Right...

So if I draw 100% red tiles I'll win?

Given that you could immediately build three Red monuments, and defend them perfectly, you'd have a fair chance. Pick your battles well, though.

You can still get treasures with your green leader, too.

Can't see it working, two player at least. Your opponent builds little green, blue and black kingdoms and joins them on to your all-red one and three of your leaders are kicked off. Sure you'll be able to kick the other leaders off one at a time in internal conflicts but that's only going to get you red blobs. Opponent goes off and makes some more coloured kingdoms somewhere else. Only way you can get your colours is if the opponent plays non-red tiles on your kingdom (unlikely) or if you can manoeuvure a big conflict (and be on the winning side) between two kingdoms containing non-red built up by your opponent, and if they've cottoned on enough then they'll skip town and joining kingdoms will get you nothing again.

Might be better with a 3 or 4 player game because the conflicts are a bit less avoidable. You can muscle in on the best side of two kingdoms ripe for conflict, but without any coloured tiles you are likely just to find yourself losing the coloured external conflicts you needed to win.

I love E&T so much because the strategies are so flexible; I'd love to play a game where I knew I was going to have only red tiles and try it out. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work though.

That was a bit of an excessive response, wasn't it Sorry, just quirked my interest.

Wow, the germans did a really bad job on this one, the original sounds way better....

Close, but no cigar. The game isn't about arranging buildings on your palazzo. It's about doing works. Works = points = winning. Buildings on your palazzo? One tiny part of performing a work.

Would you stop whining! I see humourous threads all over the place infested with people trying to "find some sense" on them...

"Oh, this is not how the game plays at all! You're so wrong..."

People, please stop acting like smart-a**es and start enjoying a good joke...

Late 1980? I think Tetris beat you on this one.

I believe you described Hunters & Gatherers, not the original.

I would say just the opposite

My thoughts exactly. God, I hate those pesky soil-tilling clowns. If I lived in the countryside, I'd stone their real-life counterparts out of spite (racking up ridiculous scores, just lying on their fields... the nerve!)

Actually, I was most frustrated when they released this game with a two-step scoring system that I had been developing independently for many years:

STEP #1: Create a game where the winning score is in the range of 80 to 130 points.

STEP #2: Provide a scoreboard that only goes up to 50.

STEP #3: ???

STEP #4: Profit

Hey, wait a sec. I think this one actually has a Step 3.

STEP #3: Make people pay for an expansion that adds a reversible scoreboard that goes to 100.

nonono.. The player that chooses 5 or 9 wins

Actually, with my brother-in-law's set we have played enough games to verify that our dice produce 11 at a higher frequency than any other combination. Makes for great opening choices...

"I should take that 6-9-10 combination there... but if the dice start going crazy again that 11-11-4 guarantees the game! Argh!!!"

Knowing how much Settlers is like Craps might make me enjoy it more.

Yeah, but what other game can you say "I have wood for sheep" with a straight face

My set is skewed to the number 4

Hillarious.

Isaac, I think the hippies combined your idea with mine to create this game:

1. Pay hippies money for a stack of cards.
2. You lose.

Reminds me of most Eurogames I play, except I give them the hammer.

My version at least was exactly the same as Fluxx:

1. Players throw random objects on the table.
2. The first player who says, "I am not going to play this stupid game anymore" wins.

If you still have your version, perhaps you can prove that you were first with carbon-dating?

I wrote a full treatment for a TV show about a high school girl who becomes Death's apprentice and starts reaping souls, almost two years before "Dead Like Me" came on the air. I'm fairly sure the production company I worked for didn't ever show the idea to anybody, but it was kind of freaky.

not really a game invention, but if Mercedes ever starts putting dimples in the body panels of their cars(like a golf ball) to reduce wind resistance, that was my idea.

Those are speed holes. They make the car go faster.

On a side note, I myself am not particularly creative, but my father invented the question mark.

Why would you want the cargo to move faster than the transport?

It's weird, I'd never heard of this game till a couple of weeks ago here, and then I saw it on sale a few days back.
Is this an insidious US import or a welcome addition to what are laughingly called "family card games"?

We play it occasionally, but with five people, it takes a loooong time to finish. Since I seldom win, I'm usually just waiting for the game to end so we can play something else.

Actually, coin tosses (and any other random way of determining the result of a match) is forbidden in tournament play.

Also, in tournaments, you get to hold people down and beat them with your sacks of $100 bills.

---
In all seriousness, why has buying a booster box of Champions of Kamigawa turned into an ordeal lasting more than a month? Are there secret fumes in each booster case that turn people into incompetent sellers?

Well you know what they say - the CoK you have to wait for is the best CoK of all...

I thought it was, "I cried because I had no shoes until I met a man who used the word 'mise' and expected anyone to take him seriously."

The best trick is that when you've mortgaged your house to buy a super unbeatable deck, they come out with a new edition to make the old one obsolete

I invented this in the 1970s. My idea was to invent a game where every month I came out with a new little add on. I figured I would get rich from all my loyal game fans who absolutely had to have the new little thing. Of course, that's as far as I got with developing the idea.

It's funny because it's true...

Personally I always thought south america was the better "fortress"

Actually, in all the Risk games I've played, the person that focused on taking Australia inevitably got shut out of every other continent and went on to lose horribly. The side with Australia was always just the last to lose.

In all the games I've ever played... whoever has North America usually wins.... and I NEVER have it

The fanaat risk variant really helps avoid the pesky control australia strategy with even better bonus that it removes the pesky dice.

By the way - what ever happened to New Zealand?

Oh god, I died laughing at this one!

I laughed so hard that I had milk coming out of my nose, and I was not even drinking milk.

Dane. Call your doctor. Now.

Too late - that was 2 years ago.

You got the "bad" kidney.

Having an average of 7 isn't bad, but having a lower standard deviation is murder.

I thought this was come up with a busted design, have it win awards, and then realize it needs a major rules fix. Outside of winning awards, I have come up with multiple games that need major rules fixes.

Dean dean dean. Just 'cos you always lose!!! (And don't try to blame it on the rules! )

I'm with Dean. The game is good, but damn, you spend a long time planning some move only to find out you can't do it because the Italian supply of pasta is low, or the German sauerkraut industry has been decimated by e-coli, and don't tell me there aren't any rules for that. There are rules for EVERYTHING in this game. It's like an RPG.

If you think this one is bad, it's probably a good thing you never got into the Europa series.

Are you sure you are playing the same Europe Engulfed as I do?
Funny list!

That would almost killed me

I've played that game

You obviously suck at this game.