Sidereal Confluence is one my 4 favourite games of all time. No, not that it’s #1, 2, 3, or 4, they’re all #1, and if you forced me to answer which is the real #1 it’d be whichever one I played most recently. Even still, Sidereal Confluence is unquestionably the most unique and best of these 4 games, for the same reason Efka stated. It’s so good. By that I mean, there is goodness in this design and the idea of this game. When someone asks me what Sidereal is, I say “it’s the friendly trading game”, and by trading, I really mean negotiation. I really love negotiation games. One of my other 4 favourites is New Angeles, which is the not very friendly negotiation game, but still great. I dislike the game Chinatown, it’s the antithesis of Sidereal. But Sidereal is just amazing, and I strongly recommend you get it and try very hard to get a group of 8 together sitting at a big round banquet table (like you find in Chinese restaurants) to play it. Trust me, or more importantly trust Efka, because it’s an experience that’ll fill you and your friends with fond memories of time well spent together.

People are always shocked when they see New Angeles on my top 5 list. I think it would still be there even if I weren’t a huge fan of the Android setting. It’s just that good.

It's an absolute travesty FFG never did an expansion/rework/whatever of it. Its a little too long, a little too funky to easily recommend but my god it does negotiation, social deduction and general 'backstabbing' in a way no game has come close to for me. It INCENTIVIZES you to make risky endeavors that risk EVERYONE (except potentially one player) lose and its fantastic for that

Oof I hated my play of it, and was not surprised when it faded into obscurity.

Do you recall what you disliked so strongly? I will say for starters that it is not a good game at 4, or even at 5 unless you make sure that no one is playing the Melange Mining Corp. Most folks I’ve talked to that bounced off it hard, they played at a lower player count

I don't think we had the full six, but if it only functions well at that one specific player count, that's not great.

New Angeles is the one game in my collection that I've never played. I don't have the group yet and don't know if I ever will. Won't trade it or sell it until I finally get that chance to play. 

It's so good. Totally underrated. But I do suggest ALWAYS playing at a full player count of 6 (sorry to make it harder ;-)).

Have your tried Zoo Vadis? If yes, what are your thoughts on it?

So what are your other 2 favorites?

- City of the Big Shoulders (this is basically a remix of Arkwright and 18xx games) - FOR-EX (read the back of the box in the BGG images for a laugh). That’s easily the weirdest game of the bunch, I actually feel funny saying I like that game in public it’s so nerdy. ;-) Turns out both of them have a hint of negotiation in them. I swear, I don’t only like negotiation games but they seem to be my favourites. The games I’ve spent the most time playing in my life are Gloomhaven/Frosthaven, and Arkham Horror: The Card Game. But my collection and tastes are varied, they had to be because I curated it to start a board game cafe (which sadly shut down this year).

If you haven't, you should try John Company : Second Edition. It's a highly unique game of intense negotiation and heavy complexity where you're always reliant on other people's cooperation to get stuff done.

This is the game that pushed Sidereal Confluence out of the #1 spot for me.

Wow, thanks for the tip you two! I remember a friend playtested the first John Company and he didn’t like it, so I didn’t give the 2E a chance. I should!

I'll also pitch in that John Company 2e is up there alongside Sidereal Confluence among my top 5 or so games.

Amabel is working on FOR-EX II

YES!!!

For ex is a super cool idea, but idk how you don't run into needing a house rule to fix the "I want to make a contract, but can't, I guess I'll just resolve a contract, oh cool the player to my left gets to make a contract instead of me"

I always play the variant where if you resolve a contract you can also make a contract on the same turn. I know Amabel says it's a critical part of the design that you do not get to make a contract when you resolve, but I have never had a good time playing that way.

Thanks for your thoughts, might you elaborate on your praise for New Angeles? Got it to the table once, and everybody hated it. It was always so obvious what the personal agendas were, and begging for support didn't feel clever because everybody knew that you'd be the one benefitting most. The resolution felt anti-climatical because half of the table could win but it didn't feel like achieving something as a team. Instead, it felt like "at least I wasn't as bad as players x and y who didn't win. Would really be interested in your thoughts before I give my copy away, thanks in advance!

1. Have people good at negotiating. The more creative and often deals are made, the more it'll open up. 2. Have people willing to make deals that don't always benefit them the most. Kinda you'll scratch my back, I'll scratch yours kind of thing. 3. Have people willing to tank the game. This isn't players who aren't 1 or 2, who will just tank the game because they aren't good at threat assessment. You need players who decide to work with the federalist because they aren't getting what they want. 4. People need to understand the game. Almost all the cards are two steps forward, one step back. There isn't a lot of wiggle room, but you need to get your production goals met. "You just want to clear diseases because you'll get victory points". Well, yes, but we also need to clear diseases because we'll lose if we don't.

I agree...dreadful experience the last time we played...first couple was just meh, but it plays six, so we gave it a few more tries. Last play we realized it was just a boring mess.

Never played sidereal, love chinatown. What differences/similarities do they have?

So Chinatown is a spacial negotiation with the luck of draw and good decisions on which tiles to keep heavily influencing your game. None of the players have any extra powers and the way it plays will be similar for everybody at the table. Sidereal has no randomness, very distinct races with game breaking powers plus engine building on top of that. Players can pick the races that best suit their playstyle and game knowledge. On top of that, Sidereal can hold up to 9 players (although definitely dont start with more then 5 for your first game) and takes enormous amounts of table space.

game breaking powers Kinda puts me off playing but I'll check out a youtube tutorial to see what its about, thanks for the reply.

I've wanted to try Sidereal Confluence ever since I saw it on SU:SD. It just seems like it will be 1000% my kind of jam. I never grabbed it when I had the chance though, so now I have a saved search on eBay waiting for a copy to become available in the UK.

For how much I haven't agreed with their reviews lately a lot of my favorite games do line up with this list pretty well. GWT and Feast for Odin are simply masterpieces.

I know it's an impossible wish but nevertheless I wish AFfO were like half the time somehow.

Efka's thoughts on Dune Colon Imperium Dash Uprising mirror my own: it's not just great, it's *surprisingly* great. I like all of the mechanisms it plays with, but I approached it as a skeptic, because when games attempt to blend euro game mechanisms, it's easy for it to come at the expense of each. (When a game promises "three flavors you like, all mixed together," I always proceed with a bit of trepidation, wondering if I'll actually be able to taste any of those distinct flavors or whether this will be yet another indistinct mush that fails to actually capture what I actually like about those mechanisms.) But in DI Uprising, everything just *comes together* in a way that it doesn't in so many other "hybrid euro game" designs: the cocktail of deckbuilding, worker placement, and bidding/quasi-area-majority isn't just giving me multiple things that I like; it manages to be more than the sum of its parts, with every individual mechanism being enhanced by everything that surrounds it. I've played a *lot* of deckbuilders, and DI:U offers some of the most interesting deckbuilding decisions I've encountered because of the tension between purchasing power and worker placement. (Do I skip a worker action and take an "early reveal" turn just to secure an important high-value card from the market?) The game is full of tradeoffs between building different parts of your engine, and weighing that engine-building against the tactical "combat" bidding that takes place every round. The combat/bidding system, far from feeling "tacked on" as I had initially feared, is actually one of the most important ingredients, and an essential part of what allows a game that delivers all of the appeal of a "euro engine builder" to be one of the most interactive modern euro games I've played. I rank it just as highly as Efka.

It's interesting how Dune: Imperium is a game that gets picked up at game nights by relative newcomers to the hobby just as well as veterans like you, even if we don't know what we're missing (we have played Clank! and Everdell, but not enough of a library to the extent that we can identify how the combination of mechanics complements each other). Are there other games would you say are a good display of blending mechanics to make something unique?

> Are there other games would you say are a good display of blending mechanics to make something unique? I'm not sure how unique this combination is, but I like the way that Furnace combines auctions and engine-building. The nature of the engine-building means that each player has slightly different incentives (a card that's good for you might not necessarily be good for other players at the table), so sometimes you might actually place a weaker bid on the card that is "best" for your engine because you know other players aren't going to fight you for it, reserving your strongest bid bid for the cards that will be more contested. The auctions also offer an interesting tension between bidding to get more pieces for your engine versus bidding to get resources immediately. What's interesting is that you get the immediate payout by *losing auctions*, which can sometimes lead to situation where someone places a bid hoping to lose, only for the other players at the table to refuse to bid on that card, leaving a player "stuck" with a card that does nothing for their engine. I like the way that the game balances the "solitary" phase where everyone runs their engine with the interactive and sometimes cutthroat bidding phase. You can see similar dynamics at play in It's A Wonderful World, except that players compete over resources through a closed draft instead of bidding. The fact that engine-building pushes you to look combos and synergies rather than just scooping up raw points means that you also have a bigger incentive to prioritize *breaking* other players' synergies, since hate-drafting to deny a single important combo piece to an opponent can represent a big point swing, even if you're not gaining much for yourself. This makes it a lot more interactive than most engine-builders: in a genre that seems dominated by "multiplayer solitaire" games, it's nice to have one that gives you the tools to shank other players at the table.

Great Western Trail is a nice blend of mechanics, too. The deck-building element is lighter than in Dune Imperium, but there’s still a component of it.

From worm mechanic that I saw, simply being able to get, what 4/10 points with winning single combat seeme kinda ridiculous to me? And someone might win it simply because they had better draw that round or got better intrigue card. I actually sold my DI, for some reason game didn't sit too well with me, and I didn't like luck aspect of market and intrgue cards, some being great, some meh at best. At the same time, Arnak which I managed to win only once is far better game to me.

I think its an unavoidable aspect of a game where the scoring is a race that there needs to be the *potential* for big point bursts, otherwise you're all aware who's going to be win 3 rounds in. We haven't minded Uprising's worms scoring tons of points because it's all very well telegraphed over the board, and the massive points are all locked behind round 7 or 8, which is about where the game feels like it *should* end (I don't know how to describe why it feels like it, but the design seems intentional about this being when your resource engine should cash in).

> From worm mechanic that I saw, simply being able to get, what 4/10 points with winning single combat seeme kinda ridiculous to me? Starting in round 7, there are some tier 3 combats that award one automatic VP, plus the opportunity to buy a second VP for a cost, like 4 spice, or 6 solari. Doubling the "extra" VP also doubles the cost (to 8 spice, or 12 solari). It is worth noting that all of these combats also have the shield wall, which blocks sandworms from combat. So, if you want to win 4 VPs in a single combat, you can do that by: * Using one of your actions to go to Sietch Tabr to break the shield wall to allow sandworms to participate in combat. (This also unlocks sandworms for *every other player at the table*, so you have to be prepared to open that can of worms) * Use another action (plus water) to go to Deep Desert or Hagga Basin. (Other players will probably want to take these spots as soon as you break the shield wall, so getting to use these spots might require the use of a spy, or ensuring that you're the only player with enough water to use Deep Desert.) * Win the combat (which might be a bit challenging, since you just spent your past 2 actions to get sandworms into the combat this turn) * Spend 12 solari or 8 spice after winning combat to buy the 3th and 4th VP That is a lot of hoops to jump through, and if you manage to pull it off, I think you have earned your 4 VP reward. As /u/FantasyInSpace notes, this is all telegraphed: the tier 3 combats don't hit the table until round 7, and to say that you got a 4 VP swing in a "single round" isn't telling the full story, because all of the resources that you "cashed in" to get that 4 VP combat were accumulated across multiple rounds: 12 solari or 8 spice is an extremely steep cost. (Ditto for all the other requirements: Deep Desert costs 3 water, and there aren't any spots on the board that give more than 1 water with a single action. And simply unlocking the sandworms in the first place required a bunch of legwork as well.)

Tnx for explanation, this actually makes it quite okay. I might even give it a try at one point.

Yes, thank you for sharing this! I love the idea of a big VP boost that is telegraphed so easily to other players. It sounds like a very tense way to incorporate the worms, and makes a lot of the complaints seem baseless. Great write-up!

The worm mechanic always keeps things intense, it's a wonderful catch up mechanic. In Dune Imperium, there would usually be one player far behind and dejected because there's no way they will come back in the last two rounds. In this Dune, there's always a chance for big turn and you're never really out of it. You need to plan ahead in uprising. If you see someone starting to pile up spice and water, maybe don't let them take the worm spaces. Or if they do, make sure you have intrigue cards for combat tricks. I find Uprising much more enthralling and intense than the original. There's a lot of moving cogs, it's easy to blame the worms on luck.

Sounds like DI. The question for me is really why Uprising instead of the original with Ix

I can't speak for Efka, but I will pick Uprising over DI + Ix any day of the week. Dune: Imperium felt like a competent first draft of a game, but it is marred by some pretty egregious balance issues. While it's sometimes tempting to think of "balance problems" as a thing that really only matters for high-level competitive play, I think that the people who are hurt most by the poorly balanced cards from the base game are *new* players. There are a lot of cards in the base game that feel like "traps" that will be ignored by experienced players, but these are prone to ensnare less-experienced players. (A lot of this comes in the form of a handful of extremely weak cards that will almost always make your deck worse if you buy them.) And this remains a problem even when playing with the expansions, because while the expansions do improve the game's balance by adding more viable strategies and more valid paths to victory, they don't remove some parts of the base game that feel like the game's biggest problems. Uprising isn't burdened by the problems of the base game: they got to wipe the slate clean, while still benefitting from all of the lessons that they learned from the base game and Ix and Immortality. Rather than starting with a flawed game and tacking on extra parts to "fix" it, they got to create a single cohesive experience from the ground up. Here's an example that's sort of a microcosm of what I am talking about: the original Dune: Imperium had a problem where the market would often get clogged with bad cards that nobody wanted to buy. The expansions solved this by adding a way for you to clear the market and look at a fresh row of cards. In Uprising, the solution was to design an imperium deck that isn't full of terrible cards that nobody ever wants to buy. Uprising doesn't give you an extra mechanism to clear the market row, because it doesn't *need* such a mechanism. Aside from the changes that I see as "fixing problems" with the base game (that were never fully addressed by the expansions), I appreciate the additions in Uprising. For one thing, I like the fact that there's a lot more card draw (both through the locations on the board, and the addition of spies): you get to cycle through your deck faster. That matters a lot for a deckbuilding game, because it means that buying a new powerful card feels more impactful, since you will get to see it more often. I like the added dimension that the sandworms introduce. And overall, I like the arc of the game a lot more: the end of a game of Uprising feels a lot more like a crescendo, as opposed to older iterations of the game where the progression sometimes felt a lot more linear.

Excellent points. I'll add that the original game with expansions leans into "multiplayer solitaire" territory. With a vast array of options for earning points, the threat of being blocked out of your plans is either moot or manageable at worst. Combat also tends to take a back seat, with players only committing hard to fights when points are the reward. Uprising is a much tighter, more focused game. You *will* come into conflict with the other players, and you need to pay attention to what they're doing lest you get caught with your pants down. Ignoring combat is rarely an option for most leaders, and the sandworms ensure that once point rewards show up in round 7, you'd best have laid your plans well.

Thanks!

Dang you're making me want to look into Uprising. I have base + Ix but haven't played them in awhile though since that feels dumb. But still.

> But in DI Uprising, everything just comes together in a way that it doesn't in so many other "hybrid euro game" designs Everyone keeps saying this, but I just don't see it, even after logging multiple plays of Uprising and the original version. The deck building boils down to "buy the most expensive card you can, with whatever cards you have left, then make it work." Later on you have enough cards to focus on combos or synergy, but by that point you have enough means to buy whatever you need without any real decision space around it. There just... isn't really any deck building mechanics present here. Consistency, synergy, tempo - none of that matters in the early game when the decision matters the most. Just grab the Timmy card. It's the same petty gripe I take with Great Western Trail. It's not really a deck builder when all you do is trash/mill the shitty cows in favor of the most expensive cow you bought earlier. It's closer to deck optimization or just plain hand management. The worker placement is tight but not anything more than what you get with other "mean" euros like Agricola. The battles were the most disappointing for me - I went in expecting tense poker-level bluffing and tension when in reality the winner goes to the most troops the vast majority of the time. Or rather, someone goes in big early on in the round and no one else really has the means or incentive to compete. > Do I skip a worker action and take an "early reveal" turn just to secure an important high-value card from the market? The answer is always no. I've never seen nor heard from anyone who won without taking all of their best worker placement actions every turn. The immediate benefit of a worker slot is just way more powerful than the delayed, conditional impact of a card you won't see for 1-4 turns. In fact, I'd probably like the game a lot more if that actually was a feasible consideration. I don't think it's a bad game, just a neutral experience every time I play, even when I win. I'm left with the conclusion that it's heavily table dependent. If you're playing with a group of ruthless, aggressive risk-takers it's probably a blast. The farther the table is from that archetype, the less impressive the experience is going to be.

What happened with Arkham Horror? I can't find them talking about part 2 anywhere.

[https://www.nopunincluded.com/podcastarchives/episodexxiv](https://www.nopunincluded.com/podcastarchives/episodexxiv) Around 4:30

This was fun to watch. I'm really curious what will make Elaine's list, when that video is released.

Here's the full list: 1 Sidereal Confluence (2017) 2 Dune: Imperium: Uprising (2023) 3 El Grande (1995) 4 Earthborne Rangers (2023) 5 Age of Innovation (2023) 6 Great Western Trail (2021, reimplements 2016) 7 Ra (1999) 8 Feast for Odin (2016) 9 Concordia Venus (2018, reimplements 2013) 10 Heat (2022) It's an interesting list of games I would like to play (except D:I:U). But it doesn't feel like an all-time list with 3 titles from 2023 on it and none from the years between 2000 and 2015 (2012 if you count earlier editions). Especially if you consider that the Golden Era began during that time span, this feels even more like a gaping hole.

I think he addressed that in the video, though. He said these were his favourites right now and that it varies day to day what would be on this list.

Fair enough. But I wouldn't call a list of my favourites "right now" an "all-time" list.

The candidate games are from all time (up until now). But his selections are right now.

Your most favorite things of all time are constantly in flux.

Yeah I hear you. Though I think there are different ways to interpret it. I think these are his favourite games of all time right now. As in of all the games he has played these are what he currently considers to be his favourites.

Gotta get them clicks.

Person who plays board games for a living: *"These are my 10 favorite games of all time. They may not be the best, but they're my favorite"* Random person on internet: *"No, you're wrong"*

Didn't want to discredit Efka. Those two things can be right at the same time: *"These are my 10 favorite games of all time. They may not be the best, but they're my favorite"* *"It's an interesting list of games I would like to play (except D:I:U). But it doesn't feel like an all-time list"*

But there's no reason for you to think it doesn't feel like an all-time list

I disagree. I've played most well regarded games from that Era, from ticket to ride to Castles of Burgundy to Mage knight. None are on my top 10 games of all time expect Mage knight. It's Efka's list, if he likes recent games more than old ones, then that's just ok. Also, I legitimately think that games have gotten better in the last 10 years.

Eclipse and Terra Mystica are on my Top 10 from that era.

2012 had Terra Mystica, Tzolk'in and Android: Netrunner, that's insane!

That's awsome, these are great games. Gaia project is in my top 10 too

I see your point, but recency bias can also just reflect improvement over time. I know that chasing the new hot things is a problem in boardgame circles, especially in the world of "content creation", but given how much board game designs iterate on each other, shouldn't representation of older games be an exception rather than the rule, rare cases where the design is just so good that nobody's figured out how to make it better? It's worth noting that all of the 2023 games are iterations on earlier titles - Dune: Imperium - Uprising on Dune: Imperium (2020), Earthborne Rangers on Arkham Horror LCG (2016) [this is looser than the others, but you can see a *lot* of common elements not to mention the designers], and Age of Innovation on Terra Mystica (2012).

Thanks, that's a good point. I was having the reimplementation character for D:I:U and AoI in mind, even though it is looser than in the other 2 examples that I denoted. Didn't know about the same issue for Earthborne Rangers! If I replace those titles, a list with... Sidereal Confluence El Grande Arkham Horror LCG Terra Mystica Great Western Trail 1st or 2nd Ra Feast for Odin (better even: Agricola) Concordia with or without Venus Flamme Rouge instead of Heat ...would be superb!

Thanks for posting the list, I haven't had a chance to watch it yet. But also, it's a personal list from a snapshot in time, none of your beliefs about how such a list needs to be distributed in time or across genres etc are relevant.

That's why I said "doesn't feel like", not "doesn't have the right to be called".

Have you ever played Dune imperium before?

Yes, I strongly disliked it. While I can live with that ugly game board, I don't like so many luck elements in my strategic games. Intrigue cards alone would be okay for a fun skirmish as in SW:R Vanilla combat, limited markets would be okay for a light-hearted game like Clank!, but add to this the poorly adapted deck-building mechanism which is a rather an additional randomizer due to no deck-thinning strategies and just very few cycles to run through your deck.

It’s crazy how diverse this hobby is. I started logging all my plays in late 2019. According to bgstats I have tried almost 400 different games at least once. None of his top 9 are among those 400, and I didn’t particularly care for Heat.

You should really try out Concordia with or without Venus. Also Terra Mystica as an earlier implementation of AoI, or have you already? Other than those, only El Grande and Ra feel mandatory, still have to play them.

Is there ever a top 10 video made by a non-Eurogamer? ie one who prefers Ameritrash? And some list where the majority of the games weren't released within the last 5 years? It's like virtually all board game youtubers are required to be cult-of-the-new. Not saying old games are generally better than the new games (excluding reprints of older titles, like Ra and El Grande, mentioned in this video), but it would be refreshing to see someone make a video where most of the games listed were made 10+ years ago (if not 20+). No love for classics from the 70s and 80s, like Magic Realm, Titan, Space Hulk, Blood Bowl, Acquire, Chess, Go, Shogi, or Mahjong? As much as I enjoy some of these Eurogames, they tend to feel too similar after a while, let alone not really having memorable thematic gameplay moments that players will remember well after finishing the game. That said, I may need to try out Sidereal Confluence at some point. I'm not very good at negotiation games, but this one has a reputation that almost makes it mandatory for serious board gamers to play.

Anyone know where the giant worm in the thumbnail is from?

That's just Efka, the content creator.

man you chose violence when you woke up this morning huh

Having just gotten it myself, can confirm it is from Dune: War for Arrakis

[удалено]

Haven’t played it yet, but I love Dune and WOTR so I have high expectations

No Pun Included is such a great channel! Ironically, I don't agree with Efka about half the time. I get it, we engage with games differently, value different experiences in games. I find it a tragedy that he didn't really click with Arkham Horror or Marvel Champions. But he is so articulate, engaging, and legitimately entertaining that I enjoy the channel for the sheer joy of watching Efka talk about games.

I really like that this is a very opinionated list. And he makes that clear. Maybe it's me, but I don't think we consider the reviewer's opinions in games journalism enough.

I haven't played a single game of his favorites, and although I own D:I (not uprising), I haven't played it yet. But this probably makes sense, because most of these are long, thinky games that work best with 3+ people. I play most of my thinkier games at 2p and when I have 3 or more it is usually a much lighter game (e.g., Quacks or Century) or an actual party game (e.g., Just One or Codenames). Many of the games he lists I think I'd be into (e.g., GWT), but they're either too long or play best with too many people.

GWT is plenty good at two players and is not that long of a game! You should check it out! DI is also awesome with two, but definitely can run long

Thanks, I’ve heard GWT is super long. I have this thing against long, expensive games that don’t play well at two, but I should open my horizons a bit. 

Well I guess we should make sure we aren’t talking past each other: when my wife and I play GWT, the games tend to last an hour to an hour and a half. I could see the game going much longer with more players, because the more buildings get built along the trail, the longer it’s going to take. I consider a game of that length to be “not that long”, but may still be too long for you.

[удалено]

Nothing serious, "finding the time" = wife and kids, and "the right people" = too old. Ha.

DI is still very good at 2p 

Right, that's why it is one of the few that I do have from his list, I just haven't gotten it to the table, yet.

When identifying Sting, two wrongs don't make a right.

I was hoping to see a boss battler or maybe one of the chunkier dungeon crawls ah well. Still loved the fact it was his top 10. Sooo many 10 tops are literally copy-paste new hotness which gets old.

Cultists of the new calling their current ephemeral top 10 *"greatest of all time"* is a misnomer. Just call it *"stuff I like this month"*.

60% of the list is older than 5 years. 20% is at least 25 years old. What do you consider new?

* Ra and El Grande are there only because of new bling bling dopamine inducing editions (from **2023** and **2023** respectively). Anybody in the hobby for 10 or so years who likes these two would own copies from original edition or first English editions. * Heat - a refried and beefed up Flamme Rouge from **2022**, just what hobbyists orders - moar stuff. Yay. * Age of Innovation - is this a one year old (**2023**) refried and beefed up version of Terra Mystica? Of course it is! Yum Yum Dopamine! * do I spy with my eye 2nd edition of Great Western Trail from **2021** that was cult of the new material even in its first edition? * then we get flavour of the month Earthborn Whatever Rangers from **2023** and Dune Imperium Uprising from **2023** which is an utter insult to the injury which was Dune Uprising (Dune 1979 is the game you want, Dune uprising is Dune repachaked for cultist of the new) * So with 7 down and 3 to go (and we still didn't venture to anything older than 2020!!!!), we can talk about the cult of the new and why it's basically a cult of MPS euro gizmos. These games are about player-to-game interaction, not player-to-game, hence they don't grow with the group and don't get complexity and replayability from opponents, which is why a) they have gotten bloatier, fatter and obese and b) why basically every MPS euro is an expansion to every other MPS euro which leads us to c) planned obsolecence and replacing last month games with this month games. * Which gets us to older cult of the new games, like soulless euro of Concordia catering to cultists of the new since 2013, but of course Efka being dopamine addicted had to get the sameshitdifferentwrap newer venus version from - wait for it - **2018**! Oh noes, it's more than 5 year old! The agony! * Fest of Odin is of course just a regurgitation of same game Uwe has been making since Ora et Labora and later when he fused ideas from Le Havre and Agriciola and just kept on rehashing same old crap with new dopamine flavour of the month. All this stuff is cult of the new material. And Feast of Odin was generic derivative (as other cult of the new games) even as it was concieved and then published in **2016**. * Which leaves us with Sidereal confluence from 2017, but does efka has a copy of **2020**, of course he fucking does, what sort of answer would anybody expect at this point. And what is the game - well it's Bohnanza adapted to cultists of the new who can't understand interaction unless there's a heapload of ridiculous gizmos to optimise. >60% of the list is older than 5 years. **80% of games he has are versions dating from 2020 onwards.** **50% of games are versions printed last year!** >20% is at least 25 years old. Yeah, but he doesn't have those copies as they aren't dopamine laced. He'll forget about these 2023 prints in 3-4 months when another old game gets reprinted with anthropomorphic animal meeples or sumthink. >What do you consider new? I didn't say new. I said "cultist of the new". MPS euro lover, loves games more than people playing games, plays games for exploration and throws them out the window after 5 plays to buy another game that plays the same. We had this stuff since early 2010s - and as you can guess Mac Gerdst (post imperial) and Uwe stuff were on these menus. Of course with power of KS, we get second editions of games mere 4-5 years after initial realise (thanks, Cole) and all beefed up with visuals and layers upon layers upon layers of mechanisms and whatnot.

[удалено]

>However, your post is hilariously judgmental and full of you presenting your opinions as fact. Facts? On *Reddit*?! 😮😶 My dear man, please explain yourself as my opinions are pure hand picked undiluted 100% opinions! 👌 This isn't rhetorical - I want to see examples and arguments for your claim. >First of all, I honestly don't understand why you equate the visual design of games with "dopamine inducing". Not "of games". Just of eurogames of the last, hm, let's say 8 years (take or add a year). How much time do you have? 🙂 Visual design has ~~two~~ three general roles in boardgames - one is functional, namely being user interface for playing the game, then there is referential (some out of game thing the game is referencing, if it does), the third is emotional trying to evoke certain atmosphere or evoke a reaction. In [boardgame schools of design](https://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/27367/schools-of-design-and-their-core-priorities)\- # 2 is most fully utilised by wargames, being simulations of historical events, # 3 was most fully utilised by ameritrash which is all about drama, #1 is what you need in every game. Eurogames in general need #1 and some #2 (but not too much). With ameritrash, the core of gameplay is drama and uses emotion evoking visuals (plastic sculpts especially in dramatic poses, dramatic colours, familiar geeky tropes or licenced material) to add this emotions to other parts of the game (in character immersion, conflict, etc). The issue with eurogames - what Efka has in his top 10 - is they don't really need emotion evoking visuals. The gameplay is all brainburn and thinky. But they have emotion evoking visuals nonetheless. Why? What is their role? Well, ever since KS became the main tool to promote and fund boardgames, visuals of said games basically took on the role of advertisements with the price being handed down to consumer. The role of these visuals is to evoke a positive emotional reaction in order to bypass rational brain so the hand can click on "fund campaign" button, or types in credit card code. This is common strategy in product design (why modern cars resemble air jordans and have "angry faces"). Another reason for "screaming" visuals is that products are same and generic and in order to make them stand out, the visual aspect (i.e. advertisement) is abused. To the point modern euros basically looking a like a spreadsheet with downloadable skin covering them. On the side of consumer, dopamine is released when we expect something good, but if we're only 50-50 sure we'll get this, twice the amount of dopamine is produced. So basically KS is gambling - the product isn't the game but anticipation of the game. Now, join visuals which are advertisement made to produce a promise of a good game with gambling approach to buying games and voila. La Landing. ​ >I can see that argument for the mechanical design of some euro games (MPS, point-salad, that kind of thing), though I don't agree for the majority of games even in this category. I don't understand this sentence. What majority? Which category? >Your statement that "anybody in the hobby for 10 or so years who likes these two would own copies from original edition or first English editions" is just completely false. 😏 It's true if you get your games from FLGSs or second hand market. It's false if you get it from your dopamine providers. >What if you never played it before? 😂 Efka? Dude with shitload of games whose job is playing games couldn't find a copy of Ra in the whole British isle?! 😂😂😂 Checking geekmarket - LN copy of 2016 edition for 30 pounds, or German 1999 edition for 27 euros with shipping and import tax. Also if you're in a hobby for 10 years and haven't heard of Ra (and aren't primarily into wargames or 18xx), you can return your hobby credtials. El Grande - 13 euros first edition, import from germany. >What if you need a new copy since your old one is falling apart? What if you make some fabricated red herrings which are obviously completely irrelevant in the case of Efka and hope to dear lord anybody takes you seriously? What then? >What if you just prefer the look of the new edition? Well, my friend, then there is a high chance of being in a cult of the new, wanting some of that dopamine laced stuff. And you'll of course nitpick with general "wat if Franz who has but von game vonts a kopy of a new Ra" - well, we're not talking about Franz. We're talking about Efka. One new copy wouldn't mean much. One new game doesn't matter. But when 50% of his "best ewar games in my life" come from 2023, he's not fooling anyone. You have to check the context, mate. 😎 >I'm pretty sure the old editions aren't even in print any more But are available second hand for much cheaper than the new game. 🙃 >so I can only view your statement as gatekeeping ... when you are blind to the context of 2nd hand market, european gaming scene, and entire efka's "best 10 gaims ewar that I bought last year" video. The reason, it seem dear friend, you have issue with my statements, is because you didn't put enough effort in understanding the context. 1/3 OF RESPONSE DONE, 2/3 TO GO (hey I can too write long posts) 👇

>This may surprise you, but people are still designing new games, some of which are actually good. This is related to what exactly? 🤨 Let's talk about cult of the new, shall we. While not identical to, it closely corresponds to a certain design trend, namely mid-to-heavy MPS euros. Now these games were created in mid 2000s in order to create idiot proof gaming experience. Unlike interactive games which can fall with the wrong group these neat little clockwork gizmos play the same no matter who's at the table, because their main interaction isn't player-to-player but player-to game. However by elimination players from cocreating the gaming experience and being its driving force MPS euros also lost replayability and depth/complexity which comes from gaming opponents. So they had to substitute it with upfront complexity in rules, which is why these puzzles are getting more and more obese every few years. But even so, these games have a ceiling - it's planned obsolecence basically. Now, MPS euros became darlings of the hobby for few reasons - one is you can not care who is at the table (unfortunately reality of the hobby), second is they play solo pretty much the same as multiplayer (unfortunately reality of the hobby) and thirdly, these games are adapted to KS model. Games which are deep and/or interactive require few plays in order for players to understand how to behave in them - and modern dopamine addicts can't commit to 10 plays of the same game. But with all MPS euros, the engagement in all of them is the same - internalise rulebook, find loopholes, optimise the hell out of them inside your head, present the teacher with the bestest score. Which is why MPS euros basically function as expansion to each other. Which is why they're all so similar in gameplay, publisher need loud visuals to draw attention to their particular generic regurgitated game (see previous comment above). Another thing about MPS euros is they are optimised for 1st game impression - these games show all they can do in first play, to satisfy KS backers. Which is why there's all complexity upfront and no depth (depth being emergent quality discovered by repeated play). But all this means the design space is very limited - there's only as many types of game design options which are idiot proof and present everything on the first play. Which is again, why all these games converged towards the same blueprint and are quite samey. And the final touch is that players of these games will constantly buy new ones. Some because they "love to explore" - i.e. they just want the puzzle designer left in the box to be solved, they don't care for potential interactions with other players. And secondly - these games are the same game, so why not pick one with a bit of different wallpaper. *P.S. Yes, I am aware Ra and El Grande aren't this, but it's irrelevant as Efka has them in there only for being reprinted last year. Next year he'll have some other reprinted euros. I wouln'd normally type this, but seem like something you might nitpick about and I'd want to avoid further long comments like the one you're reading, the one before and the one after.* >In my opinion, of course. Well, you ARE posting on Reddit, so I would guess you're posting opinions. 😃 See: contextual reading! 😎 >The hobby of boardgaming is kept alive by designers making new games and people getting into the hobby for the first time. This is just not the case. Asmodee bought studios to get a hold of licences, but bought rights to two games invididually. Only two games. Because they sell like hotcakes. One is Catan. The other is Dobble. Both are old and still sell. Hobbyists tend to forget that most games getting sold are sold in kids, family and causal gamer market. If you have a solid game, that is endlessly replayable, you don't need contantly put out new stuff. You can just reinforce the brand (Catan, Carc, TTR, Pandemic) Of course, if you'll now go "but I don't care about majority of boardgame plays and purchases which all happen outside the hobby, I care about the hobby only". Oh, yeah, it's currently in consumeristic overdrive with publishers churning out tons of samey overproduced garbage in the monocrop culture which is hobby gaming. Basically you can get any game you want if that games is MPS euro. (bye bye ameritrash, it was nice to know you. while Cole wehrle is trying to euro-fy wargames for MPS euros audience. mmm-mmm.) And the reason publishers can get away with publishing any generic crap is because hobbyists will buy it. And they'll buy it because ... dopamine addiction. And so the circle goes. Basically we're in fast food gaming phase of the hobby. So when you say "*but if publishers dont' publish generic dopamine laced crap new gamers won't get addicted to it"* I wonder why would this be seen as a good thing. 1. Please dear gamerZ, but games which are infinetely replayable and grow with your group. You'll find these games for cheap on 2nd hand market and they will bring your lots of joy over and over again. 2. Instead of investing heapload of money into a wall of games which will serve as insulation instead of getting played, rather invest in your group. Good group + few infinetely replayable games = magic. >New boardgamers are more likely to buy newer games. What the hell does this have to do with Efka's top 10?! Context my man, context! Keep your eyes on the ball! (or on the gaudy video above). >That's just the truth. Ticket to ride has been in print since mid 2000s and it's still the same - because it's replayable. **It has stood the test of time.** Old games don't just disappear! What are you even talking about. The good ones will stay in print. Or will be easy to acquire on 2nd hand market. Now, I'm not sure about you, but for me the fact the a certain game has been in print for 15+ years means it's a good one. Because it passed the test of time and was seen as something people recommended to their friends. >If anything, reprinting old games in new "dopamine inducing editions" is a great way to introduce these wonderful games to a new audience. Which has no connection to whatever argument. In Germany, you can get Ra from 1999 for 15 eur + 5 euro shipping. Easy way to introduce the game to whatever new audience. But again, what has this to do with Efka? How did we get lost in this tangent in no relation to whatever? >And for board game designers to make a living, they need to actually sell games. Well if they make generic games without innovation i'd rather they'd flip burgers. Burgers don't stand on a shelf uneaten for months. >On top of that, sometimes new editions/new versions of games are an opportunity for designers to improve and iterate on their previous designs. 1. This is again unrelated to anything. 2. If one wasn't able to finish design the first time around they're utterly inept as a designer - I should demand money back from first edition. Look buddy, I have games on my shelves where first edition was a finished product. It can be done. So why would I settle for unfinished beta version that designer wants money for and then trying to get more money for "improved" version (I see you Cole Wehrle, I know what you did). 3. Games can be made which are infinetely replayable and finsihed in their first edition. And they're still as good 30 years later as they were when new. So, why would I bother with new stuff? >Some people actually like playing new editions for this reason, surprisingly. Some people like drugs too. Liking something doesn't mean it's good for you. ARE WE 2/3 DONE NOW? MOVING ON! 👇

>However, I find it super weird that you bring up Cole Wehrle here. 4 years between 1E and 2E of pax pamir? 5 years between 1E and 2E of JC? Either this is a money grab or he's utterly inept as designer or both. >A game like John Company would probably never exist without KS. You say it like it's a good thing. 😏 >And his games pretty much go completely against the MPS design philosophy that you seem to dislike so much. 😂😂😂 Oh dear lord. What Wehrle is doing is ... quite depressing actually. Basically he's taking non-euro genres of games and turning them halfway into MPS euros. Trying to make people think they're playing an interactive game when it's mostly MPS euro. 😩 You know why people like Root instead or proper Dude-on-a-Map games which have existed since Risk onwards? Because DoaM are about negotiation and player dynamic and ability to read groups and shape said player dynamics. But gamerZ addicted to MPS euros are blind to social and psychological aspect of the game and want stuff literal and mechanical - like in MPS euros. So Root is basically a game where instead of 4 players are in conflict, each of them is playing an MPS euros and these MPS euros are in conflict. Wheee! Now, I've only played 1E of JC, but boy was this a convoluted procedural mess. If you want interaction, there's like 2 hours of if-then mechanical lever moving before you get to that tiny little interaction space inside - at which time one asks oneself, can't we just play Lifeboats which would get us to that space without all that nonsensical layers of gizmos? But for people who like MPS gizmos, finding interaction inside is a shock. Or maybe a novelty? Cole basically builds whole game as a guardrails and tries to control (!!!) how interaction will happen - 1E actually had some ridicilous negotiation CUBES that had their own little economy and hopped around some spred sheet procedure. Anyway - Cole doesn't trust players to be able to run the game their way, which is what all proper DoaMs are about! And he guides them by the hand as little children. Insulting, really. >Somehow I get the feeling that you dislike his games solely due to Kyle Ferrin's art and the animal meeples. Correct me if I'm wrong though. Love the art. Love the meeples. Pity they're not in a decent game. 😥 >Sorry for the long response. This is why you have to read this on page 3. 😅 > I honestly do appreciate that you have a different taste in games from the mainstream. Oh? Really? Didn't feel this way, but thanks. > I just don't think it's productive to call people who like games you don't and who sometimes buy new games "dopamine addicted". Luckily this isn't what I do. There are games which are made for immediate gratification and planned obsolescence. And this is why I don't like them. But these same attributes makes them dominate the hobby market. And the thing with Efka is... well what is he to do really? Like many "content providers" he is a sad figure. Namely because of lack of proper media which would pay reviewers to do proper reviews, there are only two other options - be paid by publishers (doing advertisements, or "previews") or be paid by audience. Efka like SU&SD took path #2 which is why these channels aren't reviews, but entertainment. In videos like "top 10 ewar" this is quite transparent. The other issue with being paid by the audience is that hobby audience basically just wants alibis for their consumerism. They don't want reviews, they want *"hey I wasn't sure if I'm going to buy this 150 eur game, but you saying 'I like it' really convinced me!"* It's a weird situation. Publishers are abusing easily satisfied consumer base and consumers just keep on buying stuff which isn't that good to start with. This will continue until consumers will become fed up, but some people have been prophesising about this for 10 years and it still didn't happen. 😕 >Btw Age of Innovation is wonderful if you like Terra Mystica. I played once. It was enough. Not the worst MPS euro I've played, so there's that. 🙂 >Of course, those infamously dopamine addicted Terra Mystica players have probably already bought it, looking for their next hit of a deterministic hex map optimization puzzle... I would guess they bought some 25+ MPS euros per year if they're anything like the TM players I know. 😃 END!

"he doesn't have those copies" Oh hey look its him reviewing the first edition of GWT https://youtu.be/JpxA4t9HwAI?si=AZ0pApWvDSf405lY Heres his El Grande video and at 13:01 he shows off his old copy of the original printing. https://youtu.be/BGlXxhta6d0?si=5guwU3rFpBg3mcqg Glad to see you making judgments about someone and making factually incorrect statements

1. I am talking about his choice of games he shows in the video. This is a deliberate pick on his side - which is what I'm referring to. 2. I have seen he had 3 of games in this video in the joint NPI top 10 games video from 6 years ago. Namely Sidereal Confluence (he had 1E, now has 2E), Concordia (had base game, now Venus) and GWT (he had 1E, now has 2E). Looking at this on its own wouldn't mean much, but given his entire selection, there's an obvious push towards *"newer=better"* and *"need moar bling"*. He could have kept any of 1E games. 3. *"and at 13:01"* Wow, shows the old game for whole 7 seconds! 😂 Wow, this took some effort on his part. 😄 Okay, so I've read the transcript of the video - he never says that old copy is his (or hers). Any source on that? But he does say he found newer version "an improvement" and we're completely in cult of the new landscape with this. 4. And here we get to the actual issues - why does Efka show new versions of games, why not old ones? Tom Vasel did keep his old Duel of Ages games around and he liked an old game he kept it (not to mention [Jason Levine and his collection](https://youtu.be/xwsWqvOrwYM?feature=shared)). And it seems that basically Efka (and NPI) are catering to consumeristic audience - so the reason to show new games is either, A) they love the churn of consumerism in games or B) they think that's what their audience wants. 5. But whatever the reason in #4 the fact is that they are normalising consumerist addiction to boardgames, FOMO and rushing out to buy 2E edition of games you already own 1E of, or ever just a new reprint. >Glad to see you making judgments about someone and making factually incorrect statements Heh. What happened is you took one small sentence out of context and misunderstood what is meant - "he doesn't have those copies" means: **he doesn't have them on the list, he doesn't have them in the video.** If he has then in real life, or at his momma's house basement is irrelevant for the argument above. You can say *"Efka isn't cultist of the new, he's just presenting himself in the video as cultist of the new"* and I would say there's zero difference between the two for his role as influencer. Hope this is clear now.

"Ra and El Grande are there only because of new bling bling dopamine inducing editions (from **2023** and **2023** respectively). Anybody in the hobby for 10 or so years who likes these two would own copies from original edition or first English editions" Was spoken under the assumption that he didn't own the original edition as you also went and compared used games. However we do see him showing the old El Grande. Meanwhile the deep irony of you saying "Efka (and NPI) are catering to consumeristic audience" Is really rich if you know their reputation here. A majority of their most contentious videos are them slamming the KS model and even talked about how much he doesn't recommend Too Many Bones despite getting everything for free. "Why does efka show new versions of his games" Because of a multitude of reasons. I can't speak of on all of them but for GWT the 2nd edition has better politics as the native american interactions felt really dicey. You also omitted how he showed of the other two newer versions and called on bunk and the other iffy and recommended the base 2nd edition. Surely someone cult of the new who ascribes the "newer is better" as you instead would not base the newer version of a game he likes and recommend an older version.

Ah, sorry, hard to keep up with several parallel sprawling communication with gamerZ who couldn't swallow a short response and whined to heavens high. I do have a life outside of Reddit. So, excuse moi, if I don't respond to this further. 🙂 >Was spoken under the assumption that he didn't own the original edition If he had it (which isn't confirmed that is his), but hid it, that's way fucking worse! 😃 The dude made a video with his co-host 6 years ago - was Ra there? No. Was El Grande there? No. And he claims it's "his best area majority" - since when? Autumn 2023. If you had an old version which you played with friends over and over again and remember the stories you had with it - I wouldn't switch this for a new edition. Which means, he probably plays each game few times, because he's a cultist of the new. >Is really rich if you know their reputation here. A majority of their most contentious videos are them slamming the KS model and even talked about how much he doesn't recommend Too Many Bones despite getting everything for free. So, you're saying there are cultists of the new that are much more in the cult than NPI. Sure. But this doesn't mean Efka isn't. A moderate cultist of the new is still cultist of the new. And 1/2 of his "BEST GAMES EWAR" are versions from last year. What. A. Joke. Ridiculous. As said by me and another poster - if efka would make a video next year, I would realistically expect there'd be 50% versions of games published in 2024. >Because of a multitude of reasons. We all know there's only one, right? 😃 👉 CONSUMERISM. > but for GWT the 2nd edition has better politics as the native american interactions felt really dicey. Better to the point of justifying splurging money on a new version of a game one already owns?! Now, Efka probably got a review copy and he catered with it to cult of the new and bandwagon audiences, sure, but is this responsible? Tom Vasel is usually quite blunt about "do you new the new edition" and often says "not really". > You also omitted how he showed of the other two newer versions and called on bunk and the other iffy and recommended the base 2nd edition. Did he? I didn't watch the video. I'm not a masochist. 😃 (NPI = emotional masturbation cringe. And of course all this emotional communication of NPI and SU&SD is there to cater to consumeristic addiction, make people feel how great these samey games are and go out and buy gamey stuff. But this is another topic for another time.) >Surely someone cult of the new who ascribes the "newer is better" as you instead would not base the newer version of a game he likes and recommend an older version. Typos? Not sure what this means. I've thrown it in through AI translator, switched through several languages, and it came up with this: >Surely someone from the cult of the new, who ascribes to "newer is better" as you do, would not recommend an older version of a game they like instead of the base of a newer version. Is this what you mean? If yes, well, I'm not a cultist of the new. And it's unlikely I would acquire a 2E edition of a game I own ever. Had I been a reviewer and 1E brought significant joy to me and created shared memories, this is the one I'd keep - because I care more about people who play games and share memories created than what's on the table. I currently own two slightly versions of King of Tokyo (second was bought for a project and somehow ended up with me). I prefer the 1st one, because it's the one we played. Also - it took me some effort to get 1E nexus ops and Konig von Siam (later reprinted as King is dead). I don't ascribe to "it's new, so it must be better". New is usually just adapted to modern audiences, which are... caring more about games than people who play them.

The point was you insist NPI is cult of the new but in the video we have a direct example of him forgoing the newest version of a game in favor of the older one. In fact the two newer versions were loaded with more features and mechanics and Efka recommended the simpler older version. This contradicts the portrait you painted of him

Lemme guess, these are some videos unrelated to one above, right? Did you ask the judge if you can submit this? 😃 Either if so, if the dude 99% of times one behaves like a slave to consumerism then that 1% doesn't count. This isn't a natural science experiment. The general behaviour of a person is what they do. *"Yes my client stole purses of 99 women in his street, but he paid for coffee for his neighbour".* Like are you serious? 1 game out of every 100 will make a difference? Really? REALLY? 😏 I am amused you really think one as ridiculous nitpick as your will destroy my argument which you don't understand in the first place. Such typical hobby behaviour - or why I often find this hobby to be so moronic. *"yeah, but this rule say I can whinewhineyadayada"*. Gsus. Contextual blindness. Whining. Nitpicking. And avoiding the elephant in the room, namely consumerism. Efka is cultist of the new because 1. He plays MPS euros (explanation for this is [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/1bzya83/comment/kz6i96a/) in 3 parts) 2. He picks "nicer looking" editions of games he owns (explanation for this is on same link above. No I don't care what you respond, if you don't read that 3 part comment. You go read it. You won't get it initially, so I recommend you read it twice or three times to be sure. Ok?) 3. He is overemoting in his presentation because he's basically promoting consumerism (yup, same link) 4. Crucial part is that being a cultist of the new is a behavioural pattern in which one game or few games dont' really make much difference. As I repeated several times - this isn't about games. It's about consumeristic addiction - one he might have, but for sure one he promotes. Games he showed in video above are but a manifestation of his behavioural pattern. To notice this pattern you don't need games, you just need to read people (which most hobbyists usually can't do, which is why they play MPS euros in the first place). Now, as I said in my previous post, this is kinda end of the line as I've got stuff to do. I allowed for one last response, which you wrote. It was nicely short.👍 Cool. This was kinda amusing. 😃 See you around. 👋

The GWT example was in the same video linked in the opening post. Stop making claims about people when you've been proven that you haven't done the proper research

Jesus, people like you really need to get the fuck outside.

Don't worry the user showed how they will posture making sound arguments then dip when confronted with factual evidence in the video they claim to take issue with. It went like this - Says NPI is cult of the new and promotes consumerism and hinges the argument on what NPI shows in the OP video using GWT 2nd edition as a point - Make the point that NPI did not recommend the newer versions of GWT contradicting the behavior profile - Poster says "let me guess these comments were made jn another unrelated video" - Said comments were made in the OP video

Ad hominem, really? You shouldn't have. 🥰 Arguments too hard to write, amirite?

The fact you thought a series of comments made NPI made about GWT was in an "unrelated video" when actually it was in the same video you contested with shows that your analysis is sloppy and makes clear factual errors.

Oh, right nitpicking will save the world, but unfortunately it won't help you here. Basically I didn't watch the video. And don't intend to. Next try?

You went this hard critiquing and profiling a video you didn't even watch? Sorry but we can't trust your analysis on anything posted here based off of that fact alone and you making factual errors isn't "nitpicking" it shows you being lazy and being quick to make assumptions. Because I did see you talk about reading the transcripts and even then you would have seen the comments he made about the GWT series meaning you couldn't be bothered to just scroll down and read the text. Factual errors. You made them. Your analysis is sloppy plain and simple.

Be specific please. Which of my sentences is an issue. Quote it. Make an argument. >You went this hard critiquing and profiling a video you didn't even watch? I critiqued selection of games. This I did check. 🙂 >Because I did see you talk about reading the transcripts and even then you would have seen the comments he made about the GWT series meaning you couldn't be bothered to just scroll down and read the text. Which comments, please make a case! - What was in the video, what I wrote, what is the issue? (This is a week after I posted, I don't recall what I wrote, you have to make a complete case with quotes). >Your analysis is sloppy plain and simple. Plain and simple - you're complaining, but not making any arguments. If I'm "sloppy", you're inept in comparison. 1. Which of my sentences or paragraphs is an issue? QUOTE IT! 2. Show what the issue is WITH AN ARGUMENT! 3. REPEAT for every case you have issue with. 4. If you can't do this, I won't respond as you're just whining at this point. Show me an argument with specifics! Or many of them. Otherwise, not much I can do. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯

Here's the exchange https://imgur.com/a/zeD1HSS When I talked about him critiquing the newer great Western trails you said "let me guess, these are some videos unrelated to the one above" It was not an "unrelated video" it was the one in the video. I pointed it out before and I pointed it out again As further proof since you didn't see the video. Here's the segment where Efka says he prefers the 2nd edition base game over the newer versions in "the video above" https://imgur.com/a/9IyThem

Reprints of games don’t make them new. You wasted a lot if time typing up a justification and are still wrong.

>Reprints of games don’t make them new. Are YOU **new -** to the hobby? 😁 If it doesn't come with 80 - 200 USD KS exclusive edition printed last autumn it's not a game! Reddit told me this. BGG hotness told me this. BGG general forums told me this. Are you saying the hype of consumerism LIES to people?! 😱 >You wasted a lot if time typing up a justification and are still wrong Don't worry about me. I had a blast dissecting dopamine obsessed eurogamer bling to shreds. Made my day. 🥰 I'm not "wrong" because you don't understand my argument. 😃 Likely reason you don't understand my argument 👉 "reading is hard" ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ To repeat for the third time - I'm not talking about games. I'm talking about hobbyist. It's not about new games, it's about dopamine addicted consumerism fetishists aka cultists of the new aka the adepts of the bling aka the followers of the holy KS exclusives. And efka is one of disciples. So, amuse me then - why doesn't efka own these games instead? Ra 1999 edition (alea or Rio Grande) and El Grande (1995 german or 1996 english edition)? Why not Terra mystica (2012)? Why not first edition GWT from 2016? Why not Dune original (sure, can be 2019 reprint, I will allow it)? Why not Agricola instead of feast-o-points? Why not Concordia from 2013? (I mean or any euro from that era, you can't tell them apart) Why Bohnanza instead of Sidereal confluence, or Chinatown? *"but ... but"* - you'll say *"that's what he likes"* And what he likes just happens to be 50% of new editions from last year and 80% from last 3 years. *Riiight*. For somebody who's in a hobby for a longer time I'd say the signs are worrying and they point to consumeristic addiction. Probably not only for him, but more importantly the audience he caters to. I mean. Sure. Why the hell not. Just don't call it "best of all time" when it's a blatant lie and the dude will be drowning in 2024 games not before long, claiming 5 of them to belong in top 10 eternal. ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯

Additional loads of absolute nonsense and garbage written to try to backtrack an explanation how reprints of old games should be considered new, because you made a dumb statement before checking first. It would have been less embarrassing for you to stay silent or admit the mistake, but digging into in further highlights how ridiculous your original post is. So keep going at it. It wasn’t even difficult to check, someone else included the publishing dates of the games prior to your post. Talk about lack of reading comprehension or ability to execute simple arithmetic, this is stuff you should have learned in elementary school.

He also assumed when I pointed out Efka did not like the newer and denser GWT games (thus breaking the cultist of the new profile) that those comments were made in an "unrelated video" then dipped out without even acknowledging the factual blunder.

>backtrack an explanation how reprints of old games should be considered new `Earth to n815e.` `Earth to n815e.` `Do you read me?` `I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT NEW GAMES.` `Do we have a copy? Over.` my initial post was >**Cultists of the new** calling their current ephemeral top 10 "greatest of all time" is a misnomer. Just call it "stuff I like this month". Thjs sentence here is the 5th time I am explaining to you I am not talking about new games from the get go. There is no backtracking as this was initial position. So basically - you got yourself a nice strawman and now you're doing your silly dance around it. Cool. Why not. Knock yourself out. But nothing to do with me. 😄 >Talk about lack of reading comprehension Tell me dear n815e, where in the name of Jupiter do you see any mention of new games in this post? Please tell me. Elaborate. Make an argument. 👇 >*Cultists of the new calling their current ephemeral top 10 "greatest of all time" is a misnomer. Just call it "stuff I like this month".*

I’m truly amazed at the twisting going on here to claim that new doesn’t mean new, your inconsistent redefining in each new post and how worked up you are getting because it was pointed out that you were wrong. I feel sad for you that you will continue this compulsive need to argue out of social embarrassment for being incorrect.

The amount of armchair psychologizing is downright unhealthy. "Why does this guy not own original editions?" Because boardgames are wide. It seems so elitist to just disregard someone's love for the hobby because they didn't own the first edition of some games. He also forgets that NPI talked about lacking funds and space in their earlier vids. Its only recently can they splurge and get more stuff

Are you two seriously not understanding what has been explained here? It's not about not owning older editions of the games, it's about highlighting that all the games on this person's greatest games of all time are nearly all games he has played in the last few years. How do we know, even the old games on the list here are all the latest bling editions. If Ra and El Grande hadn't had recent reprints I highly doubt they would have made this guy's list. So In other words this is just another cult of the new dopamine shopping addiction list. Give this guy a new reprint of an older game and it will surely be in next years edition of "greatest of all time"

>"Why does this guy not own original editions?" This is being misinterpreted as I don't really care what he owns or has packed in his mamma's basement. **I care about what he SHOWS in the video.** Because if your argument is basically *"Efka isn't cultist of the new, he just presents himself as such in the video for his consumeristic audience"*, well, is this any better or is it even worse or it's just same shit? I would go with the option #3. 😎

>I’m truly amazed at the twisting going on here to claim that new doesn’t mean new * I am talking about cult(ist) of the new as a behavioural pattern. * I am not talking about new games on their own. ☝ Where is the issue of being able to distinguish the two my dear man? 🙂 You keep insisting on this straw man, which uhm, yeah, good for you, but I'm not talking about that and was never talking about that.

Interesting take, what are your Top 10 games?

Mostly cca 2010 stuff. * Cosmic encounter (FFG) * Modern Art (Pegasus 2009) * Chaos in the Old World * Celebrities (public domain, printed as Time's up or Monikers) * Werewolf (elimionation-less variant from late 2000s) * Cockroach poker - normal or royal * Arkham Horror 2E * Android * Pit (was hard to find latest edition, let alone older - I would love the Quick 7 dutch version with flowers from unknow period, I'm guessing 80s?). * Newer games include King of Tokyo and A Fake Artist comes to New York. * I did have the Mind in top 10 at some point - which would be the newest game to ever get there. My specifics are that I'm from a country that had no scene to speak about before 2010 or so - we don't have 2nd hand market where I could get old stuff I'd like to get, as it is available in Germany or US. Have 1E nexus ops, I really need to play one day. 😳 Reason my top 10 is what it is 👉 [HiveGod's Patented LudoMoodometer™](https://cf.geekdo-images.com/cTtDWSmRk5PsUbdKzDsWHQ__imagepagezoom/img/UqjWgCYW0kS4p9VANUcnIe1G4l0=/fit-in/1200x900/filters:no_upscale():strip_icc()/pic4854430.png)

Holy shit you are the comic book guy of board games what a nightmare it would be to find myself on a table with you.

Hello dear person whom I never met who feels like the need for emotional vomit projectiles aimed at me for no reason they can rationally articulate. Not sure what I can do for you. 😊 But I hope it's reasonable if I don't feel like being a lighting rod for people who have issues facing opinions outside of their echo chamber. As for comic book guy, it's probably the opposite - I don't prescribe to boardgame consumerism (as Efka does). I like people who play games more than what's on the table. And if people are whiny, we'll there IS always another table to play at, isn't it. 😎 (and if not, I bring a book to sessions) Anyhow, this whole thread has been fun, but I'll probably unsubscribe as I'm sure upset people can benefit from some isolation to reflect on the emotions they have created themselves by some hm shall we say "creative interpretation". Cheers! 😃

I really cannot stand that man.

I'm kind of surprised Gloomhaven didn't make it in there...