Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

7 Wonders» Forums » Variants

Subject: 2-player variant rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Erik Andersson
Sweden
Rimbo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I really like this game but i mostly play it only 2-player. Do you think its possible to play without the neural city, to me it is pretty pointless. Maybe you can discard one card instead every turn? Or do you have any better idea for some 2-player houserule that might work?

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Juhl
Denmark
Ørbæk
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmb
In the variant section you can find several homemade 2-player rules.

Have not tried any of them so cant comment on which to use. I love 7 wonders but think it fails to deliver as a 2 player. So many better 2 player games I would rather spend my time on.

(If you want a meaty 2 player I would suggest to check out Martin Wallave new game "A few acres of snow" - it is absolutely brilliant)

Cheers Martin
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vince Lupo
United States
ALEXANDRIA
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mjuhl wrote:
In the variant section you can find several homemade 2-player rules.

Have not tried any of them so cant comment on which to use. I love 7 wonders but think it fails to deliver as a 2 player. So many better 2 player games I would rather spend my time on.

(If you want a meaty 2 player I would suggest to check out Martin Wallave new game "A few acres of snow" - it is absolutely brilliant)

Cheers Martin



You do need a fake third player to keep the balance of things.


I really like my variant:

Setup the game like a normal 3 player game and give the "third" player a board and 3 coins and the usual hand of cards.

On the dummys turn a random card is drawn from it's hand.

It tries to build that card first. If it it can't, then tries to buy resources from trade.

If it really can't then it tries to build the stages of it's wonder.

If it can't do that either, then it discards the card for 3 coins.


When trading it opts to buy cheapest resources first and then it tries to balance who it gives money too. Roll a die or flip a coin if you have to. But generally it was very logical who it would pay.




Why do I prefer my variant over the built in 2 player variant?
1) we don't have to decide something for the third player and hence the game is faster.
2) it seems more realistic/natural/balanced. Our scores are usually rather close when we use my variant. When we tried the official variant I was nearly 20 points ahead of my wife.
3) it was less confusing because it felt like I was playing a normal 3 player game.

6 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Andersson
Sweden
Rimbo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks. Acually I missed the whole forum about this, sorry meeple

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean Adam
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I thought I'd just throw in a comment to the contrary; we really like the official 2 player variant. I've seen people make some pretty clever plays using the free city and reckon far from a useless complication it adds a much needed sense of depth and tactical play to the game. It's my favourite way to play.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vince Lupo
United States
ALEXANDRIA
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
moonglow wrote:
I thought I'd just throw in a comment to the contrary; we really like the official 2 player variant. I've seen people make some pretty clever plays using the free city and reckon far from a useless complication it adds a much needed sense of depth and tactical play to the game. It's my favourite way to play.



My wife prefers my variant but I wouldn't mind playing it either way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fraser
Australia
Melbourne
flag msg tools
admin
designer
Back in the days when there were less maps we played every map back to back
badge
Ooh a little higher, now a bit to the left, a little more, a little more, just a bit more. Oooh yes, that's the spot!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thread moved to 7 Wonders» Forums » Variants
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giliar Perez
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Neo42 wrote:
mjuhl wrote:
In the variant section you can find several homemade 2-player rules.

Have not tried any of them so cant comment on which to use. I love 7 wonders but think it fails to deliver as a 2 player. So many better 2 player games I would rather spend my time on.

(If you want a meaty 2 player I would suggest to check out Martin Wallave new game "A few acres of snow" - it is absolutely brilliant)

Cheers Martin



You do need a fake third player to keep the balance of things.


I really like my variant:

Setup the game like a normal 3 player game and give the "third" player a board and 3 coins and the usual hand of cards.

On the dummys turn a random card is drawn from it's hand.

It tries to build that card first. If it it can't, then tries to buy resources from trade.

If it really can't then it tries to build the stages of it's wonder.

If it can't do that either, then it discards the card for 3 coins.


When trading it opts to buy cheapest resources first and then it tries to balance who it gives money too. Roll a die or flip a coin if you have to. But generally it was very logical who it would pay.




Why do I prefer my variant over the built in 2 player variant?
1) we don't have to decide something for the third player and hence the game is faster.
2) it seems more realistic/natural/balanced. Our scores are usually rather close when we use my variant. When we tried the official variant I was nearly 20 points ahead of my wife.
3) it was less confusing because it felt like I was playing a normal 3 player game.



This variant is awesome and Orissa very well. Thanks!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Stokes
England
Basingstoke
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nitrium wrote:
Neo42 wrote:
mjuhl wrote:
In the variant section you can find several homemade 2-player rules.

Have not tried any of them so cant comment on which to use. I love 7 wonders but think it fails to deliver as a 2 player. So many better 2 player games I would rather spend my time on.

(If you want a meaty 2 player I would suggest to check out Martin Wallave new game "A few acres of snow" - it is absolutely brilliant)

Cheers Martin



You do need a fake third player to keep the balance of things.


I really like my variant:

Setup the game like a normal 3 player game and give the "third" player a board and 3 coins and the usual hand of cards.

On the dummys turn a random card is drawn from it's hand.

It tries to build that card first. If it it can't, then tries to buy resources from trade.

If it really can't then it tries to build the stages of it's wonder.

If it can't do that either, then it discards the card for 3 coins.


When trading it opts to buy cheapest resources first and then it tries to balance who it gives money too. Roll a die or flip a coin if you have to. But generally it was very logical who it would pay.




Why do I prefer my variant over the built in 2 player variant?
1) we don't have to decide something for the third player and hence the game is faster.
2) it seems more realistic/natural/balanced. Our scores are usually rather close when we use my variant. When we tried the official variant I was nearly 20 points ahead of my wife.
3) it was less confusing because it felt like I was playing a normal 3 player game.



This variant is awesome and Orissa very well. Thanks!


Tried it last night and work very well made the game flow better than trying to work the free city.

One thing we didnt do was count the free city points, he (it) had alot of gold.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
winnie the-pooh
Hungary
Budapest
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Nitrium wrote:
Neo42 wrote:
mjuhl wrote:
In the variant section you can find several homemade 2-player rules.

Have not tried any of them so cant comment on which to use. I love 7 wonders but think it fails to deliver as a 2 player. So many better 2 player games I would rather spend my time on.

(If you want a meaty 2 player I would suggest to check out Martin Wallave new game "A few acres of snow" - it is absolutely brilliant)

Cheers Martin



You do need a fake third player to keep the balance of things.


I really like my variant:

Setup the game like a normal 3 player game and give the "third" player a board and 3 coins and the usual hand of cards.

On the dummys turn a random card is drawn from it's hand.

It tries to build that card first. If it it can't, then tries to buy resources from trade.

If it really can't then it tries to build the stages of it's wonder.

If it can't do that either, then it discards the card for 3 coins.


When trading it opts to buy cheapest resources first and then it tries to balance who it gives money too. Roll a die or flip a coin if you have to. But generally it was very logical who it would pay.




Why do I prefer my variant over the built in 2 player variant?
1) we don't have to decide something for the third player and hence the game is faster.
2) it seems more realistic/natural/balanced. Our scores are usually rather close when we use my variant. When we tried the official variant I was nearly 20 points ahead of my wife.
3) it was less confusing because it felt like I was playing a normal 3 player game.



This variant is awesome and Orissa very well. Thanks!


it is too random. the free city variant, the official one adds a plus strategy component to the game, which is needed, because of lack of players. with the free city you can trash cards that your oppponent need, or give yourself money, or make your opponent invest into more military, etc.
 
 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.