Game: California

Image

gameguythinks — 2008-10-06T06:14:17+00:00

My house at game's end

Image

Tallyhoyall — 2008-08-30T15:52:51+00:00

Waiting!

Thread: Re: Two players and the bonus tiles

ackmondual — 2008-08-29T14:59:15+00:00

I figured that was the whole premise behind a 2p game. It's a chance to put in more legwork and get more out of it. Of course, while you're able to get the things you want (relatively) easier, so is your only other opponent, so while racking up bonus bonus, so is he if he's playing his cards right.

That and the fact that you need at least 2 guests at your house to receive a gift from an incoming guest (attempts) to balance out the 2p games.

Thread: Two players and the bonus tiles

dead jawa — 2008-08-29T08:38:47+00:00

In a 2-player game it seems like there's just not enough competition for the bonus tiles. I guess that's why the game ends early if one person gets enough of them. Since they are so much easier to earn when only fighting one other player for them, I was thinking of reducing the value of each bonus tile by one, in 2-player games.

It might still be necessary to end the ability to claim bonus tiles (but not just end the game) at a certain point if one players claims every bonus tile possible for a layout, and now the other player is uncontested for the remaining tiles. Of course at that point the player with all the bonus tiles should be driving the game to its end anyways.

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

utahBGG — 2008-08-28T18:33:56+00:00

m_hamburg wrote:
Tanga should give you a commission on this review- I just bought a copy based on it. Thanks, and great job.

Seriously. I am now debating whether to get Tanga's 6-copy bundle based on the review.

Thread: Re: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

Teriyaki Donuts — 2008-08-27T17:18:43+00:00

Which goes to show that you should always pick the brown player board in order to have an initial advantage. There is no green player board. For the brown/green 2 point bonus, you have the advantage of not competing with a "green" player. Sure other players can develop both green and brown rooms, but you would be on the plus side of already having the brown floor type.

Maybe the color mansion tiles should be drawn at random before the game begins.

Am I missing something?

Thread: The females defeat the males of the family

Larry Welborn — 2008-08-26T00:46:20+00:00

Tonight before bedtime the children wanted to play a game and we decided on California. We had played our first game last week and my 5 year old daughter had won, so she was eager to play it again. My wife and 6 year old son also agreed to play so we set up a 4 player game.

The game started evenly as everyone was buying floors and storing furniture in their attic. My daughter bought the first attic expansion and quickly put it to good use as she grabbed a piece of furniture that would later garner her a bonus tile.

One of the early rounds was unusual as everyone took a coin. I explained to the children that it might be a good idea to buy stuff when the cost was only 1 or 2, but since I haven't won the game, my advice went unheeded.

By the mid game, I had picked up a few gifts but no bonus tiles. My 6 year old son and daughter had one 2 point bonus tile each and a couple of gifts while my wife had the only 3 point bonus.

In the late game, I finally picked up a 3 point bonus tile while everyone else also added at least one bonus tile.

In the last round, I had no guests and no chance to get a bonus tile,so there was no reason for me to purchase furniture. I added flooring to the house. My wife, going next, was able to pick up a green dog, which gave her a 3 point bonus tile. My daughter, going third, added a purple furniture, which gave her a 3 point bonus and my son added a gray floor, which allowed him to move furniture from his attic and score a 3 point bonus tile. I was out of money, so I took a coin and the game soon ended.

We added up the scores and my daughter had a 1 point lead over my wife, but unfortunately she had a loan she couldn't repay and the -2 point penalty gave the win to my wife.

Final scores:

Wife 22
Daughter 21 (after 2 point penalty)
Son 18
Dad 18

This has been a fun game that the children can play quite well and I expect that it will see repeated places in the future.

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

m_hamburg — 2008-08-10T15:00:46+00:00
Tanga should give you a commission on this review- I just bought a copy based on it. Thanks, and great job.

Thread: Re: A new bonus card

ackmondual — 2008-07-14T05:04:14+00:00
astroglide wrote:
ackmondual wrote:
Huh. The designer pulled a 'Zooloretto' here in where that game also has extra expansion boards outside the base game.

the same designer!yeah, that's what I was getting at

Thread: Re: A new bonus card

astroglide — 2008-07-13T23:06:40+00:00
ackmondual wrote:
Huh. The designer pulled a 'Zooloretto' here in where that game also has extra expansion boards outside the base game.

the same designer!

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

Stephanie7364 — 2008-07-12T18:08:19+00:00

California is a cool little game. And Coloretto was such a far better game than Zooloretto; it's compact, and a lot easier to set up.

Thread: Re: A new bonus card

Gamegrunt — 2008-07-11T04:29:31+00:00
A nice little "consolation prize" when one is beaten out by another for a certain bonus tile.

Gg

Thread: Re: who goes first when you start a new day (round)?

Gamegrunt — 2008-07-11T03:58:44+00:00
The player to the left of the player who ended the previous day.

Gg

Thread: who goes first when you start a new day (round)?

ackmondual — 2008-07-11T03:51:46+00:00
AFAIK, the rules make no mention of this. This issue was explicitly covered in Zooloretto and Aquaretto

Thread: Re: A new bonus card

ackmondual — 2008-07-11T03:50:32+00:00
Huh. The designer pulled a 'Zooloretto' here in where that game also has extra expansion boards outside the base game. Still, it's highly rated, so I may decide to try it out. Neat thing is one doesn't really have to buy it. You could just print it out and use it like that

Thread: Re: attic expansion "II" tile

ackmondual — 2008-07-11T03:47:01+00:00
initially, this seemed odd since in Zooloretto and Aquaretto, each player in a 5p has the option to buy an expansion (or two), but California IS different in where you can only buy it if it's sold in the store, so you need that window of opportunity AS WELL AS have the cash on hand, so I can see that.

Thread: Re: Endgame trigger in 2 player game seems premature

Gamegrunt — 2008-07-07T22:44:29+00:00
maxac wrote:
I bought this from Tanga on a whim, and I have only played it twice, each time with 2 players.

The last page of the English rules state that a two player game has the following two additional endgame triggers:
1. when all 16 tile spaces are filled by one player
2. when one player has more than 9 points worth of bonus cards

The number 1 condition seems fine, but the number 2 condition seems to happen way too early. In both games, the 9 points were acquired by one player before day 6. We were not even close to filling up our mansions.

Doesn't this seem a little early to end the game? Total playing time was only 10-15 minutes.

Thoughts?

Play defence.

Gg

Thread: Re: Endgame trigger in 2 player game seems premature

maxac — 2008-07-07T22:11:16+00:00
I like Liumas' idea of ending after 9 days, but I have yet to try it. Have to bug the wife tonight to see if she wants to play it again.

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:50:08+00:00
back of 1st unpunched sheet. Uberplay edition

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:49:40+00:00
4th unpunched sheet. Uberplay edition

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:49:14+00:00
3rd unpunched sheet. Uberplay edition

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:48:03+00:00
2nd unpunched sheet. Uberplay edition

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:47:38+00:00
1st unpunched sheet. Uberplay edition

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-03T05:46:07+00:00
inside the box of a factory fresh, Uberplay edition copy

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

Gamegrunt — 2008-07-03T01:06:35+00:00
For the bonus tiles of the 3 same colors, those tiles must be furnished. No furnishings on them, NO BONUS TILE!!

Wow! Missed this one...we've been awarding the 3 point bonus tile without room furnishings.

Gg

Image

ackmondual — 2008-07-02T17:01:38+00:00
unpunched coin sheet from Uberplay edition

Thread: Re: Much better than watching HGTV

Gamegrunt — 2008-07-02T15:39:22+00:00
I would tend to disagree about the game being unforgiving of mistakes, especially in two player games. Inaccurate placement of renovated room tiles can eliminate the possibility of certain bonus tiles being scored. This is due to the rule that identical room tiles must be placed orthogonally adjacent. The game is more interactive than many give it credit because defensive play (denying an opponent a particular tile) is so critical! The margin of victory can be paper-thin in California, and an early mistake can doom your chances of winning.

Gg

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

reapersaurus — 2008-06-28T04:27:43+00:00
California is an underrated game, has lots of gateway potential, and a winning theme for female gamers.

I think it is better than Zooloretto as well - some reasons might be:
Starting with the bank and tiles filled gives you much more strategy in each round. The opening of each of Zoo's rounds is simply filling the first spot in each truck - pretty boring, no-choice stuff.

Also, passing the bag in Zoo is a pain, and reduces the simple pleasure in the game (cooloretto does not share this weakness).
California is more streamlined, and provides more strategic choices for the time invested, IMO.

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

tommynomad — 2008-06-28T00:37:45+00:00
We love California, too. Defintely an underrated game in the light-medium range. Very true what you said about timing your tile draws/bank depletion.

Thanks for the great review, Diane!

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

EvilTimmy — 2008-06-27T18:05:40+00:00
jadzianess wrote:
My 12 year old even had a sleepover and she taught this game to 2 of her friends and said they enjoyed it. It can certainly be considered a gateway game.

I had heard the comparisons to Zooloretto, and I have to say that didn't help me want to buy it. I have Zooloretto and I don't know what it is with that game, but I cringe at the thought of setting it up.
Yes and yes!

This is an excellent gateway game and somehow does the Zooloretto 'thing' in a much better way. Maybe it's because you're just working with one room versus three animal pens and the scoring is much simpler. IMO Zooloretto is a jumbled mess and I think Schacht should have stopped with California.

Thread: Re: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

Eldard — 2008-06-27T17:48:24+00:00
Thanks for the outstanding review, Diane. We, too, have found California to be both challenging and a lot of fun.

Thread: Re: California - First Play

sinnylong — 2008-06-27T15:24:08+00:00
I recently played two games with four players each time. We liked the game, but didn't love it. One nice thing about the game is that, as you found, all players were more or less even throughout. Winners were certainly not obvious early-on, and at endgame we all had our share of 2- and 3point bonus tiles.

For some strange reason, we all started battling over the Dog tiles (I guess everyone wants a puppy), even though it has no greater value than any of the Green tiles.

Thread: California, a really good family game. Really, take a virtual trip there.

jadzianess — 2008-06-27T14:32:17+00:00
California

This is not a game I would normally have ordered from a website, but Tanga graciously put it up several times and I finally caved in and got it. Having 2 pre-teen girls had a little something to do with that, and it is said to be fairly simple and easy. Right up my alley.

]]>
This is a photo of the contents of the game. The rule book is a whopping 4 pages long with plenty of diagrams and very clear explanations.
You start with a plain board, depicting the house you inherited and that you must now update and decorate.]]> There are 16 squares on your board, and you are given one free floor tile already. There are 6 different floor tiles, and this one shows a free maroon tile. Also some squares show one, two or no silver coins. That indicates how much it costs to place your purchased floor tile there.

In the center of your game area you will put the store board, which shows 2 stores that hold 4 tiles each. ]]> and the bank, which holds 4 gold coins.]]>.

From the store you will buy one of the 8 available tiles, either a plain floor tile, which must be put down first on your board, or a furniture tile, which has to be placed on top of the same color floor tile. Such as the green dog is placed on the plain green tile. You can not put a furniture tile on the board unless a floor tile is there first.]]>and ]]>

A board in the process of being filled is shown here]]>
You'll see that the grey tiles are next to each other and that is how you have to build. You couldn't stick another grey tile on the bottom left corner of the board. It would have to be placed next to one of the previously placed grey tiles. There are also people figures standing on the board, that indicates you furnished a room by adding furniture to a matching colored tile. The guests come in the same 6 colors as the tiles, such as a grey guest only visits when a grey room is furnished. The first visiting guest brings you nothing, but if a second guest comes over they bring you a gift token, and that is worth 1 point at the end of the game. The visiting guests seem to constantly be moving between players, and if the green visitor happens to be at your place and you furnish another green room, too bad, no new presents, so you have to plan your furnishing wisely to get the points. Your potential guests.]]>

Turns are very simple with 2 choices. You either buy a tile from one of the two stores, or take a gold coin from the bank. The cost of the tiles is in silver coins, 5 silver coins = 1 gold coin. The tile cost is determined by how many gold coins are in the bank. If there are 2 gold coins, then the floor tile or furniture tile costs 2 silver coins. To place a floor tile on your board, you check your floor board and you will see that there is a cost of 1 or 2 silver coins to build that floor tile, already printed on your board. A furniture tile costs nothing to place as it goes directly on a previously paid for floor tile.

An attic space allows you to store furniture if you don't have its matching floor tile.

There are bonus tiles ]]> such that if you add the same tiles on your board as depicted on the bonus tile, you get that tile and at the end of the game you get the points printed on the tile. For the bonus tiles of the 3 same colors, those tiles must be furnished. No furnishings on them, NO BONUS TILE!! Once you get a bonus tile, no one can take it from you.

There are 12 rounds in the game. Each round ends when either one of the stores has no tiles, or the bank has no coins. The store board is actually two stores with 4 tiles each. So each round will last a minimum of 4 turns up to a maximum of 10 turns. I don't like it when the round ends right before my turn, as 4 gold coins are put back in the bank and the store is filled with 8 random new floor and furniture tiles. That means each tile costs 4 silver coins, and I often don't have money after a round. Thus I take a gold coin from the bank, lowering the price of the store tiles for the next players.

After the 12th round, you add up your points. Each gift you received from a visiting guest counts as one point. Your bonus tiles are added to that, and then you count up how many squares you managed to cover on your floor board. The squares do not have to be furnished in order to count as one point. It seems like the scores are often around the 20 range and tie scores are not too uncommon.

I have played 3P and 4P games only and they are quite different. As you would expect, the 4P game is tighter than 2/3P games as you end up with fewer tiles. Your floor board has two sides, one for 2/3 player games, and the other for when there are 4/5 players. It is much easier to get bonus tiles in a 2/3 player game, than in 4/5 player. The length of the game seems to be about the same, regardless of number of players as you go through the same amount of tiles in every game. I would guess it takes about 30 minutes, certainly does not drag on.

My 7 and 12 year old caught on to the game very quickly and had good strategies. They have asked for the game many times already. They did tend to furnish rooms that they already had a visiting guest over for, so they would miss out on getting the extra gift. I prefer to get floor tiles first and then furnish them, but that doesn't always prove to be a winning strategy. My 12 year old even had a sleepover and she taught this game to 2 of her friends and said they enjoyed it. It can certainly be considered a gateway game.

I had heard the comparisons to Zooloretto, and I have to say that didn't help me want to buy it. I have Zooloretto and I don't know what it is with that game, but I cringe at the thought of setting it up. California just feels quick and easy to get it out and going. I would keep California over Zooloretto at this point. It just seems more streamlined than Zooloretto.

It may sound like a game where you automatically pick the best tiles and don't have to think too much, but you do have the ability to mess up someones plans. For example, during our last nights 4P game, it was the final round and my 7 year old needed the motorcycle to get the 2 point bonus tile. Her older sister had the turn before her and knew she wanted that motorcycle. The older one chuckled greedily and took the last tile from one of the stores, not one that she necessarily needed or wanted, but she thus ended the game prematurely, locking the younger one out of getting the bonus points by using the motorcycle.

In all, I give this game a big thumbs up, and my kids do too! Husband even played it when he was quite tired (winning also) and he seemed to enjoy it.

Thread: California - First Play

JayB — 2008-06-27T13:09:42+00:00

This was my first time to play California.

There were two of us for this session.

We briefly went over the rules and setup the game. My wife, Shaye, was chosen to go first. She purchased a piece of brown furniture for her renovated start room and I chose to take a coin, on my turn, to make things a little cheaper.

A few turns later I had finally obtained three guests and my first gift. Shaye quickly matched this and obtained her first gift as well; we now both had three guests each.

It didn't take long for one of my guests to be taken from me and Shaye picked up her second gift. I, however, in response picked up the first bonus tile for having three blue rooms renovated and shortly thereafter received the brown guest matching her two gifts.

We stayed almost even the entire game, matching points turn for turn. Near end game we each had two 3 point bonus tiles, one 2 point bonus tile and three 1 point gifts. Shaye triggered the end round by obtaining one more 3 point bonus tile which I matched on my turn.

Since we were tied on bonus tiles and gifts, the determining factor of the game was renovated rooms; of which, Shaye had one more of.

Play time: 35 minutes (including rule discussion/setup)

The two player game seems to go really fast; the end game triggers are very easy to obtain or at least they were in this session. I look forward to playing this again soon with at least three players to see how the dynamics change. The two player game seems it will always be very close in score, perhaps with first player being the determining factor.

Thread: Re: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

Drew1365 — 2008-06-18T13:45:02+00:00
MasterDinadan wrote:
Well, you'll notice that for the 2-piece bonus tiles, they take one color from EACH of the "one piece of each of 3 colors" tiles. In other words, you can't go for the pair bonus and go for the 3 color bonus at the same time.

AH HA! That's it! That's what I wasn't seeing. Good catch!

Thread: Re: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

MasterDinadan — 2008-06-18T04:46:19+00:00
Well, you'll notice that for the 2-piece bonus tiles, they take one color from EACH of the "one piece of each of 3 colors" tiles. In other words, you can't go for the pair bonus and go for the 3 color bonus at the same time. As far why they picked the colors they did, there doesn't need to be any reason. There's no difference between each color, so they could just arbitrarily pick three colors to form each "three color" bonus, then pick one color from each tile to form the "furniture pair" bonuses.

The downloadable bonuses are a very nice option to add in too.

Thread: Re: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

Drew1365 — 2008-06-18T03:31:13+00:00
reapersaurus wrote:
And if you want more bonus tiles, look at the expansions for California, linked in the game description.
They provide tile bonuses for (IIRC) first to 5 gifts, first to have all of each kind of color room tile (not necessarily furnished), and one or 2 others.

Oh, I alreddy made those.

Thread: Re: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

reapersaurus — 2008-06-18T00:21:12+00:00
Drew1365 wrote:
So why these? And why are there only three?

I counted them out once - as I recall, there was the same number of each color furniture. So why the pool, as opposed to any other blue furnishing? No reason - just to have one of each color by worth a different amount than the other 2.

Why only three combinations of colors?
Just because there's 6 colors, and it covers the pairings.

And if you want more bonus tiles, look at the expansions for California, linked in the game description.
They provide tile bonuses for (IIRC) first to 5 gifts, first to have all of each kind of color room tile (not necessarily furnished), and one or 2 others.

Thread: Bonus Tile configurations . . . what's the logic?

Drew1365 — 2008-06-17T20:44:01+00:00
You know, I was just wondering if anyone knew the logic behind the three bonus tile configurations that related to specific purchases.

For example:

Dog & Pool Table = 2 points
Motorcycle & Pinball Machine = 2 points
Pool & Piano = 2 points.

So why these? And why are there only three?

I understand that the first one is Green & Brown; the second is Grey & Purple; the third is Blue & Red(dish) . . . but I wonder why only three of them?

I was thinking of creating some tiles with other combos and maybe a random draw at the start to determine which are the prized possessions.

Image

Rokkr — 2008-06-17T19:13:15+00:00
loan certificate and gift tiles

Thread: Re: Family Game Night - First impression

Drew1365 — 2008-06-16T03:29:16+00:00
humeral wrote:
I'll go on to say that I think it's a good stepping-stone game for a budding little gamer. My 4 year old son enjoys it and does quite well.

Interesting. I was just thinking that our 4 year old (4 and a half, she insists) might be able to play this. But we'd probably have to play it when the 3-year-old was occupied.

The only criticism I'd level at it is that it's perhaps a little too even. The last 4-player game we had was 32-31-31-31. Perhaps it was just chance, or perhaps there isn't room to screw up much unless you really play off the wall. Regardless, it's a fun play and popular with non-gamers.

I've only played twice so far. 2-players. One game was a tie, 18-18, the other was a total blowout, 28-14.

Thread: Re: Box Insert

Drew1365 — 2008-06-15T23:31:39+00:00
China and California -- both thin boxes -- are both are stuffed to overflowing with bits under the insert flaps. And I still manage to fit both China Erweiterung, and China - Das Duell in the China box. But it's really stuffed.

Thread: Re: Endgame trigger in 2 player game seems premature

Drew1365 — 2008-06-15T23:27:08+00:00
Having just played a couple 2-player games, I have to agree that the endgame conditions for two-player seem to come way too quickly. (First game was an 18-18 tie, second game a crazy 28-14.) However, it also seems like if you played through 12 days, your house would fill up very fast.

That said, I suspect the more we play, the more cutthroat we'll become, and the contest for scoring tiles will be severe. So I'm not ready to house-rule it yet.

Thread: Re: Family Game Night - First impression

humeral — 2008-06-13T15:04:07+00:00
I strongly concur that this is a good one for a family game.

I'll go on to say that I think it's a good stepping-stone game for a budding little gamer. My 4 year old son enjoys it and does quite well.

The only criticism I'd level at it is that it's perhaps a little too even. The last 4-player game we had was 32-31-31-31. Perhaps it was just chance, or perhaps there isn't room to screw up much unless you really play off the wall. Regardless, it's a fun play and popular with non-gamers.

Thread: Three Way Tie for First

Volfield — 2008-06-10T21:24:53+00:00
Given that Uberplay has gone out of business, I decided to pick up a copy of California from my FLGS while I still had the chance. I bought it on Saturday, and managed to get it to the table on Sunday (which is a record for me - usually games have to sit for weeks between purchase and play).

There were four players at the table: Jeremy, Joshua, Ed, and me.

We randomized the player boards (making sure to use the 4/5-player side), set everything up, and selected a start player (who ended up being Jeremy). I ran through a quick rules explanation (having read them the previous night) and we were off and renovating.

Rooms were renovated, and furniture purchased for them. Guests wandered across the table bearing gifts (except, of course, for those freeloaders who showed up first). By the second or third day, we started acquiring the bonus cards, and eventually got all of them. They were spread fairly evenly, with 6 points to me, and 8 each to the others.

The 12th day came to an end, and we counted up the points. The scores were Jeremy 22, Joshua 23, Ed 23, and me 23. We knew it had been close, but I don't think anybody expected a three-way tie for first place. Ed had the most money, so he won the tie-breaker and the game.

Total time was well under an hour. I have to say that for such a short, easy game, it has some surprising depth of strategy. This is one that I can easily see getting played repeatedly.

Based on my first impressions, I rate the game a solid 7.

Thread: Re: Family Game Night - First impression

inkcat — 2008-06-01T18:05:09+00:00
Update... Play #2

After church today DD (we'll call her E-bug) really wanted to play again. "Please mom, please please please!" Well twist my arm a little. SURE! My 12 yr old son (who had already crashed last night when we played - we'll call him Astrocat) was anxious to try it out too. He likes to play games about half of the time when the family plays - often he'd rather play on the Wii. DH saw us setting it up and said "Hey, I want to play too!"

Keep in mind that this is a beautiful Sunday afternoon - and the neighborhood pool is open and we just got a new Wii game a few days ago. And they want to play a game!! SCORE!

We quickly explain the rules to Astrocat and get started. Since we now have 4 players, we get to flip the mats over to the other side with the cheaper renovation costs. The game progressed well. We kept having to remind Astrocat to collect his gifts. E-bug and I started to get annoyed with this and told him that it was HIS responsibility to remember during his turn or he forfeits the gift. Around day 8, Astrocat once again forgets his gift. We pointedly asked him, "are you done? Are you sure you are done?" He said yes, at which point my ultracompetitive sweet little darling girl fist pumped and screamed "YES! You forgot your gift HAHA!" I was in the you snooze you lose camp, but pushover Dad decided that "it's his first game, just give it to him." I said ok, but if he wins there will be an asterisk (which is now the new family joke).

Astrocat and I were nearly tied in day 11 and DH had the turn before me. Twice in that day he stole tiles I needed that would put me ahead of Astrocat, so I felt obligated to give DH the "evil eye".

Last turn came and there was NONE of the furniture available that anyone had been hoping for. We grabbed as much as we could to get us end game points.

When we tallied everything up, Astrocat beat me by ONE stinkin point (20 to 19) and Dad and E-bug tied at 16. We congratulated Astrocat as I wrote our scores down in our game log (we keep one in every game box) and dutifully (and smilingly) added that asterisk that I promised. We laughed.

Things we noticed - The 4 player game played out quite differently than the 3 player, but was just as much fun. There were a bunch of bonus cards left over unclaimed at the end. With 4 people collecting furniture it seemed like it ran out faster (may have just been our tile luck though).

I am soo glad we have found a fun game that they seem to love as much as I do. I was really getting tired of Bohnanza which was the only game DH wanted to play for a while.

Thread: Re: Family Game Night - First impression

jadzianess — 2008-06-01T13:43:34+00:00
Hi Laura, glad to hear the game has promise, I too ordered it from Tanga, and it sits unopened on my table. I know it will appeal to my 7 year old diva girl when I get it out. My husband will grimace when I do suggest it but he will be a good sport and play it. Keep working on yours, it's been 3 years since I started buying games and my non gamer husband is getting better, his deepest has probably been Puerto Rico, there is hope! He hasn't commented on the new Stone Age game sitting there

Thread: Family Game Night - First impression

inkcat — 2008-06-01T04:20:41+00:00
Ok, so here's my situation. I'm a gamer mom with a 10 yr old gamer daughter and a non-gamer husband who will sometimes play with us.

Most everything we play MUST be light to medium-light weight. Any more than that and DD gets analysis paralysis or DH loses interest before learning all the rules. And the game should be fast enough to play between supper and bedtime - about an hour is best.

I just got California from the Tanga deal and have been anxious to break it out and see how it fits our game style. The theme was a hit for my daughter and me right off the bat.

We were a little overwhelmed at first just figuring out what all those pieces were and where they went on the table. I really should have studied the rules before we began, but they were willing to play this game right then and I sure wasn't going to say no. The rule book was very helpful in describing the pieces and we used the picture from the back of the box to figure out placement.

The rules were fast to learn after a quick read through. Either take the money or buy a tile. No problem. We had a few moments of confusion while trying to figure out when the bonus tiles were awarded but a quick look at the clearly written rulebook cleared it right up.

DD and DH were happily buying room tiles & furniture and receiving guests. I started off by studying those bonus cards and buying with a goal in mind. I got off to an early lead by snagging 2 of them rather quickly. They woke up to that strategy quickly. DH was all about collecting the blue and/or gray furniture so he could get the "hot babes" to come and visit his place.

At day 9 or so, DH asked to be reminded about the end of the game - how and when it would occur. I glanced over at the rulebook and mistakenly looked at the 2 player rules. When one player has 9+ bonus card points then the game ends at the end of that day. Well I had 10 points right then and insisted that I was the winner but he wanted to play on. I agreed but told him that the game would have an asterisk next to it. (I thought it was a VERY GOOD sign that he wanted to play MORE!).

We continued through the rest of the days getting more and more cutthroat as we went on - buying furniture we really didn't need just to keep the next player from getting it. It was neck and neck between DH and I and the guests were travelling quite a bit. At one point he took out a loan to finish getting the blue furniture for that bonus card.

Day 11 came and only one bonus card was left - the brown 3 tile one. I had 3 brown rooms and 2 had furniture in them. We turned up the store tiles and there was NO brown furniture available. I chose to take the gold coin twice on that round just to make it end faster and to ensure that I had enough money to buy that brown furniture if it came up on day 12. DH ended day 11 and we nervously pulled tiles out of the bag. The last tile was a brown one with furniture. Yippee. DH and DD quickly whispered their plans to keep it out of my hands and then they realized that it was my turn next and I was loaded with cash. bwahaha.
I snagged it and the guest bearing a gift. We bought a few more tiles but that effectively ended the game.

It turned out that I beat DH 31 to 30 (DD had 27). I celebrated my "second" win (since I thought I had already won earlier). A little while later I was rereading the rules and realized that the 9+ point rule was only for a 2 player game. He certainly gave me grief over that mistake. But he said he was glad that it wasn't the 3+ player rule since that would make the game too short and California was too much fun to stop before 12 days.

We LOVE this new game. I was surprised at how fast my DD not only learned the rules but started strategizing and playing to keep points away from her parents. And I'm very happy I've found another game that my husband will play too. We can't wait to play it again.

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

Angry Duck — 2008-05-26T15:44:26+00:00
astroglide wrote:
for more control you could perhaps use most or least money as the determining factor instead of forced alternation, and switch in the case of a tie.

For two players, I wouldn't mind money being the determining factor. Thanks for the great idea. I'll definitely have to try next time and post its results.

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

astroglide — 2008-05-26T05:22:12+00:00
Angry Duck wrote:
jbhuter6041 wrote:
I just received my copy and haven't had a chance to play yet. However, if your 2P games are consistently working out where the first player never relinquishes control, it seems that a very easy fix would be to simply alternate the first player after each day instead.

Well, that would be taking away an important part of the game mechanics. The it would become a pure game of luck imho.

which important mechanic would be lost? players would still have control over when the round ends, and if things are as you say in the original post it's not clear to me how forced turn order wouldn't be an improvement over simply ceding control to the start player. for more control you could perhaps use most or least money as the determining factor instead of forced alternation, and switch in the case of a tie.

Thread: A new bonus card

fubar awol — 2008-05-25T04:07:40+00:00
Check it out here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/315547

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

Angry Duck — 2008-05-23T17:39:26+00:00
jbhuter6041 wrote:
I just received my copy and haven't had a chance to play yet. However, if your 2P games are consistently working out where the first player never relinquishes control, it seems that a very easy fix would be to simply alternate the first player after each day instead.

Well, that would be taking away an important part of the game mechanics. The it would become a pure game of luck imho.

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

jbhuter6041 — 2008-05-23T14:51:35+00:00
I just received my copy and haven't had a chance to play yet. However, if your 2P games are consistently working out where the first player never relinquishes control, it seems that a very easy fix would be to simply alternate the first player after each day instead.

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

Angry Duck — 2008-05-23T07:23:06+00:00
Yes, we were playing with the person ending the day not starting the next day.

Money isn't the most important part of the game imho. Player one can always take the first important tile off the board, then take the second coin available. If player two takes another coin, then player one only has to pay two coins for the tile plus the value on the floor plan. Also, loan markers help in this scenerio b/c there are times when there is no important tiles on the board for either player, then player one can just take the first and third coins and pay back any debt.

Don't get me wrong, the last two times we played, I tried exactly what you said and came close to winning, but never gain control of a day. First game lasted about 7-8 days, with my girlfriend not being able to pay back her marker, yet still won by 3 points. Then, game two ended on day 9 with her winning by 4 points. In this game, she had to borrow markers three times, but she never let go of her control. I might have won if the board was more in my favor, unfortunately both games fell more her way.

I'm not saying I'll never play it with 2 players cause I do find it fun ... ... as well as a challenge. And I will continue trying ways to change the control factor. I'm just saying it won't be my first choice. Thanks for the response.

Thread: Re: California for 2 players !!!

avmartin — 2008-05-23T05:18:08+00:00
I don't understand. It is very unlikely that someone will be first choice for multiple days. The mechanic for setting the start player almost makes it impossible.

The other player needs to make the 1st player pay for the priviledge...if by nothing else than by taking all the money. If you take coins, the 1st player will either run out of money and have to take coins, or on thier first choice as first player again will be forced to take coins, leaving the other player (with lots of money) to pickup tiles.

You did play that the person ending the day is NOT the first player in the next day, correct?

I don't know what happened, but I suspect that one player did not control the money - which will necessarily create choices since you can outspend the other player. I find it works very well as a 2P game myself.

Thread: California for 2 players !!!

Angry Duck — 2008-05-22T23:50:02+00:00

My girlfriend and I have played California a few times now, but never with anyone else. What we found is a game that should be fun at its core, but scales relatively poor at the two player level.

The biggest problem is that the first player is always in control of the new day and has the full selection of new tiles. With 12 tiles available each day, mathematically the 2nd player will always have to take the 10th tile as long as the 1st player is controlling the board correctly. This becomes a huge problem when the players are looking for the same piece or racing to get one of the bonus cards. Also, even if the 1st player don't find his tiles, he can still block the 2nd player from his most desired piece. It's frustrating when you, the 2nd player, cannot change that scenerio no matter how hard you try.

I discovered this problem in the very first game we played. After I had gained control on the third day, I never relinquished it and resulted in a win. After the game, I pointed this factor out to my girlfriend, who had noticed as well. Consequently, the 1st player in our future games has won everytime ... ... and since my girlfriend always goes first, I have gotten use to losing in California.

Regardless of the results, I believe California can be a very fun and balanced game, just not for two. I can see how this would work so much better for 3, 4, or 5 players. Besides, there's not many euros I can convince my girlfriend to play without a theme like California. I truly believe it can become a regular amongst my lighter gaming group, but my girlfriend and I will likely avoid playing California on our own.

Thread: Re: Scoring question regarding spaces on the mansion board

MasterDinadan — 2008-05-22T13:55:30+00:00
Yeah I'm still a little confused.
Do you score for the attic TILES or do you score for FURNITURE in the attic?

Thread: Re: Much better than watching HGTV

craniac — 2008-05-11T15:04:07+00:00
Right now (5/11) it is being closed out for $10 a copy shipped, making it a great gift game for non-gamers. I think it fills that niche perfectly.

Thread: Re: Much better than watching HGTV

anubis9 — 2008-05-11T14:30:53+00:00
Thanks for this review!
It's a very nice balance between rules and opinion.
I'm on the fence with this one as I already own Zooloretto.
Do you think it is different enough to warrant having both?

Thread: Re: ...knows how to party? = 6/10

bartman53d — 2008-04-17T03:57:00+00:00
Hahaha

Love the review title

Cheers,
Bart