Columbus Day is just around the corner! I’m taking the day off work.

Did Columbus discover America? Certainly not. People had been here for thousands of years before he arrived.

Did Columbus discover America for the Europeans? Well, probably not–the Norse were in Newfoundland probably and Greenland definitely before Columbus.

What Columbus definitely did was bring back the idea that the New World could be exploited. And without European exploitation of the rest of the world, where would we be? Certainly without such fantastic games as Puerto Rico, Goa, and Taj Mahal, just to name a few. So let’s pause for a moment to remember… well, I’ll call him Lolumbus, in honor of the fact that rape and exploitation is actually nothing to base a holiday around.

Notwithstanding! Speaking of exploitation, I have finally finished the prototype of Invasion. The tables are turned, and aliens are exploiting Earth. The Earthlings try to fight back, but not with much success.

The story of the design is this: The original design for the game had about 7 separate decks of cards, one each for each of seven different game mechanics. Well, it turns out making cards is actually kind of a pain, what with creating a custom script to output a PDF, printing them, cutting them out, sleeving them… and I was in eternal procrastination mode. Well, then I bought these awesome plastic centimeter cubes in 10 different colors from an educational supply place (highly recommended) and it made me want to finish the game so I could play with them. But how to make those irksome cards? I was thinking about ways to substitute a die roll for the card draw when it finally occurred to me: the die roll is better because all the possible outcomes are right there, no need for players to be surprised when a card comes up! The dice are color-coded so you roll them all at once and then put them in the appropriate place on a playmat (printout taped to foamboard).

Photos will follow in a day or two.

Notre Dame: After two more plays, this is definitely at least as good as I thought it was. 3+++.  It’s easy to pick up and surprisingly subtle. Once you have the basic hang of it, the myriad ways timing is important become apparent. The comparisons to Puerto Rico are very apt. People speak glowingly about the prettiness of the pieces, which are indeed pleasant, but I’m more impressed by the scoring chits. Scoring might otherwise be fiddly, but the chits come in ultra-convenient denominations of 1, 3, 5, and 10, with plenty of each to go around. The presence of the 3-valued chits is particularly welcome and saves a lot of changemaking.

Yspahan: I had been pretty enthusiastic about trying this game out. But I downloaded the rules and the computer version and I’m not so sure. In particular, I can’t tell what you’re supposed to do well during the game in order to get a good score. I’ll reserve judgment until I play an over-the-board game at some point, but I don’t think I’m going to run out and buy a copy any more.

Caylus: Got it in the mail today; hope to play at some point this week. I have high hopes; it looks like it features the same timing challenges and balancing of resources that make Puerto Rico, Notre Dame, and Caylus Magna Carta so much fun. The original rules for Caylus are a notoriously tortuous pamphlet–one can be forgiven for thinking it’s a hard game to learn. But also included in the box is a single-sheet description of the rules–front and back, in a large font–with apparently no omissions, everything right there.

A variation of the Pirate Riddle from intrepid reader John Rhoadhouse, on honor of Talk Like A Pirate Day. Arrrr.

First, the pirates have a new constitution. The first pirate makes a proposal. regarding the distribution of treasure. If half or more of the pirates vote for a proposal, it succeeds. Otherwise the proposer is executed and the next pirate down the list makes a proposal. Pirates vote based on the following priorities:

1. Life–a pirate will vote for whatever will save his or her skin.
2. Treasure–the more, the better
3. Bloodlust–life and treasure being equal, pirates will vote in the way that will see as many of their fellows killed as possible.

So, the riddle: Our salty pirate crew of 10 has fallen upon hard times and has a meager treasure of only one gold coin, which cannot be cut or split up. How many pirates will die? In general, for n pirates, how many will die?

Hint: Solve the case where there is no treasure at all.

Quick link for the title: Meeples’ Choice. Go check it out…

The two most prestigious awards for Euro-games are the Spiel des Jahres (SdJ) and Deutscher Spiele Preis (DSP). (Roughly, “Game of the Year” and “German Game Prize”.) I put very little stock in either award. The SdJ is awarded by a jury, and like the Oscars, seems to go to an inappropriate choice more often than not. Supposedly it’s aimed at a more family/”light” market, but then what are (relatively) thought-heavy brainburners like Tikal, Torres, and El Grande doing on the winners list? Zooloretto, the 2007 winner, is totally forgettable, as is Elfenland. Villa Paletti is a dexterity game that won out over Puerto Rico.

By contrast, the DSP is awarded by more-or-less open voting. It has many fewer embarrassments (Puerto Rico won 2002) and most of the winners are at least defensible. Having played both Notre Dame and Pillars of the Earth, I can say that I greatly prefer Notre Dame, but at least Pillars isn’t painfully mundane.

But I want more. In particular, I think that fact that Tikal beat Ra in 1999 is a grave injustice. I had almost despaired until I happened upon the Meeples’ Choice Awards. Of particular note:

• Ra and Lost Cities selected in 1999, Tikal not even mentioned
• Puerto Rico and LotR: Confrontation selected in 2002
• Torres is absent, as is Alhambra
• Bohnanza selected for 1997

I like how three co-winners are chosen every year. (It’s worth noting that the years are broken a little differently than the SdJ and DSP. Apparently it’s by publication year for Meeples’ and award year for the others; for example, Caylus was the 2006 winner for DSP but 2005 for Meeples’ Choice. In fairness, I should note that they have the benefit of hindsight; the awards for years previous to 2001 were given retroactively. But with BGG top 50 favorites like Shogun, Taj Mahal, Tikal, San Juan, and Torres not present, I can’t fault them with crowd-following. (The snub of Taj Mahal is the only choice I really disagree with; I prefer it to Citadels. The other two for that year, Princes of Florence and Carcassone, are both very strong; 2000 was a tough year.)

Based on winners I have not played, my Radar has been updated with Age of Steam, Attika, Louis XIV, and Wyatt Earp.

I have been going through BoardGameGeek’s list of games, ranking the games that I’ve played using my own rating scale and adding a short blurb for each. The list is permalinked in the sidebar, but I’ll call it to your attention here.

I’m going from the #1-rated game down, and as of this writing, I’ve gone through the first 200. I’ll add more later and call attention as I hit various milestones. Interestingly, my preferences definitely span the whole spectrum even in the top-rated games, from 4 down to 1, and that’s not even including the wargames I know I wouldn’t be interested in.

Sorry for the long absence. I demoed Notre Dame this week and Silk Road two weeks ago. I thought Silk Road was OK, if a bit underwhelming for the $50 price tag. Then I played Notre Dame, which is fantastic and $10 cheaper. Reader Fu Leng is right: Life is too short to play merely good games.

Notre Dame: People are saying this in the same breath as mighty Puerto Rico and that’s tough company–and it speaks very well of this game that it holds its own. The two mechanics at the core of the game, action-drafting and building up resources in a triangular fashion, work very well. We played it with 5 new players–two had read the rules, three totally new–and finished in 75 minutes including rules explanation. (To be fair, we’re all seasoned gamers.) It’s lighter than Puerto Rico or Caylus Magna Carta but fills a similar niche; I much prefer it to Pillars of the Earth. If it has a weakness, it’s that player interaction is minimal. Verdict: 3++, maybe 3+++.

Silk Road: You know that feeling in Settlers when you roll a 7 and have to hit someone with the Robber, but don’t have a clear choice? OK, imagine that every turn of the game. Silk Road is packed with decisions but not only are they difficult, they’re made with limited information and don’t matter much. Production quality is fine but wasteful; inexplicably, they’ve opted for, say, wooden money chits (where every other game in the Universe uses cardboard), pushing the cost of what’s actually a small game up to $50. Look, people, for $50 I can get Memoir ‘44. It’s a playable game that I wouldn’t say no to playing in the unlikely event someone asked me to. Verdict: 2

It has come to my attention that occasionally my figures of speech get lost on people who don’t know me all that well. For instance, I sometimes use the phrases “XYZ says I have a really great personality” or “RST thinks I’m a really great friend.” The untrained Robspeaker might believe that XYZ and RST enjoy my personality and friendship.

In fact, both of these phrases indicate rejection, that XYZ and RST want nothing to do with me, in reference to the line that inevitably follows: “but I’m not interested in dating you.” This can be used semi-sincerely in the case actual of romantic rejection, or facetiously for a submission, application, request, etc. “GMT Games got back to me about my submission. Turns out they think I have a really great personality.” It can also apply to other people. “Did you hear back about your job application? Oh, they love hanging out with you and think of you as a really good friend. Sorry to hear that.”

(Should you actually need to communicate the literal meaning of one of these phrases, it needs to be recast or have context added. “XYZ and I get along well together.” “RST and I have been friends since that party back in ‘05.”)

Reader Nathan & the Cynic (that’s one reader) pointed out that when referring to games but especially when doing review-esque writing, I should include a link to BoardGameGeek for the game in question. Sheesh. You’d think getting me to complete unpleasant but important chores was part of his job or something. He’s right, of course. For some time I’ve been throwing around the idea of making an expanded version of that article for all of the games I can remember playing, and putting a sidebar link to it. I’ll try to make a Labor Day Weekend project out of it (it’s like labor!) and add links, of course, since that would be immensely helpful to those that are curious about the game.

How do you split a cookie between two people? One person cuts, the other one chooses. Great.

OK, Solomon, help me out with this one. I wish to assign starting positions on, essentially, a map board. Assume that the map board has no particular symmetry and, in particular, no rotational symmetry. Resources may be unevenly distributed. Furthermore, I would like to adhere as closely as possible to the following parameters:

• From 3-5 players will be choosing locations. Each player will choose basically one location.
• It’s OK if the locations are not quite equal, but no position should be hopelessly bad. In particular, it is not OK to have every player choose one location and then randomize who gets what location.
• Two players should not be able to collude to give one of them an excellent location.
  (Likewise, there should be no frustration that an inexperienced player has inadvertently handed out a gift.)
• It should not take too long–nothing very mathematical. The Settlers of Catan initial settlement placement is the outside limit for how long this should take.
• Since this will take place before a new player gets to see the game, it should be possible for experienced players to offer meaningful advice to a new player without having to worry about who among them will be helped or hindered by the placement.

If you can’t guess, I’m fishing for ideas to see if this basic layout can be made to work. I think it would be a lot more flavorful than a clever board with rotational symmetry for 3, 4, or 5 people; yet I still want the basic balance I’ve come to expect from Euros.

Over the last few months, I have developed a satisfied feeling. I feel like I have explored the breadth of hobby boardgaming. I don’t remember how many years ago I first looked at BoardGameGeek’s list of top-rated games, but I remember feeling overwhelmed. There were just so many of them, and Settlers of Catan, the game which had been so far above any board game before, rated only twenty-somethingth!

Now, I have played many dozens of board games including many of these widespread favorites, and I understand why people love them. I know many of the important ideas that cross across games and their history. I know some of the important designers and publishers and a little bit about the publishing industry.

To be sure, I have not explored the depth of the hobby, and this is also a good feeling, because I like learning, and I like playing new (or new-to-me) games. Being done would suck! Certainly there are a couple dozen great games and a hundred or so I’ll enjoy still out there. But I know where to look to find them, what to look for, and what I know to avoid because I won’t like it. And new stuff is still being published, which is great, of course! But I feel “caught up” in a way that I never could with, say, books or music–I feel like I have a grasp of the gaming zeitgeist, despite the fact that I wasn’t paying any attention between 1995 and 2004.