Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

Taj Mahal» Forums » General

Subject: Connections not as valuable as goods? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
jan w
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yesterday we played our first 3 player Tadsch game and whilst I was trying hard to get good connections (at the end I had 11 regions connected), another player was aiming for the goods tokens and the region markers (the one's you get from the elephant). By doing so, he scored far more than I did. Somehow this seemed strange because the aim of the game seems to me to be to make the connections, no? Perhaps it's because I let him have most of these chits and tokens that he scored so highly? Should I be trying to reduce his chances of getting these goods markers? Are they really worth that much compared to connecting area's or am I just doing the scoring wrong perhaps?

Great game, but if the goods chits are worth that much, it seems a bit useless to have a map...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mauro Di Marco
Italy
Firenze
Unspecified
flag msg tools
badge
Visit www.ilsa-magazine.it
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It depends on the number of players (that's the reason why several BGGers claim that TM works only with exactly 4 players): if you have 3 people, goods are definitely better than connections. The reverse happens with 5 players. It looks like the whole thing balances out only with 4 players.

Have fun

Mauro
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Van Biesbrouck
Canada
St Catharines
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you don't prevent a single player from scooping up almost all of several types of goods, then they will get too many points. If all players compete for goods then the points differential will be reasonable. A 3-player game should allow you to get many more points for connections than a 5-player game. You should also get more points for goods, but I think that connection points have a greater opportunity for points variation between players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yehuda Berlinger
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In my experience, goods are "better" than connections.

You score points for goods anytime you collect them, and sometimes many cascading points. Due to the scattered areas on the board, you could win castles in every province and still only score for connections a few times.

If you let someone win all the elephants, they are going to walk off with the game. The same is true of Jesters in Princes of Florence. Because of this, players should carefullly battle for elephants to ensure that they are evenly distributed. Since the the elephants are going to be evenly distributed (see my last sentence), the second most important source of points gains importance, and that is the connections.

The number of players greatly effects the ability to make connections. Connections are a more viable strategy in a three player game where it is much easier to win battles almost every turn. It is practically hopeless in five player. On the other hand, it is not as comparably difficult to horde goods in five player. While it is harder to horde goods in five player than in three player, it is not as hard as compared to the difference in ability to make connections in five player versus three player.

Yehuda
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you look at the order of the visits on the board at the start of the game, you can determine how strong a potential connection strategy might be. This can vary considerably from game to game. Note that a connection strategy tends to be stronger when you are starting a round and weaker when you are ending a round, so you should look at the provinces in which you will start the round and think about how those victories can best serve your purposes.

I can attest to the strength of a connection strategy. Nick Anner beat me by about 2 points in a game at WBC last year; I scored about 40 points on commodities and he scored more than 40 in connections.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jan w
Belgium
Brussels
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
i guess i'll need a few plays to see these strategies better. Though I am surprised that you scored so highly with connections (only, i presume?). In our game I had connections almost every round, though counting for 2-3 only, due to the placement of the regions. Only once i scored 11. Possibly this had more to do with the placement of the regions than anything else.
Thanks for your comments guys. I'm already dying to give this one another go
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Van Biesbrouck
Canada
St Catharines
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Due to the scoring system, only long-scoring chains are worth many points (and for goods, only many of the same type). Note that the order in which the chains are built is also important. For the sake of example, compare two ways of getting a trail of 5 regions. If you build A-B and D-E and then C in the middle, you will score 1+2+1+2+5=11. Building in order gives 1+2+3+4+5=15 points. If the 5 regions were disconnected then you would score 5. Since we assume that you will end up with 5 in a row, another 4 points are guaranteed. Thus one method earned an extra bonus of 2 and the other one an extra bonus of 6 -- ordering is important. A chain of seven can score anywhere from 17 to 28 points.
 
 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.