

An Old-School Board Game Goes Viral Among Silicon Valley's Techie Crowd - andrewpbrett
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126092289275692825.html

======
misuba
Settlers isn't very good. The game is largely all due to luck after the
initial placement of pieces; get that part wrong and you'll be spending 45 to
90 minutes repeatedly asking anyone if they can trade you that one resource
nobody can get, and repeatedly hearing "no." (The 45-to-90 is conservative; if
your game contains one of those knobs who drags trading out into elaborate
haggling over resources-to-be-named-later, God help you.)

Of course, the luck in Settlers is actually why it appeals to people. Nobody
likes feeling like they lost because they played poorly or because somebody
else is better than they are. That said, there are games like Carcassonne and
Ticket To Ride that actually balance luck and skill, and so help to provide
that social insurance against feeling pathetic while still making the time
spent making decisions actually feel like it was worth something.

~~~
nas
Yeah, I find the article humorous because of that. It's not a great game
(well, maybe great compared to traditional North American board games). I get
the impression that these guys are trying to be cool by playing and the WSJ
thinks they are hip by covering it. Maybe that's too harsh but that's the vibe
I get.

There are lots of great board games out there, check out
<http://www.boardgamegeek.com/browse/boardgame>. I like Puerto Rico myself
although I would say it's too tactical to be a good simulation of running a
business.

Update: I haven't played it yet but "Power Grid" is on my purchase list and
probably would be good for the entrepreneurial types. There is a "Board games
with Scott" video on it (with the designer, cool).

~~~
eggoa
Power Grid is good. Less random chance, less trying to trick your friends into
making bad trades.

------
JacobAldridge
I've seen Settlers of Catan at my local puzzle store, where they promote its
popularity. Any personal experiences here about whether this is worth buying
it and introducing it to friends to play (especially over options like Risk,
Cashflow, or even Monopoly which has less of a 'I don't know this game'
resistance)?

~~~
RevRal
Out of all the games that we've played, none have been funner than Munchkin.

The diplomacy aspects of this simple card game don't become apparent until you
start playing.

~~~
misuba
The diplomacy is what game fans call "petty diplomacy;" that is, you have to
smack somebody and there's no compelling in-game reason to smack anyone in
particular, so you default to smacking the guy who smacked you last, or the
guy who's ahead. This can be fun, but it isn't exactly the game itself that
brought that fun to the table.

As for the humor on the cards, you'll have seen it all in two plays
(especially since the game drags on for a while). This explains the healthy
market for expansion sets.

------
Calamitous
So there seems to be a lot of more interesting board games than I ever
realized, but they all seem to require 4-6 players and take over 90 minutes to
play. Juggling two full-time work schedules and a toddler old makes these
restrictions a non-starter.

Does anybody know of a good tactical game, preferably playable by two people
who _used_ to have time for Risk and Monopoly, that can be finished generally
in about an hour?

~~~
alanthonyc
Not quite what you're looking for, but Settlers can actually be played by 3
people and usually lasts for less than two hours.

It's designed so that the longer the games goes, the more likely it is to end.
Also, three seems to be a reasonable minimum number of people for a "social"
game.

------
mreid
For kicks, play a game of Settlers with a New Zealander and ask them if they
have wood for sheep. ;)

------
rms
I'll play Diplomacy with people once I make it out to the west coast.

~~~
vlad
Worst game ever.

