Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
57 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Agricola (revised edition)» Forums » General

Subject: Why is the "Revised" edition still it's on page? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jimmy Song
United States
Glenside
PA
flag msg tools
mbmb
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page (I voted yes btw to combine). As the community know, the only game play difference is in the streamlined cards.

At this point people will have to go to two pages for looking at rules, variants, and etc.

Edit: forgot another reason. the Agricola revised page is basically way too quiet anyway and nonactive
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derry Salewski
United States
Augusta
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
. . . give a ship.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jimmysong wrote:
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page (I voted yes btw to combine). As the community know, the only game play difference is in the streamlined cards.

At this point people will have to go to two pages for looking at rules, variants, and etc.

Edit: forgot another reason. the Agricola revised page is basically way too quiet anyway and nonactive


The only gameplay difference is the completely different deck of cards which are half the game, that one group of owners will have no idea what they are when seeing threads about them?



7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
that Matt
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
I'm a quitter. I come from a long line of quitters. It's amazing I'm here at all.
badge
I can feel bits of my brain falling away like wet cake.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jimmysong wrote:
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Webster
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
scifiantihero wrote:
jimmysong wrote:
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page (I voted yes btw to combine). As the community know, the only game play difference is in the streamlined cards.

At this point people will have to go to two pages for looking at rules, variants, and etc.

Edit: forgot another reason. the Agricola revised page is basically way too quiet anyway and nonactive


The only gameplay difference is the completely different deck of cards which are half the game, that one group of owners will have no idea what they are when seeing threads about them?





Thank You. Please keep it separate
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Madison
Wisconsin
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tumorous wrote:
jimmysong wrote:
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page



Cheertator.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
scifiantihero wrote:
jimmysong wrote:
I thought there was a vote whether or not to combine this with the regular Agricola page (I voted yes btw to combine). As the community know, the only game play difference is in the streamlined cards.

At this point people will have to go to two pages for looking at rules, variants, and etc.

Edit: forgot another reason. the Agricola revised page is basically way too quiet anyway and nonactive

The only gameplay difference is the completely different deck of cards which are half the game, that one group of owners will have no idea what they are when seeing threads about them?

Also, some of us would prefer to log plays of the different editions separately; this would be impossible if the entries were to be merged.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Estonia
Tallinn
Harjumaa
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
They are two incompatible editions of the game. So they are separate pages.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Wells Kerenza
United Kingdom
Bradford
W Yorkshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Slashdoctor wrote:
They are two incompatible editions of the game. So they are separate pages.


Mayfair have repeatedly said that the games are 'compatible' but only if you understand the differences in terminology.

I would rather the entries were merged and the versions better organised but we all know the database is not that simple and there are numerous compromises and discrepancies.

I don't think users being confused when answering questions over which edition someone is using is very valid as I for one am subscribed to both editions even though I have the old set. Most questions I will answer but enquire about the version if something is confusing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Webster
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Swampy Crocker
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
that Matt
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
I'm a quitter. I come from a long line of quitters. It's amazing I'm here at all.
badge
I can feel bits of my brain falling away like wet cake.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Swampy Crocker
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
SwampMonster wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.


This comment about sums it up. Agricola is a game not a collection... or it was at any rate. A really top notch game all in one box ready to play with no need for expansions or other packs.

Now it is being fundamental changed to become a attempted money pit for those that like to collect games in sections as much as actually play the game. This goes against everything the designer Uve has believe in his game to date.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.


This comment about sums it up. Agricola is a game not a collection... or it was at any rate. A really top notch game all in one box ready to play with no need for expansions or other packs.

Now it is being fundamental changed to become a attempted money pit for those that like to collect games in sections as much as actually play the game. This goes against everything the designer Uve has believe in his game to date.

I hope you post this rant in, like, at least 7 or 8 more threads. I think it's really starting to gain traction.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


In the original game you have the family game plus the full game all in one box, plus it plays up to five players.

The new modeling of the game splits the game into three box purchase. The main game (only plays up to 4 players), the family game and then the 5-6p expansion. The only reason for this is to make people purchase 3 rather than one box - with the combined purchase probably costing double.

Then there is the reduction in the card decks, which is very important. People from Mayfiar will rubbish the old decks by claiming they are unbalance etc. There are not many experienced players who would agree with this, there were a few cards that were overpowered and people would leave out (maybe 10 cards) but the rest of the 350 odd deck works and offer infinite reply ability, variety and combos. With the reduced deck of 98 cards most of the cobos and options are diminished and cards repeat very quickly - which is not the Agricola experience. Agricola is a game with a big deck so that you don't expect cards to be in the game, unlike some games with limited or full use decks. However in the new edition this changes, in the 4p game each player has 14 cards in a game meaning there are 56 cards in any game. It does not take a mathematical genius to realise that with only 98 cards and combos are going to repeat time and time again - this is not Agricola and is a diminished game.

However the punch line is Matfair know this... they plan 48 card expansion decks for game - I guess they will be released every 6-12 months and cost day £15. So what they are doing is greatly diminishing the base game and then hoping that people will buy into the LCG and keep buying expansion decks.

I assume there will be two players from this:

1. Those that just buy the base game, tire of the repeating cards and combo and move on to a new game.... or

2. Those that get hooked and buy the expansions and they can see that this will provide a much fuller experience.

In this day and age of broken down part sold games (often marketed by Mayfair, take Dominion and Catan as example) Agricola was shining light. A near perfect game sold in it entirely in one box. Now this great game is being broken up and diminished by greedy publishers.

I am sure if I had never played the old version like the poster above I would still think it was a good game, especially on the first handful of plays as the mechanics are perfect.

However when making a decision on which version to buy I ask you the following whose opinion would you listen to.....

Those in the industry, or with links to the industry pushing the new version......

People that have never played the full game and so have nothing to reference the new version against.....

Or a simple games player with no vested commercial interest who thinks the full Agricola is possibly the best modern board game....

I will let you decide
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
grant5 wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.


This comment about sums it up. Agricola is a game not a collection... or it was at any rate. A really top notch game all in one box ready to play with no need for expansions or other packs.

Now it is being fundamental changed to become a attempted money pit for those that like to collect games in sections as much as actually play the game. This goes against everything the designer Uve has believe in his game to date.

I hope you post this rant in, like, at least 7 or 8 more threads. I think it's really starting to gain traction.


It is not a rant it is comment and opinion. You obviously just don't agree with it hence your attempt at derisory statements. Anyway have a lovely day
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yodi wrote:
grant5 wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.


This comment about sums it up. Agricola is a game not a collection... or it was at any rate. A really top notch game all in one box ready to play with no need for expansions or other packs.

Now it is being fundamental changed to become a attempted money pit for those that like to collect games in sections as much as actually play the game. This goes against everything the designer Uve has believe in his game to date.

I hope you post this rant in, like, at least 7 or 8 more threads. I think it's really starting to gain traction.


It is not a rant it is comment and opinion. You obviously just don't agree with it hence your attempt at derisory statements. Anyway have a lovely day

I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
that Matt
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
I'm a quitter. I come from a long line of quitters. It's amazing I'm here at all.
badge
I can feel bits of my brain falling away like wet cake.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
grant5 wrote:
I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.

Not only that, he posted it in this thread, then deleted it, just so he'd have free space to repost it here. Now Frank is feeling all out of context above.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
tumorous wrote:
grant5 wrote:
I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.

Not only that, he posted it in this thread, then deleted it, just so he'd have free space to repost it here. Now Frank is feeling all out of context above.



Exactly mate. If that is all you have to post, then I think that is perfectly reasonable to mess around with your non-post as you are clearly just being provocative
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tumorous wrote:
grant5 wrote:
I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.

Not only that, he posted it in this thread, then deleted it, just so he'd have free space to repost it here. Now Frank is feeling all out of context above.


Frank Underwood is NEVER out of context! The context is out... of.. Frank Underwood... or something.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
grant5 wrote:
Yodi wrote:
grant5 wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Yodi wrote:
SwampMonster wrote:
Dnasearchr wrote:
Yodi wrote:
they should be separate as they are two very diff games.

Diff terminology, this has a greatly diminished deck, it only plays 4 and doesn't have a family game.

I would also rate Agricola a 10, while this I would rate a 1.

To me and many other Agricola players, they are very different entities.


I was thinking of buying this game. Why do rate this version a 1 while the original a 10. Is it just because of a smaller set of cards and only 4 player?


He's been all over saying this version is not as good - mostly due to the thinning out of the deck.
As someone who never played Agricola before buying the revised edition, I see no issues with it. The lack of cards is not noticeable as I never had more than 96. I assume the mechanics are the same, as every video I've watched looks like how I play - just with different occupations and minor improvements. I'd give revised edition an 8-9 if it was allowed to stand on its on merit - which for me it can(as I have not and probably never will play the "first edition").


and your final sentence is so sad as Mayfair are going stop most people from discovering how much better the original game is!


I'm fine with that. As a completionist it is much easier to start with a new version than jump in somewhere in the middle. Same reason I'm glad I became an X-wing player in Wave 2 and a Star Wars collector after the "Great Canon Nerf." Just makes life easier.


This comment about sums it up. Agricola is a game not a collection... or it was at any rate. A really top notch game all in one box ready to play with no need for expansions or other packs.

Now it is being fundamental changed to become a attempted money pit for those that like to collect games in sections as much as actually play the game. This goes against everything the designer Uve has believe in his game to date.

I hope you post this rant in, like, at least 7 or 8 more threads. I think it's really starting to gain traction.


It is not a rant it is comment and opinion. You obviously just don't agree with it hence your attempt at derisory statements. Anyway have a lovely day

I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.


I post sparingly on BGG. I read more than I post. I have also never felt that strongly about something in the board gaming spectrum before. When I found this section for the revised edition I was surprised how quiet it was and how it had the same small number of people posting repeatedly, often disparagingly about the old reversion and encouraging the new one. You were among these posters. It is your prerogative to do this if wish it is also mine to post my views on a number of threads as well as they are relevant to what is being discussed. It is irrelevant if I post as much generally on BGG as you do and it does not make my comments any less valid.

I have no ax to grind as you put it. I just think the old version is far superior and I would like that view which is held by a large number people known to people that may know little about the game. I could just have easily asked why you feel the need to post so widely on these forums and what ax you have against the original version. Rather than just try and belittle my comments why don't you reply to the points I make.

Once again have a lovely day
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
that Matt
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
I'm a quitter. I come from a long line of quitters. It's amazing I'm here at all.
badge
I can feel bits of my brain falling away like wet cake.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yodi wrote:
tumorous wrote:
grant5 wrote:
I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.

Not only that, he posted it in this thread, then deleted it, just so he'd have free space to repost it here. Now Frank is feeling all out of context above.



Exactly mate. If that is all you have to post, then I think that is perfectly reasonable to mess around with your non-post as you are clearly just being provocative

cry
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
tumorous wrote:
Yodi wrote:
tumorous wrote:
grant5 wrote:
I beg to differ. When it's almost exclusively the only thing you post about on BGG, again and again, in dozens of threads, almost the exact same thing, its a rant. I don't know what weird ax you have to grind here, but you are putting an incredible amount of effort into this campaign of yours.

Not only that, he posted it in this thread, then deleted it, just so he'd have free space to repost it here. Now Frank is feeling all out of context above.



Exactly mate. If that is all you have to post, then I think that is perfectly reasonable to mess around with your non-post as you are clearly just being provocative

cry


Mr Non-Post strikes again
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.