OO Boardgamers, what did you play this weekend?

[baelthazar]

People's attitude toward Alien Frontiers here is fairly interesting to me. I love the game, absolutely, but I got the impression of it as being a bit more "hardcore" than the posters here. It has a lot going on, decisions about resource generation, heated competition over colonies, how to use colony superpowers, how to use alien tech powers, buying new dice over building new colonies, etc. There is a lot going on, in my mind, far more than Kingsburg vanilla (which I feel is just roll dice, get stuff, spend stuff). Alien Frontier can get very nasty, particularly over those hot colony spots, and you practically can't win without screwing someone else over.

Daveman, stick with Troyes. I've played two games with my wife and the first game we sat there, scratched our heads, and said "what the heck are we supposed to be doing?" The second game went much better, and I suspect the third game will be even better. It does seem like there is a lot going on, but no more really than Agricola or Le Havre, just under s different guise. There is only one resource to worry about - deniers (money) and dice represent actions. Unlike AF, higher is ALWAYS better. You can spend influence to flip and re-roll (like AF's tech). The difficult part of Troyes is that there are many many paths to victory, but learning about them is part of the learning curve of the game.

[Daveman]

Oh I think there's a lot of depth to Alien Frontiers... but especially when teaching the game, it's far less complex than either Kingsburg or Troyes.

You roll your dice and have to decide where to put them, but often your choices are limited. You need a pair to use several options, 3 of a kind to use the constructor, a straight to use the raider outpost, etc. Then there have to be open docks where you want to go and so on. Alien tech can be used to manipulate certain die rolls, but only once per turn. Bottom line, while there are lots of potential choices, the ones that are actually available to you on a given turn are often limited. There's very little to build (ships, colonies, tech cards) and only 2 resources, but they're all very important so what you build and when are critical decisions.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that in Alien Frontiers there seems to be fewer, but more important decisions to be made. That makes for a "simpler" game to teach new players, but it takes time to get the strategy behind those choices. In Kingsburg, your choices in terms of die placement can often be very limited too, but there's 3 resources, building up your army, and choosing which of the many building tracks there are to choose from. In Troyes it seems there's a ton of subtle choices to be made.

[hepcat]

I played it twice this past weekend and I have to say that I would never apply the word "hardcore" to Alien Frontiers.

It's easy to pick up, doesn't include a lot of fiddly pieces, and it doesn't have any odd rules that defy the theme of the game. I think it would be a great game to actually ease non-gamers into.

[El Guapo]

I put in a pre-order on 1989 (from GMT, based on the TS engine) a couple nights ago. They announced that they're including a mounted board on that, which is nice. Not coming out until September (IIRC) unfortunately, but I'm definitely looking forward to that.

GMT also announced reprints for Labyrinth and Twilight Struggle. I'm a little tempted by Labyrinth, but I don't know if I really need three 2-player GMT games, plus I really already have more games than I play. I guess I need to convince someone else to buy it.

[hepcat]

I put in a pre-order on 1989 (from GMT, based on the TS engine) a couple nights ago. They announced that they're including a mounted board on that, which is nice. Not coming out until September (IIRC) unfortunately, but I'm definitely looking forward to that.

GMT also announced reprints for Labyrinth and Twilight Struggle. I'm a little tempted by Labyrinth, but I don't know if I really need three 2-player GMT games, plus I really already have more games than I play. I guess I need to convince someone else to buy it.

I've mentioned it before, but I'm not a big fan of Labyrinth. The rules are a little too asymmetrical for my tastes, making it a little difficult to teach.

I'm tempted by Space Empires 4x and I'll definitely buy 1989. That last one is a no brainer for me.

[El Guapo]

I put in a pre-order on 1989 (from GMT, based on the TS engine) a couple nights ago. They announced that they're including a mounted board on that, which is nice. Not coming out until September (IIRC) unfortunately, but I'm definitely looking forward to that.

GMT also announced reprints for Labyrinth and Twilight Struggle. I'm a little tempted by Labyrinth, but I don't know if I really need three 2-player GMT games, plus I really already have more games than I play. I guess I need to convince someone else to buy it.

I've mentioned it before, but I'm not a big fan of Labyrinth. The rules are a little too asymmetrical for my tastes, making it a little difficult to teach.

I'm tempted by Space Empires 4x and I'll definitely buy 1989. That last one is a no brainer for me.

That's true, which is one reason that I'm not inclined to pick it up right now. But I'd only be playing it with one or two people, so I'd only need to get through the rules slog once, maybe twice.

Anywho, probably won't get it. I am also keeping my eye on Space Empires as well. Don't really know much of anything about the game, except that I like GMT and like a space theme.

[MythicalMino]

gonna be setting up A Touch of Evil tomorrow, or maybe the next day. I got the Hero Expansion Pack at my game store that I will try to pick up either Saturday or Sunday. Got my sister-in-law and her husband coming over maybe sunday evening to play it....

[hepcat]

gonna be setting up A Touch of Evil tomorrow, or maybe the next day. I got the Hero Expansion Pack at my game store that I will try to pick up either Saturday or Sunday. Got my sister-in-law and her husband coming over maybe sunday evening to play it....

I have that and the expansion Something Wicked. I really need to get that out and play again someday. It's a great alternative when you don't want to go the full Arkham Horror route.

[Boudreaux]

I put in a pre-order on 1989 (from GMT, based on the TS engine) a couple nights ago. They announced that they're including a mounted board on that, which is nice. Not coming out until September (IIRC) unfortunately, but I'm definitely looking forward to that.

I can't decide if 1989 will be distinct enough from Twilight Struggle to warrant a purchase. I'm biased somewhat by my purchase of 1960: Making of the President. I got that largely because of its mechanics connection to TS, but I hardly ever play it because TS seems like such a superior game in almost every regard. I'll have to wait for some impressions of 1989, I think.

[Chaosraven]

Taught my son Alien Frontiers, played a couple 3 player (where you fillin six slots with the unused dice, much like Dungeon Lords). Also played a couple four player of it. Discovered answers to a few questions, like the true power of a Plasma Cannon (pay one to clear a ship, pinpoint or wide effect). Clearing one out of Robber Outpost to play a sequence that has a higher *sum* (like knocking out the six of a 4 5 6 to play a 3 4 5). Extra move from Asimov to start next colony. Playing a low (2 or 3) to clear the Artifacts, playing a high to clear again and THEN claim one as the total is 8+. Helps to read the examples of play, would have been nicer if they had been put in more appropriate places in some cases... Read on bgg and game website they are playtesting two expansions. Now to get those doggoned Promo artifacts...

[MonkeyFinger]

Been reading about Fantasy Flight's Lord of the Rings "living card game" and it sounds pretty nicely done. Since it's "living" that means new "adventure packs" will be released on a regular basis which seems more interesting to me than the old "CCG" mechanics. Anyway, was wondering if anyone here had it and what they thought.

[Daveman]

I ordered the 2nd printing "premium pack" last week and it came in just a few days. Came with the little rocket ship scoring markers and the Mind Control Helmet card. One small problem with the MCH card is that the card back is in purple and doesn't match the other Alien Tech cards... but we'll just deal from the bottom of the deck when we play with them.

http://shop.gamesalute.com/SearchResult ... ver%20Mojo" target="_blank

I think the only way to get the initial Kickstarter bonus card (Space Crane) would be Ebay.

[hepcat]

Hmmm...I did not realize the Lord of the Rings LCG could be played solo, or that it was a cooperative game. Color me intrigued.

[MonkeyFinger]

Hmmm...I did not realize the Lord of the Rings LCG could be played solo, or that it was a cooperative game. Color me intrigued.

Yup, that interests me about it as well.

[hepcat]

Picked up a copy this afternoon at a local game store. Currently watching some video tutorials on BBG. I like the mechanics I've come across so far. It plays like a deeper version of the Space Hulk Death Angel card game. I just wish I liked the theme more. If this were a Lovecraft game, it would be perfection itself in my book.

[MythicalMino]

I quite interested in the LotR card game....

[SpaceLord]

I know I'm late to the party, but last week, I fianlly picked up Memoir '44. I've played it 10 times since, and love it. It's fast, fairly simple, and fun. Now I want ALL of the expansions.

[hentzau]

I know I'm late to the party, but last week, I fianlly picked up Memoir '44. I've played it 10 times since, and love it. It's fast, fairly simple, and fun. Now I want ALL of the expansions.

Great game. I'm always up for playing it. Or Battle Cry. Or Battlelore.

But the one that hits the table the most often for us is Memoir.

[hentzau]

Played a couple of games of Crokinole today. Outside. In the cold. Boy, was that dumb.

[hepcat]

So I played a solo game of the LotR lcg last night.

Each turn for a player is split into the following phases:

1) Resources - add 1 resource token to each Hero card (heroes are always on your table and never in your hand). Draw a card from the player deck.

2) Planning - spend resource tokens from your heroes to buy allies and/or attachments from your hand. In addition, there are 4 spheres in the game (example: leadership, tactics, spirit and a fourth i can't remember right now). when playing an ally or attachment, the resources you use have to come from a hero with a matching sphere. (this is basicially resource matching from the Call of Cthulhu LCG).

3) Questing - Commit heroes and/or allies to a quest by putting them in the staging area. Draw a card from the encounter deck and put it into play. Add up the card value of each card in the staging area (the staging area is full of future events and locations not yet reached by the player.). compare the total of that to the total of all your committed characters' willpower value and if you have more, you place progress tokens on the quest equal to the excess value. If you lose that struggle, your characters are forced back to your play area and you increase your threat value by the excess loss value. Heroes and allies are exhausted (tapped) by committing to a quest.

4) Travel to any location in the staging area by putting it in your play area. The reason you want to do this is because while a location exists in the staging area, it's card value counts towards the total mentioned in phase 3 above. if you travel to it, it moves to your play area and you simply have to overcome it's quest value during the next quest phase. once that's done, any remainder from that quest phase go to the actual quest card.

5) Engagement - Enemies go first, but you can choose to actively engage any enemy you want with one of your allies or heroes. if you choose not to, any enemies in the staging area will actively engage you if their engagement value is equal to or less than your threat value. threat values increase by one at the end of each turn, as part of the loss if you fail during the quest phase and through the action of some of the encounter cards. the initial threat value is a total of the threat value of each of your heroes. you can select the defending hero for each enemy that engages you in this manner, though. but only one hero/ally per enemy for defense. Committing a card to defense exhausts it.

6) Combat - Draw a card from the encounter deck for each engaged enemy. place each card on an attacker. this is the shadow card. it's revealed during the enemies attack and if it has an action, that action takes place before the attack. Enemy attacks first by adding up their combat value and comparing it to your defender's defense value. Anything that gets past your defense is placed on the defender in the form of damage tokens. once these damage tokens equal or exceed the hit points of the defender, they're discarded. After the enemy attacks. the player then take their attack. They choose any number of attackers and commit them to one enemy. Exhaust these cards and compare your total attack value to the total defense value of the enemy. If you win, place damage tokens in the amount you exceeded their defenses on their card. if that beats their hit point value, then discard the card. repeat until you have exhausted all your heroes or simply don't want to keep attacking for some reason.

7) refresh - all exhausted cards are turned back to their non-exhausted state. note: enemies that are in your play area that haven't been defeated remain there. as do locations that haven't been "explored" by exceeding their quest value.

The goal of the game is to work your way through 3 or more quest cards within a scenario. Quest cards are simply flavor text and perhaps some setup specifications for the scenario being played (example: draw an orc card from encounter deck, put that card into the staging area, then shuffle the encounter deck). If you've played the Call of Cthulhu LCG, questing is like committing characters to a story. Once the quest card's quest value is exceeded, it immediately is discarded and you place the next quest card in the chain into play.

after my first game, i think it's safe to say that it plays very nicely as a solo game. As i mentioned earlier, if this was a cthulhu game, i would be head over heels in love with it as it really does give me my card/adventure game fix. i'm not much a LotR fan, but it's a testimony to the gameplay that I still enjoy this game quite a bit.

the only downsides i see is that they really should have included more than just 3 scenarios (a collection of quest cards that tell a story). it's even more grating when you realize the difficulty for these 3 scenarios are all over the place. one (the suggested starting scenario) is a lvl 1, while the others jump from 4 (or 5, can't remember right now) to 7. seriously, scenarios are 3 or 4 cards with very little on them beyond some flavor text, a small setup guide, a value and a quest cost. i know FFG wants to make money on future adventure packs that include more scenarios, but 3 is a bit ridiculous for a 40 dollar game, imho.

Thankfully, some folks are already releasing new scenarios though. check out bgg for some great stuff.

overall, i say go for it if you're looking for a good coop or solo adventure card game. it really is quite fun. especially if you're a LotR fanboy as the artwork and flavor is just top notch.

[Jow]

Bunch of games over the past two weekends, in no particular order:

Wrath of Ashardalon: first time playing. First game, using the "save the villagers" scenario, was just not a lot of fun as we felt overwhelmed the entire time. Part of that was our fault (we played every "long" corridor type as a "long hallway" so we got basically overrun with monsters), but I really didn't care for the nearly constant stream of negative encounters (both thematically and for the effect on gameplay). Endgame was triggered when we were several tiles away from the dire chamber and we never had a chance to get down there to save the villagers in time. Second play, on the scenario where you had to take down the Duergar cult, was polar opposite of the first: we ran through everything without too many problems. A couple of us got down to relatively low health solely as a result of encounters but no one went down. The scenario ended with the boss dead and a whole mess of critters that never reached us because, again, endgame was triggered when we were way down the hall from the dire chamber. Overall we had fun but the pacing/theme just felt off to me, primarily due to the encounter mechanic. Now that we've learned some of the important concepts behind the game (e.g, grouping together on the same tile is usually a bad idea due to encounter cards), I'd play this again.

Cadwallon: City of Thieves: First time playing this too, but unfortunately this was an overall "meh". Nice theme and interesting ideas, buried behind what is essentially a dice game. I really like the asymmetric approach to the different thief bands, but the dice do a good job of making them all feel relatively symmetrical anyway. Overall I'm just not a big fan of dice-heavy games so I don't foresee wanting to get this one to the table again any time soon.

Mansions of Madness: My third play of this. Play time has dropped dramatically since we started, from 7+ hours for the first game down to just about three for this play. I've played the keeper all three plays - wonder if I'd enjoy playing an investigator as much.

Red Dragon Inn: First time playing this as well. The game is fun but I'm not sure if it's something I'd want to play repeatedly. Big positive: decks are somewhat asymmetric so each player has a playstyle they should be pursuing. Negatives: both times we played with 6 or 7 players and this game suffers in the same way many large-player games do: the landscape can often change dramatically between turns. This is only a big deal here because Red Dragon Inn is a player elimination game, so you can easily find yourself eliminated very early just on luck alone. I made it to the final three before going out in the first play, but the second play I only got to play a single turn and was eliminated from the game on the turn before I was to take my second turn. In my little gaming world getting to play and do fun stuff is good, not getting to play and/or do fun stuff is bad.

Space Alert: I really want to play this more. Problem is, it's been hard enough to maintain enough interest to drive through the entire group of tutorial and preparatory scenarios so that all mechanics are actually included. For one reason or another I keep introducing the game to new players, so I've played through the first couple of tutorial scenarios probably 3 or 4 times now, with only once and very briefly getting to play with internal threats.

[hepcat]

I sold my copy of Space Alert after the first play. It was just too chaotic for the group I game with, imho. I couldn't see any way to make it an attractive option on game nights. Plus, I'm always annoyed by that designer's need to introduce AI's into his games when playing with less than 3 or more players.

Red Dragon is a filler game for those nights when you want something quick and doesn't require much thought. If you want something along similar lines but with more options/more backstabbing, pick up Cutthroat Caverns.

I was interested in City of Thieves, so I'm disappointed to hear you didn't enjoy it that much.

[MythicalMino]

we just won a 3-player game of Defenders of the Realm. It was very close, though, and we came extremely close to losing if not for timely special cards use, but in the end, we won. First game out of probably 15 games or more....

Chris

[SpaceLord]

Wrath of Ashardalon: first time playing. First game, using the "save the villagers" scenario, was just not a lot of fun as we felt overwhelmed the entire time. Part of that was our fault (we played every "long" corridor type as a "long hallway" so we got basically overrun with monsters), but I really didn't care for the nearly constant stream of negative encounters (both thematically and for the effect on gameplay). Endgame was triggered when we were several tiles away from the dire chamber and we never had a chance to get down there to save the villagers in time. Second play, on the scenario where you had to take down the Duergar cult, was polar opposite of the first: we ran through everything without too many problems. A couple of us got down to relatively low health solely as a result of encounters but no one went down. The scenario ended with the boss dead and a whole mess of critters that never reached us because, again, endgame was triggered when we were way down the hall from the dire chamber. Overall we had fun but the pacing/theme just felt off to me, primarily due to the encounter mechanic. Now that we've learned some of the important concepts behind the game (e.g, grouping together on the same tile is usually a bad idea due to encounter cards), I'd play this again.

Yeah, you have to wrap your head around the Encounter deck having either bad things, or really bad things. Like taking a point of damage for being next to a wall, when your entire party is in an area that's really narrow.

[Jow]

I sold my copy of Space Alert after the first play. It was just too chaotic for the group I game with, imho. I couldn't see any way to make it an attractive option on game nights. Plus, I'm always annoyed by that designer's need to introduce AI's into his games when playing with less than 3 or more players.

That's the way it's starting to look with some of the people I game with as well. Two of them, both newbies, were very meh on it last night. However, the rest of the people I've shown it to have liked it at least enough to be willing to play it again.

Red Dragon is a filler game for those nights when you want something quick and doesn't require much thought. If you want something along similar lines but with more options/more backstabbing, pick up Cutthroat Caverns.

Yeah, I got the feeling it was filler right away, and filler is okay, but I would most likely not play this with more than 5 again just due to the sheer chaos. Thanks for that tip - I'll check it out.

I was interested in City of Thieves, so I'm disappointed to hear you didn't enjoy it that much.

Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad game. I just personally have a love/hate (mostly hate) relationship with dice so I enjoy games where I can at least somewhat reliably manipulate my rolling odds. here's an example of something that bugged me: one of my thieves was a big strapping type whose ability allowed him to reroll one die in combat. He was the only thief in the game that had that extra combat ability In addition, you have various cards which will boost your combat even further, like being able to roll an additional die or add one to your highest roll. Over the entire game, using that thief and playing those cards occasionally, I won one combat out of a total of four or five. That's the sort of thing that seems prevalent in this game: you can endeavor to use your thieves wisely, but ultimately all is decided by the infernal cubes.

[Chaosraven]

Jow- if you want to try CC, get together with LM and crew and I can loan out my copy (it has the expansions). Could be a good time to bring the newbies and test it out.

[Boudreaux]

the only downsides i see is that they really should have included more than just 3 scenarios (a collection of quest cards that tell a story). it's even more grating when you realize the difficulty for these 3 scenarios are all over the place. one (the suggested starting scenario) is a lvl 1, while the others jump from 4 (or 5, can't remember right now) to 7. seriously, scenarios are 3 or 4 cards with very little on them beyond some flavor text, a small setup guide, a value and a quest cost. i know FFG wants to make money on future adventure packs that include more scenarios, but 3 is a bit ridiculous for a 40 dollar game, imho.

Thankfully, some folks are already releasing new scenarios though. check out bgg for some great stuff.

overall, i say go for it if you're looking for a good coop or solo adventure card game. it really is quite fun. especially if you're a LotR fanboy as the artwork and flavor is just top notch.

I wouldn't spend the money on it as a solo game, I think you'd be sorely disappointed. The 2nd (4/10 difficulty) and 3rd (7/10 difficulty) are so hard as to be basically unwinnable as a solo player with only three heroes. Seriously, I don't think it's possible. We've played the first two quests several times, both as 2-player and 3-player games, and still have not won the 2nd one. The problem is that the difficulty doesn't scale well - the latter part of the 2nd quest, for example, adds 1 more encounter card during every questing phase. With a four player game you're already drawing four, so one extra is just 25% more threat. With a solo game, it's 100% more threat. Much more difficult. The first quest is ok, but the 2nd seems designed for at least 3 players and the 3rd quest seemingly requires all four.

We have not attempted the third quest yet, since we still haven't beat the second. I can't even imagine how hard it must be, if it's nearly twice as difficult as 2. FFG seems to have structured the quests not just to invite additional card or chapter packs, but almost to require them.

[hepcat]

While I agree that the included quests are neither balanced for solo play nor numerous enough to warrant the price of the game; I'm not sorely disappointed in my purchase. The user quests on bgg and the upcoming adventure packs should address these shortcomings for the most part. the game has a very solid solo experience IMHO. One that can be easily enhanced with the aforementioned items.

[Boudreaux]

I hope so. The basic concept of the game is great, and I like that it plays so differently with different numbers of players. I was somewhat surprised the base game only came with 3 quests. I'll be curious to see what the adventure packs add and (more importantly) how they're priced.

[hepcat]

From preorders, I believe the MSRP is about 14.95. So ordering online puts them around 9.99. There's no way I'd play 15 bucks apiece for the, but 10 bucks isn't asking too much, I think.

[freelunch]

I can live with the monthly Adventure Packs.. I figure I have about enough Call Of Cthulhu cards so I'll stop adding Asylum Packs after the current set and put that $$ into LOTR packs instead. What really bugs me is that they're marketing it as a 1-4 player game, and there are apparently sufficient cards in the base set for four players but only two threat counters. how much would it have cost FFG to put two more in each box??

[Jow]

freelunch: have you been playing CoC? CoC ended up being the first LCG I bought into but shortly after I bought into Game of Thrones too. CoC has been languishing on my shelves ever since.

[hepcat]

I can live with the monthly Adventure Packs.. I figure I have about enough Call Of Cthulhu cards so I'll stop adding Asylum Packs after the current set and put that $$ into LOTR packs instead. What really bugs me is that they're marketing it as a 1-4 player game, and there are apparently sufficient cards in the base set for four players but only two threat counters. how much would it have cost FFG to put two more in each box??

Actually, the box cover clearly states it's meant for 1-2 players. It mentions on the back of the box that adding another set gives you the option to take the game to 3 to 4 players.

But honestly, it's a moot point if you have two ten sided dice. That or a pencil and paper.

I realized today that the reason the game play feels a little like CoC is because Nate French made that game as well.

[freelunch]

freelunch: have you been playing CoC? CoC ended up being the first LCG I bought into but shortly after I bought into Game of Thrones too. CoC has been languishing on my shelves ever since.

we started with Warhammer: Invasion and have played quite a bit of that, I picked up the CoC base set cheap maybe six months ago and we played it a couple of times then I started amassing the Asylum Packs, have played it a few times recently and I prefer it to W:I.

Actually, the box cover clearly states it's meant for 1-2 players. It mentions on the back of the box that adding another set gives you the option to take the game to 3 to 4 players.

But honestly, it's a moot point if you have two ten sided dice. That or a pencil and paper.

I realized today that the reason the game play feels a little like CoC is because Nate French made that game as well.

ah. I haven't seen the box yet - I'd hoped mine would arrive today but it looks like it'll be tomorrow. I've read at BGG that the base set comes with everything you need for four and assumed that was indicated on the packaging. dice I have, so it won't be a problem, just disappointing if the box does contain everything needed for four-player that they couldn't include a full quota of threat counters.

[MythicalMino]

picked up The Adventurers today, and played 4 games with the kids. They really liked it.

I am REALLY interested in Thunderstone: Dragonspire, but the gaming store I go to did not have that. Only had the base Thunderstone game. I figure if I am going to get the game, I should just get Dragonspire....


I have the Warhammer: Invasion, but have rarely played it. Love it, but cannot ever really get anyone to play it.

[hentzau]

Didn't get a chance to play anything this past week, but Tommy and I dragged out all of my old Ertl Cow Town buildings to give them a look over as we prepare to do a Warhammer Ancients: Legends of the Old West game. I really wish I could have laid my hands on a couple of extra boxes of these buildings, they are absolutely perfect for a 28mm wild west game.

Next step is to start painting up my posse. I haven't put paint to figure in probably about 2 years or so. Not expecting the best results in the world.

[MythicalMino]

A game I am interested in, but not ready to take the plunge and buy it: Cosmic Encounter.

I keep reading all this good stuff about it, ppl say it is one of the greatest games ever made, but when I look at it, it just doesn't interest me. Granted, I have not played it.

For those that have played it (the FFG version, since that would be the one I would buy), did you like it? What is so good about it?

Thanks

Chris

[El Guapo]

I'm not going to lie, despite the pleasant-looking exterior of the box, the name of this game is a little unsettling to me as a Jew. Maybe I'll pass on that one.

Did play an online game of Twilight Struggle last night, which was fun. Won a mid-game victory as the Soviets, helped by some good luck - rolled a 5 on an early coup in Italy which gave me control of there for the game, and a 6 on a coup in Iran which was very helpful. Some de-stalinization gave me control of Spain and Turkey early and helped me lock down Europe, and things proceeded fairly smoothly from there.

[hepcat]

The owner of our local gamestore was taken aback at the name of that game as well. But I guess in a historical context, that's probably unfair.

In TS, how much effort did you spend on controlling/not controlling the middle east? I've been mulling over my strategy for that region when playing as the U.S..

[El Guapo]

The owner of our local gamestore was taken aback at the name of that game as well. But I guess in a historical context, that's probably unfair.

In TS, how much effort did you spend on controlling/not controlling the middle east? I've been mulling over my strategy for that region when playing as the U.S..

A moderate amount. It went something like this:

Early War - I take Iraq and Syria to get domination (second turn, I think), and use the Mid-East scoring card. U.S. takes Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, and Iran. I successfully coup Iran, and get Egypt via the U.S.-played Nasser event.
Mid-War: I take Libya and the Gulf States via influence; U.S. takes Saudi Arabia via influence.

The thing about the Middle East is that as long as you have presence (which you should always have, without too much trouble) then it's not going to be worth much. Presence is worth 3, domination is worth 5, which means that even if a power has domination they're only going to get usually something like 3 points (5 - 3, +1 for each extra battleground country). So focus first on Europe and Asia, as one can withstand losing the Middle East and still win.

That's not to say that you should write off the Middle East - you don't want to throw away points if you can get them. Also Iran is important as a gateway to Asia. But just don't go nuts about it.

Really the more important thing about the Middle East is OPEC, starting in the Mid-War - 1 VP per control of oil-producing country. In this game that was a big score, as I got 5 VPs for controlling Iran, Iraq, the Gulf States, Egypt, and Libya. That's what you have to watch out for, more than regional domination - don't let the Soviets control too many of those (it's particularly easy to forget about the Gulf States, since they're not a battleground country).