Dennis Smith
United States
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mb
So if I had the winning bid by saying 4 because I have:
2 Infantry
1 Tactic for a bonus point
1 Colossus for a bonus point

Would I have to discard the 2 infantry, tactic, and wonder to colonize?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Grogan
United Kingdom
Cullompton
Devon
flag msg tools
designer
Check out all my instructional How to Play videos at youtube.com/GamingRulesVideos
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You dont discard the Wonder
Or the tactic.

You just discard the Infantry - those two guys together are worth 3 (assuming you had Fighting Band).

The Colossus is a permanent +1 to colonisation.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Smith
United States
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mb
Okay that's what I thought, just wanted to be sure. Thanks for the help.

And those Gaming Rules videos are great, I was just watching them last night to gear up for a play-through tonight
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Charlap
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just remember that even if you have enough to make your bid without any units (for example, if for your 4 bid above you had colossus (+1), cartography (+2), and a +1 colonization card), you MUST send at least 1 military unit. (in this case, you would probably not use the card, and send a warrior instead)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Grogan
United Kingdom
Cullompton
Devon
flag msg tools
designer
Check out all my instructional How to Play videos at youtube.com/GamingRulesVideos
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"Someone has to be there to plant the flag" is the way I always explain this rule.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J
United States
Monroe
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Qurqirish Dragon wrote:
Just remember that even if you have enough to make your bid without any units (for example, if for your 4 bid above you had colossus (+1), cartography (+2), and a +1 colonization card), you MUST send at least 1 military unit. (in this case, you would probably not use the card, and send a warrior instead)


Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Charlap
United States
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
saneperson wrote:
Qurqirish Dragon wrote:
Just remember that even if you have enough to make your bid without any units (for example, if for your 4 bid above you had colossus (+1), cartography (+2), and a +1 colonization card), you MUST send at least 1 military unit. (in this case, you would probably not use the card, and send a warrior instead)


Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


Agreed- though in my example, 1 point was from a colonization/defense bonus card; as I wrote the person would likely keep the bonus card, which would be a reason to try a bid of 4. It is a gamble, but depending on the game situation, it may not be that much of a risk.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J
United States
Monroe
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Qurqirish Dragon wrote:
saneperson wrote:
Qurqirish Dragon wrote:
Just remember that even if you have enough to make your bid without any units (for example, if for your 4 bid above you had colossus (+1), cartography (+2), and a +1 colonization card), you MUST send at least 1 military unit. (in this case, you would probably not use the card, and send a warrior instead)


Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


Agreed- though in my example, 1 point was from a colonization/defense bonus card; as I wrote the person would likely keep the bonus card, which would be a reason to try a bid of 4. It is a gamble, but depending on the game situation, it may not be that much of a risk.


True. If you have a bonus card, and you think you may not need it to win the bidding, then you might make a bid based on the assumption that you will NOT use it, and then the rest of what you say in your previous post follows.

I've only played a few games, but so far the bid numbers have been always pretty small: often just 2 or 3 in the early game. So the fact that every bid has to be at least 1 more than the previous bid makes an underbid dangerous. I mean, if bids were typically 200 or 300, and you bid 200 when you could have bid 300, and then someone else bids 210, you could always go to 220. But when you're deciding whether to bid 2 or 3 and the most you can do (or are willing to do) is 3, if you bid 2 and someone else bids 3, you lose, but if you had initially bid 3, you would have won.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Riku Koskinen
Finland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
saneperson wrote:
Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


A bit offtopic, but I'll just add that occasionally you are facing a colony bid so that you don't necessarily want the colony, but you don't want to let someone have it for too cheap either. If I have a knight (and no warriors) and Navigation for a bid of 5, I still might bid 4 in hopes of another player with a knight+warrior Mediaval Army (and I suspect he doesn't have colonization cards) to sac both units. So I'd rather take the colony with my knight than let him have it for just one unit, but on the other hand I'd rather let him have it by saccing two units (or using colonization card(s)) than get it myself with the knight. Bidding 1 under my actual minimum bid here allows this to happen. Of course if the opponent realizes my reasoning he might pass anyway, but there's nothing to lose when compared to me bidding 5.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J
United States
Monroe
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Padish wrote:
saneperson wrote:
Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


A bit offtopic, but I'll just add that occasionally you are facing a colony bid so that you don't necessarily want the colony, but you don't want to let someone have it for too cheap either. If I have a knight (and no warriors) and Navigation for a bid of 5, I still might bid 4 in hopes of another player with a knight+warrior Mediaval Army (and I suspect he doesn't have colonization cards) to sac both units. So I'd rather take the colony with my knight than let him have it for just one unit, but on the other hand I'd rather let him have it by saccing two units (or using colonization card(s)) than get it myself with the knight. Bidding 1 under my actual minimum bid here allows this to happen. Of course if the opponent realizes my reasoning he might pass anyway, but there's nothing to lose when compared to me bidding 5.


Fair enough. Making a bid that you don't really want to win just to force opponents to up their bid is inherently risky, as the other person may decide not to bid and let you win. Especially if you can't really afford to pay what you have bid. In this game as in other games, or even in real life, bidding situations. But lots of good strategies carry risk. That's what makes a game interesting.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
saneperson wrote:
Padish wrote:
saneperson wrote:
Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


A bit offtopic, but I'll just add that occasionally you are facing a colony bid so that you don't necessarily want the colony, but you don't want to let someone have it for too cheap either. If I have a knight (and no warriors) and Navigation for a bid of 5, I still might bid 4 in hopes of another player with a knight+warrior Mediaval Army (and I suspect he doesn't have colonization cards) to sac both units. So I'd rather take the colony with my knight than let him have it for just one unit, but on the other hand I'd rather let him have it by saccing two units (or using colonization card(s)) than get it myself with the knight. Bidding 1 under my actual minimum bid here allows this to happen. Of course if the opponent realizes my reasoning he might pass anyway, but there's nothing to lose when compared to me bidding 5.


Fair enough. Making a bid that you don't really want to win just to force opponents to up their bid is inherently risky, as the other person may decide not to bid and let you win. Especially if you can't really afford to pay what you have bid. In this game as in other games, or even in real life, bidding situations. But lots of good strategies carry risk. That's what makes a game interesting.

I hope by "can't afford" you mean it hurts you to pay the cost. If you meant that you literally can't afford the bid you made as a bluff, that is explicitly against the rules. It's "on your honor" that you can actually meet any bid that you make.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J
United States
Monroe
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
grant5 wrote:
I hope by "can't afford" you mean it hurts you to pay the cost. If you meant that you literally can't afford the bid you made as a bluff, that is explicitly against the rules. It's "on your honor" that you can actually meet any bid that you make.


Yes, I meant that paying the cost would hurt you more than the value of what you gain. I was not advocating cheating!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Riku Koskinen
Finland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
saneperson wrote:
Padish wrote:
saneperson wrote:
Though I think a smart player would always make a bid that takes all his bonuses plus the minimum 1 military unit into account. For example, suppose you had 2 Warriors (value 1 each) and +3 in bonuses. If you bid 4 and win, you have to send 1 Warrior. If you bid 3 and win, you still have to send 1 Warrior, so there's no benefit to the lower bid. But if you bid 3, and an opponent then bids 4, to top him you'd have to bid 5, which means sending both your warriors. But if you had bid 4, then to top you he'd have to bid 5. Maybe he is willing and able to bid 5 and maybe he's not. And by forcing him to bid 1 more to beat you, you may be forcing him to send 2 soldiers instead of just 1.


A bit offtopic, but I'll just add that occasionally you are facing a colony bid so that you don't necessarily want the colony, but you don't want to let someone have it for too cheap either. If I have a knight (and no warriors) and Navigation for a bid of 5, I still might bid 4 in hopes of another player with a knight+warrior Mediaval Army (and I suspect he doesn't have colonization cards) to sac both units. So I'd rather take the colony with my knight than let him have it for just one unit, but on the other hand I'd rather let him have it by saccing two units (or using colonization card(s)) than get it myself with the knight. Bidding 1 under my actual minimum bid here allows this to happen. Of course if the opponent realizes my reasoning he might pass anyway, but there's nothing to lose when compared to me bidding 5.


Fair enough. Making a bid that you don't really want to win just to force opponents to up their bid is inherently risky, as the other person may decide not to bid and let you win. Especially if you can't really afford to pay what you have bid. In this game as in other games, or even in real life, bidding situations. But lots of good strategies carry risk. That's what makes a game interesting.


I agree, but I was talking about a case in which I don't mind if I end up winning the bid. I would just prefer the opponent to sacrifice more than one unit or use defense/colonization card to get that colony than to get the colony myself. Here's an example:

-I am holding a colonization +3 card and I have a knight I am willing to sac for colony. I also have some aggressions and a military lead, so that my aggressions can be defended with a defense card.
-Opponent has a rifleman and a knight among his units, and some age II military cards in hand.
-A colony appears during my turn and I bid 2. Opponent bids 3. Now I have three choices:
1. Pass the bid.
2. Bid 5, which is my minimum bid because winning a bid of 4 would still cause me to colonize with strength of 5.
3. Bid 4.

-If I pass, opponent gets the colony with one Rifleman. Any defense card still in his hand will remain there. I don't want him to get it for that cheap.
-If I bid 5, the opponent will not be able to reasonably outbid me unless he has several defense cards.
-If I bid 4, I give opponent the chance to get the colony with a bid of 5, leaving him open to my aggressions.

Here the third option is the best. I certainly don't want to let it go with 3 strength so I have to raise the bid. But on the other hand I'd rather have the opponent use a defense card or multiple units to get the colony, and letting him bid 5 makes it more likely than forcing him to bid 6 or more.

Edit:
I would not have brought this up otherwise, but I have been in this situation several times on BGO. So it's not just something that's fun to discuss but never happens.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J
United States
Monroe
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Sure, I get what you're describing. So okay, maybe you're PREFER if he outbids you and thus weakens himself, but you're also okay with it if he doesn't outbid you.

Still, the fundamental point here is that you might want to bid something less than the minimum that you would actually "spend", with the deliberate goal of allowing an opponent to outbid you in a move that you think will be disadvantageous to him. i.e. dig a hole, cover it with brush, and lure your opponent into stepping on it.

Fair enough, and a case where you would NOT want to follow my advice of always bidding at least the minimum that you would be forced to spend. I admit I hadn't thought of this strategem. Sometimes I'm just not devious enough. I've had times when I've made a bid with the thought, "I don't want to let him get the colony that cheap", but I hadn't previously thought of, "I want him to win, but be weakened in the process, so how can I maneuver him into bidding more than he can really afford". :-)
 
 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.