Anybody play this?
I had no idea how complex the strategy is. It's practically on the same plane as chess, though a very different beast obviously.
It's easy to play it as a completely random and relatively simple "race" game and that's how I knew it but someone gave me a board and I started reading more etc.
>>54036599
I never thought it was more than a simple race.
>>54036599
What's that big 4/8/64 die for?
>>54036788
doubling the stakes. Either player can offer to double the value of the game (if it's a 1-point game, winner would now get 2 points etc.) The other guy can decline to double, which throws the game, or accept. You can keep doubling up to anything. It's not a die you roll, it's just there as a marker of where you are on the doubling.
The strategy articles are virtually incomprehensible.
>After some early ups and downs, White has succeeded in establishing a 1-3 back game. His chances of timing the game properly are pretty reasonable. He has three extra back men to release, and White only has a four-prime in front of his back checkers, so getting the men into the outfield shouldn't be too big a problem. His timing isn't certain, however, because Black also has some men to bring around, and this will take awhile. One quick way to assess the timing in a back game is so simple that many players forget to do it: you can just take a pip count! In this position, Black trails in the pip count by 138 to 218, a difference of 80 pips. In very general terms, a deficit of 90-120 pips signifies a well-timed back game. So White is close to having enough timing, but he's not quite there yet.
>>54036788
it's an n^2 dice. It's not actual rolled; it's meant to track the stakes being gambled. It starts at 1 (off the board), and any player can raise it to 2. Then the other player can keep it at 2, or raise it to 4. The first player can keep it at 4, or raise it to 8, and so on and so forth. At the end of the game, the original bet is multiplied by the number on the dice, then given to the winner.
>>54036599
It's my favorite board game.
>enough abstract strategy to reward skill
>quick enough to play casually
>a bit of randomness that can still make it a fun game between players of different skill levels
Chess always feels more internal; backgammon can be played alongside beer and conversation.
Who else here calls this Shesh Besh?
>>54036901
Exactly. I like card games for the same reason.
You can have a lot of fun drinking and chatting playing something like cribbage or crazy solo and people can learn the rules in 5 minutes, but there's a lot of strategy if you choose to play seriously.
I've never had a lighthearted chess game, it's inherently serious and demands concentration in a way that these other games, while skillful, do not.