Thursday, November 29
Other puzzles and prizes
Yehuda Berlinger has a gaming blog that I read fairly often. He posts a lot, which means there’s usually something new to read. The reason that I mention his blog is that he will also be posing puzzles and giving out prizes, although on a much grander scale. His latest post mentions over $300 in games that will be up for grabs to those who sign up to his Google group. If you’re interested, hurry...you need to be signed up before this Sunday.
Wednesday, November 28
Puzzle Contest
All of my posts are signed MadPuzzler, and I’ve decided that if I’m to have any credibility it’s about time I provided a puzzle. In order to encourage anyone who might actually be reading, I’m providing a small prize. Whoever first solves the puzzle and emails me with the answer will have a new, un-punched version of the game Hollywood Blockbuster shipped to them via the least expensive shipping method available (it likely won’t make it in time for the winter holiday of your choice, so don’t plan on that).
The puzzle hearkens back to some of my treasure-hunting challenges, but is a bit more involved since I expect you to have plenty of time and on-line resources at your disposal. Figure out what the message says and proceed from there. If no one has solved it in two months, I’ll replace it with something easier, but I don’t expect that to be the case. If someone does solve it, it’s likely that I’ll eventually post something more difficult.
Here is the puzzle, which is a prime example of an elementary cipher. Make of that what you will.
The puzzle hearkens back to some of my treasure-hunting challenges, but is a bit more involved since I expect you to have plenty of time and on-line resources at your disposal. Figure out what the message says and proceed from there. If no one has solved it in two months, I’ll replace it with something easier, but I don’t expect that to be the case. If someone does solve it, it’s likely that I’ll eventually post something more difficult.
Here is the puzzle, which is a prime example of an elementary cipher. Make of that what you will.
NaNbHeVRbNbNaLuKVHoHeTc
HoBiNaPmHeLuCuNbIRbTaNbNb
NaPmHeLuHeAgRbNAgLuBAgNb
HoBiNaPmHeLuCuNbIRbTaNbNb
NaPmHeLuHeAgRbNAgLuBAgNb
Tuesday, November 27
Attika and design
Having played just four games of Attika now, I’ve decided that I’m very impressed with the design of Attika’s modular board. What I really like about it is not so much that it is modular, but that the game can’t even be completed without adding more sections to the board. You must draw building tiles in order to be able to place new map sections (so you can place more buildings). You can also control when you place the new section by manipulating your draws. Being able to place your new map sections anywhere you like adds a new level of complexity to the game that wasn’t there at the beginning. And they do add a lot of complexity - new sections can be used offensively or defensively and will also affect the cost of further buildings for you and/or your opponents.
The amphoras have a similar effect. You have none at the beginning of the game (though in theory you could get one on the first turn). Having an amphora adds to your options, especially in so far as you are able to threaten to win by connecting two temples. If your opponent has one or more amphoras, you have to be more diligent about defense.
In both cases complexity is added as the game progresses, which helps new players learn the game and still be competitive during their first play. One of the things I don’t like about certain games (e.g. Settlers of Cataan) is that the decision with the biggest impact on your success in the game is made at the very beginning. Your first impression of a game can easily be soured when you realize that the very first decision you made has now made it virtually impossible for you to win. In short, games where the complexity ramps up as you go really helps out new players, and in turn those of us who end up teaching them how to play.
The amphoras have a similar effect. You have none at the beginning of the game (though in theory you could get one on the first turn). Having an amphora adds to your options, especially in so far as you are able to threaten to win by connecting two temples. If your opponent has one or more amphoras, you have to be more diligent about defense.
In both cases complexity is added as the game progresses, which helps new players learn the game and still be competitive during their first play. One of the things I don’t like about certain games (e.g. Settlers of Cataan) is that the decision with the biggest impact on your success in the game is made at the very beginning. Your first impression of a game can easily be soured when you realize that the very first decision you made has now made it virtually impossible for you to win. In short, games where the complexity ramps up as you go really helps out new players, and in turn those of us who end up teaching them how to play.
Monday, November 26
Wednesday night games - Attika, San Juan
On Wednesday night (Nov. 21st), I was able to squeeze in a few pre-Thanksgiving games with Doug and Paul. I brought my fairly recent acquisitions of Attika and San Juan, which neither of them had played.
The first game of Attika ended when each of us had about two-thirds of our buildings on the board. By saving two amphora and using a couple of turns building up resource cards, I was able to lay down a new hex and make a sudden move at the temple Paul was guarding. Although I didn’t get the draw I needed to build all the way there on the first turn, Paul only had a couple of resources and couldn’t manage to block. I’m not sure if Doug could have blocked the spot, but if so he chose not to form a new (and permanently unconnected) settlement and I was able to connect two temples shortly thereafter.
Both wanted to try Attika again, so we played a second game. Doug made an early move towards the center and allowed me to connect to the temple behind him. From that point it was very hard to block me. It was over in about five turns.
Next we opened up San Juan. It was their first and only my second game. I opened strong, getting an early library and a quick lead. Doug went strong on production buildings and Paul got an archive and then a library a bit later. I got a number of cards with the poor house and began to stock my chapel with quite a few cards. I missed some builds though, and Doug got a guild house and edged me out by one point.
Doug is going to borrow both games so I’m hoping for some more tightly contested games of Attika in the near future. After having played four times now, I’m very impressed with the design. Despite drawing tiles, there seems to be little luck and many tactical options.
The first game of Attika ended when each of us had about two-thirds of our buildings on the board. By saving two amphora and using a couple of turns building up resource cards, I was able to lay down a new hex and make a sudden move at the temple Paul was guarding. Although I didn’t get the draw I needed to build all the way there on the first turn, Paul only had a couple of resources and couldn’t manage to block. I’m not sure if Doug could have blocked the spot, but if so he chose not to form a new (and permanently unconnected) settlement and I was able to connect two temples shortly thereafter.
Both wanted to try Attika again, so we played a second game. Doug made an early move towards the center and allowed me to connect to the temple behind him. From that point it was very hard to block me. It was over in about five turns.
Next we opened up San Juan. It was their first and only my second game. I opened strong, getting an early library and a quick lead. Doug went strong on production buildings and Paul got an archive and then a library a bit later. I got a number of cards with the poor house and began to stock my chapel with quite a few cards. I missed some builds though, and Doug got a guild house and edged me out by one point.
Doug is going to borrow both games so I’m hoping for some more tightly contested games of Attika in the near future. After having played four times now, I’m very impressed with the design. Despite drawing tiles, there seems to be little luck and many tactical options.
Thursday, November 1
Review - Hollywood Blockbuster
Today I want to offer a review of a game that is relatively new to me, Hollywood Blockbuster. Hollywood Blockbuster is a remake of the Knizia game Traumfabrik for an English-speaking audience and is published by Uberplay. It is an auction game where players take the roles of movie producers trying to collect movie components and assign them to films in production. Completed films give you points and let you vie for the many movie awards given out during the course of the game.
Every player starts the game with a number of ‘contracts’, the currency used in the game, and three movies that they are trying to complete. The layout of the board consists primarily of eight spaces, each of which represents an opportunity to acquire tiles which show directors, stars, guest stars, cameras or special effects. Each of these tiles also has from zero to four stars, which add to the quality of the film to which they are assigned. Who gets the tiles from each space is usually decided by auction, but two of the eight spaces feature ‘parties’, in which each player gets to choose one of these in turn at no cost (the player who won the previous auction gets first pick and play proceeds clockwise). The players will traverse the board four times, each trip around representing one year of movie-making. That means there are only 24 auctions and eight parties to make as many movies as you can.
One of the interesting features of this auction game is that it features a closed economy. All contracts paid out by the auction winner are divided up equally by the remaining players. Any contracts that can’t be equally divided are left in the center of the board and divided along with the proceeds of the next auction. Spending money means it goes somewhere else so how it’s even more important to pay attention to how much you spend on an auction (and how much will be left in the middle).
The movies that players are trying to make are either blue, green, or yellow which correspond roughly to the action, comedy, and drama genres. Every movie requires a director and includes a spot for an optional guest star. Other requirements may vary greatly. Every movie also comes with a number of stars, based presumably on the quality of the script. When a player places all of the required tiles on a movie, it’s “in the can” and he counts up the total number of stars on the movie and the placed tiles and takes a corresponding scoring tile. Finishing a movie also means you get a new movie card, if there are still any left. There are a limited amount of scoring tiles (two for most values) and if they are already gone, he will have to take the next lower tile and score less points. Finishing first will often score you more points and counts as a tie-breaker when deciding who wins awards.
Speaking of awards, they are one of the most thematic and entertaining parts of the game. Awards for the first movie in each category reward you with five points, as do “best movie” awards for the first three years. The major awards are worth ten points each and are all given out when the game ends after year four. These awards are for best blue, green, and yellow film, best film overall, worst film, and best director (all of a player’s director stars for finished movies are added together). Everyone adds their awards to the amount of stars they garnered from finishing movies and the highest score wins.
The thing that I like most about this game is that it lies in the sweet spot of having enough strategy to entertain true gamers, while not being so daunting that family members would never dare to play. The theme of the game lies more in the board design and the names the game uses than in the actual game mechanics, but it is an inviting one and adds to the enjoyment of the game. The fact that the actors and movies are puns on those that are well-known adds to the appeal of the theme. The game is well-produced and easy to learn and play. Overall I score this game a 7.5 out of 10.
Every player starts the game with a number of ‘contracts’, the currency used in the game, and three movies that they are trying to complete. The layout of the board consists primarily of eight spaces, each of which represents an opportunity to acquire tiles which show directors, stars, guest stars, cameras or special effects. Each of these tiles also has from zero to four stars, which add to the quality of the film to which they are assigned. Who gets the tiles from each space is usually decided by auction, but two of the eight spaces feature ‘parties’, in which each player gets to choose one of these in turn at no cost (the player who won the previous auction gets first pick and play proceeds clockwise). The players will traverse the board four times, each trip around representing one year of movie-making. That means there are only 24 auctions and eight parties to make as many movies as you can.
One of the interesting features of this auction game is that it features a closed economy. All contracts paid out by the auction winner are divided up equally by the remaining players. Any contracts that can’t be equally divided are left in the center of the board and divided along with the proceeds of the next auction. Spending money means it goes somewhere else so how it’s even more important to pay attention to how much you spend on an auction (and how much will be left in the middle).
The movies that players are trying to make are either blue, green, or yellow which correspond roughly to the action, comedy, and drama genres. Every movie requires a director and includes a spot for an optional guest star. Other requirements may vary greatly. Every movie also comes with a number of stars, based presumably on the quality of the script. When a player places all of the required tiles on a movie, it’s “in the can” and he counts up the total number of stars on the movie and the placed tiles and takes a corresponding scoring tile. Finishing a movie also means you get a new movie card, if there are still any left. There are a limited amount of scoring tiles (two for most values) and if they are already gone, he will have to take the next lower tile and score less points. Finishing first will often score you more points and counts as a tie-breaker when deciding who wins awards.
Speaking of awards, they are one of the most thematic and entertaining parts of the game. Awards for the first movie in each category reward you with five points, as do “best movie” awards for the first three years. The major awards are worth ten points each and are all given out when the game ends after year four. These awards are for best blue, green, and yellow film, best film overall, worst film, and best director (all of a player’s director stars for finished movies are added together). Everyone adds their awards to the amount of stars they garnered from finishing movies and the highest score wins.
The thing that I like most about this game is that it lies in the sweet spot of having enough strategy to entertain true gamers, while not being so daunting that family members would never dare to play. The theme of the game lies more in the board design and the names the game uses than in the actual game mechanics, but it is an inviting one and adds to the enjoyment of the game. The fact that the actors and movies are puns on those that are well-known adds to the appeal of the theme. The game is well-produced and easy to learn and play. Overall I score this game a 7.5 out of 10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)