The Tao of Gaming

Ok, rather than just have a new post each day for two games, I'm just going to update this one as The Hundred reveals the top 10.

Tichu [#10] and Ra [#9} make the list simply to prove the discerning intelligence of the Tao of Gaming commentors.

I'd put Ra in my personal Top 15 and maybe Top 10. Of course, I put Tichu in the closet, but yeah, everyone and their dog, phoenix, dragon and bird has played this. I think one reason was summed up a bridge partner. He was discussing Bridge, but it applies to Tichu. Paraphrased "Chess is too hard, and requires concentration and discipline. But I can focus intensely in small bursts, and see the outcome almost instantly. Then I have a cigarette." True with Tichu. Play a hand, relax a bit while the cards are shuffled up and dealt. Play another...

Update: Two more days worth of games: Ticket to Ride [#8] -- As a popular 'gateway' game, no real surprise that it's at the Top 10.

I am surprised Age of Steam [#7] beat it, even though I much prefer AoS. Checking the comments on the post, I see Chris Farrell's point about the problems with AoS. It's true, there are some real issues (the producer role, the artificial endgame based on number of turns instead of the more elegant 18xx system). In general, my quick thoughts are:

• It seems clear that 'elegance' is not an over-riding concern of the voters (Go at #51. Prosecution rests, your honor).
• I personally don't think that the heavily unbalanced roles is a serious issue. As an auction game, the fact that somethings are worth more or less isn't a big issue. Whereas if you just selected the roles in player order, the issue would loom larger.
• The endgame effects are clearly there, but even in a more 'organic' system like 18xx, I see a large amount of gamey strangeness. Take the cyclical dumping of stock in 1830, where each player buys and then sells a share of company X, suffering no loss but inflicting losses on the president. In the real world, other investors would snap up a company that had fallen undervalued, or the president could buy it up himself (no hard limit on percentage of shares) and the traders would suffer some loss of fees. I think there's more end-game effects in AoS instead of 18xx, but that's just because the endgame is much more clearly defined. Or take a 'turn skipping takeover' from 1870. All of these games have bizarre tactics that distance the game somewhat. Whether some are more gamey than others is a matter of taste. I personally haven't had too many AoS games where people did anything other than maximize their income.
• Except of course when they bump someone one point over a ledge. I'll admit that the taxation system is a clunky hack to prevent runaway leaders.
• But I love the game, and am happy to see it here. I could easily see it 30 spots lower, though. I got carpal tunnel after typing loudly for the first 20 games posted, can't expect me to get worked up over the games I like... (he said after typing several hundred words).

I've played plenty of Power Grid [#6] online, and still don't mind playing face to face. I'll be buying the expansion...

Princes of Florence [#5] is a fine game. I can't help but crack a smile at Susan's comment -- "Gaming Nirvana." So many possibilities as to what she meant ... Is it the pinnacle of gaming ("Nirvana -- The ineffable ultimate in which one has attained disinterested wisdom and compassion." Definition A from Dictionary.com) or does the game make you renounce wordly goods and passions ("Emancipation from ignorance and the extinction of all attachment." Definition B)? Perhaps she just means that she's here now, and entertained.

In any case, I shall heretofore refer to games that provide no excitement and attachement as "Gaming Nirvana." Thanks, Susan! [Games that inspire intense hatred will, of course, get thousands of words of bile to describe them]. So let it be written, so let it be done!