Recommend
8 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

London (second edition)» Forums » General

Subject: London 2nd Edition - 2 players rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
kred raiders
Australia
Melbourne
Victoria
flag msg tools
mbmb
Does the 2nd edition play well with 2 players?

I am not sure what the Ben Luca variant was in the original edition. Is this still relevant?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Würfel Reviews
Estonia
Tallinn
Harjumaa
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kredwood wrote:
Does the 2nd edition play well with 2 players?

I am not sure what the Ben Luca variant was in the original edition. Is this still relevant?


Haven't tried it with 2 and might not get a chance to try BUT I can clearly see that it's totally playable with 2 and might be even the most fun for me. So far I played 3 and 4 and if players are a bit AP prone then waiting for your turn is just killing it. Thus with 2p it will reduce the wait yet won't reduce the fun of maximizing your own turn. It's all about tight resource management and it's kinda towards solitaire-multiplayer so I can totally see myself enjoying 2p game
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
GAMBITO
Spain
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you.

Let's see if anyone else post more opinions
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ender Wiggins
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm also curious to know whether the second edition gives special rules for the 2 player game, and if so what they are.

At the time the first edition was published, Martin Wallace's philosophy was that he'd let people figure out for themselves any rule changes that improved the two player game; he did the same with his game Brass. Fortunately gamers did come up with improved 2 player variants for both games, and hence the popular Ben-Zen-Luca variant for London.

The Ben-Zen-Luca variant is widely considered the best way to play the first edition with two players and makes the following changes:
1. No face up duplicate buildings are allowed in your own city building display.
2. Whenever you expend a card that forces a row to be cleared in the general card display, you place a neutral marker of a third colour in a vacant city borough of your choice, following the normal adjacency rules, and immediately draw and discard from the draw deck the number of cards given by that borough. (Draw and discard four cards if all boroughs are already claimed.)
7 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Isn't it a bit long with two players? Especially if players take face up cards instead of drawing from the facedown pile?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Y P
United States
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DurinTheDeathless wrote:
Isn't it a bit long with two players? Especially if players take face up cards instead of drawing from the facedown pile?

Now that the games is in the wild there's talk about the game running long with 2p in the 2nd edition too. Looking forward to seeing what the experienced players come up with in terms of tightening up the 2p game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Nold
United Kingdom
London
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
In our 2 player games we have settled on removing:

5 cards from A deck,
10 cards from B deck,
5 from C deck.

That gives a good game length and makes the distribution a bit different every time. The softhook variant
9 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Brown
United States
Summit
NJ
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
softhook wrote:
In our 2 player games we have settled on removing:

5 cards from A deck,
10 cards from B deck,
5 from C deck.

That gives a good game length and makes the distribution a bit different every time. The softhook variant


I've thought about this, but I'd probably choose specific cards. Likely removing some duplicates. There seem to be too many sewers and underground cards for a 2p game, so maybe I'll start there.

That said. I'm not bothered by the length of 2p. And I think the other 2p problems are fixed in this edition (I'm thrilled with the changes to the boroughs and loans).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damien Cosgrove
United Kingdom
Bury St Edmunds
Suffolk
flag msg tools
mbmb
After the first play, it felt like it played too long at 2p, my son was bored when we were only getting into the C deck and he usually likes games of a similar complexity.

Some of this may be due to us ending up taking visible cards more often for colour matching while developing, but that's always going to happen.

I think removing some cards is definitely needed, whether at the start of by some variant of the original's Ben-Zeca-Luca variant, as Ender referred to. Clearly it currently doesn't work as there's no adjacency in a game without any board position.

So I'd definitely be interested to see what people feels works best.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David van Damme
Netherlands
Rotterdam
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
softhook wrote:
In our 2 player games we have settled on removing:

5 cards from A deck,
10 cards from B deck,
5 from C deck.

That gives a good game length and makes the distribution a bit different every time. The softhook variant


That sounds like a good idea, will try. Maybe there are some cards which are Less useful anyway in a 2p game? Like the omnibus, or the stock exchange?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin
msg tools
Never played London 1st Edition. Just got 2nd Edition and only played two 2-player games.

They felt fine, the game length wasn't too long for us. Obviously nothing to compare it to.

Note that I think we both tended to do bigger cities running them less frequently.
 
 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.