In the unlikely event that it matters, note that I may be periodically absent from BGG.
I have been appointed Grand Jester of the Court
of The Ancient and Loyal Order of Thrifters
apparently. For 2013, at any rate.
Here's a link to my failed GeekStarter project
My board gaming history goes roughly like this:
Pre-teens: children's games and family games.
Early teens: Family games, Chess, RPGs and war games.
Late teens: RPGs, Bridge and other card games.
Pre-BGG grown-upishness: Go, Magic, RPGs, mixed board and card games (all sporadically).
Post-BGG grown-upishness: Mixed board games.
In addition to the games I have acquired in later years - in thrift stores and at flea markets - my BGG collection includes all those games I have access to at my parents' place, not just the ones technically owned by me.
A few notes on my ratings:
* I never rate a game I haven't played, but I do rate games after one full play. However, if that first session was interrupted or bungled, if the game is particularly hard to analyse, or if I expect to play the game again within a reasonable amount of time, I will generally put off rating it.
* I largely rate according to BGG's odd dual-nature rating guidelines, which concurrently list perceived quality and desire to play. I used to make conservative early assessments of 5-7 (doubtful, neutral, positive); now that I know more about what types of games exist and what I like, I tend to be bolder with my initial impressions, although it takes a lot to earn 8 or more under any circumstances. As time goes by and I review ratings of games I haven't had the opportunity to replay, I'm far more likely to drop ratings than raise them. Consequently I have a bunch of 6-7s I hope to be able to promote but I won't do so based only on a general desire to play again.
* Ratings for expansions typically answer one of two questions depending on how I regard the base game: For a game I like
, how often would I want to include this? For a game I am indifferent
to or dislike
, how would I feel about playing it when including this?
* For a few games I haven't played in many years, ratings reflect how much the game has meant to me and how much fun I've had with it, not necessarily how I would feel about sitting down to play in the current day. It would make little sense to give Squad Leader
a low rating just because I'd be reluctant to get back into a wargame of that sort. In cases where I have little more than a vague notion of what playing a game was actually like, I have typically not given a rating.
* Similarly, in a very few cases my ratings reflect my admiration for a game more than my desire to play a serious game at a moment's notice. I feel it would be a travesty to rate Go
any lower than 8.
* I haven't rated any game a 10 since the way the rating guidelines are worded makes this largely impossible. I may use it in the future on some game I really, really, really like and want to single out.
* I have largely reversed my previous policy of not rating games I've only played against bots. Such ratings are of course open to later reassessment. Reasons why I might not rate a game based on experiences with a computer implementation include but are not limited to bots playing poorly or idiosyncratically, and doubt that I properly understand the nature of the game and its interactions.
* I don't rate games inaccurately in order to unduly influence averages, to spite a designer or publisher, to "balance out" ratings of others that I consider illegitimate, or for any silly reason like that.