Skip to Content
 

Minimum requirement for trading mechanics to work.

7 replies [Last post]
Thu, 08/20/2015 - 16:06
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008

In settlers of catan, there is 5 resources and trading works pretty well. But if the number of resources type were to be reduced to 3, I am not sure the trading mechanic would be used as much.

For one of my game, I am considering to have resource tokens of 3 type with different values of them. Tokens cannot be split or make change. They must be spent or traded as whole.

So in this case, there is only 3 resources, but there is also a value on a resource, so a player could also trade the same resource for different value.

Do you think it could actually work?

Do you know any games that does this?

Preventing players from spliting a resource token could incite them to for example trade 1 large value token for 2 small if they want to buy 2 small things.

Top
Thu, 08/20/2015 - 18:32
#1
Zag24
Offline
Joined: 03/02/2014
I've played in several games

I've played in several games where you sometimes get larger quantities of whatever, but you aren't allowed to "make change." In my experience, it's just annoying and doesn't add anything constructive to the game.

Top
Fri, 08/21/2015 - 07:01
#2
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
If the trade is between

If the trade is between players. Then 3 resources or even 2 can do.

But you need a minimum of 3 players to make this worth while. (A and B trade, since C asks to much of A.)

I suppose that in your game, when you have limited resources, your choices are limited?

Top
Fri, 08/21/2015 - 07:43
#3
wombat929
wombat929's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/17/2015
Zag24 wrote:I've played in

Zag24 wrote:
I've played in several games where you sometimes get larger quantities of whatever, but you aren't allowed to "make change." In my experience, it's just annoying and doesn't add anything constructive to the game.

The exception to this rule, for me, is Alhambra, where you can't make change, and buying with exact change gives you a game advantage (you get an extra turn). You quickly learn that managing your hand so you have exact change is the difference between winning and losing.

But there's no trading in Alhambra.

Top
Fri, 08/21/2015 - 09:27
#4
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I realised that I could

I realised that I could reduce the components of the game if I used resource tracks instead of tokens. So in that case, there would be no interest in trading various denominations.

My game is minimum 3 players, but trading is a risky action players can take, so it needs to be worth trading when chosing that action.

I imagine that if resources are more concentrated on the board, players will have a lower variety of resources inciting them to trade more. That could be an alternative solution.

Do you know any game with 3 resources only for trade?

Top
Thu, 08/27/2015 - 12:55
#5
Emrak
Offline
Joined: 09/19/2013
larienna wrote: Do you know

larienna wrote:

Do you know any game with 3 resources only for trade?

I can't think of any.

I think you can--in theory--make a trading mechanic in this situation but it seems like the easy solution is to always have more resources than there are potential players. In that way, it's really tough for any single player to lock down too many resources; they have to trade.

It sounds like your current design is such that there will always be at least as many players as resource types, so to force trading you'd probably have to restrict player access to resources in some way so they can't lock down resources. They have to go to other players for stuff. You could accomplish this perhaps by limiting how much resources they could hold in their hand, or making it so that they can only ever have one type of resource in their hand at turn's end, or something of that nature.

Just throwing out ideas.

Top
Thu, 08/27/2015 - 21:13
#6
andymakespasta
Offline
Joined: 07/26/2015
In Catan

I believe in catan, trading works so well is because
- You simply cannot access all the resources by yourself
- Resource production is random, so dry spells of a resource might force you to trade.
- 4 players

If you only have three resources, it's much easier for players to be able to produce each resource themselves.
However, you can still make production very very random, so on some turns, you'll be drowning in wood, then on others dry for sheep.
You still absolutely need more than 3 players.
Unless it's a co-op game.

Top
Fri, 08/28/2015 - 05:13
#7
adversitygames
adversitygames's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
larienna wrote:I realised

larienna wrote:
I realised that I could reduce the components of the game if I used resource tracks instead of tokens. So in that case, there would be no interest in trading various denominations.

Also I think this would detract from the "feel" of trading. You talk about an agreement, then move the tracks on the board rather than exchanging goods directly with each other. I want to *hold* my trade goods.

Agreed with the others that it's harder to restrict players from being able to get all the resources themselves, and so have an incentive to trade. But I think it's doable.

I think the "no change" system could go either way. A couple of clarifying questions though:
(I'm going to call the resources Alien, Raygun and Cow just for reference)

Do A, R and C all have the same distribution of values? (ie the same number of 1s, 2s, 3s, ... rather than A coming in 2s and 4s, R coming in 1s and 3s, etc)

Can players trade more than one type at a time? (eg a 1xA and 1xR for a 3xC)

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut