Hi all,This might be a good idea to mitigate the luck at the start part of the game.
With these suggestions I try to make the game interactive and strategic, without making it a heavy weight game. Sure, combining them all will ruin the game, so think of the following suggestions as and/or-options: what do you think?
Start of the game: receive 12 cards and discard 7 - to start off more focused (although there is some caution for too many city villa's in one hand)
Start of the game: remove the 'build 2 buildings for max $4'-cards from the game - as most of the times the players gaining it win in my experienceIt is a strong card, but not a definite winner. I am always wary of removing any card from a card game before I know the game through and through.
General: limit the max gain of $/VPs per card to e.g. $4 and 8 VPs - as sometimes the gains are too extreme That is the fun of the game, building a combo that gives you an extreme gain in VPs and $. By the time you are really making extremes then usually that round or the next is the last round anyway.
General: limit the max gain of cards to your hand size, so you effectively refill your hands to 12 cards - as sometimes the gains a bit too extreme to my tasteall you do by that is increase the luck in the game, since the advantage of the huge gain is that you have more cards to choose from, and a better chance of getting one of the 11 pointers.
Phase 1: player with the most cards gives one card to the player with the least cards - to compensate for extreme situations
So you want to give an advantage to the player who is playing for VPs instead of $, why would you do that?
Also, then it is impossible to ever build one of the cards that cost $11.
Phase 3: redistribute all cards you gain that exceed your hand size of 12 to your opponents of your choice - seems like fun card management mechanism (don't be too greedy otherwise you'll benifit others)
Again giving an advantage to players who play for VPs instead of $
Phase 3: player with the least VPs* gets a free 'pick one card of the top five deck cards' - subtle but nice effectTo compenste for your 2 changes that give cardss to the players playing for VPs, you now give one more card to the player that is playing for $ instead of for VPs.
Phase 3: player with the least VPs* has the ability to build two buildings in that turn - again to compensate for (extreme) frontrunnersand again, to compensate for the advantage you have been giving to the VP players, you now give an advantage to th $ players.
Phase 3: player with the least cards to draw can draw as many as the second least player and then discards X cards as if he/she had drawn the actual cards he/she would get - for a subtle card management advantage And one final advantage for the VP player.
* of course, determining who has the least VPs depends on whether you use the VPs on the table or the cumulative gained VPs
Which (combinations of) rules do you like?
Got more suggestions or alternatives?
I'm eager :-D
I do not like these ideas at all, the only thing I might like is giving out a fe more cards at the start (not necesarily 12) to mitigate luck. I would only do this with experienced players to prevent AP from new players who are trying to figure out what to keep.
For the rest, none of your ideas seem to improve the game, I believe they will mostly imbalance this game.