BATA (Buy And Throw Away) Games - Can't Stop

redevil13 wrote:Really meh? I think Cuba's a bit limited on strategy. Might be because it's trying to do too many things at once, like Keythedral.

Sweetslut wrote:In way, i agree to Wei Xun's comparision between Pillars and Caylus. They are both workers placement mechanisms of sorts. Haven we mentioned before that Pillars is Caylus-lite? Javen also accurately nicknamed Cuba to be Pillars of Caylus in Puerto Rico, as mechanisms are inter-mixed, so are players' preferences.

Apart from associating them to Caylus and Puerto Rico, which are games i like at the same level, i am more attuned to Cuba for the reasons i like Caylus and Puerto Rico for the less randomness. However, Cuba itself does not compared to PR and Caylus, its overworked character cards and game turns just does not make it a streamline design. Given a choice, i will always prefered PR and Caylus over Cuba.

I feel pillars is more random for the game cards every turn, drawing of master builders from the pouch. Of coz Pillars is good, but i am just PR and CY material, hence maybe more Cuba than Pillars for me. IMHO, Cuba and Pillars satisfy an slightly above-average strategical appettite, more like cheeseburger to me, but not the mushroom swiss i will really prefer. I do believe causal gamers will like Pillars more thou, as it contains more elements of surprises and quicker gameplay between turns, hence has more opportunities for denial

While denial is present in both, i would choose Cuba as a PR player, but would like Pillar if i am a Caylus/Tigris player for the mutiple denials over many gaming turns. If you would agree to any thing i mentioned, you would discover that despite the similarities, there are also clear differenes. So no right no wrong.

Hatekeeper wrote:I'll go with

1. Puerto Rico
2. Caylus

coz i own them (bad reason)
coz they present dynamic playing where there are good mechanics involved.

Sweetslut wrote:
In way, i agree to Wei Xun's comparision between Pillars and Caylus. They are both workers placement mechanisms of sorts. Haven we mentioned before that Pillars is Caylus-lite? Javen also accurately nicknamed Cuba to be Pillars of Caylus in Puerto Rico, as mechanisms are inter-mixed, so are players' preferences.

Apart from associating them to Caylus and Puerto Rico, which are games i like at the same level, i am more attuned to Cuba for the reasons i like Caylus and Puerto Rico for the less randomness. However, Cuba itself does not compared to PR and Caylus, its overworked character cards and game turns just does not make it a streamline design. Given a choice, i will always prefered PR and Caylus over Cuba.

I feel pillars is more random for the game cards every turn, drawing of master builders from the pouch. Of coz Pillars is good, but i am just PR and CY material, hence maybe more Cuba than Pillars for me. IMHO, Cuba and Pillars satisfy an slightly above-average strategical appettite, more like cheeseburger to me, but not the mushroom swiss i will really prefer. I do believe causal gamers will like Pillars more thou, as it contains more elements of surprises and quicker gameplay between turns, hence has more opportunities for denial

While denial is present in both, i would choose Cuba as a PR player, but would like Pillar if i am a Caylus/Tigris player for the mutiple denials over many gaming turns. If you would agree to any thing i mentioned, you would discover that despite the similarities, there are also clear differenes. So no right no wrong.

wats else can i add in...nth except that i more of a jerry-player...heez...rather than a catan or monkin...