Print

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

[Kirian]

http://innovation.isotropic.org/gamelog/201309/08/game-20130908-201433-d5925647.html

I've always strived to achieve using only special achievements, but this game is particularly ridiculous.  Endorsed nylon for 5 achievements in one turn....I think the new achievements need some thought...

To be fair, only one of the specials from Nylon was a new achievement.  The others, though... yeah, icon dominance is already a huge lead.

[teasel]

http://innovation.isotropic.org/gamelog/201309/08/game-20130908-201433-d5925647.html

I've always strived to achieve using only special achievements, but this game is particularly ridiculous.  Endorsed nylon for 5 achievements in one turn....I think the new achievements need some thought...

i've had a game where my opponent won by getting all 5 of the new achievements,supremacy,empire and 2 temporary achievement by robert. e lee... it's getting to the point where i wonder why i even bother to score and claim age achievements

[Kahryl]

So there's no question that cities distorts the game WAY more than the other two expansions.

I've been playing games with all three expansions recently, and I barely even notice the presence of echoes and figures cards.

There's just no time for them. I need to spam cities! Splays! Endorsements! Faster, faster!

Achievements? Sure, grab them if they're available. But if you dominate icons they'll just come rolling in anyway.

You might say that icons deserve this moment. After all they used to be a noob trap. In the base game, most of the games where I'm being icon-dominated are the games that I win, because I'm spending energy scoring and achieving while my opponent is busy making his board pretty.

So maybe this isn't a bad thing. But I REALLY think endorsements need to be toned down and redesigned. Their spamminess just gets tiresome. They encourage using the same dogma over and over instead of diversifying your tactics.

How about this: When I endorse a dogma, I use it ONCE, as a FREE action, and then cannot use it again that turn. For example, I can endorse Fermenting, which activates it ONCE, and then take two more actions, neither of which are endorsements or Fermenting-activation. (Similarily, if the first thing I do in a turn is make a basic Fermenting action, I can't then endorse Fermenting).  Conceptually, your city has taken over the production of that dogma, giving you, the emperor, freedom to turn to other matters. They'd sort of be the "planeswalker" cards of this game. In fact, it would be cool if you could have two different cities each endorsing two different dogmas, and then still having two actions left.. although they'd probably just be drawing or melding, since you've already "locked out" four of your five stacks.

So cities give you just as much efficiency but force you to use more than one dogma. You can't just have 4 cities plus Industrialization.

Or as a radically different idea, endorsement could be: "Tuck or meld a card from your hand whose featured icon matches an icon of the city. Execute the dogma of that card." Anything to stop the double-spam.

Also, I like the idea some other fellow had about changing the icon achievements to "have 10 more than your opponent" rather than "have at least 10 plus double". That'll make it a little harder to reach that threshold.

[blank101]

How about this: When I endorse a dogma, I use it ONCE, as a FREE action, and then cannot use it again that turn. For example, I can endorse Fermenting, which activates it ONCE, and then take two more actions, neither of which are endorsements or Fermenting-activation. (Similarily, if the first thing I do in a turn is make a basic Fermenting action, I can't then endorse Fermenting).  Conceptually, your city has taken over the production of that dogma, giving you, the emperor, freedom to turn to other matters. They'd sort of be the "planeswalker" cards of this game. In fact, it would be cool if you could have two different cities each endorsing two different dogmas, and then still having two actions left.. although they'd probably just be drawing or melding, since you've already "locked out" four of your five stacks.

...

Or as a radically different idea, endorsement could be: "Tuck or meld a card from your hand whose featured icon matches an icon of the city. Execute the dogma of that card." Anything to stop the double-spam.

I do kind of like the idea of "available endorsement actions == # of top cities".  It trades action flexibility for the ability to pump up icons / hand.  But that definitely needs to combine with something other than standard actions; using it tuck cards or draw more cities seems okay, but getting to dogma 5 times then take two more actions seem silly.  What if endorsement action were a choice between "draw a city of the same age" or "return a card with shared color/icons to double the icon values of this city for this turn"?

[chomskyrim]

Also, cities seems to be all about manipulating the action economy, which is one of the most potentially game breaking mechanics you can add. 1 endorse per turn is plenty. If you want to make it less good, require tucking more cards, or tucking cards with particular icons.

[Kahryl]

I do kind of like the idea of "available endorsement actions == # of top cities".  It trades action flexibility for the ability to pump up icons / hand.  But that definitely needs to combine with something other than standard actions; using it tuck cards or draw more cities seems okay, but getting to dogma 5 times then take two more actions seem silly.  What if endorsement action were a choice between "draw a city of the same age" or "return a card with shared color/icons to double the icon values of this city for this turn"?

You wouldn't get to have 5 endorsements plus 2 actions because under my proposed rule, whenever you endorse a dogma, you lock out both that city and the endorsed card for the rest of the turn.
At best, you'll be able to match 2 different cities with 2 different dogmas, and that will lock out all but your 5th stack - unless you drew and melded or something with the endorsed dogmas, and melded new dogmas that had not been locked out.

But yeah, having one endorse per turn would be fine, too. The main point of my suggestion is that an endorsement would give you 1 use of the dogma at the cost of 0 actions, instead of 2 uses for the cost of 1 action, and lock out the dogma so you can't end up using it 3 (or even 2) times that turn. You've turned over the production of that dogma to the city - you don't have to manage it yourself, but you also can't rush it.

[ipofanes]

The comments have mainly been about game mechanics, which have to be sorted out for sure, and I am glad that we get the opportunity to beta-test before the printed edition is released.

My comment is about flavour. The tech cards are related to the age when the technologies have been discovered, not when they were used to their maximum effectiveness. Carl stressed that point when Echoes were introduced.

In contrast, the cities are not really related to the time when they were founded. It irritated me to see Frankfurt pop up as late as Age 8 (I think; cards lists, anywhere?) while it was a direct subordinate of the German Empire in Age 3. I would have loved to see more of Brasilia, Magnitogorsk, Milton Keynes, Mannheim or Ligang in later ages.

Edit: It was Essen, not Frankfurt (which is aptly placed in Age 4), which also was a direct subordinate in Medieval ages but much less significant. But IIRC Essen came up in Age 9 or 10 where Age 3, 7 or 8 would have been appropriate.

[WalrusMcFishSr]

The comments have mainly been about game mechanics, which have to be sorted out for sure, and I am glad that we get the opportunity to beta-test before the printed edition is released.

My comment is about flavour. The tech cards are related to the age when the technologies have been discovered, not when they were used to their maximum effectiveness. Carl stressed that point when Echoes were introduced.

In contrast, the cities are not really related to the time when they were founded. It irritated me to see Frankfurt pop up as late as Age 8 (I think; cards lists, anywhere?) while it was a direct subordinate of the German Empire in Age 3. I would have loved to see more of Brasilia, Magnitogorsk, Milton Keynes, Mannheim or Ligang in later ages.

It seems to me like the idea of cards appearing at the absolute earliest age is something mostly contained within Echoes. For example, in the base game why don't we see the origins of Democracy in Age 2? Isn't Sanitation (age 7) basically the same as Plumbing (age 1)? Instead these dogmas are held off until they feel more relevant. Honestly I think this was a strange design decision for Echoes--I take thematic issue with the idea of my cavemen ice skating around with umbrellas by candlelight.

I agree that the age value of some of the cities is very arbitrary. But at the same time, I think that trying to find enough prominent age 8,9,10 cities that were actually founded in the past century would probably end up seeming forced or obscure. I don't really have a problem with a city showing up when it "should"; I think that Echoes is the oddball in this regard.

[ipofanes]

Ok, point taken that assigning innovations to the time when they originated is a thing of echoes, which lends itself to the idea of foreshadowing. Age I, the age of Hammurabi and Homer, is hardly the domain of cavemen though, and ice skates are definitely a thing of the bronze age.

Once I was irked by the ahistoric depictions in the hexes (Atomic Theory sports Rutherfords model, which would be Age 8 in my book), but icons of prehistoric ice skates and perfume would hardly be recognisable. The Puppet is neat though :-).

[antony]

After playing a lot of Cities, I kind of agree with Kathryl proposition (endorsing as a free action, but locks out the corresponding stack for the rest of the turn, and only if the action hasn't been used before).  This would encourage more diversity and also prevent ridiculous spamming (not even talking about industrialization... but an early code of laws(->tuck+[tuck, splay, draw]x2) or metalworking (->monument anyone?)) can be quite deadly too).

[popsofctown]

Draw when you splay is worse than the old city draw rule, as bad as that rule was

[ipofanes]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect. Other than that I don't think it's too bad. You can theoretically build sick engines like Kaleidoscope/Flute echo (as splaying to and fro nets two cities) but I haven't seen this pulled off and the idea of Innovation is "every card is overpowered".

[antony]

Oh, you can certainly build nifty boards allowing you to endorse invention while splaying back with philosophy, allowing you to grab quite a few points as well as a ton of cities, but I agree that this goes with the idea that "every card is overpowered".  Moreover, I feel it's a less "artificial" rule than the 2-top-card rule (which just seems to come out of nowhere).

[popsofctown]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect. Other than that I don't think it's too bad. You can theoretically build sick engines like Kaleidoscope/Flute echo (as splaying to and fro nets two cities) but I haven't seen this pulled off and the idea of Innovation is "every card is overpowered".

You don't want things to go even further off the deep end than they already are, though.  Flute is the best age 1 card, without cities.  With cities it is now even more absurd. 

[teasel]

soooooooooo there hasn't been a change in a while...

i don't want to be that guy that looks in the horse mouth but finding people that will play without cities (it's either "all of the expansion" or "none of the expansion") is getting harder and i really don't like the current implementation and it's making playing the game frustating

[WalrusMcFishSr]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect. Other than that I don't think it's too bad. You can theoretically build sick engines like Kaleidoscope/Flute echo (as splaying to and fro nets two cities) but I haven't seen this pulled off and the idea of Innovation is "every card is overpowered".

That's an interesting point...would it be ridiculous to suggest that you draw a city whenever your opponent splays a pile? Or maybe everyone draws one? Without Echoes that might discourage splaying too much, but I do like the implementation of the Figures cards the best...it makes you think strategically about tradeoffs without just snowballing to victory. You might think twice about splaying with Industrialization if you knew your opponent might draw Dublin and win.

[popsofctown]

soooooooooo there hasn't been a change in a while...

i don't want to be that guy that looks in the horse mouth but finding people that will play without cities (it's either "all of the expansion" or "none of the expansion") is getting harder and i really don't like the current implementation and it's making playing the game frustating

Uh.. that's bad luck.  Whenever I'm on I have no trouble finding people for E, F, or E+F, and quite often see other people who refuse to play cities around.

[ipofanes]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect.

That's an interesting point...would it be ridiculous to suggest that you draw a city whenever your opponent splays a pile?

I fear it would not scale in multiplayer matches.

[popsofctown]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect.

That's an interesting point...would it be ridiculous to suggest that you draw a city whenever your opponent splays a pile?

I fear it would not scale in multiplayer matches.

"Player to your right", then. 

[Kirian]

Draw when you splay is a Matthew 25:29 effect, unlike the sharing bonus/draw figure when opponent achieves effect.

That's an interesting point...would it be ridiculous to suggest that you draw a city whenever your opponent splays a pile?

I fear it would not scale in multiplayer matches.

No different from drawing Figures in multiplayer.

[ipofanes]

There is a difference in that the number of splaying events is roughly proportional with the number of players, whereas the number of standard achievements does not.

You are right in that the number of cards drawn per event increases in a linear fashion, but the number of triggering events behaves differently.
 

[Kahryl]

"Draw when you splay" makes splaying too good
"Draw when someone else splays" makes splaying too bad
"Draw when anyone splays" would create too many cities
"Draw when the guy to your left splays" would still make splaying too bad (depending on what other xpacs you're playing)

IMO keep the rule like it is unless someone has a better idea. Cities might be too strong, but at least they're FUN.

[ipofanes]

"Draw when you splay" makes splaying too good
[...]
IMO keep the rule like it is unless someone has a better idea.

Does it mean you are fine with "splaying too good"?

[WalrusMcFishSr]

If you really wanted some negative feedback action it could be "player(s) with the fewest achievements draw a city", or something like that. That might be heavy-handed though.

[TrojH]

Here's the ruleset I'd like to try right now:

1. Keep the current rules for drawing Cities (when splaying, or when starting a new color pile)

2. Get rid of the new Special Achievements.

3. Go back to the old rules regarding City actions and Attack actions.

Under the old ruleset, I thought that Cities were way too weak. Perhaps that's just because I hadn't yet figured out the best use for them. Now that I've gotten some experience with them, I'd like to go back to the old ruleset; perhaps Cities won't feel so weak anymore.

The old rules for drawing Cities were definitely too fiddly; the new rules are way better. But maybe that's the only change that was needed.