2nd June 05.....................................................10 Players

We had a few regulars missing tonight but we still managed a turnout of 10. The 3 children brightened up the atmosphere. The last couple of times the boys have been with us they have got a bit raucous but this time thanks to Dave’s supervision they were kept in check and I hope we would all agree that it was a pleasure to have them around.

There were a lot of approximately hour long lighter games played tonight. I am usually a fan of the heavier games for a Wednesday night but the games selected fit the prevailing mood well and I for one had a great time.

I am introducing a revision to the Trophy point system. I have been contemplating a change for a while. The old system awarding poor results too generously, just turning up saw you with a large number of points. This would be fine if everyone turned up for every session but that is not how it goes. If you did not turn up every week you were pretty much out of it. I want it so those who miss a session or two a month, can still be in with a shot at taking the trophy. I did not want the system to get more complicated. I want to be able to do the calculations for the results tables in my head. This is what I have decided on:

The person who comes first gets points as before equal to the game length times the number of players. The other players get half the points of the player above them with the exception that the last player gets nothing.

New Trophy Points = game length x number of players x 2 / (2 to the power of your position)

Exception: Last place always gets zero points

That sounds messy as an equation but in practise it is simple.

Eg 120 minute 5-player game

Eg 40 minute 3-player game

If you come first or second, both systems award the same points, so no change there. Beyond 2nd the points awarded by the new system are less generous than we have been used to.

Niagara – 40 minutes

Richard and myself have played Niagara before. I have only played it with children and I was keen see how it stood up to more intense play. My one slight complaint is that the rules for collecting gems are not altogether instinctive. I do not see why you cannot collect a gem in the middle of a turn. This game looks great with the novel three dimensional river, solid game play and short play time, this must be a prime candidate for the Spiel des Jahres. Matt showed up after the game had started and watched. I was a splash away from the line with my 4th like coloured gem after about 20 minutes of play but along came Dave to steal it off me. Julian and myself went over the edge late into the game partly thanks to the rain dance Dave had preformed to speed up the river. Dave won by getting 7 gems.

Ra – 60 minutes

The first and second epochs were both low scoring. I probably went into the 3rd epoch very slightly ahead but no more than a point or two between us. The 3rd and final epoch was when it all happened. Richard was out of the epoch first with a good run of monuments. Matt finished up with the highest sun totals winning his first ever playing of Ra.

Carcassonne – 40 minutes

This game is seeing a lot of play at the moment. It was a new game to Matt who got a bit trampled on when scoring the end of game farmers. We did not play with the river because I don’t see it as necessary with just 3 players.

The Great Balloon Race – 30 minutes

I enjoyed playing this. The balloons bob backwards and forwards as we try to guide our own colours home and push other colours back. It is very like Ausbrecher AG which is a game that was released a couple of years earlier and must have been an influence on the design.

Pirate’s Cove – 90 minutes

Balloon Cup – 35 minutes  bgg

Chaos Marauders – 90 minutes  bgg

Dave told me afterwards that this game could have finished much sooner but the lads were enjoying the experience so much they kept playing even though Dave had clearly won.

The Great Balloon Race – 30 minutes

Robo Rally – 45 minutes  bgg

This game was started knowing they would not have time to finish. Good fun all the same.

8th June 05.....................................................10 Players

We had Duncan and John show up for their first visit. We hope to see them both again. They are Magic players with some experience at the big box miniature board games. We are all talking the same language and so I think they should both feel at home. We got a total turnout of 10.

Dave Dudley commented that the new Trophy system, like the old system, makes too much of a points difference between first and second, so a person can win a full session 5 player game and cruise the rest of the month to win. Steve says his pub quiz league award the lowest attendees points to any missing teams. I am acknowledging these remarks just to show I listen and am ignoring them because I’m a fascist who knows best. I suspect that on the whole you are happy for me to bumble on and do whatever I like, but if I do detect a common consent for change I will ultimately pay heed and succumb to the views of the collective.

In the Shadow of the Emperor – 140 minutes

I have been looking forward to playing this game for a while. John was also new to the game. Richard and Dave had played previously with 3 players. John was emperor for the first couple of turns then me for a turn, then Dave and finally back to John. Richard never put up a challenge for the top job but did just fine without it. John and I spent most of the game battling for the kingdom of Bohemia for the additional voting right. Dave took Palatine on the first turn to get a free noble. John and I got all 3 of our cities down early. I did not take in the extent to which Richard was picking up vp’s presumably by exchanging the top spot in a couple of provinces most turns. Richards understated presence at the board has helped crown him as the clubs “Games Guru” for In the Shadow of the Emperor.

Liberte – 165 minutes

I believe Dave is putting together a report on this game which will be pasted into this slot when this e-mail hits the web site. The game was completed, unlike on other occasions, because there was no need for a rules explanation, so they could get straight into it. Julian got his first “Game Guru”.

Carcassonne – 40 minutes

Carcassonne has been played at the club more times so far this year than any other game. Mike picked up a massive 32 points from the main farm.

Matt’s comment:

....which was over a third of his points total and nearly half of mine. To me this degenerates the game into a farmer struggle for the big fields; given that roads score next to nothing for a reasonable investment in tiles and creating small cities would seem to be a bad idea as you can't be sure that you will not be giving the lead farmer double the points you get from forming it.

 

A quick check on BGG shows the following farmer scoring methods:

 

German 1st Ed and Rio Grande:

1) Look at each city

2) total up all the farmers for each player in all the fields adjacent to that city.

3) the player(s) with the most farmers scores 4 points for that city.

 

German 2nd Ed:

1) look at each city

2) if a player has the most farmers in any one of the fields adjacent to the city he scores 3 points.

 

German 3rd Ed:

1) look at each field

2) the player(s) with the most farmers in that field scores 3 points for each city adjacent to that field.

 

And it would seem we were playing none of those if I am reading the 1st ed. scoring method correctly. We are playing 3rd ed. field scoring with 4pts/field rather than 3. I think we should adjust the scoring slightly to downgrade the effect of farmers a little to make other scoring strategies a little more worthwhile.

 

Which is not to say i wouldn’t play it again anyway- it’s great?

 

My comment:

In my English Rio Grande version of the game, farmers are scored differently to Mike's:

 

1) Look at each city

2) Total up all the farmers for each player in all the

fields adjacent to that city.

3) The player(s) with the most farmers scores 4 points

for that city.

 

I have played in games where each city is scored only once and the number of farmers within adjacent fields is totalled with 3 points going to the majority player. This system has the advantage of not being too generous and it is neat to mark off each scored city with a counter. I think this equates to your method 2.

 

The whole farmer scoring thing is a mess which was sorted out in the follow up game of Hunters & Gatherers. Hunters and Gatherers also better valued Roads (rivers) and took the sensible line of awarding no points for incomplete roads (rivers) and cities (woods) at the end of the game. It also awards completion of woods (cities) by awarding a bonus go which makes for a neater looking layout.

 

Unfortunately I am not keen on the graphics for Hunters & Gath