Analyzing My Top Ten Games / 50% Off Rio Grande Games at Amazon

John Dextraze wrote to me as follows:

Your favorite games vs your top 10 important aspects of a game do not seem to correspond to each other in any great depth.

He asked me to make the comparison. And so I will.

A summary of my top ten board games:
10. Santiago
09. The Princes of Florence (Only $21.57 at Amazon right now, by the way; see more deals below)
08. Anagrams (link is to Scrabble set; just toss out the board)
07. El Grande
06. Tigris & Euphrates
05. Pente
04. Age of Steam
03. Cosmic Encounter (OOP, try searching eBay for Eon or Mayfair editions)
02. Puerto Rico
01. Go

A summary of my top ten important aspects in a game:
10. Not offensive
09. Limited decisions each turn
08. Heavy, without dragging
07. Multiple strategic goals
06. Randomness without luck
05. Interaction without much negotiation
04. Much depth
03. Extensibility
02. The game experience
01. Replayability for a lifetime

First Notes

I think the first thing you have to note is that my important aspects refer to "games", while my favorites list refers only to "board games".

When I made my favorites list for board games only, that was deliberate. In so doing, I left off a number of games that would have knocked off many of my lower ranked games. I would add games such as Magic: the Gathering, Bridge, some sort of generic RPG such as 1st edition D&D, 8-Ball Billiards, Air Hockey, and even Ultimate Flying Disc.

It all depends on how I set my list restrictions. Allowing only board games, I had to pick some games which are sub-optimal, because I haven't yet found ten perfect board games.

Common Matches for all the Games

All of the games fulfill criteria 10, in that they, and the companies that produce them, are not offensive to me.

As far as criteria 3, I've only tried to extend four of the games (Princes of Florence and the top three). But it wouldn't be that difficult to do for the other six. Add special effects for different locations, player powers, or missions. I just haven't played these games enough to bother, yet.

For criteria 2, only my top three games have the game experience extending beyond the confines of the game. You'll find that that's true for most board games, simply because the game experience is hard to find in them. Board games tend to exist only in the box, starting when they're taken out of the box, and ending when they're put back in the box. The game experience is more common in RPGs, CCGs, and some other games, such as Bridge.

And, of course, I feel that all of these games are replayable for a lifetime. I haven't got bored of them, yet, anyway, and I've played them all between 10 and 1000 times.

Which leave me to examine criteria 9,8,7,6,5, and 4 for each game.

Santiago

Santiago has limited decisions each turn (9).
It is not that heavy, but definitely not light (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: spend a lot or save a lot, join fields or isolate your fields (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but little luck (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's pretty deep, especially as the game goes on (4).

The Princes of Florence

Princes of Florence has limited decisions each turn (9).
It is pretty heavy, but doesn't drag (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: heavy Jesters, heavy building, a mixture, or something unusual (7).
The only randomness is the card picks where you can choose one card out of five to keep, and the turn order (6).
Like other auction games, there is interaction without negotiation (5).
It's very deep (4).
Princes is one of the games for which I create an expansion (3).

Anagrams

Anagrams has a number of decisions each turn, but being a contest of speed, you can't utilize all your time trying to find all the possible decisions (9).
It's a light game, but a brain-burner (8).
Strategies include looking to form short words with the open tiles, holding in reserve words for which you're waiting for tiles, and protecting vs stealing words (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but no luck at all (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's pretty deep in a verbal manner (4).

El Grande

El Grande has limited decisions each turn, although the Intrigues give a few more decisions than most. Nevertheless, most of those decisions are easily pruned (9).
It is heavy, and can drag a bit, depending on who you play with (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: first place in some, or second place in many, and how much to use the castillo (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but little luck (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's pretty deep (4).

Tigris & Euphrates

Tigris & Euphrates has limited decisions each turn; although the board is wide open, most choices are easily pruned (9).
It is very heavy, but doesn't drag (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: isolate or expand, which colors, what types of conflicts, and so on (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but little luck, although it is possible to get hammered with some really bad draws for the strategy you're pursuing (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's extremely deep (4).

Pente

Pente has limited decisions each turn, because most plays will obviously lose quickly (9).
It is fairly light play, but heavy thinking is required (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: Five in a row, five captures, aggressive vs cautious (7).
It has neither randomness nor luck, but the game often diverges well after the first few series of moves (6).
It has interaction without negotiation (5).
It's very deep as your experience with the game grows (4).

Age of Steam

Age of Steam has limited decisions each turn (9).
It is very heavy, but doesn't drag (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: short or long routes, which roles to concentrate on, how to grow your networks, etc. (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but little luck (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's very deep, as are many god rail games (4).

Cosmic Encounter

Cosmic Encounter is the game that breaks its own rules, so I would expect it to break these, too.

It generally has limited decisions each turn (9).
It's pretty light, but good planning and negotiation can go a long way (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: choosing your allies and enemies, overt or covert wins, single or joint wins (7).
It's got a lot of luck, but so many random cards are drawn, that a lot of the luck can cancel out (6).
It's got negotiation; it's the only negotiation game I can handle, because it's just so funny (5).
It's not at all deep (4).

So yeah, it violates a lot of the rules, but CE has so many rules and so many exceptions, that it's always a blast to play, especially for a rules lawyer and variant maker like me. The game is extensible, we've added and changed many rules, and thousands of powers, cards, and other expansions have been added to the game.

And every game gives you the game experience, with great stories that carry over well after the game is put back into the box.

Puerto Rico

Puerto Rico has limited decisions each turn (9).
It is deep but doesn't feel heavy (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: shipping vs building, high score vs low score, and which goods to produce. (7).
It is an excellent example of a game with randomness but very little luck (6),
as well as interaction without negotiation (5).
It's very deep, especially as you gain experience in the game (4).

I've added many expansions to the game. And I spend time before and after games, discussing the game, how the game will be played, and how the game was played. It's an experience.

Go

Go has limited decisions each turn, despite a wide open board, because most moves can be pruned after not much thought (9).
It is very light play, but very deep thinking (8).
There are multiple strategic goals: aggressive vs defensive, single territory, multiple territories, and many others that I can't begin to understand, let alone describe (7).
It has no luck, but the game often diverges well after the first few series of moves (6).
It has interaction without negotiation (5).
It's incredibly deep, especially as your experience grows (4).

Games are played on different sized boards and with or without handicaps. There are many variants available to try. The game requires much study before and after the game, and has a language and culture all its own.

Thoughts

So do they match? I think fairly well. For Cosmic Encounter, the humor and rules lawyering in the game adds a lot, but it's a very specific exception.

As to the lack of luck in Pente and Go, they are also exceptions, being abstract games played on large boards that look very different each time they're played. Other abstracts are also strong contenders, such as Yinsh and Dvonn (Dvonn almost made the list; Dvonn's setup phase feels very random).

Deals

While looking up the games on Amazon, I noticed some pretty good deals on a few Rio Grande Games (all around 50% off):

The Princes of Florence - $21.57
Yinsh - $17.79
Carcassonne - The City - $26.97
Elfenland - $22.60
Frank's Zoo - $6.45
The Traders of Genoa - $21.57
Around the World in 80 Days - $20.49
Pick Picknic - $9.45
Paris Paris - $20.99
Evergreen - $16.90
Adam & Eva - $18.69
Igloo Pop - $17.79

If you buy one of these games, you'll be happy, Amazon will be happy, and I'll be happy. What a deal.

Yehuda

Session Report, in which I don't play the Schizoid well

The latest Jerusalem Strategy Gaming Club session report is up here. Games played: Cosmic Encounter, Lord of the Rings: the Confrontation, It's Alive, Apples to Apples, Bridge.

I choose the wrong winning criteria while Schizoid.

The U.S. military is sending copies of the fanatical Christian video game Left Behind to U.S. soldiers in Iraq, for some strange reason.

There's a website for parent gamers called Dice 'n' Diapers. It's Euro-friendly. (source)

A trucker carrying board games slid off a highway and mysteriously disappeared. The board games he was carrying included "Law and Order" and "Lost". Hmmmm. (source)

There are a lot of games for lovers. Bliss seems rather ridiculous, though. Whenever you are "in the mood", instead of breaking out the sexy request cards, or rolling the dice and moving around the track, you simply boot your computer, run the program, log in, enter your preferences, enter all the clothing you are wearing, set the controls as to what your emotional state is, configure your display settings, wake up your now dozing partner, and start the game. Don't forget to reboot if your system crashes.

Yehuda

Be Noticed! Submit Articles to the Games Carnival

I had posts listed in a few more blog carnivals again in the last week or two (other than the ones I already mentioned):

Games Carnival
Harry Potter Carnival
Travel Carnival

And, of course, I hosted the Haveil Havalim carnival a few days ago.

I will be hosting the Games Carnival in two weeks time, August 22. If you would like your article or blog post listed in the carnival, submit it to me by email or at the above link.

What is a Blog Carnival?

A blog carnival is simply a single post that links to other posts on one topic. It is a great way to find a lot of posts written about the same general topic or other people writing about the same topic. It is an inspiration for writing good posts, a convenient way to get your blog found, and a way to exchange blog links.

As you can see from the Haveil Havalim articles which I host, they can get pretty big. My last HH had around 70 links in it. They tend to be much smaller when starting out, such as 10 links or so.

There used to be a really large and popular gamer's carnival for quite some time. By games they meant video games, of course, although I managed to sneak a few articles onto some of them. For some reason, the carnival stopped last April.

In the last few months, a whole bunch of game carnivals started up, including ones specific for video game players, game producers, game designers, and game programmers.

Let's make the game carnival a big one for all types of games, including board and card games, RPGs, CCGs, Chess, Poker, and video games.

Guidelines

- Submit up to two articles. If you submit more than two, I will choose the two I like most. If you submit way more than two, I will be annoyed.

- Posts should be related to games in some way, shape, or form.

- Unless your post is obscene, illegal, grossly ill-mannered, really, really pathetic, not game related, or your submission got lost, I will link to it.

- Submit posts no later than midnight of the evening before, if possible (Aug 21).

- You can submit older posts, but the idea is to submit new posts, if possible.

Yehuda

The Mathematics of Havoc

Havoc: The Hundred Years War, the card game, that is.

I played two-player with Tal. I took a few moments to look at how the point system of the game works.

Two-player Havoc is zero-sum, like so many other two-player games. The object of the game isn't to win the most points, but only to win more points than the other player. Every point you win is a point not won by your opponent.

In a two-player game, we play that the winner of a round gets the card, and the second player, if involved in the battle, gets the third-place token for that battle.

I counted all of the available points for the game and found that there were 79 points, total. Thus, a victory is 40 points or more. If you play in every battle that has second place points, you're guaranteed at least 13 points.

However, if any battles remain unfought due to the peacekeeper, or if second-place does not score one or more of the battles, the sum total number of points decreases. For each two points lost, the victory requires one less point.

Assuming both players play each battle, each battle is not significant for the number of points won, but for the point differential won between the two players. Thus, the order of significance for the battles is: 7 (9 points), 5 (8 points), 3/8/9 (6 points), 1/6 (5 points), 2/4 (4 points).

Tal wins multi-player Havoc fairly well by passing early battles and winning the last few battles. This doesn't work in two-player, as you can see. You're going to be gaining 8 points in the last two battles even if you lose, so a score of 32 going into the last two battles is already a victory.

That's what happened to me.

(Passing a battle for an extra card, or calling Havoc for an extra card, may be a situationally good play if the draw deck is small and you need a specific card coming up. The entire deck is not that big. You know pretty much what's in your opponent's hand. In our games, practically the entire deck may end up in our hands by mid-game.)

Gin Rummy

After Havoc, we played Gin. I won three rounds in a row, putting the score at 98 points to 0. I suggested that Tal resign, but she didn't. Good move.

She won the next three rounds in a row, putting the score at 98 to 81. Unfortunately for the drama, I won the next round.

Game News

The motley assortment of board game podcasters are handing out their own new board game awards. I've actually known about this for some time, as I'm privy to their discussion group, but Tom finally made the announcement on BGG.

Electronic Arts, following press releases a few weeks ago that they are boring their customers by putting out the same game over and over with different graphics, is exploring games that change in real-time through contextual downloading. E.g. you get to play a real game that is actually going on somewhere, or your flight simulator shows actual weather conditions.

This technology has many other (much better) applications that I can think of.

The Clarion Ledger discusses video game addiction. Not so much news, but they do get both sides of the story, at least. Sort of.

courant.com covers Apples to Apples.

Starcraft: the Board Game is getting buzz. Looks to me a lot like all the other games in FF's product line.

Margaret Robertson on BBC News write an article that could have been written by Raph Koster.

Yehuda

The Difference Between Reward and Punishment

Rachel and I went to see Ariella, our (Rachel's) first child, officially inducted into the army this evening.



Until now, everything about the army had seemed a little like camp. Buses, hugs and smiles when they went off to the army. Sleeping in bunks, lots of exercise, companionship, bad food, little sleep.



It's so easy to take the world for granted. Armchair generals, couch politicians, so many of us think only of ourselves and our own pleasure, or our family. When we think of our community or country, we shout and argue, but what do we really do when the right course of action requires real sacrifice: our standard of living, ourselves, our children? That's when we run and hide.



The army is not camp. 100 young people have spent two weeks learning how to shoot a gun, stand at attention, and salute their commanders. They sleep little, march, and obey, counting off the seconds.



They speak in code. They have strange laws. They are subject to rules and discipline that we are not.



All of these music-loving, beach-going, smiling young men and women swore an oath to serve their commanders, the army, and their country, though it mean losing their lives.



As I watched them drilling, I thought less of how proud I was of them, and more of the thousands of people who have gone before them. How surely, some of these beautiful young men and women are going to see terror and war face to face. Some will have to shoot to kill. Some will have to save people from dying. Some might lose limbs or life.



If, God willing, none of them ever have to face dire situations like these, each one has been and will continue to be dramatically transformed as their service continues.



None of these people want war or fighting, but neither will they shirk from it. As we sang the national anthem, I reflected on how the Israeli anthem is one of the few that has no reference to war or conquest, only peace and longing to be free.



Last night, Ariella's commander sent them all to sleep at 8:00 pm and woke them at 10:00. While getting ready for their all night activities, the commander said that one of them was going to carry not only their own incredibly heavy packs, but an additional 12 kilo communications equipment backpack.

When they were all ready, the commander turned to Ariella and told her that she was the one.

Not only did she carry the extra load all night, but she had to run back and forth between all the groups. She ran three times as much as everyone else did. By the time night was over, her pants were ripped and she was bruised and bleeding.

Her commander finally told them at dawn that basic induction was over and they were now ready for their three months of training. She then spoke to each soldier in turn.

When she came to Ariella, she asked her "I suppose you know why I asked you to carry the communication gear?"

Ariella said, "No, commander."

The commander said, "Because I knew you could. And I wanted you to know that you could. And when I'm not around, I want you to always carry the extra load, because you can."



Yehuda

How to Ensure that Discussions are not only about Definitions

The Problem

Raph Koster, in Theory of Fun for Game Design defines games, art, and fun in rather specific ways. Raph's book is full of useful and interesting insights as to how the brain works using games, what games do for you, games in society, and so on.

Yet, many people get hung up over his definitions. When he says that "fun" is the brain's way of absorbing patterns until you're done with the pattern, he's saying a whole lot about what happens in games and other activities, but, really, very little about what fun is. The definition he uses for fun in simply a placeholder for what he wants to talk about.

This is a problem. Not only does everyone have their own ideas as to what the definitions of these terms are, but real-life always provides counter-examples. Raph has to spend time including the fun things he considers fun, and excluding the fun things he does not consider fun.

There's nothing wrong with arguing about definitions, but it always seems to overshadow the rest of the discussion.

It doesn't make a bit of difference to his discussion about what is happening when someone is playing a game whether or not you call this "fun" or not. It is a whole lot more important that it is or isn't happening, not what it is called.

The problem is, how can we concentrate on what is being said and not argue so much about the terms used?

The Solution

Use Greek letters.

Instead of games, we can use definitions like the following:

• alpha are activities
• beta are interactive activities
• gamma are interactive activities with goals
• delta are interactive activities with goals that are perceived as fun
• epsilon are interactive activities with one or more winners and losers

Etc...

Now, instead of trying to define what is or isn't "fun", let's call the brain's way of absorbing patterns until you're done with the pattern "theta".

Now we have a proposition that theta is one of the reasons that people are drawn to, and benefit from, activities such as gamma, delta, and epsilon.

Ta da. Now we have a discussion about the issues that matters, and no one comes barging in and says, "wrong, that's not what a game is" or "that's not what fun is".

Furthermore, the subject matter of the discussion is now no longer forced into talking about "games". Any activities that meet the criteria for gamma and delta, whether the currently call them games or not, are subject to the same discussion.

We shouldn't get trapped into thinking that everything that is associated with the words "game" in our minds has to be associated with everything that is produced by a game company.

For instance, your brain may be stuck on the idea that a game has to be fun. But you may define "game" as an interactive activity with rules and goals.

Instead of calling an interactive activity with rules and goals a "game", let's call this "gamma". Gammas are interactive activities with rules and goals.

Clearly, gammas don't have to be fun. That's not part of the definition of gammas. When we called them games, you were hung up on the idea that these were "games". They had to be fun.

Gammas, on the other hand, have no such associations. Gammas can be taking a math test or getting a driver's license.

Definitions

Defining things is a high and noble pursuit. Unfortunately, life always throws exceptions at us, and definitions are almost never complete. There are usually a few things that straddle definitions.

It is a shame to always come back to the definitions, which carry so much baggage, than discuss other underlying issues.

Yehuda

Two Player Mykerinos

I rarely get to sit down and play a game with Saarya, for some reason, but we got in a game of Mykerinos last night. This was his first play.

Turned out to be quite a good experience.

In my previous games, all of us rushed to the museum. The groupthink is is that museum space is a finite, scarce resource, while tiles are renewable and less scarce. As a result, the Brown bonus tiles did little good for anybody.

This time I played without rushing to the museum, seeing as it was a 2-player game, anyway. As a result, the Brown tiles became critical in Saarya taking over the game from me.

It seems to me that if you don't go for the museum early, and someone else does, you're essentially screwed. I can't see any reason not to do it.

I do think that the 3 spaces in the museum are somewhat undervalued. And I repeat what I said a long time ago, that an open-ended value track instead of the museum would have made the game a little more strategically interesting.

But it still played well. Most importantly in two-player, all that matters is the point differential for each tile pick or action, so the entire last turn's decisions were entirely calculable. Nevertheless, it was still complex enough to be fun.


Boing Boing hit several game-related sites in the last week. This one about using games to power solutions for AI problems is one I covered before, I think. Can't seem to find it.

And this RPG about gaining experience when you do household chores follows a board game I once covered on the same subject (ah, here it is: Spintastik).

Israel will be having a Poker tournament Sept 28-30 with 100,000 NIS in prizes (link is in Hebrew).

Yehuda