Ludocracy Now

Yesterday saw some serious, and not-so-serious, board gaming.  It all started off at the crack of noon when ludocrat Jessica showed up and I presented her with a slew of games new and sorta new.

We dove into Quarriors! because I wanted to get some pics of a hot chick rollin’ some neon dice but I had a major camera fail and all those brilliant pictures were lost to oblivion.  I will not be so hasty with the delete key on the camera until I know that the pictures were transferred correctly.  It’s only a mistake if you don’t learn from it, right Inspirational Poster on the Wall of the Queen of Peace Gym? Right!

Anyway, we played two games and I was… unimpressed.  Way more dice were damaged than I had initially thought, and Jessica was completely out of the first game after I had rolled a 9 and bought a Dragon or something.  I breathed fire all over her for an easy win.  The second game saw Jessica buy portals a-plenty and with her thinned deck we had a much closer game, but again, I won, this time without rolling a 9.

One good hand makes it nearly impossible for the other player to catch up because the game is so short.  Also, I felt like I didn’t make one conscious strategic or tactical decision, or any I did make were fairly obvious.  There is something to be said for rolling colorful dice, and lots of them, but I highly doubt I will recommend this one for the table any time soon—maybe, MAYBE to try it with more than 2 players and maybe if I’m completely hammered and unable to string together coherent though.  Initial estimate of a B was too high, more like a C, C-.  Although Jessica gave it an A- I think.

After a brief lacuna in play wherein I helped add some functionality to Jeff’s Meryl Streep Blog, Jessica and I took up 1960: Making of the President this time with me explaining all of the rules to her.  Heh, heh.

I played the issues very very strong per the advice on BGG and had two endorsements in every region.  However, Jessica had strong hands and I played tactically miserably in the end game to lose to her 275 to 253 (One of those southern states didn’t score because they are racist and I activated some election day event).  That’s 3 plays of 1960, and 3 Kennedy wins.  I mother effing blew it.

My brain was burnt from exercising whatever web design know-how I had and losing on 1960 but we took up Innovation because I wanted to see more of it in action.  We played about ten minutes, realized I was splaying left instead of splaying right and decided to end less than halfway through.  There’s a little too much reading in this game when you’re just learning and you want something quick.  I can definitely see this being a great thirty minute slug fest once as more people know the mechanics but we are not there yet.

Now would be time for a great CAT PIC INTERLUDE but, lucky for you, those pictures were also lost in the Great Camera Fail of 2011.  So I give you this cat emoticon: >^.,.^<

After Jessica and I parted ways, I drove south to Ludocrat Nate and anti-Ludocrat Jake’s new pad in the Wedge district (Hipster alert!  There were fixies and picnic blankets all over the place.  Didn’t they know the Hipster ended in 2003?).  Jake, as host, wanted either Dominant Species or Battlestar Galactica and although DS is probably my favorite game, I knew I had to get BSG to the table. 

History Lesson:  Battlestar Galactica was the board game that started this whole mess.  I can’t remember how I happened to get a Google search result for the BSG board game, but that led me to boardgamegeek.com and the rest is this tragedy that has turned into a tumbleog.

I was slightly nervous for BSG’s maiden voyage as we had 7 lined up, or so I thought.  Austin said he couldn’t make it so I thought: Perfect! 6 People!  Nearly ideal!  Then 6 became 7, and 7 became 9, and 9 became 5 girls talking about ice cream and networking and post-graduation plans and “Wasn’t Friends with Benefits kind of that Natalie Portman movie exactly?” And although, yes, that is true (I’ve seen neither but can imagine), this milieu did not a great Battlestar Session make.  I should say, however, that a few of the girls really were interested and hoped I’d bring it back to the table at some point when there was a little less insanity.

However, like Francis Fox Piven, I am not one to let a good crisis go to waste.  As our group was whittled down to four, my own Starbuck Angel/Ghost (seriously, what was she?) came to my aid in the form of a text from a Neo-Ludocrat Greg who I knew was a BSG enthusiast and also a resident of the wedge neighborhood.  I invited him over, and the five of us restarted the game.  Four with some, albeit little, experience, and one person with none but interested enough to pay attention.

I’ve heard five is the ideal number for this game (so as to avoid any “Sympathizers” in the Sleeper Phase [And now you’re wondering why those five girls might have been in a little over their head.  Because, what?]) and I think that’s probably right.  I opted for Gaius so I could be President and also have a better chance of being a Cylon, but I was dealt two Not a Cylon cards.  However, the very first skill check alerted us to either 1) someone who didn’t know how to help out on skill checks or 2) A cylon in our midst!

As she (spoiler alert: it was Annie [Happy Birthday, Annie!]) was not a very disruptive Cylon (she confessed she was too nervous to do too much), we proceeded through two jumps with all but one of our resources in the blue and I decided to brig Jake just for the hell of it after I used my cylon detector to prove Nate was a good guy.  As Jake was wallowing in the brig, Annie revealed herself to be a double cylon and damaged our Galactica as seen above.

With the night winding down, we decided to end there.  Now that there are more people who know how to play the game, I’m certain it will see more table time.  It is very enjoyable to accuse everyone of being a cylon for the most innocuous things (You fast forwarded through Gaga? CYLON!).  However, the next time we will start with five instead of nine, maybe.

Tonight was a very special (they all are, really) edition of Ludocracy Now!  Not only would I be breaking in a new member but also a new game.  I knew everything would have to go just right as Jessica had expressed concern that she wouldn’t “fit in” with Ludocracy Now! because she wasn’t “smart enough.”  I assured her that there are plenty of stupider people in the group and that not liking Settlers of Catan the one time you played it could actually be an indication that you will have fun playing the games that I like.  Since it would be a 2player night, I decided to make a 2player dinner.

(Hat tip to Ludocrat Tim for introducing me to the deconstructed niçoise salad).  In case you were wondering, yes, that is Tilapia (Kennedy’s favorite fish*  *not intended to be a factual statement).  Not only was the food gorgeous, but Jessica had also provided a Rosé wine—she had heard Dara Mousekowitz (the food critic?) talk about Rosés on something called a Radio earlier that day.

After dinner and a glass of wine on the porch, we opened up the box and set up the board.  I read through most of the rules (leaving out the debate round rules… thinking we could “worry about that later”…), enough that we could serviceably play cards without complete ignorance.  Jessica was excited, but wary.  As she should have been considering the lack of debate rules basically meant she conceded 4 states to me.

The board at the end of the 8th round looked neck and neck.  I went back and forth between feeling like I had won and feeling like I had completely let down the Democratic party (not unlike how I felt on Nov 2nd 2010).  We still had the two election day events to play:

Which resulted in Illinois swinging for Kennedy and then back to Nixon.  Considering that 54 point swing happened twice in the span of one minute meant that there was actual tension, something that maybe doesn’t happen in a lot of our games.

The south looked good for me/Kennedy.  I was disappointed to give up Texas and would have loved to have the 2008 electoral votes of Florida but it was nice to have the old Dixiecrat South in my pocket.

I had managed to wrastle California away from Nixon although s/he completely nullified my endorsement advantage by having single support in every other state.

The midwest looks pretty dead—but really it had been home to epic political bloodshed.  Jess and I went back in forth during a turn where I held Midwest Momentum (and probably shouldn’t have told her I did) as every time I took the lead in states, she clawed her way back to a draw thus nullifying the card and also sweeping up the undecideds with her endorsement… way harsh.

New York was also an intensely fought battle but one Jess couldn’t win.  She’s probably wondering why she spent 4 cubes on Maryland.

After the undecideds were split up, Nixon had 28 states to Kennedy’s 22.  After the initial calculation I had manged to come up with a score… 272-272.  I was pretty sure that this was an impossible result, especially since there were only 537 electoral votes to go around.  This meant:  A recount.  Thankfully I had written down each state so we double checked Kennedy’s vote count and got 272 again.  This did not augur well for Nixon as double checking her votes meant that Utah was not actually worth 11 (and I think we are all thankful for that.  In a side note, I saw that the Mormons were out in full force in my neighborhood this afternoon.  “You’re barkin’ up the wrong tree, Buddy!”) but, sadly, only 4.  Lord knows how I can write a 4 that looks like an 11 but I did.  I will say that the “recount” really added to the theme and the tension of the game.  And even though I won 272-265, I’ll chalk it up to the many rules we realized we had broken two rounds later and the fact that not explaining the “debates” round to Jessica completely halted her momentum (Not on purpose, I promise).

(Jessica surveying the recount and thusly, her loss.  Puss turning herself into a hairball)

All in all, Jessica actually enjoyed herself even though at times it felt like two hours of slogging through rules.  The last few rounds we both understood enough of the possibilities to really cramp eachother’s styles.  The game was intense and we are both looking forward to another round.  But really, I hope Nixon never wins.

(Subtitle:  Joe’s photographical incompetence makes a return)

If you’ve met me for at least one second, you know that I am an unabashedly political person.  (In some sense, you all are too because politics is life and versa vice.)  And now that the legislative session is over, I am looking for something to sate my partisan appetite until Guv Dayton wrangles the “Terrible 201” back to Skank Paul for some “special” session goodness.

Thank God for board games, specifically Campaign Manager 2008 and 1960: Making of the President.

Despite having the same two designers, the games have some immediate differences and similarities.  We see that the designers (who are the same for both games!) have chosen to put the year in different places.  I read this to indicate that they were intending to shock us with “1960” as if this year had really existed.  You’ll also notice that 1960 has been laid in the “Landscape” alignment whereas 2008 is in “Portrait”.  Does this speak to the fact that we now live in a more “image” based culture?  No, it doesn’t, although we do, it speaks to the fact that 2008 is a lighter game with less fewer components.

Here you see the rule book size comparison.  2008 definitely has a lot less going on at one given time.  Less Fewer cards, less fewer states in play [Edit: Jeff is helping me learn English.], less table space, but still the same number of presidential candidates! (that get to play the game, anyway.  Sorry Chuck Baldwin!)  Let’s open up 2008 first and see what’s inside:

Here we see the four states that are in play, the victory track, the “going negative” chart, and (in case you can’t read it) a “ZNN” Update that asks something like “Is Palin really qualified?” (Spoiler: No. She’s not!) I would have preferred the “Palin interview shows turkey being slaughtered in background” but I think that took place after the election.

The game is played with each player choosing 15 of the 45 available cards for your candidate.  They generally allow you to “gain support in minority issue” or “move issue marker one space toward defense” or “change key demographic to Spoiled Brat Limousine Liberals.”  In this instance, the Obama player has won Minnesota because she has turned all voters in the “Majority Issue” (this case: Economy [every state has the same two issues available, Defense and Economy]) so she adds the blue MN bar to her victory track and puts another state in play.

Here’s an example of some of the cards available.  Remember these jokers?  Rick Warren?  The word “Mavericky”?  The Governator and Oprah?  I really hope I forget all of this by 2014.  I’m drinking like I’m trying to, anyway.

Now onto 1960, an election I don’t even believe happened.  This game has two things that give it a huge advantage over 2008.

A shit ton of wooden cubes, and a board.

It also has a lot more complexity.  Every state is in play (Who knew Alaska was a state back then??), you have to manage media, momentum, and issues, and there are so many choices you have with the cards in your hand I imagine it could be overwhelming when you first give ‘er a shot.  (Disclaimer: I have not taken ‘er for a spin.)

Basically you run around the grand old US of A and try to place a bunch of the wooden cubes of your color on the state’s seal.  If you have four on a state, it makes it very difficult for your opponent to gain ground.

About Halfway through the game, you also have a “debate” where the Nixon player has to spritz water on his face and look gross and sweaty.

There are also many more cards involved in this game.  Also: Nixon’s Knee?  What?  Guess I wasn’t around for that one.

Anyway, both games look pretty fun.  Jeff and I played a round of 2008 and his John McCain murdered my Barry O’Bomber.  I’ve read that there are not very many viable strategies in 2008 which can make for limited replay value but considering how stupid I am, I doubt I will ever figure them out.  1960 looks like it will be a much more tense and brain drainy game but the mechanics strike me as relatively simple and possibly a good gateway into more complex war-type games.

In any event, let me know if these whacky mudslinging games intrigue you and I will play them with you—I’ll even let you be Katie Couric if you want.