Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Intrigue» Forums » Strategy

Subject: 2 Player Cooperation? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
FullContactGEEK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am very new to this game so I would like to know from any experienced players what the effect would be if 2 players cooperated with each other to the exclusion of all others giving themselves the highest incomes as early as possible.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Knack
United States
San Rafael
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Unfortunately, there isn't enough space in just one other person's house to hire all of your children, so one of the pair will have to work with a third... meaning someone is going to have to negotiate eventually.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
FullContactGEEK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
realityfoible wrote:
Unfortunately, there isn't enough space in just one other person's house to hire all of your children, so one of the pair will have to work with a third... meaning someone is going to have to negotiate eventually.



Understood...but they will have a significant income advantage early and won't have to deal with other people much until the latter half of the game. I am wondering if I am missing something.

Note...in my imagining, these two players will always give each other the highest paying spots available.

EDIT: One rule I seem to have missed is that you must send your relatives out to two different houses...so that reduces the advantage, but it is still there, I think.

I am also looking for the "anti-partnership" variant but I can't seem to locate it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Twice
Spain
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
The effect would be that the game would not be interesting nor fun and the happy couple would probably find themselves barred from playing any games with the group.

Do not play Intrigue if you want to cooperate like this.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
FullContactGEEK
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
General_Norris wrote:
The effect would be that the game would not be interesting nor fun and the happy couple would probably find themselves barred from playing any games with the group.

Do not play Intrigue if you want to cooperate like this.


This is not the help I am seeking, thanks.

I want to know if the scenario is counterable or if it is a bit of a flaw in the game...and if there is a variant to counter this type of play.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Twice
Spain
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
lsamadi wrote:
This is not the help I am seeking, thanks.

I want to know if the scenario is counterable or if it is a bit of a flaw in the game...and if there is a variant to counter this type of play.

It's not a flaw on the game, it's a flaw on the way the players behave. No amount of variant nor strategy will fix that.

It might not be the help you seek, but it's the truth.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Rogers
Mexico
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lsamadi wrote:
I am very new to this game so I would like to know from any experienced players what the effect would be if 2 players cooperated with each other to the exclusion of all others giving themselves the highest incomes as early as possible.


Which one wins? Is the other person comfortable throwing away a possible win to ensure that their partner wins? That’s a potential problem with a lot of games.

I often bring up these kind of possibilities when discussing the game with friends. Yes, two players can collude to the exclusion of the others... what happens if the other players create a three-person team? Which of the two people colluding gets to win? Yes, you can lock out a person and ensure they can’t win, but are you going to be the one of the remaining four who wins? What if you help the locked out player? They’ll be desperate, and you might get a good deal...

Negotiation can be complex, and figuring the value of alliances and trades is not a simple thing, no matter how it might seem. Of course, his assumes that each player is trying to win. If there is someone who isn’t trying to win, that’s not a problem with the game, and it can cause problems is pretty much any game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lsamadi wrote:

EDIT: One rule I seem to have missed is that you must send your relatives out to two different houses...so that reduces the advantage, but it is still there, I think.


Must be more than one edition of the rules? In my Mayfair game it explicitly said you could send to the same house, maybe they changed the rule for the reason you bring up?

I had two players try this from the start, and it did seem pretty effective at giving them an early lead, they eventually had to betray each other though, and due to turn order one of them got the initiative... so I'm not sure this is really to the advantage of BOTH players (it's really one taking advantage of the other). plus they had the ire of everyone else...

I don't know

General_Norris wrote:
lsamadi wrote:
This is not the help I am seeking, thanks.

I want to know if the scenario is counterable or if it is a bit of a flaw in the game...and if there is a variant to counter this type of play.

It's not a flaw on the game, it's a flaw on the way the players behave. No amount of variant nor strategy will fix that.

It might not be the help you seek, but it's the truth.


Highly disagree, if these players are just trying to better their chances of winning, they are doing their job as players. if the game breaks from such a simple strategy its not a good game. I'm not saying it does break, hopefully it can handle it.
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.