Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Caylus» Forums » Strategy

Subject: Correlation between winning and stone resource buildings rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joe Ganis
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Heya,

I'm a fair to good Caylus player, and I just wanted to see if this rings true for most of the other players. What I'd like to know is, how often do you tend to win if you built 2 of 3 of those buildings?

How about if you build all 3?

I've also played games where I made no overt errors and got blown out because I didn't build any of these buildings.

Thanks,
-JoeG
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Eisen
United States
Menlo Park
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Those buildings are pretty darned huge, at least if they can be built early enough on the track to get hit more than a couple of times. I'm not sure I like that some buildings are so big regardless of your strategy, but I think it's clear that they are.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think there's a correlation. Those are obviously good buildings to use, and therefore good buildings to own, but I don't think that in the grand scheme of things they win games on their own. If anything, they may be a groupthink thing... in my group, we were very fond of the buy 2 cubes for $2 building, so it was always built first, and always got used a lot... more recently we've moved away from that in favor of building more useful buildings for whatever strategy we're trying to impliment.

It would be easy for me to say that just about any strategy I'm interested in implimenting involves the Money favor track and a lot of income, that the 1-for-1/2-for-2 building is often a very useful building, so I should always build it first. I'm not sure that's the best play even in that case though.

- Seth
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the correlation is higher the more players in the game.

With 2 players, they are an advantage but not a huge one. Their advantage grows as you add players because: 1) You have less cubes per player, so getting a bonus one is more important. 2) There are more opponents picking them, so you will get a bonus cube more of the time. In 2 player, you can count on it giving a point and a cube 1/2 of the turns. In N player, it should pay off about (N-1)/N of the turns and the value of the cube increases.


In one of the two 2 players I lost on BSW I had all 3 production buildings. But my opponent got too much other stuff while I was attempting that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lucas Kruijswijk
Netherlands
Eindhoven
Unspecified
flag msg tools
I played a few games, but with experienced game players.

I think the correlation is rather large.

The reason is that the stone resource buildings give you the possibility of 'powerplay'.

I will explain this. When I played Caylus for the first two times, I tried to 'value' each item and action. I valued a resource 1.5 PP.

Given this value, the stone resoure building are good, no, very good.

However, I still underestimated something. While you are playing you convert resources in PP, however, you can't do the opposite. The player with the resource building gets a resource when someone uses it. The other players don't get this resource and they can't give up some PP to get this resource.

With this extra resource, the player can put pressure on the castle. By having some extra resources the player can threat to go to the castle and denying other players to get a Royal Favor. This is what I call 'powerplay'.

Also some 'powerplay' is involved in buying the Royal Favor on the track. If a player is the only player with a clothes, he can take this field at the end. If you have clothe resource, you can take it by yourself or at least force the other player to take it early. If you have the stone resource building that produces clothes, you induce constant pressure on the other players.

The stone resource building have very good return on investment, but the 'powerplay' make them really great.

Maybe the game is little off-balance here.

Lucas
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Meyer
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hard for me to state it better than Lucas and Alexfrog.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean McCarthy
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't played much 2 player, but in 3-4 player I think it is very, very, important. I think that the most important thing you can do in the early game is to set yourself up to buy a stone production building on the turn after the dungeon scores. This often means being first in the turn order and having cloth + food, or having more cubes than other people and winning the castle favor (though depending on the number of open spaces pre-gold mine, your building might get bumped past the gold mine if other people build, which sucks).

Building two of them is also very good, but don't expect your opponents to let it happen.

I think the other major part of winning is maneuvering correctly in phase three. You can get very screwed if you don't think about when the game will end, by being shut out of the castle with a lot of cubes, to not having enough money because you blew it all when you thought the game would end last turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
I think the correlation is higher the more players in the game.

With 2 players, they are an advantage but not a huge one. Their advantage grows as you add players because: 1) You have less cubes per player, so getting a bonus one is more important.

This I can see.
Quote:
2) There are more opponents picking them, so you will get a bonus cube more of the time. In 2 player, you can count on it giving a point and a cube 1/2 of the turns. In N player, it should pay off about (N-1)/N of the turns and the value of the cube increases.

In some of the games I've ;layed, people avoid placing in production buildings belonging to other players. I don't know if it's because they don't want to give points away, or if they don't want to give cubes away, or what. I'm not saying that's optimal or not, just my observation.

- Seth
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:

In some of the games I've played, people avoid placing in production buildings belonging to other players. I don't know if it's because they don't want to give points away, or if they don't want to give cubes away, or what. I'm not saying that's optimal or not, just my observation.


Thats pretty terrible play. But if thats the case, then I want the best produciton buildings. If they avoid them, I get them every time! Thats awesoem on a 3 cube building! And if they are really avoiding them, I dont even have to first pick them, like you normally have to do!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
david landes
United States
oak hill
Virginia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I only partially agree with the premise. Except as it is a function of an overall strategy that others are not interfering with... and letting the stone production building builder run hog wild... I think winning is more a function of exploiting the small advantages that are available any given turn.. and in 3-4 player games.. across to a second turn. Stone production buildings are nice to have built, no question, but there is just too much going on for it to be more than a small advantage. And if your opponents are watching, they should be making it expensive for you to exercise that path in terms of your opportunity costs, eliminating the advantage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
sedjtroll wrote:

In some of the games I've played, people avoid placing in production buildings belonging to other players. I don't know if it's because they don't want to give points away, or if they don't want to give cubes away, or what. I'm not saying that's optimal or not, just my observation.


Thats pretty terrible play. But if thats the case, then I want the best produciton buildings. If they avoid them, I get them every time! Thats awesoem on a 3 cube building! And if they are really avoiding them, I dont even have to first pick them, like you normally have to do!

If I remember right, maybe each player had 1 and everyone would go on their own but not on other players' buildings. And I'm not just talking gray production buildings... there was very little use of other people's buildings at all that game. Again, I'm not sayin git was good.

- Seth
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sedjtroll wrote:

If I remember right, maybe each player had 1 and everyone would go on their own but not on other players' buildings. And I'm not just talking gray production buildings... there was very little use of other people's buildings at all that game. Again, I'm not sayin git was good.

- Seth


Lets say I am one of those three, and I break that by going on somoene elses. If one of them goes on mine, the two of us get 4 cubes + 1 pt while the other guy gets 3 cubes. If they both still avoid mine, I take it and I get 6 cubes to 3 cubes to 0. (realistically, they are going on 2 cube places, so its more like 6 to 5 to 4. Thats a gain.

If on two turns, I use each of the other guys once, they each use mine once and their own once, I get a total of 8 cubes, 2 pts, they each get 7 cubes and 1 pt. Net gain over both.


Its not a huge gain, but it is there.


I have found in 2 player caylus that building all three yourself is really NOT that amazing. Which surprises me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Dawson
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
I have found in 2 player caylus that building all three yourself is really NOT that amazing. Which surprises me.


Wow, I have found it an almost unbeatable advantage. (This is especially true when you have the $6 market, and money is therefore not a problem for you.) In a round you are first, you get 7 cubes to your opponents 3. When your opponent is first you get 5 cubes to your opponents 6. That is 12 cubes to 9 advantage, or 1.5 cubes more a round. After building the three stone production buildings, you need to hit the residences hard and fast...getting 2 in the next couple of rounds. This is not generally a problem though because you have such a cube advantage over your opponent. In fact I scored 201 points on a guy the other day when I got all three stone production buildings. (He made several other mistakes as well, but a big one was letting me get all three.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, I think its quite good, but not unbeatable.
I've raised my opinion of them back up some from when I last posted that.

They are worth going after.

Being down 3-0 or 2-0 on production buildings is far worse than being down 2-1 or 1-0.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Dawson
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
Being down 3-0 or 2-0 on production buildings is far worse than being down 2-1 or 1-0.


I totally agree. Being down one stone production building is manageable. It's only 1 PP and 1/2 cube a round. But being down 3-0 is "almost" unbeatable. I didn't even mention in my post the almost guaranteed 1.5 PP a round from those buildings if you own all 3. There is no guaranteed win, but that is an almost insurmountable positional advantage in my experience (being up 3-0 that is).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ng Kelvin
Hong Kong
Hong Kong
flag msg tools
mbmb
I would stand on Alexfrog's side. I concentrate on 3-player games on BSW and believe that there is an clear advantage for the player who built 2 or more stone resource buildings.

This is not difficult to imagine, say for example when you have built 2 such buildings, you go last and your opponents grab 1 each. Each of your opponent gets 3 cubes, but it is not really bad for you: 2VP plus 2cubes and you can also choose the type.

I noticed that it is even a bigger advantage if there are not enough source of cubes, that's because there is a fierce competition on resources and you can always sit back and get something free.

Nevertheness I would also like to stress that a player who built all 3 buildings is advantageous, but not unbeatable. I have just beat such a player in a 3-player game yesterday.

In that game although the player managed to build those buildings, but on the other hand he is also forgiving too much, in terms of money, position advantage and favors. In most part of the game he is very poor and I put stress on him by locking the main cash flow and finally succeeded.

I agree the stone resource buildings are good and strong, but you will simply goes out when you are paying too much to it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the stone prodution buildings are important to the game, and thus there needs to be incentive to build them. Its a race to get them down, in the midgame. But everyone knows it, so they should fight over the opportunity.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Eisen
United States
Menlo Park
CA
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I don't think they're any more key to the game than the mason (brown building that lets you build stone buildings) is, the mason is critical to the obvious building progression. And yet there is almost disincentive to build the mason when really, those cubes and tempos are generally better spent elsewhere.

I will stand by my position that the stone production buildings are overpowered and the game would be more interesting if they weren't.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Dawson
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Puyo wrote:
I would stand on Alexfrog's side. I concentrate on 3-player games on BSW and believe that there is an clear advantage for the player who built 2 or more stone resource buildings.


No, I absolutely agree. With more than 2 players the advantage is magnified.

Puyo wrote:
Nevertheless I would also like to stress that a player who built all 3 buildings is advantageous, but not unbeatable. I have just beat such a player in a 3-player game yesterday.

In that game although the player managed to build those buildings, but on the other hand he is also forgiving too much, in terms of money, position advantage and favors. In most part of the game he is very poor and I put stress on him by locking the main cash flow and finally succeeded.

I agree the stone resource buildings are good and strong, but you will simply goes out when you are paying too much to it.


I understand your point. I make sure that I build the market($6)and so money is not generally an issue for me. And as you pointed out, they didn't play very well. I don't think I'll ever lose a game that I build all three stone production buildings, unless I make a disastrous tactical mistake. blush If anyone thinks they would be able to beat me when I build three, I'll gladly take you on. Maybe I'll learn something. I just don't see it, unless the owner of the three totally throws away the game.
 
 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.