Saturday, June 27, 2009

Friday Night Gaming: Antike & Family Business

June 26, 2009
During the week, four of us made characters for an rpg, Bones, that Merwin was going to run. Only, Merwin didn't think he was running this week. :/

So, we played board games instead.

Antike
Coming off our game last week, it seemed like a good idea to play again while the rules were still fresh. We turned over the board and used the Mediterranean map this time. As Rome, I had Merwin's Germany to the north and Brian's Carthage to the south. Figuring that I had to move quickly ahead of Brian, I moved into the Iberian peninsula and took Sardinia. This boxed Brian in, who did manage to take Sicily-slash-Southern Italy. Meanwhile, as predicted, Merwin simply developed without expanding and we had a defacto demilitarized zone between us. Robert, as Greece, expanded to the north and east until he ran into Ian's Phoenicians.

Because of the rondel, Antike makes it very difficult to take swift military action. And even when forces are finally built up toward the end game, the brutal one-for-one combat system takes a heavy toll on any aggressor. So, like last time, there was little conflict until the end. By then, Ian in his safe corner was able to amass a slight lead and good momentum. Brian went after him, but it was too little, too late. In fact, as predicted, it meant I attacked him a little while later. We were able to put off Ian's victory by buying up the last temples, but Ian sacked one of Robert's temples for a much needed victory point, and then it was just a matter of waiting a few turns to buy up his missing technologies.

Two weeks in a row, there was significant end-game calculations and king making. Once someone gets within striking distance of winning, the end game becomes calculable. This time, we didn't even play out the last round because we couldn't stop Ian.* We've seen similar endings to Vinci and Mare Nostrum (though we've had a few surprise, sneaky wins there). I don't think it's fair to complain about this element of the game. You see it in racing games (most recently, Snow Tails) and abstract games ("mate in 5"). And it's our own damn fault for how we played in the early and mid-game anyway. But given the personal sacrifice that one or two players have to make (there was no way Merwin or I could stop Ian, except when we built temples) to try to stop a leader, it can lead to bad feelings, king making, and not an enjoyable end to the game.

Part of the problem is that since you can't lose vp in Antike, bashing the leader isn't an option the way it is in other games. You might slow them down. A bit. But it's probably not worth it. But not doing anything--not even trying to go after the leader--doesn't seem like a good option, either. I don't know if there is a good solution of even if a solution should be sought.

*: For the record, I could have won a turn later, and it would have taken Robert two turns.

Family Business
We desperately needed a filler, and Merwin pulled out this game from his achives. It was a favorite of his from college. But as a game design, I don't think it has stood the test of time.

My first issue was with the "pre-Magic" card design. Like Fluxx, this is a card game in which all the cards have special functions. There are attacks that send your mobsters to the "to be killed line" (an inspiration for Guillotine, perhaps?), defense cards, which don't work against some attacks, cards that remove your guys from the "to be killed line," and counters for those cards as well. Unfortunately, the cards only list the name of the card--not what they do. For that, you have to look them up in the rule book. Which meant that as newbies, we didn't know what the cards did and made several mistakes. Experienced players wouldn't have a problem (though even Merwin made a mistake or two) and the reference card at least makes a stab at explaining what can or can't be countered. I see that the 2008 edition seems to address this issue, thankfully.

But really, my biggest problem with the game is that it is an early-eighties design that hasn't aged well. The only tactic is "attack people you think can't counter it," and the only strategy is "draw good cards."

The shining moments of the game is when we ganged up on Ian, eliminating him first as payback for Antike. And later, Robert eliminated both himself and Merwin with one play. And perhaps that's really the point of this lightweight, back-stabbing game. Brian and I were left to fight it out, but we didn't remember a crucial rule (essentially sending the game into "sudden death") and so we don't know who should have won. But I lost.

Like Red Dragon Inn, it's all about attacking and eliminating other players. But it lacks the humor and mixed card play of that more recent game. Bang! has hidden roles and special powers. Hell, even Guillotine has set collection to liven up the strategy. I simply can't recommend it over those other games.

Labels:

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Friday Night Gaming: Antike

June 19, 2009

Antike
Most of us had played once before, a few years ago, not long after we first played Mare Nostrum. It was new to Brian, so he spent some time going of the rules on his own while we talked about other stuff.*

This is another civilization-building and expansion game with some interesting mechanisms. You gain victory points when you reach certain achievements, such as establishing 5 (or 10, 15, etc.) cities or building 3 (or 6, 9, etc.) temples, controlling 7 (or 14) sea spaces, or being the first to purchase one of the 8 technologies (4 basic and 4 advanced). The hardest points to earn are those from destroying opponent's temples. The first to a preset number of points (based on number of players) wins.

Each land space is marked with one of three resources: Iron, Marble, and Gold. Each turn, everyone also gets a Coin, which acts as one of any resource. Having a city in the region gives you one of that resource, three if you have built a temple (with Marble) there. You can build a city for one of each resource, but only if you have a unit already there (which requires Iron to build). So what tends to happen is that people expand territory, establish cities, build temples, and buy technology (with Gold) until they have to start attacking other players.

Combat is deterministic and brutal. Units (you have both ships and legions) destroy each other on a one-for-one basis. Cities require an additional unit, Temples two more beyond that. So if you wanted to sack a temple, you have to send in four units plus an additional unit for every defending unit occupying the region.

What we saw this time was an extreme build up of forces between Robert and Merwin, but neither attacked each other. Hell, I was completely vulnerable to Robert and he could have wiped me out, but by then, it would have left him vulnerable to Merwin and/or Brian. Eventually, Robert made his push and destroyed a few of Merwin's temple. Unfortunately, this ended up giving the game to Ian.

Merwin had a temple-focused strategy, eventually building 9 of the suckers. And with a limited number of temples available, it got so no one could build more. I was trying to take a balanced approach, but switched to taking technology before Ian could. Brian maintained his balanced strategy. Ian never attacked anyone, but was able to concentrate on technology. He was prevented from building more temples, but once one of Merwin's was destroyed and put back in the box, I was able to build his third temple for the win. Had Brian or I been more aggressive against Ian, things would have been different, but then the high cost of attacking makes this a very difficult trigger to pull.

We had an interruption in the game when Max decided that leaving the house and going to play in the neighboorhood without telling anyone was a good idea. A search party was gathered and things went on hold for a while until the wayward child was found.

*: At one point, there was a heated discussion of whether an imaginary number like 3+2i is "between" 1 and 10. I maintained that it isn't, but Brian argued it is. It was agreed that the next time someone asks us to "pick a number between 1 and 10," we'd have to ask what they meant by "between."

Labels:

Friday, June 19, 2009

Presentations

I spend much of my professional time creating and delivering presentations using PowerPoint. Most I give myself, but I also create them for sales to deliver to customers. I definitely have my own opinions about how it should be done, what makes a good presentation, etc. And this video from cnet does a pretty good job covering the basics and biggest mistakes people make.



I must admit that I am often guilty of making my bullets too long and wordy, though not compared to many people. My only defense is that customers often want a copy of the presentation, and so without my lovely speaking voice to accompany the slides, the whole thing does have to stand up on its own. Sure, a recorded and saved webinar or voice-over would compensate, but no one I know wants to sit through those more than once. And it definitely doesn't work with internal sales presentations.

I also never use embedded video--my topics do not lend themselves to it.

To the second-to-last point, "Type matters," I have this to add: Use the effing template. I cannot tell you how many hours I've spent fixing presentations whose templates have been ignored or abused. Spending the initial time to design a good template not only saves a lot of time later, but provides a consistent look to all future presentations as well. But you knew that.

Labels: