Game: Carcassonne - The Tower

Thread: Re: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

Shadowen — 2008-06-24T20:54:30+00:00

Rygel wrote:
We use the tower, but do not play with the tower expansion.

This is what we do too. Sometimes we actually user the Tower expansion as well.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

kevhoffer — 2008-06-24T19:12:08+00:00

I have been getting a few people to play lately and we are getting a kick out of it. It's important for me to have a game that a mixed crowd (men/women, gamers/non, smart/not) can play as I honestly can't spend time going off to the game store and need ways to spend time with family that doesn't drive me nuts. So finding good expansions for Carcasonne (I can NOT bring myself to use the "Carc"!) is important.

Princess and the Dragon seems a little too nutso. Seems like the game won't be Carcasonne, but something very different (Magic Tunnels? Really?) I was hoping the Tower would be a nice addition, I'm embarrassed to say, because I like the idea of the tile holder being a tower. How neat!? Right?

But this addition of stealing people's meeples is troubling to me. I find non-gaming women (my wife, her friends, my sister, other various in-laws and cousins) do NOT like the offensive aspect of many games, and notice they apologize a lot more for "stealing" longest road, e.g. in Settlers. [note: I love this GENERALIZED difference between men and women and celebrate equality and subtle differences with simultaneous verve!] So I definitely don't want to try and add a system of stealing meeples who are even easier to get attached to (don't worry, I haven't named them yet.)

I am wary of actually getting any expansions as this is one of the fastest to explain, easy to set up, and fun to play games as it is. Settlers takes a while to set up, although everyone loves it. But I have yet to find another game I, the game geek, enjoy while also engaging all my non-gamer friends while playing and need to keep daunting rules for when I do make it to the game shop.

Thread: Re: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

Rygel — 2008-06-24T17:06:16+00:00

We use the tower, but do not play with the tower expansion.

Thread: Re: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

laxnbakpakr — 2008-06-24T16:16:54+00:00

I prefer to use a bag but found the bag that comes in the game is too small for use with more of the expansion so I had someone with sewing skills make me a larger bag.

Thread: Re: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

ColtsFan76 — 2008-06-24T15:44:32+00:00

We mix everything up and set up small stacks in front of everyone.

We don't use the bag because it is too full with all the expansions we use.

We don't use the tower because at the angle the tiles sit in it, you can see one edge of the feature (all field, road, city). You have no idea what the tile is but our group is too competitive to give even this slight advantage.

Thread: Re: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

Pepsi4Me2 — 2008-06-24T15:20:04+00:00

We use either the bag or the tower, but usually from just the bag.

Thread: Tiles drawn from the bag or from the tower??

greengow — 2008-06-24T14:51:42+00:00

How do you guys play with the Tower expansion?

Do you put all of the tower tiles in one big bag with the rest of the expansions so the tiles get drawn from that one bag, or...

...do you put the tiles in the tower to be drawn from, so the player has an option to either draw from the bag or from the tower??

Any preferences? Which is better?

Thread: Re: Question / Issue about a specific "Tower expansion" tile...

ESMP — 2008-06-13T16:26:53+00:00

Excellent ideas! Thank you very much! Now it makes more sense...

Thread: Re: Question / Issue about a specific "Tower expansion" tile...

ColtsFan76 — 2008-06-13T10:17:04+00:00

I think it may be a tie-back to the other expansions like Count and Princess & Dragon that allow you to go to a feature after it has been placed. Count will let you gt in on the action before it scores, while P&D can place you there through a magic gate after the tower is closed. In this way, you extend the usefulness of the tile.

But not counting on that, there are a few uses for it:
1) finsih it the moment you place it as you mentioned
2) play it towards the end of the game when the towers have been used.
3) play it when others have meeples int he adjacent tiles - just because a tower is placed there doesn't mean you are the one that is going to be kidnapped; so place it so there are other more valuable prisoners to be had!

With any piece, the perceived value of it is going to change when it is drawn and for the specific circumstances of that game. Most times, the tower is probably the more desired choice, while some times it may work out that the Cloister is the better option.

Thread: Question / Issue about a specific "Tower expansion" tile...

ESMP — 2008-06-13T05:35:16+00:00

I'm really traumatized about a single tile that comes with the Tower expansion... it is the one where there's a Monastery AND a freaking tower base!!! What the hell is that monastery for? I mean... if I place a follower on the Monastery, by the next turn anyone can destroy my follower by just placing a tower piece in that same tile! So is that monastery useless??
The only solution I can think of is that this one miserable tile is useful ONLY if you can finish the monastery in the same turn you place it (basically that there are 8 tiles surrounding an empty space).

Please help me... Any ideas about this?

P.S. This is the tile:

- Eduardo

Thread: Re: Certainly makes for a much different game...

ASLChampion — 2008-06-03T01:08:17+00:00

carl67lp wrote:
(As an aside: She took a while to try to reclaim her follower, so I taunted her with calls of "Help meeeeee! Hellllllp meeeeee!" in a high-pitched, Meeple-ese voice.)

We went back and forth, quickly running out of available table space (we were used to playing on the floor). A couple of towers grew, and I wondered aloud, "How are we supposed to know which tower is whose?" Then it hit me... I read the rules again, and it seemed clear from them that the towers are owned by no one, but can be used by all. Thus, at any time I could have placed a new tower piece and captured one of her meeples.

LOL, nice.

One thing I learned quickly is not to place a farmer ON the Tower tile.

He is Extremely vulnerable. SOOOO, you must lay your farmer OVER the tower depiction and PRAY that no one notices this....LOL

Thread: Re: First game of The Tower

gmonk — 2008-05-29T15:33:25+00:00

Thanks for the informative and well-written report on the Tower expansion. Some of the reviews made it seem like a game-killer but your report shows a different side of it.

Thread: most non-confrontational tower ever!

omarthetentmaker — 2008-05-28T06:47:48+00:00

We pretty much decided the tower wasn't much fun and came up with our own variant.
First: remove all tower pieces that are not directly connected to a city(I think this means removing five tiles or so, but I could be wrong)

Second: every time a tile is added to the city with a tower base, you can add a tower peice instead of a meeple.

A city incomplete at the end with a tower scores nothing.

When a tower city is completed, the knight can be removed and the city scores as normal+ 1 point for every tower section...or the knight can be moved on top of the tower and remain there for the end of the game as a "defender"

At the end of the game, the defender scores a point for every city and monastary (aka cloister incomplete or otherwise)in range, defined as the height of the tower in orthoganal or diagonal)

In practice, a tall tower scores about as much as a large farm, and leads to seriously large cities, which I like!

Plus at the end of the game it is nice to see the spread of tiles with little towers built as well. I love this game, and a lot of the appeal stems from the final layout! 3D is always better!

Thread: Re: First game of The Tower

bjornkri — 2008-05-20T08:05:17+00:00

Thanks!

Funnily enough, even though Carcassonne is one of the first boardgame we bought, it's one of the few we've never played with friends, so I've only ever played with two players.

I've been reading through some of the other comments and it does seem that the Tower in fact works better for two, otherwise it gets 'too random'. I can see how that might happen. If you place a follower somewhere in a four player game, no less than three people get the chance to plant a tower next to you before it's your turn again, and you're much more vulnerable to towers that are quite far away.

In a two player game on the other hand, unless your follower is right next to or on top of a tower, you always get a chance to block it before your follower is captured.

Thread: Re: First game of The Tower

WillT — 2008-05-19T16:06:38+00:00

An excellent review/session report. I've never played Carcassonne with only two players, so I don't have much to say about your strategies. But it does sound like you have adapted to the Tower and Inns & Cathedrals well.

Thread: First game of The Tower

bjornkri — 2008-05-19T09:07:22+00:00

This is also a bit of a review. But first, to put everything into perspective...

Back story:
===========
Carcassonne is the first board game me and my girlfriend bought that we actually liked. It's also the board game that introduced us to BGG, found after a Google search for more information on Carcassonne. Since then, we've never bought a game without at least checking it first on BGG to get a better idea of what we're actually getting. And without fail it's worked beautifully. No longer are we fooled by beautiful boxes or the promise of shiny pieces or interesting ideas printed on their backs (that means you, Anti-Monopoly).

With one exception: The Tower. We bought it and Inns and Cathedrals one day on a whim, and only after bringing the boxes home I went on-line to check the reviews. Mostly bland, some hateful. Tongue-in-cheek, sure, but still - I was a bit worried. We decided to try only Inns and Cathedrals for the first game. It was OK, but both cathedrals arrived late in the game, and the inns all ended up on short pieces of road. The big followers never came into play. Yeah. It was OK. We packed the box in silence.

Since then, the Tower has been sitting in our cabinet, unplayed. Our guilt of having bought an extension and never played it also means that we haven't bought any other extensions since. We even play less Carcassonne than before, the Tower casting a shadow over the game even from within the box.

Today:
======
After being soundly beaten in our latest acquisition, Ticket to Ride: Europe yesterday, I managed to work up the courage - and convince my girlfriend - to play Carcassonne again, this time with both extensions. Here's a description of how that went, with some thoughts on strategy, which we necessarily had to develop as the game went on.

Phase 1: How does this work now?
At first, whenever we drew a tower tile we consulted the rule sheets just to be sure, and carefully mapped out the horizontal and vertical lines leading from the towers, to make sure none of our followers would be in danger. It felt more like chess than Carcassonne. But only for a while, and soon the patterns became more intuitive.

A particularly revealing set of rounds went something like this: I had a follower on a monastery, surrounded by seven tiles. My girlfriend put the eighth tile down, but my joy was short lived as this eighth tile was a tower tile. She placed a tower on it and removed my follower. No points for me! As a revenge I put a fourth piece on one of the taller towers, snatching away her follower from a distant medium-sized castle that was one tile away from being finished. Gleefully I exchanged her follower with mine. Again this was short lived as her next tile was enough to finish the castle and she got the points anyway.

Lessons learned: Followers on the edges of the map are very vulnerable. At the early stage of the game, almost every follower placed will be at the edge of the map. Therefore, only place them to complete a feature, never to occupy one.

Phase 2: A land of towers
And that's what happened. We stopped putting followers on incomplete features, and were careful not to leave a big feature one step away from being completed. The land was almost only populated by towers, barely a follower in sight. My girlfriend played the feature game better than me: a road with an inn here, a 4-8 point castle there, and slowly she built a nearly insurmountable lead. On top of that, I tried to capture her fairly distant monks and used up most of my tower pieces, only to have them capped by her.

There was an exception to this that got me back in the game. We had a fairly large city with a cathedral in it, containing three towers, each on a separate column and row, and each of them three storeys high. No one could dream of occupying it, and it was always at least two tiles away from completion. Until she put down a risky tile to complete her monastery that left the castle only one tile away. The next few rounds passed without either of us getting that missing tile, or any tile to completely block it from being completed. It was agonizing. Finally I drew it, and with a victorious scream I shot past in the points.

But this highlight was the exception. Mostly it was a slow, paranoid build up of small features around the map, with the occasional snatching up of followers still there from the first phase when lucky tower tiles came up. I started understanding why people don't like the Tower.

Until, suddenly, my girlfriend placed a tile and shockingly (to me) put down a large farmer. The farm was huge and unclaimed, and, because of all the small features in the previous rounds, had at least 10 farms on it.

A new strategy was suddenly required.

Lesson learned: Keep an eye out for the ever expanding farms, and be ready to occupy them when the moment is right.

Phase 3: Endgame
This is where it all happens. The farms and large features are mostly unclaimed, tricky to challenge, each player has only a few tower pieces left and there is a less chance of your opponent planting a new tower right next to your follower.

Combine this with the strategic capping of the large towers dotting the landscape, and the game is wide open. Right next to the big city with the three towers was another big city with a cathedral inside. It seemed unattainable, but after capping one of the towers I could place a follower into the city deep within the game map. After that it was fairly trivial to close the city unchallenged.

But the main battle raged on the fields. She had her big follower on the biggest field and a small follower on the second biggest field, both with more than 10 completed or nearly completed castles on them. I managed to place my big follower close to the same field, and slowly managed to connect the two, while using my last tower blocks to capture her big one. Meanwhile, she got an additional two followers on the big field, with a third one a single tile away, but that tile never came.

So in the end, we shared the points for the bigger field (11 castles), and she had the second field (10 castles), but the boost I got from the two large castles with cathedrals saved me: I got 42 points for each, and in the end I won by 24 points. But it was never a clear win. We kept changing places on the score board, and the farms were contested for the last twenty minutes of the game.

Lessons learned: The towers become less of a threat as the game goes on, and there are big points just waiting to be picked up.

Conclusion:
===========
It's only our first game, but we really liked the Tower. Maybe we were lucky, and maybe it's because our expectations were low, and maybe it's because for much of the game our strategies sucked. In any case, it won't stay long gathering dust in the cabinet again.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

SVan — 2008-04-14T17:02:50+00:00

My wife got really mad while we were playing this game and she never gets mad during playing anything. I like the idea, but definately will not be playing it 2 players (or even 3) ever again.

Thread: Can somebody Scan the tile tower for me.

abodi — 2008-04-11T22:57:26+00:00

Hi Guys, the other day, I was cleaning out my office, and stumbled across the tile tower, and was like heck, thats the perfect start to a dice tower.
So i spent a couple hours cutting gluing, and watching glue dry. Now I have a rather tops little dice tower (pictures soon), however i would like to enclose it, to its totally closed rather than one side open and dice failing out.

This is were you come in, any chance someone can lay the tower flat and scan it for me? mainly just the back middle section, but more the merrier i guess.

if someone could, it would be greatly appreciated.
My email address is abodi_@hotmail.com

Thank you in advance
Abodi

Image

Angry Duck — 2008-03-27T06:02:47+00:00

The Green has 4 Blue POW's

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

unixrevolution — 2008-03-22T20:41:36+00:00

It seems, Erik, that we have more in common than a name. I was going to come here to write a review of the Tower much like this one, when I found this one already here!

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

bshirley — 2008-02-11T02:07:18+00:00

I love sundried tomatoes, and misused apostrophes just humor me and make me feel smart.

Image

aquarian — 2008-01-26T14:13:05+00:00

Torni (Finnish edition)

Thread: The Tower Protection

stenkul — 2008-01-19T11:28:22+00:00

An idea of mine to improve the strategy of the towers, and also make it more aligned to the theme.

New possible actions (instead of the ones suggested in the expansion):
• Place tower piece (with or without follower) on free or own tower
• Place follower on a free tower (with at least one tower element)

The follower to be used as a guard on a tower, can be taken from the supply or from another tower. Once it has been placed as a guard on a tower it can never be used for anything else then as a guard.

After any of the above actions (or if no action at all are done) a prisoner may be taken.
A follower can only be taken prisoner by a tower with a follower.
A follower protected by own tower can only be taken prisoner,
if the influence from capturing tower is higher then from protecting tower.

The influence depends on the height of the tower. For example a tower of height three, gives influence 4 at the tower tile, 3 next to the tower, 2 on tiles two steps away, 1 on tiles three steps away.
Influence from several towers can be added together.
The reach of tower for protection is the same as for capturing.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

erak — 2008-01-11T14:21:20+00:00

dcclark wrote:
erak wrote:

(... A Hate Factor of "10" is the equivalent of having someone misusing apostrophes while feeding me sun-dried tomatoes.)

I never knew I had a brother...

Well, my other brother always said I was adopted (and he loves tomato raisins).

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Outside Lime — 2008-01-11T13:32:48+00:00

It's called satire (or at worst it's hyperbole).

A thought a hyperbole was what you ate your hypercereal out of.

~Josh

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

TedW — 2008-01-11T03:59:19+00:00

Have you tried the tower with the Jenga variant?

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Peter White — 2008-01-11T00:03:35+00:00

cscottk wrote:
That just sounds like it would hurt. A lot.

All those adorable itty bitty razor sharp claws and teeth.... Not a pretty way to go methinks

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

dcclark — 2008-01-10T23:21:45+00:00

erak wrote:

(... A Hate Factor of "10" is the equivalent of having someone misusing apostrophes while feeding me sun-dried tomatoes.)

I never knew I had a brother...

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

cscottk — 2008-01-10T22:43:08+00:00

erak wrote:
not even diving into a swimming pool full of kittens

That just sounds like it would hurt. A lot.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

leroy43 — 2008-01-10T22:33:07+00:00

the1jugg wrote:
Drew1365 wrote:
the1jugg wrote:
well... I must say, that was one of the most biased reviews I've ever read.

Reviews are supposed to be.

(Except in Games Magazine where they're just lengthy game descriptions.)

Opinionated? Yes. Biased? No. I dont think reviews need to be so one-sided.

"Nobody enjoys playing the tower. It just makes people angry at each other and beg for the game to end. "

If he hates it - fine. But, to imply that someone who hasn't tried it will hate it too is a shame.

It's called satire (or at worst it's hyperbole). I think he nicely articulated what he didn't like about the Tower.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Scott Firestone IV — 2008-01-10T22:19:00+00:00

Drew1365 wrote:

People get too worked up about reviews around here.

Shut up, you zombie-hating jerk.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Drew1365 — 2008-01-10T21:44:56+00:00

the1jugg wrote:
"Nobody enjoys playing the tower. It just makes people angry at each other and beg for the game to end. "

If he hates it - fine. But, to imply that someone who hasn't tried it will hate it too is a shame.

I just take that to mean that of those he played it with, nobody enjoyed it at all.

After all, I like it, but I certainly don't feel threatened because he doesn't.

People get too worked up about reviews around here.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

the1jugg — 2008-01-10T20:03:15+00:00

Drew1365 wrote:
the1jugg wrote:
well... I must say, that was one of the most biased reviews I've ever read.

Reviews are supposed to be.

(Except in Games Magazine where they're just lengthy game descriptions.)

Opinionated? Yes. Biased? No. I dont think reviews need to be so one-sided.

"Nobody enjoys playing the tower. It just makes people angry at each other and beg for the game to end. "

If he hates it - fine. But, to imply that someone who hasn't tried it will hate it too is a shame.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

AdrianPHague — 2008-01-10T20:01:24+00:00

I do enjoy Tower, but it don't arf make my head hurt...

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Drew1365 — 2008-01-10T19:51:04+00:00

the1jugg wrote:
well... I must say, that was one of the most biased reviews I've ever read.

Reviews are supposed to be.

(Except in Games Magazine where they're just lengthy game descriptions.)

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

the1jugg — 2008-01-10T19:16:51+00:00

well... I must say, that was one of the most biased reviews I've ever read. Also, one of the most amusing.

Personally, I see the Tower as it's own entity. You can play a game of Carcassonne with any of the other expansions, but as soon as you put in the Tower (and I recommend not using other expansions) it becomes a game of THE TOWER. It seems to be it's own entity to me. Its more of a game of area control (eg. the piece I drew would be really great "here", but then I am getting too close to that tower, so I'll have to place it somewhere less perfect). Towers can be used to threaten an opponent, or cripple them.

Its a very different flavour. And a welcome change for those of us who have played "too" much vanilla Carcassonne and are tired of playing nicely

also, I must say that calling the Tower tile holder "useless" because you prefer the bag seems too opinionated to be constructive. (I use mine to store the tiles from all of the expansion in the longer than usual box, leaving more room on my shelf)

thanks for the review. I hope the title doesn't turn too many people off reading it entirely. It's a good read.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

eggplantia5 — 2008-01-10T19:06:01+00:00

I didn't love you less because of playing a never ending game of Carcassonne. I hated you a little more because you wouldn't let me win.

Thread: Re: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

Drew1365 — 2008-01-10T18:50:05+00:00

It casts a sadness across the landscape that not even diving into a swimming pool full of kittens and superballs can cure.

Awesome.

We've only used the Tower once, and with the base game (plus big meeples, plus builders). And I really did like it. I'm not so sure I'd like it with other expansions mixed in due to the game length. Maybe with just I&C.

We really didn't like Princess and the Dragon, so for a more confrontational Carc game, The Tower will probably be the expansion of choice.

I'm thinking of breaking it out again this Friday to see how it plays with more than two.

Thread: I Hate The Tower: A Fair and Balanced Review

erak — 2008-01-10T17:51:24+00:00

The Tower is the first and only Carcassonne expansion hate. It casts a sadness across the landscape that not even diving into a swimming pool full of kittens and superballs can cure. However, it is far from the lowest-rated expansion on BGG, so I wonder if it's just me. Here's my review as a way to help me explore and cope with all this hate.

(Note on the ratings: The Quality score is based on the impartial, logical side of my brain. The Hate Factor speaks for itself. A Hate Factor of "1" is a mild, almost amusing annoyance like that time a gnat flew in my eye and didn't come out until 2 hours later. A Hate Factor of "10" is the equivalent of having someone misusing apostrophes while feeding me sun-dried tomatoes.)

Components:
The Tower comes packaged in a box slightly longer than the standard large expansions. It includes the attractive titular tower for drawing tiles. Also included are 30 wooden tower pieces designed for sturdy stacking, as well as creating a meeple steeple at the top. Also included are 18 new tiles, each with a tower base on the artwork.
Quality: 8/10

The long box makes this set a pain in the butt to organize on a shelf and look good. My OCD is in conflict between my desire to put the expansions in order of box size versus my need to have them in the order of their release. The Tower tile holder is totally useless to me since I prefer using the Traders and Builders drawbag instead. Since the Tower is the reason for the long box, I hate it even more. The tiles curry my favor however. Since each is clearly marked with a tower base, they're quite easy to spot during clean-up.
Hate Factor: 5/10

Rules/Gameplay:
The rules are about as easy to learn as they come. Tower pieces can be played in the place of a meeple and used to kidnap other meeples, which can then be bought back with a ransom of points or even hostage exchange. Meeples can also be placed at the top of a tower (a "meeple steeple") and permanently discontinue further building of that tower.

There is a lot of interesting planning involved with the Tower. Since a tower tile could be drawn and built upon at any time, you can't plan as far ahead as you normally would, forcing you to plan for the worst. If anything, this adds a sense of immediate strategy not found in other sets.

Perhaps this new random element is too random though. It can be frustrating for a player to lose the meeple he just played, particularly in 3-6 player games where someone else can immediately take over that feature on a tile out of the tower's range.

Overall, The Tower is a bit shallow for a big expansion and leaves something to be desired.
Quality: 6/10

The rules include words like "orthogonal" which make me feel smart because I know them without looking them up. Plus, Carc jargon like "meeple steeple" always puts a smile to my face. These are about the only good things I have to say about the Tower.

The random element is nerve-wracking. While Carcassonne has always had a lucky draw element, The Tower makes it feel like you get hit with multiple poker-esque bad beats, especially in multiplayer games where a mega-farmer far out of range is suddenly kidnapped by 5 colluding opponents. Worse yet, in every case I've tried to kidnap an opponent's meeple, they draw a tile that allow them to retake the feature with no further repercussion. All I get out of the deal is one less tower piece and a lost turn.

Nobody enjoys playing the tower. It just makes people angry at each other and beg for the game to end. I can even think of a few people who would rather watch the ABC Network's Friday night lineup than play with the expansion again.
Hate Factor: 8/10 (10 - 2 points for "orthogonal" and "meeple steeple")

Expansion Interaction:
The Tower is enhanced by playing with as many expansions as possible. Since the entire expansion is 18 tower base tiles, playing with the base set alone causes a tower base draw 1 in every 5-6 tiles. Meeples have a real hard time staying on the board this way. Playing a gigantic game of Carcassonne keeps this element far more balanced.

When the Princess and Dragon is added, there will no doubt be disputes over the dragon's appetite where towers and meeple steeples are concerned. Thankfully, HiG has all the answers right here on BGG.
Quality (no extra expansions): 5/10
Quality (played with 1 or more expansions): 7/10

Have you ever played a game of Carcassonne with all the expansions at once? It never, ever ends. I've coerced my fiancee into a few of these and she's loved me less every time we do. In fact, we stopped playing Carcassonne for months because of this and only got back into it when Abbey & Mayor came out. I guess this gripe doesn't have all that much to do with The Tower but with Carcassonne as a whole.
Hate Factor (no extra expansions): 7/10
Hate Factor (played with 1 or more expansions): 6.5/10

Overall:
The Tower provides some interesting, albeit too-random elements into Carcassonne and should be, at best, a tad likable with those who love a bit of evil injected into their games.
Quality (not an average): 5/10

It's safe to say I still hate this expansion. I think I hate it enough to become the guy who would complain about it every time someone else suggests it. I really don't want that, but The Tower drove me to it.
Hate Factor (not an average): 7.5/10

Thread: Re: What about the builder and the pig??

skemmuni — 2008-01-03T21:10:56+00:00

Thanks!

We usely play, when the last meeple is gone, the builder or pig is returned to that player's supply!

Thanks for the input!

Thread: Re: What about the builder and the pig??

ColtsFan76 — 2007-12-28T16:36:32+00:00

According to the new Big Box rules, a Tower can only capture followers. A follower is only defined as the big or normal meeple (and now the Mayor and I think the Wagon). A builder and pig are not considered followers and cannot be directly captured.

So a new rule was introduced that when the last meeple is gone from the feature that contains a builder or pig, the builder or pig is returned to that player's supply. Neither of these units can be on the board independently so when their "sponsor" is gone, so are they.

If you don't want to play by the latest Big Box rules (which is the current standard set of rules), then you can capture Pigs and Builders directly. And I also think they are considered stuck on the feature until it is scored.

Thread: What about the builder and the pig??

skemmuni — 2007-12-28T16:18:44+00:00

If a meeple is captured in a city with a builder - what happens to the builder?

If a meeple is captured with a pig on the field - what happens to the pig?

Is it possible to capture a builder or a pig?

Thanks!

Thread: Re: Protected follower clarification

mogli43 — 2007-11-18T09:29:16+00:00

1) Your farmer is not protected from capture from tower O in your example. A meeple placed on a a tower only stops that tower from being used to capture meeples - it does not protect anything per se. It can actually be removed (see 3 below)

2) Placing towers with meeples all around your farmer still won't help, because someone can place a tower 2 sections high 2 tiles away and still capture it.

3) Furthermore, a meeple on top of a tower can be captured by another tower, opening up the original tower again...

So how do you protect farmers? Difficult. In my games of "carcassone the
tower", the players only place farmers at the very end of the game. The tower changes the strategy you use drastically - instead of claiming fields early on, you wait till the last possible minute. With cities or even with cloisters, you think twice about leaving a meeple around for more than a few turns - most likely it will get captured.

Hope I helped!

Thread: Protected follower clarification

dimitroff — 2007-11-17T06:12:49+00:00

I placed one of my meeples on a tower square on position (T) to protect my farmer at position (F),

TF

An opponent places one of his tower pieces on a tile orthogonal to my tower; the opponent's tower is placed at (O).

TF
-O

Is my farmer protected from capture? Is a meeple protected by a tower in one direction protected from another tower in a different direction?

Or do I need to place meeples on both towers at (T) and (O) to protect the farmer, hence tying up two of my meeples?

In theory, would I have to place meeples on towers in all four directions to completely protect my farmer; towers at positions (X) and (Y) also?

-X-
TFY
-O-

Since towers can be of various heights, the towers are not necesarily adjacent to (F), but are in the same respective row (TFY) and column (XFO).

If a meeple cannot be protected from a tower in a different direction, then is it ever really worth protecting a meeple?
The meeple may be lost anyway, and then you are stuck with a useless non-scoring meeple on a tower.

Note, this situation developed in a game when a sequence of lucky tile draws by my oppoents (unlucky for me) caused the above scenario.

Thread: Re: Question regarding the Builder Meeple

Blue_rose — 2007-11-16T12:47:46+00:00

I'm quite sure I read somewhere that the pig and the builder can't be alone. So, if the meeple that allowed you to place one of these is captured or eaten by the dragon, then the builder or the pig is returned to its owner.

I can't find where I read this. It might be an old rule, or not even an official rule at all, but that's how we play. This way we can avoid the arguing about whether you can place a meeple in a feature with a single builder or not.

There are so many rules, and after all, the game is about having fun. We mix the rules in a way that seems logical to us, and sometimes even play with rules like this, even if we aren't sure they are or have ever been official rules.

Thread: Re: The Count on the Tower variant

Urtur — 2007-10-17T07:12:48+00:00

Additional rule that applies when you play with the "Abbey and Mayor" expansion:
The points for towers are never added to the fields (meadows) scoring, even if such an event happens in the middle of the game because of the barn placement.

Image

patrel — 2007-10-01T18:44:15+00:00

Carc: Tower RGG Boxfront

Thread: Re: Follower on a Tower Building Place?

dbuel — 2007-09-30T21:32:39+00:00

Urtur wrote:
There is nothing in the rules that prevents putting a follower on an empty tower building place.

There's nothing in the rules that allows it.

Thread: Re: The Count on the Tower variant

Urtur — 2007-09-27T14:33:57+00:00

Note: this variant combines well with The Princess the Dragon and ... No Faeries one.

Thread: Introducing the Tower

MerricB — 2007-09-24T08:42:20+00:00

This was the last week of term, and a couple of my students had requested we revisit Carcassonne. Well, I gave them Carcassonne, but with a twist: The Tower expansion.

It blindsided them. It really, really did. From their reactions, it was obvious that the changes The Tower brings to the game had, in their opinions, made the game much more luck-ridden, and, perhaps, significantly less fun.

This was definitely the case for those in the class who prefer more skill-based games like Puerto Rico.

Interestingly, the game was kept pretty close by the effect of the tower tiles and pieces, and fairly low-scoring. The final scores ranged from 62 to 48, the win going to the player who had managed to place farmers in good positions, away from the lurking towers, and had also managed to score some useful points from small cities.

For those unfamiliar with The Tower, here's a brief summary:

18 tiles are added to the game. These tiles depict normal Carcassonne features (cloisters, cities, roads and fields) and also have the depiction of a tower base on them. At the beginning of the game, each player also receives a number of wooden tower sections, which can be stacked upon each other. The number they get depend on the number of players in the game. For this four-player game, each player got 7 segments.

Instead of placing a meeple (follower), the player may place a tower segment on a tower base or already started tower. He or she may then capture one meeple that is adjacent (not diagonally adjacent) to that tower. The higher the tower gets, the further away he or she may capture meeples - one tile per tower piece.

Captured meeples may be ransomed back by their owner for 3 victory points, or there's a free "prisoner exchange" if both players have captured a meeple of the other's.

A meeple can also be placed on a tower to stop it from being added to and capturing anything more. That meeple remains there for the rest of the game, and will score nothing; however, it will probably protect the player's other meeples from capture.

Personally, I rather like what The Tower adds to the game, although when played just with the basic game and without any expansions, it does have a surprising effect. I think it's also more random with more players; consider the 4-player game: you have 90 tiles in total, or 22 turns each, with 7 tower pieces. In a 2-player game, you have 45 turns each with only 10 pieces each...

Image

Puquak — 2007-08-29T06:38:43+00:00

Tuck box for the tiles and tower pieces to keep separate from base game when stored together

Image

Puquak — 2007-08-29T06:37:03+00:00

Tuck box for the tiles and tower pieces

Image

Urtur — 2007-08-27T19:44:46+00:00

"The count on the Tower" variant, game over. Notice that high tower usually raise near monasteries.

Thread: The Count on the Tower variant

Urtur — 2007-08-23T10:15:24+00:00

* * * "THE COUNT ON THE TOWER" * * *

CARCASSONNE RULING VARIANT

This ruling variant is prepared for Carcassonne players who think (like I do) that the rules included in the "Count of Carcassonne" and "Carcassonne: the Tower" in fact spoil the game, yet they want to use game elements included in those expansions. So - using other words - if you think the rules of two mentioned expansions are OK, this article is not for you.

In order to play this variant you need the base game of Carcassonne and two of its expansions: "The Count" and "The Tower". Other expansions may be used at will. All the rules of basic game and of additional expansions apply unless stated otherwise. Rules of "The Count" and "The Tower" do NOT apply!

The game starts from constructing the big city included in "The Count" expansion. The count figurine is palced on any of the two central tiles of the city. All 30 tower elements make a stock available to all the players. If you use "The River" expansion, the first river tile should be placed adjacent to any of the matching city tiles.

Tiles with tower bases are placed as usual and the active player may place his follower on the one he just played if he is allowed to do so by the general rules.

Players gain another option during their respective turns: as long as there are tower elements available, instead of placing a follower (or a builder, a pig, moving the fae, removing a follower due to the princess rule etc) they may place one tower element on any tile with the tower base on it. It may be the first tower element on that tile as well as a next one (making the tower higher). If this option is used the count visits that tower - the active player puts the count figurine on the top of that tower. As long as the count stands there new elements can't be added to that tower. (Of course when a new tower element is placed elsewhere the count moves there allowing further development of the first tower.)

When a town or a road is finished its owner (or owners if there is a tie) gains 1 point for each tower segment on each of the tiles the town or the road is on (it does not matter if the tower is in the town or out of it, or if the tower intersects the road or just stands aside). Additional 1 point is awarded if the count stands on any of those towers.

For a completed cloister the above rule apply, and the tower elements on all 9 tiles completing the cloister are counted.

No "tower poins" are awarded at the end of the game: neither for meadows nor for unfinished structures.

Special rules that apply if you use "The Princess and the Dragon" expansion:
The dragon can not be moved onto two central tiles of the starting city.
If the dragon moves onto a tile with a tower, the tower gets damaged: a half of its elements (rounded down) is returned to the stock (e.g. if a tower has 7 elements 3 are returned and 4 remain). If the count stands on any tower damaged by the dragon he escapes to one of two central tiles of the city.

Image

Urtur — 2007-08-22T08:56:00+00:00

Looking down the tower.

Thread: Re: Follower on a Tower Building Place?

Urtur — 2007-08-21T07:29:09+00:00

There is nothing in the rules that prevents putting a follower on an empty tower building place.
A tile with a tower space in fact "starts" a tower (a tower having 0 elements so far...) so the follower can be place on such an already started zero element tower.

Thread: Re: Any Tower variant suggestions for the non-combative?

Urtur — 2007-08-20T23:02:58+00:00

A non-competitive variant:

Whenever a player does not place any meeple during his turn he may place a tower segment from the stock (containing initially all 30 segments) onto any tower space or existing tower.
Whenever a town or a road is scored the owner gets N additional points where N is equal to the total number of tower segments on the tiles composing the structure.
For scoring a monastery all 9 tiles are taken into account.
No tower bonus for scoring fields.

Image

Emperor JD — 2007-08-13T17:33:34+00:00

Tower box holds all expansions!

Image

olaha — 2007-08-03T16:42:13+00:00

In the shadow of the tower

Image

Mousey — 2007-06-01T19:29:14+00:00

Carc Tower Puzzle