Why does it work?
Torrent> tonight is Carcassonne right?
zaiga> Yep, Carcass one
Scurra> OK folks This one I hope everyone has played
SVan> yes for once
Torrent> one of my favorites
SVan> ditto
Sebastian> I have, yes.
Joe_Huber> Even got to play it as a prototype...
Scurra> Joe, can you stop doing that, please?
Joe_Huber> Hey - what can I say? I really like playing prototypes...
Sebastian> Indeed. Playing prototypes - it's disgusting.
Torrent> ive actually not played the Blue Box version.. just Hunt/Gather and theCastle.. but I know quite a bit about the main one
[b]zaiga> [/b]I played only the blue box without expansions
SVan> the same, want the exp's though
Scurra> Well eventually we might talk about all those things.
Sebastian> I've played most of them except for the new Arc of Covenant version.
Scurra> But let's start with the standard, basic game.
Sebastian> (and the King and Scout expansions)
Scurra> What was it that made it "click" in the way that it did?
Scurra> After all, there had been plenty of tile laying games before
Torrent> I think it is due to a good balance between skill and luck
Sebastian> Simplicity, I think, is the key to Carcassone.
Daveman_UK> great visuals (jigsaw puzzle style)
zaiga> It's simple and looks great
Joe_Huber> I think it's one of the cleanest tile laying games.
SVan> those i play with love that the game is different everytime and that you get to build the world
Scurra> Well there are the three reasons I think it works too
zaiga> You can cooperat in the game or play it nasty
Joe_Huber> Good illusion of control...
Sebastian> Most of the other tile laying games have weird, complex ways of getting points back - Carc has place a tile, place a dobber, score.
jwarrend> Illusion?
SVan> it's so easy you could almost do it sleeping (or watching a movie like we did last night)
Scurra> Let's start with simplicity
Joe_Huber> (Sorry - illusion not necessary implying lack of anything behind the illusion - though in the case of Carc I'm not sure how much real control there is...)
Scurra> The paradox seems to be that it is rare for you to be forced into a move
Scurra> and yet it rarely feels "wrong" when you do place
jwarrend> Joe: I think it depends on size; in 2 players there's quite a bit. I would say Carc is a great 2 player game that permits larger groups as well...
Torrent> so you still have choices to make
Scurra> Indeed
zaiga> And you can still make good and bad choices, it isn't always obvious
Torrent> and you have some idea of short range tactics.
Torrent> do I extend that forest, or close it off now
Torrent> risk versus reward sort of stuff
zaiga> Forest?
Scurra> he meant to type "city"
Torrent> city.. whatever. Ive played more Hunt/Gath than anything
Scurra> It's a game in which a wrong move can eventually come back to haunt you, but rarely to the same extent as in, say, Puerto Rico
zaiga> Oh, there's a large element of luck
SVan> there's enough interaction in it as well, and I find with more players, the more interaction
”Social” play
zaiga> The game is forgiving, because unfinished roads and cities still score some points at the end
Scurra> I think that's important Zaiga (and something that the expansions messed up a bit)
Torrent> you also get more chaos with more players, as you get fewer tiles to play per player.
SVan> but at times punishing, if you lay your "meeples" too soon
Sebastian> And unforgiving, because people can poach your cities.
zaiga> SVan: it is more important to cooperate with more opponents
SVan> they don't consider it cooperating
zaiga> Scurra: it makes the base game a bit more friendly
Scurra> Yes, I agree about the basic game.
zaiga> Perhaps the expansions are more aimed towards people who wan't a bit more "game"?
Scurra> Svan that, of course, is one of the most interesting things about Carc - the essentially two levels of play.
Scurra> You can play it on a purely social level
Scurra> or on a real cut-throat level
Scurra> And sometimes it's too easy to forget which version you are playing
SVan> exactly
Torrent> it is also a great game for non-gamers. I carry H/G around just to have it to play with non-gamers
Torrent> that social -> cutthroat continum is one of these reasons.
zaiga> Agreed, it is my favorite to play with non-gamers
Scurra> Indeed. But when you play with non-gamers, it's important to be playing at that "social" level
SVan> probably the best non-gamers game since Settlers
zaiga> I always hear people say that non-gamers don't like nasty games, but I don't think that is always true
Torrent> ive had nights where it starts off nice and ends up pretty cutthroat
Sebastian> SVan: Nah. That's Apples to Apples.
Scurra> And yet the better you know the game, the easier it is to play it at that "social" level too - because you know the tiles so much better
Torrent> but it can be nasty without being violent
Scurra> Apples to Apples is a party entertainment, not a game!
SVan> sebastian: haven't tried it yet, I chose Carc over it
zaiga> Some non-gamers like games that are very nasty and their only goal in the gam is to screw everyone as hard and as much as possible
Sebastian> That's one aspect I don't like about the game - that memorising tiles gives an advantage.
Scurra> Memory is a bit of an issue in Carc
Torrent> i dont think it's as much memorizing, but getting a feel as to what is available and in about what numbers
Scurra> although one that is easily fixed, oddly
SVan> it certainly helps
Sebastian> In my ideal version of Carcasonne, you'd have a printer, and each turn it prints out a tile at random.
SVan> but i've seen newbies win after a few games
zaiga> I wouldn't like that, as it would become a purely tactical game
Scurra> One of the great things about the expansions is that it means you can remove a subset of tiles randomly and keep a reasonable number to play with
Torrent> the luck aspect means that knowing what is available doesnt make you grab the right tile.
Sebastian> zaiga: I'm not sure it would - there are still issues about the likelyhood of various tiles coming out.
Scurra> which then removes the "oh there's still two road bends left"
Torrent> so even the most expereinced players wont win all the time, another good reason for a non-gamer game
Sebastian> It's just I don't like the 'I know there are three tiles that can fit in this gap so lets play the odds'
Sebastian> type of thinking.
Scurra> with the basic set, removing any tiles shrinks the tile pool too much
”Co-operative” play
[b]SVan> does anyone play with a hand of 2 or 3 tiles?
SVan> that has to be my biggest gripe with the rules, the one at a time draw
Sebastian> SVan: Doesn't it slow the game horribly?
zaiga> No, no. One of the things I love about Carcassonne is the fact that you have to show which tile you have drawn so everyone can "help" you
Scurra> Zaiga, yes indeed.
SVan> i dont like that eithr
Scurra> Especially when you are hoping no-one notices the "kill" spot!
zaiga> No? I think it is a brilliant touch
sedjtroll> I think the tile should be drawn at the end of your turn, so you have everyone else's turn to think about where it might go
sedjtroll> (probably not revealed till your turn though)
Scurra> I've never played it any other way...
SVan> seth: that's what we do
SVan> and keep a 3 tile hand
Sebastian> sedjtroll: Well, that's fairly standard...
zaiga> I can see why "gamers" prefer to play it that way
Torrent> sedj: I think that would make it really frustrating.. especailly with a lot ofplayers
sedjtroll> a 'hand' fot tiles would probably be cool too
Scurra> Torrent, well you never really start looking until a couple of plays before your turn anyway
sedjtroll> Torrent: how? how does it change the game, except to reduce downtime?
Torrent> seeing the spot you wanted be taken.. that is the worst part of games like Scrabble to me
Torrent> i think pretty quickly, so I like current info
zaiga> I think that the "draw one tile and show it to everyone" is what sets this game apart from other, similar tile laying games
Sebastian> Hmm. A matter of opinion, I think.
Scurra> Zaiga, I'm inclined to agree with you
Torrent> it is also part of what makes it easy to teach
Sebastian> zaiga: I don't agree with that.
SVan> it probably does, but i didn't see any advantage from it
Sebastian> If it was, then metro would be equally popular.
zaiga> Well, there's more to it than just that of course
sedjtroll> Zaiga: I don't see how other people 'helping' you really sets the game apart.
Scurra> Again, it's about the "social" aspect of the game
zaiga> It makes the game much more social and it gives you something to do during another player's turn
sedjtroll> in Puerto Rico you can talk all day long about what you think the new player should do, or you could try and get someone to do something that's good for you
SVan> but able to customize the game you want to play it is great
Sebastian> There are tonnes of games where you can suggest moves. It's ... a nice touch, but I'm not sure it's something defining about it.
sedjtroll> But I don't see that as 'brilliant' or anything
zaiga> Sedj: I do
Scurra> Exactly - a chatty version of PR vs a silent one. The latter is quicker, but is it anymore fun?
Daveman_UK> mm, metro feels like a negative game of carc (lots of definative screw-you tile plays)
sedjtroll> Zaiga: you can do that in any game
sedjtroll> can you do it in Gheos or Urban Construct??
zaiga> Sedj: no, thats not true'... because you need to have full open information in a game
zaiga> Sedj: no you cannot do it in Gheos or UC, because there is hidden information in those games
Sebastian> You can suggest where to build in settlers. You can suggest when to buy in Ra. You can suggest where to go in TransAmerica...
Scurra> And they're mostly open information games too
Scurra> but there is a difference in Carc I think
Sebastian> I'll agree that Carc lends itself to suggestions because it's relatively simple.
Torrent> the other thing I like about Carc as a game is that the point payouts come at regular intervals, but with 'uncalculated' scoring at the end
zaiga> It would work in Ra, but there's hidden information in Settlers and TransAmerica
Scurra> I don't think I'd class TransAmerica in the same group
Sebastian> But I think the reason that the game is good is because of the simplicity (and hence allows suggestions) rather than good because of the suggestions.
Sebastian> It's a bit of a subtle distinction, I'll grant you.
SVan> not only the simplicity but the smoothness of the game's rules
zaiga> Oh sure, the social aspect is just one of the great things about the game
Scurra> Apart from the Farmer scoring, of course!
Sebastian> Metro, for example, is far more complex in terms of routes and secret plans for routes, which is why although it is obstensively a similar game, it isn't as good.
zaiga> What's wrong with the farmer scoring?
SVan> i think that through Carc we can learn that simpler can be better
Sebastian> Why - because the scoring is less simple to grasp at a glance. So easy suggestions like 'you can get two points for a road there' don't work.
Aesthetics
Scurra> And one other difference between Carc and Metro, and one of the reasons I love Carc so much is that the sheer "look" of the game matters
Scurra> At the end of a game of Carc, the layout simply looks beautiful
Sebastian> Indeed. That's one of the reasons I don't like H&G
Scurra> I have to confess that it's the one thing that I prefer about Carc to, say, Hunters & Gatherers
Scurra> (is there an echo in here?)
SVan> it is true the artwork help make the game stand out on its own
Sebastian> Hunters and gatherers is also a lot more fussy with the farmers, which I don't like.
Monasteries[b]
[b]Scurra> But it fixes the Monastery problem, which is a good thing, right?
zaiga> The Monasteries are overpowered
Sebastian> Scurra: The expansions to Carc fix the monestry problem much better.
Torrent> what do you mean 'fussy'?
Scurra> Not in a cut-throat game they're not
SVan> i think sometimes monasteries are worse than farmers
SVan> balance-wised
Torrent> it is just count the animals.. nothing about figuring out bordering cities.
Scurra> Sebastian, that's a good point (apart from The River, which I think makes it worse!)
Sebastian> zaiga: You haven't played on BSW enough; )
zaiga> Most tiles are worth between 1 and 4 points, a monastery can be worth up to 9 points
Scurra> Zaiga, I play the PC version a lot, and even there you learn why Monasteries aren't great
zaiga> Why aren't they as great then?
SVan> the river usually gets in the way, but it makes the game a little different
Scurra> because you don't get your meeple back if it isn't finished.
Sebastian> zaiga: Yes, but you have to fill in the spaces around a monesty. And placing tiles to stop you completing a monestry is not all that difficult.
Scurra> Now this applies to the other bits too
Scurra> but nothing like as badly
Sebastian> At which point your meeple is stuck for the rest of the game.
Sebastian> Roads, on the other hand, have only one choke point, which you can usually deal with.
zaiga> But if you draw a monastery halfway the game, you can often place it so that you can get 5 points or so from it right away
Sebastian> And towns are usually high scoring anyway.
zaiga> Who cares that your meeple is stuck, you have enough of them anyway
Scurra> !!!
Scurra> Now that's an aspect of the game that is under-rated
Scurra> The resource management component
Sebastian> zaiga: This is certainly not true in the longer games that you have with the expansions.
Sebastian> And I'm not sure it's true in the base game, either.
zaiga> OK, I'm talking about the base game... it also depends on the number of players
Scurra> If you think you've got enough meeples for the game, I think you'll lose more often
Scurra> This is why the farmers are such a brilliant idea
zaiga> Agreed, but if you play careful it is not that hard
Sebastian> zaiga: I'll grant the point about monestrys being overpowered in the base game. I was talking about the expansions tending to fix it.
Torrent> in the base game do you have the ability to get short features? two tile long things?
Scurra> because you have to decide if you are prepared to commit them and when
zaiga> Ok, I haven't played the expansions
Scurra> In the original game you only got 2 for a two-tile city, but now you get four
Scoring changes
Scurra> but that's related to the farmer scoring changing so often!
Sebastian> Now, that's one thing that irritates me about Carc. I'll grant that the updated farmer scoring is easier to understand. But it can't have been that hard to get it right in the first place.
Scurra> Well it's different, certainly - but is it easier? Maybe
Scurra> It'd certainly be interesting to know what drove the change
Sebastian> Why did it need two changes, though.
Scurra> I think possibly because of Hunters & Gatherers
Scurra> (although that scoring is totally different!)
Sebastian> You do not need to change the scoring in the base game because of an expansion.
Scurra>
Scurra> I think they were trying for consistency
Scurra> so that future games ("Starport Carcassonne" anyone?) will feel the same
Torrent> i want to say there was some descrepancy between the English and German translations.
Sebastian> Yes, but there's consistency, and there's consistency with the past. It's just ... silly. Especially when none of the future games use farmer scoring anyway.
Scurra> I'm not arguing with you
Sebastian> Every one uses the 'number of animals in the field' mechanic.
Torrent> i believe Ark looks more like HG for Farmers
Sebastian> From the descriptions I've read, yes.
Sebastian> And the castle uses fairgrounds in the fields.
Torrent> Castle certainly does
Torrent> again with that echo.
Sebastian> Well, if everyone repeats what I'm saying...
Scurra> I think Sebastian is just reading our minds...
Sebastian> That's the other way of looking at it...
Torrent> has anyone played the Builders/Traders expansion.. I'm curous how this affects things
Scurra> Well, I like the Traders bit but I don't like the Builders bit
Scurra> We generally don't use the Builders at all
Sebastian> Scurra: Which bit is which?
Scurra> The Traders bit are the tokens for the cities
Scurra> and the Builders bit is the extra turn mechanic
Torrent> where does the Pig come from?
Sebastian> Ah. I'm exactly the opposite, then. I think the Builders bit is the only good bit in the expansion.
Scurra> Oh yeah, I forgot about the pig
Sebastian> The traders bit adds fiddlyness.
Scurra> Well it's kind of like trying to include the H&G bonus tile mechanic
Sebastian> And as for the pig...
Scurra> without any actual bonus tiles...
Scurra> I don't think I've ever even bothered with the pig
Sebastian> It's interesting. It makes the thing that it's on more valuable for you to play with.
Sebastian> But I certainly don't think it's interesting enough to shell out for that expansion. The first one on the other hand is good.
Scurra> The Trader tokens is like the Gold Nugget in H&G - an incentive to finish off cities
Joe_Huber> I find the traders/city tokens a key addition, as it's the first time with the original game that there's an incentive to complete cities.
Scurra> (echo, echo )
Scurra> I really do like the first expansion too
Scurra> (sorry, I don't count the River)
Sebastian> Yes, but I'm not sure the game needs an incentive to complete cities.
Joe_Huber> Given the cost, I've found all the expansions worthwhile. If nothing else, for the additional tile types...
Sebastian> I think that scoring points should be more than enough.
Scurra> It makes farmers much more interesting though
Joe_Huber> But traders give players not involved in the city an incentive, which is rather a nice addition.
Scurra> as you tend away from that huge epic city that you vaguely hope might get finished
Sebastian> The second expansion only gives you boring extra city-with-tradermarker tiles, though.
Sebastian> *grumble*
Sebastian> And a couple of extra, I suppose
Sebastian> Scurra: How does it make farmers more interesting?
Scurra> Because lots of small cities scores more!
Scurra> I'm in two minds about the King & Scout expansion though (or, as they became known the "largest army" and "longest road" tiles )
Sebastian> And why do traders create lots of small cities?
Scurra> There are a couple of fun tiles in there, admittedly
Sebastian> Scurra: There i'm definitly against, again. Take a nice game and make it too fiddly.
Sebastian> The base game has an incentive to build small cities, because if they get too large, people will stop you completing them.
SVan> or come in and get the same amount of points as you
Sebastian> Now, build away, and give whoever completes it the trader points.
Sebastian> SVan: Well, that's the other option
Scurra> Well I don't know about that - it seems to be more about sneaking into other people's cities
