Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

Ticket to Ride: Europe» Forums » Variants

Subject: Lay down number of tunnel cards based on length of tunnel rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
fenerli bdfb
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Update: made some edits after forgetting about this post for months.

We have played a number of games "incorrectly" (now over 100!) but realised that we like our version better.

In the rules, when building a tunnel, you lay down (i.e. turn over) three cards.

In our variant, when building a tunnel, you lay down a number of cards equal to the length of the tunnel. (Instead of the default 3 cards)

e.g. tunnel with 2 segments: lay down 2 cards
e.g. tunnel with 3 segments: lay down 3 cards as usual
e.g. tunnel with 8 segments: lay down 8 cards

Advantages:

- It makes it a bit harder to obtain the high scoring 6 and 8-length tunnels and puts some of the focus back on tickets
- The triangle of death that is often avoided (zurich/venice/munich) is a bit more manageable
- It makes thematic sense, a longer tunnel is harder to build!

Disadvantages:

- Bit more gambling for the long tracks. Evens out but can lead to some silly situations. Slightly mitigated by having less probability of having to pay extra because you would have usually hoarded over half the supply of a colour to get to a position to attempt to build the tunnel

Random:

- Makes for some suspense when laying down 6 or more cards, especially when the discard pile needs to be shuffled half way through!

Feedback/results from our games:
- From over 100 games, we have never seen a penalty of more than 3 cards. And I think 3 has only been witnessed once -- on the 8-length route.
- We still think the 8-length route is well worth it and often go for it when not needed for a ticket (to end the game earlier than usual or just for the points)

Thoughts?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael
United States
Hawaii
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Would you please clarify...

fenelri wrote:
In the rules, when building a tunnel, you lay down three cards.


The rules say, "When attempting to claim a Tunnel route, a player first lays down the number of cards required by the length of the route," e.g., four cards for a four-link Tunnel, and then turns over the next three cards from the draw pile to find out whether or not he/she must "pay" any additional cards.

Does your variant require the player to lay down a number of cards equal to the length of the Tunnel route in addition to the required cards--so that, in the example of a four-link Tunnel, your variant would require the player to lay down eight cards (the initial four, plus the additional four)?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Darcy
Australia
Blue Mountains
New South Wales
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it makes thematic sense. The longer a tunnel is, the more likely to run into problems building it.

But I am not sure I would want to play that way. We have played Europe a long time now and we are quite used to the potential penalty brought by three cards. We actually find it fun to dice with death around Zurich.

A couple of other issues...
An 8 card tunnel would lead to a potential 16 card cost. But there are are only 14 of each colour IIRC. Which means locomotives would definitely come into play. You could also be reasonable certain of playing it for only 8 cards by trying twice in a row.

If it were applied to Nordic as well, the balance of some routes would be thrown out. I am thinking specifically of the coastal route that has a 5 card tunnel vying with a 6 card ferry route.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sven F.
Sweden
Västra Götaland
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Metal Rat wrote:
Would you please clarify...

fenelri wrote:
In the rules, when building a tunnel, you lay down three cards.


The rules say, "When attempting to claim a Tunnel route, a player first lays down the number of cards required by the length of the route," e.g., four cards for a four-link Tunnel, and then turns over the next three cards from the draw pile to find out whether or not he/she must "pay" any additional cards.

Does your variant require the player to lay down a number of cards equal to the length of the Tunnel route in addition to the required cards--so that, in the example of a four-link Tunnel, your variant would require the player to lay down eight cards (the initial four, plus the additional four)?

I can clarify it for you:
The original post says "lay down" but means "turn over".
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
SoCal
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
GregDarcy wrote:
I think it makes thematic sense. The longer a tunnel is, the more likely to run into problems building it.

But I am not sure I would want to play that way. We have played Europe a long time now and we are quite used to the potential penalty brought by three cards. We actually find it fun to dice with death around Zurich.

A couple of other issues...
An 8 card tunnel would lead to a potential 16 card cost. But there are are only 14 of each colour IIRC. Which means locomotives would definitely come into play. You could also be reasonable certain of playing it for only 8 cards by trying twice in a row.

If it were applied to Nordic as well, the balance of some routes would be thrown out. I am thinking specifically of the coastal route that has a 5 card tunnel vying with a 6 card ferry route.
While this is in the TtR Europe forum, note that if someone uses this variant for TtR Asia, one of the maps (Legendary Asia, aka the standard game, as opposed to the team game) have tunnel routes with numbers on them, which indicate how many cards to flip up to resolve the cave-in part of it. That'll clash with this, or at the very least, requires a ruling.

I agree with your assessment that it makes the longer tunnel routes potentially far too painful. Having to pay +3 cards is bad. +2 can still be bad.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
KK Su
Australia
Melbourne
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
How about this?

Quote:
When building a tunnel, you turn over a number of cards equal to the length of the tunnel. You pay extra for each train card turned over that matches the color of the tunnel, up to a maximum of three cards.


Essentially, it makes the payment of extra cards the same as the original rules, but the length of the tunnel increases the possibility of paying extra.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sven F.
Sweden
Västra Götaland
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
ackmondual wrote:
GregDarcy wrote:
I think it makes thematic sense. The longer a tunnel is, the more likely to run into problems building it.

But I am not sure I would want to play that way. We have played Europe a long time now and we are quite used to the potential penalty brought by three cards. We actually find it fun to dice with death around Zurich.

A couple of other issues...
An 8 card tunnel would lead to a potential 16 card cost. But there are are only 14 of each colour IIRC. Which means locomotives would definitely come into play. You could also be reasonable certain of playing it for only 8 cards by trying twice in a row.

If it were applied to Nordic as well, the balance of some routes would be thrown out. I am thinking specifically of the coastal route that has a 5 card tunnel vying with a 6 card ferry route.
While this is in the TtR Europe forum, note that if someone uses this variant for TtR Asia, one of the maps (Legendary Asia, aka the standard game, as opposed to the team game) have tunnel routes with numbers on them, which indicate how many cards to flip up to resolve the cave-in part of it. That'll clash with this, or at the very least, requires a ruling.

Actually it is the Team Asia map that has those tunnels. (Legendary Asia has no tunnels but the unique mountain routes.)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BLIND PEW
Wales
BRECON
Powys
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you don't want to play extra cards you just don't go that turn and try again later
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek H
South Africa
Johannesburg
Gauteng
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
jeremylaurie wrote:
If you don't want to play extra cards you just don't go that turn and try again later

AFAIK that has always been the rule. But the point is that you miss a turn which, in general, is Not A Good Thing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BLIND PEW
Wales
BRECON
Powys
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gamesbook wrote:
jeremylaurie wrote:
If you don't want to play extra cards you just don't go that turn and try again later

AFAIK that has always been the rule. But the point is that you miss a turn which, in general, is Not A Good Thing.

It just depends how desperate you are and what cards you have and how long you've been waiting for them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
CHARALAMPOS PAPADAKIS
Greece
HERAKLION CRETE
Non-US/Canada
flag msg tools
mb
Hello there.

I have some missunderstanding with my friends about the interpretation of the rules how to claim a Tunnel route in Europe and Swizerland maps. The rules say, "When attempting to claim a Tunnel route, a player first lays down the number of cards required by the length of the route," e.g., four cards for a four-link Tunnel, and then turns over the next three cards from the draw pile to find out whether or not he/she must "pay" any additional cards." Also, the rulebook says that if there aren't any cards in the deck and in discard pile, then a player who will try to claim a tunnel route he will claim it by giving only the amount of cards matched to the color of the tunnel. Does it mean that only when there aren't any cards on deck pile and in discard pile and the players hold in their hands all the color train cards, then the tunnels open and close without fliping and cards...?!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BLIND PEW
Wales
BRECON
Powys
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes - by deduction
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fenerli bdfb
msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Sorry guys, I thought this forum would auto-subscribe me to replies to my own thread, so I didn't see the responses until today! I've edited the original post after getting some of the feedback and insight.

@Michael: to clarify, the number of cards to lay down (i.e. turn over) would be instead of the default 3 cards.

TaleSpinner wrote:
How about this?

Quote:
When building a tunnel, you turn over a number of cards equal to the length of the tunnel. You pay extra for each train card turned over that matches the color of the tunnel, up to a maximum of three cards.


Essentially, it makes the payment of extra cards the same as the original rules, but the length of the tunnel increases the possibility of paying extra.


Nice. I've added a note in the original post about this as a possibility.
 
 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.