JasX X
United Kingdom
London, UK
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
So having got a few plays under our belts in my gaming group there have been a few comments that the 4 player game seems more fun than the 5 player game as it's much harder to be completely sure of team numbers and whether there is a lone wolf out there or not?

A few 5 player games have crunched when 3 players start playing overtly for one side (usually loyalist) and just hammer the other 2 earlier in the game having deduced by default they are the enemy.

The deck being comprised 3 plus 3 does seem to limit the team options somewhat for a 5 player game, anyone else found this and think the game would benefit from more potential 'team composition' flexibility in the 5 player game?

In practice it'll be 3 v 2 'most' games, but the remote possibility of something unusual going on seems like it'd be good for the paranoia levels in the 5 player game.

I expect some deck building would be needed so smaller games still play the same ie "in a 2-4 player game build a deck comprising 3 loyalist and 3 restorationist role cards, in a 5 player game build the deck from 4 loyalist and 4 restroationist roles"

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gordon Watson
United Kingdom
Banstead
Surrey - United Kingdom
flag msg tools
ASL - other tactical wargames call it Sir.
badge
Beneath this mask there is an idea.....and ideas are bulletproof.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It would have been nice to have the option.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JasX X
United Kingdom
London, UK
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Well I think my group is going to start playing the 5 player game subbing in some resistance/avalon cards for the good/bad role cards so we can build a 4-4 deck.

I wonder if this was tried during the playtest phase?. I'll report back on how it goes (if it works really well maybe we can pester Treefrog to print extra role cards when they fix the token error they've hinted they'll do, and/or make them available as an unofficial BGG add on 'buy an extra/two extra pairs of role cards for £5' -would help anyone who spills coffee on them replace them too /*wild pipe dream* ;p)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich P
United Kingdom
Sheffield
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
I didn't know what to do with my UberBadge, so I left it as a GeekBadge.
badge
Planning...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In a 3 vs 2 game, the larger team could concentrate on crushing the smaller, but only one of those three will eventually win. So maybe it's in your best interests to leave this work to the other two on your team, while you concentrate on getting more points than them. If everyone feels the same way, the smaller team has a chance to catch up. If it's being played as a pure team game, then 3 vs 2 would be unfair. But if everyone remembers that there's only one winner, a more interesting dynamic can be established.

This is what I find particularly fun about the game: you can ally with other players, but how far do you want to go in that direction before you're helping them too much?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JasX X
United Kingdom
London, UK
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
@rich p

Quite but why does the *certainty* that it'll be a 3 v 2 game need to be there?

IMO the increased certainty in team makeup being there from the start is less desireable and needing to be paranoid about a 4v1 situation potentially adds to the complexity/confusion and overall enjoyment.

Like I said still more testing required my end.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich P
United Kingdom
Sheffield
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
I didn't know what to do with my UberBadge, so I left it as a GeekBadge.
badge
Planning...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, in 3 vs 2 there's still the uncertainty about which side is the larger.

Perhaps extra loyalty cards weren't included because Martin thought 4 vs 1 would be unbalanced in some way (although that's unlikely given the Designer Notes where he claims not to know which side the game favours). Perhaps he didn't want to include extra rules around how to construct a loyalty deck prior to each game, or perhaps he just didn't think of it.

If you try out this variant, I'd be interested to hear if you find 4 vs 1 games to still be balanced (or if not, at least to produce a fun game). I think I'd like being the 1 in that game - you only have to do better than one other player to win and it should be possible to keep your head down and your true loyalty secret among the confusion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Turczi
United Kingdom
London
England
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The way I see it, 4v1 could go a few ways:

- if the lone player is a restorationist, he can quickly snag a few big points (assassinate a 5 or 7 royal) before the other 4 realize they share a team), and just hang onto his hat while the others fight out all the big scoring loyalist cards (hide royalty, vampires, zombies, etc), and try to get himself mad as quickly as possible. If it succeeds chances are, he won't be the last, so the loyalist players will have pretty much 0 chances to win. But if he falters even a bit (or gets unlucky on double agents) he's pretty much immediately dead. This is already a small issue in 3v1, with a lone restorationist, where the 1 either dies too easily or manages to leave 1 loyalist behind and end the game to make the other loyalists lose. 4v1 would just enlarge these problems.
- if the lone player is a loyalist, he's pretty much dead if the restorationists are capable. His only hope is to hammer on one player til morning, hoping the other players won't be able to finish the game before the war track slowly creeps up to evil-friendly levels.


The fact that there can be a 3v1 is wild enough. It's just barely on this side of sane. Don't tempt the monsters of the unspeakable depths!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J M
United States
Scottdale
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Someone suggested cards from other games. You can also use regular playing cards, eg, Hearts for Restorationists, Spades for Loyalists, and include as many as you like (five of each even for a chance of an all anarchist game- why not).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Dearlove
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
Essex
flag msg tools
SoRCon 11 23-25 Feb 2018 Basildon UK http://www.sorcon.co.uk
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
An aside, someone described vampires as a good Loyalist card. Of course it is. But it works fine for a Restorationist too. An indestructible agent makes a good royalty killer. And you can frighten off other agents, or put a dent in their plans by taking agents off them. (In fact you may do this to cycle the card.)

Of course you don't get the VPs, but nothing's perfect.
2 
 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.