|
Post by ashaman771 on Feb 16, 2010 17:55:28 GMT -5
Impromptu gaming event Sat Feb 20th
Event will run from 12:00PM to 5:30 or so PM.
It will be a Hugin and Munin: 1664 Tecumseh Rd. E. Windsor, Ontario, N8W 1C5 Telephone Number: 519 974 7898
Thought I would post an impormptu gaming event!
I will bring with me StarCraft and Dominion Seaside
or
bring a game you want to play!
See you there!
|
|
|
Post by wiltchamberlain on Feb 16, 2010 23:15:25 GMT -5
I'm going to try to come to this but it might be for a half day again.
EDIT: I will be there, and I can stay all day. WOOOOOO!!!!!
Musings on what I might bring: Small World (with expansions) Galaxy Trucker (with expansion) Candy Land Dog-opoly
Hehe.
-Jamie
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Feb 21, 2010 0:11:08 GMT -5
Games of Smallworld, Starcraft (two tables worth) and Tigris and Euphrates played. Good time had by all.
Note to self: make sure the damn humans don't control two whole planets. Both separate games were won by the same faction the same way.
WGR boardgame account updated, see our recent games at the top of the page - click for info from Boardgamegeek.
|
|
|
Post by wiltchamberlain on Feb 21, 2010 0:48:00 GMT -5
Actually in our game that human faction (2 whole planets) didn't win. The other human faction (control 6 crystal/gas areas) won on the tie break. But we both got our individual objective at the same time.
Upon perusing the rulebook when I got home we did a TON of things wrong, and not just a little bit wrong, horribly game-breaking-ly wrong.
I found that even though the game mechanics is skewed to the attacker, we were all turtling up pretty heavily. Also at game end there wasn't much difference from where we started. As it was it wasn't a game I'd ever want to play again but I'd give it another try due to all the mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Feb 21, 2010 1:04:43 GMT -5
Sorry I thought for sure the guy with the two full planets one. I thought it was interesting that both games ended on a turn where one of two players could have won. Means that it's a close game for at least some of the players. Our third player just took too long to move. He was just building up his forces and never really got to mobilize them.
Personally I'm itching to play again as we just got all the rules down and a second game would play better and faster. Not going to have any time do play again any time soon though as I'm on Afternoons next week.
Don't think we played anything wrong at our table. What types of things did you guys mess up?
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Feb 21, 2010 9:01:40 GMT -5
Actually in our game that human faction (2 whole planets) didn't win. The other human faction (control 6 crystal/gas areas) won on the tie break. But we both got our individual objective at the same time. Upon perusing the rulebook when I got home we did a TON of things wrong, and not just a little bit wrong, horribly game-breaking-ly wrong. I found that even though the game mechanics is skewed to the attacker, we were all turtling up pretty heavily. Also at game end there wasn't much difference from where we started. As it was it wasn't a game I'd ever want to play again but I'd give it another try due to all the mistakes. What were we doing wrong?
|
|
|
Post by wiltchamberlain on Feb 21, 2010 23:02:12 GMT -5
The biggest thing we did wrong was that we were using the mobilize action to start multiple fights. You can actually only move to ONE area and pick a fight. This means that at most you could only lose one area at a time. The way we were playing I lost 2 in one attack and Charles lost 4 areas in one attack. I think this might have lead to some of the hesitation on attacking. You try to do anything and someone backdoors you taking your whole planet.
Other things are smaller. Workers die if they are harvesting an area that gets attacked. Each faction can only have one base on a planet (we played only one faction can have a base, but they could have multiple bases) This could have the effect of rendering a planet unattackable it you have the air defense upgrade and a base on each planet... that never came up but I'd thought about doing it. Only one assist card per skirmish card (we did multiple). Discard any unplayed event cards each round (I had about 7 at the end of the game that I'd built up). Ownership of empty spaces is governed by who has a base there, not who last had guys there. (Unless multiple people have bases on that planet, which we couldn't do due to a mistake on a rule above.) You can play a combat card from the top of your deck blind into a skirmish if you don't have any cards you think might win and/or don't want to waste. Zerg starting build limit is still 2 (not 3) and they get higher build limit by building new building types. Build order only lets you build one building/module per build order.
There may have been other things, but that is all I can remember off the top of my head. The multiple attack thing I think was the biggest, and all the others add up to a pretty different game. There are a lot of rules in FFGs so things are bound to get missed.
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Feb 21, 2010 23:28:03 GMT -5
The biggest thing we did wrong was that we were using the mobilize action to start multiple fights. You can actually only move to ONE area and pick a fight. This means that at most you could only lose one area at a time. The way we were playing I lost 2 in one attack and Charles lost 4 areas in one attack. I think this might have lead to some of the hesitation on attacking. You try to do anything and someone backdoors you taking your whole planet. Other things are smaller. Workers die if they are harvesting an area that gets attacked. Each faction can only have one base on a planet (we played only one faction can have a base, but they could have multiple bases) This could have the effect of rendering a planet unattackable it you have the air defense upgrade and a base on each planet... that never came up but I'd thought about doing it. Only one assist card per skirmish card (we did multiple). Discard any unplayed event cards each round (I had about 7 at the end of the game that I'd built up). Ownership of empty spaces is governed by who has a base there, not who last had guys there. (Unless multiple people have bases on that planet, which we couldn't do due to a mistake on a rule above.) You can play a combat card from the top of your deck blind into a skirmish if you don't have any cards you think might win and/or don't want to waste. Zerg starting build limit is still 2 (not 3) and they get higher build limit by building new building types. Build order only lets you build one building/module per build order. There may have been other things, but that is all I can remember off the top of my head. The multiple attack thing I think was the biggest, and all the others add up to a pretty different game. There are a lot of rules in FFGs so things are bound to get missed. I agree, the attacking an area on a planet vs attacking a whole planet, pretty huge. Would seem like a different game almost, probably a bit more deliberate attacking sections of a planet instead of a whole planet. Unless you were bill, and didn't attack or get attacked! LOL!
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Feb 22, 2010 0:02:37 GMT -5
Wow that is a lot of different things missed. Based on this though it looks like we played everything correctly at table two. So you never had a planet owned by more then one person due to this, which would definately give an advantage to the Humans. In our game almost by turn two The Protos and Humans were sharing a 4 sector planet with bases for both players present. Actually that's what made the game as close as it was. Plus in two instances areas without bases were attacked just to hamper resource production and destroy workers (I lost 4 workers through the game due to loosing sectors to other players). The event card thing is huge as well. The event cards can make or break a player. I find them a great balancing influence letting an underdog get away with something you would never expect. I would have been easily defeated if I didn't get an event that let me swap the worm holes, and Alex was owning in the event phase due to being able to play two at once. One assist per skirmish could be pretty big. It definitely makes the tech cards worth a lot more. Personally I found the techs to be less then useful as most were for the bigger units in the game and we never got that far. I think on a second run though the game would go longer as we would be more cautious of other players victory conditions. Also going along with this, we were following the one upgrade/module rule so none of us had any level III bases by the end. Chris had the most as he spent more resources on them (as he was just watching Alex and I battle it out for most of the game). I definitely suggest trying the game again Jamie. I can near assure you that the normal version of Starcraft is better then your Starcraft Extreme!!! game One thing: "Ownership of empty spaces is governed by who has a base there, not who last had guys there." I'm pretty sure ownership goes to the player who has a base there while empty. If in a later turn someone is able to have a unit there during the regrouping phase they would force the player to loose the resource card. If the occupying unit also had a base on the planet they would not only cause the player to loose the resource card, they would gain it themselves. Just double checked this in the rules... and that is how it plays. "The area corresponding to each Resource card must not contain an enemy unit or base. If it does, the player loses the Resource card for that area." Also: "A player controls an area if he has at least one unit or base in the area, and there are no enemy units or bases in the area." Reading the errata though, I found out that I actually won the game. Which is something I thought at the time but couldn't figure out. I remember saying that you always check for point victory before special victory, but when I checked the reference page on the back of the book it said the opposite. Here's the eratta: "Back Page Reference The steps of the regrouping phase are listed incorrectly on the back of the rulebook. The steps are as follows (also listed correctly in the rulebook on pages 15–16): 1. Destroy Bases and Transports 2. Lose Resource Cards 3. Gain Resource Cards 4. Retrieve Workers 5. Gain Conquest Points 6. Check for Normal Victory 7. Check for Special Victory 8. Play Event Cards 9. Discard Combat Cards 10. Pass the First Player Token" One thing we did play wrong is this, though I don't think it affected our game: Q: If there is only one player with a base on a planet, does he automatically receive all conquest points on the planet during the regrouping phase? A: Not necessarily. A player can only acquire conquest points from an area that he controls.
|
|
|
Post by wiltchamberlain on Feb 22, 2010 9:27:45 GMT -5
Hmmm. With that victory condition check I would have won on points then too before the special condition tie breaker, as I would have ended the game with 16 points.
"One thing: "Ownership of empty spaces is governed by who has a base there, not who last had guys there."
I'm pretty sure ownership goes to the player who has a base there while empty. If in a later turn someone is able to have a unit there during the regrouping phase they would force the player to loose the resource card. If the occupying unit also had a base on the planet they would not only cause the player to loose the resource card, they would gain it themselves."
This is pretty much what I meant. We had an instance when Charles attacked me and took a reasource card from me, then he left the region completely. He retained the card even though I had a base on the planet and he had no presence in the area anymore. I should have gotten it back because I had a base on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Feb 22, 2010 14:05:43 GMT -5
Besides you getting them back, Charles should have never gotten them in the first place. You would have lost them due to enemy units being in the region, but Charles would not have gotten them as he didn't have a base on the planet. When he later left the area you would have gotten them back the turn they were empty during the regrouping phase. I still suggest a Do-Over. Would love to do it sometime this week but I highly doubt people want to get together to game at Midnight
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Feb 22, 2010 17:22:26 GMT -5
StarCraft Extreme! LOL! I'd like to play a do over, for sure. So would bill, no doubt. But I wan't to play games other people bring at our impromptu event usually, that way people feel like their favs are getting played as well. Don't want to be the 'that guy always brings starcraft' guy. By that time I'll have forgotten the rules, and play with a whole set of other things wrong!!
|
|
|
Post by oddzilla on Feb 22, 2010 17:36:19 GMT -5
I would! Any time.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Feb 23, 2010 2:11:03 GMT -5
Meh, nothing wrong with playing the same game a couple times in a row, especially if you pre-plan to play it. I won't be making it out this weekend if there is a gathering as I'll either be taking care of a new edition or working. The Sat. after I really expect to be taking care of a new baby. oddzilla if we can get one more I could do a Midnight session, though really I could be not free any day now. Seems it's about time.
|
|
|
Post by knightsky on Feb 26, 2010 20:58:09 GMT -5
Missed out again.
These damn PhDs take so much time.
But the next one. I'll be there.
|
|
|
Post by eldritch on Feb 28, 2010 23:15:33 GMT -5
I would be keen on more StarCraft, for sure. I don't know what I think of it, but I'm interested in getting a chance to make a better informed judgement. ...So, keep bringing it to impromptu events! I like trying new games.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Mar 1, 2010 13:07:02 GMT -5
I think Starcraft is one of those games that's way better the 5th time then the first. I think that would need to be 5 games playing the same race as well. Besides getting the rules right I think learning your tech deck and combat deck along with the stregths and weaknesses of your units would make a big difference in the strategy you play by. Almost as important would be learning the other races. I found that I had no idea what was more valuable to me each turn. Should I be upgrading my buildings, building more of the units I can, buying new technologies. Even when buying techs I had no clue what was more useful, something like detecting cloaking or +1 health. I think multiple plays would have given me these and more answers. Mark, is there an event going to be set up for this coming Saturday? I may be able to get out of the house for an hour or two and would love to escape for a bit
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Mar 1, 2010 17:42:41 GMT -5
I think Starcraft is one of those games that's way better the 5th time then the first. I think that would need to be 5 games playing the same race as well. Besides getting the rules right I think learning your tech deck and combat deck along with the stregths and weaknesses of your units would make a big difference in the strategy you play by. Almost as important would be learning the other races. I found that I had no idea what was more valuable to me each turn. Should I be upgrading my buildings, building more of the units I can, buying new technologies. Even when buying techs I had no clue what was more useful, something like detecting cloaking or +1 health. I think multiple plays would have given me these and more answers. Mark, is there an event going to be set up for this coming Saturday? I may be able to get out of the house for an hour or two and would love to escape for a bit I was planning on setting one up, but need to give Ian a call to make sure the tables are available. If so, I know myself and bill are up for starcraft, or whatever is brought.
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Mar 2, 2010 15:13:52 GMT -5
By the events at Hugin and Munin, tables will not be free for sat gaming at all in March. There's a magic day, a dnd day, and in between are the RPGA events.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Mar 2, 2010 16:57:29 GMT -5
You could always try to set something up at the KofC. I think their number is in one of the earlier posts. Just call and ask if you could reserve the big tables in the back for boardgaming and note it's the usual group.
|
|
|
Post by ashaman771 on Mar 2, 2010 18:11:32 GMT -5
You could always try to set something up at the KofC. I think their number is in one of the earlier posts. Just call and ask if you could reserve the big tables in the back for boardgaming and note it's the usual group. Called and booked, no probs. I'll post an event.
|
|
|
Post by Gilvan Blight on Mar 3, 2010 0:38:44 GMT -5
If you are going to keep doing KofC events I suggest booking two weeks ahead of time. I know at least two couples that can only make it out with advance notice due to having to get a Sitter. We usually get better crowds with a couple weeks notice as well as people can plan better.
|
|
|
Post by sentinel on Mar 3, 2010 10:29:07 GMT -5
two weeks or more please.
|
|