Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Taluva» Forums » Variants

Subject: 2 player rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
d peruzzini
United States
cheektowaga
New York
flag msg tools
has anyone playing this 2 player reduced the number of tiles in the game equal to what would be available per player in the 4 player game or 3 player game? we just picked this up and found for 2 players the victory conditions are always the early victory condition of building 2 building types. this is due to the large number of tiles available as compared with building pieces in the 2 player game. i was surprised there was no variant for less than 4 players as far as tile count goes. we have played a few games with reduced tiles (leaving 2 stacks in the box or taking 1/2 the tiles) but were curious if others have done the same. i supposed you could play with 2 colors each and use all the tiles also. thanks
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris
United States
Altoona
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played 2-player and agree that building two-types of tiles is more likely. However, I don't see this as a weakness and mention it during 2-player games as this is the goal you want to shoot for.

In my mind, playing two sets of buildings wouldn't help. It might make the game drag, or if it was me, I would use one color to block and defend while my other color goes for the building victory. Same victory condition, much longer to get to it.

Chris
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Saint Joseph
Michigan
flag msg tools
designer
I would do all the things I have ever dreamed of doing. I would love to become a professional whistler.I'm pretty amazing at it now, but I wanna get, like, even better. Make my living out of it.
badge
Bffffttt, Pffffttt, Buuuuurtt........
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All of my two player games and three player games end with the "premature ending". I haven't see this as a problem at all. I hadn't thought about lowering the number of tiles to try and run out of those before a player could build all of two types. We even saw a "premature ending" in a four player game this past week. For me, this is the "normal" ending, not running out of tiles.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Chaput
France
Veneux les sablons
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
The problem with playing the game with less than 4 players and using all the tiles, is that it will always end with the "premature ending", and after a while you'll notice that there is a predominant strategy "tower/huts", don't even care with temple and you'll win. Just go higher and higher, you'll put your tower, and more huts at the same time.

This is why I always play the game with 12 tiles per persons (which is all the tiles with 4 players) this way it's much more balanced because it become much more risky to go towers/huts as if you fail, you automatically lose to the guy that put at least one temple.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
chaps357 wrote:
The problem with playing the game with less than 4 players and using all the tiles, is that it will always end with the "premature ending", and after a while you'll notice that there is a predominant strategy "tower/huts", don't even care with temple and you'll win. Just go higher and higher, you'll put your tower, and more huts at the same time.
"Just go higher and higher, you'll put your tower" is not at all guaranteed, as far as we found (unless your opponent passively lets you do that, of course.)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Chaput
France
Veneux les sablons
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Well, may be I'm playing against bad opponents, but I find it much easier to go higher and play your towers (mainly if you play with all the tiles), especially in a 3 players game, where nobody wants to waste a tile to stop you, than speading to put your temples.
Of course, you can play the "split your village startegy" to quickly put your temple, but this one is much easier to stop
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maarten D. de Jong
Netherlands
Zaandam
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
chaps357 wrote:
The problem with playing the game with less than 4 players and using all the tiles, is that it will always end with the "premature ending", and after a while you'll notice that there is a predominant strategy "tower/huts", don't even care with temple and you'll win. Just go higher and higher, you'll put your tower, and more huts at the same time.
No, there is no predominant strategy unless it is called 'groupthink strikes again'. Such a strategy only works time and time again (paraphrasing from 'always') if people allow such high landmasses to be built time and time again (again paraphrasing). Remember that you can create lakes in the island, and that towers may not be overbuilt: I'd really like to see how you can go 'higher and higher' under those circumstances. It also helps if people pay careful attention how they orient their tiles: this can seriously discourage a player from attempting to win by mountaineering, so to speak, or at the very least slow him down to the point where temple building becomes competitive.

Also, just to make sure: you do have the finer points of the placement rules correct? In that you can simply put a single hut on the first level next to an existing settlement irrespective of the terrain, and that in a hypothetical H - H - H - ... - Te - H situation you can put a Temple on the dots?

The only real problem here is the infamous newbie on the left-issue; and that players must cooperate loosely in order to block other players. This makes Taluva at higher player numbers decidedly more complex than it would appear at first.

Quote:
This is why I always play the game with 12 tiles per persons (which is all the tiles with 4 players) this way it's much more balanced because it become much more risky to go towers/huts as if you fail, you automatically lose to the guy that put at least one temple.
My first experiments have shown that there may be something in removing tiles, but not this great a number as it now seems to over-favour the other victory condition. This leads me to the conclusion that the precise number depends on how agressively you play the game.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Chaput
France
Veneux les sablons
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
I'm not entirely sure I understood your example about rules, but I think we have the rules right.
Actually, even with 4 players, we find sometime quite hard to stop a tower/hut strategy. We played a few games where 1 or 2 players just wanted to pursue a "classic" temple strategy, and found that preventing a player from having a third level was really hard, unless you sacrifice yourself just to stopping him from winning...
A good player will also know how to place a single hut and profit of another player third level. Once you placed your towers, placing huts is not that difficult.

But once again, may be we just suck at the game, I'd love to play with you so we can see
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Randall Bart
United States
Winnetka
California
flag msg tools
designer
Baseball been bery bery good to me
badge
This is a picture of a published game designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cymric wrote:
My first experiments have shown that there may be something in removing tiles, but not this great a number as it now seems to over-favour the other victory condition. This leads me to the conclusion that the precise number depends on how agressively you play the game.
Correct. I suggest
With 4 players use 12 tiles per player (48)
With 3 players use 13 tiles per player (39)
With 2 players use 14 tiles per player (28)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls