what the hell is this blog anyways?

To the 3 people that will read this...

Expect game reviews and replays from our weekly game. I may also talk City of Heroes, movies, books and whatever else catches my fancy.

Monday, January 16, 2012

F*@% Cooperative Games

I like cooperative games, I think they can break the cycle of the confrontational style games that we play and add a lot more interaction than your typical game. Other games can accomplish some of the same goals, for example Dixit offers a lot of social interaction, and Race for the Galaxy and Galaxy Trucker have so little confrontation it's almost like playing solitaire. But cooperative games can do both.

There are a few different flavors of cooperative games.

1) Purely cooperative games where the players are all working together against a mechanic in the game (with a variance based on luck). In my limited experience, I have found the replayability is lower with these than highly ranked games. This is because once you understand the mechanic you are working against, it's a matter of how lucky or unlucky you are. With some tables, these games become fun for the loudest person, and pretty boring for the rest of the people who find themselves just following directions. Our table is pretty good about that, Ryan will occasionally remind me to let people play their own damn turn. Fair enough Ryan, fair enough :)


2) "One against many" style games where a group of players work together against one other player. In these rules the foil is playing with one set of rules and abilities and the group is using another set, typically playing a character like an RPG without the RP. These games tend to be pretty heavily tactics based, that tends to slow it down for use because we have to optimize as a group.

3) Traitor style cooperative games where the group is working together to accomplish some goals against a mechanic in the game (again, with a variance based on luck), BUT one or more players are traitors secretly working against the groups interests. Poor table talk rules can ruin this game. For example if players are allowed say too much about their hands, it can not only make the obstacles too easy to overcome but also make it easy to pick out the traitor who's not so forthcoming with information about their hand. And it's not like the traitor is able to speak up about table talk rules mid game. Games like this are won or lost by how you play when you are not the traitor. When you are not the traitor, you need to act a little erratically and you need to enforce the table talk rules. That way when you ARE the traitor, you can act erratically and enforce the table talk rules without arousing any more suspicion that usual :)

I actually write this because I'm looking for recommendations. Most of these games I've never played, or played only once. So here are some examples of cooperative games from the above list that rank in the top 250 on Board Game Geek.

Battlestar Galactica - ranked 18th - I've played this once. It was long, but I enjoyed the mechanics. Long is a big deal for me because if a game is not going well, I would often like to try it again. When a game is too long people even besides Darren are ready to move to something else. But the mechanics were good and the theme was strong and well executed.

Pandemic - ranked 37th - I've played this a couple of times. It can definitely be ruined by one person dominating the play.

Space Alert - Ranked 52nd - I have never played this, however it's ordered and due to arrive on Saturday. Apparently the rules are difficult to read, but I'm determined. This is one of Vlaada Chvatil's games, and he's quickly becoming the most interesting game designers to me because his games have such unique mechanics. I can't wait to try Space Alert.


Arkham Horror - Ranked 65th - Never played it. I understand the set up and break down are pretty intense, and it's like an all evening game. We typically play a half dozen games, not one. But really it has the look and feel of House on Haunted Hill which burnt me because of it's horrible editing, so I've not given it a chance.

Descent - Ranked 73rd - Tactical D&D. And an all night affair.

Ghost Stories - Ranked 120th - Never played this.

Defenders of the Realm - Ranked 136th - Never played this.

Fury of Dracula - Ranked 157th - Never played this, but it seems like it should be called the Hunt for Dracula, because Dracula is more than happy to leave the players be.


Shadows Over Camelot - Ranked 200th - I played this quite extensively. The mechanics were initially fresh, but they've since become stale with replay. I believe it would benefit from adding the expansion, but I think I'm done with it. This mechanics are pretty far removed from the theme, there's little connection there. It could be applied to anything. I tried not to let that bother me though.

Forbidden Island - Ranked 248th - Never played this, but it was recommended to me recently. And at $15 and 30 minutes, it sounds right up my alley.

Comments or recommendations on the games listed above? Did I leave out something good?

6 comments:

  1. BG: Calling this cooperative is really pushing the boundaries of that word, since it's a team game where one side wins and one loses, and some of the players are only pretending to cooperate.
    In that sense, Bang or Shadow Hunters is a cooperative game.

    Pandemic: Boring if everyone cooperates and understands/accepts basic math and probability. I loved it for 10-12 plays (some of them 10 mins long), then realized it was tic tac toe.

    Space Alert: Robo Rally mechanics in a Galaxy Trucker environment, with an added weird factor of someone (think Uhura) listening to a CD and telling the other players what threats are coming.
    Never played it, it's complicated. In literally a room full of Rio Grande judges, only one person kinda knew how to play it.

    Arkham Horror: Great game. Set up is complex but play is simple. Allow 6 hours [Knowing the rules or having an app would be way helpful]. RPG surrogate.
    This is far more engaging and straightforward than BG. Also involves real cooperation. When Nyarlathotep eats the Earth, nobody wins.

    Descent: Hero Quest. If you don't know what that is, then D&D 4e meets Talisman, without the depth. Cheaper for a group than buying D&D.

    Fury of Dracula: Dracula loses if he gets furious. Good game, but kinda frustrating (or boring) if Dracula plays smart. [Ditto for Last Night on Earth, but it doesn't contain the word "fury".]

    Lord of the Rings: The Card Game (2 pp only)
    Fun, challenging. Co-op magic the gathering, sort of.
    Not cheap if you buy all expansions, and you kinda need the extra cards (and the extra adventures).
    Rank 56 (#2 for customizable games)
    http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/77423/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-card-game

    Hunt for Red November: A bunch of drunken gnomes have to keep their submarine from sinking/blowing up/running out of oxygen/catching fire/getting eaten by a Kraken.
    Uses the same time mechanic as Olympus or Olympos (whichever one didn't spawn this blog).
    Much better than it's 800 rank, and not expensive. [Actually, there's a bigger box version of it out, don't know what that's about.]
    http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/36946/red-november

    Bang: Great game for 5+, a bit of a party game, you can play it a couple times in a row. Played this with my non-gaming in-laws as well as gamers.
    One guy is the Sheriff, everybody else has secret roles (and goals) to help/hinder the law.
    http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3955/bang

    Shadow Hunters: Like Bang, but more of a gamer's game. Requires a tad more logic to figure out who is who, and way more math (adding and subtracting to numbers in the teens).
    http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/24068/shadow-hunters

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think I would like more cooperative games, or at least games that require you to maintain trading relationships. I think it is especially important when playing with people you don't know (or just met) to work together a few times. Being super competitive and ruthless is more fun when everyone in the room is a close friend who accepts you and knows you're only evil at the gaming table. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. my specific problem with cooperative games is it seems like a disproportionate amount are "Adventure Games". Go there, pick that up. Open that door, whoops! Time to fight! Those really aren't my thing...except...

    Since Mike is done with role playing and he's the host, my biggest problem with adventure games has been diminished. "Oh, we're playing tactical D&D, why don't we just switch TO D&D?"

    Looking forward to trying some of these out with my new perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  4. spotty response JC. limited ranting, shorter than the original post, and didn't address each listed game. 5/10.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I generally have a love-hate relationship with coop games. I like working in teams and discussing strategies. So, in that sense, if the game I'm playing is like a fairly complex logic problem, with some elements of chance (hopefully with some amount of semi-known probability) AND I am playing with people I like AND it is a difficult game to win, then I typically enjoy it. (Pandemic with the expansion is typically good for this for me. LOTR CCG and Arkham are also fairly good for me.)

    I can also get into good themes in a game; they can go a fairly long way with me. (BSG and Arkham are good examples of this.)

    I find that coop games that play well with just two or three players (e.g., LOTR CCG and Arkham) work well for me, because they allow for me to give each player a good share of the input in group decisions without it being necessary for anyone to feel like the need to be heard more. If I'm in a 6-player BSG game, and each person wants to have 33% of input in each decision, or each person wants to have a full two minutes to speak about his strategy during every decision, it ain't gonna work. But, if only three of the players want to talk and the other three just like to sit around and go with the flow, it's also not fun for me.

    But, more than anything, in games as in life, my enjoyment of doing anything that requires cooperation is much more dependent on my liking the people with whom I'm doing it. I don't have to like you as much to enjoy competing with you. However, I must like you to enjoy cooperating with you in almost any endeavor. (Well, except for sex.)

    ReplyDelete