Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
60 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

7 Wonders» Forums » Rules

Subject: Is gold 'spent' for points before checking tie breaker? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: Dead_Horse [+] [View All]
Todd McCorkle
United States
Anderson
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wanted to double check something. At the end of the game, you get 1 vp per 3 gold. Is this gold returned to the bank/supply? I know there's nothing in the rules that says that, but it bugs me a little that you can get points for something that also counts for tiebreaker.

I'm mostly thinking of Saint Petersburg where it was the designer's intent to spend $10 to the bank for each point and leftovers were used for tiebreaker, but the rules weren't written that way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Antoine Bauza
France
Valence
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nope, keep your gold !
25 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robby Timmermans
Belgium
Wellen
flag msg tools
badge
-- -- parkibricks -- --
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You keep the gold, but it wouldn't make a difference:
Let's say there is a tie, the difference in gold would be the same wether you gave the gold to the bank or kept it.
Even if you don't spend all the money on points, and there is a tie, there still would be the gold difference. I can't see anyone keeping gold and not get points for it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Thornsen
United States
Nottingham
Maryland
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It makes a difference for the tiebreaker.

Ex: Player A has 56 points from cards, plus 12 gold = 60 points
Player B has 60 points from cards, plus 1 gold = 60 points

If you spent the gold, player B would win the tiebreaker.
Under the official rules, player A wins the tiebreaker.
21 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Duff
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Faranim wrote:
It makes a difference for the tiebreaker.

Ex: Player A has 56 points from cards, plus 12 gold = 60 points
Player B has 60 points from cards, plus 1 gold = 60 points

If you spent the gold, player B would win the tiebreaker.
Under the official rules, player A wins the tiebreaker.


I always turn in the gold bank to the bank for points in any game that has this, for precisely this reason.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rules aside, it is totally senseless to "spend" a resource that is also used as a tiebreaker. In this case, doing so would disadvantage players whose number of gold coins is a multiple of 3, which is a completely arbitrary quality that reflects nothing whatsoever about the player's achievements during the game.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd McCorkle
United States
Anderson
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yay! Discussion!

I want to thank Antoine for the quick response. I also want to ask what the logic/rationale behind the tiebreaker is. I sort of see things in two opposing ways...

To give an example: let's say I end the game with 5 gold and an opponent, Bob, has 6. After scoring all the other stuff but gold, I'm 1 pt ahead of Bob. Including gold, Bob gets 2pts, I get 1 and we're tied. He wins the tie breaker which seems weird to me since I only need 1 more gold to be a point ahead while Bob needs 3 more. Spending the golds would reflect that.

The opposing viewpoint I see is if there was 1 more turn, whoever had more money overall would most likely get more points.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
The opposing viewpoint I see is if there was 1 more turn, whoever had more money overall would most likely get more points.

Ah, but that isn't actually the opposing argument. The "weirdness" with spending gold becomes clear when you consider larger gold discrepancies. Consider the following two cases, each of which assumes that you and Bob are tied after the gold is "spent:"

Case #1:

You: 10 gold, 1 after spending
Bob: 60 gold, 0 after spending
Outcome: You win.

You: 10 gold, 1 after spending
Bob: 62 gold, 2 after spending
Outcome: Bob wins.

In your example, yes, you're 1 gold away from the next point while Bob is 3 gold away. But if you do get that extra gold, the outcome makes perfect sense: you have as much gold as Bob but more points elsewhere, so of course you should win.

In the above scenario, 2 gold makes the difference between Bob's winning and losing, but since he's massively wealthier than you already, it's quite silly that those last two gold should make the difference. In other words:

"If I have more gold, I win. If I have less gold, I lose."

Makes sense.

"If I have 52 more gold, I win. If I have 50 more gold, I lose."

Makes no sense.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd McCorkle
United States
Anderson
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is it any sillier than if I got the 2 extra gold instead of Bob, I would flat out win by 1 pt, no tiebreaker needed, even though Bob is 'massively more wealthy'? Or, heck, go ahead and give Bob the extra 2 gold too. The delta gold is the same, but now I win by 1 pt. *shrug*


Either way, I doubt it will be that big of a deal. It's just a minor pet peeve of mine when something 'double dips' like that to earn points and also count for tie breaker.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nolan Lichti
United States
Indianapolis
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I haven't played 7 Wonders yet, but I find the discussion interesting.

Here are a couple of other ways to look at it:

- The points earned from coins shouldn't be any less valuable than points earned other ways. That is, I think it's unfair to look at it from a "points before coins" point of view. During play, a player may have deliberately focused on coins b/c that was a more efficient way for him to earn points. He shouldn't be punished because he happened to land on a round number of coins.

- Likewise, does "double dipping" diminish other points earned in other ways? That is, is it more desirable to earn points through coins because they also serve as a tie-breaker?

I think the solution depends on whether it is more efficient to spend coins on other things to earn points, or whether it is equally efficient to spend coins on VP. If it's the former (which I'm guessing it is), I don't see a problem with "double dipping". If it's the latter, I can see that as being a balance problem.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kusinohki wrote:
Is it any sillier than if I got the 2 extra gold instead of Bob, I would flat out win by 1 pt, no tiebreaker needed.

This example is out of scope of the discussion. If you win flat-out, then no tie-breaker is needed in the first place. I won't disagree with your contention that the above is silly, but now you're contesting the game's fundamental scoring mechanic, not my claim that "spending" the gold when it is also used as a tiebreaker is senseless. If gold isn't needed to break the tie, then of course it doesn't matter whether you "spend" it or not. I'll concede that.

If your problem is the double-dipping, then it's worth noting that the double-dipping occurs whether you "spend" the gold or not (!). Again, it looks like your contention is with something other than my claim that "spending" gold, in the event of a tie, is silly.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Duff
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Boarass wrote:
If your problem is the double-dipping, then it's worth noting that the double-dipping occurs whether you "spend" the gold or not (!).


Huh? No, it doesn't occur when you spend it.

Back to Jeff's example:

Quote:
Player A has 56 points from cards, plus 12 gold = 60 points
Player B has 60 points from cards, plus 1 gold = 60 points


A spends his gold for his 4 extra points. It's gone, that gold is no longer available for anything, it no longer contributes to the tie break (which he rightfully loses).

The double dipping non-spending way (aka the silly way):

A uses his gold to purchase 4 points. He then uses that same 12 gold again to purchase the one extra point available in the tiebreaker.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Bazynski
Poland
warsaw
mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
3 gold is 1 point. so - 1 gold is 1/3 of a point

A has 60 points.
B has 60 1/3 points.


let's assume you get a point for 100 coins at game end.

player 1: 59 points, 100 coins
player 2: 60 points, 99 coins.

any system that gives a win to player 1 to me is more or less random...
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
UnknownParkerBrother wrote:
Boarass wrote:
If your problem is the double-dipping, then it's worth noting that the double-dipping occurs whether you "spend" the gold or not (!).


Huh? No, it doesn't occur when you spend it.

In my example, either Bob wins because you compare 60 gold to 10, or he loses because you compare 0 gold to 1. The gold is being double-dipped either way, just with different numbers. This is logically incontrovertible. If we disagree here, either you or I have misinterpreted the other's terms somewhere.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Todd McCorkle
United States
Anderson
Indiana
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Boarass wrote:
UnknownParkerBrother wrote:
Boarass wrote:
If your problem is the double-dipping, then it's worth noting that the double-dipping occurs whether you "spend" the gold or not (!).


Huh? No, it doesn't occur when you spend it.

In my example, either Bob wins because you compare 60 gold to 10, or he loses because you compare 0 gold to 1. The gold is being double-dipped either way, just with different numbers. This is logically incontrovertible. If we disagree here, either you or I have misinterpreted the other's terms somewhere.

With 10 gold, only 9 of those gold counted for points. The remainder, leftover, unspent (if spending) only counted for the tie breaker and only 'dipped' once.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boris Dvorkin
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmm. I'm trying to see your point of view, but I keep coming back to the same thing:

Case #1:

Bob has 60 gold. He spends it for 12 points (dip #1). He has 0 gold left, which he compares to your 1 gold for the tiebreaker (dip #2). He loses.

Case #2:

Bob has 60 gold. He receives 12 points for it (dip #1). He still has all the gold, which he compares to your 10 gold for the tiebreaker (dip #2). He wins.

Either way, the gold is "considered" twice.

EDIT: Oh my god I see what you mean. If Bob had 61 gold, then in Case #1, only 1 gold would be double-dipped; in Case #2, all 61 gold would be double-dipped. You're correct. I don't find this to be a meaningful distinction, however: just because a different amount of gold is being double-dipped doesn't change the fact that gold, the game entity, is counted twice.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Folke
Denmark
Lyngby (Copenhagen)
flag msg tools
badge
Pierce 2
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting discussion. I think that as long as everybody knows that 3 gold is slightly better than 1 point, there's no problem at all.

If you argue along the lines that "there's no reason that 3 coins should be better than 1 point", then you might as well argue that the tie breaker should be number of buildings or number of science symbols instead. It's the way the game was designed. IMO.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John McGeehan
United States
Manchester
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was simply considering gold to be worth 1/3 of a point, such that "leftover gold" is what made the tiebreaker, but see that that was incorrect.

I guess it's an interesting consideration - if you have that much gold left over at the end of the game, the question arises whether or not that could have been spent to build another card to gain more points, given the cost of a resource from a neighbor is less than a point's worth of gold, so therefore it's a risk to save that much...I'll have to think about the ramifications (not that this has ever come up, as I only played it a few times at BGG.con and there were no ties for first).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michele Nesci
Italy
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Many cards serve a double function. Many do their thing and help building more for free, resources give you resources and also provide potential income when your neighbors buy your stuff, military get you points while denying them to your opponents and earlier stages of your wonder (usually worse than a good card) give you access to the later ones (which are good) while letting you dump cards you don't want other players to have at the same time. If about half the game elements are good for more than one thing I don't see why gold also doing so is a problem.

The only problem I could see if there were some gold strategy exploiting that fact, meaning that to win you should just hoard gold and ignore the rest of the game. I am sure we all agree that there is no such a winning strategy for 7 Wonders though.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Konata
United States
Highlands Ranch
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have read this thread 4 times now and still don't understand what's going on devil
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rik Van Horn
United States
Livonia
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This certainly needs a clarification from the designer.

But I'm definitely in the "you turn in your gold for VP's" camp. Otherwise you're getting double value for your gold.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Duff
Canada
Ottawa
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rokkr wrote:
This certainly needs a clarification from the designer.


He already did, in the second post.

It's just that a bunch of us disagree with him.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rik Van Horn
United States
Livonia
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Then string him up I say! He's obviously drunk on eggnog or somesuch.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Williams
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rokkr wrote:
This certainly needs a clarification from the designer.

But I'm definitely in the "you turn in your gold for VP's" camp. Otherwise you're getting double value for your gold.


Obviously you have to count all gold. If I have 7 gold remaining I should win a tie with a person that has 2 gold remaining. By your account I should give back 6 and then lose the tie because they have 2 left and I only have 1.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rik Van Horn
United States
Livonia
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
fargus9 wrote:
Rokkr wrote:
This certainly needs a clarification from the designer.

But I'm definitely in the "you turn in your gold for VP's" camp. Otherwise you're getting double value for your gold.


Obviously you have to count all gold. If I have 7 gold remaining I should win a tie with a person that has 2 gold remaining. By your account I should give back 6 and then lose the tie because they have 2 left and I only have 1.

Your grasp of my position is top notch. I commend you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  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.