Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)» Forums » General

Subject: Lannaster unbalanced in 4 player? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mark Green
United Kingdom
Reading
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
So just yesterday we wound up our first 4-player game of GoT 2e. It ended with Lannaster winning mainly due to a dumb mistake by Baratheon.

But it does seem that Lannaster has a huge advantage on the 4-player map - they can grab three or four undefended castles just by breaking out to the East. With a few early Mustering cards, that can give them a force that it's tough for anyone else to stand against. Meanwhile Baratheon and Greyjoy are still sorting out their island transport and Stark is stuck in the more barren areas at the top of the map.

Is this something other people have encountered?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Juha R
Finland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
hyphz wrote:
So just yesterday we wound up our first 4-player game of GoT 2e. It ended with Lannaster winning mainly due to a dumb mistake by Baratheon.

But it does seem that Lannaster has a huge advantage on the 4-player map - they can grab three or four undefended castles just by breaking out to the East. With a few early Mustering cards, that can give them a force that it's tough for anyone else to stand against. Meanwhile Baratheon and Greyjoy are still sorting out their island transport and Stark is stuck in the more barren areas at the top of the map.

Is this something other people have encountered?


We played our first game today with 3 players so I can´t speak from experience. But I think that the Lannisters had a hard time even with 3 players, because they seemed to be in between Stark and Barantheon forces all the time. An early battle they lost to Stark with 3 casualties was major factor in their eventual downfall in this game, but I can´t see their position getting any easier in a 4 player game with Greyjoy right at their back. I would actually say that the Lannisters have the worst starting position in my opinion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kim Brebach
Australia
Sydney
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
more 4 player thoughts here http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/730585/a-game-of-thrones...

it all comes down to the geopolitics i reckon...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evgeny Reznikov
Israel
Haifa
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
hyphz wrote:
So just yesterday we wound up our first 4-player game of GoT 2e. It ended with Lannaster winning mainly due to a dumb mistake by Baratheon.

But it does seem that Lannaster has a huge advantage on the 4-player map - they can grab three or four undefended castles just by breaking out to the East. With a few early Mustering cards, that can give them a force that it's tough for anyone else to stand against. Meanwhile Baratheon and Greyjoy are still sorting out their island transport and Stark is stuck in the more barren areas at the top of the map.

Is this something other people have encountered?


I don't see a reason for Greyjoy & Baratheon to be 'sorting out their island transport' - their ships are a mobility bonus, not a disadvantage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Green
United Kingdom
Reading
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
azuredarkness wrote:

I don't see a reason for Greyjoy & Baratheon to be 'sorting out their island transport' - their ships are a mobility bonus, not a disadvantage.


Perhaps I misunderstood a rule here - it was something I had trouble with.

According to p23, "Any two land areas are considered adjacent for the purposes of marching.. when they are connected by consecutive sea areas (or a single sea area) each containing one or more friendly Ship units."

However, p25 states that "Ports function as a special area between the land and sea area they connect."

This seems to imply that if a port exists between a particular land and sea area, then that sea area cannot be used for ship transport from that land area, because there aren't "consecutive sea areas" in between them; there's a port area in the way.

This seemed a bit daft, though, so we ruled that a port area counts as a sea area. But Baratheon and Greyjoy still need to spend a fair number of March tokens getting a ship back into their port.

Was this a misinterpretation?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reaper Steve
United States
Alamogordo
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hyphz wrote:
Was this a misinterpretation?


Yes.
A port is an extra space that does not affect the adjacency of land and sea. You don't need a ship in port and another in the adjacent sea area to start a sea bridge... just the one in the sea area.

The main purpose of ports is to provide a way to muster ships even though the adjacent sea area may be occupied by an enemy. If no enemy is in the adjacent sea, you can muster the ship directly at sea or in the port.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gman Dingo
msg tools
I agree with reaper steve about ships being an advantage. When I play as baratheon, I'm on land and capturing another castle in one move.
 
 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.