Organized by subject:
News:
BBC Tech News
CNET news
Digital Tech News
NYT Tech
Wired
The Register
Blogging and Branding:
Church of the Customer
The Long Tail
Many to Many
Duct Tape Marketing
Digital Rules
Get Real
Creating Passionate Users
Moore's Law
Performancing
Gaping Void
Internet Information:
Pew Internet and American Life Project
Techdirt
Slashdot
Patents and Copyrights:
Copyfight
Infothought
bIPlog
LawMeme
RIAA vs the People
Other Tech Ethics:
Freedom to Tinker
EFF Breaking News
EFF Deep Links
Don't Be Evil
Suggestions are welcome ....
Yehuda
Monday, December 12, 2005
The PR Massacre
Well, not really. But my wife beat me in two games of 2-player Puerto Rico. It was an interesting set of buildings:
Assembly Line 1/1: All production buildings can hold additional colonist.
Small Fashion District 2/1: Trade indigo at +2.
Forest House 2/1: You can take forests. -1/2/3 ... building cost for 1/3/5 ... forests. Forests don't need colonists.
Small Warehouse 3/1: standard.
Guest House 4/2 (2 circles): Move colonists off of Guest House onto other buildings at any time.
Irrigation 5/2: Produce an extra barrel. [Note: this usually costs 4/2, but I thought it might be too strong. Nope. 4/2 is the right cost.]
Large Market 5/2: Trade at +2.
Beachfront 6/2: You can take forests. You have a wharf with capacity equal to the number of forests that you have. Forests don't need colonists.
Factory 7/3: standard.
Large General Workhouse 8/3 (2 circles): Each circle counts as production when paired with any manned plantation. Decide each time you produce.
Large Business 8/3: Pay 1 less for any building. +1 VP if you ship any goods. [i.e. Builder and Captain privileges.]
Private Boat 9/3: Ship any three additional barrels of any type, as wharf.
Cathedral 10/4: +1 VP/3 red building VPs.
Fairgrounds 10/4: +0/1/2/3/5/7/9 VP for having 1/2/3/4/5/6/7 different types of plantations.
Fortress 10/4: standard.
Customs House 10/4: standard.
City Hall 10/4: standard.
As you can see from the above, the forest strategy is an interesting new stategic addition to the normal buildings. Large Business is a better building than Harbor in a 2 or 3 player game (we play 2 player: 3 ships, 6 roles, 3 roles/round, 50 VPs, 37 colonists, -2 barrels, 1 GP/player at start). LGW is a little powerful, but not overly so, even in combination with Factory. Fairgrounds was also a little strong; usually it caps at +7, but with forests in the game, you could get to +9.
In the first game, Rachel started off with the Forest House. I perversley decided to take the Beachfront. I never used the wharf capability, but seeing as she was corn player, it seemed like a good idea. She ended up getting Factory and then Fairgrounds, while I had Large Business. She eked me in shipping and bonus building points.
In the second game, she started as corn again. This time I started with Forest House and eventually took Beachfront as well. I even had a quarry and three large buldings, but it wasn't enough to compete with her corn advantage, Large Business, and Factory.
This corn advantage seems to be a problem. I'm considering changing to sugar/indigo instead of indigo/corn for starting positions. Has anyone ever tried that?
---
In other gaming news, I received some helpful feedback on my game. It seems few people like the Menorah theme. Oh well. I have been spending time cutting up the last prototypes in preparation for mailing.
Now I get to start making new ones with a different theme.
---
Oh, and I'm finally adding some of my session reports to the Geek.
Yehuda
Assembly Line 1/1: All production buildings can hold additional colonist.
Small Fashion District 2/1: Trade indigo at +2.
Forest House 2/1: You can take forests. -1/2/3 ... building cost for 1/3/5 ... forests. Forests don't need colonists.
Small Warehouse 3/1: standard.
Guest House 4/2 (2 circles): Move colonists off of Guest House onto other buildings at any time.
Irrigation 5/2: Produce an extra barrel. [Note: this usually costs 4/2, but I thought it might be too strong. Nope. 4/2 is the right cost.]
Large Market 5/2: Trade at +2.
Beachfront 6/2: You can take forests. You have a wharf with capacity equal to the number of forests that you have. Forests don't need colonists.
Factory 7/3: standard.
Large General Workhouse 8/3 (2 circles): Each circle counts as production when paired with any manned plantation. Decide each time you produce.
Large Business 8/3: Pay 1 less for any building. +1 VP if you ship any goods. [i.e. Builder and Captain privileges.]
Private Boat 9/3: Ship any three additional barrels of any type, as wharf.
Cathedral 10/4: +1 VP/3 red building VPs.
Fairgrounds 10/4: +0/1/2/3/5/7/9 VP for having 1/2/3/4/5/6/7 different types of plantations.
Fortress 10/4: standard.
Customs House 10/4: standard.
City Hall 10/4: standard.
As you can see from the above, the forest strategy is an interesting new stategic addition to the normal buildings. Large Business is a better building than Harbor in a 2 or 3 player game (we play 2 player: 3 ships, 6 roles, 3 roles/round, 50 VPs, 37 colonists, -2 barrels, 1 GP/player at start). LGW is a little powerful, but not overly so, even in combination with Factory. Fairgrounds was also a little strong; usually it caps at +7, but with forests in the game, you could get to +9.
In the first game, Rachel started off with the Forest House. I perversley decided to take the Beachfront. I never used the wharf capability, but seeing as she was corn player, it seemed like a good idea. She ended up getting Factory and then Fairgrounds, while I had Large Business. She eked me in shipping and bonus building points.
In the second game, she started as corn again. This time I started with Forest House and eventually took Beachfront as well. I even had a quarry and three large buldings, but it wasn't enough to compete with her corn advantage, Large Business, and Factory.
This corn advantage seems to be a problem. I'm considering changing to sugar/indigo instead of indigo/corn for starting positions. Has anyone ever tried that?
---
In other gaming news, I received some helpful feedback on my game. It seems few people like the Menorah theme. Oh well. I have been spending time cutting up the last prototypes in preparation for mailing.
Now I get to start making new ones with a different theme.
---
Oh, and I'm finally adding some of my session reports to the Geek.
Yehuda
Sunday, December 11, 2005
First prototypes all sold
Sorry for anyone that didn't get any from the first batch of prototypes. That's twenty copies sold, and ten either kept or given to publishers/family. The last set was sold to three people who saw someone else who was playing a copy. Viral networking at it's best
If you still want it, I can make you custom copies with a different theme or the same theme. It will still only be bristol paper (300 gram). For those who don't know, this is a set-collection/auction game for 2-4 players ages 8 and up which can be learned in 5 minutes and plays in 20 minutes. I can send you the rules, if you like. If you want to make your own copy, we'll call it shareware: send me $5 (or not, as you like) and go ahead.
Like the guy selling wine through Gaping Void, this could be the first strategy game that sells through viral blog marketing. And Coldfoot, you still owe me a review :-).
Should I send one to Tom?
Yehuda
Update: my email is shadejon at gmail.
Update: the game costs $12, including mailing to anywhere in the world.
If you still want it, I can make you custom copies with a different theme or the same theme. It will still only be bristol paper (300 gram). For those who don't know, this is a set-collection/auction game for 2-4 players ages 8 and up which can be learned in 5 minutes and plays in 20 minutes. I can send you the rules, if you like. If you want to make your own copy, we'll call it shareware: send me $5 (or not, as you like) and go ahead.
Like the guy selling wine through Gaping Void, this could be the first strategy game that sells through viral blog marketing. And Coldfoot, you still owe me a review :-).
Should I send one to Tom?
Yehuda
Update: my email is shadejon at gmail.
Update: the game costs $12, including mailing to anywhere in the world.
JIB Awards
Ooh, maybe this year I'll submit something for the JIB awards (Jewish and Israeli bloggers). Typical winners seem to be people who post about Israel or Judaism, not simply Israelis or Jews who happen to blog, so I don't have many expectations.
Still, it would be cool to compete. Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get my site listed, at all. There are no links on the announcement.
Yehuda
Still, it would be cool to compete. Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get my site listed, at all. There are no links on the announcement.
Yehuda
Weekend Gaming
A quickie, because it's late.
Friday night I convinced my parents, children, and wife to play For Sale. Once again, I discovered a rule mistake that I had made: I had been discarding half the value of the bid, not quote half the number of chips used to bid unquote. I like the game a little better this way. I still don't really like the blind bidding during the second half of the game, because it is so, well, blind; even though I like blind bidding in other games, where that bidding does not so directly determine the game.
Still, the game is sweet, easy to teach, and a nice intro to gaming for people like my parents. Tal, the youngest present, won the game, closely followed by Rachel and myself.
Saturday we had a family with children over, whom I had to constantly keep away from my games collection, as they kept assuming that it was for kids to paw through, dump open and step on ... like all other games, after all. I tried foisting them off with the chess set, Othello, and so on, but I had to keep vigilant watch. I ended up teaching them China Moon, which went over pretty well, despite having to recollect the frogs and chips after they were thrown across the room by the loser.
Also played Havoc with my two kids. Nice game. Saarya won, Tal second, I lost.
Tal then played and lost three abstracts with my other son, Eitan, who doesn't play games, except computer games: Checkers, Chinese Checkers (corner to corner on the Checkers board, actually), and Yinsh.
Yehuda
Friday night I convinced my parents, children, and wife to play For Sale. Once again, I discovered a rule mistake that I had made: I had been discarding half the value of the bid, not quote half the number of chips used to bid unquote. I like the game a little better this way. I still don't really like the blind bidding during the second half of the game, because it is so, well, blind; even though I like blind bidding in other games, where that bidding does not so directly determine the game.
Still, the game is sweet, easy to teach, and a nice intro to gaming for people like my parents. Tal, the youngest present, won the game, closely followed by Rachel and myself.
Saturday we had a family with children over, whom I had to constantly keep away from my games collection, as they kept assuming that it was for kids to paw through, dump open and step on ... like all other games, after all. I tried foisting them off with the chess set, Othello, and so on, but I had to keep vigilant watch. I ended up teaching them China Moon, which went over pretty well, despite having to recollect the frogs and chips after they were thrown across the room by the loser.
Also played Havoc with my two kids. Nice game. Saarya won, Tal second, I lost.
Tal then played and lost three abstracts with my other son, Eitan, who doesn't play games, except computer games: Checkers, Chinese Checkers (corner to corner on the Checkers board, actually), and Yinsh.
Yehuda
Friday, December 09, 2005
More on the excrutianing subject of my game, and when is he going to come out with another one?
Speaking of theme, I came up with a new theme for my game. If you have bought my prototype, try the following theme out (and also, if you have bought my prototype, or I if I gave you a copy, feedback would be welcome):
Each player is a Sorcerer whose master sent him out to collect eight different demons, four types of lesser demons and four types of greater demons. Each Sorcerer has two spells: Capture and Banish.
When he finds a demon, he can choose to Capture or Banish the demon. If he banishes the demon, he gains in sorcerer power. If he Captures the demon, he spends sorcerer power. If he tries to capture the demon with less sorcerer power than the demon would usually require, the other players have a chance to steal the demon from him by paying more than him, and if one of them does, he gains the power that they spent, but they get the demon.
And so on for the other rules. What do you think? Better than the Hanukkah theme?
With this theme, and some pretty graphics, maybe Fantasy Flight would be interested?
Yehuda
Each player is a Sorcerer whose master sent him out to collect eight different demons, four types of lesser demons and four types of greater demons. Each Sorcerer has two spells: Capture and Banish.
When he finds a demon, he can choose to Capture or Banish the demon. If he banishes the demon, he gains in sorcerer power. If he Captures the demon, he spends sorcerer power. If he tries to capture the demon with less sorcerer power than the demon would usually require, the other players have a chance to steal the demon from him by paying more than him, and if one of them does, he gains the power that they spent, but they get the demon.
And so on for the other rules. What do you think? Better than the Hanukkah theme?
With this theme, and some pretty graphics, maybe Fantasy Flight would be interested?
Yehuda
Thursday, December 08, 2005
Waking Life
Waking Life was the movie that I chose after Rachel said that we needed to watch a movie, one of the two movies (found in a discount bin) that I brought it home from America.
The other movie, Logan's Run I remembered with some nostalgia, but I was also prepared for it to be a little hokey. Oh ... My ... God, was it bad. I'm willing to forget bad special effects. But c'mon. By the mid 1970s we already knew what acting was, didn't we? Everyone in the movie, aside from Peter Ustinov, is truly terrible (Farrah Fawset!). On top of that, the plot was truly terrible, as huge portions of it made no sense from scene to scene. On top of that, the screenplay was truly terrible, with line after line of bad dialog. Ugh. I hate it when fond memories of childhood are sullied by looking back at them through the lens of a mature reality.
Waking Life was better. Much better. I won't say it was a great movie, but it was a very good try. First of all, the animation was kick-you-out-of-this-world phenomenal. Richard Linklater and his team of animators not only produced the most "film-like" animated movie that I have ever seen, but they did it in a wild assortment of styles, sometimes switching back and forth in the middle of scenes. I have never seen animation used this way, and it is truly something to see. Not to mention that some of it is simply breathtakingly beautiful and artistic.
As an example, he captures the characters and expressions of a group of violin players with such taste and accuracy, yet with a subdued sense of simplicity, that I can't recall ever seeing more full-fleshed and lively musicians, even live.
As far as the actual contents, it is different, and for me, that means GREAT. Now, I have to say fairly enough, that the screenplay for the movie doesn't really work. The basic idea is: a guy can't tell if he is dreaming or awake, and he travels around hearing random people express their ideas about life, dreams and consciousness. That's it. Unfortunately, a whole lot of it is pretty amateur and ridiculous philosophy. I think there may be thousands of college students on drugs who will find this deep, but, for the most part, it wasn't. With the exception of the final narrative about Phillip Dick which ends the movie, and was well done and thoughtful.
But, to echo the sentiments of Robert Heinlein, even a badly done DIFFERENT movie is better for the world than a whole shelf full of well done Hollywood formulaic crap. Please! Dare to be different, even if you only partially succeed. The world needs the inspiration, because it sure isn't succeeding by doing the same things over again, but this time "more of it".
Oh, and as a bonus, I loved the scene with my favorite characters from Before Sunrise ("Oh it's so French. It's so cute. Ugh! I hate that!") and Before Sunset ("Baby, you are gonna miss that plane.").
The other movie, Logan's Run I remembered with some nostalgia, but I was also prepared for it to be a little hokey. Oh ... My ... God, was it bad. I'm willing to forget bad special effects. But c'mon. By the mid 1970s we already knew what acting was, didn't we? Everyone in the movie, aside from Peter Ustinov, is truly terrible (Farrah Fawset!). On top of that, the plot was truly terrible, as huge portions of it made no sense from scene to scene. On top of that, the screenplay was truly terrible, with line after line of bad dialog. Ugh. I hate it when fond memories of childhood are sullied by looking back at them through the lens of a mature reality.
Waking Life was better. Much better. I won't say it was a great movie, but it was a very good try. First of all, the animation was kick-you-out-of-this-world phenomenal. Richard Linklater and his team of animators not only produced the most "film-like" animated movie that I have ever seen, but they did it in a wild assortment of styles, sometimes switching back and forth in the middle of scenes. I have never seen animation used this way, and it is truly something to see. Not to mention that some of it is simply breathtakingly beautiful and artistic.
As an example, he captures the characters and expressions of a group of violin players with such taste and accuracy, yet with a subdued sense of simplicity, that I can't recall ever seeing more full-fleshed and lively musicians, even live.
As far as the actual contents, it is different, and for me, that means GREAT. Now, I have to say fairly enough, that the screenplay for the movie doesn't really work. The basic idea is: a guy can't tell if he is dreaming or awake, and he travels around hearing random people express their ideas about life, dreams and consciousness. That's it. Unfortunately, a whole lot of it is pretty amateur and ridiculous philosophy. I think there may be thousands of college students on drugs who will find this deep, but, for the most part, it wasn't. With the exception of the final narrative about Phillip Dick which ends the movie, and was well done and thoughtful.
But, to echo the sentiments of Robert Heinlein, even a badly done DIFFERENT movie is better for the world than a whole shelf full of well done Hollywood formulaic crap. Please! Dare to be different, even if you only partially succeed. The world needs the inspiration, because it sure isn't succeeding by doing the same things over again, but this time "more of it".
Oh, and as a bonus, I loved the scene with my favorite characters from Before Sunrise ("Oh it's so French. It's so cute. Ugh! I hate that!") and Before Sunset ("Baby, you are gonna miss that plane.").
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)