# Co-op game recommendations



## Merlin the Tuna (Feb 23, 2010)

Hi gang!

I just threw Arkham Horror at my gaming group for the first time, and while almost everyone loved it, the fact that it takes for-freaking-ever is a bit of an issue.  It's also the only co-op game in our repertoire at the moment, so I'm looking to expand on that with something that moves a little bit more quickly, as well as something that will less frequently put the players in the situation of "Well, there aren't any clue tokens on the board, so I guess I'll go to... umm... wherever."

Pandemic, Battlestar Galactica, and Shadows Over Camelot seem to be the forerunners as far as I can tell -- does that sound about right, or is there anything else I should know about?  Pandemic sounds like it might be right our alley, but the 4-player limit may be a problem since we're usually hovering at 5-7 players.  I've read some great reports of BSG, but we don't have a single person in the group that follows the show, which I expect will be a bit of a hitch.  And SOC I don't have much to go on aside from general favorable reviews and the Wikipedia article.

Any recommendations from the peanut gallery?


----------



## Asmor (Feb 23, 2010)

BSG is the only coop game I've found which I like. Not a fan of coops in general. You don't need to follow the show to play the game, either (I don't, for example).

All you need to know is the premise that there is an enemy called the Cylons, which have artificial-human agents hidden in the crew. The hidden agents are impossible to detect as different from a real human. In fact, there are some cylon sleeper agents who don't even know that they're cylons and will only get activated halfway through the game.

There, you know enough to play the game now. 

You might consider Space Alert if time is a constraint. It's a very strange simultaneous-action selection game. Basically, you put on a CD that has scenarios in it and "program" your turns by playing face down cards. Every once in a while the CD will tell you that an enemy is approaching, there's a communications blackout, etc. Then in the end you resolve the cards everyone's laid down and see what actually happened in all the chaos.

Pandemic plays fairly quickly and is very popular. Personally I recommend the expansion just for the bioterrorist role.


----------



## arscott (Feb 24, 2010)

I wouldn't really call BSG a cooperative game--It's really a hidden teams game, like werewolves/mafia.  That said, I enjoyed playing it, and my never having watched the show was no impediment (my never having played the game before, though, was--Playing a Cyclon, I managed to paint myself into a corner by lying about the cards in my hand.  I recommend familiarizing yourself with the various decks of cards if you're playing with experienced players.)  It's also a long game--If the length of Arkham turns you off, you might want to look elsewhere.

Pandemic is fun, and the rules are exceedingly simple to learn.  It plays quickly and manages to keep the tension up--there's not much of that "we're obviously going to win... eventually" feeling you sometimes get with Arkham Horror.  The games only downside is that there's a huge tendency towards group decision making, and you'll get situations where the most strategic or experienced player is just telling everyone else what to do.  It's also a short game--short enough that we usually play two or three games before moving on to something else.

Shadows is fun (and it's the only one of the three I own), and it supports up to 7 players (or 8, with expansion).  There's a traitor element, but it doesn't dominate the game like it does in BSG.  Even without the traitor, the secrecy rules prevent "someone else plays your character for you" situations.  And it plays in about 2 hours.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 24, 2010)

Merlin the Tuna said:


> I just threw Arkham Horror at my gaming group for the first time, and while almost everyone loved it, the fact that it takes for-freaking-ever is a bit of an issue.



How many players?  Also, how many times have you played?  It can go REALLY slow the first half-dozen or so playthroughs which can only get worse if there isn't someone at the table really comfortable with the rules.



Merlin the Tuna said:


> It's also the only co-op game in our repertoire at the moment, so I'm looking to expand on that with something that moves a little bit more quickly, as well as something that will less frequently put the players in the situation of "Well, there aren't any clue tokens on the board, so I guess I'll go to... umm... wherever."



Have you looked at any of the AH expansions?  They can add quite a bit to the game.  



arscott said:


> I wouldn't really call BSG a cooperative game--It's really a hidden teams game, like werewolves/mafia.  That said, I enjoyed playing it, and my never having watched the show was no impediment (my never having played the game before, though, was--Playing a Cyclon, I managed to paint myself into a corner by lying about the cards in my hand.  I recommend familiarizing yourself with the various decks of cards if you're playing with experienced players.)  It's also a long game--If the length of Arkham turns you off, you might want to look elsewhere.



I agree with everything here, well said.



arscott said:


> Pandemic is fun, and the rules are exceedingly simple to learn.  It plays quickly and manages to keep the tension up--there's not much of that "we're obviously going to win... eventually" feeling you sometimes get with Arkham Horror.  The games only downside is that there's a huge tendency towards group decision making, and you'll get situations where the most strategic or experienced player is just telling everyone else what to do.  It's also a short game--short enough that we usually play two or three games before moving on to something else.



Yup, we've had the same experiences and it can certainly be hard to avoid the "one person giving orders" thing.  Still, very fun game!


----------



## Woas (Feb 25, 2010)

There is a sort of Coop game based on King Arthur and associated myth. I've never played it, just know of it off hand but figured if someone else knew the name for sure, it'd be one more to the list.


----------



## Victim (Feb 25, 2010)

That's Shadows over Camelot - it also has the possibility of a hidden traitor, but I've heard that it's not as well done as BSG.

Space Alert seems fun so far.  The intense real time nature of the game makes one guy micromanaging everyone else rather difficult.  You'll only have like 10 minutes to plot out all your moves and there can be a lot of stuff going on, so rapid communication is key.


----------



## Holy Bovine (Feb 25, 2010)

Lord of the Rings is one of my all time favourite co-op games.  Lots of replay value and it is actually a hard game to master (although pretty easy to learn).  most games I've played are finished in 90 minutes the longest lasted 2.5 hours.  

You will learn to _hate_ the little 'eye of Mordor' playing piece they use!


----------



## arscott (Feb 26, 2010)

Victim said:


> That's Shadows over Camelot - it also has the possibility of a hidden traitor, but I've heard that it's not as well done as BSG.



How so?


----------



## Victim (Feb 26, 2010)

arscott said:


> How so?




I've never played it, but I've heard that the traitor has little non-obvious ability to hurt the group.  You could probably get information on BGG.


----------



## arscott (Feb 26, 2010)

Victim said:


> I've never played it, but I've heard that the traitor has little non-obvious ability to hurt the group.  You could probably get information on BGG.



That's a pretty reasonable criticism--the traitor certainly has to work harder to find opportunities for sabotage in Shadows.  I wouldn't say the game is necessarily worse for it, though.

(Then again, I've only played BSG once.  I made a pretty ineffective cylon, mostly because I played too cautiously.)


----------



## Asmor (Feb 26, 2010)

FWIW, I've only played SoC twice, both times without a traitor, and both times we lost.


----------



## Nytmare (Feb 28, 2010)

If the time limit of Arkham bugged you guys, Battlestar Galactica and Shadows over Camelot might not sit well with you either.

Between the two, I like Battlestar a lot more.  I like that the traitor aspect is a greater focus of the game, but then I'm a diehard mafia fan.  It also seems like a...  I don't want to say _easier_ game, but I never really feel as despairingly helpless in Battlestar, even when we're losing horribly.  In Shadows, even when we're winning, I know that defeat is lurking right around the corner waiting to kick me in the jimmy.

Shadows is probably a faster game normally, especially if you don't include a traitor in the mix.  Trying to pin down a possible traitor (or traitors for Battlestar) eats up a lot of time.

Lord of the Rings is a great cooperative game and relatively short if memory serves.  There's nothing bad I can say about it.

Betrayal at House on the Hill is out of print, but if you can find a copy grab it.  The game takes place over two acts.  In the first act, you and the other players explore a haunted mansion, gathering equipment and dealing with strange haunted housey things.  In the second act, someone is revealed to be a traitor and the game becomes one of 50 different stereotypical horror stories.  

Cutthroat Caverns is a pretty quick, almost cooperative card game.  Long story short, you're a bunch of adventurers killing monsters and taking their loot.  You're competing with the other players for points, but at the same time, you need to keep everyone alive and in fighting condition because the strength of the monsters is based off the starting number of players.


----------



## arscott (Feb 28, 2010)

Betrayal at House on the Hill is apparently being brought back into print soon.  Which is nice, because I've always wanted to play but the $200 out of print pricetag has kept me away.


----------



## Merlin the Tuna (Feb 28, 2010)

Thanks for all of the feedback, everyone!



John Crichton said:


> How many players?  Also, how many times have you played?  It can go REALLY slow the first half-dozen or so playthroughs which can only get worse if there isn't someone at the table really comfortable with the rules.



We had 6 or 7 when I brought it to the whole gaming group, but I'd played it with most of them in smaller groups at least once before. It does seem like it's moving a little more quickly each time, but I struggle to picture it ever _not_ dominating an afternoon.  (Well, unless the players get absolutely rocked in the first couple Mythos phases and lose disastrously).  The most time-consuming part for us is actually the upkeep phase since everyone needs to work out what they're doing before they adjust sliders and whatnot, and I don't see that every getting reduced dramatically unless we just introduce a timer that says "We have 2 minutes to do upkeep, then we move."

Betrayal at House on the Hill sounds interesting. It looks like the printing coming this Fall is a new edition (not just a new printing), but I'll definitely keep an eye out for it.

Cuthroat Caverns sounds very similar to Munchkin. That's fine - Munchkin is a good enough game - but we've got a couple versions of it already.

Space Alert... Hm.  I'm skeptical of the whole "audio CD-based game" genre.  I guess I worry mostly about replayability, since it seems like you'd be doing the same stuff every game.


----------



## Drawback (Mar 1, 2010)

Merlin the Tuna said:


> Space Alert... Hm.  I'm skeptical of the whole "audio CD-based game" genre.  I guess I worry mostly about replayability, since it seems like you'd be doing the same stuff every game.




There's a random mission .wav generator back at the BGG website... It works pretty well to create new CD tracks. It has even got the same sounds as the original CD.

Moreover, the CD is there to give cues about which deck you pick cards (threats) from. The "card factor" makes each game different anyway.

I haven't even used a self made CD track yet...


----------



## MerricB (Mar 2, 2010)

My take...

*PURE CO-OPERATIVE GAMES*

*Space Alert* (20 minutes) is the pick of the pure co-operative games. Vlaada wanted to design a game which wasn't basically a solo game (as most pure co-op games boil down to), and succeeded brilliantly. The CD track provides the game timer and tracks _when_ threats occur, but _what_ they are and their speed is determined by cards and a variety of random threat tracks.

This game has a lot of replayability and is wonderfully fun. Highly recommended.

*Pandemic* (30 minutes) has great mechanics but suffers horribly from the "I'm a solo game" flaw. I personally find it a bit too easy to solve as well. Yes, we'll lose games, but that's due to horrible draws rather than bad play.

*Lord of the Rings* (1 hour) is a game I rather enjoy. It's moderately long (hour+), but is surprisingly replayable and doesn't suffer so much from the obvious strategy that leads to solo play in Pandemic. 

*Arkham Horror* (2-3 hours with 4 players. Might be shorter, might be longer) is big, sprawling and, for inexperienced players, will take entirely too long. I've had a lot of fun this as a solo game, but I think it handles up to 4 players very well (5-8 might require you to set up for a whole evening). What AH does well is provide theme and variety. There is a certain amount of strategy that can become utterly derailed by bad luck.

*TRAITOR CO-OP GAMES*

*Battlestar Galactica* (3 hours with 6 players) is the best I've played. It has good mechanics to begin with, but its the confusion over which players are Cylons that really makes the game work. You know how many Cylons there'll be, but there might not be any until halfway through the game! 

*Shadows over Camelot* (1 hour) is nice - I've had some good games - but the traitor element really doesn't work as it should. While in BSG, Cylons are more effective unrevealed but can still have fun when revealed, the traitor in Shadows is utterly boring once revealed.

*Betrayal at the House on the Hill* (30 mins-1 hour) is awesome fun, but very, very random. Some games will come down to the wire, others peter out into dullness. It's very clever - and I'd definitely look out for the reprint - but be aware that not every game will work.

Cheers!


----------



## Verdande (Mar 2, 2010)

I'd like to recommend Descent: Journey into the Dark. It's mostly cooperative, for everybody but the Overlord. It can last a fair minute, especially your first couple of plays, but it's a real treat to play a board-game RPG lite for an hour or so with your buddies.

It's literally a beer and pretzels game; although I don't much like the salty snacks, I often (read: always) have a brew or two when I'm Overlording. It can be played super-competitively, but that can ruin the fun if you're not careful. It's ok to be a horrendous douche when Overlording, but absolutely smashing the Heroes isn't much fun for you or for them.


----------



## Nytmare (Mar 2, 2010)

I bought Descent pre 4E thinking that it would become our standard game on D&D nights when we were down too many players.  What I found is that the amount of time I needed to put into it to make it happily playable was equivalent to prepping for an actual RPG, which is what playing it left us really wanting.

The hundred dollar price tag  really makes me wish that it wasn't sitting, collecting 4 years of dust on a shelf.


----------



## Hadrian the Builder (Mar 2, 2010)

It's worth noting that there is an expansion for pandemic that will let you play with more than 4 players. We've played it and it's one of my groups favorite board games


----------



## Holy Bovine (Mar 2, 2010)

Nytmare said:


> I bought Descent pre 4E thinking that it would become our standard game on D&D nights when we were down too many players.  What I found is that the amount of time I needed to put into it to make it happily playable was equivalent to prepping for an actual RPG, which is what playing it left us really wanting.
> 
> The hundred dollar price tag  really makes me wish that it wasn't sitting, collecting 4 years of dust on a shelf.




I agree with you - the base game of Descent is not terribly great and can take an awfully long time to finish.  It sat on my shelf for 2 years until someone told me about Road to Legend.  RtL adds a 'campaign' style to the base game, shortens dungeon levels by about 50% play time (ie a dungeon level is finished in about an hour instead of 2-3) and gives you the ability to 'save' the campaign even in the middle of a dungeon (all dungeons have 3 levels drawn randomly from a deck of cards).  The smaller levels makes for quick set up and it became a staple for part of my group for the last 2 years.  If you really want to get some use out of that $100 paperweight you have now grab Road to Legend.


----------



## John Crichton (Mar 4, 2010)

Verdande said:


> It's literally a beer and pretzels game



One can drink while playing any game but Descent demands too much strategy to be a real beer and pretzels game.  Those type of games need to have more laughs not to mention fart jokes built in.  



Nytmare said:


> The hundred dollar price tag  really makes me wish that it wasn't sitting, collecting 4 years of dust on a shelf.



Yikes, I'd feel the same way if I never got to play it.


----------



## Drawback (Mar 8, 2010)

Let me add:

"Witch of Salem" : Pure-coop, stop the necromant from calling forth an Old god from it's slumber in R'lyeth (it's Arkham horror crossed with a "slimpler" Ghost stories). Drips with theme and is really easy to play, in 60 minutes. 2 to 4 players. Had a lot of fun with this one!

"Ghost Stories": @ss whopping hard, I've played 4 times.. 2 to 4 players. Rules aren't that cleat, at least in the french version. So take the time to learn them well before jumping in a game!


----------



## leebingate (Mar 22, 2010)

Woas said:


> There is a sort of Coop game based on King Arthur and associated myth. I've never played it, just know of it off hand but figured if someone else knew the name for sure, it'd be one more to the list.



That's Shadows over Camelot - it also has the possibility of a hidden traitor, but I've heard that it's not as well done as BSG.

Space Alert seems fun so far. The intense real time nature of the game makes one guy micromanaging everyone else rather difficult. You'll only have like 10 minutes to plot out all your moves and there can be a lot of stuff going on, so rapid communication is key.


----------



## Nytmare (Mar 22, 2010)

leebingate said:


> That's Shadows over Camelot - it also has the possibility of a hidden traitor, but I've heard that it's not as well done as BSG.




It's not so much that it's not as well done, it's that in Battlestar, figuring out who the traitors are is _part_ of the game, whereas in Camelot, it's just another thing that might get in your way to prevent you from winning.


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 20, 2010)

I finally cracked open the Pandemic "On the Brink" expansion over the weekend and played with 5 people.  High marks from the whole table.  Certainly better than the base game with the expanded roles even though that's the only thing we used from it along with the new Special player cards.


----------



## MerricB (Apr 20, 2010)

Nytmare said:


> It's not so much that it's not as well done, it's that in Battlestar, figuring out who the traitors are is _part_ of the game, whereas in Camelot, it's just another thing that might get in your way to prevent you from winning.




What is also bad is that in Battlestar, being a revealed Cylon is still fun. In Shadows, being a revealed traitor is dull as anything.


----------



## Asmor (Apr 20, 2010)

MerricB said:


> What is also bad is that in Battlestar, being a revealed Cylon is still fun. In Shadows, being a revealed traitor is dull as anything.




Only slightly more dull than playing Shadows in the first place.


----------



## darjr (Apr 21, 2010)

the out of print game game from pacesetter "chill: black morn manor" is very much like house on the hill but much simpler and quicker. only played it once, it was a ton of fun. one player is the minion of the secret bad guy (one of many) and other players must figure out who the bad guy is in order to know how to defeat them before turning into minions themselves


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 21, 2010)

darjr said:


> the out of print game game from pacesetter "chill: black morn manor" is very much like house on the hill but much simpler and quicker. only played it once, it was a ton of fun. one player is the minion of the secret bad guy (one of many) and other players must figure out who the bad guy is in order to know how to defeat them before turning into minions themselves



Did you just recommend an out of print game?


----------



## darjr (Apr 22, 2010)

John Crichton said:


> Did you just recommend an out of print game?




Uh... why... yes... I did.

If you find a friend who has it then your in luck!


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 22, 2010)

darjr said:


> Uh... why... yes... I did.
> 
> If you find a friend who has it then your in luck!



I was just funnin' ya.  

heheh


----------



## darjr (Apr 23, 2010)

Ravenloft?

http://www.enworld.org/forum/rpg-in...enloft-boardgame-images-released-twitter.html



Not. Even. In. Print.

Yet.


----------



## Toriel (May 12, 2010)

Castle Panic is a really nice, simple coop game. You have to defend a castle against monster attacks. The rules are simple and easy to learn. There are variants to make the game harder or easier and another one where one player controls the monsters. A game I enjoy a lot and highly recommend.


----------



## heruca (May 16, 2010)

Some cooperative boardgames that I enjoy are Zombie Plague and the Aliens Boardgame. ZP is print-and-play, Aliens you'd have to spend a pretty penny to get on Ebay.


----------



## Nytmare (Aug 22, 2010)

This was the best thread they could come up with to throw belt ads at?

How did they miss this one?


----------

