I enjoy playing many of the Euros my gaming group has introduced me to. I find some of the games well balanced, with little in the way of randomess that might turn a game on it's heels. Many of them encourage long range planning or have multiple strategies that one can attempt during subsequent games. All of these things are what I look for and enjoy in a game.
However, like many people here I began my serious enjoyment of boardgames in the heyday of Avalon hill and SPI, playing games like Dune, Civilization, and I played many of the comsims, even though I was not the best at military strategy and usually got my butt kicked. These games had theme and conflict in them, which is something I enjoyed, but I can certainly understand why they would not be to everyone's taste. I also enjoyed some of the old games like Clue, which I think had more universal appeal.
Then of course came settlers and a the wave of Euros. I caught the settlers wave, but missed the big rise in boardgames as I bought a house and started a family and some of my best game friends moved out of town. In the last year I have met people in a local game group and have been introduced to a LOT of the games I have missed in the last 10 years. OK - enough of the Bio - it's not essential, but I think it helps to understand my POV, and to put my comments in context.
There was a time in my game group a few months ago when I played Cuba, Guatemala Café, Taj Mahal and Notre Dame (among others) within the space of 2 months (I list them in order of enjoyment BTW - Did not care much for TM and ND). As is typical for many Euros I watched the token move around the edge of the board, noting the Victory points, and I started to think about how VP's seem so abstract to me sometimes. It's hard to get excited sometimes about POINTS, especially when so many games use the idea. I could not help feel that a little GREED, a little bit of the profit motive, a little bit of COLD HARD CASH would increase my interest in the games. What is so wrong with being an unrepentant capitalist? Money is already used as a resource in many Euros, it would not take much to alter the game a little so that one gets a return on investment instead of getting VP's.
The intellectual part of me says "It's all the same thing! - it's just a way of keeping score". But the less rational part misses money as an objective in some of the games. I like holding it, I like stacking it in my playspace, I like counting it. I like watching the stack increase as a game progresses. You ever try to wave around a stack of Victory points to intimidate or lord over your opponents? It's very unsatisfying.
It does not even have to be money; Give me trophies of some kind, anything other than just POINTS on the board! If you can't do that, then give me a goal, something to strive for other than points. I think this is why Power Grid has been one of my favorite Euros so far. Money is by far the biggest, most important resource in the game, and there is a clear goal to strive for. It definitely fills in some of the things I find lacking in some other games, and gives me a sense of theme and accomplishment. Part of me says it would not take much to make some of the Eros feel more thematic and help me enjoy them a lot more.
That's what would make me enjoy some games more. Give me some money, give me a goal. I would also say give me the ability to really screw over the opposing player better, but that's a completely different topic dealing with game design..
I've recently found the term "victory points" amusing since (a) my fiancee hates the term, and (b) simply "points" would suffice. In a game of baseball, do we call them Victory Runs? We totally should.
My question for you is do you like abstracts? I'd like to think Euros are abstracts that are inspired by a theme (nycavri's Penguin Soccer, though not a Euro, was created via this process).
Not quite... there's actions and the actions cost a certain number of "points". 1 to move, 2 to dig, 3 for treasure dig 3 for treasure swap, 5 to camp, 5 to lay claim, etc. You have 6 possible actions and 10 "points" to spend on those action costs.
I've recently found the term "victory points" amusing since (a) my fiancee hates the term, and (b) simply "points" would suffice. In a game of baseball, do we call them Victory Runs? We totally should.
Victory Points as a term came around both via literal translation from the German and the fact that some games have multiple different types of points and there's a need to differentiate among them. All points are not victory points.
The intellectual part of me says "It's all the same thing! - it's just a way of keeping score". But the less rational part misses money as an objective in some of the games. I like holding it, I like stacking it in my playspace, I like counting it. I like watching the stack increase as a game progresses. You ever try to wave around a stack of Victory points to intimidate or lord over your opponents? It's very unsatisfying.
You mean you're not turning your victory points into the Victory Point store? I already have enough VP's to get a Gameboy!
It's hard to get excited sometimes about POINTS, especially when so many games use the idea. I could not help feel that a little GREED, a little bit of the profit motive, a little bit of COLD HARD CASH would increase my interest in the games. What is so wrong with being an unrepentant capitalist? Money is already used as a resource in many Euros, it would not take much to alter the game a little so that one gets a return on investment instead of getting VP's.
Econ and train games would fill your desire for cash-as-win-condition and returns on investment. It's hard to tell if you'd care for them at all though, since your only rated game is RoboRally.
Tell a bit more about what you enjoy, and I'd sure that people can come up with suggestions.
Econ and train games would fill your desire for cash-as-win-condition and returns on investment. It's hard to tell if you'd care for them at all though, since your only rated game is RoboRally.
Tell a bit more about what you enjoy, and I'd sure that people can come up with suggestions.
It's not that I dislike or am not having fun with the games my group enjoys - it's just that I find points on a track a little less emotionally satisfying that reaching a goal or earning great flipping wads of cash. I would rather play a well designed game with VP's than a poor game that uses cash.
I like train games, and I own several - And I like Acquire and a couple of the other suggested games. I know I should sit back and rate my other games, but I find it hard to put them in context in comparison with other games. Expecially since many games with our game group I have played only once or twice, and it is very hard for me to rate a game because my enjoyment is dependent on my understanding of the game, the context it is played in. I might have to play a game 2 or three times before I can decide how well I like it.
Posted Tue Apr 15,2008 06:13 pm
