I always enjoy the Sea, Salt, and Pepper cards and color.

Radlands visuals are phenomenal.

On the other side, the old school ugliness of Star Realms makes it intemporel. Same for War of the Ring that keep old illustrative style.

Euro:

• Lack of randomness.
• Few direct confrontation.
• Weak theme.
• Strong focus on mechanics.

Ameritrash:

• Strong theme.
• Mechanics are rough and simple.
• Direct confrontation.
• Dices rolling, everywhere, all the time…

Not sure where this entitlement is coming from.

Being nice.

Uh? Why? That’s actually the point of individual 3D printing.

Maybe it’s a good game, but definetely not a hit.

the three of us are bird nerds

Mandatory bird pictures needed! Haha!

I just sold mine (both with European expansion) last week because, hey, and I’m happy it’s now owned by a couple that « like slow games ». :)

I see you also have the European expansion. This is the must buy to me as it adds a lot to the game.

Surprisingly, having sold it makes me realize I would be willing to play it again one day. It’s a very good game with very good components, just not the kind of game I would present to a group.

Hope you enjoyed !

I use https://boardgamearena.com

• Card sleeves. Not on all games, but the one you manipulate the cards a lot. My last sleeved game is Sea, Salt & Paper.
• Card playing mat. Makes the card manipulation so much easier on flat tables.

Something that is pretty quick in terms of set up, learning, and play.

You had many recommendations, but I think very few beats Sea Salt & Paper in term of setup, learning and play.

Yes! Digital version are always properly ruled.

But if many players understand the rule in a specific wrong way, it means the rules are badly written.

I totally agree. By physically preventing (or forcing) you to do some actions, it helps you to shape the rules in your mind. To confirm and invalidate what you think.

Radlands final turns can be so tight, I suspect variant rule is impossible, and alternative rules would be very different (and interesting).

Full alternative rules needs a lot of work as the components are already specified and you have to find interesting mechanism with them. While in board game design, components are shaped to match the mechanism. Very few games had such rules : Traditional game cards and Chess are the firsts who comes in mind, but I suspect War of the Ring also had such alternative rules.

I can’t recommend enough to write your own rule summary. Write it once, and reorganize it as much as you can with the goal to teach it in a fluent way. Teaching also means giving few components to players when you explain them, simulate actions physically (When you say I draw a card, you draw a card, When you say I push ressource A token here, you push the token, etc.).

With heavy games, players expect the owner to be a teacher. Not everyone is good at this. The owner role is to ensure peoples don’t spend a bad time with the game. Teaching the rules in a engaging way is part of owner responsibility.

This is how I take it. I have few heavy game but I try to learn rules and learn to teach rules as much as I can so players feel confident after first turn.

I suspect this will be more and more common in the future.

I wonder if this can really be stopped.

I think being transparent about what is AI generated or not is very important so we can choose to support “original content” creator.

Maybe AI will make “original creators” more recognition.

I buy Terraforming Mars (never tried yet) and CloudAge on sale to give it a luck (the universe look cool).

I tested CloudAge in solo, just to get the flow. Took me 1h to finish the first scenario. Not all mechanisms are given on first scenario which (of course) feels kinda flat, but it’s perfect to learn rules slowly. The game is cool, but what seems even better is the tiny campaign that slowly adds mechanisms and card in a story driven way. The campaign is supposed to take 7 plays and I will definitely do it.

Yes. Cats and birds are the main factions (the ones that focus on board control) others are opportunistic (takes situational benefits). 4 players is the best (2 area control faction + 2 others). 3 is cool too but could looks the same because you need the 2 area control factions at minimum.

If your group is 3 only. I recommend, if you had budget, to get one expansion that have another area control faction, for more variety.

Playing 3 with one single area control faction is less fun, IMHO.

Root is complex, so you need to have someone to really know the rules. But as soon everyone understand what its faction is supposed to do to win, it’s pure pleasure!

I just buy Sea Salt & Paper. My 9yo girl win the first (2 players) game and love it.

It’s surprisingly addictive.

I don’t play that much this WE. I paint trolls from War of the Ring.

Despite the huge respect I have for Reiner, I found many of his games have one single tiny mechanic that is often boring after the first play.