F@#$ The Newsroom

F@#$ The Newsroom Season 2

This is a review for people that either like the show or are trying hard to like the show.  I read the salon.com’s recaps, and the author of those CLEARLY despises this show.

If you cannot get past a liberal slant and news retold after 18 months of context and perspective, if this regularly breaks your suspension of disbelief, do yourself a favor right now and stop reading and watching.  The Newsroom will only provide unhealthy blood pressure increases.  Accepting (not necessarily agreeing with) Aaron Sorkin’s world view is a pre-requisite for enjoying this show.  I call this alternate world Sorkinland.

Season 2 follows Operation Genoa, loosely based on OperationTailwind, an investigation that CNN botched about 10 years ago.

This is an improvement over season 1, which followed no story.  So we follow people running down leads, vetting the story and then having the story fall apart within 48 hours after broadcast and the repercussions of falsely accusing the US Military of war crimes.  If find this a compelling plot, so no criticism here.

There are two major problems with The Newsroom; The characters and the pacing.

The characters are a mixed bag.  About half work, another quarter don’t hinder and the remaining quarter drag the show down.

The Good:

Olivia Munn as Sloan Sabbath

Thomas Sadoski as Don Keefer

Dev Patel as Neal Sampat

If you are looking for West Wing parallels, “in my opinion” Munn is most like First Lady Abby Bartlett, Sadoski is most like Josh Lyman, and Patel is most like Sam Seaborn.  This might seem like a left-handed compliment to compare these characters to Sorkin’s best show, but it really is praise.  The classics are classics for a reason, and there’s a reason why tropes are recycled.

The Okay

Sam Waterson as Charlie Skinner

Jeff Daniels as Neal McAvoy

John Gallagher as Jim Harper

Sam Waterson is Leo McGary from West Wing and Jeff Daniels is President Bartlett.  Both of these characters have great moments, but also turn in some frustratingly bad performances.  Sam Waterson in particular in Election Night Part 1 and Part 2 delivers ham-fisted over acted lines.  John Gallagher is also Sam Seaborn, but not nearly as believable Dev Patel. 

The Awful

Emily Mortimer as Mackenzie McHale

Allison Pill as Maggie Jordan

Mortimer should be CJ Craig and Pill should be Donna Moss given the West Wing Archetype Theme.  <TM>.  But the problem is they don’t work at all.  They end up as bumbling incompetent Mandys.  If you only peripherally watched West Wing, Mandy was written out of the show after season 1.  The Newsroom is still giving Mack and Maggie air time.

I don’t care about half the cast and at any given time that half is dragging down the show.

The Pacing.

Season 1 took place between April 2010 and September 2011, or 17 months.  Season 2 took place around September 2011 till November 2012, or 14 months.  There’s 10 episodes per season, so there’s quite a bit of fast forwarding, and top stories are given the montage treatment.  It is my opinion that this show would benefit GREATLY to slowing down the pace.  Sorkin should not race ahead to whatever story pissed him off in the real world timeline; he should actually develop the Genoa investigation instead (which I felt was sadly neglected).  I compare that to “All The Presidents Men…” Redford and Hoffmans portrayal of Woodward and Bernsteins’ Watergate investigation.  That movie showed the dead ends as well as the story nuggets, and ended up a much better story.

I have some minor quibbles too with Sorkinland too.  Like the fact that the fall out is centered on the producer editing the raw footage of the interview and ignoring the ONI spokesman who forged Genoa paper work and deliberately and maliciously fed a cable news network disinformation.  To me, that’s kind of a big deal.  But that arc has been dropped like 3^rd period French.

Summary

This show remains a tease.  There’s usually a couple scenes in every episode that I thoroughly enjoy, and then either spazzy characters or Sorkinland bring it right back down.  If the show is picked up for season 3 I would probably still watch, but at this point it would not sadden me at all to see this show cancelled.

Agricola - iOS

Agricola (Latin for Farmer!).  I'm a little late to the Agricola party, but hey, I made it.  iOS versions of these types of games is such a boon for fans.  Playing these games every day really allows you to appreciate the replay-ability of an "elite" board game.  Downside is that I've probably well out paced my usual gaming group ;)

Brief Overview - In Agricola you play a 17th century farmer who, with the help of his family, builds up his farm over the course of 6 years (harvests).  You get points for developing the farm, accumulating livestock/crops, and building improvements...and let's not forget building a ginormous house and a big family.  It's worker placement, using each member of your family.  And like any worker placement/development game, by the time you finally get things rolling, the game's over and it's time to score.  I'm assuming most of you are familiar with the mechanics.  The important thing to remember for the discussion below is that there are a set of spots placed to start the game, and on each of the 14 turns of the games (split into 6 harvests) a new spot is opened up.  The initial spots vary based on number players, the turn based spots are always the same but come out randomly within a given harvest.

Most of my experience is in 2 player, which can be a wonderfully hateful little chess game.  Once you get up on your opponent, I can't put into words the satisfaction that grows each turn you're able to keep him squarely over the barrel. And it's equally dispiriting and frustrating to be obstructed at every turn by an opponent who got just one turn ahead of you.  I really love it :)

This all takes some practice, but my usual opponent and I are fairly evenly matched (you can tell because we both hate playing each other) so we have some pretty fun battles.  But it's when playing the random opponent off the interwebs, and applying this style of oppressive denial, one can feel a tinge of guilt at subjecting them to this level of hate...but then you win, the guilt passes, and you're left with the warm jubilance of victory.  Ahh.  Makes me want to go find some sucker right now.

There is also a "Solo Series" challenge.  In the physical board game, it's just 8 games, but in the iOS, it goes and goes, as long as you can reach the targets.  Here's how it works:  in the first game you start with 7 occupations and a point target of 50 points.  If you achieve that, you can keep one of the occupations you played and start the subsequent game with it.  In the next game you start with only 6 random occupations (plus the 7th one already played) and target score goes up.  Eventually you have all your occupations (usually after 7 games), and just keep trying to reach every higher and higher point totals.  I'm about done with this twist of the game, here's my best effort:

Thirty-five games baby!  I broke 100 points in game 10 when I got the quarry and a couple other choice minors.  That was about my third effort, by then I had decided the occupation combination I felt was optimal.  Super fun, but not again.

I've played a couple of 3 player games, and at this point I can only comment on it in the context of 2 player.  3 Player is a certainly different, the resources that are most highly contested change.  In 2 player you have 14 clay split between 2 players over the course of the game.  That's actually plenty.  In 3 player, you have 28 clay, which is an over abundance by the end of the game, but does allow for a nice little battle for the fireplace/sheep early food engine.  Compare that to reed, where there is the same amount of reed in a 3 player game as there is in the 2 player version.  The hate/denial level of 3 player is significantly less.  I think this is typical of similar games.

I suspect most would agree what makes this game special is the Occupations and the Minor Improvements handed out before the game (and lots of them - each player gets 7 of each, more than they could ever play).  The occupations are bit more complex in their implementation (than the minor improvements) because the subset of occupations dealt is dependent on the number of players.  This means that additional reed (for example) can be made available with occupations in games of 3 or more, further tweaking the volume of each resource.  And more importantly, changing the strategy of those playing the occupation and those playing against it.  There's no point in denying wood if your opponent needs significantly less with Carpenter, and there's no use in denying reed when your opponent has a free supply of it with the Reed Collector.

To me, that's the dimension of the game that ranked it #1 for so long.  They are enough to direct your strategy, but not typically enough to give a significant advantage.  And in two player, you can let your opponent commit and contort himself to denying you one resource or another, only to surprise him with an occupation or minor improvement that turns the game on it's head.  "Your turn on the barrel my friend."

4 and 5 player versions are different still, with more varied spots to open the game (and more attractive ones).  Playing this online doesn't work for me personally because of the inherent latency between turns...I can't keep track of what I was up to and rethinking through it is tedious.  I'll save these versions for live play.  And my lack of experience in these versions should keep it more competitive between me and my usual gaming groups.

As I said, most of my experience is 2 player, so moving to 3 player (and beyond) means additional occupations are added to the mix keeping it fresh.  The game currently only includes the E deck (the original deck), however the I and K decks will be coming this Fall for a small fee...and you can bet I'll be happy to pay to give Playdek my money.

Oh, and if more cards for the iOS version of Agricola isn't doing it for you, maybe THIS will make you drool a little bit:

That's a screen shot of Playdek's next humble offering to lucky board game fans, Lords of Waterderp, I mean deep, due out "later this year".  TAKE MY MONEY.

F@#$ Iron Man 3

More movie reviews.  And keeping with the pattern I only see movies with hobbits or super heroes.  Apparently the best movie ever made will star a hobbit super hero.

I liked Iron Man 3 lots.  I maybe liked the original more, but IM3 was light years ahead of IM2.

IM2 was the classic example of comic book character multiplication.  We got Ironman, Whiplash, Justin Hammer, Black Widow and War Machine.  You only have so much time, its impossible to give everyone a story in movie-time allotment, so pick a villain and pick a sidekick and move on already!  IM2 also went Michael Bay, substituting effects for story.

IM2 was ok, because Downey remains the perfect choice for Tony Stark.  But overall the movie was totally forgettable.

So compare to IM3.  IM3 followed the Extremis story line.  And if you don't want spoilers don't f@#$ing google Ironman Extremis.

ok harsh, actual spoiler tags coming when I stop speaking in general and/or things comic nerds already now. 

The best thing about IM3 was there's an actual story. Ironman has to piece together a mystery. Crazy sh!t's going down and Tony Stark has to solve it, but its not like the bad guys left directions to their underground lair.

spolier'd.  Set the background to black, select the text to read.

The next best thing about IM3 is they found a way to get him out of the armor for most of the movie. I think this might be a one shot, otherwise they risk a nudge nudge, here we go again, the suit's malfunctioning running joke. It's like knocking out Mr. T on the A-Team so Murdoch can fly them where they need to go. But I digress. Having Tony Stark act heroic or whatnot without the suit was loads of fun.


some more spoilage

The Mandarin might not necessarily be done.  I mean he might be but AIM dude and dudette both referred to him as the master and it didn't really seem ironic.  And Mandarin is the type of villain to act dumb and pass on blame.  The point is, they left a window if they want to recycle him for IM4. AIM Dudette might not be done too. We saw her shot, but she left camera view.

I didn't care for the finale.  But you gotta end it somehow and make it bigger and badder than the last movie.  Or something.   Besides. GP in a sports bra!.

F@#$ making a game part 1 cards and game board.

So those of you who don't know yet I am designing a game.  I'm not going to post specifics here on the blog, because tricksy little hobbitses are always after my precious.

Instead I am going to write about how the hell do you make a prototype game.

I've play tested games before, and the materials weren't very good.   Card stock just doesn't have the feel of playing cards, and your dice collection is a poor substitute for meeples.





The game has run through 3 prototypes now.

Prototype one was a disaster.  The board was hand cut and hand drawn from 22X28 card stock.  (10pt Carolina C1S for any print nerds out there.  no?  just me?)






Now, you may think your hand writing is bad, but I guarantee that mine looks like yours while riding on a bus.  Add to that I created some kind of short hand for game terms in my mind, and put those on the board without suitable explanations.  Whoops.

Next I attempted to make cards real playing cards.  I had catalog referencing what does what, like 2 of diamonds corresponds to such and such actions.  This was also awful.  It slowed the game way way down referencing every which thing.  A conundrum!

Which was solved by doing my taxes this year.  You can deduct crap for a hobby business.  Since I eventually want to sell my game I can spend money on prototype materials.  Huzzah!

I bought some print labels for the next game, and stuck these onto playing cards and that worked much better.  I printed the board on 13X19 Carolina C1S card stock and that was almost adequate.  Here's the problem.  There's no good way to carry  a 13X19 game board.  Sure you can fold it, but you still have a 13X9.5 rectangle which still doesn't fit into most folders.  You can tube it, but then it doesn't lay flat.  I think next try I am doing to print on 8.5X11 plain paper and mount on cardboard with spray adhesive.  Updates to follow.

F@#$ Castles of Burgundy

castles of burgundy

back after 2 months of no posts.  I apologize.  Either for not posting enough or posting again, take your pick.

Plot:

hmm.  That's tough.  Build up your Duchy in Burgundy?  Sure.  Why not.  The theme is very stamped on (in fact, even though the tiles are all named, very few of them are known by the players.  In fact we make up names because it matters that much)

Game Play:

You get a minimum of 50 actions split into 5 rounds, so ~10 actions per round.

At the beginning of the round, roll two dice.  Each die is an action.  Now this is important, the number on the die, limits you on what actions you can take.  

General Actions:

#1:  Take a tile.  There are 6 tile reservoirs numbered 1-6.  A die value of "1" can take from the "1" reservoir and so on.

#2:  Play a tile:  Playing a tile requires to actions, first to get it, the second to play it.  The die roll corresponds to numbers on a map.  Play like colored tiles on corresponding die rolls, and they have to be adjacent to a previously placed tile.

#3:  Trade goods:  Trading earns you VPs and money.  There are 6 trade goods, which strangely correspond to the numbers of a die!

#4:  Take workers:  This is the ONLY generic action available in the game.  Spend a die and get 2 workers. 1 worker allows you to adjust a die roll +/- 1.  There is no limit on workers you can spend and the die wraps around (a 6 becomes a 1 with only a single worker).

#5:  If you have cash, you can buy 'center' tiles.  These still need to be placed, but $$$ = a free tile draft action.

Ok, so dumb game so far.  You may as well roll two dice 50 times and see who gets the highest total.  What makes this game fun is the tiles have powers that activate once you get them on your tableau.

So there are 6 colors.

Beige are buildings.  In general buildings give you extra actions.  They aren't as versatile as dies, but hey, they are free.  Things like after playing a this building, you get to take a blue or light green one.  Or after playing this other one, you get to trade goods for free.

Grey are mines.  At the beginning of a round (not turn), mines give you cash. 

Blue are ships.  Ships help you go earlier and acquire trade goods.

Dark Green are castles.  Castles give you a free die!  Use it for anything!

Yellow are knowledge.  Knowledge may - 1) give you some ability that helps placing, drafting, trading or some other ability, - or 2) give you victory points at end game.

Light Green are pastures.  Pastures hold animals.  And you want to group like animals together to get lots of victory points.  The most boring tile ever.

How do you win?:

It's a game about victory points.  The bulk of your victory points will come from closing sections on the tableau.  The earlier you close them the more victory points, and the harder they are to close, the more victory points. 

When you play a pasture tile, add up connected like animals.  So if you have a 3 chicken tile adjacent to a 4 chicken tile, you get 7 points!  These are big points, when you consider animals plus closure.

When you trade goods, you only get a dollar no matter how many you trade.  (remember a die roll determines what you can trade.)  But you get double VP for trading 2 and triple for trading 3 items.

Yellow tiles may give VP, along the lines of "get 4 VP for each <building type> you have in play."

Finally badges.  Look at the map above.  There are 2 badges for each color and these are awarded to the player who completely fills out the corresponding color's section earliest.

A winning score is around 225.

Review:

The interactions of the tiles is what makes this game.  It's not necessarily getting the most actions, its getting the right ones.  Everyone is going to get plenty of beige building actions, the trick is finding the right combination.  Something I haven't come close to figuring out.

Anyways, I really like this game, and it has stood up for well for a half dozen replays.