The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds (2014) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds (2014)

#71

Post by monadgonad » Mon, Oct 08, 2018, 7:27 AM UTC

mindgam3 wrote: post #32

Apologies in advance if this is somewhat off topic, but I have some pushback against the title of this post. No disrespect to Diplomacy, I think it's a great game. However I would respectfully submit that chess might have a stronger claim to being "the board game of the alpha nerds". (Or go, arguably, in the eastern world. But despite go's supremacy in terms of complexity, it hasn't captured the world's imagination l…

Ah, but obscurity is one of the factors of nerdiness. If you're into sci-fi films, you're more nerdy than someone into action blockbusters. If you're into 50s sci-fi B-movies specifically, you're even more nerdy.

Re: The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds (2014)

#72

Post by Doxin » Mon, Oct 08, 2018, 9:55 AM UTC

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #45

mindgam3 wrote: post #32

Apologies in advance if this is somewhat off topic, but I have some pushback against the title of this post. No disrespect to Diplomacy, I think it's a great game. However I would respectfully submit that chess might have a stronger claim to being "the board game of the alpha nerds". (Or go, arguably, in the eastern world. But despite go's supremacy in terms of complexity, it hasn't captured the world's imagination l…

Chess shows up in popular culture because it’s more popular. Everyone has heard of Chess. You don’t have to explain Chess. If you did have to explain it, its rules and concept are very easy. Go, and a lot of modern heavy strategy games are way more complex than Chess.

While go is more complex to play than chess, the rules are vastly simpler. There are -- roughly, depending on who's counting -- three rules.

Re: The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds (2014)

#73

Post by Pxtl » Mon, Oct 08, 2018, 11:19 PM UTC

wcrichton wrote: post #58

Pxtl wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. As much as the concept is neat, fundamentally it's the 7-player and runtime requirements that ruin it. Games are allowed to have hurt feelings and flaws and brutality if they make up for it with something cool... But the severity of those flaws is amplified by run-time. An 8-hour game that is ruined by betrayal is monstrous. Need a "diplomacy lite" that can be wrapped up in under 40 minutes

I would call that Resistance (or Avalon, Mafia, etc.). A social/trust/betrayal-oriented party game that's playable in less than an hour.

Yeah, but Avalon or Secret Hitler have pre-defined teams. Part of the appeal of Diplomacy is that it's a free for all and you define alliances as you need them.

Thinking it over, Nash's "so long, sucker" is probably the closest example, but I don't know anybody who's actually played it.

Re: The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds (2014)

#74

Post by fenwick67 » Tue, Oct 09, 2018, 2:58 PM UTC

monadgonad wrote: post #70

fenwick67 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same problem I have playing Risk. I don't enjoy deceiving my friends and having them deceive me. It's hard for me to understand what kind of person enjoys basically trying to manipulate other people for sport.

> It's hard for me to understand what kind of person enjoys basically trying to manipulate other people for sport. Your question contains the answer: it’s _for sport_. Sport and games are a place we can play out desires we’d never want to in real life. Tons of gamers like to pretend they’re shooting people. Strategy gamers orchestrate war and genocide. In sport, boxers pummel each other to unconsciousness, and many b…

You're not pretending to manipulate though, you're actually doing it. There's a massive difference between deceiving an NPC in D&D and actually manipulating your friends to win at Risk. This is what makes it uncomfortable for me.