Game: Palatinus

Thread: Re: Influence question

jkopena — 2008-08-02T11:11:04+00:00

Hi Andres,

That's definitely not what the English rules say, but if that's what the Italian and German rules say then that's very clear. Very interesting--thanks for the heads-up!

Thread: Re: Farmers in the Spring

tritone — 2008-07-30T02:50:48+00:00

Thanks again, Andres.

Thread: Re: Rules question, clarificatuon or variant idea regarding soldiers during scoring.

Andres — 2008-07-28T17:33:36+00:00

The resolution order is hill by hill, from A to G.
I.e.: soldiers around hill A, then influence around hill A, then soldiers around hill B, then influence around hill B, etc.

This is shown also in the example, where first (all) soldiers on hill C are considered, then influence on hill C is counted, to see who controls the hill.

Thread: Re: Farmers in the Spring

Andres — 2008-07-28T17:28:23+00:00

The other languages use only the words "field" (and "field with spring"), so it's clearer. See:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/115946

The "Insula Tiberina" tile is placed over one of the 7 Territory tiles, chosen *randomly*. So it's not important who actually places island Tiberina.
And, as the border hexes of this tile are all water, its rotation is not important too.

Thread: Re: Influence question

Andres — 2008-07-28T17:15:42+00:00

jkopena wrote:

I'm curious, are you looking at the rules in another language? I wouldn't be surprised if this discrepancy between the rules & the example is something that was inadvertently introduced during the translation into English.

I've read the Italian and the German rules, and only English shows some doubts.

E.g. in the German rules:
- the "Contents" lists:
A. Hill; B. Field; C. Field with spring (blue-bordered field)

- the farmer awards points for fields:
2 influence points for each unoccupied adiacent field (with or without spring);
2 influence points for each field with spring (farmer's field or an adjacent one).

Thread: Rules question, clarificatuon or variant idea regarding soldiers during scoring.

docreason — 2008-07-28T02:59:12+00:00

Play Palatinus today. I thought it went well, but it is possible the game was played wrong. If this is the wrong way to play, then I would suggest it as a variant. It has to do with soldiers during scoring.

This is the approach done for the soldiers:
1. Check ALL soldiers (all spaces) on the board to see if they have an equal number of merchants and farmers adjacent to them. Remove these soldiers.
2. Check ALL soldiers that remain to see if they share touching farmers or merchants which would score. Mark those with enough 1 point chips as needed.
3. Remove all units off ALL the boards at the same time, and give them (and the bonus point chips) to the players of soldiers that should score.

After doing this, then determine influence of farmers and merchants and score each hill.

Ok, the impression I have is that scoring is NOT done this way. You go hill by hill and resolve in order, or some other way? Anyone know if the above way is correct? If it isn't, I recommend that people try it this way, because the game was interesting to play using this method. Soldiers end up being a force that can radically change the board.

Thread: Re: Farmers in the Spring

tritone — 2008-07-23T05:42:32+00:00

Thanks, Andres. The example in the (English) rules seems precisely worded... but the actual "rule" pertaining to farmers seemed vague, using the phrase "unoccupied field" instead of "unoccupied terrain". It makes sense now.

I'll remember the "hill by hill" rule when we play (we did not get to play the other night). Oh, and thanks for the clarification on the water border. Have you played with the expansion? Again, I don't think the rules were very clear on how that works. After you layout the 7 basic tiles, WHO places the expansion tile? and where? Anywhere they want?

Thread: Re: Influence question

jkopena — 2008-07-23T03:47:04+00:00

Andres,

That's an interesting take explaining the example, sounds like a reasonable scoring system, and may have even been the original intent, but is definitely not what the actual (English) rules say. Note that fields and springs are different things and the relevant scoring rule specifically differentiates "occupied field" versus "spring (it doesn't matter if the spring is occupied or not)." As a spring is not a field, and the first case is for occupied fields, it would not get those two points, only the two points for being a spring (occupied or not).

I'm curious, are you looking at the rules in another language? I wouldn't be surprised if this discrepancy between the rules & the example is something that was inadvertently introduced during the translation into English.

Thx

Thread: Re: Influence question

Andres — 2008-07-22T13:31:35+00:00

Sorry to disagree, but the example is correct:
each farmer gets 2 influence points for each empty terrain (spring or not) & 2 point for each spring (even if occupied).

So, a farmer gets a total of 2+2=4 influence points from a *not* occupied spring hex (= 2 from empty terrain + 2 from spring).

Thread: Re: Farmers in the Spring

Andres — 2008-07-22T13:25:15+00:00

tritone wrote:
First, I'm a little confused about what constitutes a "spring".
A spring is an hex with a blue border.
"Insula Tiberina", the extension of the game, refers to the island in the middle of Tiber, Rome's river (insula = Latin for "island"). So, the island is completely surrounded by water.

tritone wrote:
Second, I'm not sure how the farmer scores.
(...)
So is the example correct, and you score 2 points for ANY adjacent empty hex regardless of "type", even if it's also a spring for which it also scores an additional 2 points?

Yes, the example is correct, and it has been created also to resolve this doubt.
So: the farmer gets 2 influence points for each unoccupied terrain (whether it is a spring or not) and 2 influence points for each spring (occupied or not).

And, yes, this means that an empty spring gives 2+2 influence points (to each adjacent farmer...).

By the way, notice that: the resolution order is hill by hill, from A to G.
I.e.: soldiers around hill A, then influence around hill A, then soldiers around hill B, then influence around hill B, etc.
(Some players considered - wrongly! - all the soldiers first, and then the influence on the 7 hills.)

Thread: Farmers in the Spring

tritone — 2008-07-20T02:01:10+00:00

I just picked this up in Chicago this week and am getting ready to play it tonight. First, I'm a little confused about what constitutes a "spring". It looks like springs are the slightly orange-ish hexes with a blue border. Is it the blue border, or the orange-ish tint, that makes this hex a spring? I ask, because, there is a downloadable PDF extension for Palatinus from the daVinci website with an extra (8th) tile in which ALL the hexes have blue borders on them. Are all these hexes considered to be springs, or is this border color irrelevant and just the orange hexes are springs?

Second, I'm not sure how the farmer scores. It says the farmer scores for adjacent fields and springs. Unoccupied fields get 2 points, and adjacent springs get 2 points, occupied or not. The legend at the top of the rules implies that a field is the yellowish hex, and the spring is orange with a blue border. To me this implies that no hex will score more than once. However, the scoring example for the yellow farmer says he gets 8 points, 6 for the springs, and 2 for the unoccupied terrain. This example is considering the unoccupied spring to be both an "unoccupied terrain" for 2 points, and a springs for 2 points.

So is the example correct, and you score 2 points for ANY adjacent empty hex regardless of "type", even if it's also a spring for which it also scores an additional 2 points?

Thread: Re: [Review] Palatinus

TomVasel — 2007-12-20T00:39:39+00:00

Thank you for the clarification. That is how I played it, my wording in the review was misleading.

My opinion on the game remains unchanged, however.

Thread: Re: [Review] Palatinus

jkopena — 2007-12-19T23:23:47+00:00

Small note that the gameplay summary here is most likely incorrect: Each hill is evaluated in turn, first for soldiers, then for the merchants and farmers, before moving on to the next hill. In other words, you do not evaluate all soldiers at once as described in the review. The wording of the rules could be interpreted as in the review, but a strict algorithmic reading doesn't support it (and I haven't seen them read as such anywhere else). Further, if that were the case, the tiles wouldn't be lettered, as the evaluation order doesn't matter under that scheme (other than as a means to keep track of what you've already done).

This is important because with each hill evaluated completely in turn, it adds another level of strategy in that the timing of that evaluation needs to be considered as well. For example, suppose tiles A and B are next to each other, and B has a soldier on it. I may place a merchant on A next to the soldier, knowing that it will eventually be captured by the soldier when hill B is evaluated, but in evaluating hill A the merchant will have already scored three influence points. My group of players and I make heavy use of this tactic. Best of all is if that soldier belongs to you, allowing you to get both the influence and the capture point...

Thx

Thread: Re: Influence question

jkopena — 2007-12-19T23:06:01+00:00

Hi frannstein,

You're probably well beyond this by now, but I just started playing this game. You're definitely right. I would assume that the example is wrong and the farmer should have 6 influence points.

Image

opinicus — 2007-10-09T02:58:30+00:00

Flip Them Wolves

Image

Von Cougar — 2007-05-22T21:12:59+00:00

Screen hides pieces, however unnecessary.

Image

Von Cougar — 2007-05-22T21:11:31+00:00

5-player start pieces for the Sabines.

Image

Von Cougar — 2007-05-22T21:09:01+00:00

Initial setup.

Image

Von Cougar — 2007-05-22T21:03:40+00:00

Dumbfounded during rules explanation

Image

olav.mueller — 2007-04-02T23:49:53+00:00

Image

dipdragon — 2007-03-09T15:52:04+00:00

Palatinus Tilesheets (Front)

Image

dipdragon — 2007-03-09T15:50:42+00:00

Palatinus Tilesheets (Back)

Image

dipdragon — 2007-03-09T15:48:48+00:00

Palatinus: The Rulebook In 5 Languages

Image

dipdragon — 2007-03-09T15:47:38+00:00

Palatinus Player Screens

Thread: Palatinus rules in Finnish (PDF)

SaulMate — 2006-10-02T08:24:34+00:00

http://kotisivu.mtv3.fi/sauli.tiitta/palatinus_ohjeet_fin.pd...

Thread: Influence question

frannstein — 2006-06-30T20:48:47+00:00

Hi everybody !!

Today we had our first Palatinus game. We were 3 players and the game went quickly but a little chaotic.

I've got a question related to influence given by the farmers:

- The rules state that a farmer obtains 2 influence for every empty field and every spring (this even if is where the farmer stands).

But, in the influence example at hte end of the rules, it says, literally: "The yellow farmer grants 8 influence points (2 for the unoccupied terrain, 6 for the springs)" and the fact is the only unoccupied terrain is one of the springs.

So, the unoccupied should be a field (which at the beginning of the rules is set to be different than a spring) or on the contrary, it should be a terrain (spring or field) ??

Thanks a lot !!

Thread: Palatinus Review

SusanRoz — 2006-03-13T22:54:53+00:00

Palatinus, The Seven Hills of Rome, is a new game by Alessandro Zucchini, who also designed the card game Luccà Citta, also published recently by Mayfair and daVinci Games. In Palatinus, players are trying to gain control of the Seven Hills by careful placement of inhabitants. The game utilizes a mostly hidden tile-laying mechanism and an unusual scoring mechanism to determine area control.

Components:

7 territory tiles – the tiles are lettered A through G and each consists of a central “hill” hex surrounded by six other hexes that represent either fields or springs.

7 laurel tokens, each has a number 3, 4, 5 or 6 on it

12 scoring discs, each with either a number 1 or 2 on it

5 player screens – on the back of each screen is a track that is used to keep track of the scoring at the end of the game.

5 wooden scoring cubes

60 inhabitant tokens – 12 each in five player colors. Each player set contains tokens that represent farmers, soldiers or merchants. Some are double-sided, while others have a wolf on the back. Soldier tokens are all double-sided.

1 linen bag

Rules – the rules are four pages long with color illustrations and examples. The rules do a fairly good job of explaining the fairly confusing scoring in this game.

The cardboard components in this game are fairly sturdy. The screens are rather flimsy though, and do not lay flat very well for the scoring. I have a few problems with the inhabitant tokens. The red and purple tokens are hard to distinguish from each other and this is somewhat of a problem with the green and yellow as well. They also depict different pictures between player sets for the various inhabitants which can cause confusion, although they do have 1-3 dots on them that separate the types and are a reference for the scoring. I’m not sure what the linen bag is for. Perhaps it is to store the tokens, but I found it easier to bag them separately in Ziploc baggies.

Game Play

While the actual play of the game is simple, the scoring at the end is initially very confusing. Players need to play a “learning” game and see how the scoring works before expecting to understand the game at all.

To set up the game, one territory tile is randomly chosen and placed in the center of the table. The laurel token numbered six is paced on the center hill space. This is the Palatinus hill. In clockwise order, players draw a territory tile from those remaining and place it around the Palatinus hill until all have been placed. A board of hexagonal spaces in roughly the shape of a circle will be the result. The remaining laurel tokens are randomly placed, one on each of the territory tiles. The number on each laurel token represents that hill’s value. Players take their inhabitant tokens and hide them behind their player screens. The number of tokens used is adjusted for the number of players in a way that once all players have placed all their tokens, there will only be a few empty spaces left on the board. The game is now ready to begin.

The game play is very simple. Players take turns in clockwise order placing one of their tokens on an empty space on the board. If the token placed has a wolf on the back, it is placed with the wolf side up so that the other players cannot see what type of inhabitant it is. The only restriction is that a player’s soldiers must be placed before the last three turns of the game. Note that soldiers are all double-sided and so are placed openly. Once all the players have placed all their inhabitants, the game is over and all the tokens are revealed and each hill is scored.

The scoring is the tricky part and is very difficult to explain. Each territory tile/hill is evaluated in alphabetical order beginning with the “A” tile. Each inhabitant on each of the six hexes surrounding that hill is evaluated, one at a time. The soldiers are evaluated first, and then the others are evaluated for influence to determine who controls that hill in the following manner:

-Soldiers: All the soldiers surrounding that hill are resolved at the same time. For each soldier surrounding the hill, you count the number of merchants and farmers in each of the hexes around that soldier, regardless of the inhabitant’s color or what territory tile they are on. If the number of farmers equals the number of merchants, the soldier retreats and is removed from the board. If the number of merchants is different than the number of farmers, the soldier captures the larger group. He takes the captured inhabitant tokens off the board and they will each be worth one point. Soldiers do not have any effect on each other, but can share in the captures. If more than one soldier captures an inhabitant, one player gets the inhabitant token and the other(s) get a one-point scoring disc.

Now merchants and farmers are evaluated to see who controls the hill. Players lay their player shields flat and use the scoring track and wooden scoring cube to help them add up their influence for each hill. Each merchant and farmer around the hill scores influence points in the following manner:

-Merchants: Each merchant gets influence points for each inhabitant adjacent to it regardless of color or the territory tile on which it is standing – 1 point for each merchant, 2 points for each farmer, and 3 points for each soldier.

-Farmers: Each farmer gets 2 points for each adjacent unoccupied field and 2 points for each adjacent spring (occupied or not), and 2 points if he is standing on a spring.

The player with the most influence on each hill gets the laurel token. If more than one player ties, the laurel token is discarded and the tying player(s) get two-point discs instead.

After all the hills have been scored, players add up their captured inhabitants, scoring discs, and laurel tokens. The player with the highest total is the winner.

Comments

Despite the hidden information, there are a few strategies that one can employ. It is easy to spot and grab the most valuable locations for farmers based on the springs. Soldiers can be placed on locations that are surrounded by an odd number of hexes, thus making it more likely to capture surrounding inhabitants. However, another player can also thwart this by placing a soldier on one of those spots, making the number even. Still, it is VERY difficult to predict how placements will work out as tokens may be removed as each hill is evaluated, affecting the scoring of subsequent hills.

Palatinus is a game that I really wanted to like, but after several plays I have decided that I just don’t care for it. Some people think that games with a hidden action selection mechanism feel too random, but I disagree in most cases. I put thought into trying to predict my fellow players’ selections as well as my own, sometimes trying to make an unpredictable play to throw others off. Call it “women’s intuition” or something else, but I usually enjoy and excel in these sorts of games. With the tricky, cascading nature of the scoring in Palatinus, I found trying to think through all the different placement permutations to be daunting task. Yet, it was hard for me to not try to think through at least some of them because otherwise the game would turn into one of random guesses, just as the critics of this type of mechanism claim. I really don’t think this mechanism of hidden placement is well suited to this game as it increases too greatly the number of possibilities to consider. It helps that some placements are open, but not enough. I suppose one could try to play it with completely open placements, but I imagine the game would totally bog down with analysis paralysis. I’m sure that there are some players who are up to the difficult mental task or who will be able to find a balance between analysis and guessing and hence enjoy the game, but I am simply not one of them. While watching the endgame scoring unfold is rather fascinating, the fascination often turns to frustration as the placements you thought were clever end up being detrimental. I can see though, that others may not mind and may even enjoy the surprises.

Though Palatinus is elegant with some clever ideas, in the end I found it to be too much mental work to be enjoyable. It is possible to play in such a way as to make it a lighter game, but I did not find this to be very satisfying. It plays very quickly, however, and scales well with differing numbers of players. It does feel very original and I suspect that there are some who are going to enjoy the depth that it offers in such a short playing time. However, I definitely feel that this is a game that one needs to try before purchasing.

Thread: Re: Anyone have English Rules?

otrex — 2006-02-21T16:47:33+00:00

Thanks very much!

Thread: Re: Anyone have English Rules?

SteveK2 — 2006-02-20T17:36:32+00:00

They have them on the publishers website: http://www.davincigames.com/page_eng.cfm?sez=01&gioco=palati...

Thread: Anyone have English Rules?

otrex — 2006-02-20T17:05:11+00:00

I've been looking for English rules for Palatinus and met with no success. Would someone be so kind as to post them here, or recommend a link where I can find them?

Thanks very much!

Thread: Palatinus - Session Report

gschloesser — 2006-01-18T14:02:09+00:00

The daVinci / Mayfair partnership continues to flourish, as a steady stream of games with a wide variety of themes are being offered for consideration. One of the latest offerings is Palatinus from Italian designer Alassandro Zucchini, whose previous design was the card game Lucca Citta.

Palatinus is set in central Italy in the days prior to the rise of Rome. Players represent various tribes vying to control the land and the emerging city. Seven tiles form the board, the center of each representing one of the seven hills of the area. Surrounding each hill are six smaller hexes upon which players will place members of their tribe: merchants, farmers and soldiers. The idea is to position these tokens so that opposing tribe members are captured by soldiers, and your tribe controls the hills, which are worth from 3 – 6 points to the dominating player.

I had heard some positive things about the game, but I just don’t know. I’m not normally a fan of the hidden placement mechanism, although in some games it seems to work well (Ys, for example). The mechanism is quite prevalent here, and it just doesn’t seem to work as well. There is just too much hidden information, but I do believe this is necessary for the game to work. To be sure, there are some strategies a player can pursue. Concentrating one’s tokens around just a few hills as opposed to spreading them amongst too many is important. Try to position farmers on or near springs, as this is where their strength is derived. Delay placing your solider just long enough so you can position him at a location wherein he has a decent chance of capturing opposing tribe members.

Still, in spite of the presence of some definite strategies, so much is unknown that the game seems to be based largely on luck. I won my first game, and I was placing the vast majority of my tokens without much concrete information; I was simply guessing. Unless a game is a quick filler, I generally don’t derive much satisfaction from a game that I’ve won wherein my victory was primarily determined by luck.

In spite of this, the game is worth another look. Now that I fully understand the capturing and scoring mechanisms, perhaps there is more here than just a predominance of luck. I sure hope so. Otherwise the future of the game won’t be as bright as that of Rome’s.

Kevin, Rhonda, Charles and I made our initial foray into the pre-Roman world. The sense of not knowing what to do was quite prevalent, and it appeared that we really didn’t appreciate how the game would be scored until it was over. My solider was successful in capturing three enemy tribe members, and my control of two valuable hills was just enough to edge Charles for the victory.

Finals: Greg 14, Charles 13, Kevin 5, Rhonda 3

Ratings: Charles 7, Rhonda 6, Kevin 6, Greg 5.5

Thread: [Review] Palatinus

TomVasel — 2005-12-27T15:37:14+00:00

Palatinus (daVinci and Mayfair Games, 2005 - Alessandro Zucchini) is a small area control game using the theme of the seven hills of Rome. It plays quickly and is one of only two games (Light Speed being the other one) in which scoring the game actually takes longer than playing the game (or sometimes, at least). The founding of Rome is an interesting theme to me, and I looked forward to playing this light, quick game.

While Palatinus is certainly quick (compared to other area control games), it is by no means light. It's fairly confusing, until one plays through it once, and has some difficult choices. It's almost more of a puzzle than a game, and there is a certain amount of luck in it that can throw of the best laid plans of any player. I would play Palatinus again, but only with a small select group of people - those who enjoy puzzles with a twist. It's too dry and confusing for most people.

Seven territories (seven hexes joined together) are placed in a hexagonal formation - with player's taking turn placing them on the board. Each territory has one "hill" as its middle hex. Players place a "6" counter on the center hill, and then randomly place either a "3", "4", or "5" counter on each other hill. Each player takes a screen and places behind it all the pieces of their color (the number of pieces differentiate depending on the number of players.) Players have merchants (with one dot on them), farmers (with two dots), and soldiers (with three dots). Many pieces are double-sided, but some farmers and merchants have a picture of a wolf on their other side. One player is chosen to go first, and then play proceeds in a clockwise order around the table.

On a player's turn, they must place one of their pieces on any empty space on the board. If the piece has a wolf on it, they must place it with the wolf side up. There are no other restrictions upon placement, except that soldiers must not be placed during the last three turns. Once all the pieces are placed, the game ends, and scoring begins. (quick, huh?)

Scoring takes place in two phases. First, each hill is checked for the effect of the soldiers. All the wolf pieces are flipped over; and starting with the first hill (they are marked from "A" to "G"), the players look at the adjacent pieces to each soldier (up to five maximum). If the soldier is adjacent to the same number of merchant pieces as farmer pieces, then the soldier is removed from the board. If the soldier is adjacent to a different number of merchants and farmers, then the player who is the owner of the soldier removes the larger group, placing the tiles in front of themselves. If more than one soldier has claim to the same piece and will remove it from the board, then one player takes the piece, and the other takes a one point token instead.

Once all soldiers have been dealt with, each hill is checked to see who has the most influence there. Players use cubes on their player shields (which lays down to form a scoring path) to keep track of their influence per hill. Each merchant gives a player influence equal to the total number of dots on the pieces adjacent to them (i.e. adjacent soldiers give three influence points, etc.) Each farmer gives influence for each adjacent field and spring. For each unoccupied adjacent space, they give two points, and for each adjacent "spring" space (whether unoccupied or not), they give an additional two points. Soldiers give no influence points. The player with the greatest total influence takes the token on the hill and places it in front of them. If there is a tile, each player involved in the tie takes a "2" scoring chip instead.

Players then total their scores. They add together all the scoring chips they have accumulated, plus one point for each person their soldier captured. The player with the highest score is the winner!

Some comments on the game…

1.) Components: The shields are small, thin, but are functional and work well enough for the game. I did like how they helped players keep track of how many influence points they got - usually an unnecessary step - but the double use was interesting. The territory tiles and counters are all of a good mix, and I especially enjoyed the counter colors, which are light colored, but yet not "girly" looking. One very clever touch - and I almost didn't notice - was how each color (red, purple, yellow, green, and blue) has a different border around the counter. The red has a black circle, the purple a white hexagon, the blue a black hexagon, the green a white circle, and the yellow a black octagon. This, and the fact that the pictures are different, helps differentiate between the colors. Everything fits easily into a small, sturdy white box that is perhaps twice the size needed.

2.) Rules: The rulebook is only four pages long and does a fairly good job, using some examples and color illustrations. I understood the basic gameplay in a vague sort of way. What I couldn't tell from the rulebook was how the game actually worked in action. Our first game was simply one in which we threw counters on the board as fast as we could, and then scored. After we had done final scoring, we suddenly realized how the game worked. I suspect that most people will have the same problem; they'll have to play a game pretty much in the dark and not understand what's going on until after it's over. If you are looking for a game to teach people easily, Palatinus is not the one for you.

3.) Wolves: Several of the pieces have wolves on their backsides, used to disguise what the piece is underneath. But really, that adds a level of uncertainty to the game that I'm not sure works with the rest of it. Once players understand the game, they take great care to place their pieces in the spots that will give them the best advantage. But the wolf pieces just add a huge random element to that. Why spend a lot of time putting pieces down, when you have no idea what the other player puts there? Yes, it's a fifty-fifty chance, but it's a bit of a pain and messes up strategies. Every player that I've introduced the game to has disliked the randomness. We've played without it, and it seems to work okay.

4.) Brain burner: The game really causes people to think about where they put their pieces. The game essentially becomes a mathematical equation, and players can spend quite a bit of time trying to figure out exactly where is the best position for each person. The soldiers and wolves add a lot of chaos to the situation, but the game still can become an excellent candidate for "analysis paralysis". Honestly, if you don't take a while to put your pieces, you WILL lose to someone who does. Putting down pieces randomly will only hurt a player.

5.) Fun Factor: I know that the wolf pieces are supposed to balance the fact that the game automatically lends itself to mathematical analysis, but it just doesn't work. Well, the game works, actually, but it's just not a lot of fun for me. I don't want to spend a while thinking hard about where to place pieces, and then have it all messed up by some random placement. When I win the game, I get satisfaction out of having better placement than the other players; but if the game wasn't fun, I don't get much enjoyment.

6.) Farmers, Merchants, and Soldiers: Farmers can be MUCH more powerful than merchants - especially as it's a good bet many of the soldiers (the merchant's best friend) are removed from the board. I suppose that the design is supposed to present a bit of a "rock-scissors-paper" element, but the different pieces just don't balance out. You place a soldier and hope that the pieces surrounding it will not be even; you place a merchant and hope that the surrounding people aren't killed by soldiers. But you can place a farmer (not by a soldier) and be confident that it will score you some points, especially if you place it in a spring-laden area.

I'm certainly not a big fan of the game, although I can see that it will have attraction for those who want numerically puzzling games. There's a lot of intrigue in how the different pieces affect each other - to the point that the game stops becoming a social affair and rather one in which player's intently stare at the board. It's very difficult to ascertain who wins the game until the end, and the results can be quite unsatisfying if you thought you might have a lead. Palatinus has some interesting ideas in it, but the whole package falls just a tad short of "fun".

Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
www.tomvasel.com