Skip to content

Best Gamer’s Game 2005

Posted 31 January 2006 § boardgames ‡ Comments Off °

Richard Breese’s Reef Encounter wins my personal accolade for the Best Game of 2005. The game is very “Kramer-esque” in its depth of tactical options. On any turn I’m considering

* whether, in light of inherent risks and timing, I have reached the best expected scoring potential for one of my corals.
* whether my parrotfish should consume a coral if only to gain me an early jump on locking dominances.
* how I can use one coral (hopefully mine) to attack another and gain the highly useful consumed coral tiles.
* the chance of my rushing the game to a quick end in as to leave players with one (or more!) shrimp on the board.
* my vulnerabilities, my potential defensive corrections, and whether or not my opponents have the resources to exploit them.
* taking polyp cubes to inhibit others from growing certain key corals.

…and this is only the tip of the iceburg.

The game is highly tactical, presents numerous solid options, poses risks that must be continually reassessed, and relies largely upon timing and one’s ability to control it. It is meaty enough to afford high replayability and is itself a work of art. While it is not a game for the masses, it rightly belongs in any serious gamer’s collection.

Best Family Game 2005

Posted 31 January 2006 § boardgames ‡ Comments Off °

By a landslide 10 Days in the USA was played more than any other game in 2005. The game is elegant and simple and bridges the gap between casual gamers and devoted gamers. Notably, it is a game of yesteryear as I can’t always be timely in affording games their due playtime. Nevertheless, 10 Days hit the table just shy of 30 times in 2005 and everyone who had the opportunity to play it voiced comments about how much they enjoyed it. One friend even purchased it–a truly rare event among casual players.

As the most enthusiastic of us know, this number of plays marks a game that has truly paid for itself. Most games won’t in my life be played so many times.

Though not released this year, I name 10 Days the Best Family Game of 2005. Kudos to Alan Moon and Aaron Weissblum on producing a game so well liked by two different audiences.

Power Grid: Rules, Second Draft

Posted 26 January 2006 § boardgames § usability ‡ Comments Off °

Several weeks ago I complained about poorly-written rules and offered an alternative approach to cleaning them up. I demonstrated this approach on Power Grid’s rules. I received mostly commendation for the rewrite, but there was still room for improvement.

Here are the changes I made:
Added subheadings

To add even more clarity I added a few extra divisions under some of the phase descriptions. This was the change that most dramatically improved the rules usability. I consider the intelligent dividing and subdividing of sections one of the most useful tools, if not the most useful tool, for usability. Making the change was simple and required only a few extra words and a little rephrasing. I’m almost embarassed for having missed this in my initial draft.
Reduced formatting

My goal was to improve the usability by creating magnetic words that would easily catch the scanning eye. I embolded certain words–too many–to accomplish this. One commenter accurately described my use as “willy nilly.” I had emboldened so many words that I had reduced its effectiveness.

I had emboldened phase names (as in the auction power plants phase) and numeric figures. I had emboldened words that I thought succinctly expressed the idea of the sentence/section. In the revision, I substituted quotes for emboldening of phase names (as in the “auction power plants” phase). I dropped much of the emboldening and kept some that I thought helpful.
Displaced hints

In the original draft I had hints for each of the various sections. In the revision, I thought it better to displace all hints to a later section. These were details I didn’t think the reader needed to worry about while he was digesting the rules.

To better substantiate having a “hints” section, I added a few more.
Inline player number adjustments

The initial draft highlighted in gray figures that varied depending on the number of players. The actual figures were those that corresponded to a 5-player game. The adjustments were charted in the appendix and a short “notations” section instructed the reader to look up the required number there. Some people didn’t like having to page to the appendix for the lookup.

One reader suggested adding tables inline. I tried this but it just looked to clunky having so many extra tables dispersed throughout the rules. Still, I liked the idea of having the adjustments inline. I had avoided doing this in the first place because I didn’t like the clunkiness of having to say,

The game ends in the round in which any player grows his network to include the target number of cities (2 players = 21, 3 players = 17, 4 players = 17, 5 players = 15, 6 players = 14).

I found this just too intrusive, but I agreed that having the information readily available was useful. So, I adopted a shorthand notation that I believe is obvious enough without an explanation.

The game ends in the round in which any player grows his network to include the target number of cities (2p = 21, 3p = 17, 4p = 17, 5p = 15, 6p = 14).

It’s a little clunky, but its usefulness justifies it. It’s far cleaner that having extra lookup tables everywhere. Additionally, I left the “player number adjustments” chart in the appendix for single-page reference.
Page economy

I added just barely enough text on certain pages to increase the document page count. In trying to keep my draft to 8 pages, I notice an easy opportunity to take advantage of white space in the right margin. I framed the short sections on the scoring track and the playing order track and laid them side by side. I shrunk the size of the resource icons and did the same. I do not recommend overdoing this. I chose only to do it in order to keep related groups of instructions together on one page, and to avoid just barely spilling onto an extra page.
More polishing

I took the opportunity to clarify some of the phrasing. Also, I added or pruned words and phrases as needed.
Polished rules deserve three drafts

All of this revisioning resulted in the second, but not yet final draft. It seems reasonable to me that rules ought go through a draft and a re-draft before reaching the third and final draft. Three is reasonable, though I can’t argue against still further revision.

I await your final comments. The final draft will soon follow.

The Need to Expand

Posted 23 January 2006 § boardgames § guest authors ‡ Comments Off °

On a recent visit to a number of online game stores I noticed something that really got me thinking about the gaming industry and my own personal buying habits. I noticed the glut of new expansions for Runebound and I wondered, why so many all at once? In fact, why so many at all? I began looking at expansions for other games a little more closely, specifically the expansions I own and the ones I’ve been anticipating. Now my questions have changed to just this: Why do we need expansions at all? While they’re certainly nothing new, why the sudden expansion trend?

One of the first things I did was review my own collection to see just how many expansions I owned in relation to the number of games and to quantify their effectiveness and need. After I did my tally, I was a little shocked to discover that approximately 20% of what I currently own are expansions to existing games! Quite a bit more than I thought. Looking deeper I found that I’ve only ever played a little less than half of them. So I wondered why that was. I began to sort the expansion into a number of categories, those that were needed, those that weren’t needed, those that never helped or hindered, money expansions, and addiction expansions.
Needed Expansions

Most of what I’m going to say here is completely subjective. Where I may feel a game is or isn’t lacking, many others will completely disagree. Games that need expansions are, in my opinion, games that were published with problems and/or limitations or games that grow stale over time. Unfortunately, some limitations have been purposely build in just for the sake of selling future expansions, but we’ll discuss that issue later on is this article.

One game that cried for an expansion and finally got one this year is Mare Nostrum. Was it needed? There are greatly varying opinions on that, but when the majority of what people say about a game includes statements such as: bad rules, unbalanced starting position, trading problems, end game variants, frequent ties, and king-maker problems, the answer seems obvious. The expansion managed to address most of the problems that some felt the game had. So now everyone should be happy, the group that felt the game was fine as it was and the group that felt the game needed to be fixed. Of course the latter group had to pony up an addition $34.95(MSRP) to fix a game that already cost them $49.95(MSRP)! So I ask you, would they have bought the game if it had come out right the first time for $84.90? Doubtful but then again I know people who paid $85 (myself included) for the limited edition Revolution: The Dutch Revolt 1568-1648, a game with such bad rules that I’ve yet to even attempt playing it.

There are plenty of other examples of games that needed an expansion because of problems. I would be opening the proverbial can of worms by rehashing the most debated expansion of all time, Advanced Civilization. The pro-Civilization and pro-Advanced Civilization discussion can get heated up rather quickly but it comes down to two groups, those who prefer the original and those who prefer the altered version. The only way to tell for sure is to play both and judge for yourself.

The second type of “needed” expansion is to add more scenarios to a game with limited playability. To say a game like Advanced Squad Leader has limited playability seems crazy to someone such as myself who owns nothing more than the ASL Starter Kit #1, but who can argue with 25+ Modules and more player created maps than you can shake a stick at?

Memoir’44 has it’s share of fans, but with the limited number of scenarios that came with the base game it was only a matter of time before the game became repetitive and there came a demand for more. Player scenarios quickly abounded and not long after that the expansions came with new scenarios, new terrain, new troops, new rules, and promises of more to come. The expansions are good and were definitely needed for those who played the base game a lot, though there’re a bit pricey once again. Other games such as Apples to Apples, Age of Steam, Munchkin, and Formula De also needed expansions to keep the games fresh.

For anyone who has played Elfenland with and without the Elfengold expansion, you’ll quickly see the difference. Elfenland on it’s own is a fun game but it’s much more of a family style game. Elfengold takes the game and makes it into a gamer’s game. While it wasn’t a necessary expansion, it was certainly a welcome one.

Finally I’ll site Runebound, of which I definitely have some problems with. I bought the 1st edition and loved it, I bought the first expansion when that was released and there was a lot more promised to come. The game did have some problems, though I didn’t mind because the game was fun. Instead of correcting the problems via an expansion, the company reissued the game in a 2nd edition and all future expansions would only be compatible to the new edition. If you bought the 1st edition, get ready to pay up for the new edition if you want the expansions. There’s no doubt the game needs an occasional infusion of new cards to keep it fresh and to increase playability, but the onslaught on recent Runebound expansions is just insane! So far, you’ve paid for the 1st edition, paid at least the $20 for the new edition and now are faced with about a dozen new expansions on top of it, some cheap and some expensive. I don’t understand why they didn’t spread it out a bit but I guess the market for Runebound is hot at the moment and they seized the opportunity and took advantage of the situation. So are all of these expansions necessary or are they impulse buys? Only time and playing the game can tell.
Unnecessary Expansions

Why do game companies take a perfectly good game such as Bohnanza and convolute it with an array of bad expansions? The short answer is money. Why have there been so many expansions to such immensely popular games as Carcassonne, Settlers of Catan, and HeroScape? Game companies stand to make a huge profit from spin-offs and expansions because name recognition is king in sales. If you own Blue Moon, how simple is it to toss in one pack of expansion cards when placing a game order? All too easy, they’re like candy in a checkout line.

What irks me the most are expansions that really should have been a part of the base game to begin with. Have you ever wondered why there’s so much useless wool when you play Settlers of Catan? That could be because the original game was actually Settlers and Seafarers combined, not split. The publisher decided to split the game up. Why? Take one guess. On top of that there are separate expansions for each of those to add a 5th and 6th player. So to play Settlers as it was designed but with 5 players, you’d have to spend upwards of $112.00(US)! What a marketing concept! Wings of War did the same thing. When I first played it I felt that something was missing and they told you as much by including pieces in the initial game that could only be played with the expansion! Slick indeed, I don’t know about you but I hate being taken advantage of.
Useless Expansions

These are expansions that nobody asked for, are not really needed, and no one went out of their way to purchase. The game is not helped by these expansions, they just add more or the same, usually only making the game longer. Zombies!!! springs to mind. The base game is long enough, did they really need to add a mall, a military base, and a pack of zombie dogs? By the way, glow-in-the-dark Zombies don’t really help much as you need to have the lights on to play the game! Just when you think that “The End” must be the final expansion, they spring expansion #5 on you anyway!

Does anyone actually use most of the Carcassonne expansions? Now I feel that the Inn & Cathedrals was necessary, it added much need tiles and the big Meeple is great. After that, I don’t mind the River, Traders & Builders or Princess and the Dragon, they’re fun but not necessary, but does anyone even play with King & Scout or The Count? The Spielbox expansions are nice to have if you already get the magazine but don’t go out of your way to get them, they’re just not worth the effort.
Money Expansions

I’ve mentioned a number of these games already. I don’t mean to harp on the fact that expansions often take advantage of their biggest fans but they do. Settlers/Seafarers, Carcassonne/Expansion 1, Wings of Wars-Famous Aces/Watch our Back, these all feel like two pieces of the same puzzle but sold separately! If they were moderately priced then perhaps we could swallow it easier, but instead they often cost about the same as the base game itself. The trend toward high-priced expansions keeps increasing. The Clash of Kings expansion for A Game of Thrones tops out at $35 while the upcoming War of the Ring Expansion reaches $36 and the Doom Expansionwill hit $40! You could easily purchase a new game at those prices. Game companies must figure that if you’re willing to pay $60 for War of the Ring, then $36 for the expansion is reasonable. For all the plastic goodies you’ll get it may well be worth it, I’m looking forward to it myself to be honest. Though I can’t help but feel like a sucker sometimes, and the worst part being that I’m going into it with my eyes wide open. Where will the line be drawn? How far will gamers be pushed?
Addiction Expansions

One word has probably already sprung to your mind…Magic (the Gathering). MTG is the ultimate in addictive games. I should know, before I found board games I was a Magic CCG collector. Oh, the money wasted! Now Magic was (and still is) a good game, I love assembling a deck and matching it up against other players’ creations. The problem is that your deck will never be good enough, not with a new expansion coming out about every two months. So you need to buy more, and more, and more of them. The same holds true for miniatures. I once bought a few sets of the Lord of the Rings miniatures, held on to them for a few months, then realized there was still a dozen or so sets that I “needed” to get with more coming out all the time. I luckily recognized that money pit for what it was, having learned my lesson from CCGs, and I sold off my sets at cost. Still, I fell into the trap.

Many gamers were once caught in the CCG/miniature traps but have we really learned our lesson? Blue Moon was spun to be non-collectable, half a dozen or more expansion sets later and it’s very debatable. Do you have all of the Carcassone, Settlers, Alhambra, or Duel of Ages expansions? How about all (or a great many) of the Formula De, ASL, or Age of Steam maps? Where is the line between expansions and collectable games? It looks like muddy water from here. I really enjoy Runebound but I will resist the temptation to track down all of its expansions even though I have searched out all of the HeroScape expansions to date.
Lessons Learned (?)

I guess that admitting you have an expansion problem is the first step to recovery. I’ve been bitten time and again by expansions for card and board games, so now I stop and think first, right? If it were only so easy! Many of the expansions I’ve talked about to this point I currently own or did own at one time. There was a point when if I liked a game then buying the expansion was a no-brainer. Not so anymore, I’ve come to realize that most expansions either add nothing to a game, take away from a game, or just hog up space that could be otherwise held by games I actually play. If a game is broken in some way, an expansion may fix it but don’t count on it. Your best bet may be to just accept the game for what it is or get rid of it.

I’ve also learned that patience is indeed a virtue when it comes to expansions. I let others take the plunge and, if the water looks good, I’ll take the plunge later. I can’t say that it’s true for everything, I’ll still seek out the latest HeroScape expansions and the upcoming Puerto Rico expansion is already on my purchase list, but these are tried and true games that I already know need a new infusion for myself. I’ll leave the Doom expansion and such to my fellow gamers to try first, then I’ll consider whether to buy it or trade my game. I just wish that game companies would spend their time play testing and writing good rules before putting a game out instead of spending it fixing past mistakes at the expense of their customers. In the meantime, I have plenty of other games that work fine and need no expansions to play with that will keep me busy.

That Sinking Feeling

Posted 19 January 2006 § boardgames ‡ Comments Off °

We’re all becoming gaming curmudgeons.

The gaming hobby has reached a golden age where titles, it seems, explode onto the shelves. Avid gamers like myself have a love affair with experientialism and seek out new games at every opportunity. I mean, I’ve hardly opened the shrink, popped the chits, and played a game before I’m on to the next. Partly, that’s just because I have so many untried and hardly-tried games. I mean, these games of ours are exciting stuff. I really do feel like a kid and these games are my toys. Trouble is, just like a kid on Christmas morning, I’m bored with a toy inside 5 minutes because, well–there are so many great toys encircling me.

A game that reaches my dime list is quote-unquote: experienced. That’s not saying I have learned all its intricacies, that it has worn its welcome, or that the replay value has faded, though any of these may be true. It means I’ve given it more that a reasonable number of plays in which to determine whether it deserves long-term shelf space or attic space, and that I have begun to digest all that the game offers. Now, the majority of the judgments I make are made well before the dime list and often before the nickel list. I mean, I just know if certain games don’t suit me and I don’t toss any more time at them. I’m usually willing to give a game a second play before making conclusions, but that’s not a fast rule.
Where has the luster gone?

I have been noticing an interesting phenomenon that comes a few weeks after the cocain rush of trying a new game–I’ll call it the “sinking feeling.” I try a new game and I think “now that’s a game I like,” or “that has a unique twist.” Generally, this means (if the copy wasn’t mine) I’ll be getting it.

A couple weeks pass. A big box arrives on my doorstep–Christmas again! Goodie-goodie! I carefully open the box and gingerly, neatly stack the contents onto my shelves. I take the lucky first, discard the shrink wrap, pop off the lid, pop the chits, and check out the contents before I baggie them. I place the rules on my bed stand for late night reading. Then I read them shortly in advance of the next scheduled game day. Game day arrives and I invite my fellow gamers into a new game world. I thoughtfully teach the rules. Then we begin.

Usually, that play goes fine. Maybe better than fine–I love the show-and-tell excitement of introducing people to games. The sinking feeling usually comes on the game days that follow a week or two after that. When it comes time to hand pick my tote of games, those games that once had a spark have lost it; I pass them over and choose other games. What’s weird is that this change of heart comes even though I’ve given no further concious thought to the game.

That sinking feeling is confirmed each time I contemplate whether that game belongs in my tote, and I again pass it over. A game that initially thought I liked, falls from favor. Mostly this happens with games that have borderline ratings–usually a 7 or an 8. For me there’s a chasm of a line between 6 and 7. I have some desire to play 7’s, but little-to-no desire to play 6’s. In fact, 6’s fall into the cull zone–games to be traded or sold. After I pass over a game time and again, especially a game that once garnered a worthy rating, I sometimes find myself asking “what happened?”

Let’s look at some of the titles that waxed before they waned:

Neuland
Neuland is a game that I immediately found innovative. There are a lot of favorable design elements: clever resource management using so few bits, a time track that itself offers a breadth of tactics, and the idea of erecting buildings that any player can use.

This culminates into a game of chicken where players–each one step from victory–block each other’s resources. Though some find the necessary bottlenecking palatable, I find it rather unsatisfying. Each story the game tells almost always ends the same: tactical congestion. Not to mention, each game turn seems much like the last. The game has brilliant elements that I could easily see worked into a masterpiece, but, as is, falls a little short.

Tower of Babel
When I first played Tower of Babel I thought it okay at best, but was intrigued by its tactical/strategic possibilities. I thought, this is a game that might work out as a good closer for my game nights. Although there is a game in there, and it is fine for what it is, it has no umpf! It is purely abstract with a veneered theme.

I should have stuck to my initial impressions. It’s not that the decisions aren’t interesting and that there isn’t something to differentiate good play from bad play, it’s just dry.

Himalaya
Experiential as I am, I found the programmed movement system interesting and, for not having played RoboRally, new. I especially liked the scoring system. Though a little cumbersome, it seemed almost Knizia clever. Because the game has its good elements, I’ll be keeping it at least until I can dime list it. Here’s what I don’t like: it’s underproduced and it’s another area majority contest. I’ll speak to each.

The board is badly cut so that when folded it’s crooked; overall, its one of the worst boards I’ve seen. I compared it to Maka Bana, another Tilsit game, and noted the same low-quality board. In Tilsit’s defense, the plastic bits (namely the Yaks) are great!

Area majority. What more can I say. How many ways are their to cut that pizza pie? Lately, the get-the-most-bits-in-an-area thing just doesn’t pack a punch. If not for their three-tiered scoring system, this game would have already been on the trade pile.

Havoc: The Hundred Years War
First play and I really liked it! Second play and its luster had faded a lot. I like the growing tension of trying to build several poker hands and time them for just the right battles. For a first attempt, it really is a solid game. Though it was built around the poker ranking system, it certainly is not a poker substitute. It’s its own game and poker its own.

The sinking feeling I got from this game is mostly a matter of taste. Card games, praised by Larry Levy or not, just don’t measure up to board games in my book. I like lots of card games–even classics like Canasta, Hearts, Spades, Rook, Up & Down the River, and Poker–but not half as well as I like board games. It’s personal taste. Certainly nothing to discredit Havoc’s success. For me, it’s usually the card games that play like board games that win me over. Some of the multiplayer card games I like best are: Medici, Chaos Marauders (its a nostaligic thing), Coloretto, and Colossal Arena.

Santiago
I was immediately taken by how cutthroat Santiago was. I liked the overseer role, the bidding, and the irrigating. After getting a copy, I only played it once and, for reasons unknown to me, it hasn’t called to me since. Of all the games I’ve mentioned Santiago exemplifies that sinking feeling. What once drew me in, draws me in no more.

Hansa
This was my favorite game at my first Gathering of Friends. I played it a few times since picking up a copy; but its another game, that like Santiago, has no explanation for its sudden demise.

In The Shadow of the Emperor
Here’s another game that I originally thought had a lot of promise. I played this one at my second Gathering of Friends. I got a copy and that copy still sits in shrink on the shelf. I don’t feel particularly bad for not having played it.
It’s not the game’s fault…

The first thing I have to say is that these aren’t necessarily bad games. They may, in fact, be good games, but just not games that suit me for whatever reason. I suspect that this sinking feeling comes with game glut. I get game after game after game so that my shelves are piled with games that haven’t received their due play time. Pickiness comes with having so many games from which to choose and not the time to play them all. I mean, I’ve got the time perhaps, but I still want a life outside of boardgames.
I want the repeat hitters

When I buy a game I’m really hoping it will at least make the nickel list. There’s no way to grasp the nuances that a game offers in just a couple plays. Occasionally there is a game I like so well that it repeatedly hits the table, and this lends to me liking the game even more. Some strong repeat hitters that come to mind are Goldland, Reef Encounter, Das Zepter von Zavandor, and 10 Days in the USA. A new, fresh game to me may be an aged title that I didn’t get around to for a while.

I strongly suspect I would more greatly appreciate lots of passed over games, if I had not become gluttonized by so many. Because I’m so mezmerized by discovering new games, fresh themes, and innovative mechanics, the evergrowing list of games intoxicates and distracts. I’ve realized I need to be pickier about the games I buy lest the glistening of shrink in my home resemble that of a game store. My real goal is to collect games whose facets I truly want to explore time and again.

I wish that more gamers in my lot were buying and introducing me to the influx of new games and not so much the reverse. Honestly, I can’t complain for partaking in a hobby that is so choice rich. It’s just that when I think of being faced with interesting, difficult decisions, I think of it in the context of a game, not in buying them. And my addiction has me buying-buying-buying. For all that buying and for the continual process of discovering new games, having a few go south hardly offsets the fun.

And these are my problems!? Boy, have I fallen into a wonderful hobby!

Finding “The” Game

Posted 16 January 2006 § boardgames § guest authors ‡ Comments Off °

So you already have a few favorite games, right? Of course you do, even average Joe Monopoly has a favorite game. Now you want find another game, something in line with your tastes that will knock your socks off! But how do you go about that? How can your current favorites lead you to find that new phenomenon?
Friends

This is the obvious answer. Ask the friends that you already play your current favorite(s) with. Not only will they give you plenty of choices to muse over, but in all likelyhood they will own those games and you’ll have a chance to play them before taking the plunge. Though I would take their advice with a grain of salt. Keep in mind that no two people think exactly alike, so even though you both may love one particular game it does not in any way mean that you will like their other favorite games too. Many times I’ve thought to myself, “So-and-so will love this game, it’s right up their alley.”, but when I teach them the game it gets a weak response. You never really know what will strike someone’s fancy.
If you’re lucky you may have friends who will let you borrow a game from time to time. In a case where you want to introduce a particular game to your family or game group, you could borrow the game and have them try it out. If it’s a hit, you could then purchase it yourself with confidence, but if not you’ve saved yourself the trouble and the money.
Online Friends

If you’ve been actively involved in the online gaming community then you’ve no doubt made a few online friends in and outside of your home country. They are always a great resource for information on games and are usually up the the task of imparting their opinion. Just shoot them an email or check out their online game ratings if they have them ready. I’ve run across may hidden gems this way. There are two additional resourses that I use, both found at boardgamegeek.com, the recommendation section and the Geekbuddy option.

The recommendation section is fairly new and it draws recommendations from a “strong statistical correlation” among the online users who have already rated the game. A useful resource for researching games though it doesn’t always work as well as I’d like it. For instance, when you look at Puerto Rico, I expect to find recommendations such as Princes of Florence or Tigris & Euphrates. I expect those games to be recommend because I myself love the three of them and it seems a fairly safe assumption that many who like one will like the others. However it only recommends one game, the Puerto Rico expansion. I can imagine that it’s lack of recommendations is due to information overload since Puerto Rico is the highest rated game of the site. So instead, I search for Return of the Heroes, a dungeon crawl game. It recommends Runebound (a similar dungeon crawl) and Shadows over Camelot (another fantasy theme). Both are good recommendations, but I can think of a number of games that could also be recommended such as Magic Realm or Talisman. It does get you on the right path though the recommendations can sometimes have no apparent correlation. Even worse, many times there are no recommendations at all.

The GeekBuddy option can also be useful. What’s convenient about this option is that you aren’t required to even know the person or contact them to get their opinion (if they have one). It works quite simply, over time once you’ve used the website a bit, (looking at reviews, reading the forum, or just looking at rating comments) you start to notice a few people with a similar taste in games as yourself or just someone whose opinion you respect. You can make them a “Geekbuddy”. Now when you view a game page, you can click on the “GeekBuddy Analysis” which will bring up any ratings and comments that they have given about the game. Sometimes, when I’m unsure about a game, I’ll use this option to sway me one way or the other. Of course, it only works when your GeekBuddies have played and rated the game, so it has limits.
Other Resources

There are a number of other resources out there to use, some are better than others. Webpages, blogs, and magazines are my own primary sources of information. Too many to recommend them all, blogs are fast becoming a popular trend for reviews and insights on the latest and greatest games (after all you’re here, so you know what I mean). Check out Mario’s article on the Superior Usability of Blogs for more info of the topic. What I look for in a good blog is up-to-date and relevant information and gaming news. One of the top blogs that I visit would have to be Boardgame News. Websites are becoming a thing of the past for many as blogs allow users to quickly enter in new info with little fuss. But websites are still the main source for the storage of mass information. Here I’m looking for in-depth analysis, reviews, and game aids with a good pulse for the current state of affairs. The top gaming website for me is Board Game Geek. The magazines about board games that are available have been limited, to say the least. In fact, the only magazine with any reference to board games that you’re likely to find at the local Barnes & Noble or Borders is Games which hardly specializes in strategy board games. I subscribe to a number of magazines since it’s pretty much the only way to even get them, though your local game store may carry one of them. Games Quarterly, Counter, and Games Illustrated are all excellent publications that I can recommend. I’m sure there are more out there but these are high quality magazines worth my time to read.

All things considered, some of the things I’ve mentioned were pretty obvious. As I’ve said, these are all simple tools for you to use to help you quickly decide what games are right for you without spending too much money on games that aren’t for you. However, some extra legwork on your part willl help make that decision even easier. Take the time to look at game descriptions, read the rating and comments of your fellow gamers, ask your friends for their opinion, and make it a point to try a game beforehand if possible, whether live or online. If you were to use each of the above options together you should be able to make a good sound purchase that you’ll enjoy for months, if not years to come.

Power Grid: Bullet-structured Rules

Posted 12 January 2006 § boardgames § usability ‡ Comments Off °

Having covered poorly-written rules, I decided to take a crack at rewriting and improving a set of rules. To make the best example possible I knew I had to pick a game that was very popular but whose rules were not considered well written. Immediately I knew it had to be Power Grid.

I had played Power Grid at least a dozen times, but every time I needed to look up a key point, the rules proved unnavigable. Great rules must be highly scannable. Not only am I expecting to read throught the rules once before my first game, I like being able to use them during a game to quickly and easily locate a pertinent fact.

I started nearly from scratch not necessarily wanting to model anything already in the published rules. Though I had made no conscious decision to do so, I noted that I immediately began writing out the rules in a rather unconventional bullet style. It was a natural decision that I thought very usable, especially as read back over what I had written.

In each section, I broke each key fact into the start of a sentence that itself had supporting bullets which continued that sentence. Within the lead sentence and its subordinate bullets—some bullets themselves having subordinate bullets—I embolden or italicized to create magnetic words and phrases that would grab scanning eyes.

As I developed the rules I had to read over them several times. I learned that my brain could remember the location of facts laid out in this new format quite well; I’d be thinking something like, “yes, I remember it was the third bullet down under that heading.” My brain was able to register a photographic snapshot regarding the key facts that it couldn’t have done quite so well had the rules been written using typical paragraphs. While paragraphs are good for most writing they do not offer the structural clues that make instructional material more useful.

Perhaps my brain could locate key facts only for having poured over my draft so many times and the usability improvement is not as great as I think. It may be this bullet structuring is purely preferential. That’s where you come in, my reader friend. In my prior column on rules I emphasized the importance of testing copy especially copy that makes use of a creative, untested format. My format is certainly unorthodox and in need of testing.

I had first thought to explain why I made certain decisions in the rewrite and to explain the basics of how to follow the structuring, but I thought better of it. Though I may expand on this in a later column, I wanted the views and criticisms of the unguided, untainted reader. The real hurdle will be having someone who has never played the game use them. I had no one like this readily available, but I’m keeping my eyes open. I suspect that I have knowledge in the head that makes rules clear to me that would not be to the reader having no advance knowledge. Again, just one more reason why rules copy must be tested.

I am eager to hear what others think of my bullet-structured approach. The first thing you’ll see is that I open with an overview of the game which covers the goal (how to win), the means (an overview of game play) and the end (what causes it). I always cover these three points in my oral explanations inside the first minute. Knowing the goal and the general means by which it is attained significantly improves a person’s ability to absorb and remember rules. In my experience, there is no better way to begin; it gives more meaning to everything which follows.

Please read my draft version of the Power Grid rules and tell me what you think.

2005: The Best, The Worst, The Missed

Posted 09 January 2006 § boardgames § guest authors ‡ Comments Off °

The year 2005 has come and gone very quickly. Looking back there were an incredible number of games released, many were quite good, some disappointed me, yet I also realize with a heavy heart that I never had an opportunity to play many of them.

Anyway, here’s my Top 10 Games, Bottom 3 Overall, and the 3 I Wish I’d played…
The Worst of 2005

Let’s start with the bad games. Well, not necessarily bad, maybe just disappointing. I often do a bit of research about a game before buying or even trying it, so these are primarily games that I looked forward to playing but was disappointed by them or else just didn’t like.

1. Dungeon Twister - I know there’s a large following for the game but it really fell flat with me and I sold my copy without any regrets.
2. Palazzo - I was really looking forward to this coming out, it was a must buy game for me before it was even released. However, I was lucky enough to try it out first and I found the game almost boring, saving me from purchasing it.
3. Runebound-2nd Ed. - I’m not bashing the game at all here, it’s the company. I have the 1st Edition and love it. I was very looking forward to the 2nd Ed and all the new expansions. However, Fantasy Flight stifled that by not honoring my upgrade. So as much as I like the game, I was extremely disappointed in FFG for not sending me the new edition.

The Missed of 2005

Looking back there were an incredible number of games released and I realize with that I never had an opportunity to play too many of them. I rendered my tally of games played for the year and I’m astonished that despite playing 218 different games with a total of 1,555 games played (counting live and online gaming), I still missed out on playing such highly touted games as Friedrich, Nexus Ops, Tower of Babel, Il Principe, Bonaparte at Marengo, Havoc, and Crusader Rex. There are a number of other games released too close to the end of the year for me to lament having not played such as Railroad Tycoon, Antike, Kaivai, Conquest of the Empire, Descent, and Byzantium. I anticipate playing most of those within the 1st quarter of 2006; I received or gave as gifts a few of these at Christmas, so it’s just a matter of time. Anyway, here are the 3 games I most regret not having the chance to play in 2005…

1. Twilight Imperium 3rd Ed. - I received this not long after it was released. I have not even punched anything out yet though I’ve been carrying the rulebook around with me all year.
2. Manifest Destiny - I purchased this at the 2005 WBC in August, I’ve read the rules but not yet played the game. I was very much looking forward to playing when I bought it.
3. Revolution - I was looking to forward to this very much and overpaid for it back in August. It’s still in shrink partly due to the complaints about the rulebook and partly due to the game length.

The Best of 2005

So many good games were released in 2005 that I hardly know where to begin! This year I began to broaden my horizon a bit by trying some war games but I just had no real luck finding one I really like, so none have made the Top 10 list, maybe next year. My favorites fall into two categories, strategy and fun and of course can only include the games that I’ve so far played from 2005.

10. Antiquity - The number of bits are overwhelming to be sure, but this is resource management at it’s best. I’m learning that even though Splotter Spellen only puts out about one game per year, they’re usually worth the special order to purchase it.
9. Louis XIV - I’m not sure how much staying power this game has for me but it’s a very good game in a small package.
8. Ubongo - All I can say about this game is that it’s a lot of fun. One of my most played and most requested games from 2005. If you enjoy puzzles and game, then this should be a winner for you.
7. Manila - Any game where you can be a pirate and completely overtake a ship is a winner in my book. This game of wagering is great fun and makes for some rather interesting decision making.
6. Ingenious - I’m not usually big on abstract games but this is quick enough and has enough luck that I enjoy it immensely.
5. Diamant - The game most often played multiple times for me in 2005. Takes push-your-luck games to an 8-player maximum.
4. Hacienda - Ahh…Kramer. He’s finally starting to hit regularly again after that Sunken City fiasco. Truly one of the best to come from him in awhile, and I loved That’s Life! so that’s saying something.
3. Zepter von Zavendor - Another great management resource game. Despite the theme this game has generated much more interest than I though it would. It’s the only game to draw more than 10 players alone for our group’s game days.
2. Caylus - No, it’s not the second coming of Puerto Rico as some may want you to believe, but it’s right up there. A great game in it’s own right that doesn’t need to be compared to anything else for you to realize it. This easily makes my top 10 list of all time.
1. Reef Encounter - The second game from 2005 to make my Top 10 of all time and this is even close to my Top 5. I can’t stop playing this game, whether live or online. The last game that happened with was Tigris & Euphrates, very good company.

Finding Local Gamers and Gaming Groups

Posted 06 January 2006 § boardgames ‡ Comments Off °

One of the more common questions that people ask me is how to find nearby gamers and to start up a gaming group or club. There’s no easy answer to this question, trust me. I’ve been gaming in one form or another all my life but I’d never heard of game clubs until about 4 years ago. I’ve since discovered that a large game club had existed right under my nose in my old neighborhood and met at the very mall I haunted as a teen. So why had I never heard about it before then?
My Story

As a child with two younger brothers and a sister, there was never a lack of gaming partners. Board games were one of our favorite pastimes and we had stacks of them. I would later realize how precious that was. In my teens I discovered Avalon Hill games at the local Allied Hobbies but still had much difficulty finding anyone to play them with and therefore lost interest. Gaming in the 90’s, at least for me, consisted mostly of CCGs (collectable card games). While one could always find people to play with at the local card store, they were mostly teens (much younger than myself) or else social outcasts with no detectable showering skills. I had little desire to be friends with them outside that environment, so the card store was the extent of my friendship with them. When I began to rediscover board games in 2002 I found a number of excellent resources for game information but my primary source quickly became boardgamegeek.com. My girlfriend (now wife) enjoyed playing games too but she had her limits. However, the gaming monster inside of me had once more awoke and so I set out to find other players with similar interests.

My journey started and still is primarily reliant on boardgamegeek.com. It was there that I discovered the SGS Worldwide Gamer’s Database. To be honest, it wasn’t extremely helpful, it was out of date and most of my emails were never even acknowledged. However, it only takes one response to get going. I managed to find a local gamer and start up discussion on playing, eventually we did and the rest is history. It was difficult finding more players initially since there were few resources available at the time to find fellow players. A little diligence and a lot of emails eventually paid off though. I slowly began to establish contacts though “the geek” and discovered small pockets of gamers all over the area. These were often just a group of friends that got together on occasion to play a few games but I eventually discovered actual established game clubs too. By visiting these clubs, sometimes far away, I was able to continue meeting new people, almost always finding one person that lived close by me (within 30 minutes).

Eventually we decided to hold an official game day, a 10am-10pm all-day event. We came up with a club name, rented a location (very cheaply) and set out on the next very difficult part, getting the word out. It sounds easy enough, at least I thought so at first, but how do reach a target audience with no publication to advertise in and no budget for it anyhow? I found a number of free advertisements via local community calendars in the papers and online. I set up a distribution list of the known contacts I had found and asked them to help spread the word and send me info on more potential contacts. Probably one the more important things I did was to set-up a website. It’s still nothing fancy, hardly more than a bulletin board about the group, but it was something. We also made up a few signs to not only help those expected to find us but to also draw in a few people from the street. We managed to draw nearly 20 people for that first game day, a huge success! Since then we’ve held our game days just about every other month and we’ve steadily drawn a larger crowd each time so that we now get between 25-40 people on average. A friend has established a weekly game night at his place and now that I finally have a place big enough to host, I’m hosting my own game nights too.
Finding Players

This is the first step on a long road. You need to know going in that it’s not always easy to find players and even tougher to keep a group going. If you accept that up front, you’ll be better prepared and less discouraged if something doesn’t happen quickly.

There are few more resources now than there used to be for finding players. I would start at boardgamegeek.com. They now have a number of places to look for fellow gamers. Under the Utilities-Users drop down tab, you’ll find gamer searches with or with maps. The map search is handy because it gives you good idea how far away people really are from you, especially for small towns you may have never heard of. There’s also the old Worldwide Gamers database that I mentioned previously and also their forum.

Contacting them via email at first is the best way to start but be sure to give them time to respond. I send something very generic stating who I am and why I’m contacting them. I point them to the web site and ask they to respond back if interested. Most of the time you won’t get a response so you have to keep at it. I usually give them a week or two and then send a second email. If they still don’t respond then I don’t bother any longer because they either aren’t interested, the email address isn’t used any longer, or they’re just not reading them. Once you do get some responses, keep in touch and try to get them to a game night as soon as possible. Once you meet someone you can break the ice and get a better feel for the person. Just be cautious when inviting strangers into your home, especially when you have kids, but I shouldn’t have to tell you that.
Starting Your Own Game Group

Before you go out and try to start one on your own, try a Google or similar search for game groups in your area. Finding an existing game group is much easier than starting your own. But if you’re starting from scratch you’ll have to take the long way around. Even if you find groups that are relatively close (within an hour), check out their website and try to attend one of their game nights, it can open up a lot of doors. The problem you’ll have while online searching is sorting out all the non-board gaming websites that come up anytime you search for “game” or “gamer” or anything similar; you’ll most likely get hits for mainly PC/PS2/Xbox games. Be diligent when searching and something will turn up eventually. Also check your local papers. The chance is slim that you’ll find anything, but I mention it because I once saw an ad for a game group in the paper. Afterwards, I began publishing our venue in the Community Calendar section of the paper (often free) and it had garnered some additional players. Other local game groups have had articles published about them, which are nice to see, and a real attention grabber.

There are three obstacles to starting and maintaining a game group: people, location, and time. We just discussed how to find people but you’ll need a place to play. Often this is easy in the beginning; you just need someone willing to host the event. If you’re the one arranging everything, you should be willing to host if possible, especially in the beginning. Set a place and time on a regular weekly or biweekly night and stick with it. But eventually your group could grow beyond the table space of your game room or dining room. You’ll have to search for an outside location to meet, which can be a daunting task. Game groups commonly meet at game stores, libraries, bars, bookstores, or some other public area that you can secure on a regular basis. Some clubs take membership fee and some do not, it will all depend on you, your group, and your circumstances. When I was initially searching for a location, I could not find the table space at any local library, bar, or bookstore and I did not have the room at home to host one myself. We were lucky enough to find a community center to rent for a small fee ($20) for the day.

While you search for players, get a website or blog going as soon as possible. It doesn’t need to be anything elaborate, just a place where people can read info about your game group, where and when you meet, and the type of games you play. You can find many free website and blog resources online, so money is not an issue. It’s a valuable investment of your time for a number of reasons. One is that you won’t have to field so many questions about the group. If they stumble on the website, most questions can be addressed there. Some people are reluctant to contact you directly so a website to look at may give them the necessary reassurance that it’s something they’re interested in. You can provide upcoming events and news at any time. If you start a group via Yahoo.groups or something similar you can also easily distribute emails to the entire group.

The final thing about finding players and possibly starting a game group that I’ll mention is to be consistent, be diligent, and keep at it. Once you find a few players, keep in contact with them, even if they never show up for a game night. Eventually they may come and it makes it all worth it. If you hold a regular game night you’ll also get a better and more consistent crowd since they can schedule their time around it ahead of time. Last minute calls for a game night seldom turn out well.

Welcome Jim

Posted 06 January 2006 § boardgames ‡ Comments Off °

Well, Boardgamers’ Pastime has hardly gotten off of the ground as a blog and already we’re expanding. I’ve invited my fellow gaming friend Jim Carvin to come on board and contribute his thoughts. He, like myself, is an avid gamer who buys games almost as often as groceries. I’ve enjoyed numerous opportunities playing games with him and he’s introduced me to a few games–most recently Caylus and Big Kini.

He has a good breadth of experience with games. I look forward to reading his insightful posts.

UPDATE:
Jim has discovered that his schedule is busier than he first anticipated. Instead of being a regular columnist, Jim will post occasionally as a guest author.