Jump to content



Photo

Arkham Horror or Battlestar Galactica?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 pokemon41

pokemon41

    Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 17 January 2009 - 10:30 AM

Like in topic.

Next week i can buy one of those games. Would you kindly write positive and negative sides, and your opinions about both games?



#2 Argonel

Argonel

    Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 17 January 2009 - 10:48 AM

Both bgames are very good, but they depend a lot on the group of players to make them shine.  Arkham allows 1-8 players (9 with dunwich and kingsport expansions) while Battlestar is 3-6 players.  So if you have a very small or very large group of players Arkham is "better".  Also battlestar is a game all about suspicion and working against each other.  This can bother some players and turn them off the game.  Arkham is a teamwork game with all players contesting as a team against the board itself.  Without knowing who is playing I can't recommend one over the other.  I will definately endose that they are both very good games.



#3 bitva

bitva

    Member

  • Members
  • 236 posts

Posted 17 January 2009 - 10:08 PM

I definitely recommend Arkham Horror over Galactica. Galactica is the worst designer board game I've played to date, while Arkham is one of FFG's best releases. Although keep in mind Galactica is pretty popular so you shouldn't make a decision based solely on my opinion. Also note that I dislike sci-fi themes and never saw the show, but my main problem was gameplay, not flavor.

Arkham does have a large number of additional option available due to the amount of expansions it has.


Ignorance if futile. Resistance is bliss.


#4 kennetten

kennetten

    Member

  • Members
  • 61 posts

Posted 17 January 2009 - 10:19 PM

Although I actually haven`t played Galactica, I would still advocate Arkham for the simple fact that it`s cooperative. There aren` t many games like this on the market IMO. In addition, it`s very entertaining with lots of expansions when you need a little change. Definitely a favourite.



#5 spirit

spirit

    Member

  • Members
  • 416 posts

Posted 17 January 2009 - 10:55 PM

This being the Arkham horror forum you'll find that most of us who frequent this forum will advocate Arkham Horror without too much surprise. That said Arkham Horror is my favourite board game to date. The fact that it has a single player option is appealing for those times when you just can't get anyone else to join you. The fact that you can play with up to potentially 9 players and there is so much variety and replayability within the game itself. Each different Ancient one changes the game ever so subtly and then the expansions add new little bit and new subtleties. And then there is the fact that it is as said, a co-operative game. Usually means that there isn't one player left out sulking 'unless it's the person whose drawn the short straw to watch over Kingsport' because he's being beat up on by everyone else. These things together for me make it a very rewarding and entertaining experiance.



#6 baysbenj

baysbenj

    Member

  • Members
  • 14 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 02:18 AM

I have not played Gallactica, but what from I've heard the game was really designed for people who are fans of the show.

 

I can say this about Arkham Horror:  Of the 20 or so games that I own, Arkham Horror is still my favorite.



#7 lishai

lishai

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 04:21 AM

Thats why I think there should be "general" or "other" feed.You asked this question in arkham horror feed and what do you suppose to hear?

Ofcourse arkham horror fans will vote their favorite game.Go to battelstar gallactica feed and ask this question again.And what they will say?



#8 ColtsFan76

ColtsFan76

    Rules Guru

  • Members
  • 1,040 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 08:18 AM

kennetten said:

Although I actually haven`t played Galactica, I would still advocate Arkham for the simple fact that it`s cooperative. There aren` t many games like this on the market IMO. In addition, it`s very entertaining with lots of expansions when you need a little change. Definitely a favourite.

Right, not that many co-op games ... except for Galactica!  So i am not sure they one thing that they have in common can be the thing that differentiates them! 



#9 Elric91

Elric91

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 10:20 AM

I agree, you are probably going to get several biased opinions on both forum boards. Arkham Horror fans will advocate Arkham Horror, and Galactica fans will more than likely do the same.

Usually, a good indicator of the quality of a game, its replay value, and if one is more popular than the other is to look and see how many expansions there are. But the problem here is battlestar galactica is still in its infancy, so naturally it doesnt have as many expansions as a game that has been around for years, such as arkham horror.
 

Both are co-op games. Galactica has a "hidden cylon working against the players" possibility, adding some pretty nifty suspense moments, but Arkham Horror is very bizzarre and eerie by nature, being based on the works of H.P. Lovecraft.

I personally love eerie and bizzare, like the time my investigator found a carefully preserved brain floating in its own embriotic fluids, wired into a high tech alien artifact crafted by a race calling themselves the Mi-Go. The brain in a box basically allowed my investigator to swap places with monsters that were on the board, which is very very useful. (this item came from the dunwich expansion if memory serves, but i was just giving an example)

I guess it comes down to which Genre do you prefer? Sci-fi or Horror? Heck, buy one now and the other later when you get the cash, you could certainly do worse.

 

 



#10 pokemon41

pokemon41

    Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 10:09 PM

I created topic on BSG forum too. I will buy both games, as fast as i can. I don't have enough money at the time being. I just can't make a decision wich one buy first.

On BSG someone said that AH is easy to win. Is that true? 



#11 lishai

lishai

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 18 January 2009 - 10:27 PM

No i don't think so.AH is one of the most difficult game i ever played.It's on the first place by difficulty on yhe second-Doom(playing marines offcourse)



#12 avec

avec

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,125 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 04:57 AM

The base game can be easy to win.  The expansions (especially Dunwich Horror) takes care of this problem.  If you play with the base game only, you can make it harder by playing against Yog-Sothoth. 



#13 JerusalemJones

JerusalemJones

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,716 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 06:11 AM

I think the base game is easy to win a) after you have experience with the game and b) you play the meta game. Our playgroup (or which Argonel is a member) have played in the last Arkham Horror league (which, by the way, is also another strong point in AH's favor) and pretty much every game we avoided trying to play the meta game whenever possible. Some people just say "Oh, the AO is Magically Immune and only has -3 to fight checks if it awakens? Let's mill the Common Item deck for all the Physical Weapons and win that way." AH is about the story, and as such is the reason it is my favorite game (and, coming from a Game Store owner, that means something).

BSG, however, is to me the best new game of last year. The mechanics are simple, but it is the player interaction and fear of betrayal factor that make this game so much fun. With the wrong group of players, sure, this game will be a bust. But you need not be a fan of the TV show (my wife hates the show, but loves the game), or even know what the show is about to play this game. But you have to like to play a game where most of the excitement comes from player intereaction over the game mechanics itself. Don't get me wrong -- the mechanics are solid, work well for the game, and it is easy to learn to play. But this game shines with the players.

Like I advocated in the BSG forums, talk with your group. It almost sounds like they would enjoy AH more at this point, but BSG is so different it can be hard to say.

One last thing, related to the Arkham League. Think of this as a free expansion for AH. In the last league you could at least play two of the scenarios w/o having to pick up any other expansions (and could probably easily modify the posted scenarios to pay with just AH), it can give you something to play towards as opposed to just playing, and actually helped build a community of sorts. I don't think I ever visited the AH forums except for rules questions before the league started. Now I come here frequently, and get lots of ideas. I wish FFG made more games like AH (the co-operative rpg board game where it is the players against the game itself). I'd buy pretty much every one!



#14 Elric91

Elric91

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 08:50 AM

The difficulty of the base game depends on which ancient one is selected. Some of the ancient ones, such as Yig, are definately hard to beat (short doom track, cultists killed add doom tokens, and curses everyone at the start of the encounter), but other ancient ones can be a pushover.

Typically what happens to new players is they pick the most well known ancient ones, such as Cthulhu or Nyarlathotep, and those ancient ones are pushovers with little or no chance of losing for most groups. And when they play several times with easy ancient ones, they tend to be disappointed and feel the game is too easy. Try fighting ancient ones such as Yig, Azathoth, Shub-Niggurath, and Yog-Sothoth, they are towards the difficult end of the scale and are very difficult to beat.

With BSG, by nature there is only one enemy, the cylons, so naturally when they make the cylons hard to beat, the game is going to be hard every time. But thats not the case with AH, there are 8 ancient ones in the base set, the 6 listed above and 2 others, so they put "difficulty levels" so to speak, some are easy, some are on the low end of intermediate, some are on the high end of intermediate, and some are just plain hard. If you are dealing out an ancient one randomly, there is a good chance (at least 50%) you will get one from the easy or low end of intermediate ranges several times in a row, making the game seem easy.

It really depends on your group. If you want it to be easy, then yes, it can be easy. Do you prefer hard? No problem, use one of the hard ancient ones. Better yet, download one of the free heralds on the AH website under the "heralds and investigators" column in the support tab, and you will lose so many times it will make your head spin. (Heralds are servants of the ancient one that help pave the way for their return, and they modify the game according to the special rules found on their cards.)

AH is designed to be flexible, according to whatever a group wants. Some people like it easy, they like to buy stuff at stores and equip their investigators without worrying about being eaten, so there are things in place for them to make it easier. And there are definately no shortage of advanced options to make it harder for advanced players who like to be challenged, especially in many of the expansions that were introduced. (Letting players select their investigators is one way to make it easier, while dealing out random investigators definately makes it harder.)

One piece of advice though, make sure you read the rulebook through very carefully the first time you read it, because it has several rules that can be very easy to miss, such as the rule that says combat ends your movement immediately, and the rule that says any monsters that bump into you in the mythos phase are not immediately fought, they are resolved during the following movement phase since combat only happens during the movement phase. (yes, i missed those rules when i first played). They are not found in the combat section, which is why i missed them, they are in the movement section, and if somebody (like me) just skims the rules in their exitement to play,  then missing these rules and several others like it can definately have an impact on the game, making the game much easier than it was intended.

But, well, cheating would always have this effect on a game, wouldn't it? 






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS