500 Games Rated!

I've reached 500 games rated at boardgamegeek.com! I registered there just under 3 years ago, so it's been a massive sustained and expensive effort since then. I own 348 games, so I guess the bulk of what I've played and rated has been paid for by my own wallet. Goodness. I could have invested in shares or something... if only I liked stock market games.

My extended stats say that I played 139 new games in 2005, 187 in 2006, and 112 so far this year. I guess those numbers don't include expansions. I've recorded 1809 plays in total, so about 1 in 4 times I play a game it's a new one.

My 10s are Trias, Scrabble, Mystery of the Abbey, Lord of the Rings: The Confrontation and a book (Connection Games by Cameron Browne). If I was to add another it might be a mathematically beautiful game like Hex or Twixt, but I don't get to play those often enough to be sure I really like them.

There are a lot of games that I rate a 1 or a 2, but they're mostly kids' games, party games, or just stupid things that shouldn't have been published in the first place. I save the real vitriol for the 3s - games that are obviously real games that I just detest. Here are some of my lowest rated "real games".

Maginor (2) - it's just Rock Paper Scissors. But without all the excitement.

Andromeda (3) - took way too long and wasn't very exciting for the second half.

Australia (3) - might go up a couple of rating points if it was rethemed. The theming is just so unlike the real Australia it annoys me.

Dante's Inferno (3) - when we played this the kid started cooperating with me just so we could finish the game. Interfering with another player costs too many resources to be worth it.

Niagara (3) - why does this game have gems? It's all about not falling off the waterfall. It's too annoying.

Railway Rivals (3) - one of the sorts of train games that I hate. Takes way too long.

Timbuktu (3) - it looks like a brain-burner, but it's completely random. A shame really, because it comes close to being a good game - nice bits, nice mechanics. But in the end, it's just not worth the time invested.

Dungeoneer (3) - lovely art work, but the rules were awful. I've decided that building a map out of playing cards just isn't pretty - tiles always work better. Some good ideas held together badly.

Train Games and Alan R. Moon

Oh, the anguish... we were gaming last night at Cyberkev's place and he suggested Union Pacific. It's an Alan Moon train game. I have been lukewarm on train games since the Great 1830 Trauma of '87 (or so). I have been lukewarm on Alan Moon train games since I played Ticket to Ride. So I wasn't particularly keen on Union Pacific, but I trust Cyberkev and Pushing Tin Phil to choose decent games, and agreed to play.

I can hear you screaming "back up! back up! What was that about Ticket to Ride?! You didn't like it?" No, I didn't like it, much, it's the train thing. But also, it's nowhere near intense enough for me - I like brain burners. I would play Ticket to Ride, but with gamers I would prefer something like Tikal or E&T or Through the Desert. Having seen recent SdJ winners, I think TtR is a deserving member of that sequence, but those are not my sorts of games. Niagara was MUCH worse.

Anyway, then I discovered that Union Pacific was ALSO a stock game. Oh dear... the 1830 thing was coming back to haunt me, not to mention my incompetence at majority control games... Oh well, in for a penny, in for a pound. Unless I suddenly found out it was also a stripping game - I was NOT gonna go there.

As it turned out, the game was kinda like Ticket to Ride crossed with Acquire, and it was alright. Cyberkev and I got into a pissing war over the Union Pacific shares, which he won, as he always does with pissing wars (must remember to exploit that if I can). Strangely and stupidly, neither of us remembered to play them in time for the first UP scoring, and Trevor and Phil got big points they didn't work hard enough for. Other than that, I did particularly well in the third scoring with first or second place in the top 3 or 4 companies. I don't quite know how I managed that - I had decided that playing shares was a very worthwhile exercise, and nobody was able or willing to go with me. I also had the only share in one of the smaller companies, and made good money there.

Anyway, I managed to win the game. I seemed to have good shareholdings most of the time, although why they were better than other people's I don't know. It was pretty tight, something like 117, 109, 104, 96. Overall, I would say it is a decent game, I just wish it wasn't about trains. If only Alan Moon would come up with a game on some different theme, say elves or something, I would think he was great!