Recommend
71 
 Thumb up
 Hide
55 Posts
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Clash of Cultures» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Clash of Cultures…Rise of the Heavy Gateway rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
True that. In a 2P game it will be interesting to see how the games tend to develop.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Ruzzo
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
skyzero wrote:
Action Markers: Why not provide a set of action markers for each player? We all spent too much time rewinding our turn trying to remember if we took 2 or 3 actions during play. This is easily solved by creating your own, but it's something I wish would have been included.


For what it's worth, this issue didn't really come up a lot in our playtesting. I think it's something that will go away after the 2nd or 3rd play, because eveyrone will be much more "sure" about what they want to do when their turn comes around. "Move, move, build" or "collect, build, influence." Holding those 3 ideas in your head when you already know all the mechanics is pretty simple. Trying to hold those in your head at the same time as you wrap your mind around the game for the first few plays is a bit trickier
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
Bridger wrote:
skyzero wrote:
Action Markers: Why not provide a set of action markers for each player? We all spent too much time rewinding our turn trying to remember if we took 2 or 3 actions during play. This is easily solved by creating your own, but it's something I wish would have been included.


For what it's worth, this issue didn't really come up a lot in our playtesting. I think it's something that will go away after the 2nd or 3rd play, because eveyrone will be much more "sure" about what they want to do when their turn comes around. "Move, move, build" or "collect, build, influence." Holding those 3 ideas in your head when you already know all the mechanics is pretty simple. Trying to hold those in your head at the same time as you wrap your mind around the game for the first few plays is a bit trickier


I just used 3 of the wooden idea cubes as my markers.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Seal of Approval
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ghbell wrote:
I think this is because it SEEMS like a game that will degenerate into total war more often than not. I hope that isn't the case!


I think games with 3 or 4 players will tend to have a little more threatening, a little less warmongering, because starting a war also means exposing yourself to another player.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sky Zero
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
As an additional comment to the gateway usage of CoC, I will be teaching the family tomorrow using the 4 round variant with no PvP conflict allowed until the final round. That should reduce the frustration of some not understanding how crucial it is to protect your city. In the 4th age, I'll teach them that lesson, lol
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
Important lesson!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack
United States
Cumberland
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
skyzero wrote:
That should reduce the frustration of some not understanding how crucial it is to protect your city. In the 4th age, I'll teach them that lesson, lol


Some people gotta learn the hard way. devil
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
Not the first game though. I like to avoid frustration in the first game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jack
United States
Cumberland
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Totally agree. Just mean for that last round.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Meister
United States
Michigan
flag msg tools
Clash of Cultures » Forums » Reviews
Re: Clash of Cultures…Rise of the Heavy Gateway
With my wife and son we played 5 or 6 hours, but we were learning the game, my wife was multitasking and we also downed a bottle (or two) of wine. I am figuring next time it will be about an hour a person.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K AM
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
marqzen wrote:

Hi there. War "degeneration" is quite session and group dependant. I don't think you can generalize about it. I hope you continue to enjoy the game and will appretiate it's nuances, facets and options.

Have fun!


Certainly it is "session and group dependent." The question I have is whether or not a player can effectively resist that "War" push?

We've only played a few games, but in each one, it seemed clear to me that if one player decides the "War" route is what he wants, then the other players have no choice. Realistic? Sure. Not sure that is fun (for me).

Perhaps I'm traumatized by experience in other games that makes me hyper-sensitive to "degeneration" but few games seem to be able to avoid this.

Perhaps you can give an example of how one can avoid being dragged into a "War" path if an opponent decides he likes that sort of degenerate play.

KAM
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Marcussen
Denmark
Odense C
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi.

You cant avoid war or act as if war isnt part of the game. So if someone wants war then you need to react as well. So:

- build up to be an unattractive target
- make them come to you and spend their actions (or put preasure on them somewhere else on the map).
- cut your losses
- place your cities smartly
- get a better econmic engine than them
- place single units as defenssive barriers

But I wont lie. You can't avoid or neglect the military aspect of the game.

Cheers.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
Using the terrain is important too, but in a 2P game it is tough to make the terrain lay the way you want. The map is pretty small.

I haven't tried using a soldier as a barrier. Very expensive to do and costs an action of movement to place, so if you are playing defensive to cost them actions, then you just gave tempo back.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christian Marcussen
Denmark
Odense C
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
ghbell wrote:
Using the terrain is important too, but in a 2P game it is tough to make the terrain lay the way you want. The map is pretty small.

I haven't tried using a soldier as a barrier. Very expensive to do and costs an action of movement to place, so if you are playing defensive to cost them actions, then you just gave tempo back.


You time the move so it coincides with when you want to move a Settler or other Army or Ship. But yes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Wilson
United States
Montgomery
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
KAM1138 wrote:
marqzen wrote:

Hi there. War "degeneration" is quite session and group dependant. I don't think you can generalize about it. I hope you continue to enjoy the game and will appretiate it's nuances, facets and options.

Have fun!


Certainly it is "session and group dependent." The question I have is whether or not a player can effectively resist that "War" push?

We've only played a few games, but in each one, it seemed clear to me that if one player decides the "War" route is what he wants, then the other players have no choice. Realistic? Sure. Not sure that is fun (for me).

Perhaps I'm traumatized by experience in other games that makes me hyper-sensitive to "degeneration" but few games seem to be able to avoid this.

Perhaps you can give an example of how one can avoid being dragged into a "War" path if an opponent decides he likes that sort of degenerate play.

KAM

You'll have to wait for more experienced opinions, but here are some thoughts after 3 plays.

If someone makes it their single-minded goal to crush your bones, you're probably not going to win if you ignore them. However, if you're playing 3 or 4 player, it doesn't take much to make yourself a less-appealing target.

You can also freely negotiate with the would-be foe and politic yourself into some kind of a (temporary, at least) non-aggression agreement.

A couple armies or an army and a fortress in each city within 2 or 3 hexes of the aggressor will probably make it more expensive for him to attack you. If he sees that and starts bulking up (steel weapons, more units), you can respond in kind.

Keep a few ore and food in stock (at least 3 of each (or gold)). In my limited experience, as long as you have resources, taking back a single city isn't very hard. But a counter attack elsewhere in his empire (followed by negotiations) can be even more effective.

One of the most important factors in this equation is the terrain. use choke points to your advantage. Be aware of (and use) water routes if present. Know where your enemy might come from and know where his weaknesses are. If you have 2 or 3 cities at risk to the same direction, rather than trying to fortify both of them, it might be more efficient to use a move action or two to scatter a few lonely soldiers out in the board blocking his path. When his armies fight, they'll have to stop for the rest of the turn and won't be able to use roads to continue the assault (since they'll be moving from the field instead of from their city) giving you advance warning and ruining their surprise attack.

Also note, that military units aren't worth any points, if you focus on technological advances, cultural influence, and objective cards, you can still win the game even if you're completely eliminated. Think about it this way: let's assume peaceful you and your aggressive foe are evenly matched, you spend your resources on tech, objectives, and cultural influence and he spends his militarizing. If he eliminates you, the only points he can steal are the ones from your cities, and once you're gone, the game ends (at the status phase) so your focused point-motivated development has probably put you in a good position to win the game in spite of the premature end of your empire.

EDIT: I took too long to post this and so you've already gotten an answer from Christian.

I'm happy to hear that I've caught on to some of the tricks.
5 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brent Wilson
United States
Montgomery
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
marqzen wrote:
ghbell wrote:
Using the terrain is important too, but in a 2P game it is tough to make the terrain lay the way you want. The map is pretty small.

I haven't tried using a soldier as a barrier. Very expensive to do and costs an action of movement to place, so if you are playing defensive to cost them actions, then you just gave tempo back.


You time the move so it coincides with when you want to move a Settler or other Army or Ship. But yes.


Plus, it breaks their roads (just like a real ambush). So it doesn't necessarily give them tempo. In contrast, you strand them in the field with no defense at home and no spoils at the front. If they try to counter the blockade by splitting their force (sending some to take out the blockade and hold others back to move once your line is broken), they'll probably end up moving 2 units to have a good chance of insuring victory over your one unit, but then they are limited to attacking a city with only 2 units. Try it out G B.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K AM
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
marqzen wrote:
Hi.

You cant avoid war or act as if war isnt part of the game. So if someone wants war then you need to react as well. So:

- build up to be an unattractive target
- make them come to you and spend their actions (or put preasure on them somewhere else on the map).
- cut your losses
- place your cities smartly
- get a better econmic engine than them
- place single units as defenssive barriers

But I wont lie. You can't avoid or neglect the military aspect of the game.

Cheers.


Hello,

I'm not taking the position that one should be able to ignore the military aspect of the game. What I'm asking is whether an aggressive military player can distort the entire game--resulting in a "degenerate war game."

In the games we played, the first which focused on a lot of economic building, the aggressive military action (could have) ended the game by about turn 4. He didn't as to continue on and see what happened. Lesson learned there.

The 2nd (3P) game had the weakest economic player (with the strongest military) destroy one opponent, taking a lot of victory points and winning.

The 3rd game (2P), in which I played the aggressive military role, forced my opponent to immediately follow me on the aggressive military role, which resulted in his being starved of resources (following in military after starting a different route), and then getting totally wiped off the board by about turn 5 or 6 as I recall.

Certainly these 3 games are not a full range of what can happen, but the military aspect payed THE key role in each game.

Also--that 3rd game wasn't what I'd say is the best military strategy either. I think a few rounds of building are easily fit before moving into a full military push.

KAM
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
KAM1138 wrote:

In the games we played, the first which focused on a lot of economic building, the aggressive military action (could have) ended the game by about turn 4. He didn't as to continue on and see what happened. Lesson learned there.

The 2nd (3P) game had the weakest economic player (with the strongest military) destroy one opponent, taking a lot of victory points and winning.


What I did there was a round the world ship navigation and dropped an army unit in a city that had just built a wonder. I did this on the last turn of the game. There were a lot of variables there, but it was what it was. For the record, I could have leveled 1 or 2 cities of player 1 in that game, but I did not as we were still learning and I wanted the game to progress.

Quote:
The 3rd game (2P), in which I played the aggressive military role, forced my opponent to immediately follow me on the aggressive military role, which resulted in his being starved of resources (following in military after starting a different route), and then getting totally wiped off the board by about turn 5 or 6 as I recall.

Certainly these 3 games are not a full range of what can happen, but the military aspect payed THE key role in each game.

Also--that 3rd game wasn't what I'd say is the best military strategy either. I think a few rounds of building are easily fit before moving into a full military push.
KAM


All in all, I need to figure out how to better defend. Once that is accomplished, if it is accomplished, this will be better.

The problem with the war aspect is that if this is a war game through and through, then that won't be very interesting as the combat is plain and simple dice vs dice and there is no mitigating that at all. Same units, same dice, and hope for the best.

Of course, if the war can be slowed/prevented to a certain extent, then that will help a lot.

Tile laying and some of the above strategies may help. I just have to see.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K AM
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Speedyox wrote:

If someone makes it their single-minded goal to crush your bones, you're probably not going to win if you ignore them. However, if you're playing 3 or 4 player, it doesn't take much to make yourself a less-appealing target.


If you ignore them...well, obviously you've just built them a nice city to sack.

Speedyox wrote:

You can also freely negotiate with the would-be foe and politic yourself into some kind of a (temporary, at least) non-aggression agreement.


Not going to work in a 2P game.

Speedyox wrote:

A couple armies or an army and a fortress in each city within 2 or 3 hexes of the aggressor will probably make it more expensive for him to attack you. If he sees that and starts bulking up (steel weapons, more units), you can respond in kind.


Actually, I think it would be advantageous for my opponent to build what will soon become MY cities, and a nice supply path to his first. If a dedicated military opponent plays his game right, I think it will be nearly impossible to withstand his attack, because he can send multiple waves at your city, which is limited in its defenders. An attacker (That positions units correctly on the prior turn) can send two waves of 4 attackers, which seem likely to defeat even a fully defended city.

Speedyox wrote:

Keep a few ore and food in stock (at least 3 of each (or gold)). In my limited experience, as long as you have resources, taking back a single city isn't very hard. But a counter attack elsewhere in his empire (followed by negotiations) can be even more effective.


I agree wholeheartedly, but then, this supports my speculation that this game can be dragged into "war degeneration." This doesn't mean that the game is "Broken" or doesn't work, but I'm not interested in this as a War game (only as a component). I'm concerned (not claiming with certainty) that "war degeneration" might be too easy.

Speedyox wrote:

One of the most important factors in this equation is the terrain. use choke points to your advantage. Be aware of (and use) water routes if present. Know where your enemy might come from and know where his weaknesses are. If you have 2 or 3 cities at risk to the same direction, rather than trying to fortify both of them, it might be more efficient to use a move action or two to scatter a few lonely soldiers out in the board blocking his path. When his armies fight, they'll have to stop for the rest of the turn and won't be able to use roads to continue the assault (since they'll be moving from the field instead of from their city) giving you advance warning and ruining their surprise attack.


I think you make some good points, and are correct, but I think this will slow them, not stop them, while again dragging you into a "war."

Speedyox wrote:

Also note, that military units aren't worth any points, if you focus on technological advances, cultural influence, and objective cards, you can still win the game even if you're completely eliminated. Think about it this way: let's assume peaceful you and your aggressive foe are evenly matched, you spend your resources on tech, objectives, and cultural influence and he spends his militarizing. If he eliminates you, the only points he can steal are the ones from your cities, and once you're gone, the game ends (at the status phase) so your focused point-motivated development has probably put you in a good position to win the game in spite of the premature end of your empire.


Actually, this is exactly what the 3rd player did, and was defeated, which handed the military attacker the victory.

In any case--I appreciate the response.

KAM
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K AM
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ghbell wrote:

What I did there was a round the world ship navigation and dropped an army unit in a city that had just built a wonder. I did this on the last turn of the game. There were a lot of variables there, but it was what it was. For the record, I could have leveled 1 or 2 cities of player 1 in that game, but I did not as we were still learning and I wanted the game to progress.


I mentioned that your aggressive military could have ended the game on about turn 4. You were quick to key in on the fact that military could be very strong, and I underestimated the time it would take (not much).

ghbell wrote:

All in all, I need to figure out how to better defend. Once that is accomplished, if it is accomplished, this will be better.


I don't doubt one can put up a better defense. What are the options? Fortress, terrain positioning (which is not fully controllable) and 'blockers.' I'm sure these will all help to slow the opponent. The question is will it STOP him, and whether it will require you to be on a "War footing" (war degeneration).

My SPECULATION is that this you won't often be able to stop the military push, and will in the end be providing your opponent opportunities to build a more cohesive attacking force. The issue is that one need not dominate the game militarily throughout, but at the end. A "rush" strategy isn't as likely to succeed consistently.

But if you threaten just enough, it forces your less aggressive opponent to devote resources to defense, which means he is playing catch-up most likely, and then prevents him from reaching his loftier goals.

I was perfectly happy building centers of learning, only to find that a bunch of vicious savages could sack my cities and take everything I had built. That's on you buddy.

KAM
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
KAM1138 wrote:


I was perfectly happy building centers of learning, only to find that a bunch of vicious savages could sack my cities and take everything I had built. That's on you buddy.

KAM


LOL!! We could totally agree to a non aggression pact for like 3 rounds or some such!

Bottom line, I think 3 or 4p solves much of this. In a 2p game there is an issue I think.

Solution 2, use the 3 P map but play 2P. Lots more room!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
K AM
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
ghbell wrote:

All in all, I need to figure out how to better defend. Once that is accomplished, if it is accomplished, this will be better.


Actually, I think I'd rather work the defensive strategies, as I'm not particularly good at attacking (love to turtle).

KAM
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
KAM1138 wrote:
ghbell wrote:

All in all, I need to figure out how to better defend. Once that is accomplished, if it is accomplished, this will be better.


Actually, I think I'd rather work the defensive strategies, as I'm not particularly good at attacking (love to turtle).

KAM


Ok, I will hold you to that for the next time we play this!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Seal of Approval
Austria
Vienna
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
KAM1138 wrote:

I was perfectly happy building centers of learning, only to find that a bunch of vicious savages could sack my cities and take everything I had built. That's on you buddy.
KAM


I think I read something like this in a history book once...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
G B
United States
Crown Point
Indiana
flag msg tools
NO! I'M SPARTACUS!
badge
I will find Myntokk and I will eat him.
mbmbmbmbmb
Asperamanca wrote:
KAM1138 wrote:

I was perfectly happy building centers of learning, only to find that a bunch of vicious savages could sack my cities and take everything I had built. That's on you buddy.
KAM


I think I read something like this in a history book once...


Yes but it must be fun!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.