Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
24 Posts

Suburbia Inc» Forums » General

Subject: Desert Border tile overpowered? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Unless I've misunderstood the rules you can build a Desert border tile for $6 against a lake for an immediate gain of 5 income per round.

It's easy to point it out into an area that you don't need to build and can therefore avoid paying the $10 penalty per tile.

No other tile offers an immediate $5 income gain by itself at the start of the game.

On a later turn you can place an investment marker on the desert border for a total outlay of $12 for an increased income of 10.

It's a pity about the lake loophole. Also encouraging lakes by a desert is incongruous on a number of fronts.

Edit for clarification about Car Dealership.

Added 8th Jan 2014...

In answer to my own question, I do not now think the desert tile is overpowered. That's because if either the Desert or the Radioactive Waste Site were available at the start, the designer has ensured that neither could be built on the first turn. That way anyone could turn them into a lake if they wanted too.

And if, as I pointed out below, the Desert tile was lucky enough to be turned over on turn 2 then hey you've just struck oil in the desert

For those with imagination there's a multitude of stories to be made up about the pluses and minuses of placing each tile. And that's an aspect of the game that should not be overlooked.

Dig deep enough and you can justify the values on every single one of these tiles.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ted Alspach
United States
Louisville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Preorder Ultimate Werewolf Legacy now from beziergames.com
badge
Ultimate Werewolf Legacy
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve99 wrote:
Unless I've misunderstood the rules you can build a Desert border tile for $6 against a lake for an immediate gain of 5 income per round.

It's easy to point it out into an area that you don't need to build and can therefore avoid paying the $10 penalty per tile.

No other tile offers an immediate $5 income gain by itself.

On a later turn you can place an investment marker on the desert border for
A total outlay of $12 for an increased income of 10.

It's a pity about the lake loophole. Also encouraging lakes by a desert is incongruous on a number of fronts.


It is designed to work that way. That missing lake icon is by design.

I'm glad to see another tile called "overpowered" though...at last count, that's about twenty of them in both the game and expansion. Soon the forum threads will be "Is tile x underpowered?"



20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ted Alspach
United States
Louisville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Preorder Ultimate Werewolf Legacy now from beziergames.com
badge
Ultimate Werewolf Legacy
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Steve99 wrote:
Also encouraging lakes by a desert is incongruous on a number of fronts.


That would be referred to as an oasis. And those are pretty awesome to have in your town.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Burkett
United States
Warsaw
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
*cough* New Car Dealership *cough*
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you for the quick response Ted. I take your point about the number of tiles that players have identified as overpowered.

However, I still don't understand why the Desert border tile would deliberately exclude the lake.

It means that by the end of turn 3 a player could be earning 10 income and no other combination of tiles comes close to that for such a low cost: 12.

Of the standard tiles, Fancy Restaurant could provide an increased income of 6 after 2 turns for a cost of 18 but there is a real risk of the income being significantly reduced by the building of further restaurants.

Of the new tiles the Sports Complex and Train Tracks are the closest options to matching the Desert but they cost about 3 times as much (18 and 17) and thereby prevent being doubled by an investment marker until several turns later.

The only counter is that another player turns the Desert into a Lake and this will be the obvious choice for anyone who can't afford to build the desert on turn 1. But the luck of the draw may just present the Desert border tile to a player without the opportunity to counter and then it is what it is: a no-brainer if you are lucky enough to grab it first.

Including the lake icon in the $10 penalty would have added some safeguard against that IMHO.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Burkett
United States
Warsaw
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That's all definitely true, but I think you're overstating how easy it is to play out the desert as you're saying. You'd have to have built a lake in an accessible position, which may or may not have been a suboptimal play in of itself.

I agree that if you have a lake that can accept a desert (without that desert touching anything else) then sure, it's a great tile to buy. But there's some not insignificant wrangling you'll need to do to get a lake in the proper spot ahead of time to entirely avoid the -$10 penalty.

Plus, you're essentially removing two spots from a lake that are no longer accessible thanks to the desert border. That's a potential additional cost of another 4 bucks. Not enormous, but worth considering as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Cheng
Taiwan
Taipei City
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
I don't know, you spend 3 turn building a lake, a desert, and an investment. You have +10 income, sure, but what you lost is a portion of your area prohibited to build, at least until later turn. And you lose building up your area as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the reminder that the car dealership is also 5 income but it is a C tile that won't enter the game at the start which is the issue I was trying to raise.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
eunoia wrote:
I don't know, you spend 3 turn building a lake, a desert, and an investment. You have +10 income, sure, but what you lost is a portion of your area prohibited to build, at least until later turn. And you lose building up your area as well.


As I say, you can build the desert off in a direction that won't impair you too much and while you may not be leading by turn 3, you will be in a superior position to use that extra cash flow for the rest of the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Mair
United States
Roy
Utah
flag msg tools
The Meeple Nation Boardgame Podcast - 30 minutes a week!
badge
BGGCon 2015 or Bust
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I hope it is OPed! Can't wait to get this game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
California
flag msg tools
Steve99 wrote:
Thank you for the quick response Ted. I take your point about the number of tiles that players have identified as overpowered.

However, I still don't understand why the Desert border tile would deliberately exclude the lake.


Because you're thinking mechanically instead of thematically.

Thematically, it's more expensive to build in a desert because the lack of water makes it harder to build and support offices, civil buildings, residences, and industry.

Granted, it would make the lake dry up quicker too, but like he said...oasis.

You want to talk about overpowered tricksiness?

First Turn: Build the black Redevelopment Planning tile first turn up and to one side of your initial Heavy Factory.

Second Turn: Build the Radioactive Waste Site vertically, with it's bottom indent on the Redev. tile, and the rest going up and out of the way. Notice that you don't lose people because the black tile is not any of the five tile types that lose you people.

Third Turn: Do something cheap, lake something good.

Fourth Turn: Reinvest in the Waste Site.

10 income in 4 turns for $21 with null downside, unless you actually end up swapping out the black tile.

You might be able to do better with a perfect blue cluster, but not for so cheap.

I did almost exactly this, except I got enough other income tiles I didn't even have to bother investing in the Waste Site, and near the end of the B stack, I swapped the RP for a Casino, lost the 7 people then, and was flush with cash until the end.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
OK good point. Having an oasis means less cost to provide water. But where's the income coming from in the Desert? Gambling, perhaps

Another interesting play Ian but your 10 income in 4 turns for $21 doesn't come close to my 10 income in 3 turns for $12
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Brown
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Why build a lake?

Build something that gives income on the first turn (a heavy factory or blue building). Second turn build a desert (or Radioactive Wasteland), bottom out your money/pop. Then invest in it again next turn (again bottoming out).

You now have over 10 income and don't have to worry about crossing a line for a while. Save up for a Casino and you're set.

It is very powerful, I have not played it enough to have an opinion on whether it is too powerful yet.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
steven smolders
Belgium
Heist-op-den-Berg
Antwerpen
flag msg tools
badge
Love to play boardgames with my family and spending time toghter
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
well if you have a lake + your investment tile on it + the tile that gives you +2$ for evey tile thats connected to a lake it would give you 8$ per tile you lay next to the lake. Wouldnt that be overpowered as wel ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
California
flag msg tools
Steve99 wrote:
OK good point. Having an oasis means less cost to provide water. But where's the income coming from in the Desert? Gambling, perhaps

Another interesting play Ian but your 10 income in 4 turns for $21 doesn't come close to my 10 income in 3 turns for $12


Hah, very true.

But mine still has the Redevelopment Planner which can be leveraged later on for interesting things.

Honestly, I don't really think anything in the game is overpowered, especially now that there are so many ways to get income and rep.

I really love County Assessor, especially an invested one, $4 rebates on every tile is like having every tile touch a lake with a Waterfront Realty, it's fucking fantastic.

I really want to try a game with Cemetary and an Investment Property, but they haven't come out in a game together, or at times when I could buy them together.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just to be clear this is a great game irrespective of any balance issues. An experienced set of players should be able to identify and counter the majority of high powered tiles.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Michael Hickey
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ad_hoc wrote:
Why build a lake?

Build something that gives income on the first turn (a heavy factory or blue building). Second turn build a desert (or Radioactive Wasteland), bottom out your money/pop. Then invest in it again next turn (again bottoming out).

You now have over 10 income and don't have to worry about crossing a line for a while. Save up for a Casino and you're set.

It is very powerful, I have not played it enough to have an opinion on whether it is too powerful yet.


The idea of building a lake is to avoid having to pay $10 to build the Desert next to a colour tile.

Losing $10 early on is prohibitive.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
California
flag msg tools
ad_hoc wrote:
Why build a lake?

Build something that gives income on the first turn (a heavy factory or blue building). Second turn build a desert (or Radioactive Wasteland), bottom out your money/pop. Then invest in it again next turn (again bottoming out).


Many problems with your assumptions here. The main issue is that it's against the rules. If you can't pay the negative costs of the border, you can't buy it. If you buy an income tile on the first turn, you can't build a RWS because you don't have 7 people to lose. You'd have the $10 for the Desert, but only if you bought a Heavy Factory, and not a blue, but if you were going to do that, the lake is better.

The only way to get an RWS out second is to build a Mobile Home Community to get up to 8 pop or a Redevelopment planner that doesn't cost you the penalty.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Brown
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Ian559 wrote:
[q="ad_hoc"] The main issue is that it's against the rules.



Thanks for the clarification. I had to recheck the rules. Turns out they are special exemptions for those tiles.

I would have appreciated a heading for negative effect tiles in the standard rules page. Under borders it only mentions paying their costs, not their effects when you place it. (The -10$ and -7people are effects not costs).

In fact, I don't see anywhere that it says you must be able to pay their costs when investing. It says when placing the border and placing a new tile adjacent to it.

Is this intentional? It seems like a mistaken omission if you have to pay for negative effects in other cases where you are paying for things.

In light of this the lake tile placement seems like a wonky exception for placing an early desert. This handles the question of being overpowered nicely though. If I see someone lake first turn in anticipation of the desert then I may turn the desert into a lake to stop it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Cheng
Taiwan
Taipei City
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
ad_hoc wrote:
Ian559 wrote:
[q="ad_hoc"] The main issue is that it's against the rules.



Thanks for the clarification. I had to recheck the rules. Turns out they are special exemptions for those tiles.

I would have appreciated a heading for negative effect tiles in the standard rules page. Under borders it only mentions paying their costs, not their effects when you place it. (The -10$ and -7people are effects not costs).

In fact, I don't see anywhere that it says you must be able to pay their costs when investing. It says when placing the border and placing a new tile adjacent to it.

Is this intentional? It seems like a mistaken omission if you have to pay for negative effects in other cases where you are paying for things.

In light of this the lake tile placement seems like a wonky exception for placing an early desert. This handles the question of being overpowered nicely though. If I see someone lake first turn in anticipation of the desert then I may turn the desert into a lake to stop it.


See the glossary of the tiles and borders. It also apply to tiles like "Cemetery" and "Water Purification Plant".

And the lake is nothing wonky, it's part of the design.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Brown
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
eunoia wrote:

See the glossary of the tiles and borders. It also apply to tiles like "Cemetery" and "Water Purification Plant".

And the lake is nothing wonky, it's part of the design.


Can you be more specific? I don't see where it says it applies to investing.

I suppose I just find it to be a counter-intuitive rule in general. That is not to say that it is a bad rule. It is just a criticism of how the rule book is written. The expansion includes a new rule that applies to all negative effects of $/people that the new tiles cause and yet it is only stated on the reference part for each tile. It should have its own section so that the rule is well understood. You can, for instance, build the community park while at -5 income.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian M
United States
California
flag msg tools
ad_hoc wrote:
eunoia wrote:

See the glossary of the tiles and borders. It also apply to tiles like "Cemetery" and "Water Purification Plant".

And the lake is nothing wonky, it's part of the design.


Can you be more specific? I don't see where it says it applies to investing.


That's an interesting point, I'm not sure how that would apply when investing then. However, when you invest, all effects happen again, so my assumption is that if you can't deal with all the effects, then you can't invest.

Quote:
It should have its own section so that the rule is well understood. You can, for instance, build the community park while at -5 income.


Also true. I'm sure the 15 and -5 limits are for balance, even if you could theoretically make more money or be more in debt.

Thematically and realistically, you can never have less than 0 people in a city, so those cost limits make sense to me.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Daniel Fish
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I think the Desert is overpowered. It's pretty common to have a lake at the periphery of your suburb with a few sides exposed. $6 for +5 income is just too good, i don't care if I limit future building space.

Moreover, the Desert seems like the least thematically-justified tile. Why in the world would a Desert provide more municipal income than just about every other tile in the game? More than high end businesses, more than shopping centers or airports? If it had been called Oil Field or Gas Wells it would have made more sense.

I played a game last night where I got the desert early (and put it on an incidental peripheral lake, and invested in it) and went on to dominate my opponents 147-55-47. They didn't play great games, but I jumped from 3 income to 13 income in two rounds and never had to worry about income again in the game. It felt wrong.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United Kingdom
Hinckley
Leics
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've found that almost EVERY tile is overpowered: if it's used at the right time.
1 
 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.