Quantcast
Channel: Rob Daviau | BoardGameGeek
Viewing all 192246 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: Rules:: Re: About forsaken cities

November 23, 2017, 10:14 pm
$
0
0

by ConnerCP

DeadMoney wrote:

In the rule book it says zero population cities are called “forsaken”. The title of this thread is fine.


I skimmed the rules, didn’t see it ... reskimmed, now I see it (: Edited my original post.
↧
Search

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: So we made a mistake... (no spoilers)

November 23, 2017, 10:22 pm
$
0
0

by jeep

That is a LOT of upgrade points to make up. I suggest that you figure out how many extra points you have used and at each game end you give up half your points until you make it up (if you ever do) or if there are no critical upgrades, give up all your points to make it up faster.
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: So we made a mistake... (no spoilers)

November 23, 2017, 11:18 pm
$
0
0

by Mirjam42

You could also lower your funding, so take only 2 or 0 events in your next game(s).
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: So we made a mistake... (no spoilers)

November 23, 2017, 11:23 pm
$
0
0

by Cthulhwho

At a rough estimate you’ve awarded yourself maybe 80 - 90 points when you should have had about 30 - 40?

Well reducing all those city populations back down again to at or close to starting would be a great start. That only takes a little sticker and shaves off a load of points, 5 - 7 a City maybe.

Then take a note that certain sticker upgrades you have applied to various cards are in fact inactive until you have paid for them properly.

Or if you just want to carry on taking the benefit of 2 or 3 times the amount of Improvements (taking an entire games improvements up front) then I recommend just opening up the last box, yelling “hooray we won with top score” and patting each other on the back for a job well done.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: So we made a mistake... (no spoilers)

November 23, 2017, 11:30 pm
$
0
0

by Cthulhwho

I always think the “If you’ve made it too easy reduce your funding” line in the rules to be nonsense. If you’ve made it easier than you’ve possibly won, so you have already reduced your funding and can’t lower it any more. Look at the dice tower they won the first three games by playing wrong so were on zero funding, when they discovered it they can’t lower their funding to compensate.
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: Hard, easy, unbalanced? (thoughts after SUSD review)

November 24, 2017, 12:14 am
$
0
0

by kompanjon83

we just finished August.. with only one loss in 1st February game.
We had 2 risky games: 2 February and 1st March.. from that game on, they were all too easy.

We love the game, but we are a bit disapointed about it being so easy.
We understand that we are lucky with our draws (we rarely need to go over half of the player deck to win) but it's still a bit disapointing.

[o]We are playing with 9 Epidemic cards now as we are finishing the games too fast to remove cards that we want to remove. But we still win with ease.
Also an example of our luck/foresight when to do some actions: We knew that an epidemic was soon to be drawn so we used the monitor action which removed 2 epidemic cards[/o]

Maybe the next 4 months will prove more challenging.
↧

Reply: SeaFall:: General:: Re: My apologies. . .

November 24, 2017, 1:36 am
$
0
0

by LeonardQuirm

Thanks Jim. Sorry if the tone was too harsh.

In response to your original question....

BOX 5 SPOILERS

[o]No, I never called it that, but then I had to actually search the name to know what you were referencing. Not sure if Men in Black 2 is iconic enough for many people to be linking it across, to be honest![/o]
↧

Reply: SeaFall:: General:: Re: Fortune tokens on Enmity roll

November 24, 2017, 1:55 am
$
0
0

by woodnoggin

Jancarius wrote:

1) Can you use fortune tokens on the roll at end of game for permanent enmity?


Your remaining Fortune and Reputation tokens are effectively cashed in for dice which you use to try to remove your Enmity. You can't spend Fortune to change these rolls.

[Q]2) Can you shift goods without making a full stop? I believe not, but couldnt' find confirmation in the rules. Example: Ship with 4 sail moves from the first island to port, drops off goods, then starts back out to sea.

The rules allow you to move goods before or after the ship's sail action, so you can't drop goods off mid-move.
↧
Search

Reply: SeaFall:: General:: Re: My apologies. . .

November 24, 2017, 1:59 am
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Reviews:: Re: Pandemic Legacy is a poor successor to Risk Legacy

November 24, 2017, 4:55 am
$
0
0

by Prullenbak

rmsgrey wrote:

clivej wrote:

Prullenbak wrote:

I'm not the best in statistics and chance calculations, but I doubt these 2 cards have that big of an impact. There is a slight advantage but to say it makes it worthwile to lose a game for it, is stretching it.


I doubt rmsgreay was intending to advocate "tactical loss". People are, of course, free to pursue whatever strategy they like, but it doesn't strike me as the best available, shall we say.

On the other hand, the gap between "worth losing a game to get" and "worthless" is pretty large!


Yeah, tactical losses are only sensible in exceptional circumstances - most of the time, you should attempt to win.


Ah, misunderstood your answer then, @rmsgrey Apologies!

And @clivej of course, I'm not saying the help/bonusses/rewards/whatever you want to call it that you get when you lose are worthless. They help. Because that's the way the game is balancing itself. And if you get enough funding, of course some events can help a lot. I'm just saying it's not worth losing on purpose for them.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: Strategy:: Re: Question on character balance (August Spoiler)

November 24, 2017, 5:05 am
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

clivej wrote:

If I were playing Season One again, the one character we never touched that I'd definitely give a go is the Generalist.

Then again, there were four of us, and I'm pretty sure the Generalist is stronger the fewer players you have.


All character abilities get stronger with fewer players. I agree that the Generalist's ability does become more useful as you become less able to specialise your game roles - so long as you don't decide that you need particular specialties more than you need the ability to do anything slightly better.

Of course, having an extra player's worth of upgrade slots is also a point in the Generalist's favour at lower player counts - it's easy to come up with a list of more than 4 upgrades that you quite want to have in play...
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: What did you name your Characters?

November 24, 2017, 5:05 am
$
0
0

by Prullenbak

Scientist: Bernadette
Researcher: Marie
Medic: Henri

[o]
Militarybase-guy: Berry
Quarantine specialist: Jenny
[/o]
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: Which character would you give each upgrade? (Mar version Spoilers)

November 24, 2017, 5:22 am
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

lorddog wrote:

Grizzled was our 2nd choice for medic. the local connections is great for him first.


We did Local Connections and Veteran - mobility seems pretty important for him.

Grizzled is one that can go on just about anyone - and the Medic's probably safer than most - the only ways to get scarred by an Outbreak are to finish your turn in a city with a significant number of cubes, or to finish your turn in a clear city that gets hit by the next Epidemic. When other players have to settle for ending their turn in a city reduced from 3 cubes to 2, the Medic clears it - and with Local Connections, rather than enter a 3 cube city, he can use his last action to clear it instead.

Okay, there are situations where it may be worth taking the risk of a scar to be a bit more efficient in the longer run, but, still, I'd save Grizzled for someone who's already taken a scar or two, rather than assign it pre-emptively.

We spent a lot of our early upgrades on the board - permanent structures and positive mutations - rather than on characters or player cards.

This poll is a little misleading in that respect - it implies a scenario where you're looking to assign every character upgrade, rather than holding on to some to either use later once circumstances change, or never us because you have better things to use your limited upgrade resources on.
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: What did you name your Characters?

November 24, 2017, 5:32 am
$
0
0

by rmsgrey

From memory, so a few of these may be wrong:

Dispatcher: Robert
Generalist: Jack (?)
Medic: John Smith
Researcher: Rachel
Scientist: Diana

[o]
Quarantine Specialist: Helva
Operations Expert: Bob
Colonel: Fury
Soldier: Zack Fair
Virologist: - (unofficially: The aptly named Sir Not Appearing In This Game)
Immunologist: Victor
[/o]

A number are obscure geek references. Some are either obscure references I don't get, or just whatever the player felt like.
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 2:: General:: Re: So we made a mistake... (no spoilers)

November 24, 2017, 5:47 am
$
0
0

by AJEddy

Here is what I would do:

1. Add up the total points you "spent", that you did not "earn". This is your base "debt". For example, say you spent 10 points a game for 5 games but only should have spent 4 points those 5 games. That is a debt of 10 - 4 = 6 x 5 games = 30 points.

2. Pay back that debt by:

- lowering populations evenly on the board @ 1 point per population level lowered.

- "turn off" upgrades on characters, player cards, infection cards and some on-board upgrades. Do this by using a sharpy to put a circle on the sticker, indicating this upgrade is turned off and cannot be used. In later games, once your debt to paid in full, and you want this upgrade, turn it back on by filling in the circle with the sharpy. So:

no circle = on
empty circle = off
filled circle = on

You should be able to repay your debt before your next game just with these 2 adjustments. If not, and if you are left with still some debt, pay it off with future earnings, ie. if you get 6 points for game end upgrades, spend just 3 and apply 3 to the debt. Or any split it however you feel is fair, ie. 0-6, 2-4, 4-2, etc.

You could also adjust your base debt as a penalty for having way too many upgrades for several games. For example, tacking on 5-10 points to the debt. However, given you lost many of those games, I wouldn't worry about the penalty.

Hope this helps?

↧
Search

New Image for Stop Thief!: Dice Tower Promo Card

November 24, 2017, 6:37 am
↧

New Image for Stop Thief!: Dice Tower Promo Card

November 24, 2017, 8:20 am
↧
↧

Reply: Pandemic Legacy: Season 1:: General:: Re: How do I use the insert?

November 24, 2017, 8:31 am
$
0
0

by adakers56491

Does that little space hold the entire legacy deck once it's discarded? It doesn't look big enough.
↧

Reply: Betrayal at House on the Hill:: Rules:: Re: Question about getting a haunt too soon

November 24, 2017, 8:35 am
$
0
0

by PoDGO

We have a house rule of a + 2 to Omen / haunt rolls. It negates anything happening until the heroes have explored a little and stops massively OP traitors.
↧

Reply: Downforce:: General:: Re: Contradiction between Watch It Played and Rule book on having a car?

November 24, 2017, 9:30 am
$
0
0

by fuzzyfoot

jayahre wrote:

alandric wrote:

Race Bannon wrote:

This thread was not clear, but here's what I took away from the combination of the rules, Rodney's video, and this thread. The following "rules" do have effect:

1. When there are only the same number of cars as carless players, players with cars cannot bid.

2. Cars that no one bids on are set aside and re-auctioned at the end.

3. That means every player will have the opportunity to obtain a car uncontested.

4. But if a player insists on a zero bid when he is in an uncontested auction, he will not own a car.

5. So the only rule that is negated (and changed) by the video is that it is not true that "every player must own a car." It should have read "every player must get the opportunity to buy a car uncontested."

6. There is a corner case if two players keep bidding zero with two cars left (same with 3 and 3, etc.). But once a player has bid zero in a second auction on a car, then he doesn't own that car. Cycle through them all and we're done.




Does this mean the extra car(s) that people don't bid on are just not owned at all???


Yes, it means they're not owned at all.


This drastically complicates or renders moot the auctioning part of the game. If this is the case, why would I ever bid for a car? I'd just as soon let them have no owners so I'm not starting the race negative Money. As long as I keep betting on the right horse and it wins, my money is positive no matter what.
↧
Viewing all 192246 articles
Browse latest View live
Search
<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>