Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Warriors & Traders» Forums » General

Subject: builder-path to powerful? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We are real newbies to this games but after two games (one with a big rule error) we are the opinion the three specialization-paths are not balanced. please convince me of the opposite!
supposed 3 players each of them focussing only on one path:
- player A takes the warrior path - he gets strong units but he has massive problems to feed the units (and to get the gold for recruiting new units). The problem get worse as soon as you have more than 5 regions and you have to stationize units in your regions.
- player B takes the trader path - in militaryaspects he is out - he has no chance for getting an units better than infantery. As long as nobody attacks him he can get huge amounts of gold and use it to buy victry points - but as soon as someone attacks him he is doomed.

ok - until now you can suppose that the game is build in a way that you have to mix the paths to have success. But...

- play C takes the builder path: In respect to military there is a period where he has inferior units compared to the warrior.
But he gets knights more early than the warior. The units are still inferior (no retreat, no double strike, only 2 AP)and you need 2 actions to build but he doesn't lose actions to gather food or gold.
In Addition he can build forts so he can defend his regions without the high costs in food.

So the builder is the only one who can win without investing in other paths. So he can get to the high-end tech more early - and this high-end tech is significantly better than the highend tech of the warrior tree.

Somewhat I miss something like food-income or the abilityto hold countries without having to stationize a unit in it.

How can you fight a war if you don't get enough food each round to feed one knight - not to speak of another one or all the infantries you need to hold your regions?


And do you ever put 2 of your start developments in warrior? There is litle use in buildng an archer the first round with only one food on hand...

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giancarlo Sorrentino
Italy
Palermo
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You can use your 4 princesses to control a region.

BTW, the first path is the strongest one in my opinion. The military path can hurt a little if you use it to kill enemy princesses at the beginning of the game, preventing to control more regions. But the first path lets you build forts, that give you a strong defense and 3 points that you can't lose (if someone attacks your fort, with 5 damages you will kill enough units to gain at least 3 points).

Furthermore, while players pointing on military have to waste their actions to recruit units and declare war (other than collecting enough food to feed them), you can use them to build forts (even 2 per turn in the end game), without fearing to loose any VPs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrei Novac
Poland
Warszawa
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fluxx wrote:
We are real newbies to this games but after two games (one with a big rule error) we are the opinion the three specialization-paths are not balanced. please convince me of the opposite!


I will not try to convince you of the opposite , what I will try to do is to come up with a few ideas and an announcement and to thank you for bringing this again to everyone's attention.

Fluxx wrote:

supposed 3 players each of them focussing only on one path:
- player A takes the warrior path - he gets strong units but he has massive problems to feed the units (and to get the gold for recruiting new units). The problem get worse as soon as you have more than 5 regions and you have to stationize units in your regions.
- player B takes the trader path - in militaryaspects he is out - he has no chance for getting an units better than infantery. As long as nobody attacks him he can get huge amounts of gold and use it to buy victry points - but as soon as someone attacks him he is doomed.

ok - until now you can suppose that the game is build in a way that you have to mix the paths to have success. But...


Your remark is absolutely true, the Military and Trade paths are not made to be played 'alone', meaning that one should combine them to get the most out of them.

One way you could play this is to try to use the option of Upgrading one tech at the cost of the other.

One example:
turns 1,2 - build armies to 'clean' the Barbarians out of your country, to prepare for Unification; invest a bit in Military tech
turns 3-5 - invest in Trade and move the few tokens from Military to Production, to get more resources; also, use the Unification tokens to upgrade Trade

At this point, you either got to the point of having Monopoly (so expect to be attacked since you most likely control the game) or you stopped before and you're investing your extra Action (the one you buy with 5 Gold) to get some armies or to upgrade another tech. As a trader you should never have problems with getting Food to keep armies alive.

Still, your point remains valid, Military and Trade alone are not as strong as Production. However, in an allied game, their value increases a lot since an alliance has easier access to synergies between technologies.

Fluxx wrote:

- play C takes the builder path: In respect to military there is a period where he has inferior units compared to the warrior.
But he gets knights more early than the warior. The units are still inferior (no retreat, no double strike, only 2 AP)and you need 2 actions to build but he doesn't lose actions to gather food or gold.
In Addition he can build forts so he can defend his regions without the high costs in food.


So, the Production path is a defensive one, your point absolutely correct. It is the paths that most Euro gamers will take.
As you can see from the beginning, there are 2 economical techs and only 1 military, saying that W&T leans more towards a Euro game than a war game. It makes life easier for those who think they found a 'clean path' to victory. The only things is that no two games are alike and, although there's no random in the game, how other play is unpredictable.


Still (and this is where my announcement comes), we have prepared an errata with very few rules change to encourage more the military and trade. Actually, these rules were in one of our latest prototypes, but we went on without them to make the game more attractive for Eurogamers who don't want to fight. This will not be mandatory, you can see it just as an additional set of rules to encourage player conflicts. And we'll release them here on BGG in a couple of weeks.

Fluxx wrote:

And do you ever put 2 of your start developments in warrior? There is litle use in buildng an archer the first round with only one food on hand...


If you build in the first round an Archer - which will die, it's true, you get to kill 1 Barbarian. You keep the starting Food for later, you also get 1 VP and use your second Action to develop a Tech. You can also use the ability to upgrade 1 tech at the cost of another... Or, people will find a better use of this option in an allied game
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
renard wrote:
You can use your 4 princesses to control a region.

I' aware of this - that is why I wrote that it becomes worse if you have more than 5 regions (one capital with fort + 4 prinesses). And if you want to unify bigger nationslike france or germania you propably go for 6 or 7 regions.

Quote:

BTW, the first path is the strongest one in my opinion. The military path can hurt a little if you use it to kill enemy princesses at the beginning of the game, preventing to control more regions.

Nice idea have to try this move.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
anovac wrote:

Still, your point remains valid, Military and Trade alone are not as strong as Production. However, in an allied game, their value increases a lot since an alliance has easier access to synergies between technologies.


OK - perhaps most of our problems arise from the fact that we pla with 3 players - so we don't have much of an alliance (at least not in the first half of a game).
Quote:


Still (and this is where my announcement comes), we have prepared an errata with very few rules change to encourage more the military and trade. Actually, these rules were in one of our latest prototypes, but we went on without them to make the game more attractive for Eurogamers who don't want to fight. This will not be mandatory, you can see it just as an additional set of rules to encourage player conflicts. And we'll release them here on BGG in a couple of weeks.

that sounds great. Although I'm more the euro-type of gamer I prefer it when the paths are well balanced against each other. If I want to avoid conflict I don't buy games with 'Warrior' in the title ;-)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Remy Suen
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Georg, looks like Andrei has uploaded the v2.1 rules to BGG. You should take a look at the new changes to the Trade and Military tech trees.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks, I will have a look at it immediately.
(funny thing - before I started BGG I thought about W&T and if I should ask here when the new rules would be available...)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Georg D.
Germany
Höxter
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ok just scanned the new rules. The changes sound very promising.

I hope I found all of them ;-)

Trader Path:
- Master Trader (VI) allows to buy up to two actions now.


--> still lacks any potential in warfare. But that is ok, with two actions per turn extra (and with merchant you can easily get the 10 gold each round) you can soon have a huge tech advantage. And if you make clever use of the monopoly ability you can discourage others to attack you. It still seems to be the path which is most difficult to play - but in a very challenging and inviting way.


Warrior Path:
- Pilaging (VI): No need for feeding units any more. This new trait is amazing. I hoped for a discount of one food per unit or an income of one food per contested territory - but that is even more than I hoped for. Now the warrior can act on its own and has no need of some ranks in production any more. He still has to get coins for building strong units but that should be manageable.

- Warlord (VII): in addition to the free 'declare war' action you can build two units with one action now. So - enough ressorces provided - you can build four units and declare war in one round. I think you will not often make full use of this as you need a very generous tradingpartner for it - but the possibility to do it is great.

--> My main complaints seem to be solved! You can be a warrior without beeing a builder now. And the high-end trait is worth the investment of two research-actions now. Provided enough gold he rocks the board! I can't wait to see the contest between a fullout warrior and a fullout builder :-D

I hope this changes didn't overcompensate the weakness of the warior-path. But in theory they sound great. I can't wait to play it soon! (I have to wait at least one week soblue)


1 
 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.