Codenames vs Food Chain Magnate

And I found it really hard to keep track of which words were mine - I had to write them onto a piece of paper and make sure my words didn't relate too much to my opponent's, otherwise your partner might guess a word that is for the opposing team! Not even sure where that timer comes into play because we took forever in giving and guessing clues. I guess because words can be interpreted in so many different ways and there are so many different patterns, you can use this set for some time before it gets old. I kind of feel silly now because I thought this was a strategy board game - I sent one to somebody for Secret Santa … hopefully they liked it? I do agree that this game would be better suited for older teens and adults. Not sure if I can see younger children getting into it

**Food Chain Magnate** where you're practically guaranteed to ruin any chance you have at winning in the first two or three turns unless you've played the game multiple times.

I think it's fantastic that someone who started their design career with something as niche as TtA has managed to produce one of the few true breakouts into mass market popularity from hobby boardgaming with Codenames. Such a simple, fun, and *teachable* design that can get almost any group enjoying themselves within a few minutes.

* Should designers be more aware of this problem and take better steps to deal with it? Is it lazy to just let the games play differently at different player counts?

It's a game that simultaneously feels like it's not long enough -- like I want there to be more strategic depth -- but also too long for the amount that's actually present. Maybe I would like it more if I reduced the starting health to say, 40 or even 30. I've really only gotten a good response from one person that I've taught it to. Maybe it's just not for my group

However, the amount of decisions, brain burning and depth of the game are incredible. This is tipically said to be something that *Splotter* does very well.

Even though it says for 2 players - the play is greatly diminished in fun. It's more like one person plays and the other person sits there. LOL. booo

Early on, an exile obtained it, and even became the usurper (so in a position to win), but the Chancellor just manged to scrape enough favour (coin) to buy it back. Then, there was so much favour on it, the exile never managed to get enough favour/warbands to fight for it or recover it. After the recovery a citizen made a play for the successor goal (Darkest Secret Banner), and got it, and even was in position to win with the 5th round roll, but the dice didn't fall for them. Then the Chancellor took it away from them, and essentially after failed campaigns both the exile and the citizen struggled to get any kind of resources together

My friends and I play codenames online using a voice chat and have had a long standing disagreement about whether or not Googling should be allowed or not in codenames. Now, I have no issue with the occasional Google search in casual codenames. But my friends pretty much rely exclusively on Google to come up with their words and to decode them, and especially so during our server tournaments (where the hosts allow Googling).

Edit: swapped yes and no accidentally. Should not be on the Internet when it's well past the time to go to bed.

In: **Isle of Cats, Red Rising, Parks, Racoon Tycoon, Splendor, Trails, Arboretum, The Crew, Deep Vents, Codenames, Codenames Duet, LLAMA, Friday, Wits and Wagers**, and a nicely kept 1962 copy of **Mille Bornes**

Great Western Trail - We may end up buying the new version just because of wear and tear on my current set