Loading.Stone Age 2 screenshots:Stone Age 2( Play more, games ) Stone Age 2 review:Developed by DigiPark for Windows.SYNOPSISStone Age 2 is a 2D fantasy MMORPG with anime inspired graphics, turn based combat, and a unique prehistoric theme.

May 2003. Game yu gi oh forbidden memories for pc free. Keil, Matt (June 4, 2003). Retrieved October 8, 2015. Nintendo World Report. Kosmina, Ben (July 21, 2003).

• Stone Age Mmorpg

Stone Age Mmorpg

So I've had Power Grid on my list for over a year now, and at a year-end 3-for-2 sale I finally justified picking up a copy. I can definitely see its appeal to the serious gamers on this forum, but I feel a bit burned, because it has a rather heavy weight, and because unlike quite a few other games that generally rank high, the 2-player is weak.

My wife compared it to 2-player Agricola (which she likes, but has to be in a mood to play), and I had to admit after a few rounds that other than the strict worker-placement mechanic of Ag, PG was very similar in its overall feel (you take what you need based on some established and variable turn order, making acquiring the same things harder or impossible for your opponents), while in 2p at least it was less competitive than 2p Ag because there's absolutely no competition for cities unless you start in adjacent ones and make an effort to fight tooth and nail for each new expansion. We felt, after our first game, like we'd just followed a bunch of rules until someone was declared the winner; it didn't have much appeal as a 'game'.I basically went with PG over Stone Age because the store was sold out of Stone Age, and I needed a third game for the 'buy two get one' offer. SA's first-impression appeal for me is its being 'Agricola Lite'; less setup, lighter rules complexity, less AP, while retaining the worker placement, follower-feeding, settlement-growing theme that generally appeals in Ag. My question to the players is, is the game REALLY as good with two players as the recommendations say?

There is SOME recommendation for 2p PG, but some on the forums go so far as to say the two-player is broken. OTOH, though the SA polls say 4 is best, 2 is much more highly recommended.Should I trust that? Is this game going to satisfy my craving for Ag-style worker placement without burning my wife out on rules? Understand that if I strike out again on a worker-placement game, I will likely never be able to bring one to the table again, so it needs to be a pretty sure thing. I highly recommend SA for two players.

Some very different behaviors appear in 2 player Stone Age, which might be why some people dislike it.I'd say that the rules are pretty simple, especially compared to Agricola or Power Grid. The mechanics are very consistent in what you have to do at each location, and I haven't had trouble teaching them to anyone.But, beware. 2-player Stone Age can be downright vicious, in much the same way that 2-player Carcassonne is much nastier than 3+ player Carc. Everything you do directly affects your opponent, from taking a resource spot to blocking a card they desperately need. If you're looking for that, that's good. If you're not. Strike-out time!Stone Age overall is much lighter than many other worker placement games, but there's still plenty of room for clever maneuvering.

I'd trust the reviews, but keep in mind what level of 'take that' you want. Why does it have to be worker placement?It doesn't HAVE to be, really, but I find worker placement to have several elements I like in RTSes, namely the economic engine development and the accompanying resource denial. You win many RTSes by out-building as well as out-maneuvering your opponents, and the same applies in many WPs.

I also find that luck plays a somewhat smaller role in a WP game than in other gateways; your strategy for winning usually doesn't involve regularly hoping that you get the right card, tile, or dice roll.To explain further, basically, the games that my wife and I end up playing, either as two-player or with another pair or larger group, are generally considered gateway-level around here. This is largely because very few people among those we play with have the patience (or even the attention span) for a 20-minute rules explanation. The yardstick for a game that is 'too heavy' would probably be a game in which I cannot explain the basics in about 5 minutes. Specifics can come during the first play of the game if necessary, but if people don't have some basic sense of what they do during a turn and what they're trying to do over the course of the game in that five-minute window, it's just not going to fly. My wife is a bit more tolerant of being read rules to a game, but Power Grid and Agricola are pretty much the limit there; God help me if I ever developed an ASL or Warhammer addiction.Anyway, to scratch the WP itch, I pretty much need a 'gateway' worker-placement game; I need to be able to explain the overall object towards which people should be working, and the flow of a turn/round, in about 5 minutes, with maybe a couple more minutes to explain some common but more specific rules.

In addition, bringing a game to a larger game group will usually require the wife's seal of approval, meaning that it has to play well with two players in general, and not be so heavy that you wish you had a third player just to help with the upkeep. Stone Age, at a glance, seems to be a good candidate; it's lighter than Agricola while retaining much the same basic idea, and its 2-player comes well-recommended. There really aren't too many rules for Stone Age and the differences between the 2P game and 4P game are minimal.I persoanlly love Stone Age as a 2P game.

I like it more with 2 than I do with 4, but I think I'm in the minority in that thinking.I'm not too far off. I.probably.

prefer it as a 2, but at the very least I rate it equally good with any player count from 2-4. As mentioned, the rules changes for 2P are very minimal and not the kinds of things you accidentally get wrong because they are so unusual from the regular game.I highly recommend it as a 2p and for other counts.

My girlfriend is unable to get interested in heavier fare, such as Agricola, but she loves Stone Age and is able to play it capably, even if I do still win most games because she's not aggressive enough about blocking stuff I'm going to want.I just went through a closet cleaning expedition, selling off over 30 games I never play since I'm basically only interested in one type of game. I kept Stone Age in my closet, however, as I still have desire to table it from time to time. From me, that's a pretty glowing review for a euro game. There really aren't too many rules for Stone Age and the differences between the 2P game and 4P game are minimal.I persoanlly love Stone Age as a 2P game.

I like it more with 2 than I do with 4, but I think I'm in the minority in that thinking.Minority perhaps, but not alone. My wife easily prefers 2 player Stone Age. She says she likes being able to get more things she wants each turn.To the original poster: I can't say whether Stone Age is 'a really good 2 player game', but my wife prefers lighter games and really likes 2 player Stone Age. Count that as a vote in favor.

There really aren't too many rules for Stone Age and the differences between the 2P game and 4P game are minimal.I persoanlly love Stone Age as a 2P game. I like it more with 2 than I do with 4, but I think I'm in the minority in that thinking.Minority perhaps, but not alone. My wife easily prefers 2 player Stone Age. She says she likes being able to get more things she wants each turn.To the original poster: I can't say whether Stone Age is 'a really good 2 player game', but my wife prefers lighter games and really likes 2 player Stone Age. Count that as a vote in favor.Are you playing with the 2-player rules as written such that only a single tribe can grab any resource per round (excluding food, of course) and with limits to claiming the hut/farm/toolshed options? It seems to me there shouldn't really be any 'getting more stuff' in 2p vs another player count because it actually makes blocking easier. Drastically too much food on hand is just a sign of missed priorities.

Newer players frantically collect food to make sure they always have enough, but as you also increase your farming output, the need for food-on-hand continues to reduce until it's not needed at all. Planning for this decreasing demand for food as soon as possible such that you end the game with little or no food on hand means you spent your workers on point-earning tasks instead and is going to better your score.I suppose.I've only played twice. ALthough I think it's more of a problem of taking too many extra workers than anything; when my gf takes resources, it doesn't leave a lot of options for my 7 workers.

A lot of times she'll do resources, then I might take the tool upgrade, then she takes a new person, then it's just cards if I can't build a hut. It just seems taht the Hunt is not what I want to do but have nowhere else to put workers so I might as well do SOMETHING with them. ALthough I think it's more of a problem of taking too many extra workers than anything; when my gf takes resources, it doesn't leave a lot of options for my 7 workers. A lot of times she'll do resources, then I might take the tool upgrade, then she takes a new person, then it's just cards if I can't build a hut. It just seems taht the Hunt is not what I want to do but have nowhere else to put workers so I might as well do SOMETHING with them. The only way she can block you from resources is if she puts workers in all four resource areas. That's not that easy to do, so if you do not have enough for a hut, why not take one of the remaining resources instead of going on the hunt?

ALthough I think it's more of a problem of taking too many extra workers than anything; when my gf takes resources, it doesn't leave a lot of options for my 7 workers. A lot of times she'll do resources, then I might take the tool upgrade, then she takes a new person, then it's just cards if I can't build a hut. It just seems taht the Hunt is not what I want to do but have nowhere else to put workers so I might as well do SOMETHING with them. The only way she can block you from resources is if she puts workers in all four resource areas.

That's not that easy to do, so if you do not have enough for a hut, why not take one of the remaining resources instead of going on the hunt?D'OH! Just took a look at the rules myself. I got this game for her for christmas, and she was quite excited to teach me a game for once.

Unfortunately she interpreted the 2 player rules section as meaning that only one player could take one of the 4 resources, not one player PER each of the resources. Meaning once one player took ANY resource, the top half of the board was blocked from further play.Our next game will be VERY different, lol. Just took a look at the rules myself. I got this game for her for christmas, and she was quite excited to teach me a game for once. Unfortunately she interpreted the 2 player rules section as meaning that only one player could take one of the 4 resources, not one player PER each of the resources.

Meaning once one player took ANY resource, the top half of the board was blocked from further play.Our next game will be VERY different, lolHahaha. Okay, I thought something sounded fishy about your description.

That explains it. You should find a much better game now because that is a misinterpretation with significant impact. Just took a look at the rules myself. I got this game for her for christmas, and she was quite excited to teach me a game for once.

Unfortunately she interpreted the 2 player rules section as meaning that only one player could take one of the 4 resources, not one player PER each of the resources. Meaning once one player took ANY resource, the top half of the board was blocked from further play.Our next game will be VERY different, lolHahaha. Okay, I thought something sounded fishy about your description. That explains it. You should find a much better game now because that is a misinterpretation with significant impact.That is a definite understatement, lolSo that was why we just ended up with a ton of food, being that when we had any guys left at the end of our placement they'd be dumped into the Hunt area. Looking forward to playing this for real for the first time now. Just took a look at the rules myself.

I got this game for her for christmas, and she was quite excited to teach me a game for once. Unfortunately she interpreted the 2 player rules section as meaning that only one player could take one of the 4 resources, not one player PER each of the resources. Meaning once one player took ANY resource, the top half of the board was blocked from further play.Our next game will be VERY different, lolHahaha.

Okay, I thought something sounded fishy about your description. That explains it. You should find a much better game now because that is a misinterpretation with significant impact.That is a definite understatement, lolSo that was why we just ended up with a ton of food, being that when we had any guys left at the end of our placement they'd be dumped into the Hunt area. Looking forward to playing this for real for the first time now.I suspect you will find it to be a much better game now.