Head for the Border(s)?

I stopped by the Edwardsiville Borders yesterday afternoon. There were a few games I'd consider picking up at the right price -- Dixit and Castle Panic are the two that I was most interested in. But, the Edwardsville store is still sitting on 20% off, which still leaves the games more expensive than Amazon (which sells them for 26% off MSRP). And, of course that's before I add in sales tax. (I know that I'm supposed to pay the sales tax on Amazon purchases, but the Edwardsville store adds a special TIF-style sales tax that makes it even more than a traditional sales tax.) So, in the midst of a closeout "everything must go" sale, Borders is still more expensive than Amazon. I suppose that there's just nothing more to say about that.

More APBA Soccer

Patrick and I played two games of APBA Soccer this weekend. Manchester City and Tottenham Hotspur tied 1-1 on Friday. On Saturday, his English national team defeated my Yanks 3-0. I feel as though I've played it enough to have some preliminary thoughts. I posted them at BoardGameGeek in the APBA Soccer forums (and I'll repeat them here).

1. The components are normal (post-1990) APBA standards. The cards are two-color and solid stock. The print is a little small for my middle-aged eyes, but certainly acceptable. Ditto with the charts (which are essentially an appendix in the rulebook). I scanned the charts, enlarged them and printed them out to make it easier on me.

2. The rulebook is quite bad. It's disorganized, ugly and sometimes incomplete. I'm not a sports-game novice. (I've been playing APBA games since 1981.) And I'm not afraid to work hard to understand a rulebook. (I was playing Avalon Hill wargames back in the 1970s.) But it's really bad.

3. As mentioned elsewhere in the forums, the goal scoring numbers (for me, so far) are low. I haven't made careful measurements or crunched the numbers. But here are some back-of-the-envelope calculations using 2009-2010 Chelsea:

The game lasts 180 time periods. Of these, I'd estimate that about 120 are actual rolls on a player's card (as opposed to a throw-in, loose ball check, etc.). Each player's card has 36 possible outcomes. The number of these outcomes that translate into shots depends upon the player's abilities, the location on the field and the formations used. For example, if both squads are playing a 4-4-2, the Drogba card would have 12 shot results in Area A (closest to the net). It falls to 10 in Area B (just outside the box) and then 8 in Area C (in the corners). Continuing, it would be 6 in D, 4 in E, and 2 in F. For Essien the chances (moving from A to F) would be 8-8-7-5-4-2). For Terry, the chances would be 3-3-3-3-3-2.

Estimating the "average" location of the ball and the "average" player (and noting that the charts are weighted so that forwards are more likely to have the ball when it's in Areas A, B and C; but there is an Area X from which no one can shoot), I'd estimate that there's an average of about 4 shot chances (out of 36) on any given player roll. That translates into about 13 (combined) shots per game. Let's make it 15 to reflect the chances coming from direct kicks following fouls and corners (that are taken from a table, not the player's card).

Each player has a rating indicating the probability that the shot is on goal, and this probability is affected by the area and the assist rating of the teammate who passed it. (What constites a "pass" is one of the holes in the rulebook.) For Drogba, for example, this is likely to be a little better than 50-50. For Essien and Terry, it would be closer to one-third. For a number of players, it would be closer to 10-15%. So, we're down to about 6 (combined) on goal shots per game (that actually test the keeper).

Now, moving on to the keeper card, most keepers will stop the vast majority of shots. Peter Cech, for example will stop about 70% of these tests. That takes us down to fewer than 2 (combined) goals per game.

Our highest scoring game so far has been 1-1. I admit that most of what I'm presenting are estimates (altough my sons gave similar guesses when I asked them). I also admit that we've mostly played the better teams. I'm not only open to the possibility that these numbers are wrong, but I hope that they're wrong.

4. I really like the clutch points mechanic. Each team has a number of "clutch points" (usually between 4 and 7) that can be cashed in at various points of the game. For example, 4 points can be used to change a red card into a yellow card. Five points can be used to make a shot (almost) automatically on goal.

5. There is a lot of dice rolling and a lot of charts in this game. Each time period requires at least one roll on a card and/or chart, and then perhaps a follow-up roll. A typical two-minute block goes as follows:

The keeper kicks it in (roll dice and consult chart) to Area C, where it's picked up by (roll dice and consult chart) Player-2, who is (consult scoresheet) Lampard. Lampard takes it and (roll dice, consult card for number, consult chart with number) heads it into Area B for a loose ball. The ball is taken by (double check teams' ratings, roll dice and consult chart) West Ham's (roll dice, consult chart) player-3 who is (consult scoresheet) Behrami. Behrami (roll dice, consult card for number, take number to chart) passes it into Area D, player-2 who is (consult scoresheet) Okirie.

And, unlike some APBA games where 80% of the tables' results can be easily memorized, the soccer tables have so many possibilities that I don't see how more than about 25% could be memorized.

6. I enjoy the game's feel. Many possessions end up as dead ends, but there is a nice tension as you roll on the cards and pass the ball, trying (if only with your dice rolling) to maitain possession and work the ball in closer to the net for an opportunity.

7. The lack of individual defense ratings is a weird design decision. As mentioned elsewhere in the forums, every player listed as a forward gets a defensive rating of 1; every middie is a 2; every defender is a 3. Thus, there is no obvious disincentive to starting the best offensive player at each position. In fact, if the team is down, there isn't much disincentive to putting in forwards to play defender.

My hope is that one of the following is going on:

1) There is more going on in the players' cards than I immediately can see. Maybe offensive-minded players give the ball up more often. Maybe (when they have the ball) they're more likely to start a defense check (which often turns into a counterattack) where a defensive-minded player is more likely to create a loose ball (which can't immediatly become a counterattack).

(2) Maybe this was a temporary decision, and the whole defensive rating system will be overhauled in future card sets. APBA gave individual defensive ratings in hockey, baseball and football. Why not soccer?

Overall, I'm glad I got it. But I can't give it a 100% endorsement for soccer fans.

World Cup Action

With Women's World Cup Action going on this month, Andrew, Patrick and I played a quick game of The World Cup Card Game. All of Andrew's teams were eliminated in the quarterfinals. In the semi-finals, my Germany beat Patrick's Spain, and my Mexico beat Patrick's Portugal. So, it was Germany versus Mexico in the finals. Since the outcomes are based upon card play, this meant that I could decide who won the Cup. For whatever reason, I decided to give the goals to Mexico. (I guess I wanted to see a Concacaf team win.)

The World of Wargaming

Just a quick post to note a project started by BoardGameGeek user JoelCFC25. He overlayed various wargame maps, such as Here I Stand over a world map at Google Earth. It's a very cool idea, and I hope he's able to expand it.

Memorial Day Gaming

Over the years, it's become a little bit of a group tradition to play games over Memorial Day Weekend. By far, the biggest Memorial Day Weekend game-fest was 2004, when (in addition to several smaller games) we played Napoleon in Europe on Saturday, Mare Nostrum on Sunday and Joan of Arc on Monday. (St. Joan's feast day is May 30th, so we often try to fit a Hundred Years War game into the mix.) We've already fit two sessions into this weekend, and there's a chance we'll work in one more.

Saturday afternoon and evening we played Here I Stand. Andrew's Hapsburgs scored an autovictory in Turn 3. The Hapsburgs started the game by launching two major attacks into Drew's France. Steve's English also piled on, while Jeff's Ottomans made the usual push into Hungary. Meanwhile my Protestants got off to a good start in the religious struggles in Germany, as Al's Papacy struggled. The Hapsburgs also arranged a marriage that brought the Venetians in as their allies.

In Turn 2, the Ottomans made it to the gates of Vienna, but were stalled as a Janissary revolt near Istanbul cut their supply lines. The Hapsburgs and English worked a truce with the French that yielded Bordeaux to the Hapsburgs. This allowed the Hapsburgs to focus their energies in the New World, where they conquered several native peoples and founded several colonies. They also gained the Genoans as allies. Meanwhile the Reformation largely stalled, despite the Papacy being forced to devote resources to defending against a French army in Florence. Meanwhile Henry VIII moved through three wives before Edward was finally born.

In Turn 3, the Ottomans reached an official peace accord with the Hapsburgs, but Barbarossa's pirates continued to harrass Hapsburg and Papal shipping. As the Reformation came to grinding halt, the Hapsburgs and English launched expeditions to the New World. The Hapsburg victory came when they arranged yet another marriage, bringing the Scotts in as their allies. This gave Andrew enough keys to score the autovictory.

Today (Sunday) Andrew, Al, Drew, Steven and I played Power Grid. The gameboard is a map of the US. Players buy power stations (using an auction mechanic), the resources to power them and connections to US cities. Powering cities provides income that allows the players to buy more and expand. The game is very popular (currently ranked #5) at BoardGameGeek, so I was happy to give it a try. The components are nice (although the map is a little ugly). I was pleasantly surprised that the bookkeeping is fairly easy. And the mechanics introduce a lot of factors without a lot of fiddliness. So I did enjoy the game. I do think that the game would be far less interesting with three or four people, however. I also managed to win, which indicates a serious flaw somewhere in the game design.

I'm a Loser

A new NBER paper by Steven Levitt and Thomas Miles concludes that there is an important skill component in poker. The two economists look at year-to-year results in the World Series of Poker -- an annual tournament that's open to anyone willing to pay the entry fee. They find persistence in players' performance, which indicates that skill is important. If poker was purely luck-driven, players who finished near the top one year should be randomly spread out the following year; but they're not. This result doesn't surprise me; many of the games I play have a luck component (such as dice and cards), but that doesn't mean that skill plays no role. (As an interesting aside, Leveitt and Miles point out that several studies find that there is virtually no persistence in the management of mutual funds.)

Seeing this study was somewhat timely, as I've been thinking a lot this week about my (lack of) skills as a gamer. A few weeks ago I was describing the Avalon Hill game Diplomacy to a colleague at work. He was surprised when I told him that not only was I not a strong player, but that I had never won a game. It reminded me of a discussion we had about a year ago, when he asked me what games I was "good" at. And I had a hard time naming one.

I'm twelve years younger than my brother, Dennis, and, growing up, he never took it easy on me when we played games. I was OK with that. In fact, (aside from helping a new player with the rules and basic strategy) I don't understand people who are afraid to play to win. (Being rude, of course, is a different matter altogether.) I learned early on, as a child, that I had to be able to enjoy playing a game -- win or lose.

Perhaps that "just enjoy the game" attitude handicaps me in some way; maybe it robbed me of a "winning attitude." But I really don't win all that often. So, when my friend asked me what games I'm good at, I was stumped. For the sake of discussion, the definition of good might be that you win more than your "fair share." So, you'd expect an average player to win a two-player game 50% of the time or a four-player game 25% of the time. Since I'm usually the rules guy in my group, I can think of a few games (such as Kingmaker) that I "know" better than most people, in the sense that I know the rules, the cards, and the odds. But (at least for me) that doesn't seem to translate into victory.

Pressed for an answer, I told my colleague that I was "good" at Avalon Hill's History of the World. My recollection was that I had won that game more than my "fair share" of times. Then I started playing History of the World at GamesByEmail with a mixture of long-time friends (such as Al, Steve, Jeff, Andrew, Tom and Mike) and some strangers that I met at BoardGameGeek. From November 2010 through mid-May 2011, I managed to lose 15 straight games. A couple of them were close-run things that could have gone in my direction, but most weren't. Zero for freakin' 15 in the game that I thought I was "good" at.

Which is a long was of saying that I finially won game number 16 by sneeking out a one-point last-turn victory over Tom, who is good at the game despite that fact that he's over 30 years younger than I am and just learned the game last fall. Maybe it's because he doesn't have an older brother.

First try of APBA Soccer

As hoped, Dennis, Teresa and Mom bought me APBA Soccer for my birthday last week. Patrick and I were able to give it a quick try last weekend, with Patrick taking 2010 Barcelona and me taking 2010 Inter Milan. Barcelona won 1-0.

My first impressions are mixed. The good news is that it's a nice enough game. It definitely feels like you're watching a soccer game. Note, however, that I said "watching." It's probably the nature of the sport that, unlike American football, where the coach calls plays, once you set your starting 11 and pick a formation, your job is done until you feel the need to switch.

One exception, that I feel is the most creative part of the game, is the "clutch points" system. Each team starts with a certain number of clutch points. Better teams start with more, so, for example, Barcelona starts with 10. These points can be "cashed in" to alter the game. For example, a few minutes into our game, I cashed in 5 clutch points so that a red card on my center back would be "discussed by the referees" and turned into a yellow card. Patrick used 5 points for his goalie to make a great save.

Part of what makes APBA Baseball so enjoyable is its elegance. Roll on the card; look on a chart. Eighty percent of the time you'll know the result without even looking. But part of the problem with APBA Football, Hockey and Basketball was the amount of bookkeeping required. At some points the amount of calculating and re-calculating in those games makes it feel like you're doing your taxes. Every lineup change requires re-calculating various numbers. The bad news is that APBA Soccer does require a new set of calculations every time a lineup change occurs. The good news is that lineup changes are less frequent in soccer than in the other sports.

My biggest complaint about APBA Soccer is the awful rulebook. The rulebook is poor from a technical standpoint, an editing standpoint and an aesthetic standpoint. I plan to write a full review at BoardGameGeek, but the rulebook looks like it was typed -- literally, on a typewriter -- and then copied. Several parts are unclear or missing. So, while the author felt the need to explain the positions (something I'm guessing anyone who would buy the game would know), he or she didn't include such simple instructions as how to restart the game after an injury. Finally, while not everyone gets as worked up as I do about missing commas before independent clauses, there are parts of the rulebook with missing words and non-sentences.

APBA also made the decision to downsize their tables, presumably to save money. The irony is that, when I discovered APBA in the 1980s, I had a small budget and good eyes. I would have gladly made do with smaller boards in exchange for a lower price. Now I have more money but bad eyesight, and I really miss the big boards.

I'm looking forward to playing some more this weekend.

St. Louis Maroon Knights FC -- Week 2

This is a continuation of the football season started in the previous post.

Fresh off of our 2-1 victory in Kiev, the Maroon Knights headed back home to prepare for week two. The team looked good on the pitch, but the front office discussion was glum. The signing of Park Lee had drained the bank account, and since there would be no income from the away match, we had to start by laying off the team's assistant manager.

Equally important, the medical staff reported that Welsh midfielder Cecil Bowen's knee was hurt in the first match. Since the team only has five middies on the roster (and no one from the youth squad seems ready to make the leap), manager Angus Collins couldn't play the 4-5-1 formation in the second match versus Bucharest. Instead, striker Jory Cornish got the call, and the team went with a 4-4-2 formation.

A total of 13,500 fans showed up for the home match against Bucharest. Cornish had two solid chances in the first half, but couldn't convert. Instead Bucharest went up 1-0 in the 42nd minute and then made it 2-0 in the 63rd. Guyaese wingback Samuel Buxton sliced the deficit in half with a tally in the 68th minute, but Bucharest responded two minutes later with another goal, making it 3-1. Park Lee made it a one goal game in the 81st minute, but the Maroon Knights couldn't notch the equalizer. The game ended 3-2.

The inury to the 32-year-old Bowen might have been the difference, as it forced the Knights to play out of their prefered formation. And, while Bowen appears ready to come back for next week's game against Istanbul, the medical staff reports that American midfielder Owen Jessup is llikely to be out of action. Collins will need to decide whether to stick with Cornish as a striker or to play someone out of position.

After two weeks, the league table is as follows:

Club	W	D	L	GS	GC	Pts
Bordeux	2	0	0	9	3	6
Paris	1	0	1	6	4	3
St. Louis	1	0	1	4	4	3
Kiev	1	0	1	3	3	3
Bucharest	1	0	1	5	7	3
Athens	0	2	0	3	3	2
Marseille	0	1	1	2	5	1
Istanbul	0	1	1	3	6	1

St. Louis Maroon Knights, FC

One of the amazing things about BoardGameGeek is the number of self-published board games available. It's not surprising (to me) that many serious boardgamers are wanna-be boardgame designers. It's the same as every teenager with a guitar wanting to be a rock star, every English major wanting to write the next great novel and every movie nut believing he's a director.

BoardGameGeek makes it fairly easy for amatuer designers to post their game materials and solicit feedback. I've tried out a few of them. For the most part, these games are fairly rough, but, I suppose you get what you pay for. (One exception that I discovered last year was the very-fun Delve: The Dice Game.)

A couple of weeks ago, Luke Morris (Geek handle Hamster of Fury) emailed those of us who requested it a preliminary version of his game Footy Manager. The game allows one or more players to manage the front office of a soccer (football) club. Unlike other soccer games, such as APBA Soccer or All Time Championship Soccer (another self-published game), the game doesn't focus on the play-by-play of the matches. Players spend about half their time managing the team's roster and about half playing the games. The player's team starts as the lowest-ranked team in the fourth division of a fictional soccer league. Working with a paltry amount of money (and a roster of fictional players), the player tries to win enough games to work his way into promotion. The games themselves are OK, but the real fun is the "role playing" aspect of following your fictional players through their season/careers. It reminds me of following my fictional bomber crew in the 1981 Avalon Hill game B-17: Queen of the Skies or my fictional squad in the 1983 Victory Games game Ambush.

I started a game a couple of weeks ago, but Luke made some (much-needed) changes to the injury charts (and a few other tweaks). So I started anew this afternoon. Here is a short summary of the first few weeks for the St. Louis Maroon Knights FC. (Note that Luke uses British pounds as the game's currency, but I'm using $s instead.)

The marketing deparment was able to land a $2 million sponsorship deal with Barclay's, which gave me enough seed capital to expand our stadium's capacity to 18,000. It's a long way from a Premier League stadium, as only 5,000 of the capacity is seated -- the rest is standing room.

I also hired some staff. Having learned my lesson the first time through, I hired a full medical staff to help with injuries and a youth team coach to help feed new players into the roster for next season. (This is a lot cheaper than trying to buy players off of the transfer list.) I also hired assistant managers and coaches to help with training. This left me with only $1.6 million in the bank.

Speaking of the transfer list, most of the players were far too expensive. Henrik Jacobson, a 32-year-old keeper was available for $5 million from second-divsion club Turin, and first-division club Lyon wanted $3 million for Swiss wingback Thomas Hurlimann. Then I saw that 27-year-old Korean striker Park Lee was available from third-division club Bremen for $1.5 million. Lee was much better than my top strikers, so I drained the bank account to sign him -- putting my 30-year-old striker Jimmy Swales on the transfer list cheap. (I was able to move him to fellow fourth-division club Paris for $75,000.) That left $175,000 in the bank as I headed to Kiev for the first match.

Kiev is ranked 4th (of 8) in the fourth division, so the manager decided to play a 4-5-1 formation and hope for a tie. Attacking middie Johnny Shanks put the Knights up 1-0 in the 68th minute, and Park Lee made it 2-0 in the 81st minute. Kiev scored one in injury time to make it 2-1, but it was too little too late.

The first home match will be next week against Bucharest. In the meantime, I'll need to check the injury report to see who's unavailable. Hopefully a big crowd will show up, because we need the money.

Excited about APBA Soccer

As regular readers know, I've been trying to locate an enjoyable soccer game for over a year. The boys and I had a good time last summer with The World Cup Card Game, but it's not really a simulation as much as a card game.

I played around last winter with several versions of my own soccer game. While the game was able to reproduce reasonable stats, it just wasn't fun.

Finally, last month I took All-Time Championship Soccer with me to Jamaica. The gameplay wasn't that enjoyable, and (at least for the few games I played) the results didn't strike me as all that realistic.

I'm hopeful, now that APBA may come to the rescue with its new soccer game. I've been an APBA fan since I bought their baseball game in 1981. The session report that I've read makes it sound fairly interesting. It might have a few things in common (understandably) with APBA Hockey. I bought APBA Hockey in 1994, and thought it was a slight improvement over Strat-O-Matic Hockey. My biggest complaint with both hockey games is their weak handling of line changes. Luckily, that's not an issue with soccer, so I'm hoepful that the game will be enjoyable.

I've officially told Dennis that I'd like APBA Hockey from the family for my birthday next month. In the meantime, I located the cards for the Irish National Team online. Looking at them with anticipation reminds me of the days I spent reading the brochure for APBA Baseball again and again in 1981 while waiting for it to arrive.

Gaming in Jamaica

Jamaica was beautiful, as usual. I spent most of my time enjoying the scenery and working on a paper for an economics conference. But I did get a little gaming in.

The first game is a self-published effort called All Time Championship Soccer. It's a download-for-free and print-it-yourself package. The game comes with a roster for 32 nations representing the nation's best World Cup showing. I played three games and shelved it, as the goal scoring seemed excessive. So, my search for a good soccer game continues. I still need to try The World Cup Game, and I now see that APBA has a soccer game available.

Gillian and I split two games of EcoFluxx. I still like the game, but I think Gillian still doesn't quite see the point (which is a common reaction to the Fluxx games).

The best gaming of the week was three games of Early American Chrononauts. I had a feeling that Gillian's dad, Ollie, would enjoy it, since he likes history and science fiction and has a good sense of humor. Gillian beat me in the first game while Ollie watched. In the second game, I managed to draw consecutive "Get there first" cards, and I stole two artifacts from Ollie to win the game. Ollie won the third game by snagging his three required artifacts. It was the first time I had played the game with three players, and it reminded me how much fun the game is.

Finally, I played dozens of games of cribbage on my iPhone in the airport. I think the AI is fairly weak, since I won about 80% of the games.

Extra Credit Settlers

A couple of years ago, BoardGameGeek user Joe Wasserman created a geeklist summarizing the games he uses in his high school class to teach economics. I posted some suggestions at the time, but it got me thinking about how I could bring boardgaming into my economics classroom. Unfortunately (at least in terms of my thinking), I've spent most of the last year and a half teaching quantitative courses.

This semeseter, however, I'm teaching Principles of Microeconomics. So, I turned my thoughts from Joe's geeklist into an extra credit assignment. Students wanting the extra points can play two (or more) games of Settlers of Catan and then answer one of four essay questions. The student can buy Settlers or he or she can borrow my copy. Here are the questions:

1. There rarely is enough of any resource (let alone every resource) in a game of Settlers of Catan. What big microeconomic idea does this describe? Since there isn't enough grain for you to build everything you want, buying a development card means not using the grain to build a city or trading it away for something else. What big microeconomic idea does this describe? Describe one situation during the game when you had to make a choice of how to use a resource card. What were your options for using the card? What were the advantages and disadvantages for each option? How did you decide?

2. Describe one trade that you remember making during one of the games. What card(s) did you trade away, and what card(s) did you receive in return? Explain how you eventually used the cards you received and why you preferred this to the cards you traded away. What big microeconomic idea is described by the fact that the trade made both you and the other player better off. Suppose that a "referee" cancelled your trade because it was "unfair." Would this make you better off or worse off? Would it have made your trading partner better off or worse off?

3. Even though there aren't "prices" in the game, were all of the resource cards equally "valuable." Select one of the games you remember well. Which resource was the most valuable in this game? Which resource was the least valuable? How can you tell that a resource is valuable (or not) even though there aren't any prices in the game? What factors (either particular things that happened in your game or general factors built into the game's rules) caused the valuable resource to be valuable and the non-valuable resource to be non-valuable?

4. How many times (in total) did the robber strike during your games? Of those, how many times did you control the robber (i.e., it was you who rolled the '7')? How did you go about deciding where to put the robber? What factors did you consider in making a decision? (Note that some of these may be strategic, and others may be personal.) How did your decision-making change as the game progressed?

So far one student has borrowed the game, and another has reserved it for spring break. We'll see how the answers turn out.

Good Gaming Magazine

This weekend I discovered Win -- an online magazine (German, but with an English version avaiable) devoted to gaming. The normal subscription price is six euro per year (about $8), but for the next few weeks, you can download the pdf files of the six previous issues for free. I already printed out these issues for airport reading on my trip next month.

Choose your own review: Space Hulk Death Angel: The Card Game

I used to enjoy Choose Your Own Adventure books, and I thought the format would make for an interesting review ....

You are in the midst of a quest to a strange new land! (OK, let's say you're at the dry cleaners.) As you leave the merchant stall with your new magic rune (three business shirts, light starch), you look across the parking lot and notice a game store that you've never heard of before. You feel drawn to it -- you're sure you hear a voice telling you to visit. What do you do?

a. Walk into the store. (Go to #1.)
b. Leave and go home. (Go to #2.)

1. You walk into the store and are greeted by a kindly man. He introduces himself as Manager -- he's the Subaltern of Merchants. He is organizing his wares, and you notice a game you've never seen, called Space Hulk Death Angel: The Card Game. Noticing your interest, Manager asks if you are familiar with cooperative games. How do you answer?

a. "What's a cooperative game?" (Go to #7.)
b. "I hate cooperative games; why bother to play with people if there is no winner?" (Go to #3.)
c. "It depends upon whether there's a traitor mechanic. Without a traitor mechanic, it always seems as though one person runs the show." (Go to #4.)
d. "I enjoy cooperative games -- even without a traitor mechanic." (Go to #5.)

2. You mount your steed (get into your car) and drive home. You can't help but wonder what the voice meant, but now you'll never know. (Seriously? What kind of adventurer are you? The end.)

3. Manager answers, "You were wise to speak with me first, my friend. This game will not serve your purposes. You may want to visit a friend of mine named 'BoardGameGeek' in the land known as Internet to find other options." You are disappointed to hear this, but you feel as though you have made the correct decision. (Go to #9.)

4. Manager answers, "You were wise to speak with me first, my friend. This game will not serve your purposes." If you don't already own them, you may want to consider Battlestar Galactica, Shadows Over Camelot or Saboteur." You may want to visit a friend of mine named 'BoardGameGeek' in the land known as Internet to find other options." You are disappointed to hear this, but you feel as though you have made the correct decision. (Go to #9.)

5. Manager answers, "You may find it worthwhile to buy this game, but maybe not. Death Angel's theme involves playing out a futuristic gun battle between space marines and aliens known as Genestealers. How does that sound?" How do you answer?
a. "That sounds really cool!" (Go to #6.)
b. "That doesn't sound like something my group would enjoy." (Go to #8.)

6. Manger answers, "Very good, my friend. Death Angel is largely a card game with a few markers and one die. There is no board -- not even a player mat. There are no fancy figurines. How does that sound?" How do you answer?
a. "That's OK with me -- it makes the game more portable and keeps the price lower." (Go to #10.)
b. "That doesn't sound like something my group would enjoy. My group really likes a nice board and some components." (Go to #11.)
c. "Did you say a die? Hold on there; my group doesn't go for rolling dice." (Go to #12.)

7. Manager answers, "A cooperative game is one where the players work as a group to defeat 'the game.' The group either wins or loses as one team. Does that sound like something you and your companions would enjoy?" How do you answer?
a. "That sounds cool." (Go to #5.)
b. "That doesn't sound like something my group would enjoy." (Go to #3.)

8. Manager answers "You were wise to speak with me first, my friend. This game will not serve your purposes. If you don't already own them, you may want to consider Pandemic, Shadows Over Camelot or Saboteur." You may also want to visit a friend of mine named 'BoardGameGeek' in the land known as Internet to find other options." (Go to #9.)

9. You leave Manager's merchant stall. You feel good about the decision you made. As you mount your steed (start your car), you look up to see that the stall has disappeared -- it now appears to be a seller of poor-quality armor (a Radio Shack). You stare in disbelief, but then hear Manager's voice. "Do not fear young adventurer. I will return again when I am needed." You ride away, vowing to return to the wise merchant in the future. (The end.)

10. Manager answers "It sounds as though you and your companions would enjoy Death Angel. Furthermore, Death Angel is enjoyable solitaire if necessary. Please meet me at the front of my merchant stall if you would like to complete your purchase." (Go to #9.)

11. Manager answers "You were wise to speak with me first, my friend. This game will not serve your purposes. If you don't already own it, you may want to consider Shadows Over Camelot." You may also want to visit a friend of mine named 'BoardGameGeek' in the land known as Internet to find other options." (Go to #9.)

12. Manager answers "You were wise to speak with me first, my friend. This game will not serve your purposes. If you don't already own it, you may want to consider Pandemic." You may also want to visit a friend of mine named 'BoardGameGeek' in the land known as Internet to find other options." (Go to #9.)

Happy Valentine's Game

I've put myself on a gaming-buying moratorium to try to slim my spending. So I was especially thrilled that Gillian gave me two games for Valentine's Day.

First up, she gave me No Thanks! from Z-Man Games. It's a card game with fairly simple rules. The boys and I were able to learn the game quickly when we played two games Tuesday afternoon. I managed to win both games.

She also gave me Loot by Gamewright. I haven't had a chance to read the rules, but it looks like a fun little game.

I'm planning on taking both games to Jamaica next month and trying them out with Gillian's family.

Thinking about Jamaica

The snow has me thinking a lot about my spring break trip to Jamaica. Taking a stack of games isn't an option, so I'm thinking of card games that I can take.

I'm planning on taking Space Hulk: Death Angel, since I can play it solitaire. I'm also planning on taking Chrononauts or Early American Chrononauts and EcoFluxx, since they're easy to teach and fast to play.

I'm considering picking up a new card game or two prior to the trip. I'm especially intrigued by Fairy Tale by Z-Man Games. A couple of other Z-Man card games, Archeology and No Thanks also seem interesting and get good reviews at BoardGameGeek. Asmadi Game's Innovation is one of the hottest titles at BoardGameGeek. It may be a little too complex for relaxing in the sun, though.

I'll also bring a couple of decks of cards for traditional card games. I've been wanting to learn to play cribbage. If Gillian's parents are interested in joining in, I told Gillian that I'd teach them whist.

Aside from card games, I'll probably play some solitaire games at Wargameroom. If Al has some spare time, I'd like to try to connect online and play. There are a lot of good choices there.

Start Getting Counted

Like most other web pages, Blogspot records all kinds of information about visitors. As of today, I've had over 1,000 page views from all over the world -- Germany, China, Spain and, of course, the US. Yesterday I decided to add a visual representation in the bottom right corner of the page. The Flag Counter tracks visits and shows them with the visitors' countries' flags. Unfortunately, the counter started fresh when I installed it yesterday, so the numbers will be a little depressing for awhile. Hopefully, I'll have lots of flags soon.

Death Angel

Not much gaming going on -- too much work and too much bad weather.

I did have a chance to try out Fantasy Flight's Death Angel: The Card Game. The game allows for solo or cooperative play in the Warhammer 40k universe. The player(s) control space marines fighting their way through a ship filled with Genestealers. I had picked the game up the first week of January using a 50%-off coupon at Borders. With the coupon it was about $10.

I'll write a more complete review after I've had a chance to play a few more games, but it was tension-filled and fairly streamlined, which are the two most important factors in a solitaire game. Patrick was playing Wii while I was playing the game, and the tension must have been evident in my grumbling, since he kept asking "Dad, did you die?"

I haven't played Space Hulk (which is what the game is loosely based upon). I think Space Hulk looks like a cooler game (for any groups wanting a game with the sci-fi-dungeon craw theme). But it only supports two players, plus it's out of print and quite expensive (over $100) on the secondary market.

Death Angel: The Card Game also lacks the traitor mechanic, found, for example, in Shadows Over Camelot, Battlestar Galactica and Saboteur. Cooperative games without the traitor mechanic, such as Pandemic, run the risk of becoming group puzzles, where one player takes over, telling the others what to do during their turn -- and ruining the fun. The traitor mechanic not only keeps this from happening (since players are required to maintain a certain level of secrecy), but it adds a psychological demension that resembles poker.

So, while I had a good time with the game, I don't know that it's a must-have for most gamers.

2010: My Year of Gaming

My New Year's resolution for 2010 was to keep a gaming journal. I wanted to keep track of the games I played, the games I wanted to buy and my thoughts about it all. In January, I made a few entries in a composition book, and then it occurred to me that the 21st century (and Blogspot.com) was offering a better way. A blog would be an easier way of "writing" it down, plus it would allow me to merge in photos and share it with my friends (and anyone else who cared). Thus, on January 29th, I made my first entry here. And 88 entries later, here I am. I suffered a long lull during the late summer and most of the fall, but I'm glad to be back at it.

This will be a longer posting than most, as I want to present my year in review. I want to list the 10 things that I'll remember most about gaming in 2010. Some are specific memories -- others are ongoing themes for the year. Aside from the dent that gaming put in my budget, it was a great year!

10. When On-the-Line offered (for free) their 2009 Pizza Box Football season cards for the 12 playoff teams, I printed them off thinking that Andrew and I could test them out. Andrew wasn't too interested, but Patrick wanted to try. (Patrick wasn't much of a football fan two years ago, but he started paying more attention during the 2009 season.) Patrick and I played several games pitting the Colts against the Saints in the two weeks leading up to the Super Bowl. He enjoyed it enough that we played several more games in February 2010 and again at the beginning of the 2010 season in September. I'll remember 2010 as the year that Patrick started enjoying a table-top sports game.

9. Gillian and I got iPhones in February, and many very good board games are available in the app store. During the year I downloaded and played Roll Through the Ages, Farkle, Hive and Battle Line (among others). I'll remember 2010 as the year that I started playing board games on my phone.

8. I've been trying to find an enjoyable squad-level World War II game as long as I can remember. After much thought and reading, I decided to order the Advanced Squad Leader Starter Kit #1. I was enthused enough that I also ordered Starter Kit #2, downloaded all of the free scenarios and bought a bunch of old modules from a woman on Craiglist. Yep, I went in whole-hog, and the game was ... a complete and total flop. I could live with the mediocre components, the amatuerish customer service from Multiman Publishing and the irregular availability of the core module itself. The death blow was watching Al (who is no ASL rookie) and Andrew play a game in April and have the three of us unable to figure out a basic rule about defensive fire -- in the freakin' Starter Kit. (A forum scan at BoardGameGeek confirmed that many other folks have noticed the same ambiguity in the rulebook.) The game is complicated enough, but the rulebook is awful. It's "use it in a technical writing class to illustrate what not to do" level awful. I ordered Tide of Iron last month. I'll remember 2010 as the year I gave up on learning ASL.

7. I pre-ordered Here I Stand off of GMT's P500 list the day it was announced in 2004. They had me when they described a table that the English player would roll on to see if Henry VIII's wife of the year produced an heir. I desperately wanted to play the game, but it sat on my shelf for several years. I finally corralled five other people to try it out in December 2009. It didn't disappoint, and we gave it another try on January 18 (MLK Day) 2010. I made it my official favorite game (at BoardGameGeek) that day. A Java version is available at Wargameroom, which allowed me to play it solitaire several times this year. I haven't been able to get an entire group together (in person or online) since then (although Al, Andrew and I did play an online game in Novemeber). I'll remember 2010 as the year that I discovered my new favorite game.

6. When I first joined BoardGameGeek, I listed History of the World as my favorite game. It's a beautiful mix of nice components, easy game play, an epic feel and dice rolling. But, it only makes it to the table about once a year. That changed this year when I discovered GamesByEmail.com. I started a game of History of the World with Andrew, Steve, Tom, Mike and Jeff last year, and we had so much fun that we just keep starting a new game every time we finish. Al joined me and four folks I found on BoardGameGeek for a few games as well. Al, Steve, Tom, Jeff and I also played a game of Axis and Allies. I'll remember 2010 as the year that I found GamesByEmail.

5. For over a month this summer, the boys and I were glued to the TV (and sometimes a computer monitor) watching the World Cup. Even though I'll always like NFL football more than "soccer," the World Cup is the greatest sports spectical. I'd rather watch World Cup soccer than any Olympic event. Part of the action this year involved many games of The World Cup Card Game. It's not a statistical simulation, but it is a lot of fun. The boys and I played game after game this summer. Part of enjoying World Cup 2014 will have to involve buying an updated version of the card game for the boys. I'll remember 2010 for the World Cup and the card game.

4. I first heard about Looney Labs while listening to an episode of Game On! with Cody and John. A number of the games sounded intriguing, so I ordered Chrononauts. Patrick and I liked it enough that I ordered another the Early American version as well. A month or so later, I bought EcoFluxx and then Monty Python Fluxx. The Fluxx games ended up being my most-played for 2010. I remember playing with the boys one night over the summer and saying "just one more" about five times. I'll remember 2010 as the year I found Looney Labs.

3. I can remember three times in the last ten years that I laughed so hard during a game that I started crying. All three involved visits by Steve. For most of my adult life, gaming with Al and Steven has been the meat and potatoes of my gaming -- hearty, filling and sometimes necessary just to keep alive. Jeff, Andrew, Mike, Drew and Patrick add some great side dishes. But Steve's visits make for the binge desserts. (OK, I'll stop the methaphor.) Steve's visit last month was one of the biggest gaming groups I can remember us ever having, as he brought his son, Tom, and his brother, Jeff S. We had a great time playing Formula De, but the psychological mess that Saboteur made of us all was priceless. (The other two times I cried were Al's great acting in unintentinally convincing us all that he was the traitor the first time we played Shadows Over Camelot, and the "Sassanoids" epoch of a History of the World game in 2009.) I'll remember 2010 for another great night of laughs.

2. Shortly after getting my iPod Touch in 2006, I started trying out these things called "podcasts." I found podcasts devoted to history, politics and sports, but I wanted a gaming podcast. I eventually "discovered" Point2Point -- a great (but now erratically scheduled) wargame podcast. Looking to fill the gap between their releases, in 2007 I stumbled upon what is probably the most-listened-to gaming podcast The Dice Tower. I listed religiously for about a year, but I found myself enjoying The Dice Tower less and less as it moved from "two guys talking about games" to what seemed to be an endless parade of "segments." I found a couple more good wargaming podcasts -- Contact with the Enemy and The Noise Before Defeat" in 2009, but their schedules were erratic as well. In early 2010 (at iTunes) I stumbled upon Game On! with Cody and John. It was fairly early on in their run, but the production values were great, and it was exactly what I was looking for -- two guys who sounded like they could fit into my gaming group talking about games. What I appreciate the most is that they enjoy many types of games -- Euros, Ameritrash, miniatures wargames, card games and role-playing. They (appropriately) reject the strange notion that you can't enjoy different kinds of games. I never miss an episode; the only downside is that they probably have cost me $300 this year in game purchases. I'll remember 2010as the year I found Game On!

1. As part of my divorce agreement, I've had my two boys (or should I say awesome young men) almost every Friday night since 1998. Aside from the rare out-of-town trip or illness, we've had family dinner at my Mom and Dad's house each week for the last 12 years. Since Patrick was a few years old, he has always wanted to play a game after dessert, and Grandma or Grandpa usually obliged him with a game of checkers, dominoes or Spongebob Uno. Friday night dinner, however, has taken on an extra special meaning for us since my Dad passed away in 2009. For the last several years, we've been joined more often than not by my (equally awesome) girlfriend, Gillian, my cousin "Non," and my brother's girlfriend Teresa. (Unfortunately, my brother Dennis's work schedule only allows him to join us once in awhile.) Last year it really seems that playing a game become a permanant part of what the entire family did together on Friday night. We had a few misses this year (I'd like a refund on Incan Gold) and there were a few that need a few more tries (such as The Adventurers). We had mixed reviews of Killer Bunnies (well, I liked it), but we got a lot of plays in of Farkle (especially in the winter) and Long Shot. I'll remember 2010 as the year Friday night became family game night.

I hope your year of gaming was as great as mine.

2010 was a Looney Year

I hope to make a full "Year in Review" posting later this weekend, but I wanted to post my 2010 stats for games played. BoardGameGeek makes this pretty easy, since you can log all of your plays and then view a summary. If you're curious, you can see the games I played in 2010 by clicking here.

The two incarnations of Looney Labs' Fluxx that I own -- EcoFluxx and Monty Python Fluxx got the most plays this year (25 and 17 respectively). The World Cup 2010 Card Game was third with 14. Our most popular Friday Night game, Long Shot, was next with 12 plays. Two other Looney Labs games, Chrononauts and Early American Chrononauts finished fifth and seventh.

Granted, the Looney Labs games are short, which meant that the boys and I could play five games of EcoFluxx in the time it would take the gang to play three turns of Here I Stand. But, the games deserve their place at the top -- we really played them a lot (especially in the spring and summer). And, since they all run between $12 and $20, we definitely got my money's worth.

Battling on the iPhone

Not much game playing going on this week. The one exception is that I've been playing the Reiner Knizia game Battle Line on the iPhone.

Battle Line was first published by GMT Games in 2000. It's fairly similar to other Knizia card games. The game includes a deck of 60 cards in six suits (colors) numbered 1 to 10. Players take turns playing cards in one of nine columns. A player's side of the column is filled when three cards are played. The player with the stronger set of three cards (flush, three of a kind, straight, straight flush) claims the column (by taking a marker). There are additional optional cards that add more to the mix, but I haven't tried them out yet.

The iPhone app is a bargain at $2.99. I'd like to get a physical copy of the game, but GMT has sold out two printings (with no more printings currently planned).

EPL 2.0 Playtest

On January 4th, Patrick and I tried out the new version of the English Premiere League game that I discussed in an earlier post. In terms of stats, the model is really nice. Chelsea beat Man City 3-1, with three goals by Drogba and one goal by Adebayor. The total number of shots and saves was perfectly reasonable as well.

I don't know that the game was any more enjoyable than the previous version. To be sure, the number of dice rolls was far lower (for the better). I don't know yet if that will translate into a better gaming experience. Patrick was sick last weekend, and he's busy today, so we probably won't have another test until next weekend. I need to draw up cards for two other teams, since we're getting a little tired of the same two teams. Patrick wants to play Manchester United, and I'll take Tottenham Hotspur for the next test.

If things go well, and I can make a few more teams, I hope to create a page at BoardgameGeek this spring and throw it open for general playtesting.

The Boys are Back in Town

One of the highlights of our gaming is Steve's occaissional trips back to St. Louis. He was an integral part of our gaming during high school and college, but his job has taken him away for most of the last 15 years. He makes it back to St. Louis about once a year, and we always make an effort to get together for some gaming. Wednesday night, he took time from his Christmas visit and brought along his son, Tom, and his brother, Jeff. Adding in the usual crowd (Al, Al's son Jeff, Drew, Steven and me) gave us the biggest group that we've had in years. It also created a challenge in picking out a game. (The other challenge was having two Steves and two Jeffs at the table.)

We started off with a game we haven't played in several years -- Forumla De. Published in 1991 by Ludodélire (although Al owns the version published by Descartes Editeur), it is a Formula-1 themed racing game. The latest version of the game (now known as Formula D) was published by Asmodee. The rules are simple, and we were up and running a two-lap race in about ten minutes. Steve and I were leading the pack at the beginning of lap two, but I missed a turn and spun out, leaving Steve to coast to the victory. Al was one turn behind and was able to finish second, follwed by Steven.

Not quite ready to call it a night, Jeff S. (who has become a huge gamer since we last talked with him ten years ago) brought out Saboteur by Z-Man Games. Originally published in 2004, it's a semi-cooperative card game with a traitor mechanic. The players represent mining dwarves and play cards helping the group to reach a target card representing gold. The group wins or loses together depending upon whether the group reaches the gold before they run out of cards. The players share the gold (points), but the player who played the last card (allowing the group to reach the gold) gets the most gold. The player with the most gold after three rounds wins the game (making it semi-cooperative).

What really makes the game, however, is the traitor mechanic. Before each round, players are dealt a card that (privately) indicates whether they will be a loyal dwarf (for that round) or a saboteur. It's possible that more than one dwarf will be a saboteur -- with our group of eight, five or six would be loyal, and two or three would be saboteurs. We've seen this mechanic before in one of our group favorites, Shadows Over Camelot, and Saboteur played out with much of the same feel. Every slightly off-key card play creates suspicions that the player is the saboteur. This always leads to charges and counter-charges and much laughter. Nothing is better than showing your true colors as a traitor by playing a killer card at the crucial moment. And nothing is funnier than watching an innocent person (often Al) profess his loyalty while we ignore the quiet traitor who's killing us without us knowing it. Every gaming group should try out a game with this mechanic. The previosly-mentioned Shadows Over Camelot has an Athurian theme. Battle Star Galactica by Fantasy Flight would be a choice for fans of the show. If neither of these themes have special appeal for your group, Saboteur has the feel with easier rules and a shorter playtime.