Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
49 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Genoa» Forums » General

Subject: Two Players? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
How? I assume there would be no trading in the game? Every trade has to benefit one player more than the other right? And if there is no trade, the action the players take is simply determined by the dice rolls?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Duffy
United States
Phoenixville
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Mr Worf.....Fire!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The 2 player variant has the additional rule that the active player can take a second action, if he has accepted a deal with his opponent and given him an action that turn. (I'm not explaining that well, sorry, it's been a while since I've played.)

So there is a different type of interaction here, not a zero-sum gain situation as you would expect. You may potentially gain more from your second action than your opponent gained from getting their "off-turn" action.

This game is vastly superior with more players, but give the 2 player version a try, you may like it. I've certainly played it several times and had fun. In fact, you've just made me interested in pulling it out this weekend and trying 2 player again. Thanks!!

Kevin
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Still, it doesn't make sense to trade. Even if both players are getting more money out of the trade, one player has to be making more money than the other.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sheamus Parkes
United States
Carmel
Indiana
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
Still, it doesn't make sense to trade. Even if both players are getting more money out of the trade, one player has to be making more money than the other.


Sure he is, but do you know who?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Maybe not, but we know for a fact someone is being stupid everytime a trade happens, which is important. The poorer player can just choose to not trade. It's an easy, optimal solution to his poor play. It guarantees that they will have 50-50 chances.

Consider Go, passing is almost always a worst move than any move, even an inferior one. You can't pass, because you make your poor play even worse. In Traders of Genoa, not trading guarantees to make one player's poor play better.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sheamus Parkes
United States
Carmel
Indiana
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
Maybe not, but we know for a fact someone is being stupid everytime a trade happens, which is important. The poorer player can just choose to not trade. It's an easy, optimal solution to his poor play. It guarantees that they will have 50-50 chances.

Consider Go, passing is almost always a worst move than any move, even an inferior one. You can't pass, because you make your poor play even worse. In Traders of Genoa, not trading guarantees to make one player's poor play better.


Genoa has a lot more layers of complexity though. It's not easy at all to tell who benefited more.

And what about risk adjusting the values?

One asset may payout 100 dollars, but only 10% of the time. Another may payout 20 dollars 50% of the time. They're sort of equivalent, but one player may not care to take that 10% probability. They'd be willing to trade it off and only accept maybe 9 dollars for it. That doesn't make them wrong, maybe they have a hugely risky asset pile already.

It's just not a clean cut as Go. You have cubes, money, tiles, privileges, orders and messages...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Isamoor wrote:
drunkenKOALA wrote:
Maybe not, but we know for a fact someone is being stupid everytime a trade happens, which is important. The poorer player can just choose to not trade. It's an easy, optimal solution to his poor play. It guarantees that they will have 50-50 chances.

Consider Go, passing is almost always a worst move than any move, even an inferior one. You can't pass, because you make your poor play even worse. In Traders of Genoa, not trading guarantees to make one player's poor play better.


Genoa has a lot more layers of complexity though. It's not easy at all to tell who benefited more.

And what about risk adjusting the values?

One asset may payout 100 dollars, but only 10% of the time. Another may payout 20 dollars 50% of the time. They're sort of equivalent, but one player may not care to take that 10% probability. They'd be willing to trade it off and only accept maybe 9 dollars for it. That doesn't make them wrong, maybe they have a hugely risky asset pile already.

It's just not a clean cut as Go. You have cubes, money, tiles, privileges, orders and messages...

That's not the point. It's not that clear cut in Go either.

Take a complete beginner, and a world class professional in Traders of Genoa. The beginner can make the game near 50-50 by just not trading at all, ever.

It's like rock papers scissors. You can try to outguess your opponent. Or you can just play completely randomly and make it 50-50.

A negotiation game doesn't work with 2 players. Some other games, where the whole point of the game is to share profit at the expense of others, don't work with 2 either. That's why Modern Art and Tower of Babel don't list 2 players. I don't think Traders of Genoa should either. Sure you can say, it's not easy to tell what's the correct bid even in a 2 player game of Modern Art. But there is something inherently wrong with that game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
McDog
United States
Saint Paul
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
Isamoor wrote:
drunkenKOALA wrote:
Maybe not, but we know for a fact someone is being stupid everytime a trade happens, which is important. The poorer player can just choose to not trade. It's an easy, optimal solution to his poor play. It guarantees that they will have 50-50 chances.

Consider Go, passing is almost always a worst move than any move, even an inferior one. You can't pass, because you make your poor play even worse. In Traders of Genoa, not trading guarantees to make one player's poor play better.


Genoa has a lot more layers of complexity though. It's not easy at all to tell who benefited more.

And what about risk adjusting the values?

One asset may payout 100 dollars, but only 10% of the time. Another may payout 20 dollars 50% of the time. They're sort of equivalent, but one player may not care to take that 10% probability. They'd be willing to trade it off and only accept maybe 9 dollars for it. That doesn't make them wrong, maybe they have a hugely risky asset pile already.

It's just not a clean cut as Go. You have cubes, money, tiles, privileges, orders and messages...

That's not the point. It's not that clear cut in Go either.

Take a complete beginner, and a world class professional in Traders of Genoa. The beginner can make the game near 50-50 by just not trading at all, ever.

It's like rock papers scissors. You can try to outguess your opponent. Or you can just play completely randomly and make it 50-50.

A negotiation game doesn't work with 2 players. Some other games, where the whole point of the game is to share profit at the expense of others, don't work with 2 either. That's why Modern Art and Tower of Babel don't list 2 players. I don't think Traders of Genoa should either. Sure you can say, it's not easy to tell what's the correct bid even in a 2 player game of Modern Art. But there is something inherently wrong with that game.



Well, what is the goal of playing a game? I mean for most people. Have fun. You have no monetary gain. You could do equally unproductive things...video game, pc game, movie, book.

If people sit down and are entertained, how is something inherently wrong with it?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
That's besides the point. You can use that type of argument to justify any sorts of silly things.

It is inherently wrong because it is broken and have a degenerate strategy. In fact, it is precisely because I play to have fun, and not for money, that I'd rather play a game that is interesting instead of one in which I know the perfect degenerate strategy of.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
I'd rather play a game that is interesting instead of one in which I know the perfect degenerate strategy of.


This is only valid if you think you are the poorer player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
TheCat wrote:
drunkenKOALA wrote:
I'd rather play a game that is interesting instead of one in which I know the perfect degenerate strategy of.


This is only valid if you think you are the poorer player.

I do find it asinine to have two players trade with each other because they both think that the other player is the poorer player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"Asinine" is a bit strong. Having played and enjoyed two player Traders of Genoa, it's a bit insulting to have you call my gaming activity asinine. If you don't like it, that's fine, but why did you come here to call the people who do names? Why not just say "that's not for me" and move on?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
I didn't call anybody names. And why should I stress that my preferences are just opinions? Why don't you stress that your preferences are just opinions? Censorship? Because you don't like what others are saying, tell them to shut up?

Quote:
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it. -- Voltaire

No you won't.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I didn't ask you to shut up, I asked you to explain your motivation in coming into the Traders of Genoa thread and telling people that the way they play the game is asinine.

I never said you shouldn't be here, or shouldn't be able to be rude. I just asked why you wanted to do it. I definitely didn't say "shut up."
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
You ask me to explain my motivations...right. I don't have to answer that because I am not at court. At any rate I was wondering if there was any variant rules that would make the game feasible, but apparently not.

I do think that the two player game is asinine. That comment was directed at the game itself, rather than at any individual. If you want to take it personally then I can't help you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Goodrich
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Why can't more games have a handicapping mechanism?
badge
Becoming immortal!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
I do think that the two player game is asinine. That comment was directed at the game itself, rather than at any individual. If you want to take it personally then I can't help you.


What is somewhat annoying (I would hesitate to call it asinine) is posting about a game where you ask a question and then arguing against any response that is posted in reply. It's like picking a fight. Obviously, these people are responding to try to help you enjoy the game. If you can't be convinced, or don't want to hear others opinions, you should have made a post that said, simply, "Two player Traders of Genoa is asinine." What the point of that post would be is beyond me. Or you could have asked "Does anyone have a viable two-player variant for this game besides the official one?"

Mind you, I'm not defending Traders of Genoa, as I haven't played it. I understand your frustration, any game that allows you to play worse rather than better, or opt out of a major game mechanism, and have an equal shot at winning could be frustrating. Really, many games have "degenerate" elements, as the strategies we use come from incomplete knowledge, guessing, or assuming things about your opponents. If you don't like it, don't play the game - no one is forcing you.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
I am not convinced because nobody answered my question. I didn't know that I had to be convinced by virtue of an answer being given, any answer, an answer that disagrees with/does not take into account the very premise of my question. (I was asking how the game works, because I find it broken with the multiplayer rules. I wasn't asking whether it was broken with multiplayer rules or not--I've already made up my mind on that.)

There is a difference between not wanting to hear others' opinions, and disagreeing with others' opinions. The latter case is when you argue your case. The former is when you question others' motivation to voice their opinion with comments like these:

Quote:
If you don't like it, don't play the game - no one is forcing you.

If you like the game, play it--no one is forcing you not to.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm with Alan. It's not the asking the question that is the problem, it was the aggressive and rude way you responded to people who answered you.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Goodrich
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Why can't more games have a handicapping mechanism?
badge
Becoming immortal!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
I didn't know that I had to be convinced by virtue of an answer being given, any answer, an answer that disagrees with/does not take into account the very premise of my question.


You don't have to like any answer, but you also obviously have an answer you want to hear, which is: "Traders of Genoa is broken and hence is asinine." You could have stuck to your point and remained unconvinced and still said "I disagree, but thanks for the other perspectives." Instead, you want to argue just to argue. The continued need to portray yourself as somehow being the wronged party, as if other people are being rude by "not answering your question," makes your "arguments" even more unconvincing and only convinces the rest of us you just wanted to pick a fight. You come off as a jerk, that's all.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Crispin
United States
Wilmington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am interested in this topic but sadly unenlighted at the end of this thread.

EDIT: This was clearly not the end of the thread and it has returned to being an interesting discussion.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
cayluster wrote:
drunkenKOALA wrote:
I didn't know that I had to be convinced by virtue of an answer being given, any answer, an answer that disagrees with/does not take into account the very premise of my question.


You don't have to like any answer, but you also obviously have an answer you want to hear, which is: "Traders of Genoa is broken and hence is asinine." You could have stuck to your point and remained unconvinced and still said "I disagree, but thanks for the other perspectives." Instead, you want to argue just to argue. The continued need to portray yourself as somehow being the wronged party, as if other people are being rude by "not answering your question," makes your "arguments" even more unconvincing and only convinces the rest of us you just wanted to pick a fight. You come off as a jerk, that's all.

lol ok. Because arguing with you makes my day.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
McDog
United States
Saint Paul
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TheCat wrote:
I'm with Alan. It's not the asking the question that is the problem, it was the aggressive and rude way you responded to people who answered you.


Sometimes, people who focus too much on one thing (playing games maybe?)find themselves extremely deficient in social skills.

Sometimes.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
It takes two to tango, and it takes one to know one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
drunkenKOALA wrote:
It takes two to tango, and it takes one to know one.


So by this you mean to say it's ok for you to be rude because other people are rude in return? Sigh.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Chen
Taiwan
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
Look, what I took issue with in your post (or Alan's, which was more of the same) was the part, "if you don't like it...move on." Mmmkay? Think about that. Your mom tells you that she doesn't like mango ice creams, and you tell her, "if you don't like it, move on?"

And I'd have liked to keep the discussion of the game on the game, and not on any individuals, their motivations for discussing the game, their lack of social skills or understanding on how to have "fun" that led them to start said discussion, etc. If you don't like the discussion, ignore it and move on. Don't take cheap shots at my geekness.

It's alright if someone thinks your favorite game is stupid. Doesn't mean I am trying to "pick a fight" or "insult you."

I'll just leave it at that.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.