Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
21 Posts

Blood Rage» Forums » General

Subject: Will it be good for two? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bruno Gaia
France
Asnières
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Being a Geek is a sure sign of a sound mind, cause it means you think that life as it is is dull and should be more interesting. Which it is.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As the title implies: always the great question of those among us who mainly play with their significant other.

So, any ideas so far?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Bauman
United States
Santa Cruz
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since it involves drafting, my hunch would be... probably not so great with two.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guilly Berto
United States
flag msg tools
In the comments section Thiago (playtester and I guess CMON employee) said it works fine 2 player, and that a good bit of his testing was done this way. It seems though, that you would know what cards the other player has drafted because you pick a few cards, then pass, then the other person picks, then they pass them back. I think I am understanding this correctly, meaning that you know what they would have picked and thus there would be no question who has what.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rodney "Watch It Played" Smith
Canada
Montague
Prince Edward Island
flag msg tools
badge
Join us to learn and watch games played at youtube.com/watchitplayed
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Guillyberto wrote:
In the comments section Thiago (playtester and I guess CMON employee) said it works fine 2 player, and that a good bit of his testing was done this way. It seems though, that you would know what cards the other player has drafted because you pick a few cards, then pass, then the other person picks, then they pass them back. I think I am understanding this correctly, meaning that you know what they would have picked and thus there would be no question who has what.


I would suspect the challenge at that point, isn't in knowing what people have, but trying to determine when they are going to use it.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Quebec
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree. I have serious doubts about the two player game. It seems like the map would be too open.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Lang
Canada
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In two player, the world is more constricted (three regions begin the game destroyed), and cards are drafted two at a time.

I believe it's a really good head-to-head experience, with a different texture to the 3 and 4 player version.

Eric
23 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Quebec
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eric Lang wrote:
In two player, the world is more constricted (three regions begin the game destroyed), and cards are drafted two at a time.

I believe it's a really good head-to-head experience, with a different texture to the 3 and 4 player version.

Eric


I totally missed the part about three regions being destroyed from the start. My apologies.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Marema
United States
Ellisville
MO
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well I was going to mention the changes that are made to support a better 2-player experience, but it appears a much more knowledgeable authority beat me to it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bruno Gaia
France
Asnières
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Being a Geek is a sure sign of a sound mind, cause it means you think that life as it is is dull and should be more interesting. Which it is.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Still expecting more feedback on my question but since Eric reacted here I take the opportunity to say this to him:

Man, your Warhammer Conquest LCG really is the epitomy of what a competitive card game should be. And we all agree (in the parisian competitive scene i belong to) that the more cards come out, the more interesting it gets. I now play two to three tourneys a months and none of us can get enough of it! So I believe the word that applies is: thanks

End of praise for Conquest
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pierre-Alexandre Fortin
Canada
Quebec city
QUEBEC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Would that be the answer for Chaos in the old world not being possible at 2, and not the best at 3 players?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adrian Calin
Romania
Bucharest
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It amazes me how few board games with the viking theme are out there (compared to other themes). So I feel like this is a must on theme alone for me, even thought I'll be playing mostly in 2 players. Might be my first Cool Mini or Not game...miniatures games are quite pricy.

Regarding the drafting issue discussed, you could just adopt the 7 wonders 2 player variant, where you have a virtual 3rd player for the drafting alone, and when you pass the cards there, you discard a card for him as well.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Christensen
United States
Nevada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Knowing every card the opponent has would make the 2 player experience less fun for me. I was thinking dealing each player 16 cards at the start then each player selects one card for their hand and then selects one card to discard from the game. Pass the remaining 14 cards then each player does the same thing again. Repeat this process until both players have 6 cards. Would this variant work out okay?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Canada
Quebec
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ClanNatioy wrote:
Knowing every card the opponent has would make the 2 player experience less fun for me. I was thinking dealing each player 16 cards at the start then each player selects one card for their hand and then selects one card to discard from the game. Pass the remaining 14 cards then each player does the same thing again. Repeat this process until both players have 6 cards. Would this variant work out okay?


I think this may lead to both players having much more focused hands, since they would have so much choice. Since both players would have the same advantage, it doesn't seem unbalanced, but it's hard to say without testing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
reaching out from the in-between spaces...
United States
Baldwin
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ClanNatioy wrote:
Knowing every card the opponent has would make the 2 player experience less fun for me. I was thinking dealing each player 16 cards at the start then each player selects one card for their hand and then selects one card to discard from the game. Pass the remaining 14 cards then each player does the same thing again. Repeat this process until both players have 6 cards. Would this variant work out okay?


But the idea here, like in 7 Wonders, isn't to NOT have any idea what the other players have, but wondering WHEN are they going to play that card you passed on.

This creates great bluffing opportunities that you take away. Unless of course you don't want bluffing in your games which is fair.

Jorune
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Christensen
United States
Nevada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jorune wrote:


But the idea here, like in 7 Wonders, isn't to NOT have any idea what the other players have, but wondering WHEN are they going to play that card you passed on.

This creates great bluffing opportunities that you take away. Unless of course you don't want bluffing in your games which is fair.

Jorune


You would still have some idea of what they had. Once you had the game down you would know that they either picked card x and discarded card y or picked card y and discard card x. This adds more to the bluffing because it adds uncertainty.

This would make the game more enjoyable with two players because it adds an unknown element. WHEN a player plays a card you know they have doesn't seem interesting. It usually wont matter to me when they play an upgrade or commit to a quest. In fact if I know they have a certain quest card it makes the game less interesting and less bluffing then if I knew they might have that quest card, this would make it so the opponent would have to try and fake me out or something so I don't mess with that quest objective. When a person plays a specific card only matters in combat.

Edit: oh and I'm a huuuuuuge fan of bluffing in games
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
reaching out from the in-between spaces...
United States
Baldwin
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ClanNatioy wrote:
Jorune wrote:


But the idea here, like in 7 Wonders, isn't to NOT have any idea what the other players have, but wondering WHEN are they going to play that card you passed on.

This creates great bluffing opportunities that you take away. Unless of course you don't want bluffing in your games which is fair.

Jorune


You would still have some idea of what they had. Once you had the game down you would know that they either picked card x and discarded card y or picked card y and discard card x. This adds more to the bluffing because it adds uncertainty.


So by what you're saying, after you have played the game numerous times THAN your variant kicks in and works? Until than your doing nothing more than adding more randomness, which is absolutely fine if you like that.

Seasons does card drafting with 2-players and it works just fine.

It *seems* you just don't want perfect information in the game, which I think is just fine. You want some randomness. That said, I like the rules as written. As Eric noted, the 2-player will be less random because of it and present a different strategy than 3-4 player.

Jorune
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Christensen
United States
Nevada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jorune wrote:


So by what you're saying, after you have played the game numerous times THAN your variant kicks in and works?

It *seems* you just don't want perfect information in the game, which I think is just fine. You want some randomness. That said, I like the rules as written. As Eric noted, the 2-player will be less random because of it and present a different strategy than 3-4 player.

Jorune


Yeah pretty much. I want games to be designed with lots of repeated plays in mind.

Generally I am not a fan of perfect information games. But I do enjoy some. Like BattleCON (maybe people don't count this because of simultaneous action selection?) and I enjoy Go but some of the magic might fade once I stop being bad at it.

It seems weird to me that at 3+ players you start out knowing nothing about the players hands but then when playing with 2 you will know 4 of the opponents 6 cards, once you are familiar with the game of course. I like games where I have to try and figure out what my opponent wants to do and not know what they want to do. When I have to figure out their plan and their style of play I am playing against a person instead of playing against a game state on the board.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Smales
United States
Rome
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Colonel Peter Gansevoort (1749 – 1812) Defender of Ft. Stanwix, Rome, N.Y., 1777
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eric Lang wrote:
In two player, the world is more constricted (three regions begin the game destroyed), and cards are drafted two at a time.

I believe it's a really good head-to-head experience, with a different texture to the 3 and 4 player version.

Eric


Late to the party, but I have to chime in after several two-player games.
In this mode, Blood Rage is tense, fast and full of tough decisions. Love it at this scale! So glad I finally got this to the table and looking forward to playing it regularly as a two-player contest.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Chiddicks
msg tools
ClanNatioy wrote:
Jorune wrote:


So by what you're saying, after you have played the game numerous times THAN your variant kicks in and works?

It *seems* you just don't want perfect information in the game, which I think is just fine. You want some randomness. That said, I like the rules as written. As Eric noted, the 2-player will be less random because of it and present a different strategy than 3-4 player.

Jorune


Yeah pretty much. I want games to be designed with lots of repeated plays in mind.

Generally I am not a fan of perfect information games. But I do enjoy some. Like BattleCON (maybe people don't count this because of simultaneous action selection?) and I enjoy Go but some of the magic might fade once I stop being bad at it.

It seems weird to me that at 3+ players you start out knowing nothing about the players hands but then when playing with 2 you will know 4 of the opponents 6 cards, once you are familiar with the game of course. I like games where I have to try and figure out what my opponent wants to do and not know what they want to do. When I have to figure out their plan and their style of play I am playing against a person instead of playing against a game state on the board.


You actually know only 2 of the 6 cards your opponent has.

The first 2 you don't see at all and the last 2 are any 2 from 4 possibilities. Its not too bad.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fabian
Switzerland
Bern
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ClanNatioy wrote:


Generally I am not a fan of perfect information games. But I do enjoy some. Like BattleCON (maybe people don't count this because of simultaneous action selection?) and I enjoy Go but some of the magic might fade once I stop being bad at it.


You're never going to stop being bad at Go.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dylan Grozdanich

Santa Clara
CA California
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The two-player game works. It's not bad, but it's not as awesome and epic as 4-5 players. But if you really want to play some blood rage and only have two players, it works.
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.