Tom Hazel
United States
Sammamish
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
BlackSheep wrote:

Falantrius wrote:
a) its equal to an A style board 3-5-7 - you get three stages to do it in. Board total for 3 stages is 15 Victory.
b) that it fits the design theme set out for this board (Cthulhu) In this board, the last STAGE is what happens if you wake up them up (both hard to do and scary if you do).... otherwise, all is calm.

Thing is that if you want the wonder to give 15VPs in three stages, and you're wedded to the nothing-nothing-awesome setup for thematic reasons, then by definition you're going to get a wonder that lags behind Giza A.

I can't argue with the theme decision, but I think it's problematic for balance purposes. R'Lyeh's first two stages are worthless, comparing poorly to just selling the cards for coins. So you either risk not completing it or hold off until you have all the resources needed to finish it before starting, which probably means using second and third age cards to build it. The payoff isn't big enough to make up for it.

I think I'd probably go for the standard 3-something-7 build for the A side, to represent Chtulhu rousing and returning to slumber. And then a two-stage B-side along the lines of Petra, with a somewhat weak first stage and a big but costly second stage, for Cthulhu actally awakening. But not to such extremes.


There are a couple things that I absolutely love about this board. The first is the conceptual design. The messed up stages running in reverse and its art are just top notch for me. That in additional the tentacles everyone is just a bonus. Most wont even notice the EYE looking through the Victory Points on the last stage.

Stage 1 is meant to be a free card bury.
Stage 2 gives everyone 6 coins for only a cost of two (Linen and Ore) - the Glass is Free. Unlike Giza that gives 5 points for three wood
Stage 3 is where all the cost is - the 6 coin "Tax" doesnt do anything if you aren't playing Cities but the 6 cost for the stage is free if they saved their coins. If players are playing with cities, they usually just sit the 6 coins aside waiting for stage 3 build. The player then have to get Papyrus, Stone and an additional ore for the 14 points.

Originally this board was one stage - what you see for stage 3 minus the 6 coin cost but the 1st and 2nd stages got added later to allow the player to bury more cards and so that the 6 coin TAX on the third stage wasnt as painful. So far this board has played well in all our play tests.

So I am not following how many victory you would make stage 2 - if its like Petra - its 14 Victory - which would be unbalanced in my opinion. Might was well just increase stage 3 of the current Side A.

Which bets the point - you say that the payoff isnt big enough to make up for it. So how many Victory Points WOULD be enough payoff?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Wilson
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Falantrius wrote:
There are a couple things that I absolutely love about this board. The first is the conceptual design. The messed up stages running in reverse and its art are just top notch for me. That in additional the tentacles everyone is just a bonus. Most wont even notice the EYE looking through the Victory Points on the last stage.


I've never argued with the art and graphics of Lost Wonders, they're excellent all-round.

Falantrius wrote:
Stage 1 is meant to be a free card bury.


You say that like it's a benefit. Burying a card for 1VP is essentially wasting a turn. There are zero-cost blue cards in Age I that give two or three VPs. Heck, selling for three coins is better than building for 1VP.

Falantrius wrote:
Stage 2 gives everyone 6 coins for only a cost of two (Linen and Ore) - the Glass is Free. Unlike Giza that gives 5 points for three wood


Again, there's a zero-cost Age I card that gives five coins to me and none to everyone else. Using a card to benefit everyone at the table equally is another wasted turn.

Falantrius wrote:
Originally this board was one stage - what you see for stage 3 minus the 6 coin cost but the 1st and 2nd stages got added later to allow the player to bury more cards and so that the 6 coin TAX on the third stage wasnt as painful.


Wait, so you think adding the first two stages benefitted R'Lyeh?

The one-stage version of this wonder would have been hugely powerful, letting you get all the benefit with one action instead of three.

Falantrius wrote:
So I am not following how many victory you would make stage 2 - if its like Petra - its 14 Victory - which would be unbalanced in my opinion.


Of course it would be. I'm not sure why you interpreted 'a two-stage B-side along the lines of Petra' as 'all the benefits of Petra but without the high cost'.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Levan
United States
Glenside
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I have my own custom boards, and one uses a similar power to Lhasa's third age (change one symbol). When I was creating it, I decided that one symbol change isn't enough. Since you have to lose one symbol to gain another, the trade in points is often small.
I started making some tables and computing some combinations, but I haven't exhaustively calculated the difference. What I did find was that on average (across many games with varying numbers of science cards), only one symbol change is worth around 4 points. I did the same computations for changing up to 2 symbols, and found it only increased it a little bit, to an average of 5.
You start getting larger swings once you have at least 5 of the same symbol type, (using the leaders, or some cities cards that let you copy symbols). With one change allowed, you get 1-15 point swings, and with up to 2 changes, you can get 15-20 point swings. But those are very rare cases, and most of the time, you get fewer than 5 points, and there are cases where you already have the most points you can get from any given combination of symbols.
On my own custom board (completely separate from Lost Wonders), I use 2 changes as a stage 2 power (based on my estimate of 5 points on average). The rare large point swing (that is only possible if you already have enough cards to get a large science score) acts as a reward for careful playing that enabled you to set it up. Other players should be watching, so they do not let you get that far on science.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Levan
United States
Glenside
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
BlackSheep wrote:

There are zero-cost blue cards in Age I that give two or three VPs.


Yes, but you don't have to build it in stage 1. I think it's a great trade off. Since you don't need to build the wonder early in the game, you can minimize your resources, and bury cards that others could get large points from, that you wouldn't be able to build any way. If it were one stage, you only need one build to get all the wonder points, and it seems over-powered since you still have time to build lots of points in the third age. The way it is, you have to spend time burying cards to get there.

It would be great to be able to pick and choose Gizah's B stage, and R'Lyeh's third stage, (Isn't that what Mannekin Pis does?) but the board stages don't need to be balanced between wonders or the other available cards, they just need to be balanced internally.
I understand the argument that A sides should be more evenly balanced stage-by-stage, to assist beginners, but we can assume people adding these wonders aren't beginners, and even if they are, they are not forced to use the wonders. Select from any of the other more evenly balanced wonders. Or perhaps just consider the second stage power to be "Unbalance the wonder". Fits with the Lovecraftian theme of chaos. goo
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Wilson
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sivilized wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:

There are zero-cost blue cards in Age I that give two or three VPs.


Yes, but you don't have to build it in stage 1.


Of course not, but the later you build it the greater the opportunity cost. Wasting third-age actions is worse than wasting first-age actions.

Sivilized wrote:
I think it's a great trade off. Since you don't need to build the wonder early in the game, you can minimize your resources, and bury cards that others could get large points from, that you wouldn't be able to build any way.


Any wonder lets you bury cards, it's just that normally you get a benefit for doing so, at least equal to a decent Age I card.

Selling lets you bury cards as well, but it's not someting you do except when you need to, because it gives you very little benefit.

Sivilized wrote:
If it were one stage, you only need one build to get all the wonder points, and it seems over-powered since you still have time to build lots of points in the third age. The way it is, you have to spend time burying cards to get there.


Yeah, I'm really not suggesting it should be a single stage that gives you 15VPs eiter.

Sivilized wrote:
It would be great to be able to pick and choose Gizah's B stage, and R'Lyeh's third stage, (Isn't that what Mannekin Pis does?) but the board stages don't need to be balanced between wonders or the other available cards, they just need to be balanced internally.


I agree you can't just look at the individual stages, but you can't just look at the total either. R'Lyeh A is precisely balanced with Giza A in terms of the overall finished wonder; they give exactly the same total benefit.

The problem, as I see it, is that R'Lyeh's progression effectively going 1/0/14 makes it flat-out worse than Giza going 3/5/7.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Levan
United States
Glenside
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't agree that a third age action is always worth more than a third age action. On average, yes, I would bet that building the wonder earlier minimizes the opportunity cost. But not always. For example, if I have wonder spaces open in age III, it might mean that I was able to get a key resource, or start a building chain in age I that I benefited from. If I then bury 2 age III cards I couldn't build or didn't need and get 14 points, while hurting my neighbor, the opportunity cost if the age III card is much different.

Of course, there is a risk to waiting, but there is also a potential reward. But I think that comes back to the question of using it for beginners or not, and I think on that point, we were agreed that it is not a beginner's board.

All I'm really saying is that, in my opinion, you don't need to get a net gain for every wonder stage. And while that doesn't suit everyone's playing style, it adds variety, and I see that as a good thing. That's what I like most about this wonder pack. It gives something for everyone.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wong HS
msg tools
Commenting on eldorado here:
We played a 3 person game with leader expansion and cities on Side B boards.i realized with eldorado, the player end up with tonnes of money as much as 26 pts. Imagine if the player got hold of the gamers guild, he would get another 26 points. If he also got hold the leader card with similar ability, it's another 26. With coins and 2 cards, it's a whooping 78 points which is ridiculous.

Of course, you might question the probability of having these 2 cards in play together is extremely small so it's not a big deal. However, what makes me abit uncomfortable is the fact that one card alone gain 26 points. It's equivalent to like 2 sets of science card(6cards), military vp won from 3 rounds on neibours, four civilian cards with 5,6,7,8 vp each(4cards). When I think from this perspective, I feel that it's not very fair and balanced any more. From my experience with eldorado board in play, players at least get 14-18 coins from the game. Basically,I imagined that who ever gets card with gamers guild ability should win that game and by quite a big difference.

Then, the gameplay becomes luck dependent. Because we play 4 rounds per set, catching up becomes a big problem. Would like to hear from you on this. Thank you very much.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wong HS
msg tools
Just a random thought, how about designing a board that encourages discarding of cards? Like every card the players discard, he gets two coins on top of the 3 and/or other players forfeit 1 coin for example ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kenneth Stuart
United States
Melbourne
Florida
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This was said elsewhere before now:
Dominion A stage 3 should show 1VP (estate) and 6VP (province) instead of just 7VP
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Hazel
United States
Sammamish
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Sivilized wrote:
All I'm really saying is that, in my opinion, you don't need to get a net gain for every wonder stage. And while that doesn't suit everyone's playing style, it adds variety, and I see that as a good thing. That's what I like most about this wonder pack. It gives something for everyone.




That is a very important point - and something we have to take into consideration. I know some players that will either build one stage or no stages of a Wonder and win. Shima has stated he has played El Dorado just to get the extra coin and never built any of the stages. Its very common for more experienced players to minimize resource purchase, minimize stage building and focus on how many points they can gain each round for what they spend.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Hazel
United States
Sammamish
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
naka88 wrote:
Just a random thought, how about designing a board that encourages discarding of cards? Like every card the players discard, he gets two coins on top of the 3 and/or other players forfeit 1 coin for example ?


I've considered a stage of el dorado that grants 4 coins for each discard vs 3. not worth it in play test, give 5 coins per discard I considered but didnt go there because it just didnt seem interesting enough.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Levan
United States
Glenside
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I think anything that encourages discarding (except to a limited extent, maybe one card per age) decreases the level of interaction in the game. Especially if the player has Midas in his hand, that would really encourage discarding.

Did you ever play El Dorado while including Leaders? I am concerned that it could becomes unbalanced with Midas or the Gamers Guild in play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wong HS
msg tools
Yes, we played w the leaders and precisely that's the point. With Midas and gamers guild, one card like these could earn many points, making the game very unbalanced.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.