Dominion Strategy Forum
Miscellaneous => Other Games => Topic started by: GendoIkari on November 23, 2014, 02:42:18 am
-
Temporum is absolutely awesome. Donald, you've done it again!
-
I'm quite excited to play Temporum, but I can only see it on import so far and I don't want to pay £60 ($100) for the privilege.
-
Temporum is absolutely awesome. Donald, you've done it again!
Details, man, details!
And where did you play?
-
Sorry, typing from phone; so more details later. Played at BGG.con. Will preorder unless I'm pretty sure I'll get it for Christmas instead.
-
Ok, details / review. TL;DR; read OP; it's great.
I'm not much of a reviewer; so I'll just talk about what the game is for those who don't know, and what I like about it.
So Temporum is Dominion with good theme (the theme being time travel). Ok, not really. It's nothing like Dominion, other than some sort of familiar "feel" to it. The game comes with a lot of cards (dunno how many); and you choose 10 for each game. So every game is different; and lots of potential for expansion. The 10 cards that were chosen for the current game don't act as cards; they just act as something that makes up the game board; they determine what the 10 actions are available for that game.
On top of those 10 cards; there's another type of card; which is a large deck containing 2 each of lots of cards. These are the cards that you are drawing, playing, and scoring. All from 1 common deck; each player has a hand of cards; but not his own deck. So the object is to score 30 points before anyone else. As soon as someone scores 30 points, that person wins (at the end of his turn. Dunno if it's possible to get to 30, but then lose 1 before the end of your turn. If that happened; you wouldn't win, because you check for victory at the end of turn). So of course if the start player wins; it means he had an extra turn. But this is balanced the same way Lords of Waterdeep is; by giving each player more starting money the later he is in turn order.
One great mechanic to the game is that you don't automatically draw cards or refresh your hand at the start or end of your turn. If you want to draw cards, you need to actually go to one of the 10 spaces that has a "draw cards" as the action that you take there. Same goes for playing cards. You can't just play a card on your turn, you have to go to a space that allows you to play a card. I suppose that in itself isn't new; Ticket to Ride and others do that. But where it's different is that your choices aren't "draw a card" or "play a card". You have to choose 1 of the 10 board spaces that allows you to do so, and the "draw" spaces all allow you to do different variations on "draw a card".
Then there's a part that reminds me of Race for the Galaxy a little. Every card (in the deck of cards) has both a thing that happens when you play the card, and it also has an amount of points it can score. If you play the card for the action, you can't also score the card for the points, and vice-versa. So you always have to choose what to give up, the points on the card or the action on the card. Like how in Race you have to choose whether to play a card for it's benefit or spend a card as currency to pay for a different card. I suck at making those kind of choices; but it's still a lot of fun.
So the scoring itself is really unique and awesome. Perhaps there's other things like it, but I haven't see it. It's not just a score board where you move up to 30, or collect VP chips until you have 30. Instead, you have 10 markers that each need to be moved 3 times. So like Backgammon. I guess that's another thing like it. So when you score 4 points, you get 4 point movements, which can be the same one multiple times, or 4 different ones 1 time each, or any combination of that. And it matters because you get special benefits for having the majority in each of the 4 possible score locations (including the starting location where all 10 of your points are sitting). So if you're the first person to score, and you move 1 marker twice and another marker once, then you now have the majority in 2 of the score places.
There's attacks, but they don't say "attack." So I dunno if there will be reactions. There's cards that you play for a 1-time immediate action, and other cards that you play in front of you which have an ongoing benefit. This means lots of combo potential. But slow buildup because you can usually only ever play 1 card per turn.
So while I'm sure I could play the base set several dozen times without getting bored with it; I'm already curious to see how expansions would work. It's easy to release more cards that are the ones you just choose 10 of; to make each game more different. And if I know Donald X, he already has a bunch of those planned. But then, what about the main deck that you're drawing from? You could release more of that type of card as well, but I'm not sure how it would work. Combining an expansion deck with the base deck would probably be bad. First off, you would just have a deck that's twice as large now; and you won't really see more cards per game anyway. Second, you lose a lot of possible combo things then, because you'd be unlikely to get a certain 2 cards out. Like combining all the Agricola decks together. So probably in an expansion you would just use the expansion deck instead of the main deck.
So now I'm just rambling. Feel free to ask specifics if you want to know more!
-
So while I'm sure I could play the base set several dozen times without getting bored with it; I'm already curious to see how expansions would work. It's easy to release more cards that are the ones you just choose 10 of; to make each game more different. And if I know Donald X, he already has a bunch of those planned. But then, what about the main deck that you're drawing from? You could release more of that type of card as well, but I'm not sure how it would work. Combining an expansion deck with the base deck would probably be bad. First off, you would just have a deck that's twice as large now; and you won't really see more cards per game anyway. Second, you lose a lot of possible combo things then, because you'd be unlikely to get a certain 2 cards out. Like combining all the Agricola decks together. So probably in an expansion you would just use the expansion deck instead of the main deck.
I don't know if an expansion will have more playable cards, but if it did, maybe you'd remove the duplicates from the deck and replace them with the new cards? Keep the deck size similar. This is just speculation on my part.
-
So while I'm sure I could play the base set several dozen times without getting bored with it; I'm already curious to see how expansions would work. It's easy to release more cards that are the ones you just choose 10 of; to make each game more different. And if I know Donald X, he already has a bunch of those planned. But then, what about the main deck that you're drawing from? You could release more of that type of card as well, but I'm not sure how it would work. Combining an expansion deck with the base deck would probably be bad. First off, you would just have a deck that's twice as large now; and you won't really see more cards per game anyway. Second, you lose a lot of possible combo things then, because you'd be unlikely to get a certain 2 cards out. Like combining all the Agricola decks together. So probably in an expansion you would just use the expansion deck instead of the main deck.
I don't know if an expansion will have more playable cards, but if it did, maybe you'd remove the duplicates from the deck and replace them with the new cards? Keep the deck size similar. This is just speculation on my part.
The deck is all duplicates; there's 2 of every card.
-
So while I'm sure I could play the base set several dozen times without getting bored with it; I'm already curious to see how expansions would work. It's easy to release more cards that are the ones you just choose 10 of; to make each game more different. And if I know Donald X, he already has a bunch of those planned. But then, what about the main deck that you're drawing from? You could release more of that type of card as well, but I'm not sure how it would work. Combining an expansion deck with the base deck would probably be bad. First off, you would just have a deck that's twice as large now; and you won't really see more cards per game anyway. Second, you lose a lot of possible combo things then, because you'd be unlikely to get a certain 2 cards out. Like combining all the Agricola decks together. So probably in an expansion you would just use the expansion deck instead of the main deck.
I don't know if an expansion will have more playable cards, but if it did, maybe you'd remove the duplicates from the deck and replace them with the new cards? Keep the deck size similar. This is just speculation on my part.
The deck is all duplicates; there's 2 of every card.
I'm going to assume you're being serious and clarify. Take out one of each card, leaving one of each in the deck. Then add the new cards.
-
So while I'm sure I could play the base set several dozen times without getting bored with it; I'm already curious to see how expansions would work. It's easy to release more cards that are the ones you just choose 10 of; to make each game more different. And if I know Donald X, he already has a bunch of those planned. But then, what about the main deck that you're drawing from? You could release more of that type of card as well, but I'm not sure how it would work. Combining an expansion deck with the base deck would probably be bad. First off, you would just have a deck that's twice as large now; and you won't really see more cards per game anyway. Second, you lose a lot of possible combo things then, because you'd be unlikely to get a certain 2 cards out. Like combining all the Agricola decks together. So probably in an expansion you would just use the expansion deck instead of the main deck.
I don't know if an expansion will have more playable cards, but if it did, maybe you'd remove the duplicates from the deck and replace them with the new cards? Keep the deck size similar. This is just speculation on my part.
The deck is all duplicates; there's 2 of every card.
I'm going to assume you're being serious and clarify. Take out one of each card, leaving one of each in the deck. Then add the new cards.
Yes, I was serious and had misunderstood. Thought you meant to take out all pairs of cards.
If an expansion deck were the same size as the starter deck, then I'd definitely think you'd likely just replace the entire deck. If the expansion deck is just a handful of new pairs of cards, then you could just add them in. But removing 1 of each, you completely lose the rule/mechanic of "there's 2 of each card." I think it would seem weird for an expansion to make a change like that. There's a reason that the deck has 2 of each.
-
If an expansion deck were the same size as the starter deck, then I'd definitely think you'd likely just replace the entire deck. If the expansion deck is just a handful of new pairs of cards, then you could just add them in. But removing 1 of each, you completely lose the rule/mechanic of "there's 2 of each card." I think it would seem weird for an expansion to make a change like that. There's a reason that the deck has 2 of each.
You have played the game and I haven't, so please explain. What is the reason the deck has 2 of each card, other than to have enough cards to make a decent-sized deck? Is there some mechanic that makes the duplicates pertinent? A location on the board, perhaps?
-
If an expansion deck were the same size as the starter deck, then I'd definitely think you'd likely just replace the entire deck. If the expansion deck is just a handful of new pairs of cards, then you could just add them in. But removing 1 of each, you completely lose the rule/mechanic of "there's 2 of each card." I think it would seem weird for an expansion to make a change like that. There's a reason that the deck has 2 of each.
You have played the game and I haven't, so please explain. What is the reason the deck has 2 of each card, other than to have enough cards to make a decent-sized deck? Is there some mechanic that makes the duplicates pertinent? A location on the board, perhaps?
I believe it is to make it so more than one player potentially has access to any particular card. Plus the card effects are cumulative.
-
If an expansion deck were the same size as the starter deck, then I'd definitely think you'd likely just replace the entire deck. If the expansion deck is just a handful of new pairs of cards, then you could just add them in. But removing 1 of each, you completely lose the rule/mechanic of "there's 2 of each card." I think it would seem weird for an expansion to make a change like that. There's a reason that the deck has 2 of each.
You have played the game and I haven't, so please explain. What is the reason the deck has 2 of each card, other than to have enough cards to make a decent-sized deck? Is there some mechanic that makes the duplicates pertinent? A location on the board, perhaps?
I believe it is to make it so more than one player potentially has access to any particular card. Plus the card effects are cumulative.
I was going to say the cumulative thing; I hadn't thought of the first thing.
So as I'd mentioned there's some cards that when you play, they stay in play and give you permanent (or in some cases one-shot) effects. These seem to self-combo pretty well. Not that having 2 of them gives you more than double what you get from one of them, but it gives you more of the strategy that you are going for. Like in one of my games, I had both copies of "when you score a card, draw a card" in play. So I drew 2 each time I scored; and thus didn't need to worry about taking the action to draw cards.
It would be easy for there to make a cards that specifically require duplicates... a card called X that says "when you play or score another X, ...." There might even by a card that's like that now. But I don't think it's likely that there is or will be, because it would be rare that one player would find both of the cards in a game. Macao and Agrlicola both do this, and I don't like it.
But rickert makes a good point too, having a second copy helps with the balance; it's harder for one player to win because he just happened to draw the best card. Though for the game to be balanced in general, there can't be any 1 or 2 cards that are way better than the other cards.
-
You have played the game and I haven't, so please explain. What is the reason the deck has 2 of each card, other than to have enough cards to make a decent-sized deck? Is there some mechanic that makes the duplicates pertinent? A location on the board, perhaps?
There's the opposite kind of location actually - one that lets you play cards as copies of other cards.
Initially there were no duplicates. Moritz from HiG played a game and commented on how I got plenty of variety from the 10 cards that change; why did I need the deck to be all unique cards? He thought going down to 3 or 4 copies of each card would make the game easier to learn. I thought he had a point but lowered it to merely 2 copies of each card. When I tried this out I found that I really gave nothing up to get there. And then, it can be fun to get two copies of the same card, and obv. it means 30 fewer pieces of art, which is a lot.
I will post the secret history once it's clear that people can actually buy it outside of the con.
-
Just pre-ordered from CoolStuffInc. Excited!
-
After about a dozen plays, I have high hopes that this game may actually be as good as Dominion. Of course that's impossible to say yet, but I will very comfortably say, go buy it.
-
Do you own a copy?
-
Do you own a copy?
Yeah, got it two days ago.
-
My store got them today. Sadly my gaming budget probably won't let me own it for awhile. :(
-
Voltaire, are you in the US?
-
Voltaire, are you in the US?
Yes, Chicago. I assume that means it'll be everywhere (in the US) by Monday, if it isn't already.
-
I'll check my FLGS tomorrow at the gaming meetup.
-
For those who don't care about supporting their FLGS, www.coolstuffinc.com still has it for $35. I'm extra happy because I had no idea when it was actually being released when I preordered it, but turns out I ordered it just as it was released. Should be here tomorrow. Along with One Night, Inkognito, and Castles of Mad King Ludwig.
-
Got this today, hope to get to play it soon.
-
Got this today, hope to get to play it soon.
Mine just arrived, will play a few on Monday night game night.
-
I will move to the US in a month. I am already thinking this may be the first non-necessity I buy. Please tell me it will be on Isotropic.
-
I will move to the US in a month. I am already thinking this may be the first non-necessity I buy. Please tell me it will be on Isotropic.
Come and visit me, then you can play it for "free."
-
Come and visit me, then you can play it for "free."
Those quotation marks kind-of freak me out. If you live in San Francisco or the bay area, I will gladly accept the offer.
-
Come and visit me, then you can play it for "free."
Those quotation marks kind-of freak me out. If you live in San Francisco or the bay area, I will gladly accept the offer.
I was referring to air fare. Sadly, no, I live on the opposite side of the country.
-
Just played a round of this. Oh man, this is a fun game. Have to echo Gendo's sentiments. I won the game with a Barbarian Rush from my huge hand. The only question we had was 'does the game end when the deck runs out of cards?' I couldn't find the answer to this in the rulebook.
-
Just played a round of this. Oh man, this is a fun game. Have to echo Gendo's sentiments. I won the game with a Barbarian Rush from my huge hand. The only question we had was 'does the game end when the deck runs out of cards?' I couldn't find the answer to this in the rulebook.
Found it in the rulebook: "When the Player Deck runs out, shuffle the discard pile and set it face-down as the new Player Deck."
Just played my first 2 player game. Still good with 2. I have a feeling it's going to be like Dominion, where 2 player is more strategic and competitive. One thing that's very cool is that in all 3 of my games, when a player won, at least 1 other player was 1 or 2 turns from winning. Of course, these are games between people who are all very new to the game.
I found one small thing to be a bit confusing in the rules, and that's the definition of "visiting." During the steps of a turn, it describes step 2 as moving to the zone you want to go, then step 3 as "visiting" the place, which means "following the instructions for that zone." Based on this, you would think that to "visit" a zone doesn't involve moving to it; it means simply performing the instructions on the zone. However... when various effects tell you to visit a different zone than the one you're in, the faq for those specific cards clarify that to visit a zone you first move there, then do the instructions. So if "visit" means "move and follow instructions", then why do the steps of a turn separate "move" and "visit" into 2 steps?
Also, I pulled off the Anubis Statuette / Information Age interaction/combo. This caused a confusing rule question... Anubis Statuette says that after you visit the zone you choose, you move your marker to the real zone in that time. But Information Age caused me to visit (and thus move to) other zones. So at the end of it, I was in a different time in a real zone. Does Anubis still move me back to the time where I chose to visit in the first place, in the real zone in that time? It seems not, because the Anubis FAQ says "if the player is in an unreal zone.." But it is a general rules question... why is the Anubis FAQ correct there? What stops the Anubis's normal text of "move to the real zone in that time" from happening? Has Anubis lost track of your marker?
-
Just played a round of this. Oh man, this is a fun game. Have to echo Gendo's sentiments. I won the game with a Barbarian Rush from my huge hand. The only question we had was 'does the game end when the deck runs out of cards?' I couldn't find the answer to this in the rulebook.
Is Barbarian Hoard the one that lets you discard X cards for X points? I won one of my games with that card.
-
Just played a round of this. Oh man, this is a fun game. Have to echo Gendo's sentiments. I won the game with a Barbarian Rush from my huge hand. The only question we had was 'does the game end when the deck runs out of cards?' I couldn't find the answer to this in the rulebook.
Is Barbarian Hoard the one that lets you discard X cards for X points? I won one of my games with that card.
Yeah, that one. I kind of drew it at random and couldn't believe my luck; it was just the thing I needed.
-
Just played a round of this. Oh man, this is a fun game. Have to echo Gendo's sentiments. I won the game with a Barbarian Rush from my huge hand. The only question we had was 'does the game end when the deck runs out of cards?' I couldn't find the answer to this in the rulebook.
Is Barbarian Hoard the one that lets you discard X cards for X points? I won one of my games with that card.
Yeah, that one. I kind of drew it at random and couldn't believe my luck; it was just the thing I needed.
When I had it, it was in my hand for a while, and I had 2 copies of "when you score a card, draw a card" in play. So I spent a couple turns just scoring low-value things (as I had very little money) to increase my handsize.
-
Also, I pulled off the Anubis Statuette / Information Age interaction/combo. This caused a confusing rule question... Anubis Statuette says that after you visit the zone you choose, you move your marker to the real zone in that time. But Information Age caused me to visit (and thus move to) other zones. So at the end of it, I was in a different time in a real zone. Does Anubis still move me back to the time where I chose to visit in the first place, in the real zone in that time? It seems not, because the Anubis FAQ says "if the player is in an unreal zone.." But it is a general rules question... why is the Anubis FAQ correct there? What stops the Anubis's normal text of "move to the real zone in that time" from happening? Has Anubis lost track of your marker?
I probably shouldn't speak for Donald but I get the impression he's softened his stance on "the rules are all on the cards full stop." The text, especially on Zone cards, is much briefer and seems just a hair less rigorous than in Dominion. Inquisition for instance has the same interpretation issue as Torturer from Dominion ("can I pick the choice that's impossible to carry out?") with less careful wording. Even the rulebook concedes Inquisition is an "exception to the usual rules," which I take to mean "This FAQ supersedes the card text."
If this is so, it's kind of understandable. Making the rules perfectly clear on the cards is a nice ideal to strive for, and obviously you don't want to stray too far from it, but I guess experience shows that no matter how carefully the card is worded, people will still screw it up until they read the manual (or someone explains it to them).
-
Just played my first 2 player game. Still good with 2. I have a feeling it's going to be like Dominion, where 2 player is more strategic and competitive. One thing that's very cool is that in all 3 of my games, when a player won, at least 1 other player was 1 or 2 turns from winning. Of course, these are games between people who are all very new to the game.
It plays a bit differently with each number of players. With 2 players you just desperately want to stop the other player from getting ahead; they score a card, you score a card to try to nullify any benefit for them. With 3 players there's less of that but it's still harder to rule times than with more players. With 4 players it's easy to rule times and you often can't just stop someone by yourself, you just co-rule. With 5 players it's easy to rule times but not quite as easy as with 4. And then the path of history is more controllable with fewer players.
I found one small thing to be a bit confusing in the rules, and that's the definition of "visiting." During the steps of a turn, it describes step 2 as moving to the zone you want to go, then step 3 as "visiting" the place, which means "following the instructions for that zone." Based on this, you would think that to "visit" a zone doesn't involve moving to it; it means simply performing the instructions on the zone. However... when various effects tell you to visit a different zone than the one you're in, the faq for those specific cards clarify that to visit a zone you first move there, then do the instructions. So if "visit" means "move and follow instructions", then why do the steps of a turn separate "move" and "visit" into 2 steps?
The concept of "visit" was something I was aware of needing to state clearly and I tried to and well there it is. Things that tell you to visit a zone move you there. Moving on your turn is a separate step, that seems good, and then visiting normally doesn't move you because you're already there. I wouldn't combine moving and visiting for your normal turn because on your turn you move in the way you move on turns, rather than in the way you move due to Anubis Statuette or Information Age.
Also, I pulled off the Anubis Statuette / Information Age interaction/combo. This caused a confusing rule question... Anubis Statuette says that after you visit the zone you choose, you move your marker to the real zone in that time. But Information Age caused me to visit (and thus move to) other zones. So at the end of it, I was in a different time in a real zone. Does Anubis still move me back to the time where I chose to visit in the first place, in the real zone in that time? It seems not, because the Anubis FAQ says "if the player is in an unreal zone.." But it is a general rules question... why is the Anubis FAQ correct there? What stops the Anubis's normal text of "move to the real zone in that time" from happening? Has Anubis lost track of your marker?
The intention is that Anubis Statuette just moves you back to reality. In retrospect it should say "your Time" rather than "that Time." Obv. this interaction isn't especially rare; Information Age is just the kind of place you want to go with Anubis Statuette.
-
I probably shouldn't speak for Donald but I get the impression he's softened his stance on "the rules are all on the cards full stop." The text, especially on Zone cards, is much briefer and seems just a hair less rigorous than in Dominion. Inquisition for instance has the same interpretation issue as Torturer from Dominion ("can I pick the choice that's impossible to carry out?") with less careful wording. Even the rulebook concedes Inquisition is an "exception to the usual rules," which I take to mean "This FAQ supersedes the card text."
If this is so, it's kind of understandable. Making the rules perfectly clear on the cards is a nice ideal to strive for, and obviously you don't want to stray too far from it, but I guess experience shows that no matter how carefully the card is worded, people will still screw it up until they read the manual (or someone explains it to them).
I wouldn't say that I've softened any stances. There's a basic conflict between wanting "friendly" rules and "precise" rules. The fewer card interactions you have in your game, the more you should lean towards friendly. At a certain point though friendly is unacceptable, you have to be precise because rules questions will come up. You do have to fit your text on the cards though.
You are quoting the .pdf; that "exception" business was added by an editor and I got them to take it back out. I am looking at a physical rulebook, it does not have it. Inquisition is not an exception.
I think my big mistake in the card wordings is "another." "When you play another card, draw a card" should be something like "Every time you play a card other than this, draw a card." It's clarified in the rulebook, but sometimes someone sees the printed card and thinks that the rule just happens once ever.
-
I will move to the US in a month. I am already thinking this may be the first non-necessity I buy. Please tell me it will be on Isotropic.
Where to?
-
Where to?
San Francisco, CA
-
We played another round today and seemed to run in to a stalemate situation.
Age 3 had Police State in the Middle (it prevents you from moving up to Age 2), and the two timelines reaching under it led to Nanotech Wonderland (which gains you money based on cards in hand) and the card that makes you lose your hand and gain money based on crowns in Age 4.
The problem was that neither of us had the option of drawing cards, and all our hand cards did was gain money. We couldn't exit Age 3 by going back in time and could only go between the two ages I mentioned above. Was there some way out of this we couldn't see? We just rerolled the board.
-
We played another round today and seemed to run in to a stalemate situation.
Age 3 had Police State in the Middle (it prevents you from moving up to Age 2), and the two timelines reaching under it led to Nanotech Wonderland (which gains you money based on cards in hand) and the card that makes you lose your hand and gain money based on crowns in Age 4.
The problem was that neither of us had the option of drawing cards, and all our hand cards did was gain money. We couldn't exit Age 3 by going back in time and could only go between the two ages I mentioned above. Was there some way out of this we couldn't see? We just rerolled the board.
Police State only stops you from going backwards in time from Police State itself. If you get put into Police State (or go there intentionally), you go to Nanotech Wonderland next. Maybe that's a dead turn, or maybe you have some cards in hand, whatever. Then on your next turn, you are not in the Police State, you are in Nanotech Wonderland, so you can go anywhere.
-
Hmm. I think we must have a misunderstood rule. If I understand correctly, it's only possible to travel through the real timeline, which cannot be changed from zone 4. The way we had it, the only option was to travel between police state and those two age 4 cards since we could only alter the time lines beneath police state. And those options only gave money or took it respectively. Police state just plays cards, but we didn't have those.
-
Hmm. I think we must have a misunderstood rule. If I understand correctly, it's only possible to travel through the real timeline, which cannot be changed from zone 4. The way we had it, the only option was to travel between police state and those two age 4 cards since we could only alter the time lines beneath police state. And those options only gave money or took it respectively. Police state just plays cards, but we didn't have those.
When it's time to move, you can move to any real zone - you can jump from time 4 to time 1. You have a time machine!
-
Hmm. I think we must have a misunderstood rule. If I understand correctly, it's only possible to travel through the real timeline, which cannot be changed from zone 4. The way we had it, the only option was to travel between police state and those two age 4 cards since we could only alter the time lines beneath police state. And those options only gave money or took it respectively. Police state just plays cards, but we didn't have those.
When it's time to move, you can move to any real zone - you can jump from time 4 to time 1. You have a time machine!
Wow! What a concept! That changes everything.
Sorry, as you knew already, I can't read.
-
I got this on Friday and have played about 8 games so far. Mostly 2-player, but one 3-player.
I enjoy playing it and would like to play more, so it must have something going for it. I have no handle on how "strategic" or "deep" the game is because as of now I am really awful at it. I would like to see more Time 4 zone cards, so I'm hoping we see the expansion sooner rather than later (or never).
I don't know if it will ever happen, but I would really like an isotropic or Goko-style online version. By that I mean something with easy desktop online multiplayer (not just a phone app). I'm not sure that I'll be able to play enough in real life to really sink my teeth into it.
-
I have played a bunch more times (all sadly just 2 player) but haven't had an unfun game since learning all the rules properly. I do agree with LF that the game could use more Age IV cards, but at this point it's sort of a nitpick. Age of Cats and Communist Utopia make me grin.
We are very happy to have the female meeples, by the way. It's a small touch but a nice one.
-
It is $40 CAD at Board Game Bliss. Is this a reasonable price?
I know very little about the game, but it's getting enough praise here that I am highly, highly interested.
-
It is $40 CAD at Board Game Bliss. Is this a reasonable price?
I know very little about the game, but it's getting enough praise here that I am highly, highly interested.
I paid nearly $40 for it and I would call that a reasonable price, though your definition of what is reasonable may vary. I'm sure I'll get more than $40 of entertainment from it. I also bought some wooden shape blocks (http://www.amazon.com/Melissa-Doug-Pattern-Blocks-Boards/dp/B00006JZCG) to use as replacement arrows between ages, so my actual cost was $55, though I will be giving the rest of the blocks to my kid(s) in a few years.
I have played a bunch more times (all sadly just 2 player) but haven't had an unfun game since learning all the rules properly. I do agree with LF that the game could use more Age IV cards, but at this point it's sort of a nitpick. Age of Cats and Communist Utopia make me grin.
We are very happy to have the female meeples, by the way. It's a small touch but a nice one.
While we're on the subject of nitpicks, I have a few more about the game, but they're all about the components. The arrows between times are tiny, as has been discussed to death on BGG, and that's going to be fixed in the next printing. But another gripe I have is with the crown tokens that you move along the scoring track. I believe in the prototype they were cubes, and I think that would be a much better solution. If they were rectangles or cubes, it would be way easier to slide multiple along the track and line them up without them going everywhere. It would also be way easier to tell at a glance who ruled each era. Right now I cannot quickly see the difference between e.g. 7 crowns and 8 crowns unless they're lined up meticulously, which is a pain to do. So yeah, squares embossed with little crowns would be nicer.
-
It is $40 CAD at Board Game Bliss. Is this a reasonable price?
I know very little about the game, but it's getting enough praise here that I am highly, highly interested.
I paid nearly $40 for it and I would call that a reasonable price, though your definition of what is reasonable may vary. I'm sure I'll get more than $40 of entertainment from it. I also bought some wooden shape blocks (http://www.amazon.com/Melissa-Doug-Pattern-Blocks-Boards/dp/B00006JZCG) to use as replacement arrows between ages, so my actual cost was $55, though I will be giving the rest of the blo
I'm just concerned that I'm starting to have too many games to play them all. I have at least 3 games I haven't ever played, and several more that I haven't played much at all. I wish I had a group that met more often.
I can't seem to find any reviews for Temporum other than the reviews here. A video review would help me a lot.
-
It is $40 CAD at Board Game Bliss. Is this a reasonable price?
I know very little about the game, but it's getting enough praise here that I am highly, highly interested.
I paid nearly $40 for it and I would call that a reasonable price, though your definition of what is reasonable may vary. I'm sure I'll get more than $40 of entertainment from it. I also bought some wooden shape blocks (http://www.amazon.com/Melissa-Doug-Pattern-Blocks-Boards/dp/B00006JZCG) to use as replacement arrows between ages, so my actual cost was $55, though I will be giving the rest of the blo
I'm just concerned that I'm starting to have too many games to play them all. I have at least 3 games I haven't ever played, and several more that I haven't played much at all. I wish I had a group that met more often.
I can't seem to find any reviews for Temporum other than the reviews here. A video review would help me a lot.
I wish I had a group... :'(
-
This one was on BGG. Not a bad review of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvNBtbtJCfk
I recommend the game as long as you have people to play with. (though tbh I played it 1 on 1 solo a few times and it was surprisingly fun that way too)
-
While we're on the subject of nitpicks, I have a few more about the game, but they're all about the components. The arrows between times are tiny, as has been discussed to death on BGG, and that's going to be fixed in the next printing.
Oh, any idea when that's happening? Maybe I should just wait, given my backlogged library.
-
While we're on the subject of nitpicks, I have a few more about the game, but they're all about the components. The arrows between times are tiny, as has been discussed to death on BGG, and that's going to be fixed in the next printing.
Oh, any idea when that's happening? Maybe I should just wait, given my backlogged library.
http://boardgamegeek.com/article/17623430#17623430
This is where Jay mentions that they will be fixed on reprint. Not sure when it will happen. BUT he also says they'll have extras for those who want them, so you could buy the game now and then ask for the new arrows when the reprint happens.
-
While we're on the subject of nitpicks, I have a few more about the game, but they're all about the components. The arrows between times are tiny, as has been discussed to death on BGG, and that's going to be fixed in the next printing.
Oh, any idea when that's happening? Maybe I should just wait, given my backlogged library.
http://boardgamegeek.com/article/17623430#17623430
This is where Jay mentions that they will be fixed on reprint. Not sure when it will happen. BUT he also says they'll have extras for those who want them, so you could buy the game now and then ask for the new arrows when the reprint happens.
You can sub in french fries for the time being. I hear the ones at McDonald's are actually made of Styrofoam, so they should preserve well enough in the box.
-
It is $40 CAD at Board Game Bliss. Is this a reasonable price?
I know very little about the game, but it's getting enough praise here that I am highly, highly interested.
It's still $35 at CoolStuffInc, where I got it. I guess that's the same as 40 CAD. It seems like a good deal to me, MSRP is $50; though I feel like it should be $40. I'm thinking that board games in general are just more expensive than they were a few years ago; it seems like $40 used to be the standard default; now there's a lot more that are $50.
-
Oh, any idea when that's happening? Maybe I should just wait, given my backlogged library.
On the RGG site, March 31st is given as the reprint date. I don't know how close that will turn out to be.
Probably those other games are backlogged for a reason though. What you need is something fresh.
-
Probably those other games are backlogged for a reason though. What you need is something fresh.
Good to have a completely unbiased opinion. ;)
-
Oh, any idea when that's happening? Maybe I should just wait, given my backlogged library.
On the RGG site, March 31st is given as the reprint date. I don't know how close that will turn out to be.
Probably those other games are backlogged for a reason though. What you need is something fresh.
That marketing savvy.
That's not that far off. I think I will wait on it. If it makes you feel better, I am sure I will get it eventually unless something crazy happens, like time travellers come from the future and tell me that I can't buy Temporum because it will begin a chain of events that eventually culminates in the downfall of humanity and the start of the oppressive regime of superintelligent feline conquerors. But I might buy it even then.
-
That's not that far off. I think I will wait on it.
Bear in mind that this first run of Temporum was delayed by about a year. Hopefully the next run won't have that kind of delay, but I think it's pretty optimistic to actually expect it by the end of March. Unless you want to wait until at least June, I'd bite the bullet and get it now before this run sells out completely.
-
I hope some of them make it over here before stock runs out.
-
That's not that far off. I think I will wait on it.
Bear in mind that this first run of Temporum was delayed by about a year. Hopefully the next run won't have that kind of delay, but I think it's pretty optimistic to actually expect it by the end of March. Unless you want to wait until at least June, I'd bite the bullet and get it now before this run sells out completely.
That's a good point. I'll keep it in mind. I typically buy from Board Game Bliss now, but they only offer free shipping with specific games, or else a flat shipping rate of ~$10. I think I could stand to wait until June, if only because it means they may put up a free shipping game that I am interested in, or I may build up a big enough order to make the flat rate negligible. Right now, the only things I am interested in are:
- Temporum
- Bang: The Dice game (as a gift)
- 7 Wonders: Babel (but I'm startnig to lean away from it because I haven't gotten much play from it recently and not much from Cities either)
- Colt Express (currently sold out, and it's only a maybe... it does look neat though)
In the meantime, I'd be happy to get more plays of Keyflower, Dead of Winter, Kemet, Cyclades, Among the Stars, The Ancient World, Progress... yeah. :P
-
In an alternate timeline, Donald X has recently released his new game which is set in a restaurant. Players are indecisive customers trying to come to a decision about what they should order for each of four courses. They will gain influence within their social circle as they change their mind about what dish would make a good main course, and of course if we have that then desert has to be one of these two options, nothing else would do! The first release is set in a Japanese restaurant. The game is called Tempura.
-
In an alternate timeline, Donald X has recently released his new game which is set in a restaurant. Players are indecisive customers trying to come to a decision about what they should order for each of four courses. They will gain influence within their social circle as they change their mind about what dish would make a good main course, and of course if we have that then desert has to be one of these two options, nothing else would do! The first release is set in a Japanese restaurant. The game is called Tempura.
W. Eric Martin thought the medieval theme had been done too much, and argued that Dominion should have a restaurant theme. [Before it was published.]
-
W. Eric Martin thought the medieval theme had been done too much, and argued that Dominion should have a restaurant theme. [Before it was published.]
There is probably a reason of why the medieval theme was done so much.
-
W. Eric Martin thought the medieval theme had been done too much, and argued that Dominion should have a restaurant theme. [Before it was published.]
There is probably a reason of why the medieval theme was done so much.
...Are you seriously implying it's because game designers are boring and unimaginative people? Gosh soulnet that's rude.
-
I played a game of this last night against my wife and it was the first IRL game I've played in a long time where I just wanted to quit midway through. I don't mind losing, especially in real-life games with friends, but this game was really demoralizing. She thwarted my plans almost every turn. This isn't an indictment against the game itself, but I really, really suck at it.
-
I played a game of this last night against my wife and it was the first IRL game I've played in a long time where I just wanted to quit midway through. I don't mind losing, especially in real-life games with friends, but this game was really demoralizing. She thwarted my plans almost every turn. This isn't an indictment against the game itself, but I really, really suck at it.
Strange. I haven't yet had a game where anyone was more than a few turns away from winning when the game ended.
-
I played a game of this last night against my wife and it was the first IRL game I've played in a long time where I just wanted to quit midway through. I don't mind losing, especially in real-life games with friends, but this game was really demoralizing. She thwarted my plans almost every turn. This isn't an indictment against the game itself, but I really, really suck at it.
Strange. I haven't yet had a game where anyone was more than a few turns away from winning when the game ended.
I accidentally kept setting her up to foil me. First age was Late Jurassic, second ages were Imperial China and Plague. So with Late Jurassic and Imperial China both letting you do any of the three basic Actions, there was lots of flexibility in the timeline. Anyway, I kept going up to late Jurassic to do stuff in order to keep her from having access to Imperial China and Savagery (in Age 4), both of which were great combos with the Think Tank she played first turn. But that just let her jump on over to Plague, which made me discard my last remaining card. One of the only zones that cared about who ruled it was the French Revolution, smack in the middle of Age 3. I ruled there pretty much the entire game, but it didn't matter because Plague kept making me discard the one card I could have played the next turn. And yet I kept forgetting it would happen! GRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAGHHH!!!!
-
OK, at least I won the last game pretty handily. We started on Communist Utopia, so first turn I played a Gang of Pickpockets and then another card, which drew me another card from the pickpockets. After that I pretty much sailed to victory.
I'm a bit worried that Temporum can too often be decided by what you draw from the player deck, but I'm too new at the game to be sure that's the case.
-
I played a four player game and a two player game recently. The four player game really dragged on, but maybe that's because it was the first time playing it for all of us. The two player game was a lot faster, because we knew the rules and, well, there were fewer turns.
Also, Gang of Pickpockets is really good. Especially with explorer.
-
I'm a bit worried that Temporum can too often be decided by what you draw from the player deck, but I'm too new at the game to be sure that's the case.
I have decided that I actually like the randomness of the deck because it makes different players want to pursue different strategies.
-
I'm a bit worried that Temporum can too often be decided by what you draw from the player deck, but I'm too new at the game to be sure that's the case.
I have decided that I actually like the randomness of the deck because it makes different players want to pursue different strategies.
Excellent. Everything is going according to plan.
Obv. you can get a lucky draw. Gang of Pickpockets turn one in Communist Utopia, that's pretty ideal. I am pretty sure that playing well is rewarded too though.
-
Got a chance to try this out. We played some 3-player games, and are still figuring it out. I actually haven't played other Donald X games apart from Dominion and Greed, and of those two, this reminds me more of Greed, in that the game proceeds at a more-or-less steady pace, where there is a par value per turn that you're trying to outperform. This is a game of accumulating small edges, not of preparing an explosion like Dominion often is (but not to say that you can't prep mini-explosions here too!).
Even after several plays, I still feel like I don't understand how to play well, which is nice. Although I've figured out the value point of view (cards and crowns are worth roughly $4 each, and a turn's par value is roughly $8 net), a blind pursuit of value can lead to an imbalanced resource distribution that may be difficult to quickly convert into crowns to actually win the game.
-
Played a game with ancient greece and the time IV card that gives you 2 coins for every card in your hand. Spent the first 8 or 9 turns mostly just drawing cards and praying nobody had a militia until I had 17 in hand, then went to that time IV place twice for 68 coins. Since I drew so many cards I was able to cash it all in and win in four more turns. Is 15 turns a normal game length? It was a couple turns faster that what my opponents did, at least. Seems to me this game if often about building a strategy around time IV cards, which is neat. I definitely wish there were more of them.
-
The first game I played of this was very engine-y. I got two Gang of Pickpockets (draw card when play card) very early, one Explorer (get $1 when draw card), and then I just sat in time 3 for a long time and played cards until I could win with 4 scores. I didn't really use the board at all, just the player cards. Still, another person was just a turn away from winning. I wasn't very efficient though, lots of cards and money left at the end.
The only real blowout I've had was a 2p game with Primitive Paradise (puts $2 on all zones, first visit to that zone alone you get the money). My opponent let me get a lot of these free monies at the start and then I was getting all the nice ruling bonuses throughout the game. All the other games I've played have been 1 turn margins, which is very nice.
-
Played a game with ancient greece and the time IV card that gives you 2 coins for every card in your hand. Spent the first 8 or 9 turns mostly just drawing cards and praying nobody had a militia until I had 17 in hand, then went to that time IV place twice for 68 coins. Since I drew so many cards I was able to cash it all in and win in four more turns. Is 15 turns a normal game length? It was a couple turns faster that what my opponents did, at least. Seems to me this game if often about building a strategy around time IV cards, which is neat. I definitely wish there were more of them.
Sounds like your opponent should have gone out of his/her way to keep you away from Nanotech Wonderland! :D I've yet to make good use of that zone, so it's cool to see that it can pay off sometimes.
I played a game with my wife last night where I played a Secret Society right away (when you score a card, draw a card). From that point on, I focused on keeping Space Age (Score a card. Then if you rule at least two Times, you may score another card.) real as much as possible. It was on the far left side of Age IV, but luckily all the zones leading down to it were "do anything" zones (Ancient Greece, Pax Buddha, Summer of Love), so I had a lot of flexibility in adjusting the timeline.
-
Is 15 turns a normal game length?
You can win in 15 turns without doing anything special, so I'd try to be faster.
-
You need 30 crown advancements to win. 30 crown advancements ≈ $120. You start the game with $8 worth of cards (2 cards), and possibly some additional money. The average turn is an $8 value. So assuming you can end the game with no leftover money or cards in hand, that's 14 turns. Probably you usually have resources left over at the end of the game, but you know. 14 or 15 turns seems like a reasonable benchmark.
-
I played the strategy suboptimally - its doable in 13 turns for sure.
-
I think I now understand Temporum's baseline strategy, analogous to Dominion's big money. Skip reading this if you want to figure out the baseline strategy for yourself, though it's pretty straightforward--just took me a while to break out of my initial "value idiot" mindset. :)
As a simplification, assume that only times 1-3 exist and each zone only performs its basic function (score, draw 2, play). Also assume that each player card delivers the par $12 and has no other effect.
Assume first player. Open by drawing 2 cards four times, to have 10 cards in hand. Find some combination of cards in your hand to score that sum to exactly 30 crowns. (If you can't yet, you need to spend an extra turn here to draw more cards.) Play the rest of the cards for $. Then score the remaining cards to win. The total turns taken is 14. You'll have enough money to do the scoring in this simplified scenario, because if you're scoring S cards for 30 crowns, they require 4*(30 - 3*S) = 120 - 12*S dollars, and we're playing 10-S cards for 12*(10-S) = 120 - 12*S dollars.
Analogous to Dominion's BM+X, there are obvious single-card upgrades to this strategy, like playing Conspiracy (extra crown per score) or Friends in Old Places (scoring costs $2 less) before you score anything, then adjusting your play/score balance in response.
In my most recent game, I had five cards lined up to score for the win with enough $ to score them (after accounting for bonuses), and pretty much just played my last turns on auto-pilot, except for monitoring the timeline to make sure Great Depression wouldn't wreck me. That was dull even though I won, but I think that maybe the zone selection was just unusually straightforward. Usually, I find that the zones force more adaptive play. I do find though that it's pretty common that for the last 1-2 rounds around the table, it becomes pretty clear that a certain player has a 90%+ chance to win and nobody can do anything about it, and that can be a bit frustrating.
I'm finding the tactics around timeline manipulation and time ruling are becoming more apparent and interesting with repeat plays. Edit: Here's an example. Roman Empire was initially real, so drawing 8 cards off the bat would put you $8 behind, a whole turn. So I wanted to either rule time 2 or alter the timeline so that the other time 2 zone is real, and the first is preferable since it doesn't help the other players. Either way, it was necessary to score a card much earlier than the baseline strategy wants to. I had Friends in Old Places, which I wanted to play before scoring anything, so that shook up the baseline even more.
-
Blueblimp: That appraisal of the basic economy is the conclusion I arrived at. The secondary conclusion I arrived at is that the BIG value mostly lies in Age 4 cards. For example, Communist Utopia potentially allows you to play two cards in one turn. That's enormous--basically an entire free turn--but you have to stay under $12 to do it. So you either need to spend your money to take advantage, or at the very least run around to make sure none of your opponents can make use of it. Information Age similarly gives you an entire free turn, in this case if you've done some setup scoring work. I'm trying to write a basic strategy guide to post to here/BGG.
The other big strategy thing is not to have more card/money resources than you need to win the game. You can do everything efficiently and for great value, but still lose because you don't have enough turns to turn your $130 and 8 cards into a win. (Other side of the coin: having lots of cards in hand gives greater opportunities, makes it more likely that you'll have the right-value card to score, etc.) FWIW, I think this is why Barbarian Hordes is a good card. It's not efficient, but it lets you turn card resources into VP fast and straightforwardly.
-
Finally ordered this today (and studiously avoiding reading the strategy discussion above). I'm looking forward to having a Donald X game that I can play with my group on an even footing.
-
In my most recent game, I had five cards lined up to score for the win with enough $ to score them (after accounting for bonuses), and pretty much just played my last turns on auto-pilot, except for monitoring the timeline to make sure Great Depression wouldn't wreck me. That was dull even though I won, but I think that maybe the zone selection was just unusually straightforward.
If it's any consolation, I would expect anyone putting off all of their scoring until the end to lose by a margin.
-
I got the game for Christmas and have been loving it.
-
If it's any consolation, I would expect anyone putting off all of their scoring until the end to lose by a margin.
Do you mean a large margin or a small margin? By definition, anyone who loses does so by "a margin," right...?
-
If it's any consolation, I would expect anyone putting off all of their scoring until the end to lose by a margin.
Do you mean a large margin or a small margin? By definition, anyone who loses does so by "a margin," right...?
In my experience, this game is never lost by a large margin unless you make huge blunders. It's nearly always the case that everyone is 1-2 turns away from winning when the game ends. I've calibrated my expectations so that if I'm 3+ turns behind at the end of the game, that means I was blown out.
-
If it's any consolation, I would expect anyone putting off all of their scoring until the end to lose by a margin.
Do you mean a large margin or a small margin? By definition, anyone who loses does so by "a margin," right...?
In my experience, this game is never lost by a large margin unless you make huge blunders. It's nearly always the case that everyone is 1-2 turns away from winning when the game ends. I've calibrated my expectations so that if I'm 3+ turns behind at the end of the game, that means I was blown out.
By "by a margin" I meant "by more than they need." Not just barely winning.
Yes the game is often close. I would count "save all scoring until the end" as a huge blunder though. In a two-player game (i.e. no random effect of other players), I will get in a bunch of turns of half-turn advantages from ruling places, and they will add up to you being multiple turns behind. If there are no such places, I can still get ahead with a player card that cares about ruling times.
A good baseline strategy is to try to get ahead every turn. Every turn, get more than your one turn. If you spend the first four turns drawing 2 cards, those are turns you are not getting ahead.
-
Maybe my judgment is coloured by having played mostly 3-player games, where the difficulty of ruling is highest (~1.33 ruling slots per player, compared to 2 in 2p, 2 in 4p, and 1.6 in 5p). Anyway, I don't consider myself a good player, just crawling out of being completely terrible. The "baseline strategy" I described above is an antidote to my initial "value idiot" mentality, which goes something like: greedily make whatever play maximizes your immediate value (according to the $4 = 1 crown = 1 card rule of thumb), then at some point panic and try to convert it all into crowns. There are several reasons that fails horribly, of course, not just the lack of early drawing.
The major zone-agnostic advantages I see to drawing a lot early:
- By drawing up front, you have a better chance to play cards that are advantageous to play before any scoring. For example, with Conspiracy, having it in play for all your scoring is a pretty big deal: having it in play for 5 scores puts you a full turn above par. It's pretty bad to draw a card like Conspiracy after you've already scored a few times.
- Having all your cards in hand before playing/scoring allows you to work out the combinatorics of playing and scoring to have a clean finish. After all, every $4 you have at the end of the game is a half turn lost, and every excess crown advanced is another half turn lost. It's harder to plan these things out if you don't know what you're going to draw later.
- More generally, any card requiring planning ahead is more effective the earlier you know you have it.
Considering that having the extra information (and possibility to play cards) can pretty easily provide a turn or more worth of speed-up, that makes a case for preferring to draw early even at a small loss of value.
-
The major zone-agnostic advantages I see to drawing a lot early:
- By drawing up front, you have a better chance to play cards that are advantageous to play before any scoring. For example, with Conspiracy, having it in play for all your scoring is a pretty big deal: having it in play for 5 scores puts you a full turn above par. It's pretty bad to draw a card like Conspiracy after you've already scored a few times.
- Having all your cards in hand before playing/scoring allows you to work out the combinatorics of playing and scoring to have a clean finish. After all, every $4 you have at the end of the game is a half turn lost, and every excess crown advanced is another half turn lost. It's harder to plan these things out if you don't know what you're going to draw later.
- More generally, any card requiring planning ahead is more effective the earlier you know you have it.
It's true, drawing a lot of cards early is good, and you have listed some good reasons why. As it happens scoring immediately is good too, because it means you are getting advantages from ruling places instead of not (until your opponents counter that). And playing cards immediately is good, to have perpetual abilities for as long as possible, to leave you able to score immediately when needed to thwart opponents, and for whatever other reasons due to the specifics of what the cards do. It all wants to happen first.
-
I didn't really understand how thematic Cold War was until I went there in a game. Whoever flinches last gets the payoff. Pretty clever.
-
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
-
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
Well that just sucks. I guess even a working clock is wrong sometimes. I remember one of them really hated Thebes too, which I think is great.
-
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
Ugh, it's half just complaining about theme again. Why do people complain about theme? If you want to "feel like you're time traveling", then play a role playing game with a time travel theme. Don't play a board game.
I've played a lot of Puerto Rico, and never "felt" like I was actually a land owner in Puerto Rico. I've played a lot of Power Grid, and never "felt" like I was the owner of an electric company. I felt like I was playing a good board game... and that's a good thing, I played board games because I like to play board games, so I want to feel like I'm playing a board game.
-
That is the least impressed I have ever seen a board game reviewer.
I'm seeing more and more that people get different things out of games. I don't play Dominion to pretend to be a medieval prince, and I don't play Temporum to live out Back to the Future. So far I think Temproum is about reading boards, and I suspect that the Dice Tower team just aren't that good at it.
I don't know how the strategic depth of Temporum compares to that of Dominion. There's certainly a much stronger clock in Temporum, so the skill comes in the little decisions. I guess someone needs to write an Isotropic for Temporum so that we can work out the strategy faster. Or perhaps it's already been done and we just need those in power to agree to open it up to the rest of us. :)
-
That is the least impressed I have ever seen a board game reviewer.
Oh man, you need to do yourself a favour and watch the review for Oneupmanship (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18b0XYf05tA).
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
Ugh, it's half just complaining about theme again. Why do people complain about theme? If you want to "feel like you're time traveling", then play a role playing game with a time travel theme. Don't play a board game.
I've played a lot of Puerto Rico, and never "felt" like I was actually a land owner in Puerto Rico. I've played a lot of Power Grid, and never "felt" like I was the owner of an electric company. I felt like I was playing a good board game... and that's a good thing, I played board games because I like to play board games, so I want to feel like I'm playing a board game.
To be fair, the other half was about the mechanics. In particular, they say that all the things you do felt too same-y and repetitive.
I'd love to see a rebuttal. I still haven't had a chance to play Temporum, but it is slipping from "future blind buy" to "try first".
-
I haven't watched the review yet, but anyway, my perspective is that I played something like 10-ish games with family over the holidays (mostly with 3 players), and we enjoyed them all and weren't getting bored with the game. If anything, the game was becoming more interesting. So from that perspective, I'd recommend it. But I may not have a chance to play again IRL for a while, so hopefully something Isotropic-like crops up.
-
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
Elvis Costello - Couldn't Call It Unexpected No. 4
Temporum hasn't had very many reviews so far, but some of them are positive. One site mentioned in their podcast that they probably wouldn't review it, citing how identical the zones are, which to me is like saying, Mountebank and Monument are basically the same card, you get +$2 and then there's some nuance or other. I can't do much to improve things there; you can only maximize one variable, and I'd always rather make a game I think is good, than make a game that struggles to look good at a glance. I have an edge with the SdJ jury, because they endlessly replay games to decide whether or not to recommend them, and my games try more than others to be endlessly replayable. They probably won't like the theme though - too much war and grandfather killing.
I expected Temporum to go over well with Dominion fans, and continue to. Of course the Dice Tower doesn't like Dominion anymore, they prefer clones with different themes. [I went looking for the player's choice thing where I remember them not immediately having something to say, and didn't find it - in the one for this year they were just saying, look, it fell to #4, will it be around in 10 years, probably not, it needed a steady stream of expansions. So maybe I was remembering some other entity's list. And they still rate Dominion above clones, they just said, one expansion and this clone would replace Dominion for them, also they left out the word "clone," which for some reason I find to be important.]
But anyway, like, people who want to playtest Dominion at my table and get stuck with Temporum instead, they always like it. Of course they never get to guess "there was nothing there," because the experienced players clearly know something, and beat them up. I can't include an experienced player in the box, and that's a real issue, to make sure that an all-new-player game isn't wrecked by something. In the case of Temporum the only thing I can see is, I could have had four choose-one zones instead of seven. New players sometimes just park on them.
-
I guess someone needs to write an Isotropic for Temporum so that we can work out the strategy faster. Or perhaps it's already been done and we just need those in power to agree to open it up to the rest of us. :)
I don't know of anything. You could suggest it to the Board Game Arena people.
-
Temporum got a positive review at Fortress: Ameritrash, so there. That was a pleasant surprise.
-
Rules question: If you have Secret Society in play, and you score a card while the draw deck is empty, does Secret Society get shuffled in with the discard pile, or is it still in "being played/scored land"? Gang of Pickpockets specifies that its draw is after the other card is resolved (which I assume means that it's in the discard by that time), but Secret Society has no clarification. So to generalize it; when you score a card does it go directly to the discard pile, or does it go "in play" until you're done scoring it?
-
Rules question: If you have Secret Society in play, and you score a card while the draw deck is empty, does Secret Society get shuffled in with the discard pile, or is it still in "being played/scored land"? Gang of Pickpockets specifies that its draw is after the other card is resolved (which I assume means that it's in the discard by that time), but Secret Society has no clarification. So to generalize it; when you score a card does it go directly to the discard pile, or does it go "in play" until you're done scoring it?
You completely finish scoring the card before Secret Society triggers; thus it will be shuffled in.
-
Played a few 3 player games with my group now and all like the game a lot and want to play again. There are not many turns between deciding how you are going to play then panic as someone else suddenly looks close to finishing. The limited number of turns forces you to appreciate the subtleties on the zone cards, something you probably wouldn't get from the first or second game.
Nice to have that 'no idea what I am doing' feeling again.
-
I guess someone needs to write an Isotropic for Temporum so that we can work out the strategy faster. Or perhaps it's already been done and we just need those in power to agree to open it up to the rest of us. :)
I don't know of anything. You could suggest it to the Board Game Arena people.
Does that mean you'd be fine with a temporum clone online like isotropic? I got blasted on reddit for posting my implementation of a differnt game (which was in an unfinished and AI-only state) which killed my motivation to finish it a bit.
(P.S My temporum box is waiting for me at home - such a pain to find a store with it in stock in australia!)
-
Does that mean you'd be fine with a temporum clone online like isotropic? I got blasted on reddit for posting my implementation of a differnt game (which was in an unfinished and AI-only state) which killed my motivation to finish it a bit.
(P.S My temporum box is waiting for me at home - such a pain to find a store with it in stock in australia!)
Not a "clone," no, but Temporum itself, sure. You would need to clear it with Jay, but it's extremely likely he would be pleased to have an online free Temporum implementation up somewhere - it promotes the game, and the game needs the promotion. You need to be a significant success to get to the point where you can hope to make money off of an online version.
-
I guess someone needs to write an Isotropic for Temporum so that we can work out the strategy faster. Or perhaps it's already been done and we just need those in power to agree to open it up to the rest of us. :)
I don't know of anything. You could suggest it to the Board Game Arena people.
Does that mean you'd be fine with a temporum clone online like isotropic? I got blasted on reddit for posting my implementation of a differnt game (which was in an unfinished and AI-only state) which killed my motivation to finish it a bit.
(P.S My temporum box is waiting for me at home - such a pain to find a store with it in stock in australia!)
GendoIkari has made a good start on this: have a look at http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12402.0.
-
Does that mean you'd be fine with a temporum clone online like isotropic? I got blasted on reddit for posting my implementation of a differnt game (which was in an unfinished and AI-only state) which killed my motivation to finish it a bit.
(P.S My temporum box is waiting for me at home - such a pain to find a store with it in stock in australia!)
Not a "clone," no, but Temporum itself, sure. You would need to clear it with Jay, but it's extremely likely he would be pleased to have an online free Temporum implementation up somewhere - it promotes the game, and the game needs the promotion. You need to be a significant success to get to the point where you can hope to make money off of an online version.
cool!
-
Unfortunately, Temporum was just panned by Dice Tower: http://boardgamegeek.com/video/60882/temporum/miami-dice-153-temporum
Tom Vasel seemed to think it was passable, but Dourpuss over on his left really hated it.
I have been feeling like, if I can't include base resources on things, for card balance or to make the resources always available, doesn't that just shut out broad swaths of possible games? I thought it was telling that Tom said, in his top 10 Dominion cards, that the +$2 wasn't the part he liked about Black Market. I mean, how could it be? In the early days of Dominion I didn't put +$2 on anything, I treated that stuff like part of the card concept. But cards needed their +$2's to let me do a variety of effects, and I mean it all worked out. I don't think anyone looks at Monument and Mountebank and thinks, essentially the same card. But here I am continuing to do this in new games and it sounds like some people are all, I draw 2 cards here, I draw 2 cards over there, same card. And uh not doing that is just a limitation I don't want imposed on me. I am already hard to convince to make an initial prototype of anything.
So anyway I finally watched this, to see just what the complaints were. Well, I skipped over some sections, I didn't need to hear all the card descriptions or complaining about the theme or the punchline. He got the rules right, hooray. And overall he seemed pretty friendly about it; he thought the various parts of it sounded good but was unmoved in the games. The big complaints were feeling like the action was too homogeneous between turns and across players, and the other guy feeling like combos weren't attainable because you draw random cards. They also noted that games were close as if it didn't matter what they did, but this folded back into the homogeneity; they wanted to feel like they were doing different things, and if that produced close games, okay.
The actions were less homogeneous originally and got reduced down to what worked. Again I regret having 7 cards that give you a choice of basic action. I don't imagine they totally sink it, for the kind of player with these issues, but the one guy cited this very thing, the choice cards (without quite calling them out). Main sets are trying to be as good as possible - odds are there won't ever be an expansion, so it's not like it makes sense to hold anything back - and part of that means being simple enough for a broad audience. But possibly I could have fit in a few things that were more complex.
The card drawing, I used my classic trick, which I think works and that's certainly my experience with Temporum itself, of giving cards 3 uses. You can play a card because you just want the $, play it because you want the ability, or score it. That magical 3 uses really irons out luck of the draw (well that plus card balance). There is still luck of the draw of course. But you can usually make do and be competitive with whatever you draw.
The games are close because of game balance and having the uh little edges you get be little. You can have opponents that don't bother you and you run away with the game, or can have great luck like Gang of Pickpockets turn one in Communist Utopia. But typically, if you just play better than them but have average luck and they worry about you reasonably, you accumulate small edges that add up to you winning, but it's close. This always felt like a positive for players but I guess may look bad to reviewers. The small edges could have been bigger, easily. I dunno, I like the game as is but haven't run the experiment.
The flavor issue, I just always put gameplay over flavor. The game was once more flavorful in whatever ways that maybe don't count I mean who am I to judge this; for example crowns went on specific times, which is maybe more flavorful because you know, you were powerful in the Renaissance but it's not real now, your power is gone. Instead of, you are powerful in Time 2, no matter what it is. But uh that didn't work and that always trumps flavor for me. I like the flavor; I appreciated that Barnes liked the flavor even as he said that there was no narrative (i.e., it didn't make sense that scoring that Golden Goose got you power in the Civil War or whatever it was, but he still liked flavor elements). When I make a game with strong flavor, I expect it to be changed by the publisher anyway, as happened with Infiltration. I don't usually like extra rules that are just flavorful, I like to keep the rules simple. Anyway not everyone wants to roleplay every game and I don't feel like I should be trying to make my games more flavor-heavy, unless that's what some particular game wants. For that matter I am more likely to be able to get games published that are more abstract.
So anyway. To make Tom like this game more, I think the move would just have been, more complex zones / cards. I could have gone a little way in that direction, dunno if I could have gone enough. I don't feel like I want to aim for games that only hardcore gamers can enjoy. Maybe I am underrating what the masses can cope with, I dunno; I can find Crapuchettes saying how he wished the Dominion expansions were as simple as the main set. But probably I could have replaced at least a few choice zones with more complex things. I am always pleasing myself and the people I play with; we didn't find it too homogeneous. But I lean away from playing with the choice zones, as if, why didn't I realize I had too many of them. And then, for the other guy, I think more card throughput was what he needed - draw way more cards, thus being more likely to get combos or cards you like. Card throughput is fun but not always possible to go heavy on, I mean you need to have enough cards and then you do way more reading.
Thanks for listening.
-
Like I mentioned a few posts back, I've started actually working on the game engine. I've so far implemented 15 cards and 10 zones, but the rest should be pretty simple to add ones the engine bugs are worked out :) The only big thing the engine can't handle yet is zones and cards which force another player to make a choice (i.e the cult zone). That's high on my todo list.
What I've got though should be enough to play a game with the cards I've implemented. GendoIkari is hopefully going to make his single player UI work with this, but I'm wondering if anyone is interested in joining in (testing mostly) or making a bot? The API is all REST json...
EDIT: Woo! I've implemented all the momentary cards except Infected Rat and all perpetual cards except Treasure Map (slightly fiddly with the wanting to do something after the zone is finished which isnt being handed yet).
-
Can you explain exactly what it is you're doing and how it is different from GI's implementation? I don't get it.
-
Can you explain exactly what it is you're doing and how it is different from GI's implementation? I don't get it.
He wants to make human vs human possible.
-
No one in my board game group has even spoken of Temporum so it doesn't seem to have much publicity.
-
Can you explain exactly what it is you're doing and how it is different from GI's implementation? I don't get it.
He wants to make human vs human possible.
This. He is building the code that I have, except on a server instead of in JavaScript, which is one big step towards pVp. In theory my website can stay largely the same, except the code that's not related to drawing stuff on the screen or getting user input can be on the server side, where user's decisions can be send to the other player(s).
-
No one in my board game group has even spoken of Temporum so it doesn't seem to have much publicity.
And hopefully my website can help change that.
-
No one in my board game group has even spoken of Temporum so it doesn't seem to have much publicity.
And hopefully my website can help change that.
Customers regularly ask me what I'm playing that's new, and today was the first day I said "Temporum" and didn't get a blank stare in return, so...yeah, no, sample size was one.
-
I was looking at the cards, and noticed this:
Draw 2 cards. Each player with any cards in hand passes one left to the next such player, at once.
I'm taking this as a nod to the KC/Goons/Masquerade pin. :)
-
I was looking at the cards, and noticed this:
Draw 2 cards. Each player with any cards in hand passes one left to the next such player, at once.
I'm taking this as a nod to the KC/Goons/Masquerade pin. :)
Well the games are much different. In Temporum without that clause it would be a huge windfall for a player with no cards; there's no pin possible since you have to draw cards to make the effect happen.
The wording did come out of thinking about the pin though.
-
Honestly, I didn't like Temporum all that much. However, it was definitely not for any of the reasons Tom Vasel spouted. I kind of think of EuroGames as fitting into two broad types:
a) You can do everything you possibly can every turn
b) You have to pick one or two things to do per turn
I usually prefer category a) - Dominion is an example. Do I want to draw cards, or get a new card this turn? I can do both! And other things, too!
Category b) games tend to be hit or miss with me. Race for the Galaxy is an example that I kind of like - sure, you have to pick one thing to do this turn, but this is ameliorated by i) you do whatever your opponent picks, too ii) the discard-to-pay requirement means there's usually only one or two things you *want* to do per turn, anyway, and the cards are set up so there's early game and late game cards. In other words, it's usually fairly obvious what you should probably pick to do this turn.
Temporum is very much in category b), but unlike RftG, I never really felt I knew what I should be doing on a particular turn. Granted, I only played one game, but still. It reminded me a lot of Innovation in that respect - I've played several games of Innovation at this point, and I still have no idea what I'm doing when I play it. It's basically "here, make the best of these cards, and try to cobble some strategy out of it - meanwhile, it will always seem like your opponents know what they're doing, at least more so than you, and may even win despite not knowing at all what they're doing!" I dunno. Just didn't really do it for me.
Kingdom Builder, on the other hand, I very much enjoyed - I like to think of it as the game Settlers of Catan *should* have been (yeah, I hate Settlers, sue me). I'll probably pick up a copy of KB, and probably look into its expansions!
-
Wait, you put dominion in category a? I would think dominion is the very definition of category b!
I think the issue with temporum (and infinitly more so for innovation) is that it feels like you don't have much opportunity for strategy other than playing the cards you have. There is no real way to plan ahead like dominion gives. Thats partly fair except the time zones are static and easily understood for each game, and there are far fewer cards to learn in the pickup deck (most won't kill you if you don't get them). Temporum has 10 zones per game and what? 30 player cards (times 2)? Innovation base game has 105 IIRC which is absurd.
Kingdom builder mostly flopped with my group, It almost feels too rigid.
-
I don't know, I think that Temporum has the ability to plan ahead, in that you have to think about changing history, where you want to rule, and whether you're focusing on scoring the more gold efficient cards or the more card efficient cards. I find it similar to Dominion where there's luck, but there's really only one random variable; in Dominion, it's your shuffle luck, in Temporum, it's the cards you draw. Dominion is a combination of planning and playing the hands your dealt, which is what is appealing about it to me, and Temporum seems the same way. You also have to make tactical decisions in terms of what state your opponents are in in terms of money and cards in hand, what zones they can benefit from, and of course where the time lines are pointing.
The limit on what you can do is also part of what's interesting, because I think a big part of the strategy comes in finding moves that actually do two things for you.
-
Temporum is a game of much smaller advantages than Dominion. In Dominion, you can build up a crazy engine that just destroys your opponent. In Temporum, it's more like you're trying to gain an extra .1 points per turn so that after 10 turns, you can win by 1 point. (Of course it's more like you win 1 turn sooner than it is that you win by a certain number of points). But because the gains are so small, they aren't noticeable to a new player. It's easy to think that 2 different options are both the same, because neither gives you a full "point" advantage. Rather, one option will just give you a tiny advantage that's not noticeable until you're good at the game.
And I understand what wero means by Dominion being in category a... like he said, you can draw your cards, play your cards, and buy new cards all in the same turn. Sure, sometimes you have to choose between playing 1 of 2 terminals in your hand, but the point is you can always play a card. In Temporum, you only get to play a card every few turns; you only get to draw a card every few turns; etc. I think the comparison to RFTG is a good one.
"because I think a big part of the strategy comes in finding moves that actually do two things for you." Yeah, this. That's the whole thing with Temporum. There's an obvious baseline where every turn you can either draw 2 cards, play a card (which will give you about 12 money), or score a card. The biggest part of strategy is finding things you can do that are better than those 3 options.
-
Just tried the online....super fun!
Is it just me, or is Ancient Greece kinda strong? My last game I just kinda did a mega series-of-turns after spamming a bunch of permanents.
-
Just tried the online....super fun!
Is it just me, or is Ancient Greece kinda strong? My last game I just kinda did a mega series-of-turns after spamming a bunch of permanents.
You can pay $4 to draw a card. That's OK if you have extra money somehow, but it's not amazing.
-
Just tried the online....super fun!
Is it just me, or is Ancient Greece kinda strong? My last game I just kinda did a mega series-of-turns after spamming a bunch of permanents.
You can pay $4 to draw a card. That's OK if you have extra money somehow, but it's not amazing.
If you have two Explorers, it's a pretty sweet deal.
-
Just tried the online....super fun!
Is it just me, or is Ancient Greece kinda strong? My last game I just kinda did a mega series-of-turns after spamming a bunch of permanents.
You can pay $4 to draw a card. That's OK if you have extra money somehow, but it's not amazing.
If you have two Explorers, it's a pretty sweet deal.
Sure, but similar things can be said for various other combos. :P
-
Note that as a general rule, 1 card = $4 = 1 crown. There are multiple things in the game that let you either pay $4 for a card, or discard a card for $4.
-
It's definitely lighter than Dominion and not quite as good, but Dominion is one of my top 3 games ever.
I really appreciate the setup time. There's basically none. I shuffle a few decks, we all get our crowns, and we're playing. This makes it really easy to introduce new people to. There's some strategy, but it's all based around incremental advantages. I happen to like that, some people don't. There's some luck. Not seeing any blue cards means you're in for a rough time, I've never seen someone without a single one win. There's tons of little engines you can build. They're all little, the game is short. Chances are you score 5-6 cards to win.
In fact that leads me to my biggest drawback. It's just so short. I want to build a cool little engine and combo off the Age IV stuff, but it's really hard. And a lot of the Age IV stuff is not comboriffic. And everyone can disrupt you if you do get a combo down, meaning you'll use it at most once.
If I wanted to improve it with expansions:
- More ways to be able to access unreal times.
- More persistent cards, or more draw filtering.
- Increasing the game length would not be the end of the world
All in all, a great game, and probably the best casual game I own, but it just misses a little amount of meat. I almost want to see Donald go full Euro with the design and make a 2-3 hour game out of it, engine building, scoring, ruling different times, time shifts being difficult, new timelines being created... there's so much potential, I want more!
-
It's definitely lighter than Dominion and not quite as good, but Dominion is one of my top 3 games ever.
I really appreciate the setup time. There's basically none. I shuffle a few decks, we all get our crowns, and we're playing. This makes it really easy to introduce new people to. There's some strategy, but it's all based around incremental advantages. I happen to like that, some people don't. There's some luck. Not seeing any blue cards means you're in for a rough time, I've never seen someone without a single one win. There's tons of little engines you can build. They're all little, the game is short. Chances are you score 5-6 cards to win.
In fact that leads me to my biggest drawback. It's just so short. I want to build a cool little engine and combo off the Age IV stuff, but it's really hard. And a lot of the Age IV stuff is not comboriffic. And everyone can disrupt you if you do get a combo down, meaning you'll use it at most once.
If I wanted to improve it with expansions:
- More ways to be able to access unreal times.
- More persistent cards, or more draw filtering.
- Increasing the game length would not be the end of the world
All in all, a great game, and probably the best casual game I own, but it just misses a little amount of meat. I almost want to see Donald go full Euro with the design and make a 2-3 hour game out of it, engine building, scoring, ruling different times, time shifts being difficult, new timelines being created... there's so much potential, I want more!
I am curious how things would work if you simply added a 5th Time (with 5 cards, probably chosen from the Time IV options, but maybe just any cards at all). Then you would need 40 points to win instead of 30; making the game longer; with more possibilities for engines.
-
I"m pretty sure I've won before without persistent cards, but that's against weak AI in Gendo's implementation. The game feels more fun when you have blues though.
-
Well I rather like math, so I've worked out some general relationships.
1 action = $8
1 card = $4
1 VP = $4
Based on that, the ROI on some blue cards is nuts. Like spies costs you $12 worth of resources to play, but will net you 4-5 useful cards over the course of the game, so is worth probably $16-20. Prime Real Estate starts you $5 in the hole, but you can get out of that by the 6th crown there (and it isn't very good!). Conspiracy nets you $4 every time you score, Friends in old places starts at -$6 to baseline and will earn you $10-$14 over the game, yeah.
I wish there was more rule rewards, then you could rush a few things while others were gold starved and then get Gladiator's Gladius and stuff online, but that seems hard to do so far. So far, if someone is missing blues (or only gets a Think Tank, that card is really situational) then they're usually far behind.
-
If I wanted to improve it with expansions:
- More ways to be able to access unreal times.
- More persistent cards, or more draw filtering.
- Increasing the game length would not be the end of the world
All in all, a great game, and probably the best casual game I own, but it just misses a little amount of meat. I almost want to see Donald go full Euro with the design and make a 2-3 hour game out of it, engine building, scoring, ruling different times, time shifts being difficult, new timelines being created... there's so much potential, I want more!
Thanks. The file for this game is "time travel light." The intention was to make a somewhat light game. Previously it was a deckbuilding game, and it did take 2+ hours, and well it was just way too long. The paths of history premise also pushed me towards a lighter game. Still, good players beat up weak players. There are plenty of subtle things to learn.
I am betting people who like the game will love the expansion, but it doesn't actually address any of your things. I don't want that many ways to access unreal times; I want changing history to matter. The % of perpetual cards is based on not wanting the board state to get too complex. I like the game length.
The expansion pushes planning ahead, and provides lots of ways to be clever. It has some flavorful things and some exotic things.
I do not find getting perpetual cards to be significant. Yes Gang of Pickpockets is strong, that's a great opening play. But if you say go turn one Conspiracy and I never draw a perpetual card, I feel totally in that game. As you note, sometimes I can immediately compensate by ruling times instead. I have seen many victories from people with no perpetual cards.
People do like to draw them though. There is perpetual card envy.
For me, as you can see from the thread, the big mistake was having 7 of the "score or play or draw" zones. The expansion doesn't have any of those.
-
Donald X replied to me! :-*
Early blue cards have been a very significant factor in every game since the first few. But maybe we're stuck in a particular meta. But they do offer like $12-16+ worth of benefit if you play them early, which is fairly disgusting - like an extra action or so.
Maybe we're just stuck in a meta. I've only played maybe 25, 30 times, so for me it's still fairly young. I'll try avoiding blues when I'm not given them early and see what happens more.
Oh and the expansion is a must-buy of course.
-
Have you seen Gendo's online implementation (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12402.0)?
-
I am betting people who like the game will love the expansion
So ummm is the expansion official?
-
I am betting people who like the game will love the expansion
So ummm is the expansion official?
I won't know for sure it will happen until the printer has the files and there's a date for it. It's tentatively happening though. Alayna has agreed to do the art and it's waiting on her finishing another project. The design/playtesting has been done for a while.
-
Donald X replied to me! :-*
Early blue cards have been a very significant factor in every game since the first few. But maybe we're stuck in a particular meta. But they do offer like $12-16+ worth of benefit if you play them early, which is fairly disgusting - like an extra action or so.
Maybe we're just stuck in a meta. I've only played maybe 25, 30 times, so for me it's still fairly young. I'll try avoiding blues when I'm not given them early and see what happens more.
Oh and the expansion is a must-buy of course.
You're that mafiascum guy aren't you?
-
Hi pops, I remember you. Yeppers!
Although I think I've been playing on Isotropic nearly as long as I play on MS.
-
I am betting people who like the game will love the expansion
So ummm is the expansion official?
I won't know for sure it will happen until the printer has the files and there's a date for it. It's tentatively happening though. Alayna has agreed to do the art and it's waiting on her finishing another project. The design/playtesting has been done for a while.
(http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s69/inaqui_cd/Colbert%20gifs/colbertscream.gif)
-
Early blue cards have been a very significant factor in every game since the first few. But maybe we're stuck in a particular meta. But they do offer like $12-16+ worth of benefit if you play them early, which is fairly disgusting - like an extra action or so.
I strongly suspect it's your group's meta - though I see more people win with blue than without, it's not a big difference. They're totally more fun, though.
-
Early blue cards have been a very significant factor in every game since the first few. But maybe we're stuck in a particular meta. But they do offer like $12-16+ worth of benefit if you play them early, which is fairly disgusting - like an extra action or so.
I strongly suspect it's your group's meta - though I see more people win with blue than without, it's not a big difference. They're totally more fun, though.
If you think the blue cards from the base set are cool, just wait until you see spoilers.
-
If you think the blue cards from the base set are cool, just wait until you see spoilers.
Not this again...just kidding totally worth it.
-
Early blue cards have been a very significant factor in every game since the first few. But maybe we're stuck in a particular meta. But they do offer like $12-16+ worth of benefit if you play them early, which is fairly disgusting - like an extra action or so.
I strongly suspect it's your group's meta - though I see more people win with blue than without, it's not a big difference. They're totally more fun, though.
If you think the blue cards from the base set are cool, just wait until you see spoilers.
That's not the best blue card. The best blue card is moat .
-
hey, does anyone know if Temporum will be released in Germany? and when?
-
hey, does anyone know if Temporum will be released in Germany? and when?
I have been expecting it but still have no date.
-
So I just played a 3 player game on Gendo's Temporum site that lasted until turn 21. A few turns in, I was thinking there's no way I'm going to win this one, then on turn 19, I'm thinking "how did the game last this long?". And I did end up winning.
I had Ice Age, Inquisition, and Bureaucracy on the same board.
-
So I just played a 3 player game on Gendo's Temporum site that lasted until turn 21. A few turns in, I was thinking there's no way I'm going to win this one, then on turn 19, I'm thinking "how did the game last this long?". And I did end up winning.
I had Ice Age, Inquisition, and Bureaucracy on the same board.
Wow. Yeah attacks slow the AI down a crazy amount. But that's quite a long game.
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
I'm really looking forward to it. I think Temporum turns off some hobby gamers because the base game is just too simple for their taste. The expansion really adds a lot of more interesting/complex stuff (obviously, since the simple stuff has already been done).
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
I'm really looking forward to it. I think Temporum turns off some hobby gamers because the base game is just too simple for their taste. The expansion really adds a lot of more interesting/complex stuff (obviously, since the simple stuff has already been done).
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
-
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Yes, that's fair. A lot of the meaningful choices are related to controlling time in order to use the zones that most benefit you, but that's exactly the mechanic that new players most often forget to take advantage of. Also it's often so easy for another player to deprive you of the zone you need, making it much more dangerous to plan ahead.
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
I'm really looking forward to it. I think Temporum turns off some hobby gamers because the base game is just too simple for their taste. The expansion really adds a lot of more interesting/complex stuff (obviously, since the simple stuff has already been done).
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Wait, you already have it? Play tester copies?
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
I'm really looking forward to it. I think Temporum turns off some hobby gamers because the base game is just too simple for their taste. The expansion really adds a lot of more interesting/complex stuff (obviously, since the simple stuff has already been done).
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Wait, you already have it? Play tester copies?
Yes.
-
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Well, you could try using the new zones too! Some of the new zones push planning ahead in particular. And some of the new things have very visible payoffs.
I do not think that an expansion sucks in people who did not like the original. It has a chance to reach more people due to new people seeing the game when someone pulls it out to try the expansion. And it has a better chance of impressing those new people if the expansion makes it a better game for them. But if they already tried it and didn't like it, sure why would they try it again.
When I was playtesting the game, people liked that it was close. I don't have any market research to really know what the world thinks. Obv. it would be trivial to double all bonuses and widen that gap.
As I've probably said in this thread even, I think the big mistake I made in the original is the choose-one zones. Some players park there and then think there was nothing to do, since they didn't do anything. And they didn't change history so they think changing history doesn't matter either. No-one thinks these things when playing with me, because they expect to lose and then lose; clearly there was something about what I was doing that was better. But the box never includes an experienced player.
-
Expansion is coming in Q1 2016 (or Q2 at the latest).
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/21004375#21004375
I'm really looking forward to it. I think Temporum turns off some hobby gamers because the base game is just too simple for their taste. The expansion really adds a lot of more interesting/complex stuff (obviously, since the simple stuff has already been done).
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Wait, you already have it? Play tester copies?
Taking the time to program an online Temporum client that has sold at least a few people on buying the game has its privileges. ;D
-
I'm concerned that if someone didn't really like Temporum, they aren't going to bother playing again with the expansion. Also, the majority of the time that I've introduced people to Temporum, it has been with the expansion. Or at least, with the player cards from the expansion, not with the new zones usually. And even then, it's been very hit or miss.
I think I've said this before, but the biggest complaint I get is that it feels like there aren't meaningful choices. And the reason it feels like this is that the best choices are only slightly better than the worst ones. People are used to games where a good/experienced player will absolutely crush a bad/new player, not one where he will only just barely win.
Well, you could try using the new zones too! Some of the new zones push planning ahead in particular. And some of the new things have very visible payoffs.
I do not think that an expansion sucks in people who did not like the original. It has a chance to reach more people due to new people seeing the game when someone pulls it out to try the expansion. And it has a better chance of impressing those new people if the expansion makes it a better game for them. But if they already tried it and didn't like it, sure why would they try it again.
When I was playtesting the game, people liked that it was close. I don't have any market research to really know what the world thinks. Obv. it would be trivial to double all bonuses and widen that gap.
As I've probably said in this thread even, I think the big mistake I made in the original is the choose-one zones. Some players park there and then think there was nothing to do, since they didn't do anything. And they didn't change history so they think changing history doesn't matter either. No-one thinks these things when playing with me, because they expect to lose and then lose; clearly there was something about what I was doing that was better. But the box never includes an experienced player.
Man, I already know the answer to this but: can you give us any teasers about the expansion? Even anything like, number of new zones and/or player cards? Existence of new components? Anything?
I'm sure that you will do the previews a few weeks before the confirmed release date, but I am just starving for info. Really looking forward to it!
-
I'm sure that you will do the previews a few weeks before the confirmed release date
I guess I wouldn't expect this. I mean Kingdom Builder is Donald's second most famous game, and he doesn't do previews for its expansions. It's pretty much just a Dominion thing.
-
I'm sure that you will do the previews a few weeks before the confirmed release date
I guess I wouldn't expect this. I mean Kingdom Builder is Donald's second most famous game, and he doesn't do previews for its expansions. It's pretty much just a Dominion thing.
Queen pretty much revealed everything about Marshlands in their Kickstarter before promptly cancelling it. There aren't as many unique bits to Kingdom Builder as there are to Dominion, though - I think a Temporum preview might actually be justified, since there's a lot of different cards and zones and stuff.
-
I guess I wouldn't expect this. I mean Kingdom Builder is Donald's second most famous game, and he doesn't do previews for its expansions. It's pretty much just a Dominion thing.
True good point. I don't have a ton of experience with Kingdom Builder; it seemed like with Temporum's zone and player cards were pretty analogous to Dominion cards and would be perfect for previews, whereas Kingdom Builder seemed to be more about adding mechanics and new tiles.
-
I guess I wouldn't expect this. I mean Kingdom Builder is Donald's second most famous game, and he doesn't do previews for its expansions. It's pretty much just a Dominion thing.
True good point. I don't have a ton of experience with Kingdom Builder; it seemed like with Temporum's zone and player cards were pretty analogous to Dominion cards and would be perfect for previews, whereas Kingdom Builder seemed to be more about adding mechanics and new tiles.
That's a good point.
-
Man, I already know the answer to this but: can you give us any teasers about the expansion? Even anything like, number of new zones and/or player cards? Existence of new components? Anything?
I'm sure that you will do the previews a few weeks before the confirmed release date, but I am just starving for info. Really looking forward to it!
It has as many zones and player cards as the main set - the decks will double in size. And there are extra components to handle extra things.
I could conceivably do a single preview showing a bunch of cards. Or do a combination preview / secret history.
-
It has as many zones and player cards as the main set - the decks will double in size. And there are extra components to handle extra things.
I could conceivably do a single preview showing a bunch of cards. Or do a combination preview / secret history.
Very cool thanks for the info!
I think a combination preview/history could be cool (I mean, if I get a vote). I like the idea of learning more about the reasoning behind the new mechanics and cards as much as just seeing a bunch of different cards.
-
I haven't touched my web client in a while, but is it safe to assume that as soon as the set is released, it will be ok to have the new cards available in my app? If so, I need to get working on it right away.
-
I haven't touched my web client in a while, but is it safe to assume that as soon as the set is released, it will be ok to have the new cards available in my app? If so, I need to get working on it right away.
The AI never visits time 4, right? Surely you want to add that first.
I don't know that you have to hurry, but uh I personally don't mind if you put the new cards up when the expansion comes out.
-
Just picked this game up yesterday after playing the online implementation for two games (got wrecked both times). Was disappointed by the physical components and the complete lack of bags or other ways to sensibly store said components.
That said, looking forward to playing this game.
-
Just picked this game up yesterday after playing the online implementation for two games (got wrecked both times). Was disappointed by the physical components and the complete lack of bags or other ways to sensibly store said components.
That said, looking forward to playing this game.
Note that the arrows being too small is a mistake, and if you contact Rio Grande they will send replacements... though they do ask for $4 for shipping.
But yeah, the box insert was pretty crap for a card-based game..
-
My wife and I had a situation arise last night that we couldn't find the answer for in the rulebook.
Suppose that Industrial Revolution is in the game and I rule that time. Can I play a perpetual card, return it to my hand, and still have the effect for the rest of the game?
-
My wife and I had a situation arise last night that we couldn't find the answer for in the rulebook.
Suppose that Industrial Revolution is in the game and I rule that time. Can I play a perpetual card, return it to my hand, and still have the effect for the rest of the game?
I'm not sure if the rulebook addresses this specifically, but perpetual cards are all "while this is in play"; so returning one to your hand is generally not good.
-
I'm not sure if the rulebook addresses this specifically, but perpetual cards are all "while this is in play"; so returning one to your hand is generally not good.
The rulebook said "When a player plays a Perpetual card, he ... puts the card in front of him on the table; it grants him an ability that lasts for the rest of the game." So it wasn't clear, but it's good to know how that rule works. Thanks!
-
I'm not sure if the rulebook addresses this specifically, but perpetual cards are all "while this is in play"; so returning one to your hand is generally not good.
The rulebook said "When a player plays a Perpetual card, he ... puts the card in front of him on the table; it grants him an ability that lasts for the rest of the game." So it wasn't clear, but it's good to know how that rule works. Thanks!
Yeah I am curious about this. Likely an oversight in the rules. I had to double-check my own implementation, and indeed you do not get the effect form a perpetual card that you returned to your hand. I don't have an official rule or a Donald quote to point to on that, it just seems like it's how it pretty much has to work.
-
My wife and I had a situation arise last night that we couldn't find the answer for in the rulebook.
Suppose that Industrial Revolution is in the game and I rule that time. Can I play a perpetual card, return it to my hand, and still have the effect for the rest of the game?
I'm not sure if the rulebook addresses this specifically, but perpetual cards are all "while this is in play"; so returning one to your hand is generally not good.
Correct. You have the ability for the rest of the game... unless you somehow manage to get rid of that perpetual card.
-
I'm pretty excited for the expansion:
http://riograndegames.com/Game/1309-Temporum-Alternate-Realities
Everyone keeps saying it's even better than the base set. It will probably find its way onto my Christmas list. :)
-
This is somewhat old news, but the expansion finally has a page at BGG and Rio Grande!
http://riograndegames.com/Game/1309-Temporum-Alternate-Realities
*Edit* And now I look at the post just before this one. How did I not see that last month??