-
hi all i will buy empires of the middle ages, but i have a doubt, is better decison games or original version? is only a problem of board?
-
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
-
I prefer the SPI version because it seems less fiddly with the Social State counters. The game is effectively the same, but the DG version has a lot of additional rules like Armies and Cathedrals etc. that seemed to favour the wealthy.
-
William Gaskill
United States
Bridgeton
New Jersey
-
Minedog3 wrote: I prefer the SPI version because it seems less fiddly with the Social State counters. The game is effectively the same, but the DG version has a lot of additional rules like Armies and Cathedrals etc. that seemed to favour the wealthy.
Score one for realism
OD
-
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
-
Old Dwarf wrote: Minedog3 wrote: I prefer the SPI version because it seems less fiddly with the Social State counters. The game is effectively the same, but the DG version has a lot of additional rules like Armies and Cathedrals etc. that seemed to favour the wealthy. Score one for realism OD
well, perhaps MORE favours the wealthy. I mean if you can use gold to modify an endeavour, in effect you are buying mercenaries, or churchmen, or minor princes etc, on a one-off basis. Armies, Fleets etc linger on the map, so the gold has a more enduring effect.
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
The map in the DG is done very well ... large size ... nice.
-
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
-
Dr Brian wrote: The map in the DG is done very well ... large size ... nice.
matter of taste I guess, I found the boxes and lines a bunch easier to use over the area map. There were some iffy sea area connections by recall.. something like Friesland to Wales in a single sea area..
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
Yes, definitely a matter of taste. The DG map was much easier for me … lot’s of space and more traditional. I think it’s a spatial preference. I didn't recall any sea area issues though.
I suggest cillo cillo to check the images out. There are many images of the DG map, and the SPI version can be seen on the back of the SPI box.
-
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
-
Dr Brian wrote:
I suggest cillo cillo to check the images out. There are many images of the DG map, and the SPI version can be seen on the back of the SPI box.
I did check my memory later, using the Cyberboard map image available on BGG, and it is Friesland to Wales. At the time (a few years ago) I pulled out my original SPI map to check, and Friesland did only have access to the North Sea.
I haven't checked every other connection, In truth, it doesn't matter that much, just play with the map you are using, but it raised my eyebrow at the time.
Probably the most annoying thing about the DG version to me was that it failed to fix the known 'issues' with the SPI rules.
- Raiders (in particular the Barbary pirates)
- Religious Fervour duration in the campaign.
Nothing especially wrong with the DG version, but it didn't attempt to tweak anything problematic, and just added new stuff ontop. I didn't think all of the new stuff was well thought out, the named Leader cards were very hard to play for example.
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
So true about using the named leader cards.
To help use them ... I've made a house rule in that when drawing them, if they are outside the year of play, then discard and choose another.
Granted, you still may not be able to use them most of the time, but your chances increase slightly.
Doc
-
Joel Tamburo
United States
Unspecified
-
Alas the DG version is a mess. The map may be pretty but has major errors that DG never did officially patch - the developer finally released a map patch file. Plus the rules are virtually unusable because for some strange reason they are written to use the SPI components not the DG ones.
At this point I just play the SPI version but adopt the much needed fixes to Anatolia which are:
1) Change its values to Social State +1 Eastern Orthodox with same language as Constantinople. New code 407E.
2) Remove the connection between Anatolia and Syria and replace it with a connection between Anatolia and Armenia.
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
Never heard about the #2 point. What was the problem with the connection between Syria and Anatolia?
-
Joel Tamburo
United States
Unspecified
-
The connection defies both geography and history.
Historically Armenia and Cilicia were shields that blocked direct access for invaders to Anatolia. In game terms it made it pretty easy (especially when Anatolia was classified as Muslim well before Manzikert) for the Syrian Magnates to devastate the Byzantines.
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
Hmmm... Thanks. I never saw THAT change. Sounds like a good one. LOL ...
Maybe there should be a 3rd Version of this game. ;)
-
-
i have buyed dg version...(wrong choice?) how is the territory need correction in this map?
what are the sites with download material for Empires of the Middle Ages?
i can use the material of spi version for this one?
-
Joel Tamburo
United States
Unspecified
-
Anatolia is wrong (as noted above) and I think the DG map has an error in northwest France too.
Also I would download the rewritten rules that are right here on BGG, as the ones in the DG box are a mess.
-
Brian Sielski
United States
Pequannock
New Jersey
-
It's not the wrong choice. If you never played the SPI version, you will think the DG version is fine ... both suffer from flaws! :)
As Joel mentioned, download the rules and rule eratta right here. They are helpful.
Doc
-
|
|
