No posts, and especially no eye candy. What's going on?
Well, I take pictures with a camera (not a phone), so I then extract them from there to the computer that has picture-editing software but is not connected to the Internet. Then they go onto a USB memory stick to be uploaded to a device where they can be shared to a blog.
Of course i can just grab a snap on the phone and share it immediately on Whatsit or Facelift, but I'm not about to start typing an article on the phone's virtual keyboard.
So it's taking me a while to find a flow that works for me, so I can share the tale of what I've been doing.
In the meanwhile, I've been playing 1815 Scum of the Earth, a card game of Waterloo, which has been enjoyable. I read through the rules and thought to myself, this is like Magic the Gathering, historical edition. There's a game that's all about card combinations and flow (so you keep a few cards in your hand, ready to have something to play next turn). There must be some discussion of combo's and strategy out there on the Web. Must be. Surely. I can't find it. Maybe there are just too many games these days. Contrast this with the late 1970s, when SPI were publishing new wargames at a rate of maybe one a month, and Avalon Hill were rather slower. Back then the strategies in each game could be analysed in great depth, and they were discussed at length in paper magazines like The General and Moves. Do we now have too many new games to be able to learn the nuances before moving on to the next thing?
While I'm grumbling about stuff, let me add that I was disappointed by the solo AI system. For me, the ideal AI opponent plays to the same rules as a human opponent. It's a great disappointment to see them make a move that would be illegal for a regular player. Of course they need some kind of a boost, because the AI rules will probably play some impressively stupid moves, and yet they need to be hard to beat or there's no challenge in playing against one. However, the game already provides that in the form of free resources (and the actual resources on table don't tire when used). What irked me was that cards played by the AI come back to be played again later, in a way that doesn't happen with a human player.
So what, you ask? Well I would develop strategies while playing against the AI, and they will include ways to defend against repeated use of the same card. Then I get a human opponent, and all of that study is wasted and may even lead me to be less efficient as I waste effort defending against something that can't happen. It's not so bad as a to be a completely different game for solo play (I'm sure there are plenty of those), but it falls well short of recreating the feeling of a live opponent.
Enough rambling, time to get back to figuring out my pipeline for posts with pictures.
KBO
