Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AHoppy]

So I just acquired Seaside (yay!) and we were playing it, so the first time embargo was in play, one guy decided it would be a good idea 3rd turn to embargo silvers... he had started 2/5 with wharf embargo, I had done 3/4 ambassador/sea hag and another player started amb/silver.  Normally, I would consider ambassador/sea hag a better open than amb/silver, but when the silvers are embargoed it was a much superior open (it also didn't help that my ambassador and sea hag collided on my first run through my deck on my 3rd draw, meaning they also didn't get shuffled in... anyways, the amb/silver open ended up being able to get a gold early as well and easily won the game with 34, the closest person behind him was at 9.  The person who embargoed silver said he wanted to make it interesting and force people to use bureaucrat to get silver.  Am I right to be upset that he gave the other guy the game, or do you think it's more of the fact that I had my sea hag and ambassador always collide so I could never play more than one of them?

[jsh357]

Embargoing Silver is often a perfectly valid strategy, so I don't see why you should be angry; the guy obviously misplayed it as it screwed him over too, but it happens.  On that note, nothing was stopping anyone from buying Silver.  You even could have Ambassadored the Curses, and since Hags would be handing out Curses like candy, it wouldn't have been that significant of a problem.

Ambassador/Sea Hag can be a problematic opening anyway, especially if your table position is low.  In a 4 player game, it's often very important (more than usual) to have an economical edge.  I don't know the rest of the board, but I might have choked down a few Curses to get Silvers in this situation.

[AHoppy]

I can see how it is a valid strategy, I just get upset when people decide to do something that could screw everyone over but one person, and that one person isn't themselves.  And my table position wasn't low, i was player 2, and the guy who opened amb/silver was player 1, so that just helped him even more.  But the other thing is: this isn't the first time this guy has done something like this... He seems to like to do "interesting" things that basically screw everyone (including himself) over to give someone else the game... it's really obnoxious...

[timchen]

I think amb/amb is usually better than amb/sea hag. Between amb/silver or amb/amb it depends on who you ask.

[ycz6]

You definitely need to buy Silver to get anywhere in this game, Embargo or not, and having more Ambassadors will make the Curses less of a big deal. Bite the bullet and go for it.

[ftl]

Well, that's what happens in multiplayer. People can make decisions like that. People can play kingmaker.

It's kind of annoying, but there's not much to be done about it. It's the way multiplayer games work.

[Sigmaril]

Perhaps he didn't do it just so first player could win? Possibly he MAY have envisioned himself comming out on top of the situation, it only being T3 or 4 by the time he played it?
I think, that if this get you upset, you need a break from the game.

[randomdragoon]

I think people have to realize is that Embargo's text does not say "Players can't buy this pile for the rest of the game", it says that you take a curse for buying that pile. I think scores would have been a lot closer if you just sucked it up and took a curse with that Silver (You can even get rid of Curses with Ambassador). The level of swinginess is on par with if someone played a Witch in 3p, but the other opponent had a Moat and you didn't.

Also, I probably would have preferred Amb/Amb or Amb/Silver over Amb/Sea Hag given your description of the board.

[O]

This forum has a bit of a gang-up-on-those-who-complain complex. It's quite understandable that that's frustrating to you, and it really is obviously terrible for wharf/embargo to embargo silvers before picking any up.


This situation is analogous to a person ending by buying out the last province even though they are behind two other players.

That being said, you have the choice to play with this person again. You can elect to play only with people who are competitive players like yourself, and somewhat avoid the kingmaking problem. I'm the strongest player strategically among my friends, and I now push for games that aren't Risk because too frequently the strategy is "destroy him and then decide the game among ourselves".

Even better, you can refuse to play with Embargo.

[WanderingWinder]

This forum has a bit of a gang-up-on-those-who-complain complex. It's quite understandable that that's frustrating to you, and it really is obviously terrible for wharf/embargo to embargo silvers before picking any up.

Except that it isn't? In fact, if amb and hag aren't on the board, I think it's one of the best plays. So here, it's bad, but I don't know that it's OBVIOUSLY bad.

[O]

This forum has a bit of a gang-up-on-those-who-complain complex. It's quite understandable that that's frustrating to you, and it really is obviously terrible for wharf/embargo to embargo silvers before picking any up.

Except that it isn't? In fact, if amb and hag aren't on the board, I think it's one of the best plays. So here, it's bad, but I don't know that it's OBVIOUSLY bad.

We have different standards of obvious. If a player goes around thinking that Hag and Ambassador don't change the game dynamics.. dear god, help them.

Also, I'd embargo Wharf if Hag and Ambassador were off the board in all likelihood. And if hag and ambassador aren't on the board.. What are you doing with no silvers? Not too much of a loss if your opening buys were most of the other seaside 3s, say, fishing village.

[Galzria]

I don't think it's "gang up" syndrome to point out that many players, yes even experienced ones sometimes, have an irrational fear of buying an embargoed card. Even on a board without trashing or pseudo trashing, one, heck even 2 dead cards aren't going to ruin your game, but a lack of economy will.

If you're scared to buy silver, how do you plan to hit 6? Or 5 with consistancy? One good hand is better than two poor ones. As long as you don't draw your silver and curse together, you're probably better off.

I don't think "not playing with embargo" is a fair answer. It's a strategic element to play, like any curse giving card. I can't see how, even from a late position in 3/4 player it would play kingmaker, ESPECIALLY on a board that did have a means of dealing with the curses.

Look, I'm as guilty as the next guy at failing to these same mistaked from time to time. But I'll be darned if I blame my opponent for something in my control. You'll never learn with a "It wasn't my fault" mentality. We're not here to gang up, we're here to offer advice so that the community improves. I enjoy good competition, and like seeing strong play. But if you beat me, I want to know what mistakes "I" made.

[O]

I don't think it's "gang up" syndrome to point out that many players, yes even experienced ones sometimes, have an irrational fear of buying an embargoed card. Even on a board without trashing or pseudo trashing, one, heck even 2 dead cards aren't going to ruin your game, but a lack of economy will.

If you're scared to buy silver, how do you plan to hit 6? Or 5 with consistancy? One good hand is better than two poor ones. As long as you don't draw your silver and curse together, you're probably better off.

I don't think "not playing with embargo" is a fair answer. It's a strategic element to play, like any curse giving card. I can't see how, even from a late position in 3/4 player it would play kingmaker, ESPECIALLY on a board that did have a means of dealing with the curses.

Look, I'm as guilty as the next guy at failing to these same mistaked from time to time. But I'll be darned if I blame my opponent for something in my control. You'll never learn with a "It wasn't my fault" mentality. We're not here to gang up, we're here to offer advice so that the community improves. I enjoy good competition, and like seeing strong play. But if you beat me, I want to know what mistakes "I" made.

I wasn't referring to that comment. Yes, you need to buy silver here, I fully agree with you. Assuming that the other 5 cards we don't know about are fishing village, tournament, etc.

[WanderingWinder]

This forum has a bit of a gang-up-on-those-who-complain complex. It's quite understandable that that's frustrating to you, and it really is obviously terrible for wharf/embargo to embargo silvers before picking any up.

Except that it isn't? In fact, if amb and hag aren't on the board, I think it's one of the best plays. So here, it's bad, but I don't know that it's OBVIOUSLY bad.

We have different standards of obvious. If a player goes around thinking that Hag and Ambassador don't change the game dynamics.. dear god, help them.

Also, I'd embargo Wharf if Hag and Ambassador were off the board in all likelihood. And if hag and ambassador aren't on the board.. What are you doing with no silvers? Not too much of a loss if your opening buys were most of the other seaside 3s, say, fishing village.

You've played seaside a lot more than they have. Did you understand how powerful amb was before playing it? And I've actually also seen hag listed as dreadfully underrated because it doesn't give you any benefit, like sab. Now, I found it extremely obvious that hag was powerful, and I'd say this is pretty obviously a bad move here, but I also thought it was obvious that jack was going to be a good opener (not as strong as it is, mind you), and a number of other things that a lot of people... well, didn't. So I mean, as it's their first seaside games, I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. Can't really disagree with you though.

[Davio]

Ah yes, Embargo, the bogeyman of many a Dominion player.

I've played many games in which players would immediately switch to Duchies when the Provinces only had one Embargo token on them.
This has boggled my mind for many months.

[Kuildeous]

I can see how it is a valid strategy, I just get upset when people decide to do something that could screw everyone over but one person, and that one person isn't themselves.  And my table position wasn't low, i was player 2, and the guy who opened amb/silver was player 1, so that just helped him even more.  But the other thing is: this isn't the first time this guy has done something like this... He seems to like to do "interesting" things that basically screw everyone (including himself) over to give someone else the game... it's really obnoxious...

On the surface, I'd say that you shouldn't get upset over that move.

I think your real issue may be with that player. We all have them at some point in our gaming lives. I have my own list of players that I don't like playing with. They have reasons ranging from analysis paralysis to crass table talk to people who ignore the objective of the game and just screw with the system so that others have a harder time meeting their objectives.

If I were giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'd reason that the player was trying a new strategy that clearly didn't work. You know this player better than we do, and you claim that he was doing it just to shake things up and mess up the other players. So, do you have a right to be upset? Based on how you portray him, sure. Just direct that negative energy onto the player and not the strategy (or lack thereof).

Some people have different expectations for fun. I love getting into the strategy of Power Grid, but some people prefer a more chaotic setting. For those people, I bring out Fluxx and Zombie Dice, which are also fun but not the level of fun of Power Grid. While I would prefer Power Grid, I would not want to play with someone who ignores optimal play for the sake of screwing with other players. That makes the game less fun for me.

[AHoppy]

Perhaps he didn't do it just so first player could win? Possibly he MAY have envisioned himself comming out on top of the situation, it only being T3 or 4 by the time he played it?
I think, that if this get you upset, you need a break from the game.

You make a great point, but most of the reason i guess i'm upset is because he does this kind of thing all the time.  So maybe I need a break from playing with someone who just rubs me the wrong way

[HiveMindEmulator]

If you know that he did this with the intention of playing kingmaker, or somehow that the two of them are teaming up to beat you (i.e. he buys nothing but embargoes to ruin your strategy, or he gets masquerade to pass good cards to the other player, then you should be upset and maybe stop playing with him. If he just plays bad, it will probably work out against you sometimes and in your favor at other times. Just take it as another element of randomness thrown into the game.