The Game Box
January 28, 2022, 11:01:50 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The new site is Running.
This one is closed.

sign up here:
  Home Help Search Gallery Links Staff List Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
31  Gaming Stuff / Other Games / Re: Fantasy/Adventure games not represented? on: July 24, 2014, 12:43:24 pm
A friend has MK the boardgame, but we have yet to play. He's tried it a couple of times with his family and the results were, um, not the best. And his family usually likes those types of games.

We've played the Heroes of Might and Magic game. A four-player game took us about 3 hours and we didn't quite finish before we had to call it, but about 45 minutes of that was set up and rules explanation. The early turns took more time than the later turns, even as the later turns got more complex, as we got used to the system.

Each hero controls an army of up to four different unit types (and each hero can control around 7-10 total units). Each unit has a strength ability and some have special powers. Units can be upgraded to elite status to take more damage and enable the use of an elite die in combat.

Heroes can level up and gain new skills. You can also upgrade your citadel with new buildings that activate new powers or unlock new unit types.

The board is tile-based with square terrain. There are monsters to encounter on the board that are protecting sites that you can take control of to gain more resources or grab artifacts and so on.

I'd say that it would probably make a better two-player or solo game. I enjoyed it, but the downtime can get long for what it is. Each player can recruit one or two more heroes and each hero activates when you take a move action. So one player can have up to three fights a turn and each combat can take several minutes to process.

It's also a pain in the ass to get. HoMM is licensed, but not for sale in North America, so it has to be imported.
32  Gaming Stuff / General Gaming Discussion / Re: Downsizing on: July 23, 2014, 11:25:42 pm
Yep, space. The only reason I get rid of games is to make enough room for more games. It's like they start breeding when I turn out the lights.
33  General Category / Site Direction / Re: Report to moderator button on: July 23, 2014, 07:34:40 pm
The big red X button should have the following code attached:

<input type="button" value="Big X" onclick="self.close()">
34  Gaming Stuff / General Gaming Discussion / Re: Racing games on: July 23, 2014, 06:34:09 pm
Live racing toys powered by iOS devices with a boardgame like combat system:

I had a slot racing track set up when I was kid. On the same table as a LEGO city and a scale train set. Good times.
35  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: Flying Circus on: July 23, 2014, 06:28:35 pm
Just call me An-R-Chy-1. Have a nice day, my Fellow Loyal and Completely Not a Commie Citizens.
36  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: Random music vids on: July 23, 2014, 06:07:42 pm
37  Gaming Stuff / General Gaming Discussion / Re: Meet Falafel, the world's top ranked backgammon player on: July 23, 2014, 06:01:35 pm
Cool story. Kind of an odd guy.
38  Gaming Stuff / Military Games / Re: Ogre on: July 23, 2014, 05:29:27 pm
The base set isn't that interesting. It's almost puzzle like and a real easy to solve puzzle at that.

Adding GEV improves the game, but it's still pretty lite. A good one to introduce to my kids.

I own the big box Ogre and it's hard to get to the table because it _IS_ the table. And hard to transport.
39  Gaming Stuff / Other Games / Re: Card games....yes - card games on: July 23, 2014, 02:30:43 pm
Growing up, I played a lot of Spite & Malice with my grandparents. It's still a favorite of ours.

And cribbage with my folks.

My aunts and uncles play bridge. And take it way too seriously for their health.
40  Gaming Stuff / General Gaming Discussion / Re: Downsizing on: July 23, 2014, 02:14:49 pm
I'd like to get my collection of unplayed games down to about 50.
41  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: Religion on: July 23, 2014, 02:12:54 pm
Why petty and small? Why is there being a creator more likely than there not being one?

I tried to keep it neutral. My point was that I'm not sure if there is a creator or not and that it might be just as likely there is none. I don't know.

I do think the universe is full of wonderous and marvelous things, but I also think it's amazing how much of that we have much of that we are slowing understanding. Take the big bang and the expansion of the universe, we have come to that conclusion by using evidence from pretty primitive devices. A couple of chaps get obsessive about bird poo in a radio telescope, and it eventually leads to a new understanding of our universe.
Agreed. It's amazing how far our understanding of the universe has come in a relatively short amount of time. Humans are cool. Scientists that work for the betterment of mankind are cool. Priests that work for the betterment of their flock are cool, too.

You say we cannot possibly comprehend some things, but why not? Maybe not now but who knows how much we will discover?

We have a long way to go to understand everything that there is in this universe and our attempts to find answers often just find more questions. And that's a good thing. I certainly do not know how much we will discover as a race before our time is done, but I can guarantee it won't be everything. And a thousand years or more from now, we'll probably still be arguing on whatever passes for the internet.

I'm kind of with the anthropic principle on this one. Yes it's unlikely that everything went right, but for us to be alive in universe to observe it, that universe has to be the one that supports us. Maybe there were countless other universes that didn't get it quite right. It's pretty unlikely that any of us should be alive, but we are...I'm here to have that thought because all those unlikely events happened to result in my birth and survival.
I'd like to think that there were an infinite number of possibilities before the Big Bang and there will be an infinite number of possibilities after the heat death of the universe and whatever comes next.

Unlikeliness never seemed like great evidence of a creator, unlikely things are pretty commonplace when you start looking.  Grin

So very true!

Graham's number seems to me to be proof of the ingenuity of humans. Maths is a human construct we use to model the world, and Graham's number is a very interesting result of that model. I'm not sure it means anything else to me.

It is proof of human ingenuity. Evolution and social developments and human ingenuity have brought us to point where we can create those models. To me, no amount of science or philosophy can disprove the existence one way or the other of a creator. I don't think science and religion are mutually exclusive.
42  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: Religion on: July 22, 2014, 11:17:13 pm
I don't go for organized religion, as I've said, and it don't attend church, but the universe is a marvelous and wondrous thing. It is so incredibly vast and filled with things that we cannot possible comprehend that it seems petty and small to say that there couldn't be a spirit or creator. I don't mean the old guy with a beard, that's more humans slapping labels on to things that they can't understand.

The universe itself is such an unlikely thing. The very cosmos are a statistically unlikelyhood. So many things had to go right at the moment of the Big Bang, maybe there was a guiding hand. I vaguely recall Benjamin Franklin talking about a divine being as a clockmaker starting the universe up and then letting it run. Seems apropos.

When I hear about things like Graham's Number, a number so large that if you were to count all the things in the known observable universe (and the smallest things were Planck Objects, literally the smallest things possible), you still wouldn't count enough objects to equal Graham's Number, it puts things intro perspective.

It is a gift for man to see the divine in the commonplace. For good and for bad.

I sound like a hippie. F me. ^_^

43  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: Who are you? Why are you here? on: July 22, 2014, 09:52:21 pm
I still have my nervous tic from attempting 'Air War' 30 years ago.  Grin

Air War was the first honest to goodness non-fantasy, non-sci-fi wargame I purchased. Man, did it kick my ass. I tried with a friend to play that thing  for a year, but it was painful. Eventually had to sell it.

Found an unpunched used copy some months ago. I can actually understand the rules now! Not sure if I will play it, but it has been fun to read and fondle.
44  General Category / Fuck it all / Re: The Big Baseball Thread on: July 22, 2014, 09:49:32 pm
They feel more true to the genre to me than say the old Fallout or Baldur's Gate did.
Those felt like I was playing tactical games, rather than role playing ones.

I cannot comment on BG, but the original Fallout 1:

1. Made character statistics meaningful. Try playing FO1 with an Intelligence of 3 or less. A high Luck opens so many more encounters. A high Charisma and Speech skill and you can bluff your way through the end boss.
2. Have multiple solutions to almost every problem. We used three character archetypes when designing: Combat Boy, Speech Boy and Stealth Boy. Every puzzle and encounter is solvable by at least two of those archetypes.
3. Make player decisions have consequences. Part of this was Brian Fargo telling the dev team MANY times about the boy and his dog in the early part of Wasteland. Part of this was we were purposely designing the game to be repayable and wanted it to play differently each time. Depth of gameplay over width of gameplay to use one of the terms bandied around during development.

(The Fallout 2 team went for width and depth, but I actually think they went a little overboard in the size of that game. Of course, I'm partial to FO1.)

This was the result of so many of us being GURPS fans. We actually held an in-company poll to decide which license to go after: World of Darkness, FASA's Earthdawn and GURPS. We of course voted for the one RPG that didn't have a strong setting, which was kind of a mistake. The game that turned into Fallout was going to be a Time Travel setting, but that was too expensive to develop. Then it was going to be a generic fantasy setting for a bit. Then a false fantasy game set on a sci-fi generation ship. (erm, rambling)

What I'm trying to day is that Fallout has a very strong paper and pencil RPG background. Heck, the SPECIAL system was based on my home brew RPG system that I had been running for over 10 years (mechanics, not setting).

Oh, and GO ANGELS! (Trying to stay on topic...)
45  Gaming Stuff / Military Games / Re: Napoleonics on: July 22, 2014, 09:35:04 pm
Have you tried either of Bowen Simmons' Napoleonic games? I really liked Bonaparte at Marengo even if it gets almost chess like at times.

BoM is different and in a good way. I enjoyed my couple plays even if I had no idea what I was doing. Usually it takes me a play to get the "how" and another play to start thinking of the "why". With BoM, I'm still working on the "wtf".
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy