When we find out we got a rule wrong, if we can undo it without a lot of hassle we'll do that. Otherwise, we just finish the round playing like that with the knowledge that we will play "properly" from next round on
The worst part is when it's been soo long since you've played the game and everyone forgets the rules. It had been so long since we had played Betrayal at House on Hill... it took a good hour to remember how to play..
I love your continued emphasis on how wholesome this hobby is and should be. Just makes me very happy to be reminded why board games bring me so much joy
I was keen to see what games in my collection have the lowest rankings. I'm not including any games I have, but haven't played yet - also not including games that came out his year (which may not have enough votes to give a stable ranking): UNO: 22371 Fantastic Gymnastic: 20121 Tellstones: 16159 Wallamoppi: 11326 Cherry Picking: 8359 -Rodney
Tellstones is very cool, but difficult to find. You made our lives hard by doing a video on it, Rodney! XD Then we had to hunt it down. XD I found out the production company directly sells it, though, so far as I still know, which is great.
I don't play board games often enough to justifying a new one that I might not ever get to play over getting an expansion for a game that my group already likes to play.
If any of us realize someone is playing the game incorrectly we generally point it out, confirm the correct method, and then continue to play the rest of the game in the way that seems most fair based on the impact of whatever was played wrong. No one accuses anyone of cheating and no one takes it personally if a rules mistake is pointed out. Generally we all know each other well and will enjoy being able to hang out and play a game together regardless of a rules mistake or win/lose.
I always enjoy the thinky-ness and thoughtfulness of these. I agree, the most important thing is the relationships with those who are at the gaming table. When I'm teaching a game, I try to be super attentive to what the players are doing the first few turns to catch something, but sometimes there's still those misses. I know that I really struggle to keep game rules in my head, too. When I play with someone with a lot of difficulty (like memory loss or mental challenge), I try to really pick & choose what to point out, to help them have a satisfying game experience that they will love. In the end, it's not important to me whether we kept the rules like they were commandments if it helped everyone have a great time. :)
Low ranked or obscure loves: Palaces trick taking is pretty cool actually, Kerplunk & Don't Break the Ice (loved as a kid), Fast Forward Fortress, Matter of Fact, Vanished!, Bethel Woods, String Safari
Are expansions worth it? Most accurate answer: it depends on the specific base game, the specific expansion and the specific gaming preference of the gamer.
When we notice a player playing a rule wrong (never intentionally, I don't play with such people), we let them know the right rule and they apologize and we keep playing the rest of the game with the right rule as if it were nothing... And then if ever they won the game and feel sorry for it, we put an asterisk next to their score and everyone has a good laugh about it, which removes any potential bad feeling. And yes it happened to me as well and it made me feel better and you can be sure that rule will never be wrong again ever 😉
I think a lot of people underestimate what happens when you release a product into the wild. Even if you had ten thousand people testing it, when one or several orders of magnitude more people get their hands on it, a boat load of them WILL use it in ways that you would never have considered. I think expansions often deal with plugging those holes: components+rules for extra players, fixing balance, providing more variety or complexity for people who kept playing long after you thought they'd get bored, etcetera. But then there are also the cynical expansions that are 90% cosmetic with a few meeples and half a page of rules thrown in that the publisher hopes will entice you enough to pay for the cosmetic stuff that you don't need or want.
I often game with my siblings and their spouses, which means our player count is usually between 4 and 7. That means I'll almost always buy an expansion if it increases player count for a game that I enjoy playing. Unfortunately I also fall victim to "crowdfunding frenzy" and end up with complete collections of games that I really wouldn't have been able to justify buying expansions for otherwise. Live and learn... or not.
Agree 100% with you on expansions. Mostly Nay… some expansions I do get, more (different) sheets for roll and writes (i.e. welcome to … Halloween, Winter, Zombies, etc.). I’m a sucker for those… 🤷🏽♂️
I think the biggest problem for me with expansions is the rule books... So many of them are like 'learn the base game, now here's everything you need to unlearn, and here's other new stuff to learn'... This doesn't lend itself at all to teaching the game to a new player, nor for those trying to refresh their memory and learn an expansion at the same time. I think a better approach would be to provide a replacement rulebook with the expansion that teaches the game as a complete game with the expansion rules included, but highlight anything that is new or different from the core game so that those extremely familiar can quickly identify the differences.
I love expansions, I have a small (less than thirty) collection and getting more out of a game I already like excites me more than getting a brand new game. At home my wife and I play a game many times rather than trying to learn something new very often and I know when I go to game night I’ll often get the chance to try something new. I have enough examples of games I’ve played many times where I’ve critically misunderstood the rules, and if I point out to someone that they’ve done the same I’m quick to share an embarrassing story of how I discovered how to play Ticket to Ride properly. Low rated games, I’ll have to look through my collection on BGG, but there are a few polarizing games I love, particularly Tapestry and Pendulum. I understand why they don’t get as much love but the things people complain about either don’t bother me or actually make the game better for my personal experience. I try to avoid online discussions about them though because I don’t like to argue and am more likely to second guess my own enjoyment than to actually give others something to think about.
Thanks for the video! _Expansions:_ In general, if you want more replay value of the game you enjoy, then look into the expansion. Research especially helps to find what is added to bolster the experience for the game and the ones playing it. _Playing it Wrong:_ Mistakes happen. Whether it happens during or after the game, then we learn and adjust for the remainder of the game and/or future games. Of course, it's when the game is more "a learning experience" than "for bragging rights." Kinda similar to if a player needs to depart midgame; the game gets adjusted so it can be finished out or the game could end at that point. Again, part of a "learning experience"-to know and then later be readier to play knowing what to expect. _Low-Rated Games:_ I still own a number of nostalgia games (and some of their spin-offs) like Monopoly, Uno, Yahtzee and Set; I'm not ashamed to say I'm still open to playing them, as I grew up with them before getting into euro/strategy games several years ago. Even owning a number of low-ranked roll-and-writes in my fondness of the mechanism; games like Balloon Pop (22230), Kingsburg Dice (22016), Wizard Würfelspiel (20435), Space Invaders Dice (18197), and Ripple Rush (13522). Otherwise, I will say Armonia (14089). It's a rather recent game by Uwe Rosenberg, a spin-off set in the Sagani universe. It is a dice-chucker where you roll seven standard dice Yahtzee-style towards being the first to traverse and complete four of the six paths. Each path consists of a trail requiring a set of the number (1, 2, 3,... or 6) and two temples each requiring a pentomino-shape pattern created by the dice results. One to give a try for a light-hearted experience by one of board gaming's top comprehensive designers.
Great video! You had great answers to every question. I don’t know what our lowest ranked games are in our collection but I do know that my kids tend to enjoy games that are often criticized by regular gamers. Charterstone and Discover Lands Unknown got knocked on a lot of content creator reviews but nevertheless, those are some of my kids top games of all times.
I generally like expansions for deck builders. more cards means more variety. and for lighter family type games Iike expansions that add modules. Usually one module for extra cards, one for player powers to make the game less symmetrical, one module to streamline or fix a problem, one for an extra player and one with some extra rules. these are great for more variety and to inside everything for the gamer crowd who like some heavier games and can enjoy everything at once without feeling lost.
I have a few high numbers in my collection, the lowest ranked being Pass The Pigs (rank 22,303). I love this one because it fits in my pocket and people can play it while very drunk. I also own Handy (rank:14,650) which is a really funny dexterity game. This game gives the kind of laughs that you'd expect - but never get, from Twister. I feel it is also worth mentioning Stars Align(10,755) and Panakizhi(N/A) which are wonderful little abstract strategy games.
'Magic Dance' is I think my lowest ranged that I'm not disturbed about. It is a sorry or Ludo game were all peaces are black and you only know which ones have your color at the beginning, if you have an incredible memory or when you turn them around and look at the bottom of the pieces. I really enjoy this game never had a dull play of this. Probably you need one of the higher player counts.
One of my favorite games is "Not Alone" published by Stronghold Games designed by Ghislaine Masson. The game provides different experiences at different player counts, and is just fun for a small group of people. We play this at every family gathering. Wish it was rated higher.
To just answer the basic question posed by the title: yes. Obviously it depends on the type of game and if an expansion is fitting, but games like Arkham Horror and Marvel Champions thrive in expansions. Obviously those are LCGs so it comes with the territory but if we’re not talking about those, we can use the new Star Wars: Outer Rim expansion as an example. The base game was very barebones and lacking of content. The expansion turned it into one of my favorite board games of all time. I pray that FFG releases more content for it. Another note is that if a game is so good by itself that it feels the extra content is unnecessary, I typically won’t buy it unless I really want to try it. Catan is a great example of that. Great video guys!
Counting only hobby games, looks like Pendulum (2904) is my lowest rated game, I got it primarily for the solo mode since I expect to have trouble finding other players and I’ve enjoyed playing it that way but I’ve also had a lot of fun playing it with my sister when I visit her. I find the resource management very satisfying with the advanced characters and the timers encourage an interesting rhythm that keeps me engaged. Monique and Naveen from Before You Play inspired me to give it a try but I did way for a sale, figuring its lack of popularity could work to my benefit. Wish I had Matthew Jude’s confidence in his collection, I’m normally afraid to bring it up, haha.
If we have a rule wrong. If easy to correct we correct, but if someone else benefited by the interpretation then we keep it the same for the entire game and hope to play better next time. Happened last week w a couple cards in Prodigals Club
All too often an expansion is cut content. It's cut for balance and scope (needing more time for testing) or to charge more for what should have been in the base game.
Other times they are cut because it would cost too much to include the extras in the base game (which could hurt sales), or it might add more complication than the publishers want for their target audience.
On wrong rules - most of the time I'm playing with fellow gamers who may then go on and play that same game with someone else. If they walk away thinking the game is played a certain way then it will cause issues later on. If it's early to mid-game and we've realized we screwed up, we either restart or play on with the correct rules, sometimes penalizing ourselves for doing the wrong thing when appropriate. As with all things, know your audience, know the sort of game you're playing. The more complex the game is the more it matters you get the details right.
I believe the lowest bgg-ranked games i own are: Ars Alchemia - 5,016 Elo Darkness - 5,560 Battle for Biternia - 8,333 phoenix covenant - 15,358 Ars Alchemia is a really light, but nice gateway worker placement game. You collect recipes, collect resources, gather helpers, and then craft them with alchemy to get the most points! The cards in the game are also printed in dual english and japanese, and while niche it can be great if you have japanese speaking friends or want to join a language exchange group and need something to break the ice, for example. Elo darkness and Battle for biternia are good MOBA simulating boardgames. Elo Darkness focuses more on directly translating each piece of the experience into boardgame format with incredible art, while battle for biternia has a beautiful 8-bit style and extrapolates the genre into focusing on synergies between units to overwhelm the enemy, while still trying to destroy the opposing base. Phoenix covenant is a deck construction, tactics style game that really simulates tactics RPG style videogames well. Unit card sides can have weak or strong points to make them take more or less damage, meaning facing really matters, while magic and unit abilties can effect groups of grid spaces on the board. The two resource types in the game (magic and command, used to cast magic and summon units, respectively) natively ramp up every round., which can lead to crazy rounds at the end of the game if you don't destroy the opponent's base quickly. While I like ars alchemia for being accessible, the other 3 I really think bring something very unique that I have never seen to their respective genres, and I don't expect to get rid of them anytime soon. Otherwise, I think BGG is a great reference tool, but I really try to just look into any game i find interesting and base it on its own merits first before looking into aggregate ratings. You can really miss some hidden gems if you don't!
Lowest ranked games in my collection are all the "classics" like Candy Land and Monopoly. Lowest modern games are The Oregon Trail and Samurai Jack: Back to the Past, both of which were gifts and neither of which I've played yet.
I just got rid of Oregon Trail. I recommend playing it once if you have nostalgia for the video game, but... let's just say it's a game that I never want to play again 😄
I love expansions that give "breadth" to the game, like extra maps, extra Dixit cards etc., something that you can throw in the very first game with someone without any issues. I also like expansions that feel as if they should've been included in the game in the first place, like Inns & Cathedrals for Carcassonne, or the Quests for Escape! Curse of the Temple. I'm not a huge fan of expansions that add a lot of extra "modules" so you need to first pick from the menu before even getting to play, or any expansions that "bloat" the game, exactly for the reason stated in the video - if the game doesn't get played much, with added complexity it's either bound to get played even less. If the game DOES get played much, then more expansions the merrier of course, but let's be honest, with large collections and continual influx of new games the games that actually get 10+ plays today are rarer than the dodo. Sometimes though it's pretty hard to fight that OCD. :)
Viticulture is an awesome game and Tuscany definily improves the experience! Played it for the first time last week and now I don't need to play the base game anymore. Although it is very possible to win the game if you just focus on getting more visitor cards!
Expansions... it depends on the game. Flamme Rouge peloton gets it from 4P to 6P and it's a game that plays fast at 6P. One criticism of crowdfunding that I partly agree with, is that you often have to make a 'one opportunity only' decision on expansions before you've even played a single game of it.
That is very true. I've been in that dilemma before of like, "What if I don't like this game, and now I have 3 expansions for it before I've even played it?!"
Expansions for extra players can be useful as well as those that extend the playability. I really need to justify the usefulness against buying another new game.
I think it depends how far into the game we are, but definitely at the end of the game you need to point out the mistake. Without knowing, they'll never learn. It's always better to be corrected. If someone is going to be sensitive about playing a game wrong, I worry about them out there in this world.
When someone is doing a rule wrong I call them out on it, but I think it’s just cause I’m close with my friend group so they know it isn’t a bad thing.
For the playing rules wrong, sometimes I was "complain" about having to do the correct play (ie with your example, "Ugh, I wish we didn't have to discard sets of these cards for the action. I really want to do X.") Usually the other person will either say something like "Oh, were we supposed to?" And then, especially if I taught, I will say "did I not explain that clearly? That is my fault." And take the onus on myself for it being played wrong. Or they will silently start playing right. Or I guess they will keep going and not pay attention to what you said. Lol ... but usually that is a way to point it out without calling anyone out. Expansions depend on what is being added for me. If the base game feels "complete" and the expansion add things just to add them and it is in addition to everything from the base game (looking at you Venus Next for Terraforming Mars), then nah. But if it jump starts a slow starting game (Prelude for Terraforming Mars), is modular where you replace parts of the base game (the Teotihuacan expansions), add more options (the expansions for Hexplore It or other games that add more player characters or something), or "complete" the base game (Monsters and Minions for Roll Player), then I am totally on board.
There are 2 games on my list which are very low that I enjoy. One at 9,762 is "Oh, Fox!", a standalone game. The other at 16,718 is "Dungeon Dice Monsters", a trading figure game that only got 4 expansions. For both, I can see why people don't like them, and I agree with a few points, but they hold such a special place in my heart. Oh, Fox! is an asymmetrical hidden identity programmer about animals gathering food in a forest. The asymmetry seems rather unbalanced, and some rules interactions are in desperate need of clarification, but what's there is just such a delicious concept that I hold onto it. Dungeon Dice Monsters is a little TOO luck-heavy and yields a bit too much of a time investment for what you get (Ex.: Power level is balanced out by the RNG being less in your favor and being able to perform actions requires you to roll the corresponding symbols, and this often leads to bad luck turns with nothing to do). I like it because of its novelty to be entirely honest. Occasionally, I get to play it with someone and it can be quite nostalgic.
I will say something right then and there if there is a mistake or misunderstanding of a rule. I still do the rule book thing lol. But I will usually take the blame for not explaining it or teaching it well enough. Then I will generally invite them to read that paragraph or what ever in the rule book and add in the phrase “double check here just in case I misread or misunderstood, because that happens a lot” with a smile. Nobody is offended because I take the blame.
Thanks again Matthew for shining a light on games that potentially get a bum rap. Have you tried the trick taking card game Monster Trick/Stichling? BGG ranking 6622, come on are you kidding me, it's great! As for expansions Champions of Midgard - Valhalla YES. Ticket to Ride Europe - 1912 YES. p.s. You don't know where I can get a copy of Biblios do you?
My take on the second question is to flip it around. If I were playing a game wrong (inadvertently) and someone else noticed, would I want them to bring it up? Yes! I'd want them to correct me on the spot so I could correct my mistake and get the full game experience and make it fair for everyone. That said, when the situation is flipped, I struggle as well to know how to correct it, and almost always let it go uncorrected...weird double standard I have in my brain...
Unless it's a game you absolutely love and play a lot, it's almost never worth it. I love Robinson Crusoe, but I can't get it played ... so I have 3 unplayed expansions (two in shrink, one that was teased about being played by being opened, but then never was)
Note to self - next time Slivers tells me "aaah, I must have taught that wrong" I'll know it's code for "you're either a cheater or an idiot, and neither is welcome at my table." I appreciate the heads up on that guy - been thinking for years that there's something off about that cat... nobody is that nice on purpose, and that's saying something on a Canadian channel.
I like some expansions. If it fixes a problem (Prelude for Terraforming Mars), adds variety to a game with more of the same (Dice Throne, Age of Steam, Too Many Bones), or adds interesting depth (7 Wonders Duel: Pantheon, Food Chain Magnate: The Ketchup Mechanism). There are some expansions that just make things more fiddly without making the experience that much better, some expansions that make the game actively worse for me (loosens a tight game or makes something badly unbalanced in an unfun way), or are just unnecessary. So. It's a mixed bag and I always do a chunk of research before going in on an expansion for a game (unless it's a Kickstarter that I know I want and will be more expensive down the line.) If you like Animotions, I highly recommend Moods. A similar acting exercise, but it's reading random phrases with rolled emotions and everyone guessing which emotions. The games I own below the 6k rank are: 6545: 18NewEngland (not the best 18xx and also newish) 6859: Rolling Stock Stars (a very niche stock market game) 7979: That's a Question! (A Vlada Chvatil party game. Fun, but nothing special) 8191: 18GB (An odd and niche 18xx game) 9353: Clue (it's, ya know, Clue) 9415: Moods (the aforementioned party game. I love it with the right crowd.) 20659: Oraklos (A Splotter game. It's unplayed, but I have been seeking out all Splotter games for the collection and this one was cheap. I'm guessing it is not amazing, but still want to give it a go.)
Not counting things like Arkham Horror TCG and Final Girl (which are 90% expansions) and Villainous (where every expansion is also a standalone game), I don't have a ton of expansions in the collection. I am or will be all-in on Obsession, Root, and TMNT/Batman Adventures; a couple for Carcassonne and Machi Koro; and one for Sagrada and Fort. That's about it.
I was interested in the other interpretation of the low rated games question. What are the games in your collection that YOU like the least? and why are they in your collection?
I suppose I have to credit my answer to Brandon Herrin who posted a comment here: "Someone has to be in last place....Two teams go to the Super Bowl, and even if you aren't the winner, you still beat out every other team who didn't make it to the Super Bowl." In the same way, if I was forced to rank all my games, one of them would come in last, but it's still a game I enjoy on some level, or I would have gotten rid of it :)
@@WatchItPlayed I suppose I wondered if if there were some games that remained in the collection for other reasons. Excelent artwork, specific memories, meaningful gifts.... It's also interesting to know why the "worst game in you collection is the one to make the cut" equally what was the best game that left the collection.
@@di2g10 For me, probably one of the best and worst games still in my collection is AMBUSH! Worst, because the rule book is terrible, and the design is very dated, but best because I have a lot of younger memories tied to playing and really enjoying the game.
@@WatchItPlayed Oooh, really enjoyed AMBUSH! Back in the day when Avalon Hill was king! I pulled it out and played several scenarios of it just a few years ago and still found it enjoyable even if mechanically a little dated. Speaking of expansions... I even have all 3 of the expansions for it -- Move Out, Purple Heart, and Silver Star. IIRC, Silver Star seemed to have a few rules/scenario issues.
@@JohnClem56 I pulled it out a few months ago, determined to get the rules in my brain again, but wasn't able to give it the time it required. I will get it to the table again some day!
For the rules screw up, it depends on how many people are playing wrong. We played Viscounts of the West Kingdom and screwed up the virtue track all game. Whilst live on the internet… and realised three hours into game play. We decided to just carry on as we had and worry about it next time. Still liked it! Slivers has a great system though.
My favourite lowest ranked games are Manifest ranked10,447 and zombietown 22,208. I prefer Manifest over Ticket to Ride. Zombietown creates a sense of dread that I haven't experienced in any other game.
Are expansions worth it? 1. Depends on the game. Some expansions are unecessary or excessive, some completely fix a broken or just "okay" game(which I think is pretty messed up to get someone to spend more money to buy something that fixes your mistakes), and some do what they were meant to do, which is provide just a little bit of extra stuff to do in the game while not drastically changing the whole experience. 2. Have you played a ton of the base game? So many people want everything for a game and months after receiving the game they've still yet to take the shrink wrap off.
I like expansions that offer more variety but dont change too much. If it changes the game too much im not usually for it. Expansions for games like Empires of the North where it just adds new factions to play with are great.
The three lowest ranked games I own are all Pack-o-Games games: SHH ranked 4000+, I rate an 8! RUM ranked 6000+, I rate a 7. DIG ranked 4000+, I rate a 6.
Fun video, as always! My lowest ranked: ⁃ # 22,371 UNO - I love UNO!!! ⁃ # 9,370 Helden in der Unterwelt - Fascinating game in which you are discovering the ancient Greek underworld, tile by tile, and gaining light experience and sometimes dark experience… ⁃ # 6,811 Era of Inventions - An interesting worker placement game about inventing, patenting, and producing manufactured goods. The game suffers from poor components, but it’s still worth playing ⁃ # 4,831 Hippocrates - What???!!!?? Whoa!!???!!! Why is this marvelous new game ranked so low? You’re followers of the ancient Greek Hippocrates, setting up your own medical practices, healing as many patients as possible (with no one dying, hopefully)
For all intents and purposes I understand not being into expansions. For us hobby gamers we already own so many stuff we hardly ever play the same game more than a couple of times anyway. I often have to relearn (or at least refresh) rules, so adding expansions to that is asking for a bad time. That said, I do own about 40 expansions, all connected to games I love. I have played some of them, but less than 10 probably. The reason for owning them is, first, I love those games so I want MORE; second, some expansions add to the experience or the variety; third, getting them later can be challenging, so I jump on them once they're released, because if they get out of print it can be a challenge. In this last case, I'd be wondering what could it deliver, you know.
re: getting rules wrong, I think that's a very clever (and rather British!) way of doing it. In the middle of the game, I'll usually correct it in the moment, but am very happy to apologise for not explaining it clearly at the start.
Monopoly, stay with me here, Empire. Monopoly: Empire (#20,803), is a game that I have in my collection that I can play with somebody who has only ever played Monopoly before and is maybe intimidated by the rest of the collection. You are buying and selling modern brands like Xbox and Nerf and adding them to a billboard tower. It has more gamey aspects like swapping your topmost tile with that of another player and protecting your big tiles with tiny cheap ones. Best part, it plays in 25 mins. Will never have to play Monopoly again and have a game that people who only know Monopoly are going to be super comfortable in. £2 in a charity shop.
It depends on the game. If it "expands" the game to make it playable by more people, adds a strategic wrinkle or new scenario, adds to difficulty, or fixes the base game, I like it; if it fundamentally changes the game into something else, not so much. We use the Age of Giants expansion for Kingdomino and love it. Expansions for Small World make the game better and are painless to use. And while expansions for Formula D take up a lot of room, they add to the overall game. Viticulture basically integrated the first expansion into new additions because it both fixed the base game and made it better. Others are really just cash grabs. X-Wing miniatures is a great example. I love Star Wars and really love XWM, but the expansions broke the game so much, FF had to change the rules. I hate that.
My owned lowest ranked games are: UNO (22381 - why so low, it's not the worst game, it's just not very good), Guards! Guards A Discworld Board Game (21024 - yes, this one is pretty bad - its way to complicated and long. Good artwork, though), and Firefly: Shiny Dice (20875 - also pretty bad). I only keep Guards! Guards! because of the Discworld connection and its rarity, and would probably offload Firefly: Shiny Dice if I thought anyone would want to buy such a bad game. UNO is still good to play while chatting and drinking, because the game itself doesn't matter, it's just something to do with your hands while socializing.
If the base game requires an expansion to make it good then I'll probably have such a dislike for the base game that I'll sell it instead of ever buying an expansion. If the game fully feels flushed out but then an expansion comes along and introduces something new to think about and makes it feel fresh again then great. Too often I find now games are being sold in such a way to force people if I expansions by making the player count two to four players and requiring the expansion to play any more players which annoys me. It would be the same as seven Wonders being a three to five player game and then requiring an expansion to go to play up to the seven players.
Arkham Horror card game, Sctyhe Feneris, Dark Tower Aliance, 51st States, many more... point is expansions that improve are great, those that fix the game, okay at right price, those that are just greed suck.
My lowest ranked game is Asgard's Chosen, ranked 9,692 on BGG. It's a very good game, with terrible production and quite bad design of the tiles (the cards are really nice, though).
Buying expansions for completion is probably the wrong reason to buy them. I'm wrong for doing that soooo often. So expansions "fix" or make a game better... yeah! I don't really ever need an expansion to add variability, because I have too many board games and can just play something else. I couldn't pretend (lie) to someone over board game rules. I would just say things like, "Oh hey, I think that when you do that it should be done this way... let me check to be sure. The rules say we are supposed to do that this way... It's your first time playing and I probably didn't emphasize my understanding of it enough during the teach. Whoops, I think you may have missed a rule there.. no biggy... let's just finish the game like that or do it the other way from now on." often with follow ups of... "do you know how many times I've played Ethnos wrong? So many times that my board game group has turned Ethnos into the verb that describes us not playing a game quite write... We Ethnosed that game." The lowest rated game I own is Dune 1984... which is a 5.75 ranked #14615. It is an experience that always has random results that tell wild stories. I love it. Next, there is Oktoberfest a 6.0 at #16537 which is an OK game about the greatest substance on Earth, beer and therefore it stays. Rice Dice is a 6.05 at #10645 that is an OK game but I tried to make a funny video about it... ruclips.net/video/21LNbkYuZOU/видео.html ...so it is staying. Then there is Rattle, Battle, Grab the Loot 6.13 #4828... stupid fun with lots of rules for big kids... but not serious.
Low rankings don't mean anything. Someone has to be in last place....Two teams go to the Super Bowl, and even if you aren't the winner, you still beat out every other team who didn't make it to the Super Bowl.
Are expansions worth it? Yes, if they are done well. I can't imagine ever playing base Dune: Imperium again after what Rise of Ix did to the game. Phenomenal expansion. Food Chain Magnet's Ketchup expansion? Eh... no thanks.
I like to teach games to make new players win, or at the least make them feel like they weren't cheated if they lose. I definitely point out opportunities where they can take the lead and/or leave me in an unfavorable position, and explain why that is. This way they get a really good sense for the game and I'm not playing for them.
When we find out we got a rule wrong, if we can undo it without a lot of hassle we'll do that. Otherwise, we just finish the round playing like that with the knowledge that we will play "properly" from next round on
same
We finish whole game using rule, see if better and allow balance of the broken rule to be used by all since it was used already.
We did this same thing this past weekend! -Rodney
The worst part is when it's been soo long since you've played the game and everyone forgets the rules. It had been so long since we had played Betrayal at House on Hill... it took a good hour to remember how to play..
I love your continued emphasis on how wholesome this hobby is and should be. Just makes me very happy to be reminded why board games bring me so much joy
I was keen to see what games in my collection have the lowest rankings. I'm not including any games I have, but haven't played yet - also not including games that came out his year (which may not have enough votes to give a stable ranking):
UNO: 22371
Fantastic Gymnastic: 20121
Tellstones: 16159
Wallamoppi: 11326
Cherry Picking: 8359
-Rodney
Tellstones is very cool, but difficult to find. You made our lives hard by doing a video on it, Rodney! XD Then we had to hunt it down. XD I found out the production company directly sells it, though, so far as I still know, which is great.
The last question was fantastic. I hadn't heard of any of the games you mentioned at the end; it was like a hidden gems list.
I love your friend's approach to rules correction! How gracious.
I don't play board games often enough to justifying a new one that I might not ever get to play over getting an expansion for a game that my group already likes to play.
If any of us realize someone is playing the game incorrectly we generally point it out, confirm the correct method, and then continue to play the rest of the game in the way that seems most fair based on the impact of whatever was played wrong. No one accuses anyone of cheating and no one takes it personally if a rules mistake is pointed out. Generally we all know each other well and will enjoy being able to hang out and play a game together regardless of a rules mistake or win/lose.
Fields of Green is added to the 50 games in Matthew's top ten ;)
I always enjoy the thinky-ness and thoughtfulness of these. I agree, the most important thing is the relationships with those who are at the gaming table. When I'm teaching a game, I try to be super attentive to what the players are doing the first few turns to catch something, but sometimes there's still those misses. I know that I really struggle to keep game rules in my head, too. When I play with someone with a lot of difficulty (like memory loss or mental challenge), I try to really pick & choose what to point out, to help them have a satisfying game experience that they will love. In the end, it's not important to me whether we kept the rules like they were commandments if it helped everyone have a great time. :)
Low ranked or obscure loves: Palaces trick taking is pretty cool actually, Kerplunk & Don't Break the Ice (loved as a kid), Fast Forward Fortress, Matter of Fact, Vanished!, Bethel Woods, String Safari
Are expansions worth it? Most accurate answer: it depends on the specific base game, the specific expansion and the specific gaming preference of the gamer.
When we notice a player playing a rule wrong (never intentionally, I don't play with such people), we let them know the right rule and they apologize and we keep playing the rest of the game with the right rule as if it were nothing... And then if ever they won the game and feel sorry for it, we put an asterisk next to their score and everyone has a good laugh about it, which removes any potential bad feeling. And yes it happened to me as well and it made me feel better and you can be sure that rule will never be wrong again ever 😉
That's an excellent Disgruntled Goat reference ya got there, Matthew.
I think a lot of people underestimate what happens when you release a product into the wild. Even if you had ten thousand people testing it, when one or several orders of magnitude more people get their hands on it, a boat load of them WILL use it in ways that you would never have considered. I think expansions often deal with plugging those holes: components+rules for extra players, fixing balance, providing more variety or complexity for people who kept playing long after you thought they'd get bored, etcetera. But then there are also the cynical expansions that are 90% cosmetic with a few meeples and half a page of rules thrown in that the publisher hopes will entice you enough to pay for the cosmetic stuff that you don't need or want.
I often game with my siblings and their spouses, which means our player count is usually between 4 and 7. That means I'll almost always buy an expansion if it increases player count for a game that I enjoy playing. Unfortunately I also fall victim to "crowdfunding frenzy" and end up with complete collections of games that I really wouldn't have been able to justify buying expansions for otherwise. Live and learn... or not.
Agree 100% with you on expansions. Mostly Nay… some expansions I do get, more (different) sheets for roll and writes (i.e. welcome to … Halloween, Winter, Zombies, etc.). I’m a sucker for those… 🤷🏽♂️
I think the biggest problem for me with expansions is the rule books... So many of them are like 'learn the base game, now here's everything you need to unlearn, and here's other new stuff to learn'... This doesn't lend itself at all to teaching the game to a new player, nor for those trying to refresh their memory and learn an expansion at the same time. I think a better approach would be to provide a replacement rulebook with the expansion that teaches the game as a complete game with the expansion rules included, but highlight anything that is new or different from the core game so that those extremely familiar can quickly identify the differences.
That is a very good point.
My dear friend Dave (I suspect) catches me misplaying a rule and tells me after it is done to spare my feelings. Haha
Fun video, as always!
My lowest ranked games from my small (
I love expansions, I have a small (less than thirty) collection and getting more out of a game I already like excites me more than getting a brand new game. At home my wife and I play a game many times rather than trying to learn something new very often and I know when I go to game night I’ll often get the chance to try something new.
I have enough examples of games I’ve played many times where I’ve critically misunderstood the rules, and if I point out to someone that they’ve done the same I’m quick to share an embarrassing story of how I discovered how to play Ticket to Ride properly.
Low rated games, I’ll have to look through my collection on BGG, but there are a few polarizing games I love, particularly Tapestry and Pendulum. I understand why they don’t get as much love but the things people complain about either don’t bother me or actually make the game better for my personal experience. I try to avoid online discussions about them though because I don’t like to argue and am more likely to second guess my own enjoyment than to actually give others something to think about.
Thanks for the video!
_Expansions:_ In general, if you want more replay value of the game you enjoy, then look into the expansion. Research especially helps to find what is added to bolster the experience for the game and the ones playing it.
_Playing it Wrong:_ Mistakes happen. Whether it happens during or after the game, then we learn and adjust for the remainder of the game and/or future games. Of course, it's when the game is more "a learning experience" than "for bragging rights." Kinda similar to if a player needs to depart midgame; the game gets adjusted so it can be finished out or the game could end at that point. Again, part of a "learning experience"-to know and then later be readier to play knowing what to expect.
_Low-Rated Games:_ I still own a number of nostalgia games (and some of their spin-offs) like Monopoly, Uno, Yahtzee and Set; I'm not ashamed to say I'm still open to playing them, as I grew up with them before getting into euro/strategy games several years ago. Even owning a number of low-ranked roll-and-writes in my fondness of the mechanism; games like Balloon Pop (22230), Kingsburg Dice (22016), Wizard Würfelspiel (20435), Space Invaders Dice (18197), and Ripple Rush (13522).
Otherwise, I will say Armonia (14089). It's a rather recent game by Uwe Rosenberg, a spin-off set in the Sagani universe. It is a dice-chucker where you roll seven standard dice Yahtzee-style towards being the first to traverse and complete four of the six paths. Each path consists of a trail requiring a set of the number (1, 2, 3,... or 6) and two temples each requiring a pentomino-shape pattern created by the dice results. One to give a try for a light-hearted experience by one of board gaming's top comprehensive designers.
Really nice to get your thoughts on all the topics Aba!
Great video! You had great answers to every question. I don’t know what our lowest ranked games are in our collection but I do know that my kids tend to enjoy games that are often criticized by regular gamers. Charterstone and Discover Lands Unknown got knocked on a lot of content creator reviews but nevertheless, those are some of my kids top games of all times.
I generally like expansions for deck builders. more cards means more variety.
and for lighter family type games Iike expansions that add modules. Usually one module for extra cards, one for player powers to make the game less symmetrical, one module to streamline or fix a problem, one for an extra player and one with some extra rules. these are great for more variety and to inside everything for the gamer crowd who like some heavier games and can enjoy everything at once without feeling lost.
As for expansions, I buy them for games I play a lot. Usually if I have played a game 10+ times then I consider getting expansions for it.
I have a few high numbers in my collection, the lowest ranked being Pass The Pigs (rank 22,303). I love this one because it fits in my pocket and people can play it while very drunk.
I also own Handy (rank:14,650) which is a really funny dexterity game. This game gives the kind of laughs that you'd expect - but never get, from Twister.
I feel it is also worth mentioning Stars Align(10,755) and Panakizhi(N/A) which are wonderful little abstract strategy games.
'Magic Dance' is I think my lowest ranged that I'm not disturbed about. It is a sorry or Ludo game were all peaces are black and you only know which ones have your color at the beginning, if you have an incredible memory or when you turn them around and look at the bottom of the pieces. I really enjoy this game never had a dull play of this. Probably you need one of the higher player counts.
One of my favorite games is "Not Alone" published by Stronghold Games designed by Ghislaine Masson. The game provides different experiences at different player counts, and is just fun for a small group of people. We play this at every family gathering. Wish it was rated higher.
To just answer the basic question posed by the title: yes. Obviously it depends on the type of game and if an expansion is fitting, but games like Arkham Horror and Marvel Champions thrive in expansions. Obviously those are LCGs so it comes with the territory but if we’re not talking about those, we can use the new Star Wars: Outer Rim expansion as an example. The base game was very barebones and lacking of content. The expansion turned it into one of my favorite board games of all time. I pray that FFG releases more content for it. Another note is that if a game is so good by itself that it feels the extra content is unnecessary, I typically won’t buy it unless I really want to try it. Catan is a great example of that. Great video guys!
Counting only hobby games, looks like Pendulum (2904) is my lowest rated game, I got it primarily for the solo mode since I expect to have trouble finding other players and I’ve enjoyed playing it that way but I’ve also had a lot of fun playing it with my sister when I visit her. I find the resource management very satisfying with the advanced characters and the timers encourage an interesting rhythm that keeps me engaged. Monique and Naveen from Before You Play inspired me to give it a try but I did way for a sale, figuring its lack of popularity could work to my benefit. Wish I had Matthew Jude’s confidence in his collection, I’m normally afraid to bring it up, haha.
If we have a rule wrong. If easy to correct we correct, but if someone else benefited by the interpretation then we keep it the same for the entire game and hope to play better next time. Happened last week w a couple cards in Prodigals Club
All too often an expansion is cut content. It's cut for balance and scope (needing more time for testing) or to charge more for what should have been in the base game.
Other times they are cut because it would cost too much to include the extras in the base game (which could hurt sales), or it might add more complication than the publishers want for their target audience.
On wrong rules - most of the time I'm playing with fellow gamers who may then go on and play that same game with someone else. If they walk away thinking the game is played a certain way then it will cause issues later on. If it's early to mid-game and we've realized we screwed up, we either restart or play on with the correct rules, sometimes penalizing ourselves for doing the wrong thing when appropriate. As with all things, know your audience, know the sort of game you're playing. The more complex the game is the more it matters you get the details right.
I believe the lowest bgg-ranked games i own are:
Ars Alchemia - 5,016
Elo Darkness - 5,560
Battle for Biternia - 8,333
phoenix covenant - 15,358
Ars Alchemia is a really light, but nice gateway worker placement game. You collect recipes, collect resources, gather helpers, and then craft them with alchemy to get the most points! The cards in the game are also printed in dual english and japanese, and while niche it can be great if you have japanese speaking friends or want to join a language exchange group and need something to break the ice, for example.
Elo darkness and Battle for biternia are good MOBA simulating boardgames. Elo Darkness focuses more on directly translating each piece of the experience into boardgame format with incredible art, while battle for biternia has a beautiful 8-bit style and extrapolates the genre into focusing on synergies between units to overwhelm the enemy, while still trying to destroy the opposing base.
Phoenix covenant is a deck construction, tactics style game that really simulates tactics RPG style videogames well. Unit card sides can have weak or strong points to make them take more or less damage, meaning facing really matters, while magic and unit abilties can effect groups of grid spaces on the board. The two resource types in the game (magic and command, used to cast magic and summon units, respectively) natively ramp up every round., which can lead to crazy rounds at the end of the game if you don't destroy the opponent's base quickly.
While I like ars alchemia for being accessible, the other 3 I really think bring something very unique that I have never seen to their respective genres, and I don't expect to get rid of them anytime soon.
Otherwise, I think BGG is a great reference tool, but I really try to just look into any game i find interesting and base it on its own merits first before looking into aggregate ratings. You can really miss some hidden gems if you don't!
Lowest ranked games in my collection are all the "classics" like Candy Land and Monopoly. Lowest modern games are The Oregon Trail and Samurai Jack: Back to the Past, both of which were gifts and neither of which I've played yet.
I just got rid of Oregon Trail. I recommend playing it once if you have nostalgia for the video game, but... let's just say it's a game that I never want to play again 😄
@@johnathanrhoades7751 Yeah, I've read the rules. Doesn't seem like a keeper!
I love expansions that give "breadth" to the game, like extra maps, extra Dixit cards etc., something that you can throw in the very first game with someone without any issues. I also like expansions that feel as if they should've been included in the game in the first place, like Inns & Cathedrals for Carcassonne, or the Quests for Escape! Curse of the Temple.
I'm not a huge fan of expansions that add a lot of extra "modules" so you need to first pick from the menu before even getting to play, or any expansions that "bloat" the game, exactly for the reason stated in the video - if the game doesn't get played much, with added complexity it's either bound to get played even less. If the game DOES get played much, then more expansions the merrier of course, but let's be honest, with large collections and continual influx of new games the games that actually get 10+ plays today are rarer than the dodo.
Sometimes though it's pretty hard to fight that OCD. :)
I love both Splendor and its expansions.
Own 2 games not ranked at the moment on BGG but otherwise my lowest is Micro Dojo at 7513. Harsh Shadows is next at 6296. Really enjoy them both.
Viticulture is an awesome game and Tuscany definily improves the experience! Played it for the first time last week and now I don't need to play the base game anymore. Although it is very possible to win the game if you just focus on getting more visitor cards!
Expansions... it depends on the game. Flamme Rouge peloton gets it from 4P to 6P and it's a game that plays fast at 6P. One criticism of crowdfunding that I partly agree with, is that you often have to make a 'one opportunity only' decision on expansions before you've even played a single game of it.
That is very true. I've been in that dilemma before of like, "What if I don't like this game, and now I have 3 expansions for it before I've even played it?!"
Expansions for extra players can be useful as well as those that extend the playability. I really need to justify the usefulness against buying another new game.
I think it depends how far into the game we are, but definitely at the end of the game you need to point out the mistake. Without knowing, they'll never learn. It's always better to be corrected.
If someone is going to be sensitive about playing a game wrong, I worry about them out there in this world.
My group just has the standing expectation that were going to get something wrong the first couple of times we play.
I think that's a good attitude to go in with. It's not unusual to make mistakes, so why not expect it?
Yes. Thanks.
When someone is doing a rule wrong I call them out on it, but I think it’s just cause I’m close with my friend group so they know it isn’t a bad thing.
Only if it is Too many Bones expansions.
For the playing rules wrong, sometimes I was "complain" about having to do the correct play (ie with your example, "Ugh, I wish we didn't have to discard sets of these cards for the action. I really want to do X.") Usually the other person will either say something like "Oh, were we supposed to?" And then, especially if I taught, I will say "did I not explain that clearly? That is my fault." And take the onus on myself for it being played wrong. Or they will silently start playing right. Or I guess they will keep going and not pay attention to what you said. Lol ... but usually that is a way to point it out without calling anyone out.
Expansions depend on what is being added for me. If the base game feels "complete" and the expansion add things just to add them and it is in addition to everything from the base game (looking at you Venus Next for Terraforming Mars), then nah. But if it jump starts a slow starting game (Prelude for Terraforming Mars), is modular where you replace parts of the base game (the Teotihuacan expansions), add more options (the expansions for Hexplore It or other games that add more player characters or something), or "complete" the base game (Monsters and Minions for Roll Player), then I am totally on board.
There are 2 games on my list which are very low that I enjoy. One at 9,762 is "Oh, Fox!", a standalone game. The other at 16,718 is "Dungeon Dice Monsters", a trading figure game that only got 4 expansions. For both, I can see why people don't like them, and I agree with a few points, but they hold such a special place in my heart. Oh, Fox! is an asymmetrical hidden identity programmer about animals gathering food in a forest. The asymmetry seems rather unbalanced, and some rules interactions are in desperate need of clarification, but what's there is just such a delicious concept that I hold onto it. Dungeon Dice Monsters is a little TOO luck-heavy and yields a bit too much of a time investment for what you get (Ex.: Power level is balanced out by the RNG being less in your favor and being able to perform actions requires you to roll the corresponding symbols, and this often leads to bad luck turns with nothing to do). I like it because of its novelty to be entirely honest. Occasionally, I get to play it with someone and it can be quite nostalgic.
I will say something right then and there if there is a mistake or misunderstanding of a rule. I still do the rule book thing lol. But I will usually take the blame for not explaining it or teaching it well enough. Then I will generally invite them to read that paragraph or what ever in the rule book and add in the phrase “double check here just in case I misread or misunderstood, because that happens a lot” with a smile. Nobody is offended because I take the blame.
A good approach!
Thanks again Matthew for shining a light on games that potentially get a bum rap. Have you tried the trick taking card game Monster Trick/Stichling? BGG ranking 6622, come on are you kidding me, it's great! As for expansions Champions of Midgard - Valhalla YES. Ticket to Ride Europe - 1912 YES. p.s. You don't know where I can get a copy of Biblios do you?
My take on the second question is to flip it around. If I were playing a game wrong (inadvertently) and someone else noticed, would I want them to bring it up? Yes! I'd want them to correct me on the spot so I could correct my mistake and get the full game experience and make it fair for everyone. That said, when the situation is flipped, I struggle as well to know how to correct it, and almost always let it go uncorrected...weird double standard I have in my brain...
Sounds like a desire to be empathetic on your part. Which is good!
Unless it's a game you absolutely love and play a lot, it's almost never worth it. I love Robinson Crusoe, but I can't get it played ... so I have 3 unplayed expansions (two in shrink, one that was teased about being played by being opened, but then never was)
Note to self - next time Slivers tells me "aaah, I must have taught that wrong" I'll know it's code for "you're either a cheater or an idiot, and neither is welcome at my table." I appreciate the heads up on that guy - been thinking for years that there's something off about that cat... nobody is that nice on purpose, and that's saying something on a Canadian channel.
Yes. Maybe. Sometimes.
I like some expansions. If it fixes a problem (Prelude for Terraforming Mars), adds variety to a game with more of the same (Dice Throne, Age of Steam, Too Many Bones), or adds interesting depth (7 Wonders Duel: Pantheon, Food Chain Magnate: The Ketchup Mechanism). There are some expansions that just make things more fiddly without making the experience that much better, some expansions that make the game actively worse for me (loosens a tight game or makes something badly unbalanced in an unfun way), or are just unnecessary. So. It's a mixed bag and I always do a chunk of research before going in on an expansion for a game (unless it's a Kickstarter that I know I want and will be more expensive down the line.)
If you like Animotions, I highly recommend Moods. A similar acting exercise, but it's reading random phrases with rolled emotions and everyone guessing which emotions.
The games I own below the 6k rank are:
6545: 18NewEngland (not the best 18xx and also newish)
6859: Rolling Stock Stars (a very niche stock market game)
7979: That's a Question! (A Vlada Chvatil party game. Fun, but nothing special)
8191: 18GB (An odd and niche 18xx game)
9353: Clue (it's, ya know, Clue)
9415: Moods (the aforementioned party game. I love it with the right crowd.)
20659: Oraklos (A Splotter game. It's unplayed, but I have been seeking out all Splotter games for the collection and this one was cheap. I'm guessing it is not amazing, but still want to give it a go.)
Not counting things like Arkham Horror TCG and Final Girl (which are 90% expansions) and Villainous (where every expansion is also a standalone game), I don't have a ton of expansions in the collection. I am or will be all-in on Obsession, Root, and TMNT/Batman Adventures; a couple for Carcassonne and Machi Koro; and one for Sagrada and Fort. That's about it.
Dominion needs expansions 😅
I was interested in the other interpretation of the low rated games question.
What are the games in your collection that YOU like the least? and why are they in your collection?
I suppose I have to credit my answer to Brandon Herrin who posted a comment here: "Someone has to be in last place....Two teams go to the Super Bowl, and even if you aren't the winner, you still beat out every other team who didn't make it to the Super Bowl." In the same way, if I was forced to rank all my games, one of them would come in last, but it's still a game I enjoy on some level, or I would have gotten rid of it :)
@@WatchItPlayed I suppose I wondered if if there were some games that remained in the collection for other reasons.
Excelent artwork, specific memories, meaningful gifts....
It's also interesting to know why the "worst game in you collection is the one to make the cut" equally what was the best game that left the collection.
@@di2g10 For me, probably one of the best and worst games still in my collection is AMBUSH! Worst, because the rule book is terrible, and the design is very dated, but best because I have a lot of younger memories tied to playing and really enjoying the game.
@@WatchItPlayed Oooh, really enjoyed AMBUSH! Back in the day when Avalon Hill was king! I pulled it out and played several scenarios of it just a few years ago and still found it enjoyable even if mechanically a little dated. Speaking of expansions... I even have all 3 of the expansions for it -- Move Out, Purple Heart, and Silver Star. IIRC, Silver Star seemed to have a few rules/scenario issues.
@@JohnClem56 I pulled it out a few months ago, determined to get the rules in my brain again, but wasn't able to give it the time it required. I will get it to the table again some day!
For the rules screw up, it depends on how many people are playing wrong. We played Viscounts of the West Kingdom and screwed up the virtue track all game. Whilst live on the internet… and realised three hours into game play. We decided to just carry on as we had and worry about it next time. Still liked it!
Slivers has a great system though.
Sometimes if we catch it, we'll finish the round playing according to our mistaken rule, and the play correctly after.
My favourite lowest ranked games are Manifest ranked10,447 and zombietown 22,208. I prefer Manifest over Ticket to Ride. Zombietown creates a sense of dread that I haven't experienced in any other game.
Problem is also:
*Does this include 'Standalone' expansions?*
They are their own game and can integrate
Are expansions worth it?
1. Depends on the game. Some expansions are unecessary or excessive, some completely fix a broken or just "okay" game(which I think is pretty messed up to get someone to spend more money to buy something that fixes your mistakes), and some do what they were meant to do, which is provide just a little bit of extra stuff to do in the game while not drastically changing the whole experience.
2. Have you played a ton of the base game? So many people want everything for a game and months after receiving the game they've still yet to take the shrink wrap off.
I like expansions that offer more variety but dont change too much. If it changes the game too much im not usually for it. Expansions for games like Empires of the North where it just adds new factions to play with are great.
The three lowest ranked games I own are all Pack-o-Games games: SHH ranked 4000+, I rate an 8! RUM ranked 6000+, I rate a 7. DIG ranked 4000+, I rate a 6.
Fun video, as always!
My lowest ranked:
⁃ # 22,371 UNO - I love UNO!!!
⁃ # 9,370 Helden in der Unterwelt - Fascinating game in which you are discovering the ancient Greek underworld, tile by tile, and gaining light experience and sometimes dark experience…
⁃ # 6,811 Era of Inventions - An interesting worker placement game about inventing, patenting, and producing manufactured goods. The game suffers from poor components, but it’s still worth playing
⁃ # 4,831 Hippocrates - What???!!!?? Whoa!!???!!! Why is this marvelous new game ranked so low? You’re followers of the ancient Greek Hippocrates, setting up your own medical practices, healing as many patients as possible (with no one dying, hopefully)
For all intents and purposes I understand not being into expansions. For us hobby gamers we already own so many stuff we hardly ever play the same game more than a couple of times anyway. I often have to relearn (or at least refresh) rules, so adding expansions to that is asking for a bad time.
That said, I do own about 40 expansions, all connected to games I love. I have played some of them, but less than 10 probably. The reason for owning them is, first, I love those games so I want MORE; second, some expansions add to the experience or the variety; third, getting them later can be challenging, so I jump on them once they're released, because if they get out of print it can be a challenge. In this last case, I'd be wondering what could it deliver, you know.
re: getting rules wrong, I think that's a very clever (and rather British!) way of doing it. In the middle of the game, I'll usually correct it in the moment, but am very happy to apologise for not explaining it clearly at the start.
Monopoly, stay with me here, Empire. Monopoly: Empire (#20,803), is a game that I have in my collection that I can play with somebody who has only ever played Monopoly before and is maybe intimidated by the rest of the collection. You are buying and selling modern brands like Xbox and Nerf and adding them to a billboard tower. It has more gamey aspects like swapping your topmost tile with that of another player and protecting your big tiles with tiny cheap ones. Best part, it plays in 25 mins. Will never have to play Monopoly again and have a game that people who only know Monopoly are going to be super comfortable in. £2 in a charity shop.
My lowest ranked favorite games are Cat and Chocolate, Stygian Society, and Ab Die Post
What are the best improv style games (as in snake oil, pitch storm, etc.)?
Snake Oil has always been one of my favs -Rodney
Yes
It depends on the game. If it "expands" the game to make it playable by more people, adds a strategic wrinkle or new scenario, adds to difficulty, or fixes the base game, I like it; if it fundamentally changes the game into something else, not so much. We use the Age of Giants expansion for Kingdomino and love it. Expansions for Small World make the game better and are painless to use. And while expansions for Formula D take up a lot of room, they add to the overall game. Viticulture basically integrated the first expansion into new additions because it both fixed the base game and made it better. Others are really just cash grabs. X-Wing miniatures is a great example. I love Star Wars and really love XWM, but the expansions broke the game so much, FF had to change the rules. I hate that.
I like Star Wars Outer Rim and all its expansions...
Hoax (1981) by Eon (rank 10,652) is a hidden role micro-game waaaaaaaay ahead of its time, which is not uncommon for Eon. That’s my lowest.
Some are okay for great games but some times expansions are too expensive
My owned lowest ranked games are: UNO (22381 - why so low, it's not the worst game, it's just not very good), Guards! Guards A Discworld Board Game (21024 - yes, this one is pretty bad - its way to complicated and long. Good artwork, though), and Firefly: Shiny Dice (20875 - also pretty bad). I only keep Guards! Guards! because of the Discworld connection and its rarity, and would probably offload Firefly: Shiny Dice if I thought anyone would want to buy such a bad game. UNO is still good to play while chatting and drinking, because the game itself doesn't matter, it's just something to do with your hands while socializing.
If the base game requires an expansion to make it good then I'll probably have such a dislike for the base game that I'll sell it instead of ever buying an expansion. If the game fully feels flushed out but then an expansion comes along and introduces something new to think about and makes it feel fresh again then great. Too often I find now games are being sold in such a way to force people if I expansions by making the player count two to four players and requiring the expansion to play any more players which annoys me. It would be the same as seven Wonders being a three to five player game and then requiring an expansion to go to play up to the seven players.
Arkham Horror card game, Sctyhe Feneris, Dark Tower Aliance, 51st States, many more... point is expansions that improve are great, those that fix the game, okay at right price, those that are just greed suck.
My lowest ranked game is Asgard's Chosen, ranked 9,692 on BGG.
It's a very good game, with terrible production and quite bad design of the tiles (the cards are really nice, though).
Buying expansions for completion is probably the wrong reason to buy them. I'm wrong for doing that soooo often. So expansions "fix" or make a game better... yeah! I don't really ever need an expansion to add variability, because I have too many board games and can just play something else.
I couldn't pretend (lie) to someone over board game rules. I would just say things like, "Oh hey, I think that when you do that it should be done this way... let me check to be sure. The rules say we are supposed to do that this way... It's your first time playing and I probably didn't emphasize my understanding of it enough during the teach. Whoops, I think you may have missed a rule there.. no biggy... let's just finish the game like that or do it the other way from now on." often with follow ups of... "do you know how many times I've played Ethnos wrong? So many times that my board game group has turned Ethnos into the verb that describes us not playing a game quite write... We Ethnosed that game."
The lowest rated game I own is Dune 1984... which is a 5.75 ranked #14615. It is an experience that always has random results that tell wild stories. I love it. Next, there is Oktoberfest a 6.0 at #16537 which is an OK game about the greatest substance on Earth, beer and therefore it stays. Rice Dice is a 6.05 at #10645 that is an OK game but I tried to make a funny video about it... ruclips.net/video/21LNbkYuZOU/видео.html ...so it is staying. Then there is Rattle, Battle, Grab the Loot 6.13 #4828... stupid fun with lots of rules for big kids... but not serious.
Arnak expansion yes!!!!!
Low rankings don't mean anything. Someone has to be in last place....Two teams go to the Super Bowl, and even if you aren't the winner, you still beat out every other team who didn't make it to the Super Bowl.
I like this analogy :)
Are expansions worth it? Yes, if they are done well.
I can't imagine ever playing base Dune: Imperium again after what Rise of Ix did to the game. Phenomenal expansion.
Food Chain Magnet's Ketchup expansion? Eh... no thanks.
Micro Dojo is my lowest ranked hobby game. Currently on late pledge for the base game plus expansion.
Really like Micro Dojo as well. Didnt back the expansions though
If you watch Actualol video gives you 10 reason not to buy expansions and i agree with him
Nay
Anyone else annoyed when someone teach the game also just so happens to win?
Doesn't particularly bother me - especially if they've played before. I would expect them to play better.
I like to teach games to make new players win, or at the least make them feel like they weren't cheated if they lose.
I definitely point out opportunities where they can take the lead and/or leave me in an unfavorable position, and explain why that is. This way they get a really good sense for the game and I'm not playing for them.