Recommend
80 
 Thumb up
 Hide
302 Posts
[1]  Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [13] | 

Tapestry» Forums » Rules

Subject: Official Tapestry Civilization Adjustments rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joe Pilkus
United States
South Riding
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Regarding the Futurists, that's a sensible solution as Jamey mentioned in a recent interview that the Futurists started with two resources if memory serves.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jamey Stegmaier
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Indeed, "gaining" refers to any time you would gain a civilization, whether it's at the beginning of the game or during the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Connie V
United States
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
First - love the fact that you've made adjustments (already). Tapestry is one of my favorite games that has come out in a long time - thank you for the brilliant game! I've played about 20 (yes, 20) games with other players, and 4-5 solo games. At this point, I can pretty consistently score around 300 points with a number of the different civs. So - thank you!!

I agree with most of the changes - my play group has found both Alchemists and Chosen to be extremely weak, and Traders to be weak as well. Craftsman seem like possibly most consistently strong civ in the game (though I think Heralds have the highest ceiling), so a nerf there makes a lot of sense to me.

That said, I am a little bit skeptical to the changes to the Futurists and the Architects, and I had a couple of comments about the Heralds.

- We haven't found the Futurists to be OP at all - though I know this is inconsistent with what most people have found. The players in my play group have all played multiple games of Tapestry, and we have found that the advanced starting position of the Futurists (and easier access to some landmarks) is already suitably offset by the more expensive cost to advance up the tracks, the difficulty of obtaining tapestry and tech cards, and by the fact that one of the only viable "first" moves with the Futurists is to conquer - with a 1/3 chance of rolling "no resource." The highest score we've seen in a 4 player game with the Futurists is in the low 300s, which is consistent with what we have seen from several other civs. I can't help but think that the Futurists - as initially printed - are well balanced if everyone at the table is playing relatively optimally. My thought is that this change will make them really weak among experienced play groups.

- Similarly, we haven't found Architects to be overly weak. They're slow to get going (admittedly!), but we have found them to be fairly consistent with other civs in terms of the end score. While I agree that they have a relatively low floor, I think their ceiling is high enough that adding another 15 points will make them very strong, especially in the hands of an experienced player. When played with sufficient planning, they have a lot of opportunities to sustain with resources over the course of the game, and score quite highly due to additional capital city points. Instead of a straight 15 points, would you consider adding an extra resource for the Architects - either when the civilization is obtained or upon completion of the first district with them? This might provide a boost to new players, without raising their ceiling by quite as much.

- I had a question or two about the Heralds. Our experience with the Heralds has been that they have the highest ceiling in the game, but can be extremely swingy, both due to initial tapestry card draw and to seating order. If the heralds draw an unplayable tapestry card at the beginning of the game and are seated in the first position (thus generally will have to take income first - especially if some of the resource-generating civs are in the game), they can get off to a very rough start.

Would a player who starts the game with the Heralds begin the game with -15 points?

I am a little bit worried about the straight negative points:

(1) If players who start with the Heralds begin with -15 points, this could make for a real "feel bad" gaming experience, with the wrong initial tapestry card draw and seating order.

(2) Similarly, gaining the Heralds in the last era could feel really punishing - to the point where it might discourage players from finishing the Military track. If a player gained the Heralds in the last era, they would immediately lose 15 points - and would have almost no chance of even breaking even in the last income phase.

Would it be possible to modify the Heralds such that: When you gain the Heralds/when starting the game with the Heralds, draw an extra Tapestry card. Then, lose 5 points each income(Income 2-5). I think the extra tapestry card and adjustment for how many times you could use the ability might help adjust the Heralds so they have a narrower band of variance.
13 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryan Wilson
United States
College Station
Texas
flag msg tools
Lots of repeat questions about the term "gaining," when that applies, and the issue with negative points.
Jamey, could you consider revising the text just a little to clarify? Otherwise, this forum and your facebook page will see new threads about this for months/years to come.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Clarke
United Kingdom
Caithness
Scotland
flag msg tools
Avatar

Yes, you can't 'lose' points you don't have. Just like you can't lose resources you don't have.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Abram Towle
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Custom-tailored game nights in Milwaukee!
badge
Nerd. From Earth.
Avatar
Microbadge: Copper ReviewerMicrobadge: Play a bird from your handMicrobadge: Targi fan - Silver CrossMicrobadge: Point SaladMicrobadge: Vast: The Crystal Caverns fan
Excited to try out some of these Civilization changes.

I agree that, at first blush, the wording of 'gain' seems a bit confusing (i.e. Heralds/Merrymakers), but all of the wording makes sense when viewed as a whole. Having specific language like "if you gain this during the game" helps to clarify this.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arnaud Fradin
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Just thought about it but I'm surprised Heralds don't lose points according to the number of players, because we've found them way less efficient in a 2p game than 4p. The last time I played 2p my opponent only had "this era" tapestries so I could only use the cubes with mine and had to waste one, so it seems strange to lose 15 points no matter what.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Highland Cow wrote:

Yes, you can't 'lose' points you don't have. Just like you can't lose resources you don't have.
This is not correct. Jamey already clarified earlier in the thread:

jameystegmaier wrote:
NiceShot318 wrote:
If your starting civ is the heralds, does that mean you start with negative points?
Yes, that's correct.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Abram Towle
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Custom-tailored game nights in Milwaukee!
badge
Nerd. From Earth.
Avatar
Microbadge: Copper ReviewerMicrobadge: Play a bird from your handMicrobadge: Targi fan - Silver CrossMicrobadge: Point SaladMicrobadge: Vast: The Crystal Caverns fan
Scion13 wrote:
Highland Cow wrote:

Yes, you can't 'lose' points you don't have. Just like you can't lose resources you don't have.
This is not correct. Jamey already clarified earlier in the thread:

jameystegmaier wrote:
NiceShot318 wrote:
If your starting civ is the heralds, does that mean you start with negative points?
Yes, that's correct.
How I would handle this is to put another player marker (or outpost) at the 15-point mark. Once my initial player marker reaches that point, I can reset it back to zero.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Kaemmer
United States
Iowa City
Iowa
flag msg tools
It says "Scythe"
badge
Something Clever!
Avatar
Microbadge: Twilight Imperium fanMicrobadge: Scythe fanMicrobadge: Forbidden Stars fanMicrobadge: Gloomhaven fanMicrobadge: Twilight Imperium fan
jameystegmaier wrote:

I appreciate Jeremy and Morten for working with me on this endeavor!
It was my pleasure!

I can't wait to see how things change
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Brooks
msg tools
mbmbmb
jameystegmaier wrote:
NiceShot318 wrote:
If your starting civ is the heralds, does that mean you start with negative points?
Yes, that's correct.
Now that you've changed the rule forbidding negative points, what's the new rule for Guilds? Are you allowed to go negative, more negative, negative but no farther than the -15 you started with as Heralds?

In my opinion, you should consider changing the Heralds to an Income Turn effect of -4 VP, and keep the ban on negative points in place.

Regardless, you need to clarify when you can and cannot take negative VPs.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Clarke
United Kingdom
Caithness
Scotland
flag msg tools
Avatar
Scion13 wrote:
Highland Cow wrote:

Yes, you can't 'lose' points you don't have. Just like you can't lose resources you don't have.
This is not correct. Jamey already clarified earlier in the thread:
He did. But the point is, this new sheet should be worded in such a way that you don't need to hunt for a comment in a thread.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jamey Stegmaier
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you all for your questions and comments! We're going to revise the file to make it clear that "gaining" refers to any time--the start of the game or the middle of the game--and that the Heralds would start the game with -15 VP (there's no other way to get negative VP or spend VP you don't have).
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guilherme Felga
Brazil
Santana de Parnaíba
São Paulo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for this!

Just a minor clarification: do the bots count as players for the matter of adjustments?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean McCarthy
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Only one thing puzzles me with this rebalance. Why punish players who pick up Craftsmen or Heralds at the end of the game? Balance aside ("gain a civ" is super variable), getting punished for finishing the military track is going to feel pretty crappy.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arnaud Fradin
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
SevenSpirits wrote:
Only one thing puzzles me with this rebalance. Why punish players who pick up Craftsmen or Heralds at the end of the game? Balance aside ("gain a civ" is super variable), getting punished for finishing the military track is going to feel pretty crappy.
I find it odd too, even if you gain these civs in era 4 I think there's a real possibility that you won't get those 15 points back. And as you say, it will make the last space of the military track and the radio tech not so appealing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
natbrooks wrote:
jameystegmaier wrote:
NiceShot318 wrote:
If your starting civ is the heralds, does that mean you start with negative points?
Yes, that's correct.
Now that you've changed the rule forbidding negative points, what's the new rule for Guilds? Are you allowed to go negative, more negative, negative but no farther than the -15 you started with as Heralds?

In my opinion, you should consider changing the Heralds to an Income Turn effect of -4 VP, and keep the ban on negative points in place.

Regardless, you need to clarify when you can and cannot take negative VPs.
Why does there need to be a new rule for Guilds? Guilds specifies that you can't pay VP you don't have on the card itself - why would that change?


OrigamiGoblin wrote:
How I would handle this is to put another player marker (or outpost) at the 15-point mark. Once my initial player marker reaches that point, I can reset it back to zero.
Wouldn't you just put your marker at 85 points (i.e. -15)?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Abram Towle
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Custom-tailored game nights in Milwaukee!
badge
Nerd. From Earth.
Avatar
Microbadge: Copper ReviewerMicrobadge: Play a bird from your handMicrobadge: Targi fan - Silver CrossMicrobadge: Point SaladMicrobadge: Vast: The Crystal Caverns fan
Scion13 wrote:

OrigamiGoblin wrote:
How I would handle this is to put another player marker (or outpost) at the 15-point mark. Once my initial player marker reaches that point, I can reset it back to zero.
Wouldn't you just put your marker at 85 points (i.e. -15)?
Oh yes, that would probably be a better idea.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nat Brooks
msg tools
mbmbmb
Scion13 wrote:
natbrooks wrote:

Now that you've changed the rule forbidding negative points, what's the new rule for Guilds? Are you allowed to go negative, more negative, negative but no farther than the -15 you started with as Heralds?

In my opinion, you should consider changing the Heralds to an Income Turn effect of -4 VP, and keep the ban on negative points in place.

Regardless, you need to clarify when you can and cannot take negative VPs.
Why does there need to be a new rule for Guilds? Guilds specifies that you can't pay VP you don't have on the card itself - why would that change?
I don't have the text of Guilds in front of me. I was under the impression that the prohibition of negative points was a more general ruling.

Still, I can see how some players would interpret the Heralds' negative starting points as their starting point, such that if they gained 10 VP to get to -5 VP, they would "have" 10 VP to spend on Guilds.

It's a minor point. But it needs clarification. Even if YOU interpret it in only one way, there's plenty of room for other players to interpret it differently.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve H
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
natbrooks wrote:
Scion13 wrote:
natbrooks wrote:

Now that you've changed the rule forbidding negative points, what's the new rule for Guilds? Are you allowed to go negative, more negative, negative but no farther than the -15 you started with as Heralds?

In my opinion, you should consider changing the Heralds to an Income Turn effect of -4 VP, and keep the ban on negative points in place.

Regardless, you need to clarify when you can and cannot take negative VPs.
Why does there need to be a new rule for Guilds? Guilds specifies that you can't pay VP you don't have on the card itself - why would that change?
I don't have the text of Guilds in front of me. I was under the impression that the prohibition of negative points was a more general ruling.

Still, I can see how some players would interpret the Heralds' negative starting points as their starting point, such that if they gained 10 VP to get to -5 VP, they would "have" 10 VP to spend on Guilds.

It's a minor point. But it needs clarification. Even if YOU interpret it in only one way, there's plenty of room for other players to interpret it differently.
You can find a list of all civs and tapestry cards here.
Guilds: Pay <<5>>/<<10>>/<<15>> to gain 1/2/3 [RESOURCE] or pay 1/2/3 [RESOURCE] to gain <<5>>/<<10>>/<<15>>. You cannot spend VP you don't have.

The text on the card only applies to the card. Just because Militarism says I can put outposts on explored territories, doesn't mean that I can do that whenever, it's only when the card is in effect. Similarly, I'm only prohibited from advancing on the Science track when I've played Theocracy.

Believe me, I'm all for things being explicitly called out in the rules and not hidden in things like reference guides. There absolutely should be an explicit statement that negative VP is possible.

I just think that between the fact that most games allow negative VP and the Herald's new ability, most people would be able to make a ruling.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ernesto Pavan
msg tools
Avatar
So... does this more or less officially sanction the transformation of the boardgame industry into a sub-branch of the videogame industry, where content is released that is half-baked, to be fixed via updated once people have already spent their money on it?

And no, this message isn't completely sarcastic.
18 
 Thumb up
2.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jamey Stegmaier
United States
St. Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We tested Tapestry extensively hundreds of times (blind and local playtests) with the intent of balancing it as well as we possibly could (and trying to make it as fun and intuitive as possible). The results of thousands of plays of a game upon release are revelatory beyond what 300+ playtests could provide. I choose to admit my shortcomings and act on them in a way to improve the experience for others.
73 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allen Brown
United States
Brandon
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ErnestoPavan wrote:
So... does this more or less officially sanction the transformation of the boardgame industry into a sub-branch of the videogame industry, where content is released that is half-baked, to be fixed via updated once people have already spent their money on it?

And no, this message isn't completely sarcastic.
Hundreds of play tests happened before release. Thousands of more plays is a lot more data to consider.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Genesyx

Kuala Lumpur
Wilayah Persekutuan
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Given the discussion surrounding the Herald's negative VP, and its interaction with the guilds card, wouldn't it be better to word it such that the Heralds lose 15VP at the end of the game?

ErnestoPavan wrote:
So... does this more or less officially sanction the transformation of the boardgame industry into a sub-branch of the videogame industry, where content is released that is half-baked, to be fixed via updated once people have already spent their money on it?

And no, this message isn't completely sarcastic.
I feel that this is a lose-lose scenario though?
As in the designers can definitely choose to not update the game, but that'll be a net loss for us; yet doing so would also lead to people voicing their unhappiness towards the need of an update. Personally my stance is so long as the changes don't require physical changes to the components to keep track (ie: errata specific cards), or if we can get them easily then it's fine. In this case this is just an additional sheet to print out and check, sort-of like the reference cards - so it's okay for me.

(Also I think half-baked is a strong word, but I digress)
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arnaud Fradin
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
genesyx wrote:
Given the discussion surrounding the Herald's negative VP, and its interaction with the guilds card, wouldn't it be better to word it such that the Heralds lose 15VP at the end of the game?
I think it would be better, but it's also easier to forgot. But again I'm more worried about the fact that you lose 15 points even if you get them during your last income, it seems really unfair.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [13] |