Alexander McKinney
The Bahamas
Nassau
na
-
I've looked through a few threads that state that there is an official fix for the 2 player game where you take the "take any two different resources" action space from the 4 player game and add it to the 2 player game.
I've never seen a link to it, and a google search isn't yielding an results, does anyone have any way of proving that this is actually an official fix?
-
Rich P
United Kingdom
Sheffield
United Kingdom
I didn't know what to do with my UberBadge, so I left it as a GeekBadge.
Back home after a world tour. How quickly a year goes...
-
I thought that fix was just for the 2-player Farmers of the Moor game. In several hundred games I've seen no reason for any fix to be applied to the 2-player base game.
-
Alexander McKinney
The Bahamas
Nassau
na
-
The only real reason I would be interested in the fix is that in a two player game you have no early access to stone, which can bar you from using some fun minor improvements.
Beyond that I'm honestly just curious to know if the fix is legitimate or an Agricola urban legend. Unfortunately I think that this might be slightly too niche an interest for snopes to have done the research for me.
-
Josh Martin
Canada
Mississauga
-
I was interested in this same thing; it seems that it's an urban legend. Also I don't see a need for a "fix" for the base game or with the Moor expansion. You could implement playing using this "variant" anyways to see how it works.
-
Chris F.
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
-
The post about the "official" fix is here, but it's by Ponton (works closely with Lookout Games), not Hanno (owner of Lookout games) or Uwe (designer of Agricola, of course). Legend has it that Uwe himself once posted it, but to my knowledge that post hasn't surfaced.
I used the card myself for awhile with regular Agricola, but then stopped after playing 2p on boiteajeux, where the card is not an option. Blocking tactics are the hallmark of 2p Agricola, and the 2-resource spot renders them much less useful.
I haven't played enough FotM with or without the card to have a strong opinion, but it seems to open up the FotM game more quickly than having to wait for stone.
-
-
cjfoster wrote: I haven't played enough FotM with or without the card to have a strong opinion, but it seems to open up the FotM game more quickly than having to wait for stone. Considering that FotM is balanced around the family game, which makes Day Laborer into 1 food + 1 building resource of your choice, that's not particularly surprising.
-
Fraser
Australia
Melbourne
Yep that was 12 Power Grid maps back to back over two days. Worth doing, but possibly not in such a concentrated burst.
Ooh yes, now a little to the left - my nose is itchy. No, no the other left! Now what colour is 12 supporter badge going to be I wonder?
-
cjfoster wrote: The post about the "official" fix is here, but it's by Ponton (works closely with Lookout Games), not Hanno (owner of Lookout games) or Uwe (designer of Agricola, of course).
I never seen an issue requiring a fix in two player Agricola.
-
Chris F.
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
-
Karlsen wrote: cjfoster wrote: The post about the "official" fix is here, but it's by Ponton (works closely with Lookout Games), not Hanno (owner of Lookout games) or Uwe (designer of Agricola, of course). That post is in a Farmer's of the Moor thread, not an Agricola thread. I never seen an issue requiring a fix in two player Agricola.
I know it came from a FotM thread. Ponton goes on to mention regular Agricola as well:
Ponton wrote: [COLOR=#000080]Official 2-player fix
As pointed out already by another user, the official fix is to add the 3-player family game action card "take two different building materials" at the start of the game. I've found, it not only fixes the expansion 2-player game, but also the basegame which suffered from extreme denial strategies.[/BGCOLOR]
By pointing to the source of the Official 2-player fix legend, I'm not necessarily condoning it.
-
Eddy Richards
Scotland
Allanton
Berwickshire
-
It may or may not be an official fix, but it's one I use - simply because it makes the game more fun, in my opinion. I usually play against my wife and we're not totally cut-throat which is perhaps why.
The possibility of earlier stone makes baking strategies more possible, along with other possible minor improvements.
It doesn't tend to get taken all that often - once or twice a game perhaps - but we like having the option. Other pairs of players may not, all you can do is try it and see.
I don't think 2 player Agricola needs a fix, it certainly plays perfectly well without any changes (we must have played dozens of games this way), but equally it's an easy game to tweak to suit your own tastes.
-
Richard Ham
Malta
Msida
One of our beagles (Taloula) is a bit of a camera hog
-
We're so glad we found this "semi-official" fix, because it really improved he game for us (husband and wife, non-aggressive players). It opens the door for a lot of cards that are otherwise much diminished in the 2p game. Highly recommended!
-
Alexander McKinney
The Bahamas
Nassau
na
-
Isn't the 3-player card take one resource of your choice?
-
Eddy Richards
Scotland
Allanton
Berwickshire
-
lexifer wrote: Isn't the 3-player card take one resource of your choice?
3 player family game card. Confusingly! This is 2 different resources (of your choice)
-
Alexander McKinney
The Bahamas
Nassau
na
-
Thanks for clearing that up for me
-
-
lexifer wrote: Thanks for clearing that up for me
3p Family game also has 1 resource of your choice. However, the Family game has no occupations, so the substitute is 2 _different_ (no picking the same) building resources of your choice (flip the occupation space).
I agree having more resources for 2p makes the game better for non-aggressive players. However, non-aggressive players should probably play co-op Agricola instead (The issue is, in my opinion, 2 player games should be either about helping yourself or hurting the other player. You only have 1 opponent - holding back makes no sense! You may disagree.)
-
-
zeroth hour wrote: [q="lexifer"](The issue is, in my opinion, 2 player games should be either about helping yourself or hurting the other player. You only have 1 opponent - holding back makes no sense! You may disagree.) It's all a matter of perspectives. I can beat you by making my farm more awesome than yours, or by making your farm more terrible than mine. Given that the game is, ultimately, about building a farm, it's not unreasonable for people to prefer the former approach over the latter. You have to get past the theme and think only in terms of game mechanics before the latter becomes appealing, I suspect. And if you don't want to do that, then a patch to the game that enforces your preferred playstyle isn't unreasonable. So long, of course, as both players are on-board.
In other words, this patch will mostly appeal to those people who, at the end of the game, like to look at their boards and admire what they've constructed. If they only have a three-room wooden hut, two fields, and a stable, then it'll be only small consolation that their opponent is in even more dire straits.
-
Rich P
United Kingdom
Sheffield
United Kingdom
I didn't know what to do with my UberBadge, so I left it as a GeekBadge.
Back home after a world tour. How quickly a year goes...
-
It could be said that making Stone available in the 2-player game from Round 1 unbalances some of the Improvements. I'm not sure how great this effect is, but I think some Improvements have a Stone cost as a balancing tool to prevent them from being played too early. What do you think?
-
Mike T
United States
Maryland
-
woodnoggin wrote: It could be said that making Stone available in the 2-player game from Round 1 unbalances some of the Improvements. I'm not sure how great this effect is, but I think some Improvements have a Stone cost as a balancing tool to prevent them from being played too early. What do you think?
It certainly changes the balance. Whether that change is good or bad is up to you.
In Farmers of the Moor, I think it makes the game much better and more interesting. In the base game, I don't really see the need.
-
Rich P
United Kingdom
Sheffield
United Kingdom
I didn't know what to do with my UberBadge, so I left it as a GeekBadge.
Back home after a world tour. How quickly a year goes...
-
smcmike wrote: In Farmers of the Moor, I think it makes the game much better and more interesting. In the base game, I don't really see the need.
Absolutely. That's how we always play. With Farmers of the Moor, I think it's important to be able to build Peat Charcoal Kiln (to name one example) before the accumulating Stone space appears. The fix there makes the game much more enjoyable.
-
fearful farful
United States
New Haven
Connecticut
-
In a 2-player game, remember that there is always the clay-denial strategy (or even reed-denial, which is much less severe) which makes the game a whole lot less fun. The 'variant/fix' is a way to overcome this.
-
Mike T
United States
Maryland
-
farful wrote: In a 2-player game, remember that there is always the clay-denial strategy (or even reed-denial, which is much less severe) which makes the game a whole lot less fun. The 'variant/fix' is a way to overcome this.
The other way to overcome this is playing well.
-
|
|
