13 greatest old school games
dalit...@hotmail.com
12. Mouse Trap
11. Connect Four
10. Battleship
9. Uno
8. Mastermind
7. Risk
6. Candy land
5. Trivial
4. The Game of Life
3. Scrabble
2. Clue
1. Monopoly
Chris Babcock
The conspicuous absence of "Diplomacy" from this list leads me to
believe that old_school = "games that I remember from childhood". No
problem with that, but a top X list is all but guaranteed flame bait.
While I'm not objective about Diplomacy, I'm sure that Hungry Hungry
Hippos is very much overrated is the category is any more expansive
than I intuited.
Chris
Rick Jones
It appears to me that the list is limited to widely available mass
market games, rather than hobbyist games, of which Diplomacy would be
categorized.
And entry #5 appears to be lacking a word. I have never heard of a
game named Trivial (does not mean that there is not one of course), but
Trivial Pursuit can be considered a classic nowadays.
I would ask the original poster if this list is based on his own
opinions or if any sort of research, survey or poll is behind the
selections?
--
Rick Jones
Remove the Extra Dot to e-mail me
"In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up
because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't
speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came
for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-Reverend Martin Niemoller
Manuel
What about Axis & Allies? it is a game with an impressive community
behind, played by all ages.
It is a classic wargame, with rules that can be understood by anyone.
The background is the Second World War, from the ending of 1941.
More recent games, but I think they were available in classic editions
in the past:
- Carcassonne
- Heroscape
--
http://NewOnlineShopping.net Read the article about the Star Wars Jersey!
http://TechGamesBlog.com USB Gadgets, Music, a Magic Wand and... Star Wars.
Peter Clinch
I guess it depends on your definition of "great"...
Mousetrap is widely considered "great" by people (mainly kids) who've
seen it and played it up to, say, a dozen times. But, as I found out
myself when I got it for Christmas as a sprog, it soon wears a bit thin.
A bit like Snakes and Ladders, only not quite as good as that because
once the trap is built and you're all going round in a circle at the end
there's even less of interest. So either I wouldn't put it in such a
list, or if I did it would be lower than S&L. Candyland is a US
phenomenon and I've not even seen a set, but from what I understand of
it the same would apply.
"Old school" games I loved in my youth, are not in the list above, and I
still enjoy playing today, would include Sorry! and Careers.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
John
> >> 12. Mouse Trap
> >> 11. Connect Four
> >> 10. Battleship
> >> 9. Uno
> >> 8. Mastermind
> >> 7. Risk
> >> 6. Candy land
> >> 5. Trivial
> >> 4. The Game of Life
> >> 3. Scrabble
> >> 2. Clue
> >> 1. Monopoly
I'd rather put Scrabble as No. 1 , and Monopoly as No. 3 .
I find that Monopoly relies on a lot of luck on the dice roll, and
there's only 2 options each turn if you land on an unowned property:
Buy or Sell. This is opposed to Scrabble, where you have to think of a
good word from the letters you have AND factor in the positioning of
the word to obtain maximum score.
Peter Clinch
> I find that Monopoly relies on a lot of luck on the dice roll, and
> there's only 2 options each turn if you land on an unowned property:
> Buy or Sell. This is opposed to Scrabble, where you have to think of a
> good word from the letters you have AND factor in the positioning of
> the word to obtain maximum score.
I think Scrabble is the better game too, but while Monopoly is a lot
about the luck of the dice roll it's also the case that he tiles you
(randomly) pick up in Scrabble determine a lot of how well you do too.
John
combinations of words you could potentially make.
Unless you're cursed with a rack that's all Consonants, you can
usually make more than 2 possible words, which makes it far more
interesting.
John
to strategically place a 2 or 3 letter word in parallel to another
word to gain 15+ points : ) .
Peter Clinch
> But with the letters you pick up in Scrabble, there are way more
> combinations of words you could potentially make.
Certainly, but if all else is equal a person with a better letter
selection over the course of the game will beat one with an inferior one.
> Unless you're cursed with a rack that's all Consonants, you can
> usually make more than 2 possible words, which makes it far more
> interesting.
My more usual problem is a rack full of i and e, which means I can
almost certainly make words but not which score me very much :-(
But your fundamental point that there are more options than in Monopoly
is one I agree with.
John
at the right times is more likely to succeed. However I prefer that
sort of luck which is more random (mathematically) than in monopoly
which is double dice rolls of 2-12.
I totally hate racks that are full of Is and Es (or As and Us) as
well! Too bad EIEIO isn't a word ; )
Where do you play Scrabble usually?
Peter Clinch
Just with family/friends at home: only game I go somewhere for is Go
(and I guess Chess now I've started helping the Chess Club at the
primary school where my kids are, but I'm hoping to subvert them to Go
after a while...)
John
in terms of attack and defense. I do have a Go Board at home (reverse
side is for Chinese Chess), and the black/white glass stones but I
haven't played against anyone for more than a year. It's great that
you're enjoying it though and that you're patient enough to play it
often.
There's a Go Club at my Uni, but no Scrabble Club. You might be
interested in a Japanese cartoon called "Hikaru no Go", maybe your
kids might be more interested in Go after watching the subbed version
of that series!
Peter Clinch
> There's a Go Club at my Uni, but no Scrabble Club. You might be
> interested in a Japanese cartoon called "Hikaru no Go", maybe your
> kids might be more interested in Go after watching the subbed version
> of that series!
Volumes 1-16 sit on the bookshelf awaiting their interest, which is
getting to the point it might be quite soon. There's no hurry, and I
won't push them.
John
interest. If they get hooked on Go, I guess you could add Volumes
17-23 to your collection!
What rule set does your Go Club follow?
Peter Clinch
[Hikaru No Go]
> Wow volumes 1-16, That should be more than enough for them to gain
> interest. If they get hooked on Go, I guess you could add Volumes
> 17-23 to your collection!
Just waiting for them to come out in English... next one in a couple of
weeks.
> What rule set does your Go Club follow?
We use Japanese because that's what we're used to. British Go
Association adopted AGA rules for finishing a while ago, but though
we're okay with that we never bother at club nights because they mainly
seem aimed at stopping dickheads being dickheads. At a club you've the
luxury of not having to play dickheads...
I used to look at the Go usenet group on rec.games and some there seemed
very preoccupied with the end of the game being broken with Japanese
rules and needing fixed. News to us, we never had a problem with it.
Maybe we're not smart enough...
John
the game?
I'm guessing that one of them is when the board is nearly entirely
filled and there are no more legal plays due to "Ko" repetition, or
both people passing twice in a row. And score calculation involved
counting the stones and the surrounded land territory.
Do elaborate on how people act like dickheads in Go, that's the first
time I've ever heard of anyone saying that!
John
come you don't check it out anymore?
Peter Clinch
> What are differences between the AGA and Japanese method in finishing
> the game?
>
> I'm guessing that one of them is when the board is nearly entirely
> filled and there are no more legal plays due to "Ko" repetition, or
> both people passing twice in a row. And score calculation involved
> counting the stones and the surrounded land territory.
With AGA passing at the end requires giving a pass-stone for every pass
as a prisoner to one's opponent, so there is nothing to gain by passing
and you'll effectively be compelled to play out any questionable areas
to decide who gets them. It pushes the players to a more formal
conclusion (as does Chinese scoring, where you can't lose a point by
playing a reinforcing stone into your own territory).
Those fascinated by the minutiae of Go scoring can probably give you a
much better and more complete description. My thinking is what i use
ain't broken for what i use it for so I'm not going out of my way to fix it.
> Do elaborate on how people act like dickheads in Go, that's the first
> time I've ever heard of anyone saying that!
Without the pass-stones removing the point in passing someone might
claim an area is theirs when it's ambiguous. Between friends you just
come to an equitable decision about playing it out, but if the players
are being rules lawyers (i.e., dickheads IMHO) then that becomes more of
a grey area. At club level the solution to playing with people who are
more interested in strict rules than having a good game is simply not to
bother playing them...
Peter Clinch
> rec.games.go is still relatively active with a lot of subscribers, how
> come you don't check it out anymore?
Last tme I looked they were mainly discussing things of no particular
interest to me.
Given the choice of reading about disagreements between the merits of
scoring systems, or a quick online game at KGS, I'll go for actually
playing.
I could almost certainly get a lot better by reading more about tactics
and strategy, but I personally prefer to play indifferently than read
about playing well.
John
particular on whether a territory is considered theirs am I right?
In Chinese rules, I think an empty territory belongs to you if there's
no way it can be connected to any of your opponent's pieces by any
adjacent territories.
And there's also "neutral" territories which I think are called "Seki"
in Japanese, where they are empty territories, but they're adjacent to
both player's pieces, and actually become a very dangerous area in the
later stages of the game, and they're not worth any points either.
You say that the British Go Association adopted AGA rules for
finishing, does that include the Komi being 7.5? (too high imo). What
is your komi?
Nick Wedd
<p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk> writes
>John wrote:
>[Hikaru No Go]
>> Wow volumes 1-16, That should be more than enough for them to gain
>> interest. If they get hooked on Go, I guess you could add Volumes
>> 17-23 to your collection!
>
>Just waiting for them to come out in English... next one in a couple of
>weeks.
>
>> What rule set does your Go Club follow?
>
>We use Japanese because that's what we're used to. British Go
>Association adopted AGA rules for finishing a while ago, but though
>we're okay with that we never bother at club nights because they mainly
>seem aimed at stopping dickheads being dickheads. At a club you've the
>luxury of not having to play dickheads...
I have been referee at the London Open Go tournament for the last few
years. While Japanese rules were in use, I used to have to deal with
disputes where the game had ended, or nearly ended, and there was a
disagreement about the rules of play. This problem has vanished since
the BGA switched from Japanese to AGA rules. The disputes occurred
between weaker players, below around 10 kyu, and were caused by one or
both of players having a mistaken understanding of the Japanese rules.
As almost all kyu players, and many dan players, are mistaken about some
aspects of the Japanese rules, I would be reluctant to describe them all
as "dickheads".
I will give one example. I was summoned to a game by Black, who told me
"he claims my stones here are dead, but I don't see why". White said,
"yes they're dead, I play there and there's no way she can answer". It
seemed to me that there was a way she could answer, there was a ko which
neither of them had spotted. But the referee's duty is not to establish
the "real" status of a difficult group, it is to explain the rules. I
was obliged to explain to them how the Japanese "confirmation phase",
with its "pass-for-ko" rule, works. I don't think he understood my
explanation (he hadn't realised that there was a possible ko), and I am
sure she didn't. Her eyes began to glaze over, and she resigned.
Both these players were trying to play properly, they were not trying to
be rules lawyers. They had, appropriately, summoned the referee. They
were not being dickheads. I am not pleased with the way I handled the
dispute. I am pleased that such disputes no longer occur.
>I used to look at the Go usenet group on rec.games and some there seemed
>very preoccupied with the end of the game being broken with Japanese
>rules and needing fixed. News to us, we never had a problem with it.
>Maybe we're not smart enough...
rec.games.go is almost dead now. Most of the people who used to post
there have moved to http://www.godiscussions.com/, which is more active
than rec.games.go ever was.
Nick
--
Nick Wedd ni...@maproom.co.uk
Peter Clinch
> As almost all kyu players, and many dan players, are mistaken about some
> aspects of the Japanese rules, I would be reluctant to describe them all
> as "dickheads".
I don't describe people so because they misunderstand the exact rules, I
describe people thus who won't contrive a reasonable way to finish their
game to the mutual satisfaction of both.
Again, this is much less an issue in informal club play than in a
tournament, because one can't really discuss this sort of thing under
tournament conditions. I fully support the AGA rules for use in
tournaments, ICBA with them at the local club.
Peter Clinch
> Oh so basically the people can be dickheads because they're being very
> particular on whether a territory is considered theirs am I right?
I'm not really trying to pin it down to things that specific... A
more general definition applicable to /any/ games: people playing a
game who don't realise that everyone having a good time is actually
a lot of the reason to be playing games.
Some folk who take games much, much more seriously than I do may
well disagree with that, as is their perogative, but I'd really
rather not be playing them and I suspect the feeling would be mutual.
> You say that the British Go Association adopted AGA rules for
> finishing, does that include the Komi being 7.5? (too high imo). What
> is your komi?
I think so. When we're not playing handicap stones I think we
generally go with 6. If that sounds a bit vague then it is:
playing a friend we'll be happy to say "I'm 3 ahead, but with a
Komi I guess I'd lose, that was a good game, fancy another beer?".
And I play too fast, and I'm happy to let people take moves back,
etc. To me, "it's just a game" is a feature, not a bug.
John
for a Tie? I think the standard was supposed to be 5.5 .
Anyway I agree with your stance that games are often meant to be
played for fun casually, although in tournaments, the technicalities
ought to be adhered to.
Peter Clinch
> If you make your Komi 6 though, wouldn't there still be a potential
> for a Tie?
Yes. And?
If we played similarly well, why should one of us have to win over the
other?
Phil Carmody
> John wrote:
>> If you make your Komi 6 though, wouldn't there still be a potential
>> for a Tie?
>
> Yes. And?
>
> If we played similarly well, why should one of us have to win over the
> other?
Absolutely; whilst as a mathematician I understand the desire for
there to be a winner, as a game player it's a false dichotomy.
Phil
--
Any true emperor never needs to wear clothes. -- Devany on r.a.s.f1