Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Leonardo da Vinci» Forums » General

Subject: Orthogonality of invention components rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Doesn't it strike anyone else as odd that all the inventions types have the same composition pattern as all the others? If A represents the basic component of a given invention type, B the next component, C the next, etc. then each invention type is always composed of: A AB AAD AAEE AACC. As shown here:



Wouldn't it have been better to have different components used in different ways and/or in different distributions?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon
United States
Edmond
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
admin
Convention Committee
badge
BGG.CON! BGG.CON SPRING! BGG@SEA!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This distribution ensures that all goods are equally valuable across the individual "levels" of building as well as the entire game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That's my point. Why do they need to be equal? Doesn't it make a game more interesting for some goods to be rare and some common, or for goods to be required in different amounts?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Paul Sodusta
United States
Santa Barbara
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
That's my point. Why do they need to be equal? Doesn't it make a game more interesting for some goods to be rare and some common, or for goods to be required in different amounts?


They are equal in paper, but they aren't equal in the actual game. Remember you only have 7 rounds in the game when you can gather instruments. Some resources are going to be common because noone will be after them, and some will be rare because everyone is trying to get them. Thus in actual gameplay the resources fluctuate in value as each new invention the council requires.

I think the resources distribution is fine as it is.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon
United States
Edmond
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
admin
Convention Committee
badge
BGG.CON! BGG.CON SPRING! BGG@SEA!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
...and that's what makes it interesting. Figuring out which good are valuable, which are a good deal, which are junk, predicting what will happen next, etc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Luca Iennaco
Italy
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmb
ekted wrote:
That's my point. Why do they need to be equal? Doesn't it make a game more interesting for some goods to be rare and some common, or for goods to be required in different amounts?

Goods ARE required in different amounts, because you do not have all the inventions at disposal from the first to the last turn. You have to build what is required (and more or less when it is required, or someone else will do it). THAT forces you to evaluate the real value of each good, that is also likely to change during the game, even if all the goods are equally accessible (each shop has the same rules) and theoretically equally useful (the symmetry you noticed in the chart).
Have fun! meeple
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes everyone, I understand all that. It just seemed that the game would be MORE interesting if some goods were harder to get, etc. I'm still going to buy it, so there!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
badge
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Yes everyone, I understand all that. It just seemed that the game would be MORE interesting if some goods were harder to get, etc. I'm still going to buy it, so there!

I think the point everyone is trying to tell you... some goods ARE harder to get because of the current (random) distribution of the requested inventions. One game, rope might be all the rage because the rope inventions all come up. Other games, it might not come up very much.

The more it's required, the harder it is to get. I've seen games where people have placed FIVE workers down just to be first in line for a resource. And then get screwed because someone else placed SIX, and the first player didn't have the cash to buy it as second majority.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I see your point, but that's caused by demand, not supply.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Sauberer
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
I see your point, but that's caused by demand, not supply.


So?

I think that it would harm the game if three were an unequal supply, unless you also changed the makeup of the inventions, which would land you right back where you started.

It would be horrible to have one of the resources in a very short supply and then have inventions requiring that resource fill the track. You'd end up with the track clogged as several of the inventions would be unbuildable. This would render the "look ahead" power less useful because it would take longer to cycle through the inventions. And if the track was clogged late in the game it could render the last two turns useless.

With the curent rules there is variablility in value and scarcity due to changing demand. Yet the resources will be there if someone is willing and able to pay the price. I believe that is far more interesting than having to say, "Sure, you want to pay $4 for that rope so that you can clear one of those 4 rope inventions out of the way, but there is no more rope left so they have to stay there for the rest of the game."
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.