Jump to content

Holy Outlaw

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Holy Outlaw

  • Rank

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    San Diego, California, United States
  1. Wow. This is exciting stuff. I guess the lesson is to never lose hope. How appropriate.
  2. KAGE13, It's good to hear someone else is enjoying Exodus as much as my group does. Obviously, every change in components is a trade-off and with a base game as beloved as BSG it's understandable that many players dislike replacing any aspect with some new component. Personally, I've found it most satisfying to approach each expansion component as a great option but one with a clear on/off switch. I love the cylon fleet board and the dogfights it creates, but I also love the intrigue of rooting out deep cover cylons which is an experience less common with the CFB. I actually am with you in loving the high-stakes climax that the Nebula creates but I admit it sometimes produces results that seem random and arbitrary. Very few things in either expansion have seemed to me to be categorical improvements over the base game (the exceptions being Investigative Committee, cylon leaders replacing sympathizers, and the Exodus loyalty deck nerfing executions). My group finds that all other new modules add variety at a cost, and sometimes we like to just break out the base game for some old school fun but we're very satisfied with the variety and freshness that Exodus injected into the game; I'd say we use most of its components most of the time. and like you said, we love it.
  3. Welcome Deak. Well first off, congratulations to your team for getting so close to a human victory on the first game; that's something of a rarity and the general consensus is that human victories don't tend to approach parity until the playgroup gets good. So the close game speaks pretty well for your group. (It's possible for poor cylon play to keep humans in it of course, but people will generally give your group credit on these boards for the humans keeping it close.) Anyway, the bad news for the human side of your group this time is that you played it right. The cylons do indeed get to make the choice on "Current Player Chooses" crises. So in the situation you describe, there was truly nothing you could do. Except shuffle up and play again, I mean. That's always a good option. Happy gaming!
  4. dwightsboardgame said: A strategy of both revealing first turn requires a leap of faith that both Cylon cards are handed out pre-Sleeper. I'm still not convinced that it's that good of a strategy. This is well put. The damage that two sleeper cylons can do in a short period of time during early sleeper phase can be tremendous, just as it's hard to overstate the value of the second cylon providing the first cover during witch hunts and brig attempts.
  5. I'm not aware of anything like that, I'm afraid.
  6. Yes, I agree with Skowza; the pursuit track usually advances all the way and the fleet board dumps to the main board for Fleet Mobilization. It's often game-breaking. What I'm referencing above is that if there's, say, one basestar on the board, it'll just fire, launch raiders, launch heavies, raiders move, etc. without advancing the pursuit track. That's not too bad. But it goes without saying that cylons get to choose when they play their super crises so the card is unlikely to be used when the main board has modest cylon presence. When it has heavy presence or no presence early in the jump track is when the card is most devastating.
  7. I agree with Skowza that Fleet Mobilizaiton can be game-breaking with the cylon fleet board. I've also seen times when it's like Dakuth's scenario and there's one basestar down or something so nothing much happens. I'd offer one more anecdote about my experience with Exodus that might have something to do with the different results players are experiencing and that's that two cylons from loyalty seem to win more frequently post-Exodus than pre- while loyalty-sleeper and sleeper-sleeper seems to be a heavy lift for the cylons than it was before. I haven't tried too hard to go under the hood on this and figure out why, but it's been the case in my home games.
  8. BrandonCarpenter said: I'm not a gambler so if I'm going to jump early I assume 1) the pop loss is 100% and 2) is the loss worse than what the Cylons will do to me? That being said, jumping early doesn't even occur to me until the Sleeper Phase; even with taking precautions, it seems risking that kind of loss early removes the option to force a jump later in the game. I take exception to this reasoning. You have no guarantee of what ships will activate if you stay just like you have no idea what you'll roll if you leave. You're not avoiding gambling by replacing in your calculations the roughly 75% chance of losing 3 population to FTL and the roughly 45% chance of raiders activating with a 100% chance of each. You're just doing bad math. As for your subsequent point though, about the folly of saying "-3 pop doesn't kill us right now" when it's likely to start the bleeding on something that'll wind up fatal later, I agree I've seen that mistake made more than once, and by players who should know better.
  9. dakuth said: ONE thing I did find we were doing wrong since I did the post - we did NOT move the pursuit track in the same crisis that a basestar jumped in. This may be all that was causing issues. One missed pursuit track move is, like, 25% more pursuit moves needed. You may be understating the significance of this oversight. I have a couple of other potential explanations: 1) Your human team sounds to have had a lot of success in bringing in gimped basestars early and often in jump tracks, while your cylons sound to have had tremendous trouble thwarting them. I agree that the strategy is very powerful, but my humans find it a challenge to force basestars down where and when they are wanted (particularly when we, like you, do not use Broadcast Location) meanwhile the cylons seem to find enough ways to interfere that implementing this strategy is far from a sure thing. 2) If the human fleet experiences success in all the tactics you describe, from placing two basestars in different (and relatively unoccupied) quadrants of the cylon fleet board to evading and escorting rather than fighting, the cylon fleet board will fill up all game long, and the thing that made it so easy early (basestars and ships spread out in different quadrants of the cylon fleet board) is what will make it tricky to nuke or shoot them all down when they arrive en masse. In other words, I'm surprised to hear you never experienced a very smooth early- and midgame turning into a bloodbath at endgame. 3) With the cylon fleet board in play, Caprica is simply bad. Your cylons should be using Basestar Bridge 95% of the time, generally to (A) mess with the jump track and (B) place 1 basestar and 3 raiders. If there are enough raiders down, replace (B) with the instant damage on Galactica. All that being said, I will agree with you on one point: once we adjusted to Exodus, I think my group saw a slight uptick in human wins (i.e., from just under 50% to just over) so you may be onto something when you suggest there might have been an early overstatement of the difficulty of Exodus owing to groups not yet adjusting their tactics to it.
  10. Yes, exactly. Just send them to sickbay. It would be more thematically appropriate to execute them, wouldn't it? But we stick with the rulebook on this one.
  11. Anacreon said: What are your house rules for ship damage? This is going to sound harsh, but when basestars activate, they fire twice; one shot is for Galactica and one is for Pegasus (we keep the damage tokens separate). This makes Pegasus powerful but fragile, and visiting its overpowered locations carries inherent risk. Unless the fleet designates heavy resources to shooting down basestars and repairing Pegasus, it's likely to at some point meet the fate it did on the show. (Note that at that point, damage basically works like it does in the base game: one shot per basestar, targeting only Galactica locations.)
  12. Sausageman said: Thanks for the response Holy Outlaw. I've noticed you made no reference to the Pegasus. I tend to use that in most games now - do you not rate it? Actually I forgot to mention it but we do use the Pegasus ship. We house ruled the method for Galactica and Pegasus receiving damage though, to keep the threat of human defeat by ship damage real (and to retain the value of blue cards) but we do use and like the ship. Also, I agree with Mephisto666's recommendation of using the base game standalone for a new group and directing the new player to pilot. They can also play support but obviously shouldn't be president or admiral, if for no other reason than to avoid being faced with all the "President / Admiral Chooses" events.
  13. Sausageman, I played a six-player game last night that included a novice in every sense of the word (to the game and to strategy games in general). I know you have expressed reservations about cylon leaders and I have quite a few as well, particularly when playing a five-player game. Still, I believe it is best to place new players in that role so they are immune to some of the intrigue and machinations; they know from turn one which side they're on and that it will never change; that reduces the strangeness for new players and makes it more like team games they're probably more familiar with. If they suck at the game on their first try, all the better: designers have always said that fourth or sixth player is intended to be "half a player" in terms of game balance, so a neophyte cylon leader unintentionally fits that bill very well, whereas one team being saddled with the dead weight of a bad cylon or bad human can be unbalancing and unfun for all, especially the new player who is likely to feel confused, ordered around, and mistaken when taking initiative. Our new player really took to the cylon leader role. She engaged in all the intrigue and recriminations as a sort of interested observer, occasionally weighing in and asking for clarifications. As for components, we used: (1) all characters, (2) cylon fleet board, (3) Ionian Nebula. We actually used conflicted loyalties too since she didn't have to worry about reading them and the experienced players like them, but I wouldn't say it's necessarily part of the "optimum game" (though without the loyalty deck system from Exodus, you should certainly do something in your house rules about the overpowered effects of executions and, to a lesser extent, abilities that look at Loyalty cards). My take on these items is: (1) Using all characters is fine, it really doesn't matter. (2) Cylon Fleet Board is neat. Conceptually, it is very easy to explain that you have jumped away from your pursuers but they're still behind you. The difference between jumping away and shooting down cylons is clear and the visual representation of where the "other team" is at is nifty. I think it clarifies, not complicates, board status for new players. (3) Ionian Nebula adds an ending and NPCs from the show who are otherwise absent from the game, so players familiar with the show might appreciate the game as a fuller experience, but it also adds the complication of the trauma tokens. As a general rule, I would actually say that the best bet for a new player is usually Kobol. (We had a great experience with the Nebula though.) Anyway, those are my two cents. Actual mileage may vary. Happy gaming!
  14. Well, to arrive at a general principle on the issue would be tough. Assuming all players are known to be human it sounds like the fleet is paying, over time, one population per jump to save one turn (roughly 1.5 lost each time vs. 0.5 if you were jumping on the next round). So the question becomes whether the skipped turn was likely to cost resources in excess of one population, and that obviously depends on board conditions. The thing that complicates matters significantly is the question of loyalty though. If Gaeta or Helo are cylons, they're likely to reroll successes into failures, ditto the shifty player promising Calculations. In short, any decision to hang 3 of a resource on a single die roll is likely to invite shenanigans. If it's me doing it, fine; I know my own loyalty. But if there are multiple players of unknown loyalty being depended upon to help out with the plan, the statistical calculations of their loyalty need to be factored with the ones you provided above. It seems to me that those factors make the proposition less attractive as a general rule. *Checks loyalty card* I mean, wait. I'm all for it!
  15. Oh I'll bet. And admittedly I may have a bit of US bias pushing my respect for that game but I think anyone will love it. Hmm, I also have been enjoying a game called "Stronghold" lately as a good strategy game for two.
  • Create New...