Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

The Manhattan Project» Forums » General

Subject: The option to "Load a bomb" only seems to complicate the game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Frock Lobster
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've just played TMP once so far, and enjoyed it, but the option to load a bomb once you'd built it seemed like an unnecessary complication to the already complicated aspect of building / testing / scoring bombs. To me, it felt like that rule added just one more layer of complication and hence one more opportunity for Analysis Paralysis to the game... Anyone else feel similarly or if not, can you explain what that rule adds to the game?

I can see why testing was included, and it does indeed add an interesting dimension to the scoring. Loading, not so much. Thematically, it doesn't add anything more. Scoring-wise, it only seems to obfuscate what seemed like an otherwise tight set of end-game parameters.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Treacher
United Kingdom
Moorlinch
Somerset
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't forget that loading a bomb costs a bomber and money.

Rather than automatically load a bomb and lose a bomber I feel that it's entirely correct to leave the choice of loading or just keeping the bomb should be up to the player. The player may intend to perform an airstrike (and needs to have bombers available), or bluff about planning an airstrike, or persuade an ally to commit to a mutual air strike and then 'accidentally' let them go it alone...

Well, you get the idea!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paulo Santoro
Brazil
São Paulo
São Paulo
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
After you play a few more games, you will see it's a great feature. Sometimes, for example, you need to choose if you go for 3 bombs and no loads, or 2 bombs and 2 loads, in order to win. What to do? And how to do? Try and see!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Shufelt
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thematically, it makes perfect sense.

You're loading a bomb to be "prepped for action". You're flexing your nuclear power either to show your military might or mutually assured destruction.

Mechanically, it makes sense too. It's a way to sacrifice resources to gain additional points. Maybe you can now reach your point total within one less bomb.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frock Lobster
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
You're loading a bomb to be "prepped for action". You're flexing your nuclear power either to show your military might or mutually assured destruction.


This would make sense to me if there was anything to do with loaded bombs other than getting some extra points. You can't use a loaded bomb on another player, so it's just "gravy" as that point.

The one argument I can see for it is that it does seem to allow a player that only has 2 bomb cards for instance to still be a factor late in the game without having to go through another bomb design phase.

I do get that it adds more options to the end game. But I'm more questioning if the game is better or worse for it. I tend to think that a lot of the popular games these days (I'm thinking particularly of something like Trajan here) add layer upon layer of scoring options, which lends the sense that there's a lot of nuance happening, but to me, it just feels like complication for complication's sake. Maybe it's just a personal thing...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Are you able to build a bomb on one turn, and then load it on another?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Treacher
United Kingdom
Moorlinch
Somerset
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dlewis2 wrote:
Are you able to build a bomb on one turn, and then load it on another?


Yes, you can. Or load it on the same turn that it was built.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
I don't think it makes it all that complex. It does require some planning to make sure you have that last bit of change to load it if you need those points for the win.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
蓝魔
United Kingdom
Bingham
Nottinghamshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't see an issue here either ..
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frock Lobster
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fair enough. Seems like it's just me. That's the one thing that really rankled me about the game, the rest seems really well designed.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kristoff Bergenholm
United States
Millersville
Maryland
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
FrockLobster wrote:
Fair enough. Seems like it's just me. That's the one thing that really rankled me about the game, the rest seems really well designed.


I wouldn't call it 'complex', but it is a portion of the game that I'm not happy with. It feels just too easy to score those 5 points, and it's almost impossible to deny your opponent a chance to load.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Byers
Canada
Kitchener
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It does add another level of strategy to scoring. It's like an ace in the hole.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miguel (working on TENNISmind...)
France
Caen
(from Valencia, Spain)
flag msg tools
designer
My latest game: Big*Bang, a simple abstract about the first minutes of the Universe
badge
My best-rated game: TETRARCHIA, about the tetrarchy that saved Rome
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
FrockLobster wrote:
I can see why testing was included, and it does indeed add an interesting dimension to the scoring. Loading, not so much. Thematically, it doesn't add anything more.

The modifications of the B-29s took more time (from the end of 1943) and resources than the Trinity test, so they should be considered at least at the same level within the Manhattan Project. They could have taken the risk to drop Fat Man without a test (and it would have worked), but in any event they had to modify the planes in order to be able to load, and drop, the bombs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rex Dart
United States
Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
A player in one of our games ended his turn with a newly-built bomb, one point away from victory, but didn't have enough money to load it.

Theoretically, we could have used air strikes to prevent him from loading the bomb next turn by destroying all his bombers* - trouble in practice, however, being that he was Britain with a maxed-out RAF, and it wasn't possible to take out all his fighters and all his bombers.

* Oh, and in retrospect, I suppose we also would've had to keep him from building new bombers somehow, but if his air force had been weaker, that might've been possible too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.