Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
46 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Zombicide» Forums » Rules

Subject: zombie splitting rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
mateo jurasic
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
is there anyone that likes this rule?
I enjoy this game a lot, but this rule just seems to suck.
1 zombie in a long building will eventually become many, just because it splits every turn. maybe if every building and block in this game wasnt symmetrical...

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Igor Knop
Brazil
Juiz de Fora
Minas Gerais
flag msg tools
badge
No disassemble! Vídeos de Partidas Completas Passo a Passo
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The rule is ok! No big deal.

It's a group spliting: 4xZombies splits 2 2xZombies groups. 5 zombies to 2 3xZombies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
foksieloy
Croatia
flag msg tools
You need kulen.
badge
How can you have any pudding?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am OK with the rule.
Consider it as if some zombies were lying beneath rubble, and now awake to noise, or perhaps some zombies that players though they killed were only damaged and now rejoin the horde.

We had a hilarious situation where a player drawn a AAAAGH card 4 turns in a row. It would be odd that 4 zombies were hiding in the room, but it made sense that the survivor merely knocked the zombie down, and failed to kill him instead (we even used the same miniature for flavour).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hugh G. Rection
United States
La Mesa
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What, you never heard of zombie-amoebas before?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wil
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
Read more comics!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm ok with the rule but it does seem to make the game more fiddly than it needs to be, especially inside of buildings. I've been considering making it an outdoors only rule just to avoid the upkeep.

Silent cars also bother me but that's another topic all together.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brooklyn Lundberg
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
Just posting my experience. Upon first reading the rules we decided that splitting was nonsense so we removed it from the game. Five scenarios in and haven't lost a single game. not even close. I think the game is way to easy but then remember that we removed an element that potentially makes it much much harder.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Hill
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
niku wrote:
Just posting my experience. Upon first reading the rules we decided that splitting was nonsense so we removed it from the game. Five scenarios in and haven't lost a single game. not even close. I think the game is way to easy but then remember that we removed an element that potentially makes it much much harder.


Actually, splitting doesn't add that much in the way of difficulty. Which makes me think you're probably missing other rules and/or playing something incorrectly. Or you've only played the easier scenarios with a full compliment of 6 players every time.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brooklyn Lundberg
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
niku wrote:
Just posting my experience. Upon first reading the rules we decided that splitting was nonsense so we removed it from the game. Five scenarios in and haven't lost a single game. not even close. I think the game is way to easy but then remember that we removed an element that potentially makes it much much harder.


Actually, splitting doesn't add that much in the way of difficulty. Which makes me think you're probably missing other rules and/or playing something incorrectly. Or you've only played the easier scenarios with a full compliment of 6 players every time.


4 survivors only. (noticed that there is no real scaling in the game so 6 survivors would be easier.) And im fairly certain im doing things correctly. I work at a game store so im seeing the game played all day. I would be surprised if there was something i was doing wrong that is being shared across multiple groups playing the game. i have played scenario tutorial through 5. And i honestly think its only just a moderately difficult coop game. harder than pandemic or forbidden islands but certainly easier than arkham horror, defenders of the realm or ghost stories. I think its just a 7 on a one to ten. What makes this one easier than others i think is its ability to guarantee survivability. Unless you put yourself in a position where you can be attacked, your guaranteed to not take damage. barring multiple activations which can easily be included in your calculations through card counting. If im doing something wrong i would love to know though.

you know there is something i have wondered about that i cannot find in the rule book. I'll post a new thread though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
CJ Kucera
United States
Unspecified
flag msg tools
static
badge
static
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
niku wrote:
And i honestly think its only just a moderately difficult coop game. harder than pandemic or forbidden islands but certainly easier than arkham horror


Easier than AH? Our group typically has to TRY to lose at AH. Dunwich and some other expansions help a bit, but I have found Zombicide at its hardest to be far, far more difficult than AH at its hardest. Granted, there are a few Zcide scenarios which are easy to the point of brokenness, and a number which are only moderately difficult, but the hard ones are (IMO) dead hard.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
foksieloy
Croatia
flag msg tools
You need kulen.
badge
How can you have any pudding?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nah, Arkham Horror is quite harder but you have to include expansions, and not dilute them.

Biggest difficulty in Zombicide is the extra activation, which you tend to experience less if you use extra miniatures.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stuart Holttum
United Kingdom
Southend on Sea
Essex
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
niku wrote:
Just posting my experience. Upon first reading the rules we decided that splitting was nonsense so we removed it from the game. Five scenarios in and haven't lost a single game. not even close.


Can I ask you to clarify please? When you say you "removed splitting", does that mean:

1) Zombies will still split to take two equal-length routes, but you don't add extras if they can't split equally?
or
2) All the zombies follow ONE of the equal-length paths?

If you do the first, then I'm as amazed as everyone else at your win record, though it could depend on the scenarios you're playing!

But if its the second, then I'm not the least bit surprised you keep winning. Zombies not splitting means - at minimum - that certain zones will remain clear to move through. Zombies that start coming from all directions are a LOT harder to deal with.

Also, choosing their route will allow the players to push them all that way, and so make the game incredibly easy. More empty zones is good - CHOOSING which zones stay empty is even better!

There's other advantages as well - less chance of wasting a twin-pistol shot, more zombies killed with a molotov....but I'm getting ahead of myself! Which of the two did you mean?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Hill
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Good point Stu!

I assumed he meant 1, but if he meant 2, oh boy!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeremiah Lee
United States
Milan
MI
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Had they said given us some thematic reason to have the zombies make more zombies, I would have had an easier time liking the rule. Tell me that when they split up they wake some zombies from a 'slumber', and I'm okay. Tell me zombies split into two zombies, and I say no-way.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mateo jurasic
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
I dont mind a difficult game but zombie splitting is the least fun rule in this game, and adds difficulty with out any real strategic way to offset it.
its easy to have 2 or 3 zombie splits occur in the later stages of the game, and if you just happen to be out of the right type of zombies at that point... oh well, you just died as those zombies get 1, 2 or maybe 3 extra often unexpected activations.
while you can predict some, you can not predict the ones that occur as the result of extra activation or manhole spawn cards, and in fact... one zombie split can lead to an extra zombie activation which can lead to another zombie split, then another activation... into a horribly lame chain reaction

i have no problem with the idea of zombies attracting other stragglers as they shamble around... it actually can be thematic, but when they trigger other activations, it really detracts from the fun, balance, and skillfulness of the game, unless of course spotting odd numbered zombie groups and maneuvering in ways to get them to not be in rooms with two equal distant exits is fun and strategic for you. Sounds lame to me.

i betcha this gets adjusted in any expansion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ingo Griebsch
Germany
Bochum
North Rhine-Westphalia
flag msg tools
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
badge
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi all,

just read the rules and stummbled over this strange rule. So I would like to know if you all have made some more experience with

Quote:
1) Zombies will still split to take two equal-length routes, but you don't add extras if they can't split equally?


I mean this seems to be the most meaningful way to split a group!? Don't really know if NOT adding zombies makes the game much easier. But I would like to hear your sentiments about this issue.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Hill
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
d0gb0t wrote:
Hi all,

just read the rules and stummbled over this strange rule. So I would like to know if you all have made some more experience with

Quote:
1) Zombies will still split to take two equal-length routes, but you don't add extras if they can't split equally?


I mean this seems to be the most meaningful way to split a group!? Don't really know if NOT adding zombies makes the game much easier. But I would like to hear your sentiments about this issue.


I'm not really sure what your question is, or where that quote came from...

Anyway, this is how splitting works:

Say you have a group of 5 walkers, there's two possible destinations (or equal length paths to a single destination) for them, and the first steps in going to those two destinations (or along those equal length paths to a single destination) are different, then you simply add one walker to the group, and place 3 of them in the zone that is the first step to the first destination (or along the first path to a single destination), and 3 in the zone that the first step to the second destination (or along the second path to a single destination).

If, however, there were only 4 walkers, instead of 5, you wouldn't add any more walkers and simply place 2 in the zone that's the first step to the first destination (or along the first path to a single destination), and 2 in the zone that's the first step to the second destination (or along the second path to a single destination).

So, the maximum number of zombies of a single type you will ever have to add to a single group due to splitting is 3, and then only if that group has 4 possible destinations (or equal length paths to a single destination), of which the steps to those destinations (or along equal length paths to a single destination) are 4 different zones, and the group can not be divided into 4 equal sub-groups without adding more zombies.

The purpose of this mechanic, I believe, is to stop the players from deliberately sending the larger sub-group, when a group cannot be split equally, in a direction that is favourable to them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cory J
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
d0gb0t wrote:
Hi all,

just read the rules and stummbled over this strange rule. So I would like to know if you all have made some more experience with

Quote:
1) Zombies will still split to take two equal-length routes, but you don't add extras if they can't split equally?


I mean this seems to be the most meaningful way to split a group!? Don't really know if NOT adding zombies makes the game much easier. But I would like to hear your sentiments about this issue.


I'm not really sure what your question is, or where that quote came from...

Anyway, this is how splitting works:

Say you have a group of 5 walkers, there's two possible destinations (or equal length paths to a single destination) for them, and the first steps in going to those two destinations (or along those equal length paths to a single destination) are different, then you simply add one walker to the group, and place 3 of them in the zone that is the first step to the first destination (or along the first path to a single destination), and 3 in the zone that the first step to the second destination (or along the second path to a single destination).

If, however, there were only 4 walkers, instead of 5, you wouldn't add any more walkers and simply place 2 in the zone that's the first step to the first destination (or along the first path to a single destination), and 2 in the zone that's the first step to the second destination (or along the second path to a single destination).

So, the maximum number of zombies of a single type you will ever have to add to a single group due to splitting is 3, and then only if that group has 4 possible destinations (or equal length paths to a single destination), of which the steps to those destinations (or along equal length paths to a single destination) are 4 different zones, and the group can not be divided into 4 equal sub-groups without adding more zombies.

The purpose of this mechanic, I believe, is to stop the players from deliberately sending the larger sub-group, when a group cannot be split equally, in a direction that is favourable to them.


If you read up Stuart posted what he quoted.

Ultimately it makes the game less prone to user manipulation as the zombies will follow a defined path and you can't choose to make it any better for yourself by sending weaker zombie groups one way or the other. Just think of it as the zombies picking up extra 'prone' zombies along the way that were just lying around. Watch a zombie movie, it happens all the time!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Hill
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Amyrin wrote:

If you read up Stuart posted what he quoted.


Ah... Right, I see.

Amyrin wrote:
Ultimately it makes the game less prone to user manipulation as the zombies will follow a defined path and you can't choose to make it any better for yourself by sending weaker zombie groups one way or the other. Just think of it as the zombies picking up extra 'prone' zombies along the way that were just lying around. Watch a zombie movie, it happens all the time!


Exactly.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ingo Griebsch
Germany
Bochum
North Rhine-Westphalia
flag msg tools
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
badge
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks Scott and Cory for the detailed explanation.

All I wanted to say was that I find the splitting rule a little bit strange and I find the way to handle the splitting which I quoted to be the best way. So I wanted to know if someone has more experience with this way and can tell us a little bit about the result of using it.

But your comments have satisfied me to use the rule as written and explain it with

Quote:
Just think of it as the zombies picking up extra 'prone' zombies along the way that were just lying around. Watch a zombie movie, it happens all the time!


to my gaming group...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hello folks.

I've always found the splitting rule a bit odd; My solution is to split the group as usual, then (if the group has an odd number) simply randomize the movement of the left-over zombie with a D6 (if there are 2 possible paths - which is most commonly the case - a roll of 1-3 means it goes one way, and 4-6 means it goes the other).

I've found this works well and is quick and easy to implement, and it avoids the "player-manipulation" issue raised earlier by Cory.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mateo jurasic
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
have the splitting rule is a huge factor in determining the difficulty of the game, not so much for the occasional extra zombie, but for the fact that once you run out of zombies, those zombie splits can actually trigger extra zombie activations, and THATS what can turn a victory into a zombie feast,

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ingo Griebsch
Germany
Bochum
North Rhine-Westphalia
flag msg tools
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
badge
Coding Architect | Husband and father | Boardgame addict | Loves Clutch as well as Tricky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorastro wrote:
Hello folks.

I've always found the splitting rule a bit odd; My solution is to split the group as usual, then (if the group has an odd number) simply randomize the movement of the left-over zombie with a D6 (if there are 2 possible paths - which is most commonly the case - a roll of 1-3 means it goes one way, and 4-6 means it goes the other).

I've found this works well and is quick and easy to implement, and it avoids the "player-manipulation" issue raised earlier by Cory.


That's the same idea I had. But as Mark (and others) write, it can change the balance and/or difficulty of the game...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Hill
United Kingdom
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
flag msg tools
designer
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
d0gb0t wrote:
Sorastro wrote:
Hello folks.

I've always found the splitting rule a bit odd; My solution is to split the group as usual, then (if the group has an odd number) simply randomize the movement of the left-over zombie with a D6 (if there are 2 possible paths - which is most commonly the case - a roll of 1-3 means it goes one way, and 4-6 means it goes the other).

I've found this works well and is quick and easy to implement, and it avoids the "player-manipulation" issue raised earlier by Cory.


That's the same idea I had. But as Mark (and others) write, it can change the balance and/or difficulty of the game...


How about rolling a D6 for each miniature in the group instead...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mateooo wrote:
have the splitting rule is a huge factor in determining the difficulty of the game, not so much for the occasional extra zombie, but for the fact that once you run out of zombies, those zombie splits can actually trigger extra zombie activations, and THATS what can turn a victory into a zombie feast,



I fully take your point. It does however make the splitting rule all that more irksome to me; I don't believe it was designed to make the game more difficult, and nor is there any causal basis for it to do so. (I don't actually think they designed the "extra-activation-when you-have-ran-out-of-zombies" rule especially to make things more difficult either - it was just an easy fix to the issue of there not being enough figures, but that's perhaps a separate discussion!)

Why - just because a group of zombies has two possible paths to the nearest survivor (or loudest sound source) - should there be a chance of their being a sudden activation across the board? (I'm just being rhetorical btw.) If zombie splitting was designed to increase the difficulty of the game I assume it is intended that we therefore strategize to avoid zombies being manoeuvred into a position where they are forced to split? This seems daft to me.

There are lots of ways to make the game as hard as one likes without including essentially random (and therefore unfair) and illogical difficulty spikes (such as by using fewer survivors, removing some of the "easier" zombie spawn cards etc.) I don't mind a hard game, but I prefer to lose due to overwhelming odds, my own stupidity, or bad dice rolling even, rather than illogical game mechanics.

That's just my two cents anyway

1 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonah Rees
Wales
Cardiff
South Wales
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorastro wrote:


If zombie splitting was designed to increase the difficulty of the game I assume it is intended that we therefore strategize to avoid zombies being manoeuvred into a position where they are forced to split? This seems daft to me.


You've answered your own question here. And why is it daft to strategize so that the zombies are manoeuvred in a favourable way? This is basically what the whole game is about! You have to crowd control the zombies whilst getting to objectives and then (in some missions) getting out.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  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.