Fort Worth Gamers: gaming session 07/09/06
Michael Ward
This was another of our irregularly scheduled weekend sessions. We
eventually had five gamers at two tables this afternoon.
Table #1 - Jamie, then Stephen G beat Michael K at his home made Dvonn.
Next up was Michael K's China. Scores: Michael K 50, Stephen G 35, Jamie 33.
Then, after Stephen R joined them they played Michael K's Tigris &
Euphrates, which was new to Stephen R. They were still playing when I left
at 7:40. But from peaking behind the screens it appeared Michael K was way
ahead.
Table #2 - My Hellas. The first half of the game saw no voyaging, which is
unusual. I guess we've been playing too many wargames, because all we were
doing was attacking each other (with occasional turns of "burst of strength"
to reinforce). My hand full of god cards were slowly turning the tide of
the war my favor. Eventually I tired of constant battle and voyaged. Darrell
followed suite. And he found a temple in short order. However I relieved him
of it soon thereafter with a "swap a city" god card. We both did a little
more voyaging after that. Near the end Darrell found another temple, thereby
achieving temple parity with me (nullifying my burst of strength advantage
due to temple majority). But the war had been going badly for him. At one
point I had him down seven cities to two. He had a resurgence, and got up to
six cites near the end. But I eventually got to the magical number of ten
cities to win. Scores: Michael W 10, Darrell 5. Duration: 51 minutes.
Darrell had one failed voyage (the tile drawn wouldn't fit). All of my
voyages worked out.
Then my Caesar & Cleopatra. Darrell took the Romans, leaving me the
Egyptians. Things went pretty much my way the first third of the game. Then
Darrell made a *big* comeback. It seemed like whichever patrician he
reinforced he would immediately draw their vote card (whereas I kept drawing
"No vote today - orgy"). I saw my lead in patricians taken of about seven to
two quickly crumble. We had an unusual end game. I'd read of this happening
, but it was a first for me, I think. We had a tie on the last patrician
card. And each time one of us tried to break it the other player would use
an action card to nullify the attempt. Eventually we both ran out of
effective cards and had to leave that last patrician unresolved. Yet even if
I'd gained it I still would have lost (it was only worth one point).
Scores: Darrell 16, Michael W 11. Duration: 40 minutes. We both took 10
patricians, but Darrell made more bonus points than I did.
Next, my Octi, which was new to Darrell. This game is called Octi Extreme
now, but it was just Octi when I bought it in 2001. I hadn't played it since
08/10/03. Here's a photo of what my set looks like
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/11018 The object is to capture your
opponents three Octi squares. The wooden pods have holes (8) in their sides.
Wherever you insert pegs the pod can move in that direction.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/126148 You can capture enemy pods by
jumping over them. We used the standard rules in our first game. Well, it
wasn't long before I'd captured one of Darrell's Octi squares and was
threatening another one. He thought he was in dire straights. But I knew he
still had a good chance to win, since he had a pod near my Octi squares. I
was afraid he'd capture one, then liberate a couple of captured pods and
take the other two. He eventually saw this possibility and began to
implement it. Yet I was a little quicker. When I took his third Octi square
he was only two moves away from winning himself. There's no score in Octi,
you either win or you don't. So... I won. Duration: 17 minutes.
For our second game of Octi we used two additional rules (what I like to
call the advanced game): the superprong and the endless board. The
superprong allows a pod so equipped an extra move. The endless board allows
you to do things like move off the left side of the mat and reenter on the
right side. I thought I was being smart exploiting that feature. But I was
too smart for my own good. Darrell saw what I was doing and counter-attacked
with his pod containing his superprong. By mid-game he'd captured my
superprong equipped pod. Now that he had two superprongs he basically had
three moves to my one each turn. Yet I held out for as long as I could,
pressing my attack on his home Octi squares. But his extra movement ability
overtook me before I could fully implement my plan. I had two of his three
Octi squares, but the third one was occupied by a one of his pods bristling
with prongs. And much like a porcupine, approaching such a beast must be
done with great care. So when he won I was still something like four or five
moves from winning myself. Duration: 31 minutes. I do take some consolation
from the fact that I held on as long as I did after I lost my superprong.
Usually after that happens a person loses in short order.
Finally, my Pente, which was also new to Darrell. I hadn't played since
07/28/02, but my couple of decades of experience (well over 500 games) soon
came back to me. Here's a photo of a set like mine
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/76251 The object is to get five of your
stones in a row, or capture five pairs of your opponent's stones. Most game
(something like 85%) are won by the five in a row method. Game #1 - I won in
7 minutes. Game #2 - I won in 4 minutes. Game #3 - I won in 6 minutes. Game
#4 - I won in 4 minutes. We paused at that point and I gave Darrell some
strategy tips and information on which formations are strong and which are
weak. Game #5 - I won in 11 minutes (I introduced Darrell to my variation
on the dread X; the horrible H). It was the standard 5 in a row win. But I
had also captured four pairs of Darrell's stones. Yet he held out a lot
longer this time; he was improving. At one point I thought I might lose, but
he was unable to keep up his momentum (keep me on the defensive). Game #6 -
I won in 4 minutes. Game #7 - I won in 3 minutes.
See BoardgameGeek http://www.boardgamegeek.com/ for more information on the
games mentioned above. And if you're in the area on a Tuesday night feel
free to join us for a game.
--
Michael Ward
Fort Worth Gamers
To reply directly use mwar...@charterNOSPAM.net Remove the NOSPAM or you
won't reach me.
And check out our web site http://fortworthgamers.inluminous.net/
Michael Kandrac
"Michael Ward" <mwar...@charterNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:oaksg.763$S85...@fe03.lga...
> Sunday, 07/09/06 3 to 8:00 PM at Borders Books on S. Hulen in Fort Worth.
>
> This was another of our irregularly scheduled weekend sessions. We
> eventually had five gamers at two tables this afternoon.
>
> Table #1 - Jamie, then Stephen G beat Michael K at his home made Dvonn.
>
> Next up was Michael K's China. Scores: Michael K 50, Stephen G 35, Jamie
> 33.
>
> Then, after Stephen R joined them they played Michael K's Tigris &
> Euphrates, which was new to Stephen R. They were still playing when I left
> at 7:40. But from peaking behind the screens it appeared Michael K was way
> ahead.
Gentle Reader,
Allow me to add some commentary to Michael's brief synopsis of the gaming
that occurred on Table #1.
Dvonn
We used my freshly crafted "interpretation" of Kris Burm's excellent
abstract strategy game, which is considered by many to be the best in the
Gipf series:
http://www.gipf.com/project_gipf/index.html
I've owned and very much enjoyed Zertz since the end of April. Looking at
the rest of the Gipf series, it seemed apparent that the easiest of the
remaining games that could be fashioned out of wood was also most possibly
the best. I had a generous supply of wooden disks found in a thrift store
during a recent visit to Michigan. The game "Bottle Topps" was missing the
bottle itself, but all the disks were there in a handy draw-string bag which
I purchased for a little over a buck. I didn't know how the disks would be
used at the time, but I thought at the very least they could be used for
were chips or money tokens. About 2 weeks ago it occurred to me that I
should make a Dvonn game using the disks for "stones." A Dvonn stone must
be thin in order to make stacking as many as 8 or more practical. The
Bottle Topps pieces are thin enough.
http://boardgamegeek.com/game/2693
The board would need to be over 2 feet long and a foot wide dictated by the
diameter of the wooden disks (1.5"). Originally I felt the board should be
made from a single piece of white pine, 1x12x23 inches. However, when a
scrap piece of oak 3/4" plywood became available at my Home Depot, I decided
to use it instead. Plywood is very strong and resistant to warping, but the
layers of wood that are seen along its height is unsightly and best covered
with a wood trim of the same thickness. Some scrap decorative molding with
a scroll design did the trick.
But what of the 49 rings that form the playing spaces of the board?
Initially I considered painting the rings, but then I connected the dots in
my brain to find the perfect solution. The Rio Grande version of the game
has spaces that are subtle rings (my wife remarked that they appear to be
mint Life Savers). I am familiar with hardware items as I have worked in
Home Depot strores for over 8 years. A 5/8" fender washer has a diameter
slightly greater than the wooden disks, and when placed directly on the
coils of an electric range, and immediately set on the board with
needle-nose pliers, renders a dark ring indelibly burned into the board with
a very nice effect. I then decided to finish the board using a Minwax
product that incorporates a pecan stain and polyurethane varnish in one
application. Three coats were suffiicient to obtain the result I desired.
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/132960
A Dvonn set requires 49 pieces that include 23 "white," 23 "black," and 3
"red" Dvonn pieces. I decided to leave the white pieces their natural wood
finish, spray painted the black pieces with black lacquer, and "borrowed"
some red nail polish from my wife to finish the Dvonn pieces. The effect of
the light and dark pieces reminds me of chess sets I have seen and used over
the years. So how does it play?
The women in my family were the first to try out my new Dvonn set. My
granddaughter Lacey and I played 3 games, and she won the series...
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/133100
Dvonn is even easier to explain than Zertz, and perhaps a bit more enjoyable
to play. I have not played the game using the Rio Grande edition, but I
can't imagine playing a smaller version of the game with plastic pieces on a
cardboard surface would improve upon the experience of using the wooden set.
The game play is somewhat like Zertz in that it is difficult to know what to
do during the early stages. Each game has 2 phases: a "placement" phase
that establishes the initial position of all 49 stones, and a movement phase
that will determine the final outcome. Like Zertz, the board gets "smaller"
with each move, as each vacated space can no longer be used for placement as
moves are only permitted to occupied spaces. Also, each piece or stack of
pieces are all moved at once, creating a vacant space. Larger and larger
stacks are created during play, and pieces that no longer connect to a
Dvonn piece are removed from the game. The game will end when no more moves
are possible, and it has been my experience that one player will often run
out of moves before the other, and this is never a good thing. In this
regard Dvonn is unlike Zertz in that consecutive moves by the same player
cannot occur in a Zertz game.
In my games with Jamie and Stephen this was the case. I ran out of moves,
and they mopped up enough of the stacks to enjoy a majority of pieces under
their control. I have yet to understand what I am doing to make this
happen, but I will continue to play the game until I can devise the tactics
necessary to win a game now and then.
China
Our game of China played out as a win for me; I was able to score the bulk
of my points through alliances. Jamie had only played the game once before,
I believe, and she was still struggling with the rules. Stephan has become
an old hand and has won previous contests of this Michael Schacht gem. The
"angst" I experience in China is how I will play my emissary pieces, which
is really the heart of the game.
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/119015
Tigris & Euphrates
Stephen R. is a fine young man who I've gotten to know at the Home Depot
where we are both employed, and he arrived during the last quarter of the
China session. He was soon being instructed in how to play Tigris &
Euphrates. We had the benefit of Stephen G's excellent copy of the Top
Licence edition of Reiner Knizia's masterpiece, and Stephen R. picked up my
explanation of the rules better than anyone I've taught the game to before.
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/15
Stephen R. picked a corner temple to form his first kingdom with Stephen G.
lurking in a kingdom nearby. While the 2 Stephens developed the northeast
quadrant, Jamie built up a kingdom in the south-central area, while I worked
the northwest. Conflict between the Stephens was inevitable with both of
them getting as good as they gave. I was able to gain points through
external conflicts and avoided monument formation as I wished to avoid
weakening my position. The strategy worked out for me, but this was a game
played with a novice, and in games like this winning and losing is far less
important than developing a new player's appreciation of a game. I think
Stephen R. enjoyed the game, and I look forward to future Sunday evenings of
T&E with the same foursome of players.
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/73201
The final scoring was...
Michael K. 12
Jamie 7
Stephen G. 5
Stephen R. 5
Regards to all,
Michael K.