Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3/30 - Wakefield Gaming: Limits, Volltreffer and more

Expand Messages
  • Craig Massey
    Attending: Dirty Dan Cashmore, the Hansels, Andrew, Richard, Dave R., Pat, Alan, Pitt and myself Games Played: Mystery Rummy #1, Liar s Dice, Isis & Osiris,
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 2 9:18 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Attending: Dirty Dan Cashmore, the Hansels, Andrew,
      Richard, Dave R., Pat, Alan, Pitt and myself

      Games Played: Mystery Rummy #1, Liar's Dice, Isis &
      Osiris, Big Shot, Limits, Volltreffer, Web of Power,
      Gang of Four, Spades, Mystery Rummy #2, Princes of
      Florence, Tightrope or whatever the Germans call it,
      Twilight

      A smaller group this week for Wakefield gaming.
      Richard and Andrew were the early arrivals so we set
      things up and got down to the game playing. A whole
      lot of card games were played - a trend continued at
      SSG on Saturday - what gives?

      Tightrope: Richard taught the game and then showed us
      how to play properly. I was very pleasantly surprised
      at how good this game was. What number does this one
      play best with?

      Limits - Pitt, Alan, Andrew, David, myself and Pat:
      Well we all waited for Pitt wehn the phone rang. It
      seems he was at the wrong house. After dragging Pitt
      away from hassling the neighbors who I'm sure were
      ready to call the cops for their second visit to game
      nite in Wakefield, we broke out some of the new
      Nurenburg games that he had translated. We had 6 so
      decided to try limits, a new card game from Uwe
      Rosenberg. The game has cards in 5 suits which are
      really just colors with no numbers. There is also a
      deck of limit cards. Each limit card has a number for
      each color. This number is the maximum amount of
      cards of a particular color that can be played that
      round. So a limit card might be Blue 2, Red 3, Purple
      1, Yellow 0, and Green 7.

      Each player on their turn plays a card to the stack
      face up and draws a new one. Or if they think that
      Alan (or any other player, but usually Alan) is trying
      to get away with something, they can challenge any
      players last card. If the stack contains too many of
      that color than the challengee takes the limit card
      which is worth -2 and the challenger takes a +1 point
      card. If the challengee is right than he gets the +1
      and so on. One other twist - at the start of the
      round each player plays one card face down. All of
      these cards serve to increase the limits of the
      various colors adding the element of the unknown and
      generally irritating someone highly when their card is
      challenged. Not a lot of positive scores in this
      game. Mine was particularly negative. I think Pat
      and maybe David were the only ones to finish in the
      black with Pat winning on the last round. Pretty
      decent filler that should work well with the non
      gaming crowd as well as kids too.

      That was the only new Nurenberg game I tried - bug the
      others to provide a sneak peak of Big Shot and Isis &
      Osiris.

      MR#1: Pat and I hunted down the ripper twice with each
      of us taking a game with close scores.

      Gang of Four - Alan, Dan C. Dave and myself: Karriere
      Poker variant. The 3 suits with cards numbered 1-10
      in each and 4 special cards - two Vice Presidents
      ranking higher than the 10, the Chairman ranking
      higher than the VPs and a wild 1 which counts as a
      one, but of any of the three colors. The object is to
      get rid of cards before everyone else and finish the
      game with the lowest score. The more cards in your
      hand when someone goes out, the higher the score (1-7
      cards 1 pt. Each, 8-10 2pts each and so on). Players
      can play singles, doubles, triplets, 5 card straights,
      flushs, or a full house. Once one of these has been
      lead, players must follow the lead or pass. At any
      time a player can jump in with a gang of four (4 of a
      kind). The winner of the round leads the next one.

      I started awful, but a series of hands under 7 allowed
      me to catch up and stay in the lead for good.

      Twilight - Pitt, David, Andrew and myself: This is one
      of the strangest and coolest tricking taking games I
      have ever played. It is a partnership game where the
      teams represent cults (sun and moon) vying for the
      souls of followers. There are three types of cards
      for each cult - Clerics ranked 1-5 with 1 the highest
      card, Soul cards valued 3 - 7 and are all equal in
      rank, and Sanctuaries x1, x2 and x3 which serve as the
      scoring cards by multiplying the number of souls
      collected.

      The catch to the game is that on a players turn, he
      either plays a card of his cult for himself or asks
      either his partner or one of his opponents to play a
      card for him. This allows for all kinds of deduction
      and conventions for play - most of which will take a
      number of playings to really grasp. In that sense,
      the game reminds me of Dia de los Meurtos. The first
      few hands a lot of head scratching was going on, but
      slowly the bulbs turned on. We played four hands and
      called it, though the game suggests you play to 1000
      points. After four hands Andrew and I had just under
      a 100 point lead over David and Pitt with 200+ points.
      1000 points seems to be a bit much, but maybe that
      mark becomes easier with experience. I really thought
      this was a fascinating trick taking game with a lot of
      subtle play and decisions. I definitely want to play
      again.

      Liar's Dice - I was kicked out early and was wondering
      about so I can't remember who won, but I think it came
      down to Pitt and Andrew and I think Andrew won.

      Volltreffer - Andrew, Pitt, David, myself: Another
      game that has been sitting on my shelf since last year
      yet to be played. This one is of the trick taking
      variety. The game starts with players purchasing
      their hand of cards. Each player starts with 20
      points. A trump is chosen and then four cards are
      laid out for purchase. Purchase prices are 4, 2, 1
      and 0 points. Cards slotted based on rank with trumps
      always going in the most expensive slot. After a card
      is purchased, a new card is flipped up and put in the
      appropriate purchase slot and the next player gets to
      shop. Each player drafts eight cards. After everyone
      has filled their hand, players have a chance to score
      points based on melds. Melds include 3 of a kind, 4
      of a kind, 5 of a kind, one of each suit (5 suits) and
      lowest total hand. After these points are scored, the
      trick taking game is played with each trick worth 5
      points each. The game ends when a hand is completed
      and one or more players are in the target area which
      is 61-70 points. The player who is closest to the
      bullseye of 66 points wins.

      Very cool game in my opinion given the multiple ways a
      player can score. I think David ended up winning, but
      it was late so I could be off here.

      Thanks to all the attendees. After two weeks in a
      row, WAGG is taking a few weeks off, but will return
      to its regularly scheduled programming at the end of
      the month. Stay tuned.

      Craig


      =====
      Craig W. Massey
      cwmassey@...

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
      http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
    • Pitt Crandlemire
      ... [...] ... I liked it, too, though it seemed pretty hard to keep any reasonable track of how many cards had been played in more than oen or two colors. As
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 2 9:50 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        At 09:18 AM 4/2/01 -0700, Craig Massey wrote:
        >
        >Limits - Pitt, Alan, Andrew, David, myself and Pat:
        [...]
        >Pretty
        >decent filler that should work well with the non
        >gaming crowd as well as kids too.

        I liked it, too, though it seemed pretty hard to keep any reasonable track
        of how many cards had been played in more than oen or two colors. As long
        as it's played quickly, without too much deep thought, it's a fun filler.

        Our game went on a little bit longer than most of would have liked, I
        think. However, that was because I forgot the rule about removing some of
        the Limit cards at the beginning of the game. Had we done that, it would
        have been about 10 minutes shorter, which would have been just right.

        >Volltreffer - Andrew, Pitt, David, myself: Another
        >game that has been sitting on my shelf since last year
        >yet to be played. This one is of the trick taking
        >variety. The game starts with players purchasing
        >their hand of cards. Each player starts with 20
        >points.

        Actually, 25. Each rank on the scoretrack is 5 points, so that extra 5
        points makes a big difference.

        >Melds include 3 of a kind, 4
        >of a kind, 5 of a kind, one of each suit (5 suits) and
        >lowest total hand.

        FWIW, after about 6 plays, I think that the meld scoring nees to be
        adjusted a bit. Right now its:

        3 of a kind 5 points
        4 of a kind 10 points
        5 of a kind 25 points

        That should either be 5, 10, 15 or 5, 15, 25.

        Also, the meld bonus for at least one card in each of the 5 suits is only 5
        points. Since each trick won in the trick taking game is also worth 5
        points, there's really no reason to go for the 5 color bonus. Keeping a
        void so you can ruff a color is essentially equal to the 5 color bonus. As
        a result, the 5 color bonus should probably be 10 points.

        >The game ends when a hand is completed
        >and one or more players are in the target area which
        >is 61-70 points. The player who is closest to the
        >bullseye of 66 points wins.

        I also think that the "target" range should be reduced to a single rank,
        rather than the current two. As it is, once a player reaches the first
        target rank, the only way to keep him from winning is to force him to take
        *2* extra tricks, a very difficult thing to do. Reducing the target to one
        rank allows you to more realistically hit the leader by forcing him to take
        only one extra trick.

        >Very cool game in my opinion

        I agree wholeheartedly. My comments above should not be interpreted as
        criticism of this good little game from (wait for it) Gunter Burkhardt.

        >I think David ended up winning

        I beg your pardon! This was my only victory all night! ;-)

        -Pitt
      • Richard Spoonts
        Craig, I like Drathseilakt best with four and least with five, and I think it is also quite good with three. With five, it is simply too easy to hide in the
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 2 9:57 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Craig,

          I like Drathseilakt best with four and least with
          five, and I think it is also quite good with three.
          With five, it is simply too easy to hide in the middle
          for the whole game.

          Richard

          > Tightrope: Richard taught the game and then showed
          > us
          > how to play properly. I was very pleasantly
          > surprised
          > at how good this game was. What number does this
          > one
          > play best with?


          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
          http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
        • jsyedidia@yahoo.com
          ... I disagree a little with Richard. IMHO, I would say 3 players is best, than 4, than 5. Jonathan
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 2 10:09 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Unity_Games@y..., Richard Spoonts <Richard_BOS@y...> wrote:
            > Craig,
            >
            > I like Drathseilakt best with four and least with
            > five, and I think it is also quite good with three.
            > With five, it is simply too easy to hide in the middle
            > for the whole game.
            >
            > Richard
            >
            > > Tightrope: Richard taught the game and then showed
            > > us
            > > how to play properly. I was very pleasantly
            > > surprised
            > > at how good this game was. What number does this
            > > one
            > > play best with?

            I disagree a little with Richard. IMHO, I would say 3 players is best,
            than 4, than 5.

            Jonathan
          • Dave Bernazzani
            We played this at B&N last August (15, 2000) with 5 players. I won and remember that the scores were clustered near the winning score and then a _big_ drop
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 2 10:21 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              We played this at B&N last August (15, 2000) with 5 players. I won and
              remember that the scores were clustered near the winning score and then a
              _big_ drop for one or two of the players. It was light and somewhat fun but
              I I was not overly impressed (just not my cup of tea I suspect) and it fell
              into the eh-filler category for me. Interesting to hear that the number we
              played with (5) is not quite optimal.

              --
              Dave Bernazzani
              dber@...
              http://www.gis.net/~dber (South Shore Gamers)
            • Richard Spoonts
              I think that three players makes for the most strategic game; however, given the lightness of the game, I still prefer the four player game with its slightly
              Message 6 of 6 , Apr 2 11:40 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                I think that three players makes for the most
                strategic game; however, given the lightness of the
                game, I still prefer the four player game with its
                slightly less control (though this preference is not a
                strong one). Also, given the lightness of this game,
                I have written far more about it than is probably
                necessary. :-)

                Richard

                --- jsyedidia@... wrote:
                > I disagree a little with Richard. IMHO, I would say
                > 3 players is best,
                > than 4, than 5.
                >
                > Jonathan
                >
                >


                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.