|
|
|
||
I’ve managed to get a few hikes in so far this summer, more than last summer anyways. They’ve all been great hikes, and I took a number of photos (as usual). I’ve started to upload some of them here. The photo on the right is from a hike I did with Brian, Pam, and Arman to Elbow Lake. Click on the photo to see the rest of the photos rom the hikes.
Observed today on 17th Avenue SW:
If December was the month of the ‘A’ Games (Acquire, Agricola and Agatha) then May is the month of the ‘S’ games. I picked up Santiago and Steam this past weekend and I’m looking forward to getting them to the table over the coming months. I’ve played Santiago in the past, but I’ve never played Steam (or any of the other incarnations of Age of Steam over the years). I think they’ll both be good additions to my collection since they’re pretty different from what I already own.
I’m curious to see what my Monday night group thinks of the games when they come up in our queue.
No I’m not talking about angsty teenage girls fawning over vampires that have cranked their bedazzlers up to 11. I’m talking about a more imperial kind of twilight.
One of my game groups and I are going to give Twilight Imperium a try for the first time. I’ve been studying the rules in some vain hope it will help me win. The good news is that of the five of us, exactly zero have played before. So we’re all be fumbling around the galaxy together.
It all goes down tomorrow at 11am. Here’s hoping I do well, or at least have a ton of fun losing.
The top ten list in the latest Dice Tower episode was the top ten games that cause you stress. I found the lists interesting, and I thought I would post my opinion.
One of the most stressful games for me, like Tom, is Diplomacy. And I agree it’s too stressful to the point where I don’t enjoy it.
Battlestar Galactica came up as one of the games people find stressful, as did Ghost Stories, but for me I find pretty much all cooperative games stressful. I’d say the most stressful for me is Lord of the Rings, followed by Arkham Horror, and then Battlestar Galactica and Ghost Stories. The rich themes in Lord of the Rings and Arkham Horror always make me feel small, insignificant, and like there’s absolutely no hope of victory.
One other game stands out for me as one that I find very stressful. Power Grid.
Don’t get me wrong, I love power grid and will never turn down a game. Maybe it’s just the group I usually play with, but I feel constant pressure during the game, and some maps (like Brazil) up the ante quite a bit. I think a lot of the stress in the game for me comes from the hidden money aspect of the game. My group uses poker chips instead of the paper money that comes with the game, partly because it’s easier to hide poker chips. I usually keep general track of everyone’s finances, but it’s hard to keep the exact numbers in my head and that lack of knowledge is really stressful for me. If I could only know for sure how much money someone had, I could probably figure out what resources they want and what cities they want and then bid them just a little too high in the power plant auction.
Another thing about my group is that we’ve all played the game a number of times, and we all play to win (read: viciously). Which again adds to the stress. And makes me enjoy the game that much more.
Last Monday, Union Pacific made it to the table again (at my suggestion). And once again, I came in second. And once again, the reason I lost is that I was tied for first on the Union Pacific shares instead of having a clear majority. And yes, once again, it was Jason B. who snapped up that crucial share and caused the tie. I lost by such a small amount that this would have made the difference.
I think I played well, but I should have been paying more attention to the UP shares than I was. Maybe my fate is to always come in second in this game. I still really enjoy the game, and it’s a shame it’s out of print.
I’ve played a large number of new (to me) board games over the past six months, both with my regular group and otherwise. For the most part, I’ve enjoyed all of the games, but a few games stand out as ones where I’m not so sure. To be perfectly fair, I’ve only played each of these three games once to date.
First up: the Farmers of the Moor expansion to Agricola. I like Agricola by itself, but I’m not sure about the expansion. The biggest issue I have is that it extends the game time by too much for too little gain. It also adds complexity and hence makes the analysis paralysis problems in Agricola even worse. Maybe the problem was that we played it with five players. I’d be willing to try it again, although only with three or four players next time. I don’t think I’ll buy it though. I can’t see playing it very often with my regular group.
Next up is Dungeon Lords. I did enjoy the theme of the game, but it seemed like things progressed too slowly and there weren’t enough interesting choices to make. I don’t know that I really want to even try it again. I think I’d rather give Galaxy Trucker a go as an alternative.
The most recently played game I’m unsure of is Primordial Soup. I finished in the middle of the pack, but the last place player finished way behind. It seemed like the game balance was tilted towards needing to stay in a somewhat tight pack to make it interesting. There was a mild “punish the leader” mechanic in the game, but it was such as small disadvantage that I’m not sure it was enough. This one I definitely want to try again now that I’ve played once, and I suspect I’ll like it better. I also wonder whether it would be better with only four players (we had five).
Aside from these three, I’ve enjoyed all of the other games I’ve tried over the past six months or so. Hopefully the trend continues through the rest of 2010.
Between Christmas gifts, birthday gifts, and some purchases on my own, I now have a number of new games to play. In the new year, I definitely want to get all of them to the table. In particular:
Aside from these new ones, I’d like to play more Descent this coming year, and I’m also long overdue for a game or three of RoboRally.
I picked up the Ticket to Ride: Europa 1912 expansion for Ticket to Ride: Europe a little while ago and have had the chance to play 3 games using the expansion.
The expansion is 2 parts. First, a whole bunch of new ticket cards and some new rules for playing with the new tickets. So far I’ve only tried playing with the “big cities” tickets.
The second part is the new Warehouses and Depots rule, which can be used with any variant of Ticket to Ride (not just Europe).
I’m very glad I bought the expansion, in particular for the new tickets. They change the game dramatically, and make it much more interesting to play. And although I haven’t tried them yet, having an additional 6 long route tickets (for a total of 12) should make for more interesting (and less predictable) games, since it will be harder to guess what someone’s long route ticket is.
Another thing about the new tickets is that, playing the big cities variant in a 2 player game of Ticket to Ride: Europe was much more interesting than playing a 2 player game with the regular tickets. It wasn’t quite as tense as playing on the Switzerland board, but it was still a definite notch up from the original.
The warehouses and depots rule is interesting, but it’s not one I’m sure I’ll play that often. I felt it unbalanced the game a little more than I wanted, although I’ll have to try it a few more times to be sure. The problem I had was that in the game we played, I managed to pick up cards from both warehouses pretty early in the game, giving me a huge hand advantage. I was able to very quickly pick up most of the routes I needed for my network and ran away with the game.
The expansion has definitely added some new life to an already great game, and I’m looking forward to playing it more often.
Once upon a time, Gutenberg invented the printing press. Books were expensive to produce and distribute, and literacy was a luxury only the privileged could afford. But the printing press started an inexorable trend. Since its invention in the 1400s, the technology for information distribution has progressed rapidly.
Newspapers, then radio, then television, the internet are major milestones on the path to the present. Information has become ubiquitous, available instantly to anyone who wants it.
When information was scarce, it was easier to absorb it, digest it, and make decisions regarding its importance and relevance. Now, we face an entirely different problem. The signal to noise ratio has eroded dramatically in the past decade, making it increasingly difficult to find information of value.
One problem is a shift in mainstream media away from news and towards entertainment. For example, a popular Calgary radio station has three celebrity gossip segments every weekday morning. I’d much rather hear a traffic report, local news, weather, or heck, maybe even some music, but this is what mainstream media provides.
Of course, they wouldn’t devote three segments during the peak morning listening hours if people didn’t want to listen. This is an interesting comment on our society by itself, but it has the effect of reducing the amount of airtime that can be given to a topic like local news.
The news has also gotten shallower. A typical story on the radio or television has been reduced to a couple of sound bites chosen for maximum impact / entertainment value rather than their value as information. Someone seeking more depth to a given story has to do a lot of digging to find it and frequently needs to look beyond mainstream media. I don’t know how many people make this effort.
A second problem is created by the rise of social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook. In and of themselves, they’re great ways to keep in touch with people and find out about events and news of interest, but there is an awful lot of noise there as well. Unfortunately, these sites only provide one really effective way to deal with the noise: ignoring someone entirely. This means you throw out some of the signal along with the noise.
I don’t think there’s an easy solution to this one – we’re already at the saturation point for information and the trend shows no signs of slowing down. I firmly believe that information availability is a good thing relative to the alternatives, but what do we do when such a large amount of the information available has so little value? What do we do when mainstream media does not provide an appropriate level of depth? How do we improve the signal to noise ratio?
Jeremiah Wittevrongel lives in Calgary, Canada. Though he works as a software developer and loves what he does, this blog isn't about that. It's about the rest of his life, which tends to revolve around board gaming and cooking.
As seen on last.fm
Subscriptions