Top 5 least favorite games
So spurred on by my favorite games list, the other side of
the mixed metaphor, games that I don't really like. There are rules for these selections. They have to be decently rated on BGG
list. Top 500 at least. If they are ranked 6000th, well let's face
it, no one really likes it. They also
have to have been released post Settlers of Cataan. I can go on for pages about what a crappy
game Car Wars is, but it's also 30-35 years old and the context really doesn't
apply anymore.
First the dishonorable mentions.
Samurai ranked 89th
This actually barely made the mentions list. The core mechanic is basically playing dots
and boxes, which I don't like at all.
But it plays 3 quite well and quickly. So I won't say I will never ever never play
this again, but there's got to be pretty specific circumstances. #1, there has to be only 3 people
playing. #2, I have to not want to play
the other usual suspects we typically break out for 3 player.
Tobago ranked 252nd.
The game play is actually pretty cool, but the scoring has
problems. There's a lot of variance and
something you invested 6 moves in can be worth a lot less than your opponent's 3 move
play.
Stone Age ranked 36th
2nd player to move has one hell of an advantage, and since
we have started informally tracking victories, Player 2 wins at least 3/4's of
the time, and maybe as much as 9 out of 10 games.
Credit where credit is due, Juan came up with an auction-based
house rule on who gets to be player 2 that I am positive would balance the
game. But it's simply not a good enough
game to play test this house rule to confirm that.
#5
Glenn Drovers Empire: Age of Discovery ranked 54th
This actually isn't an awful game. I just don't want to play it again. It takes 3 hours and the most successful strategies
are way too similar to one another.
That's way too long for such narrow victory paths. It did have some decent replay until I
figured that part out.
#4
Fresco ranked 137th
The problem in this game is a convergence of scoring and
turn order. Cash turns into VPs at game
end, but doesn't influence turn order during the game. So you can hoard money (delayed VPS), and
still get the advantages of being in last place during the game.
Now we can probably house rule some patches for this game,
but like Stone Age it's not a good enough game to bother play testing and
trouble- shooting fixes. In fact, Fresco
is a lot less fun than Stone Age.
#3
Thebes ranked 198th
A game I've only played once. It does have a clever mechanic. The primary thing you have to manage is time,
you have 2 years worth of moves. And
whoever is furthest in the past goes, which means you can manipulate the game
so you can take multiple turns in a row.
The problem is the scoring.
You invest a lot of your time into "digs" which in game turns
means pulling tiles from a bag and hoping that some score. There is way way way way way way way too much
variance in what you pull.
#2
Genoa ranked 188th
I've also only played Genoa once, and that was enough. It's got one neat mechanic. The game board is a gridded map, and you roll
two dice to see where this turn's move starts.
You get 5 moves from that spot to pick up various assets.
The problem is every asset is trade-able and every move requires negotiation. This destroys pacing with endless contract talks and makes the game experience
a lot like buying a used car.
#1
Smallworld ranked 69th
I haven't played Smallworld in over 2 years, and apparently
am still carrying the scars. This game
has a lot of problems.
A) the pacing is atrocious.
I'd probably only dislike this game and not despise it if played in
30-45 minutes and not 75-90.
B) some of the
badge-tribe combinations make unbalanced power combos. So either that guy wins or the table unites
to gang beat him down. Either way, I
don't find this fun.
C) the core mechanic
is calculating a provinces defense and adding 2, then sending the appropriate
amount of soldiers. The game is centered
around counting. Effing Lame.
Now THIS is the list. I would expect this to be much easier for you than favorite games :) ("Darren hates every game" joke, check.)
ReplyDeleteFIRST of all, Samurai is my favorite game, so I disagree with you :) You over simplify it by calling it the box game. Even calling dots and boxes a game is a stretch. It's something you do to kill time on in the car. If Samurai were as straight forward as something like roshambo, then it would just be luck. Yet skilled players beat new players all day long. I think you just don't like the game because you're not good at it, and that's fine, I can be biased against games I'm not good at too :) But call it what it is: I suck at this game and I don't like getting my ass kicked.
I don't understand how you can put Genoa as your second most disliked game after playing it once.
Smallworld is what it is. I acknowledge it's not Brass, it's just a silly little smiting game. Sure it would be better if it took 45 minutes, but 90 minutes is still super fast for us. It's better than Zombies.
Thebes is terribly flawed. Which is a shame because it has some neat stuff going for it.
Fresco is also flawed, but I think we gave it more than one try after we realized it was flawed. Well I think I realized it before the rest of you after you beat me with money :)
You left Through the Desert off your list. I need to see if someone else exists who doesn't like that game. Let me check with my Dad.
re: Samurai. This actually pisses me off. I put Galaxy Trucker on my favorites and have yet to win ever, BECAUSE I LIKE THE GAME PLAY.
ReplyDeleteIrrelevant. I like Ra despite sucking at it. I don't want to play El Grande or Wallenstein mostly because I suck at them.
ReplyDeleteComment on Small World. Games aren't about having fun, Darren. Games are about me being better than you.
ReplyDeleteRyan you have already proven you are better than me by owning a much larger TV.
Delete