Collectibles on your game table

I am apparently one of a small group of people in this world who can play a collectible game without getting sucked in. I also have a tendency to be able to wander away from the games and then wander back. This is fine for me, but bad for getting a collectible/constructible game on the table, since my fickle nature has caused me to leave behind groups of players because I became less interested in the game (the only game) they played. I've wandered into and out of Magic: The Gathering multiple times since it's launch, and I still play it with my dad whenever I see him¹.

I've played most of the good collectible games² over the years, either when the came out, or once they were cheap. Here's some mini-reviews on some of my favorites, some of which are odd. I'd love to play these games more often, but the learning curve is high for almost all of them, so even keeping a set of playable decks around doesn't help get them on the table - you really need to commit to playing one game several times with the same group.

It should be noted that with a few exceptions collectible games require player elimination for victory, or encourage player elimination, so... if you didn't know, you've been warned.

Magic: Let's start with the original.
Good Stuff: Huge base of art and styles of play along with easy core concepts so you can get playing quickly. If you want to dabble, this is the game to do it with, since you can have a fun game after a 5-10 minute teaching session. Sadly since the game is older the newer cards require more attention to the rules, so the ease of the core concepts gets hidden by the newer complexities - but at heart it's a very easy game to play.
Bad Stuff: Two player. Multiplayer works okay, but it can bog down into the same traps that occur in multiplayer wargames - "Let's you and him fight so that I win". There's also some attitude in the greater tournament scene, but don't let that worry you. Just play with friends.

Over The Edge: Second/Third game I bought into.
Good Stuff: Quirky. Lots of fun theme³, alternate win conditions and some positional tactics. It's not just about attacking the other players (which is rare), so defensive tactics are possible. Also, dirt cheap these days.
Bad Stuff: Basically just a heavily modified Magic, it's a bit better for multiple players, but a bit more complex. The quirky art and theme isn't for everyone.

Jyhad/Vampire:Jyhad on release, so that's how I always think of it.
Good Stuff: Tied for best multi-player game. This one is all about negotiations and alliances, with a strong set of rules governing when and who you can hassle. A good feeling of running a family of characters (vampires) that then take actions on your behalf. Great costing mechanic that makes you more vulnerable to loss the more resources you put in play. Voting, attacking, etc.
Bad Stuff: Long. Lots of deals, promises and waiting for the most opportune moment (I love it, you may hate it). Very Very hard to teach, with lots of rules and sub-games within the game. I can't comment on the newer sets. At its best with four players.

Shadowfist:
Good Stuff: Other half of the multi-player tie. Theming is strong⁴, and winning doesn't require player elimination. As a second generation game⁵, it pulls mechanics from a bunch of sources, resulting in a more complex feeling than Magic. Less rules than Vampire though.
Bad Stuff: Lots of blowing stuff up. Oh wait, that's a good thing. Still fairly complex to teach, and can run a bit long. Not so great with two.

NetRunner:
Good Stuff: Very nifty two player. Feels more unlike other CCGs than most, and has asymmetrical play. Strong fan base among boardgamers.
Bad Stuff: Good Deckbuilding is really hard. It's still not easy to teach and can be very intimidating due to the asymmetrical play. Hard to find.

Guardians
Good Stuff: Funny. Tactical Board game style movement coupled with some of the best graphic design/art in the genre (That's design from a art perspective, not usability).
Bad Stuff: Light. Hard to find. Very odd.

Deadlands
Good Stuff: Great combat mechanics that use the playing card suit/rank that is built into each card. Good location/character based play that supports the theme (Weird West/Horror). Good for multi-player.
Bad Stuff: A bit overly complex, especially as expansions were added.

Mythos
Good Stuff: Different. More storytelling than any other collectible, though you still have to send monsters to the other players. Nicely done, and works well with a wide range of number of players. I'm surprised that more eurogamers don't try this game - it's got the blend of story/game that seems to appeal to many.
Bad Stuff: Specificity on the cards is a bit much, making building decks frustrating, if not difficult. There are certainly some solitaire elements to the game that don't always mesh well with the aggressive elements. And you have to like stories and Lovecraft.

As you can see, in general the basic drawback to most collectibles as games is that they are complex. Sometimes in the basic rules, always in the infinite combinations of cards.

I've mostly listed older games. I pay attention to the new games, but none have really grabbed me (and many of the recent ones have been launched on the basis of their tournament support). There's a couple games I left out of the list that deserve some note - Legend of the Five Rings, Game of Thrones, Pokemon - but they never really grabbed me (though I played L5R with a group for over a year)

Cheers.

--

¹He got my cards the first time I wandered away from the game, and proceeded to grow them into a huge collection. He started me on Avalon Hill/SPI, and D&D. I repaid him in kind by introducing him to Magic.

² Which were of course almost all cards until the appearance of pre-painted miniatures, which I've dabbled in, but since the prepainted games were basically just applying the concept of collectibility to an existing game genre, I was less excited.

³Based on an RPG called On the Edge about tiny Mediterranean island with about 60 different world-domination conspiracies vying for control. An RPG that was light years ahead of it's time.

⁴ Lots of conspiracies (again) vying for control over the world (again) by using time travel. Cyber-Monkeys with guns. Kung Fu. Think Big Trouble in little China squared.

⁵I'm generous with my CCG generations, using them to categorize games. In general 1st gen are the games from 1993-1995, while 2nd gen are from 1995-crash 1. Third gen games are clumped around the rise of Pokemon/Yu-gi-oh and stretch into modern times. I haven't decided if the games of the past 2-3 years are sufficiently different from the poke-era games to merit calling them 4th gen. In short: 1st Gen - Magic and games that imitate it directly. 2nd Gen - More complex CCGs, with more rules and targeting a 20+ gamer demographic. 3rd Gen - Simpler CCGs, using licenses and anime art to target a younger demographic. 4th Gen - ??? Some weird blend of the prior generations - I haven't really found a common trend that differs too much from early games. Perhaps the 4th gen is the retro gen.

San Juan? - No Thanks!

I had the pleasure of spending a good portion of the past week, hanging out with old college buddies in sunny Puerto Rico. Not one to miss a gaming opportunity, I brought along a few games to show off.

San Juan – How could I pass this one up? Puerto Rico is too big to bring on a plane, and would have been a bit much to spring on my non-gaming friends.

No Thanks – This is my go-to game for non-gamers, its small size makes it nice and portable.

Bang! - I brought Bang! and its expansion, Dodge City as I thought the theme would work well with our group of five.


In the end, No Thanks was the big winner, being played at least seven or more times, stirring up much discussion. We got in one play of San Juan which went over “OK”, and Bang! never made it to the table.

I’ll start with San Juan, as I have less to say about it. While I find it a fun little game, I think it doesn’t do the great game of Puerto Rico justice. There is still a significant luck of the draw on how the cards are distributed. While an experienced player can sometimes overcome it, it is harder for newer players to know how to compensate. For example, I had no production buildings in hand, even after choosing the councilor phase twice (well the second time I got a second indigo plant). However, I did manage to get the aqueduct and market stall early in the game so was able to eventually sell both indigo plants on a regular basis. I find the aqueduct and market cards to be far too powerful. Players that get both, can always earn two good and sell them both, without having to even choose either role. This adds up over the course of the game, making it difficult for any player who does not have one. This is probably mitigated in a two player game, as more cards are available, but in a four player game one player is guaranteed to not have each card. In our game, I started behind due to a lack of production buildings but was able to catch up in the late game. One of the biggest surprises of the game for me was that the only other gamer present often hit minor bouts of analysis paralysis. I think it may have been BECAUSE he had played Puerto Rico before, and he was reading more into San Juan than was actually there. I realized after I had won, I perhaps should have tried to play so as to give someone else the win (and increase the chance it would be played again) but I rarely see these guys so it probably doesn’t matter in the long run.

No Thanks!, however, was fairly successful. After a minor amount of foot-dragging everyone started playing and caught on quick. It is always interesting to watch people learn the game and develop strategies for playing. As all these players were college chums, they are very smart (I went to a nerd college) and were quickly analyzing the relevant aspects of the game to try to develop a winning strategy.

The development of play went through stages that I now consider quite common in people learning the game. Initially, the playing chips were undervalued and everyone tended to let the cards load up on chips. A twenty five card might get ten chips on it and still be considered nearly equivalent to a fifteen. After just a single play, everyone saw the value of chips and began to plan out their needs for the whole game. A significant portion of good-natured threats to screw each other over was also present, preventing anyone from running an unwanted card (to all but one player) too many times around the table. One player was fascinated by the value of chips and was trying to assign value to them, hoping to be able to assign an optimal expected value for a given situation. If chips have a certain value, then a chip/card combination could be set that would always be a good decision – similar to betting tables for Video Poker or Blackjack that show the optimal decision for each situation. As everyone soon learns, however, in No Thanks! the value of a chip fluctuates during a game. At the start of the game, they are more valuable, as they can prevent one from taking a bad card later. At the end of the game, they simply have the negative one point value and that’s it. If nothing else, I was surprised at how quickly everyone developed from beginning players to very good strategists. What typically takes many plays to develop was found and adopted within just a few. By the end of the first night, everyone was balancing card and chip values fairly well, and the cards were almost always picked up off the table right when everyone else was “about to pick them up”. Even the endgame was vicious as we all kept track of our chip needs, devaluing them as the deck wore down. (One of the biggest faults I see in somewhat experienced players is how they fail to devalue chips in the last few rounds. Putting a chip on a 5 card is a totally valid move if there aren’t many cards left in the deck.)

With everyone playing in such an efficient manner, I was once again struck by the elegance of the game mechanics. Sure, there is a huge amount of luck involved due to the 9 cards removed from the game, but there are also some very nice balancing mechanics to prevent one player’s strategy from dominating. One good strategy is to take a reasonably high card early, and then hope for more to come up in the sequence, sending them around each time they appear to glean even more chips from one’s opponents. However, this strategy is self-limiting as players will eventually run out of chips – you can’t milk a dry cow. This can be even more significant, if players are valuing the chips differently. If you have only a few chips, it may just be worth it to take a fairly high valued card to be back in chip-flush territory again. This can be even more worthwhile if by taking the card you break another player’s sequence. Thus, if there are a few chip-scarce players around, sending a sequence-joining card around the table can be a risky proposition. I even came across a new strategy to consider. While the idea of “not running out of chips” is fairly straightforward, I did observer the power of having a single chip left. If you have no chips, you have to take whatever comes up. Having even a single chip, can mean you cycle a bad card one more time around, making sure that you aren’t forced to take a card several times in a row. While it may be obvious to some, I realized that the difference between one chip and no chips is significant enough to modify some of my choices as I get close to running out of chips. Being the great universal game that it is, No Thanks played an even larger role in our evening relaxations… since it comes with a small baggie of chips we conveniently used them in several games of poker.

Board Game => Card Game

Some of the most popular strategy board games have been recreated into card games with little loss of popularity, fun or strategy. It’s amazing to me that someone has managed to take the best parts of the games and converted them into a portable, easy-to-set-up card game when the board and pieces seem so integral to the game.

Settlers of Catan, a game which so many gamers recall as their intro to Euro-games, has a modular board which would seem to be a major part of what makes the game and yet someone considered it a good choice to be made into a card game. It’s a 2-player game rather than 3-4 and maybe that’s why it works without a board. It lost some of the interaction between players but that has been replaced with variety in the building of your own personal province.

Puerto Rico, with its many chits and bits, wouldn’t seem a likely choice for a card game but San Juan has been well-received. It’s a lighter game since it’s introduced luck into the game with the card draw, but the character selection and building portion of the game are intact and hand-management has been added. Such ingenuity in converting it has got to be applauded and marveled at.

Tigris and Euphrates, a VERY popular game, would seem to rely on its board since placement of pieces is what the game is all about and yet it now has a child which you can take anywhere. From what I’ve read, it appears to parallel its parent very well although I doubt it will ever walk in his shoes.

Ra, one of the most lauded auction games, was re-themed and converted to a card game. O.k., that one didn’t go over so well with Ra fans mainly due to the absence of an equivalent to the disaster tiles but many still like it as a lighter version, especially for teaching to new players.

So, as a purely mental exercise, which of your favorite games would you like to see reborn in a smaller package—portable and easy to set up but without losing too much of what you love about it?

How about Torres? We could be rid of the tediousness of having to collect and stack our tower pieces for each round. Placement on the board and height to the board is where the game is but I’m sure some brilliant designer can figure a way to overcome that.

Through the Desert may suffer as a card game since it would lack those candy-like pastel camels but I’m sure the cards could have equally endearing drawings of pastel camels. And you could pop them right into a pocket and weave your way through a paper desert wherever you go.

Wouldn’t it be nice to play Tikal without having to sort and stack all those pieces? If someone could figure a way do it for Puerto Rico, why not Tikal?

In a couple of years, Caylus could be a contender. Once all the hubbub has died down and it’s settled into its appropriate ratings niche, it could be revived with a card game version.

Who knows but that a suggestion here may kick the turning wheels of inspiration in someone’s head into high gear and a wonderful new game will emerge.
~~~~~~~~~
Games

This week I got my copy of Commands & Colors: Ancients and spent about 5 hours putting the stickers on the pieces. That sounds like a long time when some other players have said it took them 2-3 hours but I was also watching CSI and Medium so my attention wasn’t solely on my task. That and I’m as picky as you get about placement.

One of the most obvious differences between Ancients and Memoir ’44 is that there are more types of units available, most with their own unique movement rates, strengths in combat, and special rules that apply. I haven’t played with the elephants yet but I’m looking forward to my first elephant rampage!

The next big addition is the difference between Ranged Combat units and Close Combat units which seems to this inexperienced wargamer to add a level of strategy which is missing in Memoir ’44. Some units cannot fire from a distance—they have to get in there and fight hand to hand—but they’re stronger in a battle (roll more dice) than the units that have the option of Ranged or Close Combat.

The drawback to Close Combat is another addition to Ancients. The defender now has the ability to return the attack under some circumstances. I think this is very cool since it removes a little of the bad luck if you can’t draw a card which lets you order that unit.

Ancients has also added Leaders and they aren’t just another block to move around, offering scant help on occasion. They give you an extra hit symbol when battling from their hex or an adjacent hex, let you ignore one retreat flag for their hex, and lets foot units make a Bonus Close Combat attack after advancing. Nice guys to have around and fairly hard to kill unless they’re alone.

I know some people are disappointed that the game didn’t come with miniatures but I like the blocks. They’re easier to move around in a group and the different sizes are useful for assessing the board at a glance. I also think it would be hard to tell the difference between the types of infantry and cavalry if it were done with miniatures whereas the green circles, blue triangles and red squares are very easy to display on the blocks. Besides, miniatures like the ones in Memoir have a tendency to come with strange quirks like the guns that shoot around corners and the infantrymen that are perpetually leaning into the wind.

I AM disappointed that the Light Infantry and the Auxilia units’ pictures are so hard to tell apart, especially for older eyes like mine, but that may get easier with more play. I’ve found that laying at least one block in the hex down makes it easier to see the difference between them, at least in the lighting that I play under.

This is one of those games that has invaded my thoughts long after I finished playing it and I can’t wait to play again. I was looking for a war game with a little more strategy and control than Memoir ’44 while not being overwhelming in the rules department and I think I’ve found it.
~~~~~~~~
Until next time, watch your flanks.

Mary

Deal 'Em

I love playing cards. One of my earliest memories is playing Rummy with men in my grandmother’s tavern—and sharing my Popsicles with her dog. Kids can get away with things that adults wouldn’t dream of.

Later I learned Euchre (I’m originally from Illinois) and Canasta (double deck with a widow hand). I haven’t played either of these games in a very long time and doubt I’d care to play Euchre now but I’d still be willing to play a no-holds-barred, vicious, teeth-baring game of Canasta.

After I married into the Air Force, I learned to play Pinochle (double deck, no passing). I was never really good at it since I am not a card-counter and am lucky to keep track of either trump OR aces; trying for both causes the blue screen of death in my brain. Sad, I know, but I always enjoyed myself.

As my kids got old enough to play cards, we found Wizard, which is a great trick-taking game that we all enjoyed. The luck in it lessens with each hand because each hand is dealt with 1 more card than the last. The addition of the Wizards and Jesters gives you a touch of control that is more fun than simply playing Oh Hell.

When my son, Chris, was in high school, Richard and I taught him and his friend, Eric, how to play Pinochle. Now what I need to know is how is it that 2 kids with no clue can come up with great hands time after time and beat the snot out of 2 veteran adults? They would bid something outrageous, not really understanding what they were doing, and manage to make the bid each time. It was really quite embarrassing. Still, we all had a good time and that’s what counts, and I’d do it again in a heartbeat.

When I found my way to the Internet, I found very nice free downloadable programs of card games from around the world at Thanos card games. Here I discovered Mizerka, King, Preference and Madrasso, among others. Of these, I taught my daughter and husband to play Mizerka since it’s for 3 players and it’s getting almost impossible for me to find 4 card players these days. This has some elements that were new to us so it stands out as a very good trick-taking game. Nastiness, tough decisions, and “oh, shit” moments included.

Then I found the Board Game Geek and lots of card games, some just variations of older games like the Mystery Rummy series or Corsari, which we like very much. Some are totally new ideas for us like Crazy Chicken (Drive), 6 Nimmt (Category 5) and Coloretto, which have all been hits with us. These are all lighter games that you can play with your children or with non-gamer friends and have a good time. I love Crazy Chicken, although I rarely win, and my husband is partial to Corsari, which he wins only occasionally. Why are we attracted to the very games that we don’t seem to have a knack for? That seems dumb to me but I still can’t fight the feeling.

Some are trick-taking games that I may get to play occasionally because they don’t require 4 players--David & Goliath and Sticheln—and require only basic knowledge of trick-taking games to have fun. Others are trick-taking games that I’ll be very lucky to get to play like Mu, and Victory and Honor because they require a higher degree of trick-taking experience but I’m happy to have them in my collection in the hopes that some day…ah, some day…

There’s also climbing card games where the “trick” keeps going around the table, getting stronger with each player, until everyone passes. The last player that played to the trick, wins it. Again, this was a totally new concept for us and Gang of Four became a favorite even with 3 players and a dummy hand. A couple nights ago we gave Frank’s Zoo an inaugural playing with 6 players and I can see this one getting played when we want something light and fun. It’s not as easy to look at your hand and form a plan until you’ve played enough to know what beats what in this strange hierarchy but that isn’t necessary if you’re looking for something fun.

These are just the games I own; there are many others, each a little different with its own twist on the rules. If you like card games, there’s something here for everyone. And give the dog a lick of your Popsicle; it won’t hurt him.
~~~~~~~~
Games

Ta-Yu
I finally got to try Ta-Yu as a partnership game. I and my son, Chris, teamed up against Richard and Chris’ girlfriend, Jessica. Chris had played before but Jessica was playing for the first time.

This is not a rowdy, quick game at any time; it’s a head-to-head competition and the play was appropriately slow and calculating. We were drawing our tiles ahead of our turn in order to have time to plan our move but there was still plenty of down time whenever the board took an unexpected turn.

Amidst all this silent pondering, we managed to get in a few chuckles and a good laugh or two. At one point I declared that a certain tile looks like boobies in a sports bra—well, it does! So during one of the long, indecisive pauses waiting for Chris to make a move, I asked him if he wanted my boobies. It’s a good thing no one was drinking anything at the time.

In the end, it was a very close game, the final score decided by the last tile played by Jessica who was sitting to my left. After much thinking and weighing of choices, she decided to block our access to a 2-point space but also gave us one connection. This turned out to be a very good move because Chris’s next play would have given us the two-pointer and a single connection. The final score was 40 (5 x 8) to 49 (7 x 7). If Jessica hadn’t blocked Chris, the score would have been 50-49. I consider that a very close game.
~~~~~~~~

Christmas Wish Lists

I see the Christmas Lists are starting at the Geek, and none too soon. As for myself, I don’t put games on my Wish List since I buy so many during the year. I usually find one or two to buy before Christmas, though, to have something new to play with friends and family during the holiday season. This year I’m thinking of either Apples to Apples or Squint—something fun for a bunch of people. My Wish List usually includes music CDs, DVDs, books, my favorite perfume and PS2 games. Yeah, I’m a PS2 junkie as well as a board game addict! “I Love Katamari” is my #1 choice this year, followed closely by the third Sly Cooper. Of course, if anyone insists on buying me a board game, I’ll graciously accept!
~~~~~~~~
Until next time, let your actions be controlled by knowledge.

Mary