do it. Use the mechanics. Don't get sidetracked by the themes wrapped around them.

Efficiency

Mechanics are fuel for your counter. Each mechanic contributes to your victory, some more than others, and some not at all. The game comes down to this: you have a certain number of resources each round, the most important of which is the number of actions you can take. Each action gains you a certain number of points. Almost always, the least number of resources expended gaining the most number of points equals victory. Those points don't have to come at the same time that the action is taken, but they have to come.

Deciding where to put your camels in Through the Desert? How much closer to victory does it get you? You are on an imaginary scoring track with your opponents. Where is your counter compared to theirs? By placing this camel, you will be gaining X points here, and be giving up Y points there. X points is better than X-1 points. Y points given to a last place opponent is not a problem; to your nearest competitor or to someone beating you, is.

Tactics

There is no mercy in winning. Everyone else has to lose in order for you to win. The sooner each other player is out of competition the better, assuming that they do not then spend the rest of the game wreaking vengeance on you.

The best tactics first and foremost build up your strategy to a decisive win before the game ends. That gives you the most points overall per move across the entire game.

Of course, in some games points are non-cumulative, which means that there is no real strategy for positioning your pieces to gain large rewards in later rounds. In these cases, you simply need to maximize your points versus your opponents each round or over the course of a series of rounds.

Don't hand large point opportunities to your opponents and don't leave large point opportunities open for your opponents. Small points are different. You can tempt an opponent away from his strategy with a few points. The odds are that the resources wasted to acquire those points would have been better used fueling a long term strategy.

Another time when a small point loss is acceptable is when you can use it set long term plans while your opponent's choices become more restricted. As a general rule, the more predictable your opponent's next few turns will be, the better off you are. Leaving a small fuel dump that you know they will stop for, or leaving a gold on the Trader when you know they will take it, allows you to change from single round tactics to multi-round tactics while your opponent's moves are forced. The ability to plan tactics over several rounds is a great advantage.

Always choose to give advantages to your most impotent opponent if you have to give an advantage at all.

Strategy

When several options are equally optimal, or at least none are proven to be sub-optimal, you are faced with a strategic choice. Your strategic choice should maximize your strengths and undermine and exploit your opponent's weaknesses.

Don't waste your time on a few tactical pluses; in a strategic game, tactics that support a long-term strategy will bear out a higher cumulative point reward by the end of the game. Don't get distracted from your long term goals unless the change in strategy offers you a better chance of winning the game even faster.

This is where you can utilize the theme to your advantage. You want your opponent lost in the mechanics chasing short term single step goals while you are working on moving your counter around the track. For instance, you want your opponent gaining two cubes at a time in T&E while you are working toward establishing a fruitful external conflict or a defendible monument (so long as it pays off more than the lost two cubes a turn by the time you have finished with it).

You want your opponent taking multi-step chains to receive non-cumulative rewards while you are pursuing the most direct path to the highest victory conditions. For instance, you want your opponent building knights to gain single points from the barbarian attack, while you build settlements and cities which accumulate resources for more cities.

Conclusion

Winning is not about moving around pieces, attacking, trading, accumulating, buying, or building. It is about using game mechanics to achieve the victory conditions first or best. The rest is theme.

But hey, winning isn't everything.

Monday, January 16, 2006

Gone Gaming: Board Game Internet Awards nominations are closed


The Gone Gaming: Board Game Internet Awards nominations are now closed. A big thank you to everyone who participated in the nomination process. You have nominated a diverse range of excellent material. The nominations in each category are listed below.

If your site was nominated, you may display the "Nominee" image here on your site as follows:





<a href="http://boredgamegeeks.blogspot.com/2006/01/gone-gaming-board-game-internet-awards.html"> <img src="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/1983/123/1600/bgia.2.jpg"></a>


Some nominations were disqualified for one or more of the following reasons (all of which were listed in the rules before nominations began):

- No English content: Unfortunately, we cannot judge non-English sites. We tried to be as liberal as possible with this if the sites still contain content or features useful for English-only speakers.

- Not "new board game" related: Sites that only feature Chess, Checkers, Go, Backgammon, Bridge, Dominoes, Scrabble, and Poker were disqualified.

- Not from 2005.

- Improperly formatted to the point of incomprehensibility.

- Not in the correct category.

- The Gone Gaming site and posts exclusively on the Gone Gaming site were ineligible.


The Gone Gaming staff will now retreat to our secret location to discuss and vote on our picks for each category. The results will be published around January 28, 2005. Good luck to all nominees.

The Gone Gaming staff


The valid nominations are as follows:

Best Game Publisher Site:

Black Powder Games: http://www.esprawl.com/bpg
Dan Verssen Games: http://www.dvg.com
Days of Wonder: www.daysofwonder.com
Edition Erlkoenig: http://www.erlkoenig.net
Fantasy Flight Games: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com
Gaissa.com: http://www.gaissa.com
GMT Games: http://www.gmtgames.com
Histogames: http://www.histogame.de/e_index.html
Memoir '44: http://www.memoir44.com
Rio Grande Games: http://www.riograndegames.com
Simmons Games: http://www.simmonsgames.com
Table Tactics: http://www.tabletactics.com
Z-man Games: http://www.zmangames.com

Best Game News Site:

About: Boardgames: http://boardgames.about.com
Board Game Geek: http://www.boardgamegeek.com
Board Game News: http://www.boardgamenews.com
Consimworld: http://www.consimworld.com
Gaissa.com: Board Game & Co.: http://www.gaissa.com/Gaissa_game/Gaissa_enter.htm
GameFest: http://www.GameFest.com

Best Game Information Site:

Board Game Geek: http://www.boardgamegeek.com
Board Game News: http://www.boardgamenews.com
Gaissa: http://www.gaissa.com
Memoir '44: http://www.memoir44.com
Spotlight on Games: http://spotlightongames.com
The Dice Tower: http://www.thedicetower.com

Best Game Community Site:

Board Game Designer's Forum: http://www.bgdf.com
Board Game Geek: http://www.boardgamegeek.com
Consimworld: http://talk.consimworld.com
Harris Game Design: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com
La Tana dei Goblin: http://nuke.goblins.net/index.php?newlang=english
Talk Blood Bowl: http://www.talkbloodbowl.com

Best Game Club Site:

Billabong Boardgamers: http://members.optusnet.com.au/dacoutts/Billabong
Billygames and Stuff: http://coljenngamer.blogspot.com
Board Gamers Anonymous: http://www.bg-anon.co.uk
Columbia Strategic Simulation Society: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/csss
East Tennessee Gamers: http://www.easttennesseegamers.com
Game Club of Maryland: http://www.gamesclubofmd.org
Globetrotter Games: http://www.globetrotter-games.com
Houston Gamers: http://www.houstongamers.org
International Blood Bowl Players Society: http://www.bloodbowl.net
San Antonio Board Gamers: http://saboardgamers.blogspot.com
Weekly Amateur Gaming Society: http://wagsociety.blogspot.com

Best Online Game Journal/Magazine:

Indepth: http://www.libogroup.com/indepth.htm
The Games Journal: http://www.thegamesjournal.com

Best Online Gaming Site:

Biskai: http://yinsh.biskai.de and http://punct.biskai.de
Blue Gecko: http://www.bluegecko.ro
Brettspielwelt: http://www.brettspielwelt.de
CCG Workshop: http://www.ccgworkshop.com
Days of Wonder: http://www.daysofwonder.com/index.php?t=play
Game Table Online: http://www.gametableonline.com
Little Golem: http://www.littlegolem.net
Puerto Rico Game: http://www.pr-game.com
Richard's PBem Server: http://www.gamerz.net/pbmserv
Scheming Mind: http://www.schemingmind.com
SpielByWeb: http://www.spielbyweb.com
Super Duper Games: http://superdupergames.org
VASSAL: http://www.vassalengine.org
Youplay.it: http://www.youplay.it

Best New Site (2005):

Axis&Allies "Rune Blade's" 'A&A' Gamemaps: http://axisandallies.metalsaber.com
Black Powder Games: http://www.esprawl.com
Blue Gecko Entertainment: http://www.bluegecko.ro
Board Games with Scott: http://boardgameswithscott.blogspot.com
Board Game News: http://www.boardgamenews.com
Gaissa.com: http://www.gaissa.com
Gathering of Engineers: http://pdxgaming.blogspot.com
Grog Blog: http://grogsgamesblog.blogspot.com
Grog's "GLOG" for 'Fortress America': http://grogsglogforfortressamericax.blogspot.com
Tao of Gaming: http://gaming.powerblogs.com
The Game Table: http://ekted.blogspot.com
Gathering of Engineers: http://pdxgaming.blogspot.com

Best Strategy Article (2005):

Board Game Geek - Princes of Florence, The: From the Library to the Laboratory (Linnaeus, 3 part article): http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/79193
Board Game Geek - Yehuda's Response to "Why, Why Can't I get this game?" (E&T): http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/498259#498259
The Game Table - Carcassonne: The Math: http://ekted.blogspot.com/2005/09/carcassonne-math.html
The Game Table - Forces: http://ekted.blogspot.com/2005/11/forces.html

Best Promotional/Advocacy Article (2005):

Chris Farrell - So you want to play Civilization?: http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/iblog/C2097221587/E20051116234109/index.html
Gamefest - Rick Thornquist's Essen 2005 Preview on Caylus: http://www.gamefest.com/news/feature_detail/3255_0_3_0_C/#ystarigames1
HourCNY TV news show - Scott Nicholson: http://scottnicholson.com/games/hourcny.html
The London Free Press - Board Game Boom: http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Today/2005/12/19/1359325-sun.html

Best Humorous Game Article (2005):

Gamefest/Boardgamenews - New Misadventures in Gaming: http://www.gamefest.com/news/feature_detail/2514_0_3_0_C/
or http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/the_new_misadventures_in_gaming_1
Board Game Geek - Intelligence Report on Subject #M33P135: The Meeples.: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist.php3?action=view&listid=10585
Gamefest - Tom Vasel: The Meeple Wars, Part One: The Meeple Revolt: http://www.gamefest.com/news/blog_detail/3343_0_15_0_C/
The Game Table - Ode to Carcassonne: http://ekted.blogspot.com/2005/10/ode-to-carcassonne.html
Yehuda - A Mad Game Club: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/03/mad-game-club.html
Yehuda - BGG Con: Thursday, Oct 27: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/10/bggcon-thursday-oct-27.html
Yehuda - d6 or not d6: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/11/d6-or-not-d6.html

Best Article Series (2005):

About Board Games - Four Questions With...: http://boardgames.about.com/b/a/187466.htm
Gamefest/Boardgamenews - New Misadventures in Gaming: http://www.gamefest.com/news/feature_detail/2514_0_3_0_C/
or http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/the_new_misadventures_in_gaming_1
Mikko Saari - Reports on Essen 2005: http://www.melankolia.net/gameblog/archives/session_reports/essen_2005
Mr Nizz - Metagaming Nostalgia: http://mrnizz.blogspot.com/2005/12/metagaming-microgame-nostalgia-part-1.html
The One Hundred (Stephen Glenn & Mark Jackson): http://fluffysnoop.blogspot.com
Tom Vasel - Interviews by an Optimist: http://www.thedicetower.com/interviews/int001.htm
Tom Vasel (and friends) - Musings On...: http://www.thedicetower.com/musings/musings9.htm
Yehuda - BGG Con: Thursday, Oct 27: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/10/bggcon-thursday-oct-27.html

Best Session Report (2005):

Mikko Saari - Reports on Essen 2005: http://www.melankolia.net/gameblog/archives/session_reports/essen_2005
Yehuda - BGG Con: Thursday, Oct 27: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/10/bggcon-thursday-oct-27.html

Best Game Blog:

&games: http://andgames.blogspot.com
Best of Boardgames: http://boardgames.blogsome.com
Chris Brooks: http://www.chrisbrooks.org
Chris Farrell's blog: http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/iblog
Defective Yeti: http://www.defectiveyeti.com
Gathering of Engineers: http://pdxgaming.blogspot.com
Grog Blog: http://grogsgamesblog.blogspot.com
Grog's "GLOG" for 'Fortress America': http://grogsglogforfortressamericax.blogspot.com
Mikko Saari's Gameblog: http://www.melankolia.net/gameblog
Musings, Ramblings, And Things Left Unsaid: http://tajmahalfred.blogspot.com
Naturelich Games: http://www.naturelich.com/games
Pawnstar: http://fellonmyhead.blogspot.com
Rick's Boardgame Blog: http://boardgameblog.blogspot.com
The Game Table: http://ekted.blogspot.com
The Tao of Gaming: http://gaming.powerblogs.com
Tom Vasel: Real Men play boardgames: http://www.thedicetower.com/tomvasel.html
Yehuda: http://jergames.blogspot.com

Best Game Blog Post (2005):

Chris Farrell - Shadows Over Camelot review: http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/games/reviews/ShadowsOverCamelot.html
Chris Farrell - So you want to play Civilization?: http://homepage.mac.com/c_farrell/iblog/C2097221587/E20051116234109/index.html
Gamewire - Jeremy Avery: Confessions of a gaming brute: http://www.gamefest.com/news/blog_detail/2786_0_23_0_C/
Gamewire - Jeremy Avery: The Jedi of Puerto Rico: http://www.gamefest.com/news/blog_detail/2821_0_23_0_C/index.php/cPath/21
Rick's Board Game Blog - Analysis Paralysis: When You're Not Smart or Decisive Enough: http://boardgameblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/analysis-paralysis-when-youre-not.html
San Antonio Board Gamers - Kung Fu Fighters of Gorillas with Machine Guns?: http://saboardgamers.blogspot.com/2005/11/kung-fu-fighters-or-gorillas-with.html
The Tao of Gaming - Never get involved in a land war in Mordor: http://gaming.powerblogs.com/posts/1106689381.shtml
The Tao of Gaming - "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect": http://gaming.powerblogs.com/posts/1106603883.shtml
The Game Table - Ode to Carcassonne: http://ekted.blogspot.com/2005/10/ode-to-carcassonne.html
Yehuda - BGG Con: Thursday, Oct 27: http://jergames.blogspot.com/2005/10/bggcon-thursday-oct-27.html

Best Game Podcast/Videocast:

Board Game Speak: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgamespeak.php
Boardgames to Go: http://www.boardgamestogo.com
Board Games with Scott: http://boardgameswithscott.blogspot.com
Have Games Will Travel: http://havegameswilltravel.libsyn.com
Pulp Gamer: http://www.pulpgamer.com
The Dice Tower: http://www.thedicetower.com

Best Game Podcast/Videocast Episode (2005):

Board Game Geek - BoardGameSpeak 2005-03-12 (Interview with Reiner Knizia): http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geekforum.php3?action=viewthread&threadid=58128
Board Game Geek - BoardGameSpeak 2005-06-05 (Knizia at KublaCon): http://files.boardgamegeek.com/boardgamespeak.php?id=31
Boardgames To Go - Episode 29 (The Wife Show): http://libsyn.com/media/boardgamestogo/BGTG_29_2005-08-07.mp3
Boardgames To Go - Episode 30 (Game Presentation with Greg Wilzbach): http://libsyn.com/media/boardgamestogo/BGTG_30_2005-08-11.mp3
Boardgames To Go - Episode 38 (Interview with Mike Siggins): http://boardgamestogo.com/2005/10/bgtg-38a-oct-4-2005-eurowargame.html
Boardgames To Go - Episode 42 (Boardgamegeek.Con with Aldie and Derk): http://libsyn.com/media/boardgamestogo/BGTG_42_2005-11-06.mp3
The Dice Tower - Episode 26 (CCGs and Miniatures): http://www.boardgamenews.com/thedicetower/TheDiceTower-Episode26.mp3

Best New Game Blog/Podcast/Videocast (2005):

Best of Board Games: http://boardgames.blogsome.com
Board Game News Regular Columnists: http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/C29/
Boardgamers' Pastime: http://www.boardgamerspastime.com
Boardgames To Go: http://www.boardgamestogo.com
Boardgames with Scott: http://www.boardgameswithscott.com
Gathering of Engineers: http://pdxgaming.blogspot.com
Have Games, Will Travel: http://havegameswilltravel.libsyn.com
Pulp Gamer: http://www.pulpgamer.com
The Dice Tower: http://www.thedicetower.com
The Game Table: http://ekted.blogspot.com
The Tao of Gaming: http://gaming.powerblogs.com

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Must be the 'Season' of the "Twitch"

Well, it's "Official" as the "Pats" won't be going for their "three-peat" now! Since the "Broncos" put them out of their 'misery' last night, and today we have the vaunted "Colts VS Steelers" and then later on the "Bears VS Panthers", while I'm rooting for the "Panthers" and "Steelers" in their games as I'd like to see "Carolina" end UP here in SEATTLE! We're pretty happy about the 'Seattle - Washington' game despite the early 'problems' they'd encountered in that, while my heartiest hopes, are for a "Denver VS Seattle" 'Super Bowl'! Just a few years back, then this wouldn't have been possible, but NOW it can take place. There was a somewhat 'friendlier' rivalry between the Teams, compared with the "Raider Hatahs" that even still maintain their animosities for such. I know some folks who even have their "West VS East" and "North VS South" mentalities about these matters too, and for them, then this is well founded as evidenced by the BIAS of whomever they consult regarding these 'things'. Sure, this is on account of the develoment of our fair 'Nation' with its "Easternly" preponderance, while those of US on this 'side' of the ole "Miss" river, tend to become overlooked, and even looked down upon in most cases. That's WHY it is so 'righteous' for US when some "high falootin" EASTERN 'Team' gets whomp`d & stomp`d upon from our "backwoods asses" no matter what 'arena' this is conducted upon. I'm even GLAD for when the likes of the "Longhorns" are able to obtain their "National Championship" TITLE, since at least they're on the RIGHT 'side' of the "River" there`n!
"Hook`em HORNS!"
I'm still awaiting upon some enterprising "Canuck" to create an easy and representative GAME about the "C.F.L.", while it shouldn't be too difficult for this. I'm not very familiar with their 'system' and just how the actual 'games' are played out, but that is for THEM to figure upon.
UPDATE! the "Steelers" have 'done in' the "Colts", so it's OFF to "Denver" for them!
Now to await the outcome of the "Bears" and "Panthers" game-woo HOO!

There's also speculation upon what 'direction' that should be taken as regards any NEW and *Improved* type of gaming experiences that could become created. I don't know just what some folks expect or envision this to entail, as not too many of them could agree upon the "theme" in the first place. With plenty of already 'done deals' as it stands, then just WHAT else could there yet be "discovered" for this all? Chocolate 'bits'? I'm sure that the likes of "GO" could be easily adapted with "M&M"s, for those who wish to try that out. "Gummi" kinds are available for select kinds of games, and others should be soon to follow. Just think if someone made some components out of "pretzels", while you'd still need to provide the BEER for this too. In fact, you could PLAY "Pick UP Stix" with them straight "pretzels" pieces, or some variation of "Jenga" too. I'd bet that "Animal Crackers SCRABBLE" could be 'done' as well, with "cornmeal" gameboard to play upon, making it as: "the GAMING 'treat' that's Good to EAT!", once you're done 'playing' with your food. Just NOBODY 'combine' the likes of food, nudity, and "Twister" for some disgusting, digestive, degenerative derivative, thank you very much! I have heard mention from a few people, upon some simpler version of a "Galactic Conquest" type of game, since they're somewhat disappointed with what's out there now. I do know that ole "Dead-Eye Dick" of the "BGG" is still working upon HIS 'design' for this. He 'told' me so! In case you've forgotten about it, then this is to be called as: "StarQuest!" From what I recall upon the matter, then it is sort of like "M.O.O."-the computer game, while being conducted within a gameboard format for such. YOU-(the 'player') are to build UP your "reputation" through "deeds of derring-do" in that, so this probably won't appeal to those folks who wished to "Conquer Galaxies" as their 'prime directive'. And yes, we're ALL wondering just WHEN someone is going take on the "Herculean task" with creating a BOARDGAME about the "Sid Meier's Alpha-Centauri" computer one. I don't expect this anytime soon-if ever-since there's too much detail for THAT, of which it DOES require a computer for its resolution. I know, as I play that regularly and I just don't 'see' it ever taking place, unless YOU don't mind it having like 1500 & PLUS for 'bits' in this, and costing near to $200! There's currently '7'-Factions, and each has their various "ideologies" of which they have to ascribe to. Those will limit some of them, concerning 'developments' that they can pursue, while they strive to become the ONLY 'Group' remaining upon the Planet's surface. "Dumbing it DOWN" won't help matters either, since you have to pursue 'goals', to achieve enhancements that apply to your "Societal Ills", with "R&D", and "Alien Artifacts" greatly speeding the process up. Alright, well the 'Game' is ON and I'm outta here for now!

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Cosmopolitan, Baby

People are always coming up to me and asking, "Joe Gola, are you cosmopolitan or what?" One has to chuckle, and of course my response is always the same. "Are you crazy? I'm practically the most cosmopolitan person you ever heard of. Don't even start with me already." Yes, it's true: blindfold me, stuff me in a trunk, pay a fortune to customs for exporting awesomeness out of the country, and mail me to any point on the globe, and ten will get you twenty that within two hours of arrival I will be cooling my heels at the swankiest cocktail party in the nation and sneaking squeezes of the springy dewdrop derrière of an ambassador's niece. "Ah, no no, cheri, you are too, too bold...."

Just to prove my point I will let the reader in on the secret that as recently as last weekend I traveled south from my country seat in Connecticut to the bustling burg of Brooklyn USA in order to cross swords in games of chance with no less a personage than Morgan Dontanville. What's that? Haven't met Morgan? Lower your voice darling, someone might hear. Surely you know sisteray of BGG, noted wit and raconteur, soon-to-be-published author of Spectral Rails and Recess? The world famous horse trainer, the importer of rare and fabulous manuscripts, the man who knocked up Princess Rajneesha on the night of her father's coronation?

In honor of Morgan's recent engagement to the winsome and tolerant Alice X, I arrived at his Brooklyn pied-à-terre carrying a four-foot ice sculpture of Leda and the swan, which, after our hearty salutations, was transferred to the sink. I was told that the fiancée and future brother-in-law were yet recovering from an all-night Battlestar Galactica marathon, and so it was decided that we would pass the time quietly with a game of Michael Schacht's Gods. It was a nice homemade copy of the print and play version, and it seemed to have a certain aura about it, a charismatic sheen, if you will, as if it had passed through the hands of greatness....

I was warned by Morgan that the people of Brooklyn are, as a rule, slow to stir on weekend mornings, as the winter nights are long and boozy, but we had barely scuffed the rules before we were handed the calling cards of two more noble gents, Sir Larry Chong and Jon Squires esquire. Larry, as the reader is no doubt aware, was a world-class breakdancer in his youth, and he only lost the championship in '83 because of a freak rotator cuff disintegration that happened during his infamous "Tweezing the Crease" move. That particular breakdancing maneuver has been since condemned by the Surgeon General and is no longer allowed in tournament competition, though of course it is still often attempted, with similarly disastrous results, in the numerous unsanctioned matches that take place in South America and the Ukraine. And Mr. Jon Squires? Witty, urbane, deadly. He wore a jaunty sherpa hat which my contacts in Bangkok tell me was taken off of a newly severed head as a trophy. He did not have his machete with him, thank God, or I would have been terrified to reach for the crackers; more than one hand has been lost to the Squires reflexes acting on their own. In any event, it was to be a quartet.

So, to the game. We each represented divinities trying to woo the mortals of the world to our worship. Temples were erected, villagers awed, whirlwinds and lightning unleashed. Halfway through Larry decided that he had been picked on by the table once too often and so demonstrated his outrage in interpretive breakdance. It was an emotional moment, with one particularly reproachful headspin causing the group to gasp in alarm, and several stacks of magazines were toppled in the process. However, heartfelt apologies were made and accepted and we pressed on. In the end, Morgan's cagy tactics and tile-flipping skill won the day. Bravo!

By this time we had been joined not only by the daylight-shy Alice and her brother Jack, but also by a mysterious and unpredictable man known only as Doktor Glaze. While we finished up our game the Doktor was loudly munching away on some sort of Jamaican cabbage patty, groaning with joy over the savory delight. Despite the fact that "Jamaican cabbage patty" also happens to be the name of a costly and immoral service which can only be provided by a specially trained escort who knows how to use a floor waxer, my stomach began to rumble quite noisily. It was agreed that those of us who had struggled along unnourished would cross the street for bagels and eggs; as we left the Doktor was dousing the heat of the zesty Caribbean spices by slurping water off the melting bosom of Leda.

The trip to the delicatessen was an adventure in itself, as a large plastic Santa Claus was looming in the rear of the store with a tantalizingly mysterious power cord issuing from his rear. I was content to ignore the thing, but Morgan, impulsive as a puppy, asked the proprietors if he could plug in the mechanical Kringle. They assented, and so Morgan electrified Santa and we were all treated to something...odd. The animatronic elf suddenly began twitching in every direction like a jolly epileptic, and a speaker buried within his chest started playing back a recording of a tinny Christmas carol as its mouth jerked open and shut in time to the music. Strangely, the statue had no legs, but rather the hips were connected directly to the ankles, and what was particularly offensive was that those hips were rolling and thrusting in a bawdy bump and grind not at all in keeping with the holiday spirit. I put a dollar in Santa's belt and Larry started break dancing to the music until the store owners threw us out.

On the way back in I unknowingly slammed the door in the face of a new arrival, a country lord from the land of Jersey, a Sir Gil Hova, also sometimes known by the moniker of Ingredient X. Gil and I knew each other from online discourse, and Gil informed me that I looked nothing like he had pictured me, which was as a Puerto Rican hunchback with a cape. He then proceeded to tell us all a story which prominently featured the phrase "fatty apron"; this was a new piece of vocabulary for me and I'm hoping to toss it off casually at a few cocktail parties this weekend. If I can somehow work it into a story involving a Jamaican cabbage patty I may even start a riot.

After one more late arrival by a man who shall only be referred to as "The Butterscotch Fog," our group numbered nine, and it was decided to attempt a playing of the two-board extravaganza Fische Fluppen Frikadellen. Doktor Glaze, Gil, Jon and I sat at one table, and Morgan, Alice, Jack, Larry and The Fog circled the other. Jon tied on his lucky sherpa hat and we began.

First: faring far and fro for fetishes. Gil finds fame filching fricassee as Jon in fleece fedora fondles fennel feloniously. Glaze farts out a fanfaronade (fault of flatulence: cabbage fermentation) followed by frenetic finagling. I ferry fish, flabbergasted from foofaraw. Finances fading and firewater futures fragile as frosty ficticious fertilzing fowl flows into fluid. Faster and faster! Foreigner Morgan floats in on frigate and flies forward feet first, followed by Fog flashing funds. Frantic fencing by franchises! Finally Fog finishes. Fudge!

Sadly, at that point I had to return to the bosom of my family, and so I kissed Leda on her rimy rump, said adieu, and pointed myself towards the fair fields of Connecticut. However the important thing is this: if anyone asks you if Joe Gola is cosmopolitan, you straighten your tie, dust off your coat, look him square in the eye and say, "Joe Gola who?"

Friday, January 13, 2006

Searching for a tagline.

I've always wanted a good tagline. Good ones are truly memorable. Who can forget "Keep your stick on the ice", and "And that's the way it is". Who do you think of when you see "Real men play boardgames" or even "MMM"?

People who come up with good taglines are lucky, and people like me are left saying to ourselves, "I could have thought of that." But what really irks me is that Mary (Sodaklady right here on this very blog) comes up with a classic tagline every week:

Talk nice to your dice
May your men control the Castillo
May all your farmers lie in large fields
I'll be trading my sheep for pesos
Only the mediocre are always at their best
Buy stock in Ziploc
May your camels be swift and plentiful
Until next time, Clubs are trump

These are just a few of the lines she has signed off with each Wednesday, and I can come up with bupkis.

It's killing me. I have thought about it on and off for 3 months, and the best I can do is, "Keep your snowboots handy".

I was waiting in my car the other day and I noticed a sign that had the line "The Champagne of Beers". That got me thinking. "The Champagne of Beers" isn't really a tagline, nor is it particularly good, but it is proof that a tagline doesn't need to be catchy to be identifiable. That lead to new ideas.

Hmmmmmm, "You know you're a gamer if you know more Knizia stats than Favre stats". It has the possibility of being adaptable, for example, "You know you're a gamer if you wait until you check out to decide if you'll buy coffee, tobacco, or sugar." But no, it is too long. Not a bad first try. Something edgy would be good.

"Will trade John Kerry for Francis Tresham". Edgy, yet outdated. It would only be good for a couple months at most. It is also too long and too political. (Note to self: that one might make a good bumper sticker.) Controversial, I need a little controversy to catch eye.

"Charles Darrow is a fag." Not just no, but hell no. It catches the eye. It's edgy. It's controversial. It's insider-ish. It's short. It's better than "Keep your snowboots handy", it's a mile better than "The Champagne of Beers", but I quickly discarded it before I alienate my last two readers. Maybe controversy isn't so good.

"Keep your nose to the grindstone." Ahhhhh no. Now I'm back off track. It's not controversial, but I want to keep my tagline search related to game topics and away from grandma-isms.

"May your opponent's sand timer be a few grains short". Now we're getting somewhere. It's game related and original. It's as good as the already taken, "May all your hits be crits" but it is too "chessy" ("chessy" not "cheesy", although it is a little cheesy).

I could use the phrase I am currently using on my geek badge. It's not political. It is a spoof on politics, though. "Knizia/Moon '08". (Note: After I had Knizia and '08 on the geek badge, I only had enough room left to put Moon or Berg in the second slot.) I put that one on my "possible" list. I then went to my wife to ask for a tagline. I should have known better.

"I'll play it by my rules" was her response. She thought it was hilarious. When she noted my squinty-eyed glare and lack of laughter she got serious and said, "Will game for food"? That was better, I put it on my "possible" list. Two days later she said, "I thought of one."

"One what?"

"A tagline."

"What is it?"

"Will trade John Kerry for Bruno Faidutti."

"That doesn't make any sense."

"Why not? I thought it was funny.

"That's like trading Marx for Lenin, it's way too insider-ish and I already decided not to get political."

"Well maybe I'll use it then."

It was clear that she would be no further help, and I had a back-up idea anyway. The other day I surfed on over to a local gamer website and I noted that many of the posters (video-game players all) signed off with "Currently playing (Insert Latest-Must-Have Video Game)". That might work.

Currently Playing Carcassonne. No. If I'm writing something I'm really not playing Carcassonne. It wouldn't make much sense, and no one would buy it. But I could modify it a little.

"Currently reading the rules to Reef Encounter". Most people would discard that, I on the other hand, am desperate for a tag line. Even though "Currently reading the rules for Reef Encounter" is original, it means nothing to the uninitiated masses and it has an elitist and snobbish ring to it. I don't see a downside.

I am currently reading the rules to Reef Encounter, Revolution: The Dutch Revolt, Railroad Tycoon, and Descent: Journey into Dark. I am always reading the rules to something.

Oh well, I've come to the conclusion that a good tagline is kind of like pornography. I can't define it, but I'll it know it when I see it.

Until next time, Keep your snowboots handy.

Coldfoot (Currently reading the rules to Reef Encounter)

Thursday, January 12, 2006

It's Not if You Win or Lose ...

Grantland Rice, an American sportswriter who lived from 1880-1954, once wrote, "For when the One Great Scorer comes, / To write against your name, / He marks - not that you won or lost - / But how you played the Game." I'm sure we've every one heard that saying, probably in its shorter more succinct form.

There's no doubt that Rice's saying has become a touchstone for competition of all sorts. But, that doesn't mean that everyone agrees with his point of view:
Grantland Rice, the great sportswriter once said, 'It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game.' Well Grantland Rice can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.
Gene Autry

I have never had much sympathy for the point of view, "it isn't whether you win or lose that counts, but how you play the game."
Richard Nixon

Winning isn't the only thing; it's everything.
Vince Lombardi
However, Autry, Lombardi, and Nixon were from an older generation than I; for myself, Rice's words were a simple tenet of life, to the point that I had no idea who might have first spoke them before I began to research this article. I was brought up to be gracious in defeat and polite in victory. Now, when I win a game, or even win a string of games, I'm almost embarassed to say so, online, in-person, or elsewhere. To do otherwise would be "gloating", "vanity", "poor sportsmanship" or other such bad things.

The Flip Side

Of course, there's a flip side to this. I always try and win the games I'm playing. And I get annoyed in a game if there's someone else who isn't playing to win. Now, I've never encountered some of the truly frustrating elements that I've heard other people mention in their gameplaying, such as someone throwing a game so that their spouse can win, but I've had players give up, start pursuing terrible strategies, or push the end of the game even when it's not in their best interest (or at least not in their best interest in-game, as their reasoning is sometimes, "Well, I'm going to lose anyway, and I just want to get it over as fast as I can").

That's not right, any of it, and I don't think people should be playing a game if they're not trying to win it. Which at first seems to fly in the face of good 'ole Grantland Rice's axiom. Fortunately our very own Reiner Knizia comes to the rescue with a quote of his own:
When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning.
Reiner Knizia
Now there's an idea that I can fully stand behind, and not just because I was indoctrinated with the axiom as a youth (as was the case with Grantland Rice's famous saying). You do want to play to win, and that should be your goal, but if you end up losing, that should be OK too. Otherwise you end up with a bad experience when gaming as often as not, and what's the fun in that?

Defining Winning

Of course every question of this sort raises new ones, and the obvious response here is, "what's winning?" I always though I knew: it was coming in first, and if you couldn't do that, second, and if you couldn't do that, third. I always play to achieve the best position I can in a game.

Of course this can wind up being a probabilistic exercise. If I have a 5% chance of achieving first place, a 20% chance of achieving second, and a 75% chance of achieving third, and the criteria needed to achieve first place and second place are different, which do I go for?

In general I'll try and go for the first if there's a reasonable chance I can achieve it, even if it results in forgoing second, but if that chance for first diminishes sufficiently I might go for second instead.

When a new player joined my regular review group a year or two ago now, I was surprised to hear that he had a different philosophy: always play for first, whether you have a decent chance at it, a dwindling small chance at it, or no chance at it. Never accept anything less.

This has resulted in some entirely friendly disputes between us, and I think we both accept that we'll play games differently. But it can result in some awkwardness in a king-making situation. If I'm in third-place in a game, and I have a last chance to make a difference in another player's score, I'm likely to hurt the second-place player rather than the first-place one, unless the scores are very close. Hurting the second-place player can help me rise in position, but hurting the first-place does nothing.

The other player would do the exact opposite, always.

I feel like I'm vindicated somewhat by the fact that whenever I see a discussion of competitive ranking, inevitably the second place player is rewarded more than the third. I played Days of Wonder's Gang of Four for a long time before I figured out how to play a hand to go out, but during that early time period my ranking slowly rose because I regularly came in second out of four. Likewise, if I was playing Survivor and I honestly felt like my chance was second place (earning $100,000) or third place (earning an estimated $65,000) you can bet I'd play for that additional $35,000.

I'm a bit envious when I read about a game club designing their own ranking system (which inevitably rewards place), because it sounds like a neat way to recognize winning in exactly the way I think it should be recognized.

So, that's my definition of winning: achieving the best position I reasonably can, which may or may not be first.

Conclusion

It's not whether you win or lose? Perhaps not, and our society has definitely been sending that message for decades. But, nonetheless, I play to win, and I hope all the other players do too, whether they feel like winning is the only thing or not.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

A Miserable Week


I’m sorry to say that my mind has not been on games this week. I’ve found the one thing that can get my mind off of games—sickness. I spent last Wednesday and Thursday at the height of a cold which left me lying on the couch with my box of tissues, cough drops, orange juice and television remote.

By Saturday I felt almost human and ready to play a game or two to celebrate my 50th birthday. Cori, Richard and I had Chinese food and an ice cream cake and then they proceeded to whoop me at Hacienda. Is that any way to treat the birthday girl?

Sunday morning Richard woke up with some kind of stomach bug so it was his turn on the couch where he spent the day but by bedtime Cori was also sick and took his place on the couch.

It’s now Monday morning and although I’m feeling alright so far, I thought I’d better put something together just in case so that you all don’t spend all day checking Gone Gaming to see where the heck my blog for the week is. But instead of a game related post, I’m left with only an interesting coincidence to share.

Thursday evening while I was holding down the couch and feeling like my head would explode, I searched for something worth watching on t.v. and found a Sci-fi channel movie called Epicenter, I think. It’s about an FBI agent trying to catch the bad during a major earthquake in San Francisco. It wasn’t really very interesting so after about 45 minutes and the obligatory chase scene through the streets of SF, I went in search of something else to watch. How about an Eddie Murphy movie I don’t recall seeing before called Metro? He’s playing a cop in San Francisco.

It wasn’t as entertaining as Beverly Hills Cop, but good enough for a tired mind to appreciate. Of course, there is a chase scene through the streets of San Francisco but wait…isn’t that the same Chinese arch over the street? Did we already have a chase scene in this movie? Oh, no, that black SUV just flew through the air, flipped 3 times and landed on it’s side—just like the chase scene in Epicenter. Yep, there’s the street car and the SAME driver. You know he’s gonna get shot. Uh huh, and he falls into the controls sending the streetcar racing down the hill out of control. It was very interesting to see where they’d cut out parts or added close-ups of their own characters to make this chase scene their own.

I’m not surprised by the use of an old chase scene, cut and spliced to fit the new movie, but it IS decidedly strange that I just happened to catch them both on the same night especially since the 2 movies overlapped in time. What are the odds of that and how many 6’s would I have to roll on how many dice to equal it?
---------
P.S. Wednesday morning. Everyone’s feeling much better and I didn’t get whatever is was that Cori and Richard had.
~~~~~~~~~
Until next time, do Meeples use Kleenex or Puffs tissues?

Mary

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Pay Attention. This Will Be On The Test.

Were you ever walking down the street and some strange guy came up to you and asked, "What sort of results are produced by game classification systems?" Yeah? Me, too! I bet you felt pretty stupid when you couldn't think of an answer right on the spot, right? And then you wanted to call your local game store friend but the guy already took your cellphone and your wallet, right? Happens to me all the time.

Now you don't have to feel stupid! The following four comparisons make up the distinguishing aspects of the results of most game classification systems:

Single List vs Multiple List: Single lists present all games in their results. Their usefulness is based on how the results are sorted. Examples include lists ordered by: alphabet, popularity, sales, price, and so on. As long as all games can be compared based on one or more criteria, a single list can be presented. Typically, only parts of the list are relevant to most people, such as the top or bottom entries, or a comparison between the rankings of certain entries.

Multiple list systems return "buckets" of results; only those games that satisfy a certain criteria are returned, such as all games beginning with the letter "C", or all games from 1974 made in China. The results in a bucket may be sorted by additional criteria or may be left unordered.

Single Criteria vs Multiple Criteria: A single criteria system returns a list sorted by a single criteria (duh!), or derives buckets according to a single criteria. Single list/single criteria examples include: alphabetically, popularity, publication date, volume sold, and so on. Single criteria buckets include: games according to first letter, a matching search term, a single mechanic or theme, and so on.

Multiple criteria lists produce lists with a secondary sorting, such as "by year, and alphabetically within each year". Or they can produce more specialized or generalized buckets by combining criteria with logical conjunctions (AND, OR, NOT, ...), such as "is an auction game and was made in 1991".

Single Value vs Multiple Value: A system may insist that a game can be assigned only to a single value within a criteria. For instance, when the criteria is "theme", a game may be allowed to belong to "War of 1812" or "Western", but not both.

Some criteria really require that a game can be assigned to multiple values within the criteria. For instance, considering game mechanics, Amun-Re is both an "auction" and an "economic" game. Demanding that the game be assigned to one or the other of these values within the criteria, but not both, can give someone who is searching for the game a headache.

Discrete vs Weighted Criteria: Discrete values assumes that a game either is or is not something. For instance, a game has sold 40,024 copies or has not sold 40,024 copies. It either is, or is not, made in 2004. When sorting based on discrete criteria, it is easy to assign an item to its proper location based on its discrete value within the criteria.

Using weighted criteria, you can assign a percentage to a value. For instance, we might decide that Amun-Re scores 0.94 as an auction game and 0.88 as a strategy game. If we rank games according to "is an auction game and is a strategy game", we can come up with a formula that will place Amun-Re into its correct location within a list or bucket of games. I'm no expert, but something like the following might work (I'd be happy to see real life systems that do this better):

R = (C1 + (1 - C1)(N-1)/N) * (C2 + (1 - C2)(N-1)/N) ...

Where C1, C2, ... is the value within each criteria, N is the number of criteria, and R is the final ranking.

If the criteria themselves have weights (e.g. it is more important that the game be an auction game than an economic game), we can easily adjust the formula, multiplying the appropriate terms by the weight of the criteria.


You can find all combinations of these systems around the internet, and often multiple combinations on a single site. There is no one correct choice for which of each pair to choose; it depends on the type of information you are looking to present.


The Test

See? I told you that there would be a test. You didn't pay attention!

1. What type of game results do your favorite game sites provide?
2. What type of game results do you typically use/wish you could see?
3. Wouldn't it be cool if one of the search criteria was "pagan element"? ...

Fire: Light, Chaotic. A party game, such as Balderdash. High energy with occasional flare-ups.

Air: Light, Planning. An abstract game, such as Go. Cool and directed.

Water: Heavy, Chaotic. A Euro-game, such as El Grande. Immersive and interactive.

Earth: Heavy, Planning. A war-game, such as ASL. Wide and solid.

Yehuda

Only five days left to nominate for the Board Game Internet Awards! Hurry!

Monday, January 09, 2006

GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ The game that ate itself

Caution ~ What follows will be considered, by some, to be a rant. While I won't openly disagree, I view opinions like these to be thoughtful, deep and well reasoned. Particularly if they're my opinions. Which they are. Some of you will certainly disagree with me and insist on viewing this as a rant, which I understand. Hopefully you'll see the light before there is no turning back and the planet plunges into despair, ruin and eternal darkness.

You've been warned.

_____________________________________________________________

About 10 years ago I read a book called Out of Control, written by the guy who was the editor of Wired magazine. One of the subjects he covered was nanotechnology, the soon-to-be-real science of making tiny little machines that can do weird stuff like be placed in your bloodstream to hunt down fat cells or disease. Anyway, Kevin, the guy who wrote the book, started in on one of the fears that future nano-technologists will have to contend with; out of control microscopic machines that end up doing more harm than good.

What he revealed was that the scientists figured they would have to give the nano-machines the ability to replicate themselves using whatever materials were at hand in the environment. The problem would be how to keep the little buggers from consuming everything in sight as they go on a wild and unstoppable replication invasion!

For example, let’s say we are tired of eating Pop Tarts and we want steak instead. So we order up a bunch of little nanos that turn anything they come into contact with into a steak. Sounds good eh? Except for the problem of too much steak! What happens if the nanos go berserk and really start turning everything into steak? Trees, dogs, driveways, designer jeans, Angelina Jolie, all of it, it all becomes a t-bone. If the scientists fail to find a way to stop the little buggers, well then, eventually I guess the entire planet would be red meat. Seriously, trillions and billions and jillions of tons of meat. A humungous BBQ with its own gravity field.

I personally think they need to work a few kinks out of the nano-thingie before we start using it for breakfast orders.

In the meantime, the game industry has its own plague of vermin that in many ways reminds me of the nano-threat that turns us all into red meat. That disease is, of course, CCG’s.

Thirteen years ago this coming August, Wizards of the Coast innocently unleashed on the gaming world the industry equivalent of rogue nano-machines. They created and released Magic: The Gathering. What they didn’t foresee was that within the first 15 months after MTG’s release there would be over 80 copy-cat CCG’s. I’m certain they hoped they would have a reason to release multiple expansions to MTG, but what is it up to now? Thirty? Forty? And how many cards? I’m guessing around 10,000, just for Magic alone.

While CCG’s don’t turn environmental materials into meat or Porsches, they do turn money, attention, shelf space, consumer focus, warehouses and ad budgets into CCG bitches.

The suspicious part about CCG’s, other than the inherent evil in them, is how they are all very close to MTG in design and presentation and how quickly most fail and disappear. The back rooms of game stores and distributors around the globe are this moment, stuffed to overflowing with unsold cases of Sim City, Wyvern, Star of the Guardian, Temple of the Gods, Hyborean Gates, X-Files, Lara Croft, and on and on and on, ad naseum. I'm guessing there have been somewhere around 300 failed CCG's, yet for every one we put to rest, two take it's place. The publishers won't stop because instead of trying to design good solid games, they're trying to "catch the next wave of cash."

Think about it, how many dollars has WotC earned on MTG alone? Forget thinking of it in terms of millions, or even hundreds of millions. If ol’ Pete Adkinson and Richard Garfield each walked away from the first 10 years with $100 million and change, then the number has to stand at somewhere between one and two billion bucks.

And Pokemon sold even better. It’s the best-selling CCG since the genre was created. The planetary numbers of Pokemon sales are unbelievably huge.

With Pokemon as an example, is there any doubt now in the evil that is CCG? I think not.

The most damning evidence of all is that when you dissect the nasty little buggers they’re all pretty much the same, with this mutation here and that mutation there. Basically, clones of MTG. There isn't even any attempt to disguise the things, just change, name, draw crappy art, slap on theme and tap(tm).

From the designer to the art to the production to the advertising, the support staff, the web sites, the distributors, the retailers, the printers, the conventions, tournaments and associated after-market efforts, CCG’s eat up the vast majority of all funds and efforts that exist in the board game segment today. And the publishers and distributors have gotten very smart about how not to get stuck with a loss if the game is a stinker… which, by the way, almost all of them are. It’s really simple, once the product gets to the retailer, the retailer owns it. No warranty. No guaranteed sell-through. No advertising credits. Nothing. Nada. If the little bastard tanks the retailer eats the loss while the publisher and middle-men have taken the money and are busily designing new permutations of the same idiotic game.

This, if you hadn’t noticed, leaves the consumer with a box of cards that he overpaid for and nowhere for the game to go. No way to get new players into it, no expansions, no fixes, no prizes or tournaments. Just an empty wallet and bad vision from straining to read the miniscule text that never really explains the card anyway.

A shallow thinker might stop me right here and say something dumb, like;

“Ah DW, but what you failed to mention is that CCG’s are a force within themselves. They may have roots in popular gaming, but they owe little or nothing to the board gamer. Why, one might even suggest that CCG’s have added to the ranks of board gamers. They are givers and creators of new gamers and fresh t-bone steaks to gnaw on, they are not the insipid little money suckers that you claim.”

To which I would reply:

“Well Maud ‘Dib, apparently you need to sprinkle more mélange on your Pop Tarts. Out of all the possible futures that the inception of CCG’s could have created for gaming, none could have been more dead-ended and destructive than the path that was taken… the path of Mutually Assured Crapola. It is good you stuck with vocational classes, as thinking is not your strong suite.”

The facts are CCG’s succeeded because of retailers. Specifically, Brick & Mortar retailers. Seeing as how there was no real WWW at that time, my point is obvious. What an unwitting WotC and it’s partners in evil did was create a monster using an established network of gamers and gaming outlets and the gamers who resided there and then infected us all with it’s devious and wantonly destructive virus. Then they piled on, they added less playability, more expansions, more titles, fewer cards for the dollar, less tight design and shorter life spans… which they tied to really dumb and offensive properties like Zatch Bell and Monster Rancher.

If I had been consulted I’d have shown them the proper path, the one that leads to wealth and gaming goodness for all, not just a select few who drive new BMW’s and Hummers. The industry now, in 2006, is nearing the end of the “snake that ate itself” phenomena. On a weekly basis more and more new CCG’s are announced. It’s close to frantic, the numbers are unreal. Who the hell is buying these things? What the crap is a Hecatomb and why on Earth would anyone pay $3.99 for ten little cards with retarded looking manga-thingies on it and text that is at once childish as well as utterly confusing?

The CCG machine has now devolved into a short-lived and ever-hungry monster that is dependent upon grabbing as many bucks as possible and then moving on to the next game, the next expansion, the next crop of 8-13 year olds… or their mental equivalent in adults.

Here’s a sample of recent and upcoming CCG’s and CCG expansions, from just three issues of a popular distributor product catalog:

Hecatomb ~ 6-sided clear cards and foul creatures from WotC. Plays like MTG

Pokemon, exDelta Species ~ more degenerate looking crap. Plays like MTG

Call of Cthulhu CCG, Forgotten Cities ~ Not as good as the old CoC game. Plays like MTG only with a story line.

Full Metal Alchemist, Artificial Human ~ Striking in it’s complete lack of originality. Art that makes non-artificial humans feel strangely irritated. Plays a lot like MTG.

War Cry CCG, Hand of Fate ~ MTG-like clone set in the world of Warhammer. Art that may or may not be good, sort of like shrinking the “Last Supper” down to postage stamp size.

Marvel CCG, X-Men ~ Back from the Over Power grave. More stupidity and insane grimaces from the art-vampires at Marvel. Similar to MTG in play.

Avatar CCG, Master of the Element ~ innovation-deficient design that has players utilizing the four elements in play. Based on a Nickelodeon children’s infomercial. Appears to poorly mimic MTG.

MTG, Guildpact ~ the 367th expansion for the original CCG. Designed with restrictions and banned cards pre-determined so players can start bitching and arguing before they buy any of the cards. Plays the least like MTG of all of these new releases.

Neopets CCG, Travels in Neopia ~ the CCG equivalent of offering candy to little girls, vapid art, wretched names for everything. Something smells funny here. Plays a lot like MTG.

High Stakes Drifter ~ WizKids/Upper Deck’s attempt to cash in on the History Channel. Uses “Dollars” instead of mana, has chips that act as instants. Plays a lot like MTG but with more players and more confusion.

City of Heroes CCG ~ AEG’s newest hit-and-run, based on an online community. More mindless super-hero idiocy that plays a lot like MTG.

Warhammer 40K CCG, Dark Millenium ~ a two player battle pack that offers up more unfocused art in dark shades and stilted flavor text. Its saving grace is it plays a lot like MTG.

Vampire: TES, Legacies of Blood ~ another expansion for this completely unplayable CCG. Immature theme, metrosexual art. Not enough MTG design elements for this game to be considered a game.

Xiaolin Showdown CCG ~ my first look at this one had me hugging the toilet puking up $60 worth of Cuervo 1800 from last night’s party at the Country-Western saloon. Totally devoid of anything that could even be considered art and woefully disguised as a Chinese-Western theme that is supposed to make sense. Has many elements of MTG in its design.

Yu-Gi-Oh! ~ Expansions come at a rate of one every several days. Too numerous too mention. Plays like MTG but has a horrible theme, putrid art and a name that makes me cringe to read, write or think about, much less to say.

Universal Fighting System CCG ~ the GURPS of CCG’s. A CCG system, similar to MTG, that you can’t actually play unless you buy the “hot property” expansion, such as Street Fighter (whoa, what originality), Soul Caliber (uh, okay) or the Penny Arcade web comic. Huh? A CCG where you play a dweeb from a web comic? Crap art. From the description it appears to play a lot like MTG.

Raw Deal CCG, No way Out ~ more non-existent tension in the retarded world of wrestling. “Lock up the trailer door! Put your teeth in Ma! We’re going to see wrasslin!” Pure dreck. Plays a lot like MTG though.

Conan CCG ~ liberal use of the terms; original, unique, brutal, pulse-pounding and gritty. Great art. Plays a lot like MTG.

Gundam War CCG ~ this is what you’d create if you sat in a room with a Japanese fanboy for 30 years and neither one of you had the capability to muster an original or cogent idea. Same dated art that looked wrong in the 70’s. Plays a lot like MTG.

Zatch Bell CCG, Blinding Fate ~ Doomed to fail because, a) it has an original mechanic, the spell book, and b) its not very much like MTG. Oh yeah, and the storyline, art and concept both suck and blow.

Phew. And that’s just a sampling. I didn’t even cover such developments as Anachronism, The History Channel’s leap into the nano-CCG machine building competition and I left CMG’s (collectible miniature games) alone and purposely avoided the re-emergence of Dragon Dice and the new Marvel collectible dice game. But I’m certain you see the pervasive and antagonistic trend here? What of all these resources had gone to building a long-term game market over the last 13 years? Do these designers really give a crap about the games? Or are they just drawing a check and moving on to the next project?

I know for certain that the publishers have about as much concern for their customers as McDonald’s does when they coax obese 11 year olds in the Biggie-Size mindset. These games aren’t labors of love, they aren’t innovative, hell they aren’t even good. Virtually every one of them will be a rapidly fading memory of a wasted allowance within a matter of weeks or months. A couple of years perhaps for the ones with ties to a solid property like Warhammer or Lord of the Rings.

The comparison of the CCG virus to nano-machines gone amuck is acceptable in my mind. The potential for applying the huge amounts of money that MTG made towards innovation and creativity was there, but someone chose to eat their young instead. And the process is, in my opinion, very close to complete. I’d give the whole cycle perhaps 5 more years tops before most CCG’s, as we know them today, will be history… distant history. An anachronism perhaps.

Thanks for attending my bitch-session this week. What got me started on this whole subject was some time I spent reflecting on my retirement from game store ownership and several discussions with a good friend who will be opening a new store in a few months. He asked me if he could spend some time with me just covering some of the basics that I learned in my years in the trenches. I know I’m going to have to tell him that CCG’s are a gravy train and that if he wants a better shot at success then he’ll need a ticket for the ride. But damn, he also needs to understand that CCG’s have changed everything about retailing games successfully. They are the gaming equivalent of Gordon Gecko, whose modus operandi in the movie Wall Street was to buy a company, suck all of the assets and life out of it and then leave a desiccated husk in his wake.

If you get an outside, long view of the last 13 years, that’s exactly what has developed in the game industry. CCG’s are short-term. They are not designed to make gamers out of kids; they’re designed to open mom and dad’s wallets as quickly and efficiently as possible and then move on to the next school of fish.

Anyway, it’s food for thought. And speaking of food, I’m hungry. I’m not sure if I want a Pop Tart or a steak. Oh well, I’ll just go program the nanos to make me something. Hopefully the instructions make more sense than the average CCG rulebook.

_________________________________________________

*Disclaimer*

No actual CCG's, game designers or industry workers were harmed in the process of making this blog. In particular, any CCG designer who may also write a blog entry right here, or any who read this blog, should know that the author personally believes that if CCG design were left solely up to that designer(s) the entire population of Earth would now be gamers, the author of this blog would be a wealthy man living a life of excess and gluttony and the threat to humankind of being consumed by nano-machines chomping up every animal, mineral and vegetable on this dirtball as they relentlessly churn out Yu-Gi-Oh! expansions every 13 minutes, well, that threat would never come to pass.

Sunday, January 08, 2006

ch-ch-ch-CHANGES!

The "New Year" is here, and everywhere the "winds of change" are blowing! Even upon the 'blog' site as well, as I *notice* that they implemented a 'Link' address function underneath the "Title", as I write this up! Of course, the most relevant 'one' ongoing is upon the "BoardGameGeek" site, as no doubt many are discovering once they've checked into this. We're STILL awaiting upon 'word' about the CHAT there being RE-'implemented', since many folks and especially the "nOObz" tend to drift into there. While sure, I like to 'show off' for them as well with the inclusion of actual photos of GAMES from the site itself. Then, we occasionally have some people who just NEED an 'answer' for something or another concerning gaming, and usually with the variety of 'regulars' there, then they can obtain such handily. It sure was nice to Chat-Chit with others from around the WORLD at various times of the 'Day', when they were able to be ON that. And NO, I'm not at all 'concerned' with utilzing some other 'one' like IRC or IM and their 'problems' associated with those. As the '1st anniversary' for the "Geek Chat" approaches, then I just wonder how much MORE "wonderful" will this become? And just WHAT is that "must have" *feature* that they're proclaiming all upon the 'site' going to entail? Will this 'be' some sort of "online popcorn maker"? OR... shall it encompass some sort of "Geek" Cat-or-Dog grooming services? I'm sure that "our gal pal VAL" would prefer a 'Ferreting' out of unwanted 'North American Marsupials' from her garage space as well! Maybe a "shoo the foo" dispenser to entice undesireables away from where they're not as 'wanted' eh? That could become a useful 'tool' as well, with something along the lines of "Almost Wanted", for those 'fence sitters' of whom YOU all 'know' quite well. This will just have to be 'seen' to become 'believed' then, once they decide upon informing the rest of US about the matter at hand.

I've also 'noticed' a trend amongst the "Euro-Snobs" where they're going around and proclaiming to whomever they can, regarding "designer" GAMEs! What the 'fudge'!?! These ALL have to be 'designed' by SOMEONE! It's not like I go down the street and 'find' such laying about just waiting upon its 'discovery'! They haven't "fallen off the 'Games' truck" whilst on their 'way' to the 'market'. Yes, I realize that they're just trying to obtain a "status symbol" sort of distinction, to place their 'precious-s-s-s-s' apart from the "riff-raff", but insipid 'terms' won't cut it! How's about "GAMEs to look down upon others with" for this? It's WHAT they're trying to get across with anyway, so WHY "beat around the bush" for such? I'd prefer the "Euro-Snob" denotation version, as it is more succinct AND it conveys the 'spirit' as well. It also 'sounds' great too, so that when you 'point' a finger at them, you can 'say' thusly: "Euro-Snob"! So there you have it, you "Euro FREAKS!", courtesy of 'moi' and whomever else first uttered that phrase. While YOU can just 'call' myself as "your WOIST nightmare" if you'd like, and I don't mind in the least, as "sticks & stones may be employed to 'break' YOUR bones" as you utter something that I don't 'agree' with! But that's just 'me', while others might be more tolerant about the matter. Oh, and for those who take 'umbrage' upon what I've 'exclaimed' previously, then kindly remove your "funny-bone inserted within your butt", and get a 'sense of humor' we only hope then.

There's also the 'topic' about having additional "Admins" at the "BGG" site for the likes of "photo submissions" and it is a welcome extension for just such a 'project'. As it stands, then they ought to "review" MANY of what they already have, where these are over 100 or the like for just ONE particular and/or certain 'games'. Good GAWD! does there really 'need' to be that many taking up valuable "bandwidth"? Hey, I've had probably twice as many been "rejected" for some inauspicious 'reason' or another, and even where that was the ONLY 'pic' being submitted at the time! Then there's the kinds that have all sorts of unnecessary "background" surrounding their 'subject', like we REALLY want to 'see' their atrocious "home decor" as well. Sure, it allows for some good "making FUN of" times, but come on! Aren't the gamings supposed to BE for this? I could 'name names' if I HAVE to, but I haven't the'stomach' for such, just right now, and I'm sure many others would be more than willing to accomodate upon this matter as well.

As a 'final note' then I admonish YOU all to get IN your 'nominations' for any "Awards" either here or upon other 'sites' where this is taking place.

P.S.-has anybody been able to find out where the latest "Dice Tower" is located at?

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Gaming in 2005

Ah the New Year and my first blog. Firstly, my thanks go to the team for the invitation to join them. Since it is the start of 2006, I thought I would talk about what games I played in 2005 and who I played them with. (Note that Melissa calls Daughter the Elder "Biggie" and Daughter the Younger "Otto")

In 2005, I logged 725 plays of 123 distinct games. 88 of those games had not been played by me in 2004 and thus could classify as new games.

In 2004, I logged 302 plays of 66 distinct games. 31 of those games did not get a repeat play in 2005, although it is fair to mention that they only accounted for 20% of the total number of plays.

What didn't get a repeat play in 2005 and why?
  • They were owned by someone else:
    Loco!, Barabarossa, Doom, Goldbrau, Honor of the Samurai, Master Labyrinth, Odin's Ravens, Oh Pharoah, Pizarro & Co, San Juan and Wings of War - Famous Aces
  • I didn't want too or I really, really, really didn't want to:
    Set, Basari, Spell Maker, Mouse Trap
  • Destroyed by Daughter the Younger:
    My First Uno
  • Couldn't find the right people or just couldn't convince anyone to play:
    Ninja Burger, Alan Jones Formula 1 Grand Prix Racing Game, Squatter
Full details of what I played and how often can be found in my GeekList Fraser's Games played in 2005 - an Annotated List.

Looking through who I played games with there are really a number of different groups.

Daughter the Elder
She turned seven this year. She and I play two-player games together most weekends. Some of the more blatant children's games like Snakes & Ladders, Ludo etc have dropped off or are in the process of dropping off our playlist. We still play Balloon Cup and now play Carcassonne Hunters & Gatherers with the full set of rules. We also notched up a few games of Lost Cities, initially playing open hands with some discussion but soon graduating to normal play. She's not winning yet, but is getting close. She began playing Connect Four at school this year and received a copy of her own for Christmas. I managed to chalk up ten plays with her between Christmas and New Year and we are running about even in our win/loss tally.

Daughter the Elder and Melissa and sometimes others
Mainly three player games. Daughter the Elder is a huge fan of Settlers of Catan, Melissa less so, thus it is Melissa who needs to be convinced to get it to the table. We have kept a record of each die roll in each of our three player games and the results are surprisingly good bell curves given the distribution sample for each game – even the one where my 8s never came up!

We have also played Carcassonne and Perpetual Commotion. Zendo is a recent acquisition in our house and a big hit with Daughter the Elder, which leads me to think we should bring out Cluedo for her to try. She has also played Pirate's Cove, Around the World in 80 Days, Circus Flohcati and Ticket to Ride with us and gamer friends and played very well indeed.

Halli Galli has been very popular with Daughter the Elder and her school friends. Hopefully it will become more obtainable in Australia soon.

Occasionally she makes wistful comments about Puerto Rico and Tigris & Euphrates. Whilst it would be good to have a ready-made third player at home for these, we think we have a fair few other games in our collection to work through with her first.

See also my GeekList of Games that Daughter the Elder trades bedtime books to play.

Lunch time games at work
Our lunch-time gaming group started off with two or three regulars at the start of the year and we now generally have five. The games played have to be an hour or less, and are usually card games. We started the year with Mag-Blast and graduated to Mag-Blast Second Edition when one of the group bought it when looking for Mag-Blast. In two player, we can knock over six games over lunch; with four players, that drops to one or two. Gang of Four took over as our flagship game in the middle of the year. We play with the Game Dealers edition because it is a quarter the price of the Days of Wonder edition. We are onto our second pack due to wear and tear and have developed a system of play for five players and a weird three player variant for when we are bored.

Other games with this group include High Society, Tower of Babel, TransAmerica, Bang!, Guillotine and Ra.

Friday night games
We have games at home every second Friday, alternating with another two daughter family each week. We usually have four or five players and occasionally more. This is pretty much a gamers' night, with game complexity up to things like Puerto Rico, Power Grid, Tigris & Euphrates and Louis XIV and varying to much lighter fare if it has been a long week at work and we are tired.

These Friday night sessions rarely go more than two to three hours, therefore we usually only play one game or a couple of shorter ones.

Gamers@Dockers
In late 2004, dacoutts , REGGY and I founded Gamers@Dockers , which ran every 2nd and 4th Thursday at our work. In late 2005, it went to every Thursday. We usually have had between ten and twenty people show up to each session. I find it to be a great place to look through the pile of games that people have brought and just ask "who can teach me this one?" as a way of working through my unplayed games and trying out new ones. Just this week, we got to play our first game of Wallenstein because someone had brought it along.

The Gamers@Dockers sessions generally run five or so hours, so it is quite possible to fit in a fairly long game or a couple of normal length games.

Melissa would love to be able to come to Gamers@Dockers regularly but the practicalities of childcare and after-school activities don't usually allow us both to attend.

KiddieCon
A lot of our friends are gamers and/or old roleplayers and quite a few of them have small children now. Kiddiecon is not a real convention, more an in-joke since we used to run a large RPG convention in the pre-Daughter the Elder days. We hire Daughter the Younger's child-care centre for a day on the weekend and play games, letting the children play in the purpose-built environment. It generally ends up costing us about $10 per adult. These sessions are pretty much like Gamers@Dockers in that there is usually a wide selection of games to be played or tried out. It is worth noting that we also get a few childless gamer friends who come along too – just for the games, or is that the pleasure of our company, nah probably just the games.

Inviting people over for games
With two young children needing our attention, it is difficult for both of us to get out for a games day or evening, so we often invite people over to our house to play. This is both casual gaming friends with or without children and the more serious gamer friends (who are generally without children at the moment).

We are very grateful to these people for making the effort of coming to us to play. Over recent months, this has meant that Melissa and I have played games such as Die Macher, Caylus and Das Zepter von Zavandor. Without these travelling gamers, this would not have been the case.



We are now just a week into 2006 and I have already experienced games with a number of the groups above. Next week we start our beach holiday and Melissa and I are looking forward to the Puerto Rico grudgefest as well as a bunch of other games.

Mmm meeples.

Fraser

Friday, January 06, 2006

Vacation Surprises

I hope you all had a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. I've been out of town for the last few weeks with little access to the internet. I would like to thank Ava Jarvis and Iain Cheyne for covering for me during my absence. The family and I enjoyed a nice Christmas vacation with our families in the lower '48. Although my wife and kids try to visit their grandparents at least yearly, it was my first trip outside of Alaska in 3 years (not counting a single jaunt over to the burlesque and gambling Mecca of the far-north; Dawson City, Yukon Territory).

I checked out a couple of the game stores I used to frequent back in my college days, and made a couple great finds.

Although I liked strategy games back in my younger days, I wasn't a game whore like I am now. No, far from it. I didn't discover the wide world of German games until I was 30. Until I discovered Boardgamegeek I thought Tactics II was the be-all, end-all of war games, Monopoly wasn't too bad, Talisman was the ultimate "insider game", and Advanced Civ was the pinnacle of gaming.

One store I used to frequent had 2038, Samarkand and a plethora of original Avalon Hill titles, including a couple Advanced Squad Leader modules in stock, in original shrink, with their original price tags. I picked up 2038 and Samarkand for a little bit of nothing. Those games were all probably sitting there when I frequented the store in my college days. I sent out a couple e-mails asking if anyone wanted the ASL modules, but none of my friends were interested. I would have picked them up for myself, but I had already spent too much on games because of this surprise...

World Games of Montana.

World Games of Montana. Yes. No joke. If you live within a couple hundred miles of Missoula you need to stop in. It is the best boardgame store I have ever seen.



The store carries some puzzles, and some games with mass market appeal, but there were no miniatures, no comic books, no CCGs, no RPGs, no baseball cards and no video games. The staff was very knowledgeable about modern strategy games, and was very friendly. They interrupted their game of Torres to teach me and my kids to play Gulo Gulo.

I said, "The staff was playing Torres". That has to be a good sign. And in case you missed my inference, they have numerous games open and ready to play, so you can try before you buy.

Daniel and Annie were pleasant, knowledgeable gamers, I was very pleased to make their acquaintance. Matt actually writes boardgame reviews for the local rag, The Missoulian, under the name Smatt. He also contributes to Knucklebones magazine, does a daily puzzle blog entitled simply, The Puzzler, and posts his game reviews on another blog, Traditional Game Reviews.

I bought entirely too many games, including some kids games for Christmas. I restricted myself to games that I know my local game store hasn't been able to get into stock. I could only pack 4 or 5 games in my luggage, so with the games I bought from a couple other stores, and the games I brought down with me, I had to ship most of them back to Alaska via the Postal Service.

But the surprises didn't end there.

Somehow the issue of games came up and my father-in-law (a non-gamer) mentioned that he used to be pretty good at chess back in the day. I shamelessly used that information to talk him into a game of YINSH. He picked it right up. We played a couple games and he did very well.



At one point in our first game I was down one ring to none. He was able to keep some serious pressure on me for a dozen consecutive moves. I couldn't do anything but play defensively, lest I went down 2 rings to none. He moved me from one tight spot to the next with ease, and that was just his learning game.

I also introduced my brother to Battle Line, Puerto Rico, Australia (a game I picked up at World Games of Montana), and a couple other German games. He really liked Battle Line, a game we were both just learning, and did well at numerous other games. I don't think I converted him to the dark-side, I doubt he will be starting a game club anytime soon. I'll have to try again in another three years.

Until next time,
World Games of Montana.
Remember it.

Coldfoot

P.S. And let the treasure hunt begin for the store still carrying original ASL modules.

Thursday, January 05, 2006

The Year in Review: 2005

Another year is behind us, and as January slowly dawns over the horizon of the twenty-first century, our ever-human instinct is to look back and reflect upon what the previous year brought.

It was, in general, a year of growth and change for the gaming industry. I'm not convinced that any true classics were produced last year. I think that Caylus will ultimately prove too long to support its continued rating as a top-10 game. However, there were a decent number of good, gamer's games which I'm happy to own and which will continue to occasionally hit tabletop for many years.

The biggest trend of the year seemed to be a bifurcation of the gaming market. More of the gamer's games tended to top the two-hour mark, with Caylus being just the most extreme example of the trend in the Euro market. In the Shadow of the Emperor, Parthenon, Alexander the Great, Conquest of the Empire, Railroad Tycoon, and many of Fantasy Flight's new big-box games matched the trend, and although part of this is due to an increased Anglo-American influence in the designer game market, some of the most notable true Eurogames followed the trend as well.

On the other hand some of the older manufacturers seem to be slowly backing off of the gamer's market. Here Alea is the most extreme example. Louis XIV felt like a good game in the old Alea mold, but Palazzo is definitely trending toward the lighter side and most people don't have much faith in their pirate game already announced for 2006. In general, a much higher percentage of games from Kosmos and Hans im Gluck, as well as from top designers like Reiner Knizia and Wolfgang Kramer seemed to be pretty light.

The other big trend of the year was the evolution of the Internet. Though we saw setbacks with the fall of GameWire and The Games Journal, I think that was met with growth thanks to the creation of BoardGameNews and an increased number of regular and/or group blogs, including Gathering of Engineers, and of course this one. I believe that boardgaming news is better off for its transition to a more freewheeling and freemarket site, while the fight between traditional columns like The Games Journal and more open blogs is a general problem facing the Internet right now; though we're not necessarily better off for the ascendency of blogs over articles currently, that's only because we're still transitioning. On the more upbeat side, BGG.con 1 showed the real power of the Internet as an organizational tool that stretches beyond its own electronic boundaries.

The growth of the Internet also offers up the potential for future problems in our industry, and I think that Funagain games epitomized this in 2005. They secured no less than three games as exclusives: Control Nut, Havoc: The Hundred Year's War, and most surprisingly Carcassonne: The Discovery. I'm sure that every one of those publishers felt like the exclusive was best for their company, and in some cases the game might not have been published without funagain. Likewise, funagain may be considering themselves patrons of the arts, helping out in the publication of otherwise unpublishable games. However, I think that seducing people into eletronic sales at the detriment of local game stores which better support the industry at the street level is ultimately a very dangerous trend, and as a result I'm very wary about what funagain is doing.

The other trends of the year tend to be more personal, either on a company, game, or designer basis.

The Companies in Review

Here's a rundown of the major American board game companies & distributors and what they've been up to in the last 365 days.

Asmodee, after many years of largely ignoring the U.S. market, suddenly burst onto it. I think that's a great sign for the growth of the industry in the United States, and I also suspect it'll work out well for Asmodee, due to the better theming of French games in general, as I discussed in the waning days of 2005. This year we saw Dungeon Twister, an expansion for the same, and Mall of Horror--which altogether doubled the size of Asmodee's U.S. catalog--while next year it looks like they might double the size of their U.S. catalog again, with more Dungeon Twister expansions and Mission: Red Planet already solicited. And thus far Asmodee's U.S. games look to be fun.

Days of Wonder seems to have generally proven and stayed with their model in 2005. They want to produce Evergreen games that are continually supported, continually sold, and continally played, so this year we saw a gamer's variant of Ticket to Ride, a computer version of Ticket to Ride, a micro-expansion for Mystery of the Abbey, and two and a half major expansions for Memoir '44. We only saw one utterly new game, Shadows over Camelot, and that was almost immediately supported with a miniatures expansion. Days of Wonder has already announced another Memoir '44 expansion and another Ticket to Ride variant in 2006, so clearly this is working for them.

Eagle Games also stayed the course for much of the year, putting out more big-box American style games, but toward the end of the year they introduced something new to their lineup: Martin Wallace. Eagle Games had gotten some flack for rules & playtesting before this, while Wallace's Warfrog had gotten flack for component issues and production mistakes. You put them together, and it's a match made in heaven. The two releases thus far, Conquest of the Empire and Railroad Tycoon, have each produced rules that are just as good as Martin's originals, if different, and vastly superior components. I hope those trend continues into next year.

Fantasy Flight Games really blew off the doors in 2005 by producing multiple huge games, starting with Twilight Imperium 3 and moving on to Descent, Worlds of Warcraft, and others. Although not quite as big, Arkham Horror and the new Runebound fit straight into the same trend. These are very American games, but have an increasing number of good, German-style mechanics. FFG also continued to really support Reiner Knizia in the U.S., including multiple Blue Moon expansions, a U.S. Ingenious, Beowulf: The Legend, and a new edition of Through the Desert.

Mayfair Games seems to also be in a period of real expansion. Their new distribution deal with daVinci Games appears to have worked out well for them, because they put out a huge number of co-productions in 2005, though most were very light. They've also started distributing all of Phalanx Game's titles, and I think that's great timing because Phalanx seems to be just coming into their own; the playability of their games really increased in 2005, with Alexander the Great and Trick, Trumps, Game both being standouts and the rumor mill saying similar things about the just-released Mesopotamia. Mayfair also seems to be returning to their successful roots with a vengeance. They published no less than three Klaus Teuber games--Candamir, Elasund and the new version of Barbarossa--as well as a new edition of Australian Rails, quickly following on the heels of last year's brand-new Russian Rails.

Out of the Box and Playroom Entertainment continued to follow curiously similar paths in 2005. They're each putting out fairly simple games designed for the mass market, but that includes some light Eurogames. So from OTB we saw Moon's 10 Days in Europe and Knizia's Tutankhamen and from Playroom we saw Knizia's Poison and King of the Beasts. Both companies continue to put out German games that can be nice fillers for more serious players.

Rio Grande Games continued to produce the mix of games that's their norm. Some good games, some family games, and some others. However, I fear that Rio Grande Games is losing notable ground in the current market. They continue to put out some great games because of their manufacturer agreements. The new Alea games, In the Shadow of the Emperor, and Caylus all came out from RGG, and were definitely some of the best of the year. In addition they've expanded their network a bit and are now publishing Queen Games and an increasing number of small-publisher games, such as the aforementioned Caylus, Ys, Oltre Mare, Mall World, and the FFF games. However, some of their self-publications weren't quite as sharp, with the new Bohnanza supplement rules riddled with errors and Carcassonne: The Discovery ending up exclusive over at funagain. I have no doubt that RGG will keep putting out great games for many years to come due to their partnerships, but I don't see how they can ultimately compete against American companies who are larger and really have the resources to do top-notch publications of their own--such as Days of Wonder, Fantasy Flight Games, Mayfair Games, Uberplay, and Z-Man Games. RGG ultimately needs to grow to survive.

Uberplay heavily retrenched in 2005. The declining American economy cut deeply into their German manufacturing deals and so Uberplay ended them after one last release, China. Since they've been going with their own productions, such as Buy Low, Sell High, For Sale, and Ra. I've always found Uberplay's own productions to be of singularly high-quality games (with occasional theming complaints), while their co-productions were more varied, running as they did from Hansa and Tongiaki on the good to Manga Manga and their other small-box Kosmos games on the bad, so I can't complain about their new trend. I'm a little less enthused about their rollout of Simply Fun Games, which revolves around Tupperware style parties that again cut out the local game stores, but they tend to be lighter, more family oriented games, and so are largely off my RADAR.

Z-Man Games really burst onto the scene this year. In the past they'd published some B-movie card games that I found way too random and some other games that just hadn't received much attention. This year, however, they started publishing Eurogames, and Zev somehow managed to pick out the best games that weren't yet in print in the United States. Three big-names games that people already knew about were Santiago, Ursuppe, and Reef Encounter, but he also brought over no-names Street Illegal and Saboteur which both turned out to be really good games and is now on the front line of some of the new games getting lots of attention like Il Principe and Siena. At the same time this has dovetailed nicely with his own releases, such as Parthenon, a very nice combination of American and German aesthetics in a trading game. I hope this new direction works out for them, because Zev's taste in coproductions seems to be selective and singularly good.

The Games in Review

BGG shows six of 2005's games in their Top 100 (excluding wargames): Caylus, Ticket to Ride Europe, Shadows Over Camelot, Louis XIV, Revolution, and Arkham Horror, plus a couple of first American publications: Dungeon Twister, Santiago, and Ingenious.

It's the same mix I mentioned earlier of very long games and lighter/family games. Only Louis XIV and the republications of Santiago and Ingenious really match previous years' trends toward short, yet elegant and deep Eurogames.

Caylus is clearly the top story of the year, and the one game which a lot of people seem to think is going to be a new touchstone for our hobby. I managed to get in one play before the end of the year, and I can now say that I think that once Caylus gets into wider circulation in this next month we're going to see the honeymoon period pretty abruptly end.

It's a good game, no doubt about that, but the sloppy mixture of tactical & strategic requirements is a bit offputting, and the ensuing chaos that results is pretty high. Even more, the 2-4 hour playtime is really going to put most people off. I paid real cash for my copy of Caylus; it wasn't a review copy. And, I'm happy with that purchase because it's a game that I think deserves to be in most serious gamers' collections, but it in no way has the polish and superb development work of a Puerto Rico or a Tigris & Euphrates, and most of the time I can't believe I'll get more enjoyment from it than the 2-4 other German games I could play in the same time period.

Dungeon Twister is the only other game of the year that I think deserves additional comment, and that's because it has legs. It's never going to be a top gameclub game because of its core 2-player sensibility, but 5 years from now it's going to be considered a genre classic, and it'll be worth good amounts on eBay if Asmodee is foolish enough to let is slip out of print. The great artwork, fun theming, and excellent tactical play all combine to make this a standout.

Personally, I rated ten games released this year as perfect 10s over at RPGnet: China, Conquest of the Empire II, Dungeon Twister, For Sale, Memoir '44: Eastern Front, Ra, Shadows over Camelot, Three-Dragon Ante, Ticket to Ride Europe, and Trump, Tricks, Game. In retrospective I'm a little less confident about the ratings for For Sale and Trump, Tricks, Game, but then I find card games somewhat hard to rate because there's only so much the genre can do.

Of the aforementioned BGG top games, I haven't reviewed Ingenious or Caylus and I haven't even played Revolution. I suspect Ingenious would get an 8 or a 9, and I don't know about Caylus, but I suspect it'd be trending toward an RPGnet 10, with notable caveats that many players won't want to play it due to length.

So, 2005. It was a fair year for games. More importantly, the American gaming industry really seems to be on the upswing.

Now let's see what 2006 brings.

PS: If you haven't already, please submit your nominations for our 2005 Board Game Internet Awards.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

I've Located the Problem


Just after Christmas I received Hacienda, which Richard and I liked after the first half game. We’ve played it a couple of times now, enjoying it more each time but so far Richard has won each time with very good plays and strategies which have slipped by my sensors. This has finally helped me identify my biggest problem when playing strategy games.

Some games, especially when there are only 2 players, move very quickly from turn to turn which means I’m planning my next move while the other player is taking theirs, often barely noticing what they’ve done. I have my plan and I move ahead with blind confidence, not stopping to ask myself “What did they do, why did they do it and should I be trying to stop whatever it is?” Pilots call this Target Fixation. Your goal is the only thing in your sights, excluding everything else even danger. This is my problem. Alright, to be honest, it’s probably one of many; but this is one I should be able to overcome.

In theory, it should be easy to take 5 seconds to look over the board and assess my opponent’s position and possible strategy, the equivalent of stopping to think before opening your mouth in a conversation (which I’m also not good at). In reality, I feel the need to keep the game moving, not slow it down and drag it out.

I think this is partly because I feel that my target audience hates to sit still for too long playing my games. There are many games that my family enjoys but not all of them so I’m not trying to place the blame on my family, but I know there are times when they’d rather be doing something else.

Another reason for this habit is just that—habit. Years of playing roll and move games where you pick up the dice as soon as someone finishes and press on with your turn have drilled into me the need for speed. There was no need to make a long-term plan or pay particular attention to what another player had done on his turn.

The last thing to mention is that I see games as fun, not to be taken too seriously with every choice a chance for disaster. I like to win as much as anyone else does, but I don’t mind losing as long as I had a good time along the way.

This desire to keep the game moving at a steady clip has thus become a habit which persists even when I have other gamers to play with. It’s only with play-by-email (PBEM) games do I take the necessary time to make my decisions since I know no one is sitting right by their computer waiting impatiently for me to take my turn.

Is my target fixation/full speed ahead method of play a habit that can be broken (or maybe I should say “fixed”)? Can I teach myself to take the time to see the situation, and then let go of my pre-arranged plan in favor of a more sensible course of action? Will it make me a better player or do I have other issues that are even more dire? For the answers to these and other questions, tune in next time.
~~~~~~~~
Games

This week I got to play Hacienda three times, twice with 2 players and once with 3, and I have to tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that this is exactly our type of game. The rules are simple and easy to understand but the play is rich with decisions and options for scoring and making money.

I’ve heard this compared to Through the Desert several times but I think it more closely reminds me of Magna Grecia, a game that is less well-known than Through the Desert. In both you want to reach as much of the board as possible to make money or points from their markets, and the bigger your hacienda/city, the more points you’ll make. Both boards start empty, for the most part, and you can start anywhere as long as you follow the rules for beginning your hacienda/city. There’s the same tough balancing act between building your area and increasing your supply/hand of cards which seems to appeal to us so much.

I like games where the winner isn’t clear until the final points are tallied and this qualifies in that respect. There are 5 ways to score points, which are scored in mid-game and at the end, which means there are many combinations of strategies to try. The obvious one, connecting to many markets, isn’t necessarily the strongest one. In the one game that Cori played, she had connected to only 4 markets compared to Richard’s 7 and my 6 but still came in a close second, 4 points behind me.

One thing I’d also like to mention is the start-up table in the rules which shows the different number of cards/pieces used for the different number of players. This is something I usually write down on a small piece of paper for quick reference but there it all was in an easy-to-use format which I wish more developers would do in the future.

All of this goodness AND my husband likes it. I could tell because he said, “Yeah, I could see playing this again.” Well, what more could I ask for?

Long-time gamers won’t find anything new or innovative in Hacienda but if you’re looking for a well-developed game that’s fun, easy to understand and has tight, balanced play, I recommend it.
~~~~~~~~
Until next time, I’ll be trading my sheep for pesos.

Mary

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

You mean, like Merlot?

I've been running a game group for close to ten years. A lot of you, and you know who you are, have been spreading the love and joy about "better boardgaming" to the masses for this long, or longer in some cases. The result of this is that we who like these games are now the snobs of the game world.

The word "game" as currently used in the English language means "PC or video game". If you ask someone where a "game store" is, you will be directed to a store with racks of Sony playstation cartridges. If you tell someone that you play games or design games, they assume you mean computer games. A mass media list of the "top thirty games" for last year meant the top thirty video or PC games. "Gaming" is a hot term because is means hordes of pimply teenagers with disposable cash, tech grrls, and business suits extolling marketing segments, all collecting around virtual iconography and black boxes of witchcraft and wires.

"Board game" isn't doing any better. "You mean, like Monopoly?" is not just a derisive catchphrase with which we identify the teeming hordes of smirking, clueless citizens; it is a real question (much like, "How do I find the 'e' so I can click on 'the Internet'?" in another field).

When these citizens ask me about my game prototype, the question they ask is, "What is it about?" Now to me, my first question about a game is, "What is the game like?" Because, frankly, what it is about doesn't interest me as much as how the game plays. This is not to say that theme is totally unnecessary. But first things first. This is not the case with the rest of the world. If you say, "The game is about the Lord of the Rings", they will say, "Really? It sounds like fun." It does? Just because it is "about" the Lord of the Rings?

Yes, that is what it is all about. To me, 150 games of Sorry with different themes is 150 games of Sorry. It plays the same. It's still dumb. Not so to the rest of the world. These citizens can actually rank, in order, which games of Sorry they like based on the theme of the game. "I love Lord of the Rings Sorry. I would never play Powerpuff Girls Sorry." and so on.

In researching my Parlor Game post, I noticed that there were dozens of games that had essentially the same mechanic but had different themes. For instance, a game of additive remembrance, such as "The Minister's Cat" is a different game from "I went on a Picnic". The same is true for a variety of Simon Says games. The same game. Different theme. Yet I'm sure that you could have found hundreds of people who would tell you that they loved one of them and hated the other.

This post from Creating Passionate Users tells us why. In summary: when you learn about a niche culture, you perceive the objects within that culture differently. The movie Sideways demonstrated this within the wine culture; the main character can't stand a type of wine that most people would find pleasant and enjoyable. The article goes on to say that to sell these types of objects, you need to educate the consumer.

There is always a trade-off. When you know nothing about art, you might like 90% of all art. When you know a lot about art, you may like 20% of all art. Net loss: the enjoyment for 70% of all art. Net gain: a deeper enjoyment of the 20% you now like. And, a realization that the 20% you like is still so big a field that you won't exhaust it during your life. So who has time for that other 80%, anyway? It also means that you now have to be passionate about finding that 20% you enjoy, because it isn't going to be available at Walmarts.

If you are a passionate gamer, you should be able to understand that people who are not passionate about gaming have no more clue as to why you would like a deep game than you have a clue why someone would like ... just pick anything about which someone else is passionate but in which you're not interested.

As long as BGG remains a gamer's site, the best games for passionate gamers will always be on the top of BGG: games with fine tuned mechanics, beautiful components, complex game systems; these games are generally ugly and not fun for average citizens. The games don't associate with any of their favorite media stars, they have complicated rules, they take a long time to play, they are hard to play. The top games on Amazon and so forth are always going to be Lord of the Rings Monopoly, Bratz Sorry, and Flintstones Chutes and Ladders.

Fine gaming is a learned taste. We are the spokesmen and women for this game experience. Accept this. Do it in style.

Yehuda

Monday, January 02, 2006

GAME STORE CONFIDENTIAL ~ Dumb Gamers

For the first time in over 23 years I don’t have my game store weighing on my mind. It’s been a constant background noise in my addled brain since November of 1982. And now it’s gone. Done. Finito. No mas.

Just the final boxes of product and eBay fodder to box up and store, move the extra displays into a storage unit, clean up a few odds and ends and it will wink out of existence… remaining just as a fading memory in the gray matter of several thousand gamers.


A very small portion of what I'll be unloading on eBay over the next several months

A number of people on BGG have asked me to relate some of the more humorous occurrences that have occurred in my years of game store ownership. The thinking is, I suppose, that Game Geeks are somehow more prone to doing dumb stuff than normals are. I’m not sure that’s true. Human nature is such that dumb stuff - which I suppose means funny stuff – is a common trait for gamers and non-gamers alike. In addition to which, most of what I consider “dumb” is shake-your-head-in-amazement stuff and not always funny in the slapstick comedy sense.

For example; I had this guy working for me back in the 90’s. Nice guy. Young and mixed up with your typical Psycho-Bitch from Hell D&D Geekette. She was as batty and as wicked as they come. She popped two kids out from him, over the course of several years and two or three break-ups and restarts of the relationship. During the 18 months or so he worked for me I noticed he was always broke, always wanting an advance and very sensitive to his money situation. Almost as much as he was continually upset that she kept sleeping with different people from the various D&D groups they played in.

You don’t want to get me started on D&D and Satan… or D&D as a corrosive element in modern youth… or D&D as an addictive force that generates slack-jawed losers who, as they age, become increasingly inept at social activities that don’t focus on hit points, class, alignment or leveling up.

Back when I used to sell street bikes for a living, during the very early days of my game store, I was asked by a friend who hated motorcycles if I had any ethical considerations about selling 100 horsepower bikes to 19 year old kids suffering from adrenaline overload. All I could say was, “Hey! I own a game store. I sell D&D. If I’m burning in hell someday it isn’t going to be because of a biker kid who overcooks it into a corner and gets introduced to a logging truck. It’ll be because despite what TSR and industry PR-Schmoes say, D&D really is a force of evil on the planet.”

Anyway, back to the psycho-bitch and the guy with money issues. Anyone who has run a business that involves a till probably understands that by keeping this guy on at the store I was ignoring several seriously red flags. Money problems? Energy and life-sucking female problems? Two kids? Her cheating heart? The smart move would have been to part company with him. Send him down the road.

But instead I counseled him. He’d buy a sandwich almost every day from the deli at the corner. Five or six bucks a pop. So one day I said, “Did it ever occur to you that you’re spending close to $150 per month on lunch? You could go to the grocery store, pack three sandwiches a day for lunch and still come out $100 ahead at the end of the month.” He’d always reply that he didn’t have time, the car was broke, the kids were sick, the psycho-bitch was gone all night, or some other reason. No matter how I tried to help, he gave me similar responses.

Along comes January and I’m doing the final numbers for the year that just ended. Something didn’t add up. I got with my dad and pointed out that we really ought to have several thousand more in the bank than was there. So my dad and me, we start going back through sales records for the year, tallying the daily totals with the product record sheets we kept. Starting in the previous spring, this guy’s daily numbers were almost always less than the product sheets revealed were sold. Yet every other person who worked the counter had product sheets that correctly reconciled with the sales receipt packets.

When I had all the incriminating data, I sat him down, told him I figured he had nipped me for somewhere around $6,000 or so and asked what he wanted to do about it. He denied it… of course. I also pointed out several items that he had specifically asked me to order for him that were on invoices yet the products themselves were absent from the store. And there was no record of him having bought them at his discount, or at all. He denied it. Even after I showed him the math, of his own sales records and sheets, he denied it. So I asked him on what basis he was denying it? He said, “I’m really bad at math.”

I couldn’t bring myself to call the cops. I didn’t want the hassle, which was one reason. The other was the guy had two kids. Maybe this would be a wake-up call. It’s not like having him locked up would ever really put the $6,000 back in my pocket where it belonged. My reasoning was the kids would be better off with a dad who was a thief buying diapers than with no dad around at all.

And off he went.

About 6 months later I get a call at home. It’s the thief. I was a bit dumbfounded and so I asked him why the hell he was calling me. “Well, I’m applying for a job at Toys R Us and I need a recent work reference.”

“You’re asking me to give you a reference for a job?”

“Yes.”

“Even after I fired you for stealing my money?”

“Errr… well, I thought we’d taken care of that.”

“You mean the part about you being bad at math?”

“Yes.”

All I could do at that point was laugh, a real belly laugh too, not some weak chuckle. It just struck me as so nuts, steal a guy’s money, deny it, and then ask for a work reference. After wiping the tears of hilarity from my face I suggested that he never, ever, under any circumstance, call me, visit with me or even be in the same general location as me.

What got me thinking about this guy was the fact that we’ve been playing a lot of Bang! lately. And every time I pull my copy of Bang! and Dodge City out it reminds me that the only documented case I have of actual board game theft from my store was that about 18 months ago somebody stole my copies of both games. Well-worn copies I might add. Not that two $10 games being nicked is major, but my copy of the hard-to-find High Noon subset was in the box as well. That pisses me off.



If you happen to see a worn and dirty copy of this along with the two expansions, it's mine!

Okay, I do recall one more board game theft. This slimy weasel that used to come in, Jake is his name, most certainly lifted a couple of expansions for Supremacy from me some years back. He denies it, of course. But it is a well-known fact in this part of Idaho that the only person who ever actively tried to get a Supremacy night going was Jake. He was also perpetually broke or in jail for everything ranging from passing bad checks to soliciting internet sex from minors.

Would it matter if I mentioned Jake’s real first love is D&D?

Nah, it means nothing… well, except to me perhaps.

One evening, a couple of years ago, we assembled our usual Thursday night board game session at the store and it was decided that we’d play Runebound. One of the people there is a long time buddy of mine who is not so much a gamer as he is a world-class miniature painter. And I mean that sincerely. Mike is one of the best painters ever. He is also a sergeant in the Sheriff’s Department… in charge of the County Jail, home to over a thousand people like Jake. In fact, a frequent stopover for Jake. Who, I might add, came rushing into the store as we were pulling Runebound out and preparing to play. He demanded to be let into the game so I said okay.

Eventually Jake looked closely at the other 5 players and his eyes got really, really round and buggy when he saw Mike. I guess he didn’t recognize him at first, which isn’t surprising when the only previous time you met someone they were hand-cuffing you, patting you down or standing there with their arms crossed while some FNG at the jail snaps on the surgical gloves and preps you for a cavity check.

Once he realized that Mike wasn’t going to acknowledge their “real life connection”, Jake started getting cocky. In that jailhouse sense. Talking smack, chattering about being in the lead, having all the cool stuff, being the Runebound King and just in general making an ass out of himself. He was so assured of his victory – as he had the teleporting mirror – that he even began to carefully taunt Mike, who smiled benignly and ignored the verbal jabs.

Finally, Jake declared that nobody else could possibly beat him as he had the right henchmen and equipment to take on the Big Bad Guy. When it was Mike’s next turn, he flipped his encounter card, got the Big Bad Guy and trounced him completely in two combat rounds. Game over.

I haven’t seen Jake since then. He never came back in the store. Mike mentioned to me a couple of times that Jake still visits him frequently though.

An astounding number of local D&D Geeks reside with these fine people

_________________________________________________________________


The sheer amount of games I’ve played in the last two weeks probably exceeds any three month total in my entire life. Everything from the aforementioned Bang! to For Sale to Oasis to Liar’s Dice to Knizia’s Formula Motor Racing. And tonight, thanks to Shannon Appelcline and his totally superb articles on this blog, I taught three of my frequent gamer buds how to play Eurorails. Shannon’s articles are among the best on the internet and every time he delves into a game system it makes me hunger to play it… well, not every time, but every time he covers something I already know I like.



This is the shiny new version of Mayfair's excellent game. Mine looks like something from the 1950's, a longish box with corporate gray and faded pastels.

One thing about the crayon railroad games, set aside an extra hour when you teach it and only play to $150 million. Otherwise you’ll run the risk of losing the newbie forever. My new players tonight loved it. So much so that they asked me if I had any of the other sets. Gotcha!!!!

Another landmark event occurred in my gaming life on New Year’s Eve. I was visiting BGG for a while before going out to the local dive bar for a beer and I got drawn in again to the reviews of Friedrich. Mike Siggins even likes this game and from what I can tell, the old Sumo doesn’t particularly like games to begin with. So that’s a pretty high recommendation. With that in my mind, I went to Bowen Simmons’s website and bought the damned thing.

What is this world coming to? I buy my very first game ever online, and I pay full retail for the damned thing?

Happy New Year!!!!!

Sunday, January 01, 2006

Happy New Year's Day!

Happy New Year!
Well, here we have a brand spanking "New Year" upon US, and just what shall we expect from this upcoming occurance? Oh sure, we ought to 'reflect' or genuflect, and pay our 'tribute' to what already had been 'done' during the previous year's course of events. Much of that was of the 'Good', while there were other instances of which are just BAD, and yet some make you just go ''hmmm...'' Today is also a 'Day' of recuperation for many who are probably STILL feeling the 'effects' from last night! So I will admonish whomever to GET your 'nominations' IN for the "B.G.I.A." 'Awards' and let others KNOW about some little 'known' site that they ought to be drawing their attentions towards. Yes, I'm also wracking my 'brain' for these as well, and shall be bringing along some contenders of my OWN 'makings' for this too. There's also things going ON right NOW as I'm typing this UP and of which many ought to check into when they can.

One of these 'items' happens to involve an ole "shout OUT about" fellow 'blog`r' by the name of "Scott Nicholson" who has gone ahead and created his "VLOG"-(for 'Video-Blog') with a 'site' dedicated JUST for this! Here's the LINK for it then:
"Board Games with Scott"
BoardGamesWithScott

As you'll no doubt discover, then HE is making Great Strides in promoting "Better Gaming through MEDIA exposure", just as long as not TOO 'much' is shown off and this WILL 'include' the likes of "Strip Twister" I might heartily 'add'! It wouldn't surprise 'moi' in the least that others would go so far and we've got an 'award' JUST for such folks here:

NO, I'm not inferring that ole "Scott" is SUCH, you "numb-half-wits", while sure, there will be plenty of others that ARE, and I'll 'admit' as much myself! This will bring up many "not-as-familiar" types of 'issues' that people will have to discuss further and relate either FOR or NOT about those as these 'crop up'. I shall make *note* of the 'fact' that even "I" have attempted to bring the gaming 'phenom' to the small-screen through the "Public Access" Channels WAY back in the 'day' of the early 1990s. But once I'd left the excellent facilities of the SEATTLE area and settled within the barren 'media-scape' of where I'm at NOW, then this 'experience' was stunted further until the present. I've got some 'stuff' laying about that could be cobbled together for something or another in this regard. With the advances already made since those 'beginnings'- for myself at least-then I fully expect to SEE and 'create' yet others as well.

One prime example, would be for folks who aren't able to get IN as much 'gaming' as they'd like due to some 'factor' or another during their 'normal' daytime routines, and this is "Dream Gaming"! Yep, that's right, 'game' while YOU are asleep! That'll involve some working upon to get the kinks out, since some will resist the temptation of it-and it's "futile" in case you're wondering. Another method could involve "Stasis Gaming" where TIME is made to 'halt' while a 'game' commences within such. Then, when the 'players' re-emerge, they can pick up where their 'lives' had been placed on "hold" before, without skipping a beat to THAT! I can just SEE them "LARP" folks doing such while many will probably 'disappear' entirely into the 'lore' of their "gaming archives". They're SUCH "Freaks"! ya kno? Still, once a "wormhole" or the like is found out and put into 'uses', then there'll definitely become fresh, fertile 'grounds' for gaining "other worldly" gaming partners, as hopefully those 'peoples' will enjoy THIS "pasttime" instead of "How to 'SERVE' Man" recipe booklets. It sort of makes you wonder about whether or not the good ole "Dr Who" fellow does any kind of 'gamings'?