With some exceptions, my wife and I are mostly looking for a different gameplay experience from an expansion. The best example is where an expansion brings a cooperative experience to a competitive game, and ideally where it's really an entirely new experience. Some great examples of this include: The Missing Expedition expansion for Lost Ruins of Arnak, the Crisis expansion for Terraforming Mars Ares Expedition, the Invasion expansion for Orleans, the Solitaria expansion for Concordia, and the Viticulture World expansion for Viticulture World. I try to do a lot of research (mostly RUclips) on expansions to be sure it's worth the investment, and end up passing on most. I really appreciate when reviewers clarify whether an expansion is of the "won't ever play without" variety or if it's just "okay".
QotW: Expansions! Well, I’m often conflicted about them… On the one hand, I’m a completionist, and I want everything for a game that I love. But sometimes I feel like I HAVE to get the expansion, or I may be missing out on the “complete experience”, even though the complexity of the game will certainly increase. One that I’m certainly looking forward to is the expansion for Clank Catacombs due out later this year.
Yes, another Monday, another #JEFFWEEK I like small expansions that enhance and expand the game without changing it into something too different and adding too many additional rules. Expansions can be a mixed bag so I try to be careful when getting them. Some seem like a no brainer, but sometimes they just add complexity and more admin to an already complex game and that might mean it's a bit more of a hassle than it's worth. Bonus points if you can just add it seamlessly in the main box.
I love expansions but more because I'm a completionist than actually to play them. I'm sure they're good but I really don't play any one game enough to warrant it (although the Ark Nova expansion is wonderful).
Week was so long it was another week before I watched the video! RE Math Trades: You should let the organizer know if you haven't already (especially if the other person ghosts you). If the organizer is any good, they will keep track of things so if people are repeat offenders they can be banned.
I buy most expansions for games I have. I usually see it as a way to add more to a game I already have/love. I think the Norwegians expansion for A Feast for Odin is still one of the best. Most expansions aren't THAT good, but I can't offhand think of one that was bad or a waste that I'd picked up.
For years, we were "completionists" and had to have every expansion for every game we had, but eventually realized that we almost never played with them. Now, we tend to only pick up expansions for the games we really enjoy, and want more content for. We tend to look for expansions that expand the game without changing it completely, if that makes sense.
QotW: Recently, I realized that I'd generally prefer to spend money on a new game instead of an expansion. I overdid it on Villainous expansions that didn't get enough play. But Canvas: Reflections was worth it for me as were the Thunder Road Vendetta expansions.
I'd get an expansion if it truly added some interesting twists to the base game, an upgrade that would increase the feels. A game that I have in mind is Lost ruins of Arnak, I feel like I'd rather play it with the expansions. I love using the different characters and their various abilities. On the other hand, I am less interested in Forest shuffle expansion for now (heard there was a new coming aside of "Alpine" so I'm staying tuned)
For QotW: I have cooled off on expansions recently. I used to think I needed everything for a game to enjoy it but now it seems that more often than I would like I stop playing a game + expansion because it gets too complex or changes the base game too much. There are exceptions of course. I can't imagine playing Viticulture without expansions, Terraforming Mars without some of the expansions, Lost Ruins of Arnak, Roll Player and maybe a few more 😊
"...you just have this massive lay..." easy now! 😋 That was a good unintentional pun! Speaking of humour...I tell my wife and daughter all the time that one day they will be changing my diaper...and I will be wearing one if I need it or not! I guess your dad and I share a twisted sense of humour! Expansions...I think, that as long as the expansions augment a game or add different playability; then they are welcome. Otherwise if the expansions add no value to gameplay, they just feel like the publisher/designers are trying to wring as much cash from the consumers as possible.
Expansions are a mixed bag for me. Sometimes the added rules overhead makes me less likely to pull the game off the shelf. I think my favorite expansions add variability without bogging the game down.
Qotw: I am all for expansions. Give me all the expansions... and all the upgraded components possible. I love adding complexity to games and giving more paths to victory. I will say the one obstacle is just that when a player is learning a game it is often bad to add expansions because it overwhelms them so then more often than not I am playing with the base games. But if they have played before... then I whip out the expansions. One expansion that let me down big time was the Scythe Wind Gambit expansion. The airship were just stupid and clunky. Meanwhile other games such as Orleans I would not play without expansions because it enhances the game so greatly. Some more good examples are Dead Reckoning, Expeditions, Splendor, Tapestry, Great Western trail, Quacks, Teotihuacan just to name a few. All of those games are better with expansions in
QOTW: Crowdfunding FOMO has led me to buy more expansions than I will ever play. That being said, I prefer expansions that add more content (characters, missions, etc.) to the base game rather than adding different modes of play. I rarely touch the latter.
QotW: Generally I want expansions to open up more of the base game. More variety to decks of cards that already exist, that type of thing. Ones that fundamentally change the game I'm less interested in, as I already like the game I don't want a different game! I never Eben played the kegs expansions to Heaven & Ale as when Zee Garcia reviewed it he said the game changed entirely to be focused on the new content, which means the game I really like would be totally different, no thanks.
yah, the person that traded that to you , needs to do something for you, it's their fault and they need to be flagged, that version isnt' worth near as much, people may claim an accident, but they fudged that up.
QotW: Overall, I'm in favor of expansions except when it comes to Kickstarter (for the most part). A brand new game rolled out through crowd funding doesn't (IMHO) need expansions, when you don't know if the game will be popular or need an expansion to fix an issue with the game (then it should be part of the base game!) People don't know your game yet and you're announcing "must-have" expansions? Smells like a money grab.
Yeup - kinda in line with what Chuck suggested down below - I do agree that the day-1 expansions always seem a little off... They probably learned that from EA Games... 🤣
![Baby Kia - GLOVES & DRACS (BLACK AF1s) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ajm8LeB0qQk/mqdefault.jpg)
With some exceptions, my wife and I are mostly looking for a different gameplay experience from an expansion. The best example is where an expansion brings a cooperative experience to a competitive game, and ideally where it's really an entirely new experience. Some great examples of this include: The Missing Expedition expansion for Lost Ruins of Arnak, the Crisis expansion for Terraforming Mars Ares Expedition, the Invasion expansion for Orleans, the Solitaria expansion for Concordia, and the Viticulture World expansion for Viticulture World. I try to do a lot of research (mostly RUclips) on expansions to be sure it's worth the investment, and end up passing on most. I really appreciate when reviewers clarify whether an expansion is of the "won't ever play without" variety or if it's just "okay".
QotW: Expansions! Well, I’m often conflicted about them… On the one hand, I’m a completionist, and I want everything for a game that I love. But sometimes I feel like I HAVE to get the expansion, or I may be missing out on the “complete experience”, even though the complexity of the game will certainly increase. One that I’m certainly looking forward to is the expansion for Clank Catacombs due out later this year.
Yes, another Monday, another #JEFFWEEK
I like small expansions that enhance and expand the game without changing it into something too different and adding too many additional rules. Expansions can be a mixed bag so I try to be careful when getting them. Some seem like a no brainer, but sometimes they just add complexity and more admin to an already complex game and that might mean it's a bit more of a hassle than it's worth. Bonus points if you can just add it seamlessly in the main box.
I love expansions but more because I'm a completionist than actually to play them. I'm sure they're good but I really don't play any one game enough to warrant it (although the Ark Nova expansion is wonderful).
Week was so long it was another week before I watched the video!
RE Math Trades: You should let the organizer know if you haven't already (especially if the other person ghosts you). If the organizer is any good, they will keep track of things so if people are repeat offenders they can be banned.
I buy most expansions for games I have. I usually see it as a way to add more to a game I already have/love. I think the Norwegians expansion for A Feast for Odin is still one of the best. Most expansions aren't THAT good, but I can't offhand think of one that was bad or a waste that I'd picked up.
For years, we were "completionists" and had to have every expansion for every game we had, but eventually realized that we almost never played with them. Now, we tend to only pick up expansions for the games we really enjoy, and want more content for. We tend to look for expansions that expand the game without changing it completely, if that makes sense.
QotW: Recently, I realized that I'd generally prefer to spend money on a new game instead of an expansion. I overdid it on Villainous expansions that didn't get enough play. But Canvas: Reflections was worth it for me as were the Thunder Road Vendetta expansions.
I'd get an expansion if it truly added some interesting twists to the base game, an upgrade that would increase the feels. A game that I have in mind is Lost ruins of Arnak, I feel like I'd rather play it with the expansions. I love using the different characters and their various abilities. On the other hand, I am less interested in Forest shuffle expansion for now (heard there was a new coming aside of "Alpine" so I'm staying tuned)
For QotW: I have cooled off on expansions recently. I used to think I needed everything for a game to enjoy it but now it seems that more often than I would like I stop playing a game + expansion because it gets too complex or changes the base game too much. There are exceptions of course. I can't imagine playing Viticulture without expansions, Terraforming Mars without some of the expansions, Lost Ruins of Arnak, Roll Player and maybe a few more 😊
"...you just have this massive lay..." easy now! 😋 That was a good unintentional pun! Speaking of humour...I tell my wife and daughter all the time that one day they will be changing my diaper...and I will be wearing one if I need it or not! I guess your dad and I share a twisted sense of humour!
Expansions...I think, that as long as the expansions augment a game or add different playability; then they are welcome. Otherwise if the expansions add no value to gameplay, they just feel like the publisher/designers are trying to wring as much cash from the consumers as possible.
Expansions are a mixed bag for me. Sometimes the added rules overhead makes me less likely to pull the game off the shelf. I think my favorite expansions add variability without bogging the game down.
Qotw: I am all for expansions. Give me all the expansions... and all the upgraded components possible. I love adding complexity to games and giving more paths to victory. I will say the one obstacle is just that when a player is learning a game it is often bad to add expansions because it overwhelms them so then more often than not I am playing with the base games. But if they have played before... then I whip out the expansions. One expansion that let me down big time was the Scythe Wind Gambit expansion. The airship were just stupid and clunky. Meanwhile other games such as Orleans I would not play without expansions because it enhances the game so greatly. Some more good examples are Dead Reckoning, Expeditions, Splendor, Tapestry, Great Western trail, Quacks, Teotihuacan just to name a few. All of those games are better with expansions in
QOTW: Crowdfunding FOMO has led me to buy more expansions than I will ever play. That being said, I prefer expansions that add more content (characters, missions, etc.) to the base game rather than adding different modes of play. I rarely touch the latter.
QotW: Generally I want expansions to open up more of the base game. More variety to decks of cards that already exist, that type of thing. Ones that fundamentally change the game I'm less interested in, as I already like the game I don't want a different game! I never Eben played the kegs expansions to Heaven & Ale as when Zee Garcia reviewed it he said the game changed entirely to be focused on the new content, which means the game I really like would be totally different, no thanks.
yah, the person that traded that to you , needs to do something for you, it's their fault and they need to be flagged, that version isnt' worth near as much, people may claim an accident, but they fudged that up.
Yeah I got an update today that it'll all get resolved.
QotW: Overall, I'm in favor of expansions except when it comes to Kickstarter (for the most part). A brand new game rolled out through crowd funding doesn't (IMHO) need expansions, when you don't know if the game will be popular or need an expansion to fix an issue with the game (then it should be part of the base game!) People don't know your game yet and you're announcing "must-have" expansions? Smells like a money grab.
Yeup - kinda in line with what Chuck suggested down below - I do agree that the day-1 expansions always seem a little off... They probably learned that from EA Games... 🤣