Beyond Die Siedler...
DCORaspler
as it's great reputation.
Can some of those in the know please post a few descriptions/reviews of
some of the other German games out there? I hear there are some "must
haves" -- if these others are as great as Die Siedler, I think I'll be
spending some money soon.
What's Mue like?
El Grande?
That multi-game Roman one?
Die Macher?
Also, at Origins last year, I saw the pyramid one, which looked GORGEOUS.
Is that a good one?
Dan Raspler
dcora...@aol.com
Aforandy
for my taste and certainly there is vastly more scope for clever play in
El Grande.
If you reply i can send an article that may help, it mentions games
you may have played which may be a useful yardstick.
We really need some sort of German Game guide for this newsgroup,
Siggins is thinking of doing a web page.
Mu oder Mehr is good.
Tal der Konige [pyramids] is OK, has its problems.
Die Macher is old, and out-of-date, Germany is no
longer divided. May be out -of-orint, it was one of the Big Four in
the early days [1990], along with McMulti, 6 Day Race and Schoko & Co.
Entdecker [Discoverer] looks very nice.
New Games of Old Rome is OK, the rulebook in English costs $22.
Recent orders include:-
3,4-player Stratego
Carabande [auto racing on wooden track]
Members Only -avoid Vegas
Battle of the dinosaurs -this is like an MB large box game with lots of
S,M, L, and XL dinosaur miniatures, 4 player, much reduced in price.
Reibach and Co is good.
Here a list of games a customer wants:-
<<In no particular order:-
Lords of Creation Manhatten
C&O/B&O Die Hanse
Homus Tour/Demarrage Medici
Drunter & Druber Die Macher
Modern Art
Dickie Kartoffeln Quo Vadis
Six Day Race Wucherer
Big Boss DTM Hockenheim (not sure about title)
Formula De + add on circuits Square Mile
Full Metal Planete + expansion Die Siedlers
Sack
Iron Dragon Rette Sich Wer Kann
Elfen Wizards
Greyhounds Ave Caeser
World Cup Tournament Football Game
Mr President Campaign Trail
Candidate
Source of the Nile Iron Dragon
Liars Dice
Airlines
Al Parlamento (may be Italian)
Automania
Daytona 500
Bandu Was Sticht
Tutanchaman
New Games in Old Rome
En Garde!
Empire Builder>>
I'd say avoid 1630 something....
Andy
Brian Bankler
>
> I think I've been bitten by the "German Game" bug. Die Siedler is as fun
> as it's great reputation.
>
> Can some of those in the know please post a few descriptions/reviews of
> some of the other German games out there? I hear there are some "must
> haves" -- if these others are as great as Die Siedler, I think I'll be
> spending some money soon.
>
As Always, http://www.gamecabinet.com/ is the web's primary
clearinghouse for info on German games...
> What's Mue like?
Multi-player (3-6) Bridge without fixed partners or artificial
bidding conventions. I love it. The only game that deserves to be
considered for game of the year except...
> El Grande?
A deceptively simple little game. I think this should beat
Mu for Spiel des Jahr from time to time. At other times I like Mue
better. I say deceptively simple because the rules are very clean
(except us Mericans have to translate the cards). It has a bunch
of cute little mechanisms that add up nicely. I belive this game
is going to take the SdJ.
> That multi-game Roman one?
New games in old rome is supposed to be very good. I
haven't played it.
> Die Macher?
Die Macher is THE political game. It isn't really in
the classic german mold in that there are complicated rules.
It is probably the only german game I can't feel comfortable explaining
the rules in 15 minutes. (More like 30-45). It is also fairly long,
usually clocking in at 4 hours. Exactly 4 players, so it's tough
to get up a game but well worth it. (I'm overdue to play it again)...
> Also, at Origins last year, I saw the pyramid one, which looked GORGEOUS.
> Is that a good one?
Tal De Koenig. (Misspelled, of course)
Certainly a reasonable game. There are a few possible
interpretations to the auction rules, but they all work (that I've
seen). You can usually get a copy for $75, so it's pricey. But
a nice game. At $40 it would be a definite buy. I did buy one
(at $75), but I am a compulsive game buyer.
If nothing else, it's better than those damn expensive
'coffee table books'. It's a coffee table game. And it plays
well.
For more info, check out hte above address. (Some of
*My* more detailed thoughts are in the CMU gaming reviews area,
which is linked in from Ken Tidwell's gamecabinet.
> Dan Raspler
> dcora...@aol.com
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------\
| Brian Bankler | Based in the Swedish part of |
| ban...@rtp.ericsson.se | North Carolina |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|
| Ericsson wants my opinions, but isn't willing to admit it.|
\-----------------------------------------------------------/
Adam Huby
DCORaspler <dcora...@aol.com> wrote:
>What's Mue like?
Ultimately, I guess you'd call it a Bridge variant for a variable number
of players, with flexible partnerships and more convoluted card play.
It's quite fun, but I think that it's too difficult for players who
are interested in playing for the (equivalent of) the contract to pass
information about what they're going for without overbidding.
>El Grande?
Superb - this and Medici were surely the best two games to come out of
Germany last year.
>That multi-game Roman one?
Well, you definitely get a lot of games ! Most of them are quite quick
and simple, and I've not yet found one that I've wanted to play over and
over again, but it's certainly great value for money.
>Die Macher?
Never played it, and I suspect it's tricky to find.
>Also, at Origins last year, I saw the pyramid one, which looked GORGEOUS.
>Is that a good one?
Tal Der Konige ? I like it a lot, though it's really no more than a
simple abstract game and, in game-play terms, it really isn't worth
the price. But the components are great !
>Dan Raspler
>dcora...@aol.com
So how come we never see you in the comics newsgroups, Dan ?
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One day, my son, these views will be Crosfield's (but for the moment they're
mine, all mine).
--
Adam Huby Crosfield Electronics Ltd Hemel Hempstead HP2 7RH U.K.
uucp: a...@crosfield.co.uk
phone: +44 1442 230000 ext 5251 or +44 1442 345251
fax: +44 1442 343362 telex: 827530 CROSEL G
Jonathan Degann
>
> I think I've been bitten by the "German Game" bug. Die Siedler is as fun
> as it's great reputation.
>
> Can some of those in the know please post a few descriptions/reviews of
> some of the other German games out there? I hear there are some "must
> haves" -- if these others are as great as Die Siedler, I think I'll be
> spending some money soon.
>
> El Grande?I bought Siedlers and El Grande on the same order. And the better
game is... El Grande! There is less luck, more aggression, greater
variability, more fun in the strategies.
The basic idea: the board has 9 regions (+ a special one), into
which you play a certain number of "caballeros" each turn. On every
third turn, you score the board. Most cabs in a region scores the
most points, with lesser amounts for second and third place.
Central regions, which tend to be more unstable, score higher than
outliers.
Now each turn you have to bid on special cards that give you the
right to play between 1-5 cabs on the board, and also confer special
moves. Some cards let you move cabs around the board, others let
you score a region of your choice, others let you alter the scoring
for a region, and so on. A neat feature is that the higher you bid
for the right to pick the juiciest card, the fewer cabs you get to
move from the "provinces" to your "yard". Since you can only place
cabs onto the map from your yard, bidding high limits your
resources.
There is considerable fun as you kick your opponents out of regions,
or launch a surprise attack from the "tower" (the 10th region) into
a region of your choice.
I enjoy it every time I play it.
Mario Boller-Olfert
>What's Mue like?
It is just another card game. First you lay out cards from your hand.
If you laid out more cards than the others, then you say trump and
tell with whom you will play together. The second highest says the
second trump. The it is a normal trump game.
>El Grande?
It is my favorite this year. I think everyone should buy it. There
is a review in the game cabinet.
>That multi-game Roman one?
Did not try it, but heard only bad news about it.
>Die Macher?
Is no more available as I heard.
Bye
Mario
GameBase - The Database of card and board games
See the database, the review index and win a game!
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/mboller/gamese.htm
Aforandy
Blatz/Hans im Gluck-HiG and Goldsieber are good company
names to look for.
Siedlers oddity is that you have to get 10 points to win
you are given two at start, the winner nearly always has
2 points for the longest road, getting 2 more points as development
cards makes the final total hard not to amass. The robber system
has its problems and the player who goes first in placing initial
settlements has a big advantage -if he knows how to use it.
The trick of the game is its incredibly non-threatening nature,
it appears to all players as easy to win. Not much of a challenge
after the first games, though.
Andy
Paul Andrew King
afor...@aol.com (Aforandy) wrote:
>Entdecker and Members Only are good. Vegas not so good.
>Blatz/Hans im Gluck-HiG and Goldsieber are good company
>names to look for.
>Siedlers oddity is that you have to get 10 points to win
>you are given two at start, the winner nearly always has
>2 points for the longest road, getting 2 more points as development
>cards makes the final total hard not to amass.
This doesn't really match my experience. The two points for longest road
is a significant advantage, but not that great. In the last game I played
(with six players, using the expansion) the winner had the largest Knight
force points, but there were two other players on 9 points, and a fourth
player had longest road.
The robber system
>has its problems and the player who goes first in placing initial
>settlements has a big advantage -if he knows how to use it.
Not in my experience. Because the second settlements are placed in reverse
order the first player is possibly in the weakest position. IMHO going
third is probably best.
Paul K.
Aforandy
(Paul Andrew King) writes:
>
>This doesn't really match my experience. The two points for longest road
>is a significant advantage, but not that great. In the last game I
played
>(with six players, using the expansion) the winner had the largest Knight
>force points, but there were two other players on 9 points, and a fourth
>player had longest road.
>
>Not in my experience. Because the second settlements are placed in
reverse
>order the first player is possibly in the weakest position. IMHO going
>third is probably best.
But is the game challenging? Even when i lose it all seems too easy.
When i win I feel "of course, so what...."
Paul Andrew King
afor...@aol.com (Aforandy) wrote:
A lot of the decisions are obvious, but certainly not all. It's less
challenging than some games, more so than others.
Paul K.
John Parr
>Siedlers oddity is that you have to get 10 points to win
>you are given two at start, the winner nearly always has
>2 points for the longest road, getting 2 more points as development
>cards makes the final total hard not to amass. The robber system
>has its problems and the player who goes first in placing initial
>settlements has a big advantage -if he knows how to use it.
>The trick of the game is its incredibly non-threatening nature,
>it appears to all players as easy to win. Not much of a challenge
>after the first games, though.
Totally disagree. Read the rules carefully and you will find that
going first both a benefit & a hinderance. You roll dice to determine
the order. Highest roll goes first down to lowest last. Each player
places ONE settlement & ONE road. You then go back the other way
(without re-rolling) from lowest to highest, placing the second
settlement & road. These placements do not have to be adjacent. The
initial resources you get are based on the areas next to the SECOND
settlement. There are always a choice of good locations so the first
player has to pick one of them, knowing that it everyone else will get
a choice of these sites before he gets to place the second settlement.
It's a tough choice.
Longest road is not a pre-requisite for winning, nor is die grosse
rittermacht. I have won games simply by building settlements &
converting to cities. This weekend I was in a good position with two
locations adjacent to ore & grain. These quickly became towns & I was
rolling in Ritter cards until the robber got landed on me and I
couldn't shift it.
A group of us play frequently and find that the game is still very
challenging.
John Parr
Aforandy
(Paul Andrew King) writes:
>A lot of the decisions are obvious, but certainly not all. It's less
>challenging than some games, more so than others.
Few games fall outside the parameter set by the second sentence.
Why is Siedler so popular? Games such as Medici and El Grande
are really unassailable, whereas Siedler has its
problems, but the relative amounts of feedback would
suggest Siedler is better.
Aforandy
10072...@compuserve.com (John Parr) writes:
>Totally disagree. Read the rules carefully
What makes you think I have not?
and you will find that
>going first both a benefit & a hinderance. You roll dice to determine
>the order. Highest roll goes first down to lowest last. Each player
>places ONE settlement & ONE road. You then go back the other way
>(without re-rolling) from lowest to highest, placing the second
>settlement & road. These placements do not have to be adjacent. The
>initial resources you get are based on the areas next to the SECOND
>settlement. There are always a choice of good locations so the first
>player has to pick one of them, knowing that it everyone else will get
>a choice of these sites before he gets to place the second settlement.
>It's a tough choice.
Hardly. The best is obvious and 4th, 5th, and 6th don't have a lot
between them.
>Longest road is not a pre-requisite for winning, nor is die grosse
>rittermacht.
>I have won games simply by building settlements &
>converting to cities.
So have I, and the extra cards generated made it hard to miss
that road bonus which served to end the game that much faster.
>This weekend I was in a good position with two
>locations adjacent to ore & grain. These quickly became towns & I was
>rolling in Ritter cards until the robber got landed on me and I
>couldn't shift it.
Well the law of averages sees to that...
>A group of us play frequently and find that the game is still very
>challenging.
>
Well I am glad you find this. How do you rate El Grande in comparison?
Ken Sheffield
> Hardly. The best is obvious and 4th, 5th, and 6th don't have a lot
> between them.
>
Are you playing the 3 player game? Die Seidler is much better with
4 players.
Later,
Ken
Frank Branham
>
> dcora...@aol.com (DCORaspler) wrote:
> >That multi-game Roman one?
>
> Did not try it, but heard only bad news about it.
>
I own a copy and find that it is a mixed bag. For your $65 + dollars,
you get 14 games. Many of these seem like really good ideas Knizia had
for games, but never quite fleshed them out into full games. (exception:
Medici is the infinitely better game based on Mercator from this set)
But most of them play in 15-30 minutes, and have fairly elaborate
strategies. The chariot racing game in this set is so far my all-time
favorite twist (over Circus Maximus and Circus Imperium anyway) because
the game relies heavily on using chariots to block other chariots.
I also dearly love the memory game (which shows how good I am at them,
as I cannot for the life of me remember the name). Normally I hate games
that rely on a memory element. This one has you trying to turn up sets
of cards with all the same color cards, or all of the same number of
cards. Players take turns bidding on how many points they can turn up,
and the "winner" gets to try and turn over a complete set. The only
problem with this short game is the rule allowing the first one to shout
out a bid to be the first bid.
If anyone is interested, I think I'll drag my copy to The Gathering of
Friends. Maybe we can grab a corner and play out the History of Rome.
Moo
Frank
Paul Andrew King
afor...@aol.com (Aforandy) wrote:
Well, personally I prefer Medici, but I'm not so sure about El Grande over
Siedler. I think Siedler is popular, not because of the level of
intellectual challenge, but because it is a fun game. Nuclear War is very
popular, too but it's less challenging than Siedler.
Paul K.
David desJardins
> Why is Siedler so popular? Games such as Medici and El Grande are
> really unassailable, whereas Siedler has its problems, but the
> relative amounts of feedback would suggest Siedler is better.
Hypothetically, perhaps it's because people decide what they like on
their own, rather than following your own infallible guidance. No doubt
the world would be a better place if everyone would simply wait for you
to decree which games are "unassailable," and only play those. If
nothing else, it would be a lot more efficient to just print two games a
year in enormous press runs.
David desJardins
--
Copyright 1996 David desJardins. Unlimited permission is granted to quote
from this posting for non-commercial use as long as attribution is given.
Aforandy
<ua...@mck-uaii.mck.ncsu.edu> writes:
>Are you playing the 3 player game? Die Seidler is much better with
>4 players.
Agreed, and 5 and 6 has the unescapable prob of waiting for your turn.
Andy
Aforandy
<< Hypothetically, perhaps it's because people decide what they like on
<their own, rather than following your own infallible guidance.
I very much doubt that game players make buying decisions
on their own, because of the amount of time so many of us spend
giving and receiving opinions on games.
Thats what the newsgroup is for-
and not for gamers who make buying decisions free of outside input,
clearly.
Siedler is bought in large numbers,
and I am interested in reasons as to why this is. The fact people like
it falls into the realm of the obvious, as I am sure we can agree.
Do you have a copy of Siedler?
<No doubt
<the world would be a better place if everyone would simply wait for you
<to decree which games are "unassailable,"
I think you're wrong here, but please tell us the problems you find
with El Grande and Medici
< and only play those.
Do not all games, and books, indeed newsgroup
posts, teach useful lessons, however good or bad they may be?
< If
<nothing else, it would be a lot more efficient to just print two games a
<year in enormous press runs.
Which by definition is what happens to very successful games
each year.
PS: 1630~something is wonderful, buy a copy!
PPS: I note your copyright notice and I apologise
for not giving attribution, the Reply function
seems not to work on your post.
PPS: Is plagiarism a problem, or is this major hubris?
Or maybe something learned in college?
Andy
Dirk Bock
: I think I've been bitten by the "German Game" bug. Die Siedler is as fun
: as it's great reputation.
: Can some of those in the know please post a few descriptions/reviews of
: some of the other German games out there? I hear there are some "must
: haves" -- if these others are as great as Die Siedler, I think I'll be
: spending some money soon.
: What's Mue like?
"Mue und mehr" is a collection of card-games with the game responsible for
the title, "Mue" (short for micro-Bridge) being the best one in the set.
Doris and Frank, the inventors of Mue, say: "We started to learn Bridge,
but somewhere along the way we decided to design our own, somewhat
bridge-like game". As I don't know much about bridge I just tell you that
Mue is a straightforward card-game with some extremely important bidding
going on before the game itself is played.
: El Grande?
Sort of a role-model for German games: complete, well thought-out,
attractive components, and high replay-value. What's more, it's also a
very involved game of skill. Just the price is a pity; it should have been
possible to do a somewhat less impressive with a higher print-run and a
lower price. But at least the price of the game has already been lowered a
bit. It costs nearly twice as much as your "usual" German boardgame, so I
would advice to play it once before you order it. (Hehehe... it's great
knowing that as a German once you have to pay less to play).
: That multi-game Roman one?
It's not a game, it's a collection of seven (?) comparatively small games
bei Reiner Knizia. If you like his games you should check it out. A word
of warning: Knizia's last year's game Medici is essentially one of the
games of Neue Spiele aus dem Alten Rom packaged as a game on its own.
: Die Macher?
A rather complex game of elections in Germany with politicians of the
eighties. Does Karl-Heinz (inventor of Die Macher an proprietor of Moskito
Spiele) still have it in stock?.
: Also, at Origins last year, I saw the pyramid one, which looked GORGEOUS.
: Is that a good one?
This one has to be Tal der Koenige. Sorry, but it's definitely better to
look at than to play. It's an okay game which would be a good by at half
its current price.
Greetings
---Dirk
David desJardins
> I very much doubt that game players make buying decisions
> on their own, because of the amount of time so many of us spend
> giving and receiving opinions on games.
By definition, everyone makes their own buying decisions on their own.
I would guess that the great majority of people in the US who have
bought a copy of Die Siedler von Catan have done so after playing it at
least once. (This might change if Mayfair distributes it more widely.)
> Thats what the newsgroup is for- and not for gamers who make buying
> decisions free of outside input, clearly.
Of course, you are free to post your opinions of games. When you do so
by saying that some games are better than others, you insult those who
have different preferences; you are free to do that, too, but I don't
have to like it. It would seem to me much preferable to simply describe
things that you like or don't like about particular games; then other
people can decide for themselves whether those things are likely to be
important to them.
For example, we all know by now that Mike Siggins disdains Die Siedler
because he thinks it has too much luck. I think he could express that
preference in a less condescending way, but at least he gives his
reasons. Therefore, we can decide for ourselves whether we view having
a lot of luck as a flaw, and use that in deciding whether to buy the
game. (I think most people have no problem playing games with large
luck factors, at least some of the time; therefore, they are relatively
unaffected by this criticism.)
On the other hand, the fact that Andy thinks the game has "problems," or
another game is "unassailable" is useless to anyone. And it defies
reality: any game is going to be liked by some people and disliked by
others, because different people value different things.
> Siedler is bought in large numbers, and I am interested in reasons as
> to why this is. The fact people like it falls into the realm of the
> obvious, as I am sure we can agree.
Why is the fact that lots of people like it not a sufficient explanation
of why lots of people buy it?
> Do you have a copy of Siedler?
No; mine was stolen.
> PPS: Is plagiarism a problem, or is this major hubris?
> Or maybe something learned in college?
From time to time people will publish postings, or collections of
postings, in other media such as books or magazines. I've had a couple
of experiences with this which I didn't appreciate, so I'd rather people
ask my permission in such cases. On Usenet, simply quoting my comments
is fine; I think posting to Usenet implies implicit consent for that.
MSiggins
desJardins) writes:
>For example, we all know by now that Mike Siggins disdains Die Siedler
>because he thinks it has too much luck. I think he could express that
>preference in a less condescending way, but at least he gives his
>reasons. Therefore, we can decide for ourselves whether we view having
>a lot of luck as a flaw, and use that in deciding whether to buy the
>game. (I think most people have no problem playing games with large
>luck factors, at least some of the time; therefore, they are relatively
>unaffected by this criticism.)
Well, thanks for dragging me into the conversation!
I do not disdain Die Siedler. I simply stated that it isn't what a lot of
people think it is, and for that I get the usual stick from 95% of
respondents. My aim in the review is to describe and state my
recommendation.
Condecension? I'd be interested in an example please.
Mike Siggins
"The essential matter of history is not what happened but what people
thought or said happened". Maitland
Aforandy
>> I very much doubt that game players make buying decisions
>> on their own, because of the amount of time so many of us spend
>> giving and receiving opinions on games.
>
>By definition, everyone makes their own buying decisions on their own.
About 2 hours ago [well days by the time the subber reads this]
I was asked the question "should I buy [a certain CCG]?"
by a member of our game circle.
>I would guess that the great majority of people in the US who have
>bought a copy of Die Siedler von Catan have done so after playing it at
>least once. (This might change if Mayfair distributes it more widely.)
Excepting the irretrievable collectors? Actually "try before you buy" is
a standard reviewer's warning, oft ignored.
>Of course, you are free to post your opinions of games. When you do so
>by saying that some games are better than others, you insult those who
>have different preferences;
I did not say some games were better than others but would
be happy to do so. If you feel insulted by this then you have a problem
which I would rather you do not father on me.
I am stating my opinion [and I note your condescension
here]. I started all this by asking for others opinions or preferences,
validated with reasons to give some meaning to the endeavour.
You also commit the sin of putting thoughts into my head, which is
arrogant but I believe unintentional.
>you are free to do that, too, but I don't
>have to like it.
Yes, we have freedom of speech, luckily untainted by political correctness
-so far. Why should you like my opinions?
>It would seem to me much preferable to simply describe
>things that you like or don't like about particular games; then other
>people can decide for themselves whether those things are likely to be
>important to them.
I was genuinely interested in the reasons for the popularity of Siedler,
but perhaps asking was not worthwhile. If the popularity of
Sieldler can't be defined, or has a strong emotional rather than
judgemental component, that is what i want to hear. There is a
necessity to voice a didactic and comparitive opinion, say
in the closing paragraph of a review,
otherwise computer mag percentage ratings beckon.
The opinion you express above is too lacking in definition for me.
>For example, we all know by now that Mike Siggins disdains Die Siedler
>because he thinks it has too much luck. I think he could express that
>preference in a less condescending way, but at least he gives his
>reasons.
He does indeed! Could it be he is interested in dispassionate debate?
Over four or five long pages....which i found hard to plough through.
>Therefore, we can decide for ourselves whether we view having
>a lot of luck as a flaw, and use that in deciding whether to buy the
>game. (I think most people have no problem playing games with large
>luck factors, at least some of the time; therefore, they are relatively
>unaffected by this criticism.)
>On the other hand, the fact that Andy thinks the game has "problems," or
>another game is "unassailable" is useless to anyone.
Well actually i can prove this is untrue [see above].
> And it defies
>reality: any game is going to be liked by some people and disliked by
>others, because different people value different things.
Surely; and you have my opinion, lets hear the reasons for yours,
and if you have four pages' worth or none that is equally good.
>> Siedler is bought in large numbers, and I am interested in reasons as
>> to why this is. The fact people like it falls into the realm of the
>> obvious, as I am sure we can agree.
>
>Why is the fact that lots of people like it not a sufficient explanation
>of why lots of people buy it?
Perhaps not entirely, for a small minority
reading rec.games.board.
>> Do you have a copy of Siedler?
>
>No; mine was stolen.
! This is hard to criticise: Siedler is worth risking criminal
prosecution.
>From time to time people will publish postings, or collections of
>postings, in other media such as books or magazines. I've had a couple
>of experiences with this which I didn't appreciate, so I'd rather people
>ask my permission in such cases. On Usenet, simply quoting my comments
>is fine; I think posting to Usenet implies implicit consent for that.
Well I am a little surprised, but thanks, maybe copyrighting should be
mentioned in the FAQ if not there already. I can't help feeling that
once published, the damage is done.
Andy
Paul Andrew King
afor...@aol.com (Aforandy) wrote:
In my experience there's enough going on in a turn (getting new resources,
trading and building) that that isn't a problem as long as everyone plays
at a reasonable speed.
Paul K.
BenF
On 17 Apr 1996, Aforandy wrote:
> >It would seem to me much preferable to simply describe
> >things that you like or don't like about particular games; then other
> >people can decide for themselves whether those things are likely to be
> >important to them.
>
> I was genuinely interested in the reasons for the popularity of Siedler,
> but perhaps asking was not worthwhile. If the popularity of
> Sieldler can't be defined, or has a strong emotional rather than
> judgemental component, that is what i want to hear. There is a
> necessity to voice a didactic and comparitive opinion, say
> in the closing paragraph of a review,
> otherwise computer mag percentage ratings beckon.
I think that Settlers is a very elegant game. I am talking more
about how it was designed rather than how it plays. There are several
different strategies that you can win with. There are few situations
which are unresolved by its small rulebook (good in a simple game). Nice
components. And alot of positive player interaction. I suspect that this
game has limited replay value, but for a very short multiplayer game this
is not suprising.
Settlers is a building/diplomatic game. The building and buying
decisions are important early. The diplomacy is important throughout the
game. The diplomacy is of a more cooperative type (simular to Adv. Civ.).
You try to look less treatening than the other players, until you make
your move. Luck (dice rolls and card draws) and hidden information can
influence game play. But the luck factor will usually decide the
winner, though it might cause someone to lose.
- Ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which one is right.
And which is an illusion???."
from Nights in White Satin by The Moody Blues 1967
Adam Huby
Aforandy <afor...@aol.com> wrote:
>I was genuinely interested in the reasons for the popularity of Siedler,
>but perhaps asking was not worthwhile. If the popularity of
>Sieldler can't be defined, or has a strong emotional rather than
>judgemental component, that is what i want to hear.
With some trepidation, in the light of the raging flamefest that's been
provoked by this seemingly innocent question, I'll risk giving my
opinions on this.
Firstly, I ought to say that I am entirely in agreement that Medici
and El Grande are _the_ class games of last year, but that I also get
a grest deal of simple pleasure from Siedler. Now that you have prompted
me to think about it, I think I've realised that the main reason why I
enjoy the first two of these so much is that there's no let-up; every
turn provides a number of reasonable options, and there's enough
information available about the likely effects of each choice that
picking the correct one is almost always difficult.
However, while this is a definite plus-point to me, I suspect that
the majority of gamers prefer a slightly easier life. Sure, they like
making decisions, but, provided that the game flows along nicely, they're
quite happy if these decisions aren't quite so critical or quite so
relentless as in the above two. Here's where Siedler scores for this
sort of gamer; once the initial builds have been made, a lot of the
game can really be played on auto-pilot. On many turns either he
won't have the resources to make any sort of build, or the correct
build is very obvious. Sure, there are occasions when deciding where
or if to build a road, say, can be a very tricky decision, but this
sort of turn is comparatively rare.
On the other hand, of course, Siedler also has a great many good points
that make it stand out from the crowd of ordinary games. There's good
player interaction and it's visually extremely attractive, but I suspect
that the real source of its appeal is that the fact that it's a game of
continous positive development. Settlements only ever expand, they
never contract, so that even a player who's losing by a fair distance
will feel some sense of achievement at the improvement he's made over
his starting position. Also, and possibly of equal importance, is the
fact that there are several different possible routes to victory. It's
comparatively rare for a player to be in such a bad position that he
can see no possible win by any of these routes (though I've certainly
managed to get into this sort of situation on at least a couple of
occasions <g>).
Hmm - I hope that makes some sort of sense to somebody. Interesting
question, Andy - I'd like to see some more responses to this from
people who actually do rate Siedler higher than El Grande or Medici.
BenF
On Wed, 17 Apr 1996, BenF wrote:
> influence game play. But the luck factor will usually decide the
> winner, though it might cause someone to lose.
Sorry, this should read: But the luck factor won't usually decide the
winner, ...
Aforandy
Huby) writes:
>With some trepidation, in the light of the raging flamefest that's been
>provoked by this seemingly innocent question, I'll risk giving my
>opinions on this.
Not at all, the people I'd most like
to replay and discuss Siedler with at present are yourself and Mr.
desJardins.
I have just been reminded by Dr. Owen of the Siedler problem we had, ie.
one player rolling the Wrong number about 10 times consecutively -
I remember the ensuing "this is crap" comment clearly, however.
I am getting similar remarks about the expansion, and the
collation of this item appears faulty. Like no wooden bits in one copy.
>Firstly, I ought to say that I am entirely in agreement that Medici
>and El Grande are _the_ class games of last year, but that I also get
>a grest deal of simple pleasure from Siedler. Now that you have prompted
>me to think about it, I think I've realised that the main reason why I
>enjoy the first two of these so much is that there's no let-up; every
>turn provides a number of reasonable options, and there's enough
>information available about the likely effects of each choice that
>picking the correct one is almost always difficult.
Entirely agree. And there's the loss of perspiration..
>However, while this is a definite plus-point to me, I suspect that
>the majority of gamers prefer a slightly easier life.
Agree even more.
>Sure, they like
>making decisions, but, provided that the game flows along nicely, they're
>quite happy if these decisions aren't quite so critical or quite so
>relentless as in the above two. Here's where Siedler scores for this
>sort of gamer; once the initial builds have been made, a lot of the
>game can really be played on auto-pilot. On many turns either he
>won't have the resources to make any sort of build, or the correct
>build is very obvious.
So the player can rest after a hard day at work?
Or fall asleep in the 6-player?
>Sure, there are occasions when deciding where
>or if to build a road, say, can be a very tricky decision, but this
>sort of turn is comparatively rare.
OK I believe you.
>On the other hand, of course, Siedler also has a great many good points
>that make it stand out from the crowd of ordinary games. There's good
>player interaction and it's visually extremely attractive, but I suspect
>that the real source of its appeal is that the fact that it's a game of
>continous positive development. Settlements only ever expand, they
>never contract, so that even a player who's losing by a fair distance
>will feel some sense of achievement at the improvement he's made over
>his starting position. Also, and possibly of equal importance, is the
>fact that there are several different possible routes to victory. It's
>comparatively rare for a player to be in such a bad position that he
>can see no possible win by any of these routes (though I've certainly
>managed to get into this sort of situation on at least a couple of
>occasions <g>).
.
>Hmm - I hope that makes some sort of sense to somebody. Interesting
>question, Andy - I'd like to see some more responses to this from
>people who actually do rate Siedler higher than El Grande or Medici.
>
>
All excellent points IMO.
That Siedler combines the above qualities
is the answer I was looking for.
The idea that siedler is a good "mixer" for
gamers and non-gamers appears to hold little water, according to the
gamer side of the argument.
Andy
Bruno Wolff III
]
] The idea that siedler is a good "mixer" for
] gamer side of the argument.
I agree with that. While I am willing to do that (play with nonserious
gamers), it is very frustrating having people place the ritter and choose
who to draw from or trade with based on whims instead of how well everyone
is doing and how their actions will effect this.
Elliott Bonnett
Seattle in May, and I want to get them to pick up a few games for me. Can
anyone recommend a game shop in Seattle that stocks German games. In
particular Die Siedler but also El Grande and/or Medici.
Elliott
(from game starved New Zealand)
Stephen Graham
Elliott Bonnett <bon...@corp.telecom.co.nz> wrote:
>I really want to get hold of Die Siedler. My in-laws are travelling to
>Seattle in May, and I want to get them to pick up a few games for me. Can
>anyone recommend a game shop in Seattle that stocks German games. In
>particular Die Siedler but also El Grande and/or Medici.
There are no game shops in Seattle that stock any of these games. All
copies that I have seen have been mail-ordered from Games People Play or
other sources.
--
Stephen Graham
gra...@ee.washington.edu
gra...@cs.washington.edu uw-beaver!june!graham
MattS
writes:
>The idea that siedler is a good "mixer" for
>gamers and non-gamers appears to hold little water, according to the
>gamer side of the argument.
I have a quick question about the difference between gamers and
non-gamers. I see these descriptions used fairly often and wonder if
someone could make clear the difference. Is it the amount of time that
one spends playing games? The type of games? The player's personal
dedication to games? Thanks for the help.
Matt
Bill Masek
|>
|> Hmm - I hope that makes some sort of sense to somebody. Interesting
|> question, Andy - I'd like to see some more responses to this from
|> people who actually do rate Siedler higher than El Grande or Medici.
I find Settler's a much richer game than Medici. There are so many additional
strategies you can choose. Medici has too much calculating and seems like you can
figure out the "optimal" bid for a set of cards. Also in Medici you are looking
for the best deals, so it becomes a much more passive game, more waiting. In
Settlers you should always have things you are trying to do.
--
bill masek open software foundation
(617) 275-4565 (h) (617) 621-8892 (w)
bi...@osf.org uunet!osf.org!bill
Aforandy
or even just looking at boardgames? Do you hang about Toys R Us
compulsively? Do you get edgy if your mean average monthly boardgame
expenditure falls below a certain level? Have you had pro treatment for
game buying addiction? Does it *really matter* if you lose? Do you buy
a $65 dollar game, unfold the map, say "thats pretty" put it away,
never to touch it again? Do you get upset when a games for sale
list comes in the post in case someone has bought stuff off it before you?
Do you suffer from "Buy First, Play Later" disturbance?
Do you write about games and have subsequently been diagnosed with
Game Related OleaGiNous ARticle Disorder [GROGNARD] ?
Are you reading rec.games.board?
Have you said "yes" to all the above and yet still said:-
"but I am much worse off than THAT!" ?
Then you're a gamer.
Andy
Aforandy
writes:
> ...........games and have subsequently been diagnosed with
>Game Related OleaGiNous ARticle Disorder [GROGNARD] ?
>Are you reading rec.games.board?.....
........Do you arrange boxes alphabetically by manufacturer then by game
title? Do your rooms feel warm in sumer due to insulation by wraparound
game-laden shelves? Do you own three copies of RAILROADER? can you open
and sort all the boosters in a display in under 4 minutes whilst
discussing Bosnia? Have you hurt your back carrying _all_ your Sale
purchases out of the gameshop in one go? Do you keep all your ASL modules
in a little red wagon? Does it say "Siedler" on your daughter's birth
certificate? Do you...
Andy
Kevin J. Maroney
>Do you buy
>a $65 dollar game, unfold the map, say "thats pretty" put it away,
>never to touch it again?
Worse: Do you do this and consider it _money well spent_?
--
Kevin J. Maroney | Crossover Technologies | ke...@crossover.com
Games are my entire waking life.
Markus Stumptner
>or even just looking at boardgames? Do you hang about Toys R Us
>compulsively? Do you get edgy if your mean average monthly boardgame
>expenditure falls below a certain level? Have you had pro treatment for
>a $65 dollar game, unfold the map, say "thats pretty" put it away,
>list comes in the post in case someone has bought stuff off it before you?
>Do you suffer from "Buy First, Play Later" disturbance?
>
>Have you said "yes" to all the above and yet still said:-
>
>"but I am much worse off than THAT!" ?
>
>Then you're a gamer.
I think this should read "then you have a real problem".
--
Markus Stumptner m...@dbai.tuwien.ac.at
Technische Universitaet Wien m...@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria vexpert!m...@relay.eu.net
You may just have missed your last chance for incremental garbage collection.