Jump to content

jeff.kahan.1

Members
  • Content Count

    296
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About jeff.kahan.1

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Burke, Virginia, United States
  1. It was a mistake on their part. The FAQ has a correction for this by placing a spaceport token there when that culture is discovered, however, this leaves the whole map of spaceports short a token (for those longer games where every spaceport gets built)
  2. It was a mistake on their part. The FAQ has a correction for this by placing a spaceport token there when that culture is discovered, however, this leaves the whole map of spaceports short a token (for those longer games where every spaceport gets built)
  3. Ruvion said: Eric Summerer mentions on BGG that the northern nav circle space in the Multi-Generational Ship system was originally a port location. I haven't played the original nor the new version…yet, but I'm wondering what kind of change this could spring: Major, minor, just different…what? ….those with previous experiences with the classic game, any opinions or ideas? I was finally able to view a map of the original and found exactly what he was talking about. In this system there is a navigation circle at the north that has an oribital for the building of a spaceport (200 towards end game, unlimited buy/sell, plus 10% commission of transactions). Either it was left out of the navigation circle in the new version (either intentionally or by happenstance) or the graphic is just too busy to "see" it. Basically, this means that every one of the other 13 systems has 1-3 spaces to build a port in while this system does not. Granted, Neutron Port in the original wasn't my favorite place to put a port (smack in the middle of the nav circle) but if I landed on the world and had the cash, I'd buy it for sure. Eric's suggestion that this is easily house ruled should definitely be considered if the final version leaves this out.
  4. Mister Tim said: Does this mean it will support more than 4 players? That's the one sticking point for me and my board game group - we sometimes have as many as 6 people playing. Since they are printing the original game on the back, I'm "assuming" that it will be just like the original with 6 player colors/pieces an ALL the alien races but I can't say for sure….
  5. Here's what we know (I think) so far..... Our 4 player races..... •Human–Adaptable and generally content to inhabit any planet they run across through technological inventions. •Whynom–A strong race of intelligent horses. •Qossuth–Insane and bent on taking over the universe, the Qossuth often devise elaborate plans which require vast sums of money (making them good targets for trade). •Eeepeeep–Intelligent machines descended from a single toaster that achieved sentience after being stabbed with one too many kitchen utensils. New mechanics.... Fans of the original version will find the core mechanics intact, but boosted with new options that enrich the game by presenting fresh strategies and welcoming direction to new players. •Missions–Mission cards provide immediate goals that can boost your fame and lead to awards upon completion. Each player starts with a single mission, and can adopt mission-centric strategies if they choose. •Fluctuating Markets–Every culture has a market that waxes and wanes on a regular basis. Savvy traders can watch the markets and time their deliveries carefully to sell for maximum profit. •Fame–Fame can be profitable! Missions, better pilots, ship upgrades, victories over space pirates, and other game effects allow players to accrue fame throughout the game. At the end of the game, players receive money based on the amount of Fame they accrued. Discuss......
  6. DaveNYC said: For someone who has never played the original, what other game or games could you compare Merchant of Venus to? Off the top of my head, I'd compare it to a crayon rail game (Eurorails/Martan Rails), though with MoV you don't have to build track but rather discover where the various good are for pickup and delivery. Same type of theme- goods are picked up in specific places, and then you travel to places to sell the goods in order to make money and win the game. MoV is one of my favorite games to play. I hope FFG doesn't botch it but even if they do, I've got the original.......
  7. Oboewan said: We actually just had this very same scenario come up (but with the Dragon Tower) and after talking about it, we ended up playing the way you did. However, I was wondering if there is anything in the game mechanics that allows a player to "voluntarily" lose a turn. If there isn't then, I don't think the character in the CoC would need to fulfil the quest. Well folks.. .please ignore the above.. the text of the Quest has been pointed out to me as being "Lose your next 2 turns" in which case all is well with the universe.
  8. We actually just had this very same scenario come up (but with the Dragon Tower) and after talking about it, we ended up playing the way you did. However, I was wondering if there is anything in the game mechanics that allows a player to "voluntarily" lose a turn. If there isn't then, I don't think the character in the CoC would need to fulfil the quest.
  9. I. J. Thompson said: plokoon9619 said: Your not going to get half the pilots you named like Porkins, Biggs, Janson, Chewie. Those generic named pilots we saw on the cards are actually using the appearance of named characters. Again, that suits me just fine, for the most part. Like, I consider myself pretty well-versed in my (movie) X-wing pilots - I can tell you who 'Dutch' and 'Pops' are, for instance. But those two dudes on the cards are unknowns to me. And using photos, they had to put somebody on the cards, after all. I'm cool with having a few options, but not every single guy in the movies. After all, how different could their stats be, anyway? Not to rain on your parade... but weren't Dutch and Pops Y-wing pilots? After the debaucle that was WOTCs Starship Battles I'm not hoping for much with this game. I'd love to be pleasantly suprised though!
  10. I love the original and I'm not sure how I'm going to like the remake. A "reprint" I could handle... a "remake" with only 4 races? Then again... it's is just 4 player races with the other 10 from the original as discoverable? I actually built a homemade copy for a friend of mine and am glad I have the original. It's definitely one of my favorite games and I'll never turn down a chance to play it. We'll have to see how this all turns out between FFG and Stronghold and how FFG is going to handle the game. I'm not sure I like the combat enhancements for Dungeonquest for example (it bogs the game down) and the "new features" for MoV are currently unknown (and thus worrysome).
  11. Well... up until Tuesday when a wonderul Amazon box was on my porch, I've been able to tote around my Talisman + expansions all in one box. After punching and bagging Dragon, I'm not sure this will work anymore. Just curious if anyone has been able to get everything into one box (and I just need to revisit my logistics). Thanks!
  12. The_Warlock said: It's a fact that Base game Characters become weaker the more expansions that come in. The Base game (& Reaper) Characters have abilities that are differently worded if compared to Characters from Dungeon and following expansions. Many of them have abilities related to certain cards that become useless or indifferent in a game where those cards won't easily show up. Moreover, the flavour "penalties" of the Priest and the Monk have become obsolete and ridiculous while new Characters never have penalties and display powerful Abilities instead. Yeah... this type of thing can easily be handled but updating the FAQ and just adding expansion text to base characters to keep them up to speed. But FFG hasn't deemed to update the FAQ for a while now. Hopefully, we'll see an updated one shortly after Dragon hits.
  13. Since FFG provided us with dual sided fate tokens, we've been playing that each character has their starting fate tokens with the gold side up. When they use the fate token, it is flipped to the blue side (spent). When they replenish, the token is flipped back to the gold side (active). If they GAIN a fate, another token is added. Discard a token causes a token (even one of the starting ones) to go back to the fate pile. It seems like a good way to track your base fate and it also limits some of the token flinging/movement that can be so prevalent in Talisman. Seems to work well. I'm wondering what they actually designed the two colors for based on this statment from the rules: "Although the two sides of these tokens have a different appearance, this makes no difference in the core game." What else is there besides the "core game"?
  14. FYI- Amazon's pre-order states a release date of 9/12 .... if all well, I'll have it on the 14th!
  15. Christen said: Thanks, I forgot to mension that it was RTL, sorry. I dont find it that hard to stall the players so that I shuffle, but twice is hard. The reasoning behind the "ejection rule" was to counter the "gaming of the system" that some players were doing by just staying in one dungeon indefiinitely forcing the OL to eventually reshuffle and slowly built up the CT count. I am of the opinion that if the players aren't abusing this idea, I don't really enforce it. If they are actually playing the game and not just dicking around, going through the deck more than once in a dungeon doesn't happen too often,.
×
×
  • Create New...