Information |
|---|
|
|
| |
| You know, I'm sure I must have played this game, but I don't remember. It's quick to play, challenging, and I'm good at it!!! It's definitely a classic, and that's not nostalgia talking. | |
| 1835 is the fifth 18xx I learned. It's hard to imagine ever being willing to play this without computer assistance for scoring, entering, etc. |
Tuadeng (2006)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| Strategic + dice effect = amazing game!@ | |
| Just so-so. | |
| Looks rubbish, but surprisingly fun to play. |
Bienilo (2001)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| Simple and elegant redesign of an interesting set of wargaming rules for the 2WW. | |
| Played it with 3 players, maybe it is not the best number. | |
| Jul 2011: Upgrading the rating to 8 from a 7. I like the game, but there is a lot of randomness to it. The theme is more pasted-on than many CDGs, and to me it screams, "EURO!" There is a good amount of tension, especially as players get familiar with (memorize) the cards and frequently scan the table to see which state cards their opponents are holding. Jan 25/2011: So far so good. |
Warlords Safari (2008)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| This is the game where you bet on different outcomes of the action on the board. | |
| 4-10 players. I'm one of those guys who doesn't mind a game being nothing but bets. I think there should be more basic beer cards and less those special cards. I'm not sure how much this game differs from RHB's DTP game of the same name...but for an elaborate boxed game I was hoping for better development. LNL says they will post PDFs which is great, I am going to wait for them before attempting to play. Perhaps the game would benefit from some way to improve the balance of power in the opening deal? |
Shaun Nations Singles: Role Halloween (2002)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| You have to have the right people for this. Much creativity involved... | |
| Never been opened, don't plan on opening it :D. |
Gettysburg and Book II Play Aids Kit (2007)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| Haven't played yet. However, I don't see playing Age of Steam anymore having played 18XX, despite the extra playing time required. |
UNO: East (2001)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| Excellent components. | |
| Good scenario but it takes to long with 6 players. The game just isn't fun. Hey and it's only 4 bucks!!! I'll stick with my 20mm plastic, resin and metal minis and Rapid Fire rules. I didn't dislike it, but neither did I enjoyed it. Total yang saya keluarkan 8 Box Tekken6 @ Rp480.000, dan 8 box SF @ Rp550.000 dan 10 starter dek @ Rp 120.000. Ending when Mr.X is found is not spectacular, feels almost accidental. While the game does not promote deep, tactical decisions due to the results of die rolls, it is a very fun game...just not super serious. So the emotional vibe and pacing has reduced the rating of the game considerably, but these two factors can be put down as being my fault. I hadn't been prepared to introduce the game, forgetting the principle that the time on the box should be multiplied by 1.3 to get a better idea of how long it would to take to play. (no big difference for ROF and hit probability for assault guns, tanks and guns alone.) - another big problem is the rules lack some kind of opportunity fire, just race to your target and you'll be fine usually - hit probability depends more on the skill of the crew of the target than of the gunner?!? Also I didn't do a dry run, so I didn't learn the importance of the wall building which should have been emphasised before the game. In this case, weapon "A" should get 4 hits and defender "1" should then get 2 saves. An early Sherman not unlikely being able to penetrate a Tiger Front armor even on long ranges; many Russian tanks with far to low armor values) - Pricing when setting up an "army" is simply not realistic at all, not even in game terms (a Stug being more "expensive" than a PzIV?!, first wargame I have seen that, I assume the reason for this is simple here: designers didn't properly reflect assault guns and the advantages of a tank compared to it, thus with current rules they would be to strong in game terms) - Range usually isn't really a factor, just check if you are over or below 40 cm no matter what gun (gunsight quality used by the nations etc don't seem to matter)?!? Well, why not cut to the chase and just say weapon "A" against defender "1" only hits on a 1 through 2? What's the difference? Ah...yes...so because its cool they have a virtual stabilizer now... The city wars seem to introduce an intriguing new element though, but figure out early who your partners is, stick with the city wars and make damn sure that partners are roughly equally strong as it makes no sense for a significantly weaker player to support a stronger one. Turret-less artillery pieces can fire in a 180 degree arc and not be considered to have moved. | |
| One of my favorite of the Cheapass games I've played. I really like this game, well designed missions keep the game fresh, plenty of opportunity to mix things up and play around with your force. This story is really good and is very classical both in the mood that in the theme. | |
| Rating based on The Great Wall scenario only. Pretty solid mechanics that make sense when you finally figure out the poorly explained rules. The "rainbow" card lets you see one other player's hand - good towards the end of the game. However, I don't think I'll ever see that day due to lack of interest. |
Astintes (2010)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| An initially exciting game with solid, chunky components and well realised symbols to ease understanding of the elements, peters out into a too chaotic, drawn out double-think game that doesn't repay strategic thinking in better positioning. But still a hard task to win as the Soviets, in my experience! Birthday from Nonie & Poppa. Perhaps maybe not for 5 players (I like the control you have on 3 players game). Very nice production. Therefore a few quibbles, but none the less, this is a nice, enjoyable, well-rounded game. Overall, not a bad little game, and one that I won't mind playing from time to time. And AP support is terrible. The box, board, rules and chits are attractively and glossily done. However, the rules are typically Wallacian. Es un juego de bastante planificación y en el que además, hay que adaptarse a lo que van haciendo los demas, que puede (y seguramente lo haga) interferir con tus planes. | |
| Need to try this one again. Game, no more, no less update from 6 after 3 games. | |
| Solid game. 3+ players only too. Thanks Joshua for adding to our rotation. |
Maya Sturzflug (2005)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| Still a decent game with a nice mix of mechanics but it has been pretty much supplanted in my collection by Tower of Babel as my choice for a 3 or 4 player game, as ToB plays faster and with greater interaction. Well, maybe it would have been a winner on my table too, when yesterday would have been somewhere in the mid-90's. It's in great shape. To be played as a medium-weight game once in a blue moon. | |
| Good German. Not the best sign that this should be a keeper for me. Otherwise, I would give it a "7". :) Rating will probably drop after more play (especially with a 5-player game, I bet). | |
| Loved it as a kid and the game's idea is pretty original. After our first few pays it was obvious (and unanimous) that the roadblocks give too much of an advantage to the detectives, so we'll scrap those options in the future. | |
| Wargame Santa. |
Sons on the (1992)
| ||||||||
|
| |
| More fun to play as a child than an adult. The combat is also really dumb in which a super-giant force can be destroyed by one unit. | |
| The rating is based on numerous play tests of the 'quick game rules'. The combat is also really dumb in which a super-giant force can be destroyed by one unit. The 'quick game' rules get a 5 because it gives all players a chance to win, except that the game is far too long. Didn't even finish first game. These cards were potential game changers and caused some frustration. Read my for more details. And for such young fellows it is imho a blast of a game. | |
| The 3 is for the standard rules, in which players are forced to be elimenated before the game can be won, is really stupid and prolongs the game for several hours. We played that you split into two teams and each person on the side describing the object has to say their description out loud. The rotating "storm" disc goes BETWEEN the mounted board and a square clear layer that clips onto the board. Guess we'll just have to mow zem down vit ein heavy machine gun, Mon Capitain! I couldn't for the life of me figure out how this worked until I saw it. |
Data from BoardGameGeek, mashed up by Leonard Richardson. Logo by Beth Lerman.
Updated every five minutes. RSS (daily)
|
This document (source) is part of Crummy, the webspace of Leonard Richardson (contact information). It was last modified on Tuesday, August 09 2011, 22:54:28 Nowhere Standard Time and last built on Thursday, July 09 2020, 01:05:03 Nowhere Standard Time.
| Document tree: Site Search: |
