Quantcast
Channel: Rob Daviau | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 192799 articles
Browse latest View live

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Very weird May spoiler

$
0
0

by onigame

maximum wrote:

So my group played our games for May today, and we noticed something strange. Under dossier I, it has all the normal stuff listed there, but it also says "917 channel". Does anyone have any idea what this is about? We're all quite confused.


It has no gameplay effect and is there for flavor only.

In the United States, there are three official levels of security clearance, "Confidential", "Secret", and "Top Secret". The levels higher than "Top Secret" are compartmented (meaning that each one is received separately and doesn't automatically get you others) and often have their own names. Every time you've opened a box so far, you've seen a sticker that tells you the name of the clearance level you've received. That is just for the story. I suspect that if the US actually did have more than three levels of security clearance the game designers would have used the official names instead.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Poll - why Pandemic Legacy have risen in the rank so quickly?

$
0
0

by Stubentiger

I would assume that the high desire for that game - and therefore the high rating - comes from the simple fact that it incooperates a welldone game like Pandemic with the cool concept of risk legacy.
So the game starts with a big player base and has not to build a reputation itself over the time like e.g. Terra Mysitca.


From a personal point of view the legacy aspect solves some of the "boring" elements of cooperative games (also pandemic); and the cooperative aspect solves some of the risk legacy issue with a player getting a too good base on the board after 10 games.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: ON NO! Eight...

$
0
0

by tillmannen

Budapest wrote:

What card could possibly be destroyed in the first half of January?


[o]The "Cure all 4 deceases" objective?[/o]

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: ON NO! Eight...

$
0
0

by thargan

Budapest wrote:

Geeky_Farmer wrote:

January minor spoilers...

He also found great joy in destroying our first card. Here is hoping our early failure does not doom us or the world...



What card could possibly be destroyed in the first half of January?


The answer to that is itself a spoiler, if I'm remembering correctly.

[o]At the second epedemic, when you flip cards off the legacy deck, you're told to destroy the starting objective in order to replace it with a new one.[/o]

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Strategy:: Re: Just another approach to minimize distances from Research Centers

$
0
0

by onigame

Wentu wrote:

Honestly we are just playing Pandemic in a quite casual way, not much of a planning. But some things easily capture my enthusiasm so I like to spend time on such probably useless topics. I doubt my fellows will be extremely interested in all this but i like nonetheless to be able to say "if we put our second RC in Cairo we will be more able to easily reach the rest of the cities"


Figuring out that Cairo is the best place to put your second Research Center is a bit like figuring out that Illinois Ave. is the most-landed on space in Monopoly.

Doing the math is kinda fun, but it's not like you can really plan a strategy around buying Illinois Ave.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Non-replayable??

$
0
0

by onigame

reverendunclebastard wrote:

There are cards (objectives, characters) that are destroyed and removed from the game. The board becomes slowly covered in stickers as your (no spoiler, this is in the rules) cities slowly riot and then fall. There are stickers to track upgrades to the diseases.


Also, there are many perforated items (boxes, panels) that cannot be restored to their original pristine state after opening, and some scratch-off cards that would take a lot of effort to reapply the scratch-off paint.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: Compiled FAQ (Spoilers Hidden, each month hidden Separately)

$
0
0

by onigame

david707 wrote:


What's the difference between the Red and Blue box?
There is no difference in the contents of the boxes, only the box art itself is different.


Isn't the art on the cover page of the rulebook different too?

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: 2nd Positive Mutation Require Research Station? (No Spoilers)

$
0
0

by DaveD

Nolto wrote:

reverendunclebastard wrote:

The second positive mutation must be put on a disease that already has the first mutation, so the first mutation means you don't have to be on a station and the second one means that same disease no longer takes an action to cure.


Isn't there only one sticker for each positive mutation? (I am only in March currently, so don't spoil anything after March).

If there is only one sticker for each mutation, then only one disease could ever get any of the mutations.

If there are multiple first mutation stickers, then I either overlooked them, or I don't have them all.


reverendunclebastard wrote:

Those stickers are on the big sheet of stickers, the one with your panic level stickers, player upgrades, scars etc. There are multiples of level 1, less level 2 and only one level 3 if I remember correctly.


The figures are-

3xL1
3xL2
2xL3
1xL4

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Rules:: Re: DEUTSCH / German: Zentraler Thread Deutsche Errata (Spoilerfrei!)

$
0
0

by duchamp

TheCze wrote:

Forscherin (spoiler für Febraur):

[o]Die Forscherin kann einer anderen Figur die ein Kollege irgendwo anders ist jegliche Startkarte geben für je eine Aktion. Kollegen der Forscherin dürfen der Forscherin nur die Karte aus der Stadt in der sich der Kollege gerade befindet an die Forscherin schicken. Haben wir das jetzt richtig verstanden?[/o]


Fast korrekt.
[o]Kollegen dürfen sich eine der beiden Stadtkarten schicken, in denen sich die beiden befinden. Einer befindet sich in Stadt A, der andere in B. Beide dürfen sich jetzt die Stadtkarten A oder B schicken. Die Forscherin kann sowieso JEDE Stadtkarte weitergeben - als Kollegin muss sie nicht einmal in derselben Stadt stehen wie der Mitspieler.[/o]

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: New #1

$
0
0

by Sephakay

Its baffling how important it is too some people that their little baby is higher on a list then another game. Downright silly.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: 2 players, play 2 characters or all 4?

$
0
0

by RandomGraham

onigame wrote:

carlsbad wrote:

ahmorse wrote:

Conventional wisdom is that 2 characters is easier than 4 characters.


Could you explain why this is so? I would think that more characters would give you more flexibility and cover more territory?

We just started January 2 player tonight and played one character each, but I am curious what the difference would be if we were to play with a neutral third character. How would it be more difficult with a third?


For a 2-player game, each character will draw about half of the cards in the deck. For a 3-player game, each character will draw about one-third of the cards in the deck. Since curing a disease requires many cards of the same color in the same player's hand, it stands to reason that a cure is more likely to be naturally discovered, without Sharing Knowledge, if there are fewer characters. This advantage is somewhat stronger than the advantage a large team would get from having more character abilities.

This is true of base Pandemic. For Pandemic Legacy, it would spoiler-y to go into the details as to why this argument would still hold true as the game changes radically...


Also based on the game setup and new rules introduced you'll pick the best characters for the job. Thus the special ability that best deals with your current problems will get used more.

Session: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: A-Team Late April [Spoilers through May 1]

$
0
0

by MrWeasely

Initial conditions:

Coda is Yellow. Sub-Saharan Africa is faded, and churning with riots - 2-3 panic in all four cities. We've got all 6 research centers permanently built. We've got a Medic with Local Connections (treat an adjacent city) and a Scientist with Pilot (Direct Flight doesn't discard).

Manila and Tokyo both start with 3 cubes. Mexico City fades with 3 faded, but that and Los Angeles are thankfully the only cities with active faded populations ... this week.

First up is Scientist, and she flies to Mexico City and drops a quarantine. She can only get one three-stack, and this is clearly the one to get. She draws the turn-1 epidemic, and draws to city cards, and they're Manila and Tokyo. Sheesh! Twin outbreaks on the first turn! Her move was correct, the game hosed us.

Our city card breakdown is pretty slow to ramp up. We each draw about two of every color of cards, with the Scientist getting most of the epidemics and special events. For this reason the game will be a fairly long one.

LA and Mexico City's faded keep on breaking our quarantines, and the Quarentine Specialist keeps on remotely dropping more. Essentially we got a 3-action-per-turn character who kept these two cities in check for the rest of the game. It was a fair trade.

We got the cure for red, and took advantage of not having to wait a round, thanks to the disease's two positive mutations. Medic went on an two turn tour of the Pacific Rim, and got the eradication, a process aided by 3~4 quarantine markers we'd randomly placed on the east coast of Asia.

But the disease was not so easily beaten. There was an outbreak of faded in Lagos that we allowed to wash over Africa.

Milan, Algiers, and Baghdad went to three cubes, and with the Medic engaging in Pacific erantries, it fell to the sluggish Quarantine Specialist and Scientist to treat them. Quarantine Specialist had one particularly agonizing decision where she could either break her pair of blue city cards (the dominant cache) or have a very slow turn of treatment. She kept her pair, and proceeded to draw 3 blue city cards over the next 2 turns. So she cured blue, as well as red.

We needed the cure for black. We each had 3 black cards (only 2 for Scientist). We had 4 still to draw in remaining player deck of 10. We decided to transfer one of Medic's black cards to the phasing player (Scientist), since she'd have a 67% chance of drawing the game-winning 4th black card that turn - and if not, Medic could just trade the card back from Scientist. Scientist drew black.

One Quiet Night squelched a late outbreak and we stalled for time. Scientist's turn came up and we closed out the game with 6 cards still in the player deck.

Did we win?

Yes, we won decisively. We had an unlucky pair of outbreaks on T1, and one preventable outbreak in Coda-Yellow. Zero cities faded, save for the two that faded during setup. Of late, that's a pretty good track record for the A-Team.


_______________

Upgrades:

We got the third positive mutation for red: now it takes one fewer card to cure, and cures can happen out of turn and away from a research station. That's a no-brainer.

A long discussion about military bases followed. As a means of mobility, they are unimpressive - especially being so heavily invested in research centers as we are. However, as a means of winning the game, they're not bad.

A case was also made for Air Strike (unfunded event) to remove one faded from play.

However, both these ideas eventually lost out to buying the "forecaster" character upgrade for Quarantine Specialist. She gets to look at the top 2 or X cards on the infection draw pile. This, it is thought, will help her get a few more double use quarantines, and help us triage right after an epidemic.

Win Bonus: remove one faded figure at the start of the game.

_____________

New rules:

We immediately regretted the decision not to invest in military bases upon opening the new rules for March.


Rule H: Build Roadblocks: If your current region has a military base, you may spend one action to place roadblocks on as many routes as you want out of your current city. Diseases and the Faded cannot spread due to outbreaks along routes cut by a roadblock.

Rule I: If a city is completely roadblocked off, do not mark an outbreak on the outbreak track when it outbreaks since none of the adjacent cities are affected. Make sure to increase the panic level, however.

Players may no longer Drive/Ferry along a route containing a roadblock unless they discard a card of the same color as the city they are entering.

Rule P: Accelerated Incubation: When drawing palyer cards, check if any City cards drawn match the color of COdA. Place a Faded figure in each of the matching cities. If this would place a fourth figure, it's ignored and not placed - no outbreak occurs and no quarantine marker is removed.



We also got new cardboard roadblock counters, new relationships (friends and rivals again, IIRC), and two other things I'm forgetting....

We're ready for May!

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Fastest top 20 ever? (EDIT) ...I meant top 1

$
0
0

by Aweberman

Votes: 4406 (+103)
Average: 8.69 (-2)
BGG: 8.213 (-1)

Twilight Struggle: 8.201 (±0) -- 12 points behind (-1)


PL took over the #2 slot on 13 December and had an average rating of 8.83. The very next day its rating began to tank. Here were the daily losses: -3, -2, -1, -2, -1, -1 ... and then it was 8.73, where it hovered until the end of the year. Interestingly, on the day that it lost three points, there was a lot of publicity through Rob Daviau's Twitter account and the next day it added 148 ratings (much like yesterday's add of 149). The following day, as the hubbub began to die down, it added 105 ratings (much like today's add of 103). And then after that it settled into its usual range of added votes in the mid-40s.

The performance over the last two days has been quite similar to the performance from a couple of weeks ago, with similar losses on similar gains in votes. While I will not continue tracking this rating indefinitely (there are other places that cover this area more comprehensively), I am interested to see at what point its rating restabilizes. And, ultimately, I'm very interested in seeing where it finally peaks.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: New #1

$
0
0

by Aweberman

linusglenhaber wrote:

On a slightly related sidenote, does anyone know how the score is calculated? Thanks!

The average rating of a game (which you can see in the title bar of each game's page -- Pandemic Legacy's is 8.69 today) is simply that: an average of all the ratings a game has been given.

The geek rating of a game (which you can see if you click a game's rank in its title bar, or by clicking on Browse > Games in the BGG menubar) shuffles in a certain number of "dummy" votes of rating 5.5 or so. The purpose is to strike a balance between overrewarding games with high ratings but low numbers of votes while not overrewarding games with high numbers of votes.

The dummy votes are what kept Pandemic Legacy from hitting #1 weeks ago when its rating was around 9.00 but its vote total was quite low. But the overall number of ratings is what keeps a game like Mage Knight (ranked #9, average rating 8.15 on 13664 votes) below games like Agricola (ranked #7, average rating 8.10 on 41154 votes).

Reply: Risk Legacy:: General:: Re: misslabled packets? anyone else have? (spoiler free)

$
0
0

by ruesifus

Happened to us tonight. We had the 3 missiles happen, and the contents clearly were not for it.

We opened the other, took out the contents, replaced them and kept on trucking, but what a huge spoiler!

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: New #1

$
0
0

by mavo

Congrats!

Finally, we have a number one on the geek which I at least can be proud of. How long was TS number 1? Not so Long, I guess, I think Puerto Rico and maybe even Agricola were #1 longer...

Anyway, I am happy that TS lost ist throne - no offense intended, but I think it was a very Special American thing that it was #1.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Strategy:: Re: Just another approach to minimize distances from Research Centers

$
0
0

by debwentworth

isellsunshine wrote:

This is very useful info. I play on the phone app a lot and have always had a tendency to pick Istanbul & Hong Kong as they both outbreak to six cites so I like to be able to reach them quickly if the need arises.


Susan, this is exactly what I do and for the same reason.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Reviews:: Re: A step down from Pandemic - avoid like the plague.

$
0
0

by clivej

Jefferoni wrote:

1. What effect does an exponentially larger number of potential voters (i.e., growing number of BGG users) have on the rating of a game based on BGG's current rating system?

My guess: at this exalted level, very little. Any game with true staying power will also be getting an exponentially rising number of ratings as the hobby expands and new people discover it.
2. Also, with Pandemic base game being available at retailers like Target and Barnes&Noble, the exposure it has received is much greater than any of the previous #1's. Stands to reason P:L would get a healthy boost from an already popular base game.

Fortunately, Monopoly isn't the highest-rated game here. (-8

Wide availability will increase the number of ratings a game gets, but it won't make those ratings higher.

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Strategy:: Re: Just another approach to minimize distances from Research Centers

$
0
0

by clivej

debwentworth wrote:

isellsunshine wrote:

This is very useful info. I play on the phone app a lot and have always had a tendency to pick Istanbul & Hong Kong as they both outbreak to six cites so I like to be able to reach them quickly if the need arises.


Susan, this is exactly what I do and for the same reason.

Interestingly, in Pandemic Legacy there's a potential downside.

Although it's good to be able to reach those cities easily because they're so connected, that high connectivity also makes them more vulnerable. Making a permanent research station is an investment you don't want to lose, so there's a slight argument for putting it in a more protected location.

At the very least, it seems like a good idea to have two research stations with staying power: given the rules on scarring if caught in an outbreak, you really need a choice of place for everybody to start the game!

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Pandemic Legacy No 1? I have a question.

$
0
0

by dugman

Rapscallion_69 wrote:

dugman wrote:

Sorry to say it but if the rest of your group wins 2/3 of the time and you lose every time it's not because "the decks didn't align properly". You're simply making strategic mistakes when you play. I'm not saying you need to like the game but claiming that the game is only beatable due to the luck of how the decks are dealt is patently false. Frankly it's not even all that hard to win compared to some other cooperative games.


I have seen it happen SEVERAL times! You can get a set up in the game that will kill you no matter what you do. Not saying that in all the games I have played of it that a mistake wasn't made and we played flawlessly and still lost, but to say out of hand that the game is 100% winnable (which is EXACTLY what you are saying that any loss was due to strategic error) is an outright fabrication. The Decks can align so you lose, period. No amount of strategy, no amount of planning, no amount of luck will save you. In my experience (MY experience here) it happens more often than not....


That is not at all what I said. I never said its impossible to lose due to bad luck. I said that, mathematically, if most people are winning a game 60-65% of the time and you are winning the game only 30-40% of the time over many games then the probability that the difference is due to "bad luck" is incredibly low. It is much more likely that you simply aren't playing the game as well as you think you are. It has nothing to do with enjoyment of the game, it's just a mathematical observation.

To put it another way, if for example most groups who play well win 2/3 of the time and "bad luck" is the deciding factor in the games they lose then that means a loss due to bad luck only actually happens 1/3 of the time. (And honestly if you play perfectly I suspect the numbers are even more skewed, but I'll go with 2/3 win rate for argument sake.) So if your win rate is only 1/3 then you are presumably winning 1/3 of the time, losing 1/3 of the time due to bad luck, and losing an additional 1/3 of the time due to imperfect play.

So your claim that Pandemic is a game that people primarily only win by virtue of chance is simply false. Just because you THINK in "YOUR EXPERIENCE" your losses are all due to bad luck doesn't make that true. All you have to do is look at overall game statistics to realize the error in that line of thought.
Viewing all 192799 articles
Browse latest View live


Latest Images

<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>