DC Comics: Deck-Building Game

My husband and I are DC fanboys.  I need to admit that right now.  So when the DC Comics: Deck-Building Game came out, of course we bought it... and loved it! To support my love of the game, I wrote a review on boardgaming.com and have decided to share it below. Enjoy :)

The theme of this game (obviously DC comics) was very well implemented including lots of New 52 artwork, the most recent run of DC comics.  There are villain, super-villain, hero, super-hero, power, equipment, weakness, vulnerability, and location cards with the super-hero cards being the only ones that aren't added to your deck.  The latter provide you with special abilities that you as an individual can use throughout the game. The only issue with the theme is that you can being playing as Wonder Woman using your heat vision while driving the batmobile in Arkham Asylum with Mr Freeze at your side fighting against the Anti-Monitor. My husband and I took advantage of this situation to add some role-playing in the form of weaving an entertaining story as to why this would  ever happen, which added a huge element of fun to the game.

The mechanics of the game are the basic deck building mechanics with one type of currency used for everything (purchasing cards as well as defeating super villains) so it's a great game to teach the mechanics of deck building.  My only difficulty was remembering when to shuffle my discard pile because of the complexity of the conditions and how it can really impact game play if you do it at the wrong time.

The overall goal of the game is to defeat the chosen number of super-villains before the source deck runs out of cards for everyone to buy.  Players can play as many cards as they have in their hands and buy as many things as their "power" total (the game's currency) allows in any given turn.  This means that you can move through the deck of source cards a lot quicker than you would expect.  However, I have played this game with 2, 4, and 5 players and as well as the maximum number of super-villains without coming close to running out of cards from the source deck before defeating (buying) all of the super-villains.  It seems like there are just so many cards! As such, it seems this other end game condition is just one that the creators of the game included for an "in the unlikely event..." situation.

Overall, a fun game that scales well from 2-5 players including a more interactive experience when it is not your turn (due to the high number of cards with an attack aspect) than a game like Dominion. Fanboys of DC will probably love the theme although people not as familiar with the DCU might not appreciate  many of the cards.

9/10 stars

Di Renjie Review

My husband and I have recently gotten very into funding Kickstarter projects.  In particular, we have enjoyed funding board/card games.  Like most people in the US, we grew up playing the basics like Monopoly (this game still makes me cringe whenever I think of it), Sorry!, and Clue.  We had no idea there was an entire board gaming culture out there filled with wonderful possibilities for fun and thinking.  Our first realization came when my husband stumbled across Pandemic.  We ordered it out of curiosity and have been hooked on awesome board and card games ever since.  Fortunately, there are a lot of them out there.

One way that we have chosen to engage in this community is by supporting start up games on Kickstarter.  It's always awesome to see a game that we helped fund the production of show up in brick and mortar stores (e.g. Flashpoint).  But not all of them do (e.g. Di Renjie).  So I've decided to share my feelings about Di Renjie on my blog.

First, some background.  When I turned 10 or 12, I realized that you could use logic and strategy to almost always win at Clue as long as you didn't share this strategy with everyone.  So even though I got this game for Christmas one year, my family quickly stopped being willing to play this game with me.  Plus it needs at least 3 players to be a reasonable gaming experience.  Cue the appearance of Di Renjie on Kickstarter.  My husband saw the game come up and immediately thought of me always wanting to play Clue but never having the opportunity.

So the game.  Di Renjie is a deduction based card game where you are an inspector trying to determine the target, weapon, and location of an impending assassination.  It is cooperative in the sense that all of the players collectively must guess the correct combination in order to stop the assassination.  Yet it still has an element of competitiveness in that you gain points in a few different ways and can be the most successful inspector in a group of victorious gamers.

What makes this game superior to Clue, other than an more intriguing theme, is the mechanisms of the game. In Di Renjie, the mechanisms of the game make it difficult if not impossible (meaning no one I've played it with yet has managed this) to know the entire solution to the game before everyone is required to do so.  This drastically reduces the possibility that I will come up with a strategy that always wins me the game making it no fun for the other players.  If the outcome is always known and always the same, a lot of the fun is lost.

Another superior mechanism is the ability to deceive within the constraints of the rules.  Sometimes, deception is even mandatory!  So even when you gain information and clues about the targets, weapons, and locations, you don't always know how reliable the information is.  There is a way to investigate the reliability of the clues, but you can't use it very frequently.

And I also love that this game actually works well with 2 players.  Since our son is only 2 1/2 years old, my husband and I are a little short on available gamers.  We are always looking for games that scale well with 2-4 players, and this is a game that clearly accomplishes this.

Of course, this game also has an element of randomness that drives a lot of game play as well.  So this a competitive cooperative game requiring lucky strategies.  Lots of fun and definitely a keeper.  Glad we funded it and can't wait to play it with even more people!

Windows 8

My husband is always excited to upgrade to the latest and greatest OS for whatever platform we happen to be using at the time.  So we just recently upgraded to Windows 8 to get in on the early adoption pricing.  I have to say that I'm loving the new operating system.  While there are a couple of things that kick me out of metro into the desktop interface (e.g. Photoshop), I spend most of my time in the metro state, which is largely customizable.  I initially thought that I wouldn't like to have what is essentially a tablet interface for a desktop computer, but I am finding that it actually increases my productivity.  Windows 8 even allows multi-tasking like watching something on Hulu while I do photo editing.  Big fan.  I look forward to getting more use out of this OS.

Amulet Graphic Novels

I was listening to a Talking Comics podcast the other day and heard them recommend the Amulet graphic novel series.  I figured I had nothing to lose by seeing if my local library carried a copy.  Surprising, they carry a lot of graphic novels including the Amulet series.  I went ahead and checked out the first two volumes (the others are currently on hold) and read them both in about 1 1/2 hrs.  Loved them!  The artwork is a nice break from the typical DC and Marvel superhero styles, which is most of what I read.  It definitely gears itself towards a younger audience but without sacrificing quality.  The artwork was in fact engaging enough that I had an inner soundtrack going for all of the  implied sound effects without really even trying.  I also thought the story was well put together.  While it clearly has the Harry Potter/Lord of the Rings vibe going for it, no story is really original anyway.  If it comes across as enjoyable without being super predictable, I can give it a thumbs up.  I of course plan on giving a more detailed  reaction/review later but for now I will wait for the other volumes before going further.

Arrow Pilot

Last night, my husband and I watched the Arrow pilot on Hulu.  This show is being carried by the CW--same network that gave us Smallville.  As a big fan of Smallville (recognizing that it is not the greatest show ever or terribly if at all faithful to the source material), I was pretty excited to learn that CW was going to be taking on the Green Arrow character.  To be honest, it seems like the only network that knows how to make a successful, live-action, superhero TV show.  The primary key being to minimize the superheroness.

My general reaction to the pilot is mainly positive. The Stephen Amell seems to fit the part in a very Bruce Wayne fashion, which is completely appropriate since Green Arrow was designed to fill in for Batman on the comic book shelf.  At first I thought the actor was just awful because of how deadpan his delivery was.  Then he really opened up his box of acting tricks when he played the happy-go-lucky party boy at his homecoming bash.  I really enjoyed the juxtoposition.  I also liked the reference to so many different characters that play an important role in Green Arrow's comic book existence (e.g. Speedy, Merlyn, Black Canary).  It almost felt like the show picked up where Smallville left off in terms of character cast.  Some people have complained that there are too many character nods.  I say, if you live in a city, there's going to be a lot of people.  No need to create an entirely original cast when you're coming from such a rich source material.

I also liked a Green Arrow who is willing to kill.  For some characters, it makes total sense as to why they won't kill an enemy no matter the level of scumbaggery.  Superman vs the Elite addresses this issue thoroughly enough to satisfy me.  And Batman is practically standing on the wrong side of the line with just a fingernail still hanging onto it so killing is clearly out of the question for him.  But Green Arrow?  Finally, we have somebody who's willing to make a TV series where the protagonist is actually willing to do what it takes to get the job done.

My major complaints about the show may go away over time.  First off, there are a few "really?" moments.  When Adam Hunt is yelling, "Untraceable?!" and we cut to a very visible and very traceable arrow embedded in the wall that is freaking flashing.  Really?  Yeah.  Second, the acting from a lot of the supporting cast is a little cringe worthy.  Laurel's co-worker at the legal aid office made me wince almost every time she was on screen.  In fact, she seemed to have a negative impact on Katie Cassidy (playing Laurel) with the latter's performance going down a notch whenever they were together. Lastly, supposedly Oliver Queen has extensive injuries that never healed properly on the island.  For a guy with some pretty major damage, he sure dishes it out pretty well.  I think I would have been happier if they just talked about burns etc.  It would have made the frankly amazing shape that Stephen Amell is in a lot more believable.

My one cautionary piece of advice to myself?  Avoid reading anymore Green Arrow comics.  It's painfully obvious that the CW is going to be doing some major reworking of the Green Arrow mythos.  As long as I don't realize how extensive that reworking is, I should be fine.

Tri-Cities Quality Forum 2012

I think that a forum discussing quality improvement and analysis qualifies as something nerdy even if it isn't in the entertainment sector so here are my thoughts on the portions that I attended.

The Tri-Cities Quality Forum 2012 had David McClaskey as the keynote speaker.  He is the president of Pal's Business Excellence Institute and gave his address focusing on what the spoke on what his company does to help others improve their quality.  When I attended last year, I heard speakers from two different companies talk about how they had used the principles from Pal's BEI to dramatically improve their quality.  One was a restaurant and the other a gas station/convenience store.  Hearing the basics from David McClaskey brought those previous presentations to the forefront of my mind.  The most important principles (to me) are (1) to strive for 100% right 100% of the time even though you know that it is an unreachable goal and (2) never make the job easier to do wrong than to do right. There were of course several other principles, but these stuck in my head the most.

Because I am a stay-at-home mom right now, I don't get very many opportunities to think about things from a business or scientific perspective.  However, the nice thing about these types of presentations is that they are very general and broad.  They have to be in order to reach out to businesses running the gamut from restaurants to convenience stores to hospitals to chemical companies.  The two principles I mentioned above stuck in my head because I could see how to apply them to my daily life.  As an individual, I should strive to achieve perfect eventually by giving myself clear expectations and holding myself accountable for both failures and success.  I can do the same for my son by giving him clear expectations and holding him accountable for failures but also giving praise for his successes.

This relates directly to the second principle: never make the job easier to do wrong than to do right.  If I always fix everything for my son, he never learns to take responsibility for himself and never learns from his mistakes.  He only learns to make mistakes so that I will do it all for him.  Other than fixing other people's mistakes for them, we can also make the job easier to do wrong than right by never admitting to them that they have failed.  Too often we tell children that everyone is a winner and any effort is praiseworthy.  The truth is that people fail all the time, but if we never tell them they've failed, they will never learn to do it right because wrong is just so much easier.

The breakout session I attended was "How to Lie With Statistics" by Mark Ewing (no relation to the book by the same title).  This presentation focused on the things that people frequently do with statistics that lead to intentional or unintentional lies.

1. Claiming a difference between things when a statistical tie is the reality.  It doesn't mean there isn't a difference; it just means the data can't tell us what that difference is.  This is especially common during political election seasons.
2. Poor data collection resulting in an unrepresentative sample.  When this happens, you just can't make the claims you want to about the "population."
3. Excessively wide confidence intervals (resulting from a variety of things) leading to a meaningless point estimate.  When people only then report the point estimate, this misleads the recipients of the information.
4. Multiplicity of error.  If you keep on looking and keep on looking for connections between things that aren't there without adjusting your statistical methods, you're going to find things just by coincidence.

I really enjoyed the presentation (even though I already knew everything) and hope that other's attended might become more reliable consumers and producers of information.

The Ones You Love

My husband and I just watched the most recent Warehouse 13 episode ("The Ones You Love"), and we very much enjoyed it. In this episode, we see things come to a head between Brother Adrian and Artie.  Three artifacts have been sent to loved ones of the three people that Artie cares most about in the world--Pete, Myka, and Claudia.  As each of our three heroes heads out to rescue their loved ones, Artie attempts to determine how Brother Adrian has been infiltrating the Warehouse.  Pete saves his ex-wife from the explosive tattoo of a suicide bomber.  Myka saves her sister from a chord that brings sibling rivalries to murderous levels.  And Claudia saves her brother from being encased in amber.  Meanwhile, Mrs. Frederic and Steve discover that the Brotherhood of the Black Diamond has been trapped the last few months in a painting in Rome.  When Brother Adrian is the last to leave the painting, we realize that the Bro. Adrian we have been seeing as the viewers is actually a manifestation of Artie's evil alter ego created by the astrolabe.  Leena confronts Artie and is apparently killed by him at the conclusion of the episode.

My first reaction to this reveal is, "Sweet!" I actually did not see that coming until half way through the episode.  The major fault of this show has been its pleasant predictability.  So to have something actually surprise me was very refreshing and makes me excited to see where the show heads with this new Artie development.

My other reaction to the reveal is more of a reaction to the conclusion of the episode.  Finally someone dies! I'm not too heartbroken about Leena being the one to bite the dust.  To be honest, I cringe every time I see her come onto the screen so here's hoping that I won't see her on screen again.