Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

Advanced Civilization» Forums » General

Subject: Is it worth playing this game with (only) 3 players? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Ingo Griebsch
Germany
Bochum
North Rhine-Westphalia
flag msg tools
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
badge
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi,

I'm planing the first game and asked some buddies around. Unfortunately only three of them have time at the moment.

So I would like to know if it is worth to trying the game with (only) three players.

Any comment could be helpful...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Freelance Police
United States
Palo Alto
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Depends on the players. The best reason for three players is that, the fewer players you have, the less time this *long* game takes -- especially your first game. Also, if you like building civilizations more than elbowing for territory, three players should work fine.

The worst that can happen is that you all learn the rules so your next game goes smoothly!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mr G
United Kingdom
Hatfield Heath
Essex
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
YES

It is always worth playing Advanced Civ!

You can pick adjacent nations to cause conflict, but that is probably a bit flawed as the nation with the best 'external borders' will benefit.

Better to start with 3 nations who are fixed to give a good run at it. Say a North / East / South start. Will likley be a lot of building / trading and less fighting, but that's all good.

and good prep for your next full size game.

Regards,

Fentum
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
H-B-G
United Kingdom
Halesowen
West Midlands
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think it would be OK for a learning game, but I would never play with less than 6. To me the integral part of the game is the trading and this would suffer with this few players. Maximum 3 cards from each deck drawn per round (unless buying from deck 9) would mean longer to build up useful sets and a corresponding increase in the time needed to buy civ cards. The frequency of calamities would also be reduced.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vidar Ambrosiani
Sweden
Nyköping
Södermanland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A house-rule to make trading more interesting could be that you draw two cards for each city, i.e. if you have 4 cities you draw two 1:s, two 2:s two 3:s and two 4.s. That should make the game flow better too I think.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ingo Griebsch
Germany
Bochum
North Rhine-Westphalia
flag msg tools
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
badge
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi Vidar,

Vidarrr wrote:
A house-rule to make trading more interesting could be that you draw two cards for each city, i.e. if you have 4 cities you draw two 1:s, two 2:s two 3:s and two 4.s. That should make the game flow better too I think.


with 1:s, 2:s,... you mean what? Or asked the other way: What do you mean with the s in 1:s?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Shaffer
United States
San Francisco
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I probably wouldn't play with three, unless the plan is for the three to learn the game and then teach it to more players later.

He means draw two cards from the level one deck, two cards from the level two deck, two cards from the level three deck, etc. rather than the usual one card from each deck. Basically, draw double the normal allotment of trade good cards.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vidar Ambrosiani
Sweden
Nyköping
Södermanland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, that's how I meant. I think it will give a more "real" feel for the trading if the longer sets are workable. I once played with 4 players, and collecting anything less than 6-value cards was totaly pointless playing with the rules as written.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin DeOlden
United States
Chino
California
flag msg tools
badge
3D board game prints: www.3dhubs.com/service/3dgaming
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For 2 - 4 player games I usually allow buying from any stack for double the stacks cost. this gets more traded early and allows for a quicker game.
Also when I play a 2 player game I have always made the calamities non-tradeable.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bruce Schlickbernd
United States
Santa Clarita
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I played a whole bunch of three and four player games of Original Civ (not advanced). Basically, I wouldn't do it now since there is a much wider selection of games available than there was then, and the game is generally speaking the more the merrier, but sure, give it a try, especially just to get the rules down if you are not that familiar with the game. Plays a lot faster.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
I would say "no".

I would probably say that with fewer than six players (or less than a full day at your disposal), play something else.
 
 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.