Jump to content

GiraffeandZebra

Members
  • Content Count

    1,029
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GiraffeandZebra

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 07/24/1980

Profile Information

  • Location
    Greenwood, IN
  1. Seconded. Helpers adds a lot of options for the players to accomplish what they want outside of the dice randomness. Smooths out a lot of rough edges in the game.
  2. 7 Wonders and Lords of Waterdeep (or Stone Age) are the best recommendations so far. Someone recommended Suburbia, which is also great, but Castles of Mad King Ludwig is probably the better game. There are a lot of recommendations so far that Id stay away from right now for various reasons. 1. Pandemic - I have a group that cooperative games just simply did not jive with, so it hasn't been a universal hit. 2. Pandemic Legacy - same as above, plus you have to have the same group of players play it over and over. You can't just pick it up and play it with anyone. 3. Twilight Empirium/Star Wars Rebellion/Archipelago/Robinson Crusoe/Battlestar Galactica - No, just no. You don't go from Settlers to any of these games. They all take a LONG time to play are way to complex for a new Boardgamer to digest, particularly well enough to teach. 4. Betrayal at House on the Hill - this is kind of a mess of a game. Great theme is its saving grace, but not a great game. 5. Space Cadets - what a nightmare to teach. Every person has their own station, which is completely different from all the others. It is basically like teaching 5 different games all at once. Fun, but too annoying to teach. I wouldn't recommend any of the games on your list. Carcassonne is the closest to a match, but I find it pretty dry. Cards Against Humanity is funny once and the drops off the fun cliff after one play. I'll throw out one more - Codenames. If you ever play with non-gamers, this is a must own. I've never had this game fail to get a request for more plays. People call it a party game, but I wouldn't say that. It isn't raucous fun that I'd want in a party, and I wouldn't play it with 40 people over for a party. I'd call it a "gathering" game. Family get-togethers, 6-8 people getting together for dinner, etc are what this game is perfect for. Source: I own 300 Boardgames and run a bi-monthly game night.
  3. Hate to break it to you, but true mathwing threads are pretty few and far between these days. There's a lot of speculation about ships that are broken because somebody THINKS this or that, but I almost never see mathwing anymore. I think you are using mathwing as a perjorative for all "people who ***** and moan about imbalance", and the two are not the same thing. Though mathwingers do point often out imbalances, 99% percent of the moaning threads have no mathwing in them at all.
  4. Why don't you think the reverse one will be red?
  5. The sixth maneuver on the quad is a reverse 1. Funny story - when FFG spoiled the ship at Gen Con, the guy said "this ship, when you place it on the table, it immediately explodes". While everyone laughed at the reference, he said in a kind of quiet, kind of mumbly, and kind of like he was still joking tone of voice: "Just kidding, it goes in reverse". I think a lot of people didn't hear it and s lot of others thought it was another joke...there really wasn't a "wait, what?!" reaction from the crowd.
  6. I didn't see Heroes on display. Only the Wave 9 that is previewed. Heroes is in the display case. No sightings of boxes or product though.
  7. What if it's as bad as the TIE/sf dial? Kinda tired of hearing this. The thing has an aux arc. Of course it's not going to have an interceptor dial. And thank goodness it doesn't have the same nearly identical dial the non-Defender 3 agility Ties all have, because it actually gives the faction some diversity for once. ...But that would be pretty funny if the Protectorate has an awful dial after it's been hyped up so much. If it's going to be a part of the TIE Fighter family, then it should look and act like a TIE Fighter, otherwise it should have been something different. This physically looks like a TIE Fighter, but doesn't resemble one in any other way. It can't even ride the novelty of being the only small ship with an aux arc, as the ARC-170 comes out at the same time, and has a better aux arc to boot. Sorry guys, but I'm going to pull a PGS and ***** about this **** thing for a while. I was so excited for this ship, and it was nothing but a big disappointment. Soooooo...TIE Interceptors and TIE Defenders are cool, then? Basically the same dial, right?
  8. Look at the labels on the boxes of you still had any doubts. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Co8fnd3WIAArxKI.jpg:large
  9. Why has nobody pointed this error out? "its triple laser turret could have been represented in the game by either a 360-degree firing arc, as with several other turreted ships like the Millennium Falcon and VT-49 Decimator." THEY DONT HAVE 360 DEGREE ARCS. This is like newb-o mistake numero uno, and you just reinforced it with your dumb article.
  10. All of your banks are 5mm off from what I've seen before. That doesn't mean you are wrong. You won't find official numbers.
  11. So clearing out some old bookmarks and came across the Kickstarter link for this. He STILL hasn't finished. In fact, he is only 40% finished per the last update. The communication appears to have gotten worse, not better. To add to that, I've seen a lot of feedback that he operated his store with the same terrible communications practices he used on the Kickstarter. So sadly, just for the sake of anyone else out there that may someday see this, I must downgrade my recommendation to "Just don't buy from this store." It doesn't seem like you are likely to have a good experience no matter how you interact with this guy, and the product is just not so good that it is worth it. I'm glad I'm a lucky one who got his order, but I feel terrible for everyone who didn't, now almost 10 months later.
  12. That is the point. "Once a list goes down too many points, it will be weaker". If it goes down many points and is weaker, yet still beats the field, isn't that an indication that it was too strong for its points to begin with? I'll try to remember to gather some more before I seek to publish in Nature. For the record, a hypothesis requires no proof. Even anecdotal evidence, weak as it is, is more than is required.
  13. Whoosh! You missed the point. If the list isn't capable of competing against the field, then it isn't a list I'm talking about. We're talking about lists that BOTH are competitive AND have a bid significantly under 100. If it only does one of the two, it doesn't belong in the conversation.
  14. Everyone on the internet always seems to think they are the first to see that there may be shades of gray, caveats and exceptions; while those they disagree with are simply bricks who see only absolutes. But of course I put a question mark in the title and use words like "indicator" rather than "proof" for a reason. I too see that there are caveats, exceptions and gray areas. Your specific examples I won't go into too much detail on because they are just that - specific. I'm not talking about specifics, but a list's aggregate chance to win against all comers in multi-game settings. Specific upgrades may or may not be used in single match ups, but that isn't exactly why you take them. You take them because they improve your aggregate chances of winning against all comers (there are exceptions, such as to deal with a particular weakness, but it is still kind of about improving your chances against the field). You take Autothrusters on Soontir not because you expect it to pull its weight in every match, but because you expect it to do so often enough against the field over the course of many matches.
  15. Thanks for seeing the middle there Rauhughes. I'm not preaching any absolutes here.
×
×
  • Create New...