Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Rising Sun» Forums » General

Subject: How is the game at all player counts ? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Marko Ilič
msg tools
I have only played 5 and 6 players with all expansions and love 5 and 6 the same way they look and feel the same love it.

But what is your personal opinion on 3 and 4 and then 5 and 6 players i am more interested in 3 to 4 people and what do you think.

Never played with that player count and thinking bout it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
P L
msg tools
I played it a few times with 3 and one or two times with 4.

I enjoyed both player counts very much. But 3 players was more interesting to me as the tee ceremony really started to shine. There were really interesting discussions about the forming of alliances at the table.

Also sometimes the player that had the least alliances still managed to win.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicolau Tudela
Portugal
Porto
Porto
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Imo, the main 2 difference are:

- each player gets to play political mandates more often which might shaken the status quo a bit, it also gives a little bit more tangible control to each one.

- because of it, the diplomacy and the tea phase get a bit nerfed, but not entirely of course.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeremy Slayton

Anniston
Alabama
msg tools
mb
I don’t think the game is unplayable at any player count. But for my taste, I likely won’t play the game at 4 players and definitely won’t play it at 6 players.

The odd player count forces interaction at the very beginning of the tea ceremony. I like this. From my experience, the clans vary slightly in their strengths at different player counts as well. Which, I also like. But, 5 players is definitely my favorite and, at this point, is likely the only way that I am willingly to play 99% of the time. Granted, we can easily get 5 players together, so I have the luxury of choosing to only play at my favorite count.

The reason that I won’t play at 6 players is the limited mandates selected. At 4 players, I find that only one individual not committing to negotiating in the tea ceremony can leave a bad taste in some people’s mouth. I think 3 players is really, really good. It just isn’t great.

And, so at 5 players, I think the game is great.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick White
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dragon7Lord wrote:
I have only played 5 and 6 players with all expansions and love 5 and 6 the same way they look and feel the same love it.

But what is your personal opinion on 3 and 4 and then 5 and 6 players i am more interested in 3 to 4 people and what do you think.

Never played with that player count and thinking bout it.


the first week everybody was up in arms how 3 play is or was broke, NOW many people claim 3 player is there favorite way to play. I think its a matter of people learning the game and how to deal with not having a alliance possibly to your advantage. I also read/was told that many people prefer certain season cards combo with 3 players.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mr. Octavius
Canada
Chilliwack
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played 5 and 6. I like 5 a lot, 6 causes the game to drag a bit too long and you really feel limited in mandate selection. I'd be willing to play 6 again but I'd much rather play 5.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kin
Canada
Etobicoke
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are obviously differing opinions.

It depends on how much negotiating your gaming group enjoys.
My group dislikes negotiation in almost all games. So for us, the odd player count of 3 or 5 is not ideal.

We play with 4 because one guy is not left out of an alliance.

As others have said, if you like to introduce a more meaningful tea ceremony phase where negotiation is more consequential, then the uneven player count is more ideal.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Reisinger
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Maebon wrote:
I've played 5 and 6. I like 5 a lot, 6 causes the game to drag a bit too long and you really feel limited in mandate selection. I'd be willing to play 6 again but I'd much rather play 5.


Ive only played 6 and I have the same type of feeling. With 6 the limited mandates really makes the game feel longer with downtime.

I think a design mistake was made with the total number of madates played in a season. I think the game would have been better with either 6 madates per season, with 4 playable seasons ( 5 with winter ), or 8 madates with the designed number of seasons.

Easy enough to home brew I suppose but I try to use RAW as much as possible and it doesnt get played enough for me to play around with it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaganishu Khan
Germany
flag msg tools
mbmb
After a high two-figure number of plays, I am in favor of 4 and 5 players. 3 works but changes the game into a very harvest-heavy game especially early on, and some clans dont do well in 3s. 6 players is just not good, mostly due to extremely limited mandate selection and a high probability that the 3 lowest honor players will have to fear only getting half as many mandates in their alliance than their high honor counterparts (especially Sun+Lotus alliance, if Lotus is not smart enough to avoid it, can CRUSH at 6 players).

So I would say 3-5, with a preference towards 5.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Campos
Costa Rica
Florida
flag msg tools
I played 3 and 4.

The thing I liked about 3 is how the negation game opens up a lot and it becomes a lot more interesting.

For 4 players I didn't liked that you're forced to ally with players who don't always want to cooperate with you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Casey Smith
Switzerland
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ShapingSickness wrote:
I played 3 and 4.

The thing I liked about 3 is how the negation game opens up a lot and it becomes a lot more interesting.

For 4 players I didn't liked that you're forced to ally with players who don't always want to cooperate with you.


You are never forced to Ally. You could just leave another person out cold.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Isaac Campos
Costa Rica
Florida
flag msg tools
SwissQueso wrote:
ShapingSickness wrote:
I played 3 and 4.

The thing I liked about 3 is how the negation game opens up a lot and it becomes a lot more interesting.

For 4 players I didn't liked that you're forced to ally with players who don't always want to cooperate with you.


You are never forced to Ally. You could just leave another person out cold.
Oh yeah I know but what I meant is that you'll lose on bonuses if you don't.

I've only played twice so for now it's hard for me to see any benefit to not being in an alliance...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Snow
United States
New York City
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Having played over 20 times, I love it with all player counts. For the 5-6 player games we tend to leave out the Kami expansion; just as a matter of playing time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Terry Sucrana
msg tools
First time we used kami expansion at 6 players, game was 6h long. Still enjoyable (one of the most intese times) but after that we need to stop playing everything for 3 weeks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Casey Smith
Switzerland
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ShapingSickness wrote:

I've only played twice so for now it's hard for me to see any benefit to not being in an alliance...


If you don't ally with the other guy, you force him to also try to break up the other alliance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stanley Laurel
United States
flag msg tools
I love the game at every player count, my personal favorite is 3 players. A 3 player game of Rising Sun with experienced players is a 90 minute intense fight to the end.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bob Watson
United States
Bolingbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
5 is the best player count in my opinion, with three next in line. Our 4 and 6 player games often became team games, where alliances were made and almost never broken, because it's almost always better to be in an alliance than not. More strategic decisions can be made with odd numbers, and there's significantly more bargaining and bartering.

In three player games, the only difference is obvious - all players will get at least two mandates, and one will get three in a round - whereas in a game of more players, someone only gets one mandate per season. It's faster, and you get more options, but I'm hard pressed to say it's better. It's different.
 
 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.