Game: Genesis

Thread: Re: Scoring Question

cyberkev63 — 2008-06-26T06:37:59+00:00

TheArk wrote:
Upon reading the rules again, they state:
"If there is a single largest herd but a tie for the second largest herd, the tied players divide the two points for second place between them."

Throughout the rules, the word "point(s)" is associated both with the word "herd(s)" and with the word "player(s)". However, in this scenario, the word "points" is associated with the word "players". Therefore, I would deduce that the only purpose of the herds is to determine which players are involved in the tie. Then, those players split the points between them and round down.

So, using your scenario above Dave:
It does not matter how many "single" herd tiles the blue player has...he is tied with the green player with a herd that has one tile in it and therefore the green and blue players split 2 points.

A clearer version of the rules would be helpful though!

Noah, the example in the rules clearly states this is not the case. See page 2 of the PDF of the rules on BoardGameNews - http://www.boardgamenews.com/gamepreviews/genesis/documents/...

In that example, there's a wetland area that has a herd of 2 humans, another of two dinosaurs, another of two reptiles, and yet another of 2 humans (so there are two separate human herds in the area). The scoring example says: "In the wetland, the four tied herds share 6 points (for first and second), resulting in 1 point per herd. Therefore the human player scores a total of 2 points, and the dinosaur and reptile players each score 1 point."

So, like Mark said above, scoring is done by herds.

(Edited to remove excess spacing.)

Thread: Re: Scoring Question

TheArk — 2008-05-06T19:39:22+00:00

Upon reading the rules again, they state:
"If there is a single largest herd but a tie for the second largest herd, the tied players divide the two points for second place between them."

Throughout the rules, the word "point(s)" is associated both with the word "herd(s)" and with the word "player(s)". However, in this scenario, the word "points" is associated with the word "players". Therefore, I would deduce that the only purpose of the herds is to determine which players are involved in the tie. Then, those players split the points between them and round down.

So, using your scenario above Dave:
It does not matter how many "single" herd tiles the blue player has...he is tied with the green player with a herd that has one tile in it and therefore the green and blue players split 2 points.

A clearer version of the rules would be helpful though!

Thread: Re: Scoring Question

MarshmallowWP — 2008-05-06T16:39:49+00:00

Dave,

The third scoring alternative, which I might add is the one I was hoping for when we were playing:
Blue has taken two thirds of 2nd place and therefore wins both points despite being non-adjacent tiles.

This may be wishful thinking, but it could really make a difference when it comes to placement of your last few tiles if you could take extra points from someone else.

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

GSReis — 2008-05-06T15:49:24+00:00

Your story is very illustrative, indeed. You see? The dice made the game much less predictable, and you were forced to pursue less obvious tactics. That's the beauty of the game.

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

Stephen Glenn — 2008-05-06T14:11:54+00:00

I see now what you mean by "harm". The decision tree becomes so large as to make the game far less enjoyable -- and, thereby, almost an entirely different game than the one that comes in the box. Variant B is, therefore, only provided for those sadistic enough to enjoy such a contest.

As I've stated from the beginning, I think the game is brilliant as-is. But the last time I played two-player, my opponent and I were having a mad fight for majority in the largest territory (which was red). For three straight turns I couldn't roll a red, while he rolled double wilds twice in a row. This seemed rather frustrating. Of course, I was having much better luck with wilds earlier in the game, so it did even out.

Ironically, I ended up winning the game and it may very well have been because I lost the battle for largest territory. Not being able to roll reds, I was forced to work on other colors and was able to complete two territories where I was the only one present. That's six points each, whereas my opponent only took a six-point advantage over me in the largest territory. So the overall score in those areas was 18-12 in my favor.

All in all, a damn fine game. In fact, I might even like it better than Through the Desert (which is REALLY saying something)

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

GSReis — 2008-05-06T01:54:10+00:00

Without the dice, the game becomes a luck-free two-player abstract.
Exactly. I'm not into two-player abstracts and not very fond of Math, either.

Are you saying:

1. First player has an insurmountable advantage.

or

2. Second player has an obvious response to every action taken by the first player.

or

3. Something else.

Maybe "2", but also "3", in the sense that, with every possible move at will, the game would favor analysis paralysis.

(Understand, I love the game as-is. But if I see that you are right, I will delete my variant)
In any case, no need do delete anything. As you said, it's pretty obvious, and lots of other people may have come up with it.

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

Stephen Glenn — 2008-05-06T01:42:46+00:00

I'm not disagreeing, but I'm not sure I follow you here. Without the dice, the game becomes a luck-free two-player abstract.

Are you saying:

1. First player has an insurmountable advantage.

or

2. Second player has an obvious response to every action taken by the first player.

or

3. Something else.

Can you help out this math-challenged individual? Thanks!

(Understand, I love the game as-is. But if I see that you are right, I will delete my variant)

Thread: Re: Scoring Question

habermanm — 2008-05-05T21:14:50+00:00

Scoring is done by herds, so it is indeed a three way tie. You are correct. Nice visuals btw.

Thread: Scoring Question

HemlockWP — 2008-05-05T19:38:52+00:00

Lets say we have the group below:

The devil gets 4 points for having the 1st place majority. My question is about 2nd place. My interpretation is that the 2nd place score is 0 because of a 3-way tie (blue - blue - green). The rules say fractions are rounded down. Is my interpretation correct or is it really a 2 way tie in which case blue and green would get 1 point each?

Thanks in advance for your input!

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

GSReis — 2008-05-05T02:44:43+00:00

but since the results are *always* theoretically possible anyway (A - you always roll one wild / B - you always roll two wild) then I'm comfortable saying they don't harm the game in any way.
I would say that maybe they don't break the game, but at least variant B must be quite harmful. Having total freedom in choosing tiles and their placement would probably make the game pointless, especially with two players. If they don't want to get behind, they could simply keep adding tiles to the same group until they run out. The game has just the right amount of randomness - I even hesitate to call it luck!

Thread: Re: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

wmshub — 2008-05-05T01:20:00+00:00

Another way of reducing/eliminating luck: Shuffle a couple decks of cards. Lay out a bunch of cards per player face up. Each suit matches a color, face cards are wilds. You must "use" the cards in order, so you are still restricted, but you can see what your upcoming cards are and plan for that.

Note: I don't have this game yet, so maybe what I said makes no sense, but usually in a game when you want random events that you can predict a bit (and thus remove some randomness from them), a row of face up cards are the way to go.

Thread: Reducing or Eliminating the Luck

Stephen Glenn — 2008-05-04T06:09:09+00:00

These variants are suggested for the two-player game only. No real reason you couldn't use them for multi-player, though.

Variant A - Reduce the luck: Only roll one of the dice per turn. The other die is ALWAYS a wild. Game ends when there are *four* empty spaces (giving each player an equal number of turns)

Variant B - Eliminate the luck: Roll no dice. Always play two tiles of your choice. Game ends when there are *four* empty spaces (giving each player an equal number of turns)

Point #1: These variants are somewhat obvious, so I'm not looking for alot of credit here. In fact, I think the game works just fine as written. But if you're playing with someone who complains about the luck (or if *you* are that person) then these might help.

Point #2: I have not play tested these variants, but since the results are *always* theoretically possible anyway (A - you always roll one wild / B - you always roll two wild) then I'm comfortable saying they don't harm the game in any way.

Thread: Re: First Impressions

Stephen Glenn — 2008-04-03T04:04:30+00:00

It may not have been on Tanga, but I know some site had it on sale awhile back.

Thread: Re: First Impressions

Larry Levy — 2008-04-03T00:49:36+00:00

Hey Snoop, you were in my neck of the woods! I've never actually been to the Woodbridge Game Parlor (the original store is in Chantilly, right on my way to work), but that's still only about 20 minutes away from me. Wish I'd known you were going to be in town, I would have motored down and shared a few laughs. Oh well, I expect I'll be seeing plenty of you next week. Maybe you can show me your new prize, as I've never played Genesis.

Thread: Re: First Impressions

wmshub — 2008-04-02T22:44:58+00:00

Genesis? On Tanga? I hadn't seen it, and can't find it in the list...this is on my "want to buy" list so I probably would have noticed it!

In any case, thanks for confirming that this is a game that I should get. I'm looking forward to picking up a copy.

Thread: First Impressions

Stephen Glenn — 2008-04-02T22:29:08+00:00

I was in Northern Va/Southern MD this weekend and I visited a very nice game store in Woodbridge, VA called The Game Parlor.

I picked up a newish Reiner Knizia game called Genesis. I was hesitant to pay full price ($35) for a game I hadn't fully researched, especially since it was recently seen at Tanga for <$20.

I decided to take a chance ~ and I think I made a very wise purchase. It combines elements of Through the Desert and E&T (much moreso the former than the latter). Both of those are top ten games for me, so Genesis is a no brainer. If you can imagine Through the Desert with dice, you'll come closest to imagining how the game works. Instead of picking two camels of your choice, you roll the dice to determine which colors you can place. But since there are only four colors, two of the die sides are wild. Meaning (using my limited math skills) you would still be able to place at least *one* color of your choice 2 times out of 3. So, interestingly, the luck portion of Genesis is not that overwhelming.

In Genesis, the "caravans" can consist of multiple players. Much like the kingdoms in E&T. The "caravans" can also (like E&T) merge together. Those are the only real similarities between the two games. Genesis cannot really be considered E&T light, but it's not hard to see that both games came from the same design drawer. Genesis, like Through the Desert, is more of a majority-one-trick-pony, and doesn't have the richness that E&T has. Tactically, I'd say the game offers more than TtD, given the ability to share and merge "caravans" (in Genesis, they're called 'Herds').

I'd give it a solid 8, which very likely means it will be one of my top game purchases of the year, and end up in my top 100.

Thread: Re: How this game ends?

GSReis — 2008-01-02T19:22:40+00:00

Is the picture at the back of the rule sheet depicts an endgame scenario?
No. This is an endgame scenario:

]]>

Thread: Re: How this game ends?

GSReis — 2008-01-02T19:18:19+00:00

The game ends immediately when there is no empty area with at least three spaces.

Thread: How this game ends?

ymir — 2008-01-02T18:24:37+00:00

Hello

Just got this boardgame recently.
I am getting myself a bit confused on how this game ends.
An area of three connected vacant spaces??
Is it one, two or three connected vacant spaces?Or just one or two.
What does this really mean?

Is the picture at the back of the rule sheet depicts an endgame scenario?

Thanks!

Thread: Re: Knizia Gets This One Right

elcomadreja2 — 2007-10-13T20:02:54+00:00

oh my gosh, how did I miss this one? Nice Review thx.

Thread: Knizia Gets This One Right

MENAREUS2000 — 2007-10-12T17:47:15+00:00

Considering that Dr. Reiner Knizia is probably one of the most famous and prolific game designers in the world, it may come as a surprise that he's never been one of my favorite game designers. Part of the problem has been that many of his games are for 3 or more players and I usually only play 2 player games. In addition, with so many of his games to choose from, only a few seemed like really great games, with most being fair and several that I thought were down right terrible. Lastly, a Knizia game so often seems to have a dry and mechanical feel to them.that just lacks the spark so often found in a Leo Colovini or Wolfgang Kramer game. Genesis, published by Face2Face Games, is a game that seemed different in some way. It's more like one of the wonderful Kris Burm games, (Dvonn, Gipf, Punct, Yinsh or Zertz) but with much more color and theme thrown in.

COMPONENTS:

A sturdy quad folding game board with nice graphics.
Nice sized Mammal, reptile, dinosaur and man tiles, 16 in each of four colors or landscapes if you will.
Four very attractive large round wooden pieces with a mammal, reptile, dinosaur or man symbol on top which are placed on the scoring track, each representing a player in the game. A pair of dice, with landscape colors on each side as well as a side with all four landscapes represented, which is Wild.

HOW TO PLAY:

At it's heart, Genesis is a simple tile laying game for 2-4 players. Each player controls a supply of tiles that come in 4 different colors, which are represented by 4 different landscapes. Each player is either a Mammal, reptile, dinosaur or a man and each of the tiles you start with, have a picture of who you represent on them. On a turn, you roll two dice, which have the different types of landscape colors on them, including a side which is wild, which lets you pick the landscape of your choice. Based on your roll, you place 2 tiles on any two empty squares on the board.. In addition, you can choose to ignore the dice roll all together and just place 1 tile of your choice on the board. Several of the squares on the board have either volcanoes or tar pits on them and cannot to played on.

OBJECTIVE:

Each player is trying to end up with the biggest heard of their type (mammal, reptile, dinosaur or man) in each of the territories created. A territory being any group of 3 or more tiles of the same landscape and a herd being any 3 or more connected species. Each species must be adjacent vertically or horizontally connected to be part of the same herd.

SCORING:

When 3 or fewer connected empty spaces remain on the board the game is over and is ready to be scored. As in several other Knizia games, the way the game is scored adds an interesting twist that will affect how the game is played through out. It's possible to score, single, double or triple points for your herds as follows:

The largest territory on the board scores triple for the largest herd within it for 12 points and 6 for the second largest with ties being split between the players. The largest of each of the remaining three territory types score double, or 8 points for the largest herd and 4 points for the second largest. Any other remaining territories score 4 and 2 points respectively. Winning the game just requires scoring the most points at the end.

THOUGHTS ON THE GAME:

There are probably plenty of people that won't like the idea that you roll dice each turn to place your tiles. The fact is, with only four landscapes and 2 Wild sides on each die, it's really much less random than you might think. Ironically, it's the dice rolls, that keep this game from being overly dry and uninteresting. Plus deciding when and if you should ignore a particular roll and just place 1 tile instead of 2, adds to the enjoyment of the game. Add in the fact that you can place tiles on ANY empty squares on the board, makes for some interesting choices. Are you better off starting a New Herd, as opposed to increasing the size of an old one. Should you connect a herd of your own or cutoff the herd of an opponent. Should you stop increasing the size of a particular territory, so as not to let your opponent get triple point value for their herd. Should you settle for a 2nd place herd in one area to focus on getting a bigger herd in an even bigger territory. It's all these questions and more that makes Genesis so much greater than the sum of it's parts.

IN SUMMARY:

The bottom line with any game, is that it should be fun to play. Genesis certainly fits the bill in the fun department. In addition, with simple rules and game play, it should appeal to a wide range of ages and tastes. Personally I love looking over the board each turn and trying to figure out the best place for my tiles. It's that constant search to try and get a little edge here or there that makes Genesis work for me. But if you judge a game by how often it comes off the shelf on game night, then with Genesis, you just can't lose.

Arthur Reilly

Thread: Re: Genesis, simple, elegant, pure Knizia

Dr Tachyon — 2007-03-19T08:38:15+00:00

Got this game as a B-day present over the weekend. We have a regular Sat night gaming group of two couples, we usually play a few different games an evening, a mix of Euro games and party-type games. El Grande, Carcassone, Wits & Wagers, and Aquire are frequently played, occasionally T&E, Antike, or Settlers.

At first, I was a little nervous because the game seemed too simple...It seemed like a devolved T&E, and since it was a birthday present from the other couple, I really wanted it to be fun and a challenge for what is becoming a pretty seasoned gaming group. Short story long, we all really enjoyed it.

The rules are simple, but game play is typical Euro: lots of decisions, too few options, it's all about the points and it's usually close.

One more thing, we thought we might try a varient with the extra tiles. There are two of each color if I remember correctly and without a player species printed on them. We thought we would try transfering the devastation tile rule from T&E. Players could use the blank tiles to break up large terrains. Haven't thought it through completely but it almost seems like they are there to do something like that!

Image

Ceryon — 2007-02-04T22:41:38+00:00

In play and so near

Image

Ceryon — 2007-02-04T22:39:43+00:00

In play

Thread: Camels, Carolus, Tigris....Go

qrux — 2007-02-04T17:40:25+00:00

Camels, Carolus, Tigris…Go

There can be little argument that Reiner Knizia is one of the most prolific game designers in the world. With the exception of a good trick-taking game and a war game his designs appear in every genre of gaming. Of course with such a large catalog of titles it is inevitable that some of his games are great, some are terrible and the majority are average. Genesis is one of the great one’s.

Everything in Genesis has appeared before and yet Knizia has cobbled together simple mechanics resulting in a game where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Genesis is, at it’s core, a simple area majority game. Up to four players receive icon labeled tiles in a variety of colors (reminiscent of the player identifiers in Tigris and Euphrates). On a turn, a player rolls two d6 and places tiles of the matching colors. This method for determining piece allocation appeared in Colovini’s popular Carolus Magnus. The two games are similar in this and the area control aspect with Carolus Magnus being the more complex. However, it is in this simplicity that Genesis shines.

Unlike Carolus Magnus the board is stagnant; only tile placement alters the situation on the board. (In Carolus Magnus the board begins to shrink into fewer areas.) Genesis requires that players position tiles for majority in ever growing and changing areas. Placing a specific tile may join two smaller areas into one large area (as with the kingdoms in Tigris and Euphrates) thereby altering the values of the tiles previously placed. As with Go, correct tile placement is critical. Planning several turns in advance is required even though the color of tiles to be placed will not be known in advance. (Similar to the situation a player faces in Tigris and Euphrates.) This requires extreme flexibility in a player’s strategy. In some ways Genesis could be viewed as a Tigris and Euphrates lite with additional parentage from yet another Knizia masterpiece.

Effectually players should create chains of similarly colored tiles in the various areas with the largest/longest being the one’s that will score. Sound familiar? Though the physical layout is different and the theme just as relevant, Genesis is a genetic relative of the Knizia classic Through the Desert. Where players attempt to form long chains and carve out territories on the board in Through the Desert, Genesis requires players to dominate large areas through tile placement. (Essentially the camels in Through the Desert are tiles.) Both games can be enjoyed on two levels: as family entertainment, being played casually or as a competitive match-up between aggressive opponents.

The final scoring adds another element to the game increasing the factors to consider when placing a tile. There are basic scores for claiming majority (and second most) in a given area and multipliers for the largest areas. The same tile placed in two different locations may generate significantly different victory points.

Chock full of challenging decisions with extremely simple rules, this one of Knizia’s best games to date. Of the two noticeable board games released by Knizia in the past year (Genesis and Blue Moon City), Genesis could become a classic.

Image

GeoMan — 2007-01-26T22:58:59+00:00

4 player game

Image

GeoMan — 2007-01-26T22:56:49+00:00

Closeup - Desert dominates!

Image

GeoMan — 2007-01-26T22:54:56+00:00

4 player game end

Thread: Re: Genesis, simple, elegant, pure Knizia

sedjtroll — 2006-12-25T09:15:45+00:00

I agree, Genesis seems to be a very elegant design. However it's not one I find particularly fun. It's the kind of game I wouldn't mind playing online in a play-by-web format, but I don't think I'll play this much face-to-face.

It was confusing at first to figure out just the way the scoring worked... but once you get the hang of that it's not so bad. This is one reason I think PBW is a better format - the computer can keep running totals of the current values of each area/herd, and everyone's score so you don't have to worry about counting it all the time (which is something many people may feel inclined to do, since all the information is out there).

In case it wasn't clear in Brian's summary, the points for 1st and second biggest herd are multiplied by 2 for the biggest area in each color, except the largest area overall in which it's multiplied by 3 instead. Of course size only matters at the end, so sometimes it's not clear which Red area will be the largest (for example). This is neat and interesting, and I once won a game I thought I was going to lose by placing a tile on the last turn which didn't look like it would help me, but I figured out that it would change the 'largest area' size, thereby taking points away from the leader and allowing me to win!

I fear this game will succumb to a lot of analysis paralysis (as they say) with a lot of people I game with (myself included), which is too bad, because it is really clever.

- Seth

Thread: Re: Genesis, simple, elegant, pure Knizia

matt769 — 2006-12-25T05:29:42+00:00

I enjoy the game too. I think there is a typo in the English rules though. I believe each player gets 16 tiles (not 13) of each terrain. The French rules state 16 tiles. That would explain the one extra tile of each type (instead of four) included in the game.

Thread: Genesis, simple, elegant, pure Knizia

kasuga3 — 2006-12-24T00:22:46+00:00

Genesis
A tile laying, area majority game for 2 to 4 players.
The game has a fairly thin theme of different pre-historic species competing for dominance in different regions and terrains. Games with thin themes don't bother me in the slightest. It seems that Knizia's goal is to design games that are very elegant, meaning super simple mechanics, yet game play rife with tactical depth and decision making. Genesis is certainly not nearly as complex as Knizia classics Euphrat & Tigris or Taj Mahal. Genesis may get overlooked because it seems like such a simple light weight game.
Genesis is a beautifully elegant game with a good amount of tactical depth that can be a terrific gateway game or fun family game that children as young as 6 or 7 may be able to enjoy. The box says it for ages 8 and older.

Components

The game comes with a nice board with a linen finish, with an array of 14x10 square spaces,
four wooden scoring markers depicting the four animal species in the game (reptile, dinosaur, mammal, cave man),
two dice that depict different terrain (colors; yellow, blue, green, and red)
208 square tiles in the four terrains (colors; yellow, blue, green, and red) and depicting the four animal species (reptile, dinosaur, mammal, cave man),
and literally a single page of rules and beautiful example of scoring on the reverse side.

The components are nice and of typical Face2Face quality. The game even came with small plastic baggies, presumably for storing the tiles.

Game Play

The rules for play are extremely simple (only one page of rules) yet once the game is played, one will notice slightly more tactical depth than expected (As is true with most Knizia games, IMHO).

Players begin by choosing a species of animal; Reptile, Dinosaur, Mammal, or Cave Man. Players then recieve 52 tiles for that species (13 in each terrain or color, blue, green, yellow, and red). It is important to remember that players represent animal species and not colors.

Then in turn order, players roll the two dice. The dice have the different Terrain colors on them. The player must then place two tiles of the corresponding colors anywhere on the board (There are some spaces which depict volcanoes or oil puddles. These spaces are off limits) Each dice has a couple of sides that show all four terrain colors. Obviously when that results, the player gets to choose which color of terrain to play. In addition, if a player chooses, they can disregard the results of the dice roll and instead of placing two tiles, they may play one tile of any terrain color they choose.

Play continues in this manner until there are no longer three empty connected/adjacent spaces on the board. At this point the board will have several regions of like terrain that have different animal species in them. Each group of adjacent tile that have the same animal species within a particular group of terrain tiles forms a herd. The areas of different terrain types are scored according to the largest and second largets animal herds

In typical areas, the player with the largest herd scores 4 points and the player with the second largest herd scores 2 points. No points for third place, and in case of ties players split the points as evenly always rounding down.

Additional scoring for the largest terrain areas also occurs. The player with the most points at the end of the game wins.

Conclusion

I really enjoy this game. I love heavy games like Caylus and Age of Steam, but sometimes I'm not in the mood to play a long complex game. What I really love and appreciate are games that are relatively simple and fast and yet still provide me an opportunity to think and reason and make fun tactical decisions. It's also very easy for me to get my wife to play this game with me and that counts for alot. I give this game a solid 8.0
I'm very glad that I own this game.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

ekted — 2006-11-03T01:47:15+00:00

KGBRadioMoskow wrote:
jttm wrote:
I thought this post was going to be "Coz I can't dance, I can't talk, the only thing about me is the way that I walk..."

Genesis is board game forbidden, take many permits!

"When?" is now. "How much?" is where?

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

Phelonius — 2006-11-03T01:00:19+00:00

The funniest part is that its a game about 'evolution' and they called it 'Genesis'.

Those that aren't pissed off are ROFL.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

DougOrleans — 2006-10-29T05:59:24+00:00

mfischer wrote:
I would totally play a Battle of Epping Forest game.

Ha! Me too.

You know, I never actually read all the lyrics before. Apparently it's about a gang fight. Huh.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/g/genesis/the+battle+of+epping+fo...

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

mfischer — 2006-10-28T15:28:26+00:00

I would totally play a Battle of Epping Forest game.

Ha! Me too.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

txrobpam — 2006-10-28T13:58:03+00:00

Ha - sounds like we need a geeklist called "If you had to rename your games to Genesis songs"

Railroad Tycoon - Driving the Last Spike
Power Grid - Turn it on again (or fading lights)
Dreamscape - Dreaming while you sleep
King's Breakfast - Suppers ready (<-----my fav song ever)
Survive - Undertow
Dwarven Dig - Deep in the Motherlode
Formula De - Follow you Follow Me

Ha - I crack myself up.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

DougOrleans — 2006-10-28T13:32:58+00:00

Thedalek wrote:
Wait, it's a game about pre-history, which plays fast and loose with established history? And it's called Genesis? I think the appropriate line here is Land of Confusion.

I would totally play a Battle of Epping Forest game.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

Thedalek — 2006-10-27T22:08:27+00:00

sedjtroll wrote:
jttm wrote:
Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.
I thought this post was going to be "Coz I can't dance, I can't talk, the only thing about me is the way that I walk..."

Hah, try getting that out of your head!

"She seems to have an invisile touch, yeah. She reaches in, and grabs right 'hold of your heart."

Wait, it's a game about pre-history, which plays fast and loose with established history? And it's called Genesis? I think the appropriate line here is Land of Confusion.

Image

mankka — 2006-10-27T15:55:48+00:00

Genesis at Essen Spiele 2006

Image

Gonzaga — 2006-10-27T09:31:38+00:00

Essen 2006

Image

Gonzaga — 2006-10-27T09:22:05+00:00

Essen 2006

Thread: Misprint in English rules

Fledermaushaus — 2006-10-26T17:48:49+00:00

The box and English rules refer to 52 tiles (13 of each type) whereas the French rules have 64 tiles (16 of each). I pointed this out to the Face2Face people in Essen and was told that the correct number is 64 (16 of each). The box contains 17 of each, 1 spare in case of loss.

Image

giochiusati — 2006-09-19T20:40:50+00:00

The Game

Image

giochiusati — 2006-09-19T20:38:02+00:00

The Box Front

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

Drew1365 — 2006-09-13T02:05:12+00:00

Anyone who's freakin' out because there are humans and dinosaurs in the same game, . . . geez, loosen up a bit. It's a game fer cryin' out loud! It's not a religion.

Well, I take that back, because this is a Knizia.

And hey, those could be jars, bulls, lions, and archers . . . and this could be a simplified Euphrat and Tigris. In fact, it's Euphrat and Tigris as designed by Leo Colovini!

The artwork is rather drab. I hope that's not the final board and tiles.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

HamsterOfFury — 2006-09-13T00:25:37+00:00

Well the word "genesis" just means a beginning, so meh, even as a Christian I know the Bible doesn't have the patented rights to use the word...Even capitalized....
More dinosaur games! Dinosaurs are cool!

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

KGBRadioMoskow — 2006-09-13T00:18:39+00:00

jttm wrote:
I thought this post was going to be "Coz I can't dance, I can't talk, the only thing about me is the way that I walk..."

Genesis is board game forbidden, take many permits!

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

sedjtroll — 2006-09-13T00:17:37+00:00

Henry Rhombus wrote:
JeremiahClayton wrote:
This game should have been named "Intelligent Design" because of the nonsense involving dinosaur and man co-existing at the same time.

I disliked that aspect as well, but the game play is abstract and the anachronism doesn't matter in the long run.

Hmm... did you also take offense to the unnatural colors of camels in Through the Desert?

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

sedjtroll — 2006-09-13T00:16:29+00:00

jttm wrote:
Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.
I thought this post was going to be "Coz I can't dance, I can't talk, the only thing about me is the way that I walk..."

Hah, try getting that out of your head!

"She seems to have an invisile touch, yeah. She reaches in, and grabs right 'hold of your heart."

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

jttm — 2006-09-13T00:12:47+00:00

Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.
I thought this post was going to be "Coz I can't dance, I can't talk, the only thing about me is the way that I walk..."

Hah, try getting that out of your head!

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

Henry Rhombus — 2006-09-13T00:04:10+00:00

JeremiahClayton wrote:
This game should have been named "Intelligent Design" because of the nonsense involving dinosaur and man co-existing at the same time.

I disliked that aspect as well, but the game play is abstract and the anachronism doesn't matter in the long run.

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

sedjtroll — 2006-09-12T23:00:57+00:00

Mandrake wrote:
Genesis definitely piques my interest. I'd like to see some images of the components.

BoardGameNews linked to the rules, which has some pics of the components:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/123079

Thread: Re: Rules are up on Boardgamenews.com

vinay1276 — 2006-08-24T08:26:55+00:00

Looks nice. The rules are short and clear as expected of a medium weight Knizia.
One concern at this point is if people might start calculating (the score) a lot and slow the game down.
Hope it plays well with 2 players!!

Thread: Rules are up on Boardgamenews.com

Stena — 2006-08-23T08:43:03+00:00

This looks to be the fourth game in the Knizia Tile Laying Trilogy.

Looks really interesting and the rules are short.

http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comment...

Thread: Re: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

Mandrake — 2006-06-24T13:35:48+00:00

Genesis definitely piques my interest. I'd like to see some images of the components.

Thread: Sounds cool...and the name cracks me up.

pothocket — 2006-06-12T12:00:04+00:00

I can imagine trying to get this on the table at my Dad's house (He's pretty big on the ways of the church).