Any fa/tg/uys try Tak? simple rules, complicated strategies

>>54259508

thank you this is way better than the rules on playtak

any thought on making your own pieces?

Wow, this is really cool!

>>54259236
I really love when I encounter a new abstract strategy game that just intuitively feels right. Like "of course this is a game. This has always been a game"

Some of the Looney Labs pyramid games feel like that. Onitama and Tsuro feel that way. Thud! feels that way. this? absolutely.

So, the point here is to lay 'stones' to create a road from one end of the board to the next. You can also lay 'walls' to prevent your opponent from placing a stone on top of yours. Finally, you have a 'capstone' that can be used to flatten a 'wall.'

>>54259236
Yeah, I'm friends with the Wyrmwood guys and they've all taken up Tak. It's pretty fun, though I'm crap at it. Wall strats are currently the meta, which makes sense, since Tak hasn't been solved in a general sense yet and they're kinda where you gravitate after learning the game and playing a few times.

>>54259580
Shit I need to find a 3D printer, stat. Someone find me some good 3D objects to make Tak pieces from...

I still haven't beaten intermediate bot on the playtak. beginner bot has ai you can take advantage of and thus is too easy

>>54260080
Speaking of smart abstract games, what's that one about sliding blocks around on a grid? I think Penny Arcade used to sell it.

so I'm thinking of just carrying enough for a 5x5 and no board. i'd mostly be doing 3x3 to teach flats and walls then bumping to 5x5 if they want. a 3x3 is easy cause you just have to designate the center square. but if i'm playing a 5x5 i figure there will be enough experience between us that setting up a center should suffice