QuoteIt's actually a bit scary, the way in which an apparently large number of people process all sorts of different experiences through television terms.

Yep.
Talk about brain damage...

Quote from: Pierce InverarityStuart, can we stop posting lists of what the fun of Eurogames is NOT about?

If this helps you:

People prefer Eurogames to "American Style" boardgames because they:

* Have Less Complicated Rules
* Involve Themes Other Than War / Fighting
* Have Less Direct Player vs Player Conflict
* Players Do Not Get Eliminated from the Game
* Shorter Playing Times
* Less Dependence on Luck

Words fail me.

That's par for the course, really.

Here.  Same thing... again...

* Easy to Learn Rules
* Involve A Wide Range Themes
* Indirect Player Conflict
* All Players Stay in The Game Until The End
* Short Playing Times
* More Focus on Strategy Than Luck

Let's try and avoid any more pedantry.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityPerhaps it works if I write out the question in boldface?

So what is intrinsically valuable about these games as games?

I am not sure I "get" the question.
Let me try another another question to see what kind of features you are looking for:
What is intrinsically valuable about RPGs as games?
(Or, if "RPG" is too broad a category, D&D?)

On a side note: I find it strange that the first Eurogames were designed by American designers, Sid Sackson and Alex Randolph.
Acquire, Bazaar, Metropolis (all Sackson), and Moonstar, Schachjagd, and Inkognito (Randolph) paved the way for the likes of Reiner Knizia, Bruno Faidutti, Klaus Teuber, Stefan Dorra etc.

Quote from: Dirk RemmeckeI am not sure I "get" the question.
Let me try another another question to see what kind of features you are looking for:
What is intrinsically valuable about RPGs as games?
(Or, if "RPG" is too broad a category, D&D?)

Dirk, bringing in RPGs would take us right into apples and oranges land.

Unless you game for the cheetos, in which case good luck.

Quote from: SettembriniArkham Horror is a game for dense people. There´s an optimal strategy, that makes it pointless to play the game. They later introduced complications, but that just stretches it, doesn´t invalidate the optimal strategy.

Typical FF-game. Just one step away from the Eagle Game sickness...

There's an optimal strategy to most American-style boardgames.

You seem be talking out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you dismiss euros as unsophisticated games you play with your grandma. Then you call games with optimal strategies (ie almost all thematic American games) pointless.

So what sorts of boardgames do you think are thematic, sophisticated, and deep?

Quote from: Pierce InveraritySo what is intrinsically valuable about these games as games?

Ease of entry - You can get a few guys together, read the rules out in 10 minutes, and everybody knows how to play. By one complete play-through (1-2 hours), everyone should be familiar with how the mechanics work and interract. That means you can focus all of your mental energy on thinking of tactics/strategies to win, instead of pausing to look up rules and special exceptions all the time. It also means that after one or two plays, your group of new players can be plumbing some fairly deep strategies and discovering new interrationships and dynamics in the system.

Different Paths to Victory - Euros tend to be designed and developed so there are no obvious paths to victory. You don't 'crack' them after a few playings. An approach that gave you the win last time will not work because the variables have changed. You have to be flexible.

Tough Choices - You usually have more things that you want/need to do, than you have actions/resources. This makes for very tough choices.

Balance - Euros often feature tight finishes. The better player will usually win (there tends to be little luck), but it's rare to see situations where a player is obviously out of the game 1/3rd of the way in, and so has to play out the string in despair or capriciously play king-maker. The intent is that you spend as much of the game as possible playing to win.

New Mechanics - A lot of people enjoy exploring new mechanics (bidding, placing influence, drafting, placing tiles, etc.) and seeing how they interract with one another.

Brevity - You can usually play 3-4 euros to completion in a 6 hour gaming session. This means you're not stuck in the same situation for too long. This gets back to spending as much of the gaming time as possible in contention to win.

Replayability - The better ones don't get stale after a few playings.


That's not to say euros are the be-all and end-all. But they address a lot the weaknesses of traditional American designs (strong get stronger, early elimination, playing time only young single men can accomodate, optimal strategies).

If you still fail to understand their appeal as games, my next question is whether you think Chess, Go, or Bridge have any merit as games.

Haffrung, thanks. That's illuminating at last. I'm doubtful about some criteria but not all.

"Easy" and "doesn't take long" seems to mean a eurogame is good insofar as it's not much of game. Were it more of a game, it wouldn't be good.

Elimination: How many American games still use that? (Honest question, I've no idea.)

Replayability/different paths: that does make sense.

Bridge, Chess, Go: see, that's the thing, and I think it's what Pundy means also. Bridge etc. are unabashedly abstract games. Form = content. Fine. Whereas eurogames look like Bridge et al. dressed up with some random theme.

Quote from: HaffrungThere's an optimal strategy to most American-style boardgames.

You seem be talking out of both sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you dismiss euros as unsophisticated games you play with your grandma. Then you call games with optimal strategies (ie almost all thematic American games) pointless.

So what sorts of boardgames do you think are thematic, sophisticated, and deep?

Not many.

Cosmic Encounter, Dune, Europe Aflame, Red Storm Rising, A line in the Sand, Fortress America, Shogun, Civilization, Vertigo, all Borg-Games, Titan, Axis & Allies, hero Quest, Star Quest. etc.

City of Chaos.

Empires in Arms, World in Flames, Imperium Romanum II, Wooden Ships & Iron Men, Third Wolrd War.

Block Games, J.U.M.P.

Pax Brittanica, Britannia, Age of Rennaissance.

I´m sure I´m missing some fun ones.

The grandness of "American" boardgame design has pinaccled some time ago.

Now, there´s a HUGE difference in quality between the games I cited and their modern cousins.

Just look at the Eagle Games...or Fantasy Flight.

We tried BattleMist and Twilight Imperium VERY hard, very often. We wanted it to be fun. But it wasn´t.

And don´t get me started on the sheer stupidity that is Age of Mythology, Tenjo, Civilization Boardgame or Napoleon in Europe.

What about Tide of Iron? Combat Commander?

I have the opportunity to play those, and all I know is that ToI is fat and CC is all the rage.

Don´t know enough about them. have to check them out. There´s still good in the market, I´m just burnt out on EG/FFG-like fiascos of the 200xs.

EDIT: I just read the reviews at BGG, and it sounds as if all FFG-suckages are firmly in place. Especially unbalanced scenarios. Why play something unbalanced if it´s not as historically accurate as can be?
We´re at war, choose sides: Game or Simulation. Don´t take the worst of both: Abstraction/ahistorical elements AND unbalanced Scenarios.

I might end up buying it for the minis. Traveller is SO hungry for all eras of warfighting.

But I´m inclined to let someone convince me of ToI´s merits. The "positive" reviews at BGG didn´t.

I totally agree with your criteria... but imbalance doesn't seem foreign to the Borgverse either. I can point you to some M'44 scenarios, and some dude on BGG actually compiled a statistic for every single one of them.

Re. ToI, some of the BGG threads seem to indicate it's more complicated. Mike Zebrowski headed the playtest, for what it's worth. What gives me pause is a purely aesthetic reason. The game looks crassly overproduced.

Quote from: SettembriniIf I meet with my gaming buddies, I will not waste my time for such trivial shit. Because we play RPGS or Wargames that are way more sophisticated and specialized. That´s just TRUTH nothing offensive going on.

You're a sad little man, but you do make a luke warm troll.

Quote from: SettembriniNot many.

Cosmic Encounter, Dune...

That's actually a pretty good list. Personally, a lot of those games are off my list because I just don't have 10-14 hours to play a boardgame these days, and when I do I want to play a 2-play wargame. Just can't stand the downtime in some of those old-school mulitiplayer games, where you often wait around for 40 minutes or more until you can take an action.

An excellent historical game in the old-school mode that plays quite briskly (though a full game will still run 10+ hours) is Pax Romana. Richard Berg has churned out a lot of dogs in his day, but Pax is a fantastic game.

For a longer two-player wargame with an emphasis on the game, you can't beat Europe Engulfed. WWII in 15-20 hours without the perfect-plan bullshit of Third Reich of the mind-blasting minutiae of World in Flames.

Quote from: SettembriniNow, there´s a HUGE difference in quality between the games I cited and their modern cousins.

Just look at the Eagle Games...or Fantasy Flight.


...And don´t get me started on the sheer stupidity that is Age of Mythology, Tenjo, Civilization Boardgame or Napoleon in Europe.

I'm with you, brother. I can't understand how Eagle Games titles even got produced. They couldn't possibly have been played by anyone except the designer.


And Tenjo is simply appaling. Gorgeous, original - a true labour of love. And completely broken out of the box. It's like an anti-game.

Fantasy Flight Games are massively overproduced and procedural. If they can turn a simple action into a three-part process where you have to shift all sorts of markers, cards, and tokens around the board, they'll do it every time. And I don't think they're allowed to publish a game that doesn't have at least four decks of cards, with a dozen coloured symbols denoting piddly shit that ultimately has little to no effect on the game. But they obviously know their market.