Physical board game play

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on :
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 6
Joined: 02 February 2024, 13:09

Physical board game play

Post by kalencap »

Just bought the physical game and finished two-player game with one easy variant (U.S. and Europe) with my partner. We lost in round 5, but it helped flesh out some oof the details that can occur in the online version here. Wondered how many others have played with the physical game board as well and whether it has helped in your understanding of the beta version here.
User avatar
Posts: 1
Joined: 22 April 2020, 16:09

Re: Physical board game play

Post by squiz18 »

Yes I've played both. I like the BGA version for keeping track of the maths side of it. It's also helped with clarifying what certain cards do. The cards that remove communities in crisis don't make it clear you can remove for anyone for example.

It's more collaborative in person though and we help each other more. Online is a bit more multiplayer solitaire.
User avatar
Posts: 7
Joined: 15 January 2012, 15:25

Re: Physical board game play

Post by TheInquisitor »

I've only played my physical version once but have played the game many, many times online. Playing in-person can definitely help with better understanding how the different pieces of the game fit together. The digital implementation certainly is nice for doing all the math for us in the blink of an eye. It is definitely more of a multiplayer solitaire experience though as squiz18 noted.
Posts: 2
Joined: 20 October 2020, 20:29

Re: Physical board game play

Post by Miriam_R »

I would agree that analog games tend to be more collaborative than most of the games I've played here are. I'll also agree that the running tally of carbon emissions is very useful, and in that aspect I think the analog game is more difficult, because you don't just KNOW when you're in drawdown territory, and either have to wing it and hope, or count up everyone's emissions in advance.

I find it easier to track crises, global projects, etc. when I have an entire table instead of just my laptop screen. I also find it easier to allocate cards ("Okay, I'm going to tuck this one and then discard this one to activate it, and then I can stack this on top..." and it's easier to not make moves where you realize just after the undo button has disappeared that you should have done it in the other order, or spent this card instead of that one, and so on.

I really like the way power vs. demand is implemented in the physical game -- the demand slider lines up really nicely with the power generation pieces, and while the red text for demand outstripping power supply makes it clearer, I don't find it quite as utterly intuitive. (I'm not saying that it's difficult in the digital version, but I find analog more seamless.)

My biggest complaint about the physical game is that the board is too big -- it's hard to fit the short direction of the board plus a player on each side on my (good-sized!) table -- and then you have to fit all the containers of pieces, too. It's not even using all that space; I think it could be half the size without feeling cramped.

My other complaint is that there are things that aren't immediately clear when looking at a particular card, and the QR code on the card generally doesn't provide rules disambiguation. (I assume it's in the book somewhere, but I hate pausing gameplay while someone flips through the book trying to find stuff.) There are definitely things that I know how to handle because I've seen how BGA implements them.
User avatar
Posts: 381
Joined: 17 October 2011, 01:39

Re: Physical board game play

Post by Kayvon »

I agree with all the opinions in this thread. It's great that the digital adaptation does the math for you, but it also makes it easier to overlook what's happening. The physical version is a joy to play, but I'd just as readily play the digital version when we can't all sit down together.
Post Reply

Return to “Daybreak”