Game: Quinamid

Thread: Re: Dual wins

fellonmyhead — 2008-06-27T12:36:35+00:00

We noticed this whilst demoing at Essen last year (well it came up once in the 400+ games I played). I was playing against James Hamilton (hammy) and we decided to call it a draw. I don't see anything wrong with that.

If you prefer to have a definite winner I would suggest you give the victory to whoever makes the last move. To give the game to the other player is a bit like giving them an extra move where there was not one.

Thread: Re: Dual wins

russ — 2008-06-15T13:18:27+00:00

A copy of the official rules is in the Files section here. I also see nothing about what happens if a move makes 5 in a row for both players. It just says "The winner is the first player who achieves five counters or more in a row."

Good catch!

A house rule could reasonably be that the opponent wins (as you play it), or you win, or it's a tie... I've seen different game rules for such games that decide it all these ways...

Thread: Dual wins

magicalsushi — 2008-06-15T12:32:18+00:00

Perhaps I've missed something in the rules (my copy lives at a friend's house so I won't be able to check for a while), but I don't think they cover the situation where a player can make a move which gives them five counters in a row but simultaneously gives their opponent five in a row too. We've been using a house rule that if a player makes such a move, their opponent wins.

Have I missed something in the rules about this? If so, what, and if not, what do other people do about it?

Thread: Re: Rules Query

Aiken Drum — 2008-05-21T17:18:04+00:00

The rules are available in the files section. And there it does clearly state

"Once a board has been rotated or moved the next player cannot move or
rotate the same board in their turn."

So, it appears I have been playing this incorrectly as well. Of course, the above rules covers the dont-do-what-the-other-guy-did rule as well.

Now, I am curious if this changes the game play much.

(I only have played it with my daughter of 9, so not too big a deal in my case)

It's a good catch....

Thread: Re: Rules Query

russ — 2008-05-21T17:11:22+00:00

Aha! Now I get what you mean. I did not realize the rules said that. Now I wish a little more that I'd bought the game, just so I could look this up and ponder it. It's been too many months since I last played it, so I can't even remember if we followed the rule as written or just did the weaker "don't undo their action" version.

Thread: Re: Rules Query

Brass Jester — 2008-05-21T16:55:27+00:00

Russ
What I wrote was a direct quote from the rules. It clearly says you cannot move OR (not AND) rotate the same board in your turn. I know that you can only do one of the three actions. There is nothing else; certainly there is no direct rule against undoing the opponents move (but see below)

The way the rules read is this: - if you move or rotate board C in your turn, then in the subsequent turn your opponent cannot move or rotate Board C in any way (they can of course move Board B, which will carry Board C with it)

However, the way everyone on the Geek seems to be playing it, is that if I rotate Board C clockwise 90 degrees, my opponent cannot then rotate it anticlockwise 90 degrees. Fine, this is to prevent the 'loop'. But my opponent can still move Board C in some other way (slide it, rotate it a further 90 degrees clockwise etc.) and I wondered why people are playing it this way as the rules as written forbid this.

Thread: Re: Rules Query

russ — 2008-05-21T05:34:06+00:00

Brass Jester wrote:
Anthony, could you clarify this please. Quin is brilliant; but all reviews I've read, and how I was taught to play, say that in your turn, you can't undo the move your opponent just made. The rules don't actually say this in my copy. They say you can't move or rotate the same board in your turn. This is a major difference,as the way I was taught, you couldn't (say) unrotate a board, but you could still move it sideways. So which is correct?

You seem to be mixing 2 concepts with the 2 quotations.

1. Not undoing your opponent's previous move is one concept (to prevent infinite loops in play).

2. Not moving and rotating the same board in your turn is a different concept that has nothing to do with what your opponent did on their turn, but just means a player cannot move (slide) AND rotate in the same turn; pick one of those actions and do it, not both actions. It's not meaning "the same board your opponent affected on their previous turn".

Sorry I don't have the rules at hand to quote, but I remember when I played this (16 times) last year there was surely something about not being able to undo the opponents' previous move. Such a rule seems obviously necessary to prevent a losing player from forcing an infinite loop draw result very easily.

Thread: Rules Query

Brass Jester — 2008-05-21T00:09:59+00:00

Anthony, could you clarify this please. Quin is brilliant; but all reviews I've read, and how I was taught to play, say that in your turn, you can't undo the move your opponent just made. The rules don't actually say this in my copy. They say you can't move or rotate the same board in your turn. This is a major difference,as the way I was taught, you couldn't (say) unrotate a board, but you could still move it sideways. So which is correct?

Thread: Re: European Distribution

vendettaspel — 2008-04-01T17:50:04+00:00

Hi Anthony, we´ve put your game on our website: www.vendettaspel.nl
kind regards

Thread: Re: European Distribution

quinamid — 2008-03-26T15:51:29+00:00

I am having trouble getting a reply from funagain. dont know why!

Thread: Re: European Distribution

wwscrispin — 2008-03-25T15:32:34+00:00

Send some to the US . This is on my list.

Thread: European Distribution

quinamid — 2008-03-25T08:29:11+00:00

Vendetta has received 200 games for distribution in europe (mainly netherlands and others) look out for quinamid in your local shop

Thread: Re: [Review] Quinamid

Jugular — 2008-03-14T14:00:07+00:00

Do you not find it far too easy to force draws?!

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

quinamid — 2008-03-12T07:46:50+00:00

The game is being updated for a new edition which will not be in a wooden box sadly due to the shipping weight but a new and enhanced set of instructions will be produced combined with the double height counter and some other small modifications.

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

Grumpf — 2008-03-09T17:28:34+00:00

@Antony: Any updates as of yet on this?

Thread: Re: Variant idea

Grumpf — 2008-03-09T17:25:03+00:00

quinamid wrote:
I bet all those that have the game are now digging out their double sided tape and creating there own
You got me Have not tried how this plays, though.

Thread: Re: Variant idea

quinamid — 2008-02-04T07:34:46+00:00

I bet all those that have the game are now digging out their double sided tape and creating there own

Thread: Re: Variant idea

GeoMan — 2008-02-01T21:55:23+00:00

quinamid wrote:
Great

Each game has the full compliment of counters

i.e. all holes can be filled with 30 red and 30 blue counters meaning i have ample supply of counters to implement this idea

i will add this to all new versions of quinamid

thanks

tony

I am glad that you liked my variant.

If you play the double-height piece in the middle of a row you permanently block the board above from covering this row for the rest of the game.

But with careful timing you can also use it as a delaying action by placing it in a board corner.

Thread: Re: Variant idea

quinamid — 2008-02-01T21:26:16+00:00

Great

Each game has the full compliment of counters

i.e. all holes can be filled with 30 red and 30 blue counters meaning i have ample supply of counters to implement this idea

i will add this to all new versions of quinamid

thanks

tony

Thread: Re: Variant idea

GamesOnTheBrain — 2008-01-31T01:51:51+00:00

Nice.

Thread: Variant idea

GeoMan — 2008-01-30T19:08:58+00:00

Here's a variant idea:

Both players have an extra double-height piece in their color.

This piece can be placed normally and it blocks movement of the board above in it's direction.

(That's why it is a double-height piece: it doesn't allow the board above to slide over it).

Thread: Re: Quinamid Review by Patrick Korner

caesarmom — 2008-01-24T03:22:36+00:00

I couldn't agree more -- it's a lovely, addictive little game. It has a decent chance of becoming a 10 for me.

(And I'm not just saying that because I have copies for trade.)

Thread: Quinamid Review by Patrick Korner

PatK — 2008-01-18T01:13:17+00:00

By Patrick Korner
Originally posted to BoardGameNews.com on December 10, 2007

Publisher: Third Dynasty Games
Designer: Antony Brown
Players: 2
Ages:
Playing Time: 10-15 minutes
Rules Language: English & German
Price: 25€ / approx. $44

One of the things I look forward to most when visiting the Spiel board game fair in Essen, Germany, is just wandering up and down the halls. I spend a lot of time poring over the preview articles, printing out hall plans, marking out stands and games I think might be interesting—but even with all that effort, I can bank on one thing: I will end up intrigued and impressed with a game that was so far off my radar screen as to be invisible. This year was no different, and this year the game was Quinamid, designed by Antony Brown.

Quinamid is, at heart, a variation on the “get five in a row” genre of two-player abstract strategy games. In this case, though, the game board changes regularly over the course of play, and this fluidity is enough to make the gameplay experience very different from most games of this type that I’ve played.

The game comes in a nicely-built lacquered wooden box, and when you open the sliding lid the well-made game components come into view. Included with the game are a set of five wooden boards in gradually decreasing sizes with countersunk playing spaces, a cloth bag containing 30 counters each of blue and red, and a rules insert in both English and German. (Rules in additional languages are available from the publisher’s website.). The component quality is superb, and I think the nice wooden bits enhance the gameplay experience.

Setting up the game is simple: First place the 6x6 board on the table. Then place the 5x5 board on it, such that it lines up with the edge of the 6x6 board on two sides (leaving two lines of playing spaces free). Stack the remaining 4x4, 3x3 and 2x2 boards in the same manner, resulting in a pyramid shape with two vertical sides and two stepped sides. Finally, give each player the counters in their colour, and you’re good to go.

On your turn, you have three options:

* Place one of your counters into any exposed, unoccupied space
* Slide one board (along with all boards above it) one space horizontally or vertically (as long as no portion of any board hangs over an edge—all boards must be completely supported at all times)
* Rotate one board (along with all boards above it) 90 degrees in either direction

One additional rule: You can’t reverse the move the opponent just made. And that’s it. First player to get five in a row horizontally, diagonally or vertically, over any number of boards, wins.

Sounds too simple to work, right? Wrong. It works, and it works amazingly well. There is a bit of first player advantage, I think—as the 2x2 board space closest to both stepped sides is stronger than the others by a small amount—but not as much as in other games of this type. The rotating boards can completely mess up your plans, and memory elements introduced by the overlapping boards can result in some surprising “you won!?” moments when you uncover the fifth counter you need for the win. Gameplay is quick yet thought-provoking since you have to constantly check whether you’re missing a potential winning move by the opponent while putting your own strategy together. Of course, as in most other popular abstract games, it’s when you can do both at once that you can start to really pull away.

The other thing I like about this game is its speed—I have not yet had a game go longer than about 10 minutes, which makes it perfect for a quick two-player filler or for playing multiple times in a row in tournament mode. And if you start to feel that you’ve got the game figured out, you can introduce one of the many rules variants included with the rules. They change the game by adding restrictions to play that typically take the “obvious” starting moves and render them invalid —such as prohibiting a player from placing on the 2x2 board until he has at least one counter on every other board.

So overall, there’s very little about this game for me to dislike apart from the fact that it’s only a two-player game. This makes it less likely to come along on game nights, where multiplayer games are the norm. But for getting together with a friend for a couple of hours of play, this is a perfect addition to the game library and is a game I expect to see on the table regularly.

My only real concern with the game? Well, the price point isn’t exactly bargain basement, primarily because of the wooden components, I think. This makes it a less attractive game for those who don’t play two-player games regularly—and even less so for those who look for a little theme with their games. One way to alleviate the two-player issue is to try a team variant, but given the short play time I don’t know if it would work all that well. It’s probably best to appreciate the game for what it is—a superb two-player game—than try to force it into the multiplayer arena. And to be honest, that’s good enough for me.

Thread: Quinamid Make The Dice Tower's Top Ten List of the Year

quinamid — 2008-01-14T14:52:58+00:00

Thread: Re: [Review] Quinamid

Arcubalista — 2007-12-18T09:23:52+00:00

Thanks for the review! It's nice to see that you as much fun playing the game as I had presenting it at Essen with Tony & Tony. See you next year guys!

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

russ — 2007-12-06T06:49:02+00:00

A plastic sheet that sits under each level and doesn't turn when you turn the level sounds mechanically cumbersome and aesthetically unpleasing, alas. I'm starting to think the best solution might be to just say that players should not look as the level is turned; feeling it with your hands to ensure that the rotation leaves the level in the correct place should be doable, I think, right?

By the way, although of course players should be able to make house rules and play a game however they like, I think it's important that there be a clear "right" or intended way, since often players from different gaming groups meet and play, and it's good to have a common standard ruleset. Especially for tournaments!

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

quinamid — 2007-12-05T07:19:31+00:00

Maybe the next edition requires a shield between the boards that you dont turn thus maintaining the secrets of the board below. I suppose it could be made of a thin plastic material as used in plastic cards.

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

russ — 2007-12-04T16:32:09+00:00

Luke the Flaming wrote:
Why don't you simply allow the players to look at the hidden pieces? As long as you aren't training for a tourneament, I can't see the problem with a simple (and dare I say "obvious") house rule raising your enjoyimnet of the game (since you are "not as fond of memory games") AND solving the above issue.

Treating it as a public information non-memory game, then it's impractical and annoying that you have to physically move the layers to see the game state. Thus I would say that it's a very cool game design in the abstract, but has concrete physical design issues.

Either it's an open information game, in which case all the information is cumbersome to get at, unlike most similar elegant pure strategy games with simple components, or it's a hidden information game, in which case the hidden information is too easily accidentally revealed (unlike, say, Gobblet, a vaguely similar abstract strategy game with some hidden information that can't be easily accidentally revealed since it's under cups).

It is ironic that the very physical mechanism of the game that abstractly makes interesting game mechanics also causes this practical problem!

If it's an open information game, then maybe plexiglass layers would be a good solution, but the wooden bits of the current sets are nice.

The interim solution being considered, that you can see only what's revealed when you rotate a level, is a bit kludgy, as both players must watch as it's rotated and there's the issue of "wait, slow down, I didn't see that upper left corner" or whatever.

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

quinamid — 2007-12-04T13:36:28+00:00

After a bit of thought i would say no peeking unless exposed by rotation.

new variant to be added to rules

peek and let both see any single level before play

i love variants aslong as everyone agrees before play.

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

quinamid — 2007-12-04T13:29:18+00:00

I think i will go along this line of thinking as a player could turn the board to let everyone have a peek below.

NO CHANGING YOUR MIND DURING THE TURN ALLOWED REMEMBER!

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

quinamid — 2007-12-04T13:19:06+00:00

Hm, we didn't think about that issue fully when it came to turning the board 90 degrees

we will investigate

Thread: Re: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

Luke the Flaming — 2007-12-04T13:19:06+00:00

Why don't you simply allow the players to look at the hidden pieces? As long as you aren't training for a tourneament, I can't see the problem with a simple (and dare I say "obvious") house rule raising your enjoyimnet of the game (since you are "not as fond of memory games") AND solving the above issue.

Thread: Rules unclear about hidden spaces

russ — 2007-12-04T12:44:00+00:00

Another thing to clarify in the next edition of the rules:

When I read the rules, I couldn't find anything about whether one is allowed to inspect hidden spaces. At the Essen booth, someone told us that you can't. OK, so fair enough, apparently Quinamid has some memory aspect (which is a turnoff for some people and a turnon for other people).

But then that raises the question of what happens when rotating a level: that will reveal a glimpse of the level underneath, particularly the corner spaces. What's the rule about seeing this (often quite important) hidden info?

1. It's officially OK to see the spaces underneath during the rotation. So if I don't see a part of the lower level (because of my opponent's hand blocking it, or it's on the far side or whatever) can I explicitly request to see it?

2. It is "unsporting" (bleah, that's not a good solution).

3. It is explicitly illegal. That's kind of impractical as players must be careful not to look while the rotation happens.

4. Something else. E.g. "Hm, we didn't think about that issue."

This annoying little issue was the main thing that made me hesitate to buy Quinamid, by the way - it's like a physical practical design problem in a theoretically very elegant clever game design. I'm personally not as fond of memory games, and I'm a bit turned off by the ambiguousness of being able to see a little of the "hidden information" when turning a level. Aside from this somewhat technical/practical issue, I am quite impressed by the game.

Thread: Patrick Korner plays tetris with quinamid ?

quinamid — 2007-12-04T09:50:15+00:00

Patrick has just published his essen report on board game news and seems to have invented a new variant on quinamid or is it a variant on tetris.

DON’T play smaller publisher abstract games. Seriously. I mean, if you do you’ll just find that games like Quinamid or Katalon are friggin’ great and you’ll end up spending that much more money on them (not to mention bringing a few more boxes to the luggage tetris party). You’ve been warned!

The full report can be read at :-
http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comment...

Thread: Re: 4 player expansion pack

quinamid — 2007-11-28T10:26:51+00:00

I was thinking in the future quinamid+ (a multi player varient) could have dark red and light red etc.. it allows me to give more game varients for the same money (production costs). a game with a few players could allow players to use just red and a game with a lot of players can have dark red for a player and light red player.
This also allows for rules like 5 in a row for the light red player but 1 counter can be from the dark red player etc.

Thread: Re: 4 player expansion pack

Blind Reality — 2007-11-27T11:05:55+00:00

Tony,

My first idea for the new colors would be black and yellow/white.

Couldn't you just use the original counters for teamplay where teammembers simply play with the same color? Or are you designing a variant where the counters placed by teammembers should be distinguisable from each other?

Other than that I agree with Carsten that the current board is too small for four individual players. So I would think an extra level would be needed.

If you're looking for more playtesters let me know. I would be very interested to play a 4 player version.

Thread: Re: 4 player expansion pack

quinamid — 2007-11-27T10:42:03+00:00

Black and white! yes that was more first idea with the prototype but the texture and look of the white counters was identical to a mint. The 4 player game is just in game testing we shall quickly see what happens and if another board is required. time will tell.

Thats a good idea with light blue light red because it would allow 4 individual players or team play. IDEA NOTED!

Thread: Re: [Review] Quinamid

kenrick822 — 2007-11-26T18:43:41+00:00

Hi Tom

great review as ever - I met Tony two weeks ago who also came with a copy of his game to my house ( as the set he sent had not arrived - so he hand delivered a set to me ) and I too, can't stop playing this gem of a game - he deserves all the success he can get - he is a really nice bloke - and I know there is more to come !!!!

Ric

Thread: [Review] Quinamid

TomVasel — 2007-11-26T13:58:13+00:00

I have been a huge fan of Pentago and have probably played fifty to one hundred games over the last year. The simplicity combined with real strategy of this abstract game kept me coming back for more. When I read the rules to Quinamid (Third Dynasty Games, 2007 - Antony Brown), I was immediately reminded of Pentago - and much more in game play. Both games require getting five pieces of your color in a row, and both allow rotation of boards.

However, Quinamid has quickly become my favorite. With boards that both slide and rotate, the strategy, while simple, is simply marvelous. The basic game is interesting enough; but the advanced game with variants make this a true masterpiece - and one that I would stack up against any abstract game on the market. I've played Quinamid almost fifty times since I've received it, and there is a good chance it will become my favorite abstract game.

The game consists of five boards that are stacked on top of each other from largest to smallest. Each board has a ring of squares on its border, starting with the bottom - having twenty squares, to the top with only four. When stacked on top of each other, the board becomes a six by six grid of squares with twenty-four others covered at any given moment. Each player takes a pile of discs of their color (red and blue), and one player is chosen to go first; with play alternating between them.

On a player's turn, they do one of three things:
- Place a token in any free space on the board.
- Rotate one of the top four boards ninety degrees in either direction.
- Slide one of the top four boards one space, but staying within the confines of the board directly beneath it.
A player cannot rotate or slide the board that was just moved by an opponent and must continue to rotate or slide a board once they start, even if by doing so they put themselves in a worse position. Turn passes to the next player. The first player to get five tokens in a row wins!

The "basic" game does not allow rotations, while the "advanced" game does. There are also five variants that players may use.
- Players cannot place a piece in the top board on their first turn.
- Players can only place one piece in the top board the entire game.
- Players can't place a piece in the top board until they've placed one in every other board.
- Players must get six in a row.
- Players can only rotate boards clockwise; but can rotate a board just moved by the other player.

Comments on the game…

1.) Components: The five boards are quality wooden boards that slide and rotate easily. All of them stack to fit into a nice wooden box with sliding lid to form a very respectable looking game - one that will look exceptionally good on a coffee table. The tokens are red and blue discs that come in a small cloth drawstring bag and are quite easy to distinguish from each other. Because of the nature of the game, these discs need to be flat to allow the boards to slide over them, but they can occasionally be a bit difficult to get out of their slots once placed.

2.) Rules: The rules are on four pages, and these are mostly pictures of the boards being shown on how to exactly rotate or slide them. Teaching the game is a cinch, as the concept of five-in-a-row is something most people have seen before; and it's easy to understand the rotating and sliding mechanics. Some people might have a harder time with the fact that the board is considered with a bird's eye view and that adjacent pieces are adjacent even if one is four levels higher than the other; but that's easily overcome.

3.) Strategy: In the basic game - and I use the word basic to mean "without variants", as I can't understand why anyone would want to play without rotating - the initial strategy is obvious - get the top board filled! Since it can never be covered, it's important to have at least two pieces up there, as they will constantly be threatening your opponent. Interestingly enough, Quinamid is the first five-in-a-row game that I've played that isn't won through diagonal rows as much, and I think it's because of the sliding of the boards. Once one player gets four in a row in the middle - a killer strategy in other games, they put the other player on the defensive, who must then move or rotate a board to stay in the game. This can lead to more defensive play; and a player can struggle futilely until finally losing. Players must realize that rotating and sliding are good, because they can set the board up the way they want to; but they will have one less piece on the board than their opponent. On the other hand, sliding over pieces is quite fun, because one can reveal them later to win the game or simply knock out a bunch of the opponent's pieces temporarily from the game.

4.) Variants: If you'll notice, three of the variants deal with the top board, and that's because it becomes such an obvious strategy for players. The third variant, that of placing a counter in the bottom four boards before the top board, is by far the best and the only one I use when playing on a general basis. Getting six in a row is quite difficult, actually changing the game to some degree, and rotating the board only clockwise really has an odd effect on how players place pieces. The variants are nicely thought through - should be required for advanced players - but I can see why they weren't included in the original game.

5.) Fun Factor: The fact that the game only takes five to ten minutes to play is a real draw to me, and I love that my young seven year old daughter can play fairly well - learning how to look ahead with planning strategy. Rotating and moving the board to get that "aha!" feeling when you manage to get five in a row is very satisfying, and it's nice to have a game that completes the evolution of Connect Four in a strategic and tactical way. Quinamid almost feels like a cross between Pentago and Gobblet - and I say that in a good way - it's a game I'll be playing in ten years with as much enjoyment as I do now.

I highly recommend Quinamid; from the quality components to the simple yet engaging rules, this is one of the best games of 2007 - and easily one of my favorite two-player abstract games. When using the variants, it can become rather deep, yet never so overwhelming as to cause me to dislike it. A two-player game that I can enjoy with my wife, children, or a friend who drops by, Quinamid will likely never leave my collection - an exceptional game.

Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
www.thedicetower.com

Image

Ceryon — 2007-11-12T00:35:06+00:00

Image

Ceryon — 2007-11-12T00:32:59+00:00

Game in play

Thread: Re: Metal counters

quinamid — 2007-11-11T23:39:58+00:00

maybe the counters should be out of the same material as clear dice, acrylic i think

Thread: Re: Metal counters

Ceryon — 2007-11-11T21:30:16+00:00

I don't think that metal counters would add anything to the game.
I thought for myself to substitute your counters by gemstones of two differend colors, but it's not really easy because of the maximum height they can have...

Thread: Re: 4 player expansion pack

Ceryon — 2007-11-11T21:26:12+00:00

What about black and white?

Do you really think, that this game can be played with 4 players without adding more levels? Or do I have to play with my partner and the other colors would be light-blue and light-red?

Thread: Re: BGG.CON 2007 Sponsor

agashamirv — 2007-11-10T23:02:53+00:00

This is a fun fast little abstract, and I don't normally play abstracts.

I won a copy of this a board game news (pay your dues) and am extremely happy with it.

Thread: BGG.CON 2007 Sponsor

quinamid — 2007-11-10T21:40:20+00:00

Third dynasty games is a listed sponser of BGG.CON 2007, Haappy gaming

Thread: Re: 4 player expansion pack

agashamirv — 2007-10-31T03:05:14+00:00

Not green. I personally know three color-blind gamers.

Since red is already in there, pick yellow and orange or light purple, or black, etc.

Thread: Re: BGG Con Donation

agashamirv — 2007-10-31T03:02:39+00:00

I just got my copy in the mail. (Pay your dues at BGN, and you too could win)

It looks really cool, and I'm not a giant fan of abstracts. I hope to try it out tommorrow night at the game shop.

Thread: Re: Metal counters

russ — 2007-10-29T23:32:58+00:00

We played it several times during Essen and were very close to buying it (but there's finite money and space, alas...) We liked the wood set, which looked and felt nice, and I think metal would be less appealing to me.

Thread: Re: BGG Con

molnar — 2007-10-29T19:58:40+00:00

Good to hear Antony. I'll be sure to check it out.

Thread: BGG Con Donation

quinamid — 2007-10-29T19:09:37+00:00

I Have donated a copy of Quinamid to the BGG Library to be used at the BGG Con.

Good Luck Playing (read the rules for stratergy and tips on game play)

Antony Brown

Thread: Metal counters

quinamid — 2007-10-29T08:34:49+00:00

Do you think the game can be improved with metal counters ? the same thickness as the wooden version or thinner the thickness of a euro perhaps?

Image

Ceryon — 2007-10-22T18:53:07+00:00

Game in play

Image

rdenning — 2007-10-22T14:04:26+00:00

Quinamid Game at Essen

Image

quinamid — 2007-08-15T13:20:52+00:00

Quinamid Back of Box

Image

quinamid — 2007-08-14T13:59:45+00:00

Quinamid Packaged for delivery

Image

quinamid — 2007-07-25T17:12:26+00:00

Quinamid Pen drawing

Image

quinamid — 2007-06-08T09:39:58+00:00

Box, board and counters