Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

Terra Mystica» Forums » Variants

Subject: interaction in 2 players rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
jay cutler
Italy
flag msg tools
mbmb
using factions chosen at random, there is not much interaction in 2 players.

I do not like the dummy player, and the idea of ​​using two factions per player could cause a lot of A / P

I thought of a house rule that constrains the placement of the first dwellings as close as possible to the opponent. since the first placement is done alternately, the first player chooses the first hex, the second player places next to him and then chooses another hexagon on the map for his second place, and at the end, the first player places close to him.

What do you think?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Allan Clements
Norway
Oslo
flag msg tools
badge
Turns out Esseb did touch the flag. Don't tell him I said so though.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Try removing a section of the map from play, making sure to keep the number of available spaces of each terrain equal. I would say remove about 4 of each terrain type. (find something to put on them to cover them up)



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Why do you not have interaction? You should still want to build next to each other to allow cheap Trading Houses and to acquire power.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mc Jarvis
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
I speak to improve upon the cacophony.
badge
This heart is meant to convince you that I feel.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chally wrote:
Why do you not have interaction? You should still want to build next to each other to allow cheap Trading Houses and to acquire power.


This. There are a few races which don't want to build adjacent because the cheap trading houses are not as big of a discount (engineers), but for the most part you should want to get optimal adjacency.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jay cutler
Italy
flag msg tools
mbmb
McJarvis wrote:
chally wrote:
Why do you not have interaction? You should still want to build next to each other to allow cheap Trading Houses and to acquire power.


This. There are a few races which don't want to build adjacent because the cheap trading houses are not as big of a discount (engineers), but for the most part you should want to get optimal adjacency.


sometimes it is better to build away from opponents if there are best hexagons.

for example, this morning I played with the dwarves, in the lower right of the board there is an area with 3 gray hexes, great for the tunnel and make valuable points. I was the last to place and I was completely alone in that area ..
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.

Also, the advantage of building next to each other is symmetric. Sure, you get power (and cheaper trade houses) but so does your opponent. If you can come up with a better income engine than your opponent, then there is a disincentive to build close to him or her.

Lastly, there is less competition for the power actions in the 2-player game. If your opponent doesn't have power, you have a lot more flexibility with your first turn or two in a round. With more players, there's usually at least one other player who has the power and wants the same action you want making turn order more important and "forcing" your first move.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.


Funny. I tend to think this cuts the other way. There is no need to waste actions chasing a distant opponent on the cult track because the difference between first and second just isn't big enough. Same with network, frankly. I'll concede first in those in every two player game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.


Funny. I tend to think this cuts the other way. There is no need to waste actions chasing a distant opponent on the cult track because the difference between first and second just isn't big enough. Same with network, frankly. I'll concede first in those in every two player game.


Hmm. Interesting. If you concede first on the four cult tracks, that's 16 points (assuming you're playing 1st and 2nd points not 1st and 3rd like you've suggested in other threads) and if you concede first on the longest road, that's another 6. In our games, the scores have been close, conceding 20 points seems like a lot unless you're getting a whole lot of compensation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.


Funny. I tend to think this cuts the other way. There is no need to waste actions chasing a distant opponent on the cult track because the difference between first and second just isn't big enough. Same with network, frankly. I'll concede first in those in every two player game.


Hmm. Interesting. If you concede first on the four cult tracks, that's 16 points (assuming you're playing 1st and 2nd points not 1st and 3rd like you've suggested in other threads) and if you concede first on the longest road, that's another 6. In our games, the scores have been close, conceding 20 points seems like a lot unless you're getting a whole lot of compensation.


The "compensation" would be the actions that not sweating the cult tracks frees up. You would want those actions to be bountiful enough to be beneficial. If I can steal first place from an opponent with a single action, that swing is clearly worth it. But if, as in your example, my opponent used early priests on the cult tracks and I would now need 2-3 actions per track to take back those tracks, I'm unlikely to bother.

Given the openness of the 2-player game, I usually score 100-125 points by the end of round 6. In that context, I think the extra actions can often be used better elsewhere. I will note, however, that I typically win these games by a lot, so perhaps I just need better competition to make me see the necessity of the tracks/network.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.


Funny. I tend to think this cuts the other way. There is no need to waste actions chasing a distant opponent on the cult track because the difference between first and second just isn't big enough. Same with network, frankly. I'll concede first in those in every two player game.


Hmm. Interesting. If you concede first on the four cult tracks, that's 16 points (assuming you're playing 1st and 2nd points not 1st and 3rd like you've suggested in other threads) and if you concede first on the longest road, that's another 6. In our games, the scores have been close, conceding 20 points seems like a lot unless you're getting a whole lot of compensation.


The "compensation" would be the actions that not sweating the cult tracks frees up. You would want those actions to be bountiful enough to be beneficial. If I can steal first place from an opponent with a single action, that swing is clearly worth it. But if, as in your example, my opponent used early priests on the cult tracks and I would now need 2-3 actions per track to take back those tracks, I'm unlikely to bother.

Given the openness of the 2-player game, I usually score 100-125 points by the end of round 6. In that context, I think the extra actions can often be used better elsewhere. I will note, however, that I typically win these games by a lot, so perhaps I just need better competition to make me see the necessity of the tracks/network.


Our last game was 129 to 128 so definitely close. I won on 3 tracks because she used her last 2 priests to up her shipping and take the network away from me (she had the witches). If she had dropped her priests on the cult track she could have won but not both of the tracks, so shipping was definitely better for her.

We were both using the favor tiles (and bonus tiles and cult bonuses) for a good amount of VPs (she focused on dwellings and I focused on trading houses).

This is definitely a deep game and although I continue to be on the fence about selling it, I'll probably end up holding on to it. I'm just not as good as you at letting go of things. I think there's a good 2-player game here if I can tighten things up somehow.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
badge
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
chally wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
There are other problems with the 2-player game. First, the cult track is too wide open. If one player gets priests early, they can dominate the cults, making it very hard for the other player to catch up.


Funny. I tend to think this cuts the other way. There is no need to waste actions chasing a distant opponent on the cult track because the difference between first and second just isn't big enough. Same with network, frankly. I'll concede first in those in every two player game.


Hmm. Interesting. If you concede first on the four cult tracks, that's 16 points (assuming you're playing 1st and 2nd points not 1st and 3rd like you've suggested in other threads) and if you concede first on the longest road, that's another 6. In our games, the scores have been close, conceding 20 points seems like a lot unless you're getting a whole lot of compensation.


The "compensation" would be the actions that not sweating the cult tracks frees up. You would want those actions to be bountiful enough to be beneficial. If I can steal first place from an opponent with a single action, that swing is clearly worth it. But if, as in your example, my opponent used early priests on the cult tracks and I would now need 2-3 actions per track to take back those tracks, I'm unlikely to bother.

Given the openness of the 2-player game, I usually score 100-125 points by the end of round 6. In that context, I think the extra actions can often be used better elsewhere. I will note, however, that I typically win these games by a lot, so perhaps I just need better competition to make me see the necessity of the tracks/network.

Drive on down to Richmond, Ben! I'm your huckleberry.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gavan Brown
Canada
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
I'm your huckleberry.

6 
 Thumb up
5.05
 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.