Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
No, I mean like board games, as per the topic in this thread.
Settlers of Catan fans?
- Thread starter green
- Start date
I was responding to an apparent gratuitous ageist insult with humor, as I term "humor". I'm an old fart, and I work a lot. My kids sometimes kidnap me and force to play games. I used to be an addict to games, but it truly was sixty years ago. I once had fantasies of inventing new games, but pretty much I am at peace with myself as I am, and content with the old games, when I have time to play.
I would follow this thread for some faint perception of the newer games, though, but indeed, I do play Settlers of Catan, a lead-in to the topic of a new generation of games. My kids deserve all the "credit" for any modern updated game options in my life. . . .
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
The reference to old games is basically a condemnation of their quality in comparison to the new Euro wave of modern board gaming. Despite the general stability of old card games like Canasta, older board games have been shown to age tremendously poorly in comparison to the new wave, and can generally be objectively shown to be weaker in quality, once nostalgia has been removed. ConnectFour is very simplistic and mostly deterministic, Battleship is pretty much completely luck based, Life is roll dependent with little skill, Risk has a wide and unpredictable length of play, and Monopoly is the worst of them all.
Monopoly is luck based, dependent on dice rolls, has an obvious strategic pattern, has no predictable length of play, and has eliminations. A group of 5 wanting to play for a couple hours can turn into 3 players being eliminated, thus broken off from the other 2, with the remaining 2 waiting out dice rolls because they're never going to yield to any play with obvious disadvantages with no end in sight.
The new games generally have fixed time limits (dependent on players' pace of play), players determine the direction of the game based on their own choices, rather than dice rolls (why Catan is considered somewhat weak amongst the new wave), and there's generally no exact way to play and win, removing the simplistic model.
Would be hard for me to play those older games in comparison to the new games. I could play Sorry or Life if I'm just passing time and don't want to think about the game at all, but most people should derive more enjoyment out of the newer games than the older ones.
Monopoly is luck based, dependent on dice rolls, has an obvious strategic pattern, has no predictable length of play, and has eliminations. A group of 5 wanting to play for a couple hours can turn into 3 players being eliminated, thus broken off from the other 2, with the remaining 2 waiting out dice rolls because they're never going to yield to any play with obvious disadvantages with no end in sight.
The new games generally have fixed time limits (dependent on players' pace of play), players determine the direction of the game based on their own choices, rather than dice rolls (why Catan is considered somewhat weak amongst the new wave), and there's generally no exact way to play and win, removing the simplistic model.
Would be hard for me to play those older games in comparison to the new games. I could play Sorry or Life if I'm just passing time and don't want to think about the game at all, but most people should derive more enjoyment out of the newer games than the older ones.
games have always been throwaway time whose value consists in having people around doing something because we value each other and are willing to share the time.
I agree with the analysis of the old games, and I have recognized these deficiencies and problems with them.
Now you have got me interested in the new games. This thread could be the most efficient way for me to get familiar with them. Tell me about them, case by case, please.
Never heard of any of these - are they actual board games or online board games?
I've started playing Gin Rummy and Yahtzee online. Living the high life. I miss the days when my siblings and I played board games for hours.
I watched part of a game of Settlers of Catan once - didn't understand what was going on and was bored out of my mind.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
I mean, you can find info on these games at boardgamegeek.com , so no real need for me to go in depth on any of them.
However, generally speaking, and I'll use Power Grid as examples, most of the new games have similarities.
First off, no dice. Or, at least no nice used to determine movement. In fact, "movement" in these games as most would tend to believe exists in board games, doesn't actually exist. Instead of reacting to the board via random movement squares, you interact with the board on your turn via different rules. In Power Grid, the goal is to power more cities than your opponent. When it's your turn to interact with the board, you can pay to extend your city coverage if you can and desire to.
Another similarity is multiple steps in a round. Many games have few rounds. Terra Mystica has 5. Power Grid has more, but length of play is only widened if a player does a stalling strategy (useful in some places, a knock on the game, I suppose). But at the end of a round, board elements are "reset" and the next round begins. In Power Grid, you determine player order (an extremely strategic element set by actions in previous rounds), then begin the power plant auction phase. When that's complete, the resource buying phase begins, and after that, the city building phase begins, finally culminating in the clean up round, where players power their cities, earn money, replenish supplies, reset the auction board, and start the next turn via player order. This happens until a city threshold is reached, and the game ends with a determined winner. Everyone plays until the game ends.
Terra Mystica turn order is determined, first player makes a move based on resources, and play moves around until all players pass, board is "reset," resources gained, and play begins again. Agricola has similar actions.
Most of the actions on the board affect the other players, so when a turn starts in a game of 5, and you're third to act, you can often have a course of action that you planned eliminated by the first two players, forcing you into different actions that will likely affect the next two players' actions. Some games you can actively bargain actions by the other player. Sometimes not.
Starting positions in these games are generally chosen, and not forced, thus not starting from the same location adds to the complexity of the decision making.
Note: there is an online version of Power Grid. Downloadable here: https://www.brettspielwelt.de/Spiele/Funkenschlag/?nation=en
I've never played Power Grid online, and don't intend to, since I don't want to get to point with experience with the game to where I'm winning all the time over my friends due to experience and not through cunning gameplay.
Have played "Catan" on Aso Brain (nope, it's Xplorers if memory serves
), but lost the account due to inactivity right before they stopped taking registrations, a BRILLIANT move on the web site's part, to eliminate any fresh players.
However, generally speaking, and I'll use Power Grid as examples, most of the new games have similarities.
First off, no dice. Or, at least no nice used to determine movement. In fact, "movement" in these games as most would tend to believe exists in board games, doesn't actually exist. Instead of reacting to the board via random movement squares, you interact with the board on your turn via different rules. In Power Grid, the goal is to power more cities than your opponent. When it's your turn to interact with the board, you can pay to extend your city coverage if you can and desire to.
Another similarity is multiple steps in a round. Many games have few rounds. Terra Mystica has 5. Power Grid has more, but length of play is only widened if a player does a stalling strategy (useful in some places, a knock on the game, I suppose). But at the end of a round, board elements are "reset" and the next round begins. In Power Grid, you determine player order (an extremely strategic element set by actions in previous rounds), then begin the power plant auction phase. When that's complete, the resource buying phase begins, and after that, the city building phase begins, finally culminating in the clean up round, where players power their cities, earn money, replenish supplies, reset the auction board, and start the next turn via player order. This happens until a city threshold is reached, and the game ends with a determined winner. Everyone plays until the game ends.
Terra Mystica turn order is determined, first player makes a move based on resources, and play moves around until all players pass, board is "reset," resources gained, and play begins again. Agricola has similar actions.
Most of the actions on the board affect the other players, so when a turn starts in a game of 5, and you're third to act, you can often have a course of action that you planned eliminated by the first two players, forcing you into different actions that will likely affect the next two players' actions. Some games you can actively bargain actions by the other player. Sometimes not.
Starting positions in these games are generally chosen, and not forced, thus not starting from the same location adds to the complexity of the decision making.
Note: there is an online version of Power Grid. Downloadable here: https://www.brettspielwelt.de/Spiele/Funkenschlag/?nation=en
I've never played Power Grid online, and don't intend to, since I don't want to get to point with experience with the game to where I'm winning all the time over my friends due to experience and not through cunning gameplay.
Have played "Catan" on Aso Brain (nope, it's Xplorers if memory serves
), but lost the account due to inactivity right before they stopped taking registrations, a BRILLIANT move on the web site's part, to eliminate any fresh players.
What's that? A combination game of Risk and Monopoly? Sounds intriguing.
Yeah, google it for rules, I probably can't explain it well.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk