@fathermackenzie since our group has an uneven distribution of game ownership, we bring things to the table and the first person to nominate a diverse set of N games (where N is the quantity of players) as a cohort of games starts the process. Then everyone gets to remove one game (the original selecting person doesn't because they defined the cohort) until you have just one title remaining.

That's effectively the "least bad" choice at the time, because people remove the title they least want to play and the remaining game is not the bottom choice. It also means you have to sort of read the audience for what they might go for (e.g. don't pick 5 train games for a mixed group where a disproportionate number don't like train games). Given enough time, everyone will get to define the cohort once.

@pathief Your Dorfromantik comments made me laugh; I've had discussions about what happens when you decouple ways of determining "victory" from players and their actions (coop or competitive) and you essentially have the same opinion I do.

"All games are activities, but not all activities are games..."

Dorf is not a bad thing, but it's not my jam is all. I know people who absolutely adore it and I'm happy it exists for them.

@lolzy_mcroflmao Yeah, we've seen the "blow out one really good round, and then don't paradox" in 4p. 3p less so but it's still a decent approach. This may just be a quirk of the design is all (and that's fine. I have lots of games where there are annoyances and I still love them). I appreciate the replies, thanks.

@lolzy_mcroflmao Yeah, generally. I've also seen the term used where "the influence of a player to your left/right is outsized compared to the effect of players which are separated by at least one other player" (so in Pax Porfiriana or The King is Dead, you are responsible for stopping your left-handed opponent from winning).

In Cat the Box, our observation is the further you are from the trick leader that started that round, the more likely you are to get stuck in a bad situation. So we really want to either lead the trick, or be second. In a 3p game, we found it was just a quirk, but in 4p, the pressure on the 4th player to disrupt the tendency of "complete my run and get out" that you find in many (but not all) trick takers caused the game to be less stable and more often then not, the 4th player in that round fared worse.

I'm willing to accept it as a group dynamic issue in terms of conservative/aggressive play styles, but since you said you'd played at 5 (and none of my group) I thought I'd ask if you had seen a similar effect.

@lolzy_mcroflmao I've played the original Cat in the Box a decent amount and we noticed that there is a seat binding that becomes more prevalent in impact at 4 players than at 3. Not having access to the re-issue, I've never tried it at 5. Do you think it becomes more so at 5 than at 4?

@dpunked I playtested Oath, but I've never played the final ruleset (we did all of our contributions at the beginning before covid started). It is complex though, and requires people to really sign on for that experience so I agree with that inclusion.

I've played a snot load of Terra Mystica and I've heard that Gaia Project is effectively "Space TM w/ a variable setup." I've also played a lot of FCM, the expansion really helps the game, if for nothing else than the new milestones. I would have nominated Indonesia over FCM, but that's purely personal.

Even if you exclude wargames though (so ASL, Here I Stand, etc which all have monster level rulebooks), the one omission I'm surprised about is that John Company 2nd didn't make it. That's like 45 pages but its doable. It's not like it's out of print or just unavailable either. Might not be able to walk into a generic hobby game store and pick it up, but that's a bending of the criteria IMHO (even if the article is intended to be a list of complex stuff that would be something you graduate to, which excludes High Frontier for example). Overall not a bad list.

PS: High Frontier should be a computer game for the rules enforcement standpoint and I'll die on that hill. Also, while the rules are only 1 sheet of paper, Southern Pacific from Winsome should be a computer game for the automated accounting alone...

@pathief your kallax alternatives for the frugal end of storage amounts to two options:

1. you go to a bracket system that is mounted on the wall. For years we did this with books and games. You end up buying boards and sanding/staining/painting yourself, but it's adjustable once you get the brackets mounted (and you can even mount them so that they are "flowing" as it moves around the room instead of being constrained by furniture or other things). The downside is when you move, you have to patch the holes.

2. in the US, you can get antique furniture at yard sales or other places that you can sand and refinish on the cheap as well. That's about how we came into ours.

Both of these require some work though (although, you can say Kallax does as well with assembly). It's a question of what are you optimizing on; space utilization, appearance, etc. Space was a premium for us.

Let's see how pictures federate across Lemmy/Mastodon systems. Attached is (should be?) a photo from earlier this year of my adjustable book case. Some stuff has moved around, but it's illustrative of just how little space is wasted. The Eldritch Horror set is now too big and heavy to store anywhere other than the floor, that's our one exception to the rule.

@donio bingo. I'm of the opinion that Kallax are the low hanging fruit of boardgame storage; looks nice enough, but just isn't optimized for the job. I use an old bookshelf with adjustable shelving that I took the doors off of and that allows me to use almost every cubic centimeter of space. That means I can fit anything up through the BattleCon big box set on it (so 2x the El Grande big box) without my difficulty.

The super long stuff that is *also* wide is where I run into problems; stuff like Kaivai where it's both long and wide gets stuck on top. I generally don't have a ton of those games so it's ok.

@pathief how long does it take to complete a game? If you get about 16 cases, are you ripping through 2 or 3 in a single sitting or is each more of a distinct event when you play?

@dpunked I can understand that, I won't play games related to work anymore either. When I clock out of work, that's basically the last I want to see of it until I clock back in.

@ada Bingo. I deal in systems professionally and how they are designed and that sort of stuff. It definitely gives me a leg up in the process.

One big thing is that of the modes of learning (visual/tactile/auditory), I prefer to feel pieces and stuff while I'm learning (and sometimes I'll even go through and do solo rounds multi-handed just to see how things fit together), but I can pick up manuals and just read them now to at least get started. I can't just sit and listen to someone explain the game though, something about just the listening piece does me in.

My spouse laughs at me, everyone knows when I'm learning a new *big* game because I have all of the pieces setup on the board, a tablet with a PDF I can search through, the rulebook in hardcopy, and a notepad where I have both "ooo, this is probably critical to remember" type things, and a second sheet of paper with what will (after a bunch of drafts) become the lesson plan when I teach others (assuming they don't read in advance).

@Nerorero

A) 6 Nimmt. scales relatively well with a sweet spot at 4 and 6 players. Takes about 20-40min to play a complete game.
B) One Night Ultimate Werewolf. The first two sets and maybe the bonus roles have lasted us hundreds of iterations. I think it's superior at 5, but other groups like it from 5-8p. Total round/game length is about 10min (almost regardless of player count).
C) For Sale. Skip the expansion, the base game is one of our better higher count options. Total game length is maybe 20min since the second half of the game is simultaneous action selection.

ONUW in particular should go over really well with a LARP group. I do recommend doing index card type role cheatsheets and laminating them. I used to have one that fit in the box but I've lost the photoshop file I made it in... If you get more than about 12 people, then Two Rooms & A Boom works as well and has a ~20min running time. It needs a lot of players though.

@donio I have done lesson plans like that for teaching a game (I used to have them saved in google drive so I could pull them up on my phone). I haven't done it for setup though outside of one instance; for Ginkgopolis, I had a sticky note with with player count and resources in the game for each but I think I have a note in the print out of the english rules now for it.

Most of the time, I can open the box, and look at the components and that's enough to jog my memory for setup.

@Profilename1 I agree with your right up; your first game might have been the better of the two. I haven't played the final version of JC2, but in the first one, the most interesting games were cash poor and always teetering on the edge of collapse.

Indonesia: Booo people who are merge happy and still lose.

Have you ever played Bus at 3?

What did you think about expropriation in Fresh Fish? (I think it's possibly the most polarizing aspect of it))

@Profilename1 If you're headed to #PaxUnplugged this winter, I'm happy to bring Southern Pacific and try and put together a 3 or 4p game. I know some other train gamers who are going so that should be doable.

Send me a DM if so.

@Ineedcoffee O&L is one of my favorite euros. I have a friend who super digs it solo, but its a very different experience then the 3/4p game. Ireland is more forgiving than France, but both are sort of relaxing compared to something like Agricola.

This weekend I'm advancing the game we have in the table well; Kim Kanger's Dien Bien Phu: The Final Gamble. We futzed around a couple weeks ago and made it through turn 1 (it's a monster long game, but even at Origins I got through like 6 turns before we had to pack up), hoping to get to the end of T3 before our time runs out. I suspect we're going to move it to Vassal just because our schedule doesn't sync up well and I'd like to get access to the table well again.

@Repptar Had it and got rid of it (well, more accurately, a friend had it and got rid of it). Juice wasn't worth the squeeze to us. It's a big game, and I think the one piece of advice I'd have is to approach it more like you would Here I Stand where it's going to take gobs of time and require a greater rules burden. This isn't TS2.0 sort of thing, and it wasn't intended to be.

I get really picky about my wargames, and this wasn't a time period that I felt passionate about. That's my fear with the upcoming Simmons game (which was BaM2e, now Triomphe à Marengo). I like Napoleon's Triumph in part because it does a great job of helping create that immersion of "I'm a commander and here is the situation" given the presentation, but it's not my time period so the rules burden and eccentricities are more of a burden than I normally want to put up with. I'm hoping this is an easier hill to climb as I do have some other fiends who jam on that era and it would be nice to have a game that meets my level of engagement with it that they are likewise interested in.

@Profilename1 lol, yeah, Italian Railroads was.... "not good" and would require more development and changes if it were to get licensed (IMHO). I did recoup my cash on that one at least. I actually *did* like Iberian Railways though, but it requires a very careful reading of the game and John's explanation that you *want* to make and break ties as ties score for those tied in each category and you can even tie yourself in some categories and score extra points. That's the point of the game, but it's buried in an explanation note that I'm not sure many have caught. I actually pointed it out to Ken Hill and it was revelatory (and that was AFTER the licensed it and announced it on BGG). Southern Pacific is the one unlicensed Winsome I still have, and it's about shuffling/suitcasing money to your advantage, but it has a very narrow "good" player count in my mind, and some terrible accounting...

I haven't even cracked open Horseless Carriage yet. I have the errata package taped to the back side of the box currently... That's a fall task I guess.

@donio I think my best hit rate is with Cole Wehrle, but I've sat and thought about this for a bit and I think I run into the issue that I generally only bat about 50% on any designer that does more than a couple games. There always seems to be something that they do that makes me go "no, you sort of missed on this one..."

For example:
- I enjoy Roads & Boats, Indonesia, and The Great Zimbabwe, but Antiquity/FCM/Bus all fell flat to me after a play or two.
- I adore Root/Pamir/JC1 but An Infamous Traffic was not good, and Oath was not worth keeping (and I skipped JC2 after playtesting).
- Glass Road/Ora & Labora/Bohnanza/Patchwork I like a lot, but I got rid of Caverna, Agricola, and I'm still deciding on the new Canal game.
- Twilight Struggle/1989/1960 I adore, and a bunch of other Matthews games I got rid of.
-- Glory to Rome, Innovation, and Mottainai are respectable, but The Bird and some others just sort of miss the mark I'm after.
- John Bohrer is on a 30% hit rate and I think I still have like 3 or 4 of his Winsome games.

There are some designers who I don't bother with at all anymore, because their style just doesn't mesh with me at all, and that's great cause there are other people who like those, but if we're talking about "who is your go-to" then that's tougher to say.

@dpunked Ooof, most disappointed I've been with a game has to be Cosmic Encounter; it's primarily rooted in two things.

1. I had a terrible first play. I won (no ties even), but it felt vapid and arbitrary.
2. The inability to select a target (and thus negotiate accordingly) sort of removed where I was hoping the game would be. Instead it was "oh, I'm targeting Jerry cause the game told me to"

Someone else in the group brought it, so it's not like I was out any skin. The game I did purchase, played a lot of to confirm some suspicions, and then traded away was Terra Mystica:

1. It has a declining critical nature of decisions as the game progresses (the three most important decisions you'll make in the game are during setup).
2. I found the faction dictated my strategy at an almost claustrophobic level (in particular, digging costs). This came across as a game about "here is what you need to do, can you do it better." Ora & Labora gives you a ton of options each turn and some of those are legitimate but it depends on your goal. TM says "here is your goal and strategy, can you actually do it" which I was less interested in.

I played maybe 7 or 8 games in person and double digits online but haven't played in years...