Kingsburg | BoardGameGeek

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

Tall_Walt — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:54:40 +0000

You're not using Internet Exploder are you?

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

twthomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:13:57 +0000

Man this is frustrating! If I let the web site load completely I get an error that it cannot load. So I finally was able to click on the red X stop button before the error could come up. Now I have the thing downloaded. Thanks. Not sure what the issue is (VISTA!!!) other than something isn't liking the whole web page.

Thread: Kingsburg:: Variants:: stats on the "2 dice King's aid" variant

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:43:58 +0000

by ackmondual

For those that are interested, the odds for Kings aid's troops during phase 8 (Winter battle) for the "roll 2 dice take the difference of the 2 #s rolled, and add one for the king's aid" is presented below...

Results are:
1 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 6 -- 16.6667%
2 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 10 -- 27.7778%
3 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 8 -- 22.2222%
4 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 6 -- 16.6667%
5 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 4 -- 11.1111%
6 was rolled this many times +Percentage: 2 -- 5.55556%

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

Golux13 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:23:36 +0000

by Golux13

ackmondual wrote:
Golux13 wrote:
Tall_Walt wrote:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/8323/item/632316#item6...

If this doesn't work for you, something's wrong on your end. I just d/l'd and ran it fine.

Worked just fine for me. And it was a very pleasant surprise, since I had no idea such a thing even existed.
neat thing is, a preview of the expansion is available, as well as some established variants

I saw that. It's wonderful.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:58:47 +0000

by ackmondual

Golux13 wrote:
Tall_Walt wrote:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/8323/item/632316#item6...

If this doesn't work for you, something's wrong on your end. I just d/l'd and ran it fine.

Worked just fine for me. And it was a very pleasant surprise, since I had no idea such a thing even existed.

neat thing is, a preview of the expansion is available, as well as some established variants

New Image for Kingsburg

Tommy_M — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:30:14 +0000

by Tommy_M

Player Board - polish (home made)

]]>

New Image for Kingsburg

Tommy_M — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:26:17 +0000

by Tommy_M

Player Board - clean (home made)

]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

Golux13 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:18:43 +0000

by Golux13

Tall_Walt wrote:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/8323/item/632316#item6...

If this doesn't work for you, something's wrong on your end. I just d/l'd and ran it fine.

Worked just fine for me. And it was a very pleasant surprise, since I had no idea such a thing even existed.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

Tall_Walt — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:28:16 +0000

by Tall_Walt

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/8323/item/632316#item6...

If this doesn't work for you, something's wrong on your end. I just d/l'd and ran it fine.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Looking for Java version

ozjesting — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:05:24 +0000

by ozjesting

Not sure why you are having a problem. The link on the games homepage under "online play" works fine.

New Image for Kingsburg

josephc4 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:03:54 +0000

by josephc4

Bay Area Games Night - Webster,TX - Cafe Express - Meetup.com

]]>

Thread: Kingsburg:: General:: Looking for Java version

twthomas — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:55:51 +0000

by twthomas

Anyone know of a site that isn't broke where I can DL the JAva version? Or perhaps email it to me if you already have it saved?

Thanks

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:08:59 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

reapersaurus wrote:
Please - share with us all the text you thought might be beneficial to have in the Scenario.

Thanks for the support, but they were just a few bits of flavour (nothing you cannot miss ;) ).

Mr_Nuts wrote:
Cheers, both for posting these nifty little PDFs for one of our favorites games, and also for the Arkham Horror references in your post, Luca (unless "Stars Are Right" is referring to something else.)

Thanks (yeah, those stars! :) ).

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Mr_Nuts — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:50:36 +0000

by Mr_Nuts

Cheers, both for posting these nifty little PDFs for one of our favorites games, and also for the Arkham Horror references in your post, Luca (unless "Stars Are Right" is referring to something else.)

File: Kingsburg:: Kingsburg Official Scenario: Wheel and Deal (Russian)

bretteur — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 13:09:06 +0000

by bretteur

Kingsburg Official Scenario: Wheel and Deal (Russian) for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

frog213 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:16:57 +0000

by frog213

Luke the Flaming wrote:
Did I answer the question(s)?

Yes, and thank you. I don't know why I thought it would function any different than influencing twice w/ the envoy? Maybe the way it was worded? These scenarios are awesome BTW. I thought you were done at 3, but here's #4.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Goblin Valley

reapersaurus — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:55:01 +0000

by reapersaurus

ahhhh .... no, I hadn't calculated in the extra King's soldiers as a buffer for the increased monster difficulty. Thanks for pointing that out.

With that bonus in mind, I can see why this might be survivable in the game - it would just really push the players into a much more defensive build (increased competition for Soldiers, etc).

My only worry would be that if someone loses out on an earlier contest, he might fall behind the building/defense curve and not be able to keep up with the additional monster strength.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

reapersaurus — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:49:41 +0000

by reapersaurus

Thanks for the detailed answering of curious fans' questions.

Luke the Flaming wrote:
As a side note, I had initially thought to copy the rule from Puerto Rico of "adding a coin to unchosen roles", but using "+2" tokens rather than coins (or to avoid a cascade of tokens: a "+2" token if the role is left unchosen for a turn, a VP - indicated by a penny or a bean or something - if unchosen for another consecutive turn, and then a gold, a wood, a stone... Possibly with some sort of scaling due to the number of players, since unlike PR here there are always 8 roles, so the unchosen are 6 with 2 players up to only 3 with 5 players).
But the text was already long so I cut that part.

That's an interesting idea - both the bribing to balance weaker roles, as well as the problematic scaling factor.

Of course it quickly gets fiddly and complicated - perhaps the simplest mechanic would be to add +2 tokens on unchosen roles, and then allow players to swap out multiple +2 tokens on some scale you come up with.
Perhaps 2 +2 tokens = 1 VP
3 +2 tokens = choice of gold, wood, or stone

I added some "flavourful" explanations here and there, but the text was already too long and FFG had to cut them (for example, the Outlaws getting their "free" help as the product of successful blackmail, of course done against the "weakest" Advisor not under the influence of anyone).

I'm afraid it was too wordy for FFG to put all of that in the template.
However, it is just intended to be a reminder of who chose what. You may use any system you prefer: wirte on paper or use 8 "role" cards a-la-Puerto Rico (it could be easy to create them with Strange Eons, for example)...

I'm curious - what was the complete text you wanted to fit on the Scenario?
Because while FFG may use a restricting template, your BGG posts can be as long and sharing of details as you want. :cool:
Please - share with us all the text you thought might be beneficial to have in the Scenario. :thumbsup:

I think FFG will post something when they think that the Stars Are Right (ooops, wrong game... I meant, when they think it is the right time. Hopefully soon. ;) ).

Are you referring to the upcoming Faidutti game, Ad Astra perhaps? ;)

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: News:: Re: To Forge A Realm - Preorder

Newyn — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:12:22 +0000

by Newyn

French, German and Italian

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Luke the Flaming — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:14:21 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

reapersaurus wrote:
The Aristocracy, Military, Secret Society, and Craftsman seem at first look to be on the stronger side.

As a side note, I had initially thought to copy the rule from Puerto Rico of "adding a coin to unchosen roles", but using "+2" tokens rather than coins (or to avoid a cascade of tokens: a "+2" token if the role is left unchosen for a turn, a VP - indicated by a penny or a bean or something - if unchosen for another consecutive turn, and then a gold, a wood, a stone... Possibly with some sort of scaling due to the number of players, since unlike PR here there are always 8 roles, so the unchosen are 6 with 2 players up to only 3 with 5 players).
But the text was already long so I cut that part.

reapersaurus wrote:
The Clergy may be poor (in dice pool, therefore resources) but they grant a nice VP effect.
So thematically brilliant! :thumbsup:

Thanks. I added some "flavourful" explanations here and there, but the text was already too long and FFG had to cut them (for example, the Outlaws getting their "free" help as the product of successful blackmail, of course done against the "weakest" Advisor not under the influence of anyone).

reapersaurus wrote:
Oh - also it mentions that each player should place one of the building tokens "near" the roles on the card.

Problem is - there is no area on the card to really do that.
There is no easy-to-see line of demarcation between the 8 roles on the card.

I'm afraid it was too wordy for FFG to put all of that in the template.
However, it is just intended to be a reminder of who chose what. You may use any system you prefer: wirte on paper or use 8 "role" cards a-la-Puerto Rico (it could be easy to create them with Strange Eons, for example)...

frog213 wrote:
Peasants: and spot 5 w/stables and spot 6. How does it work?

If you "double" (via Peasant) Advisor #5, you get his help twice. With the Stables, his help means 2 soldiers. Thus the total is an impressive 4 soldiers!
If you "double" (via Peasant) Advisor #6, you do a transformation and then the other (so you can use a product of the first one to fuel the second one).
Did I answer the question(s)?

frog213 wrote:
I check BGG everyday for news on the expansion release. A lot of retail sites say July. Any info on that? Also, any more teasers ie. characters or events?

I think FFG will post something when they think that the Stars Are Right (ooops, wrong game... I meant, when they think it is the right time. Hopefully soon. ;) ).

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Goblin Valley

Luke the Flaming — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:32:58 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

reapersaurus wrote:
Luca -
on average, how could most players win Year 5's battle?

What are the average Year 5 monster strengths?
When doubled, I don't see how anyone would win unless they play an ultra-defense strategy, and were the ones to get the most of Advisor 10's benefit.

It seems to me at a quick glance that this scenario would be too overwhelming to the gameplay - it would be all about the soldier acquisition, and anyone who couldn't recruit a lot would be decimated (and be more likely to lose next year) -

wouldn't this lead to a downward spiral?

Have you noted that the King sends extra soldiers as well? (equal to the number of the year, e.g. 1 in the first, 2 in the second... 5 in the fifth)
Avg power of year V = 8.2
Doubled = 16.4
Minus five extra soldiers= 11.4
Net increment = +3.2
Nothing an extra soldier and the wintry die roll cannot handle.
Of course, since the scenario just adds power to the invaders, the mlitary strategy is more advantageous than it is in a vanilla game. The point is "how many soldiers / military buildings are enough" (so that you can start to invest in resources / VPs generation)... the scenario moves this "value" so requires to evaluate again what you knew, thus posing a challenge to the players who were looking for something new in their good old Kingsburg. Or at least, that was my idea. :)

New Image for Kingsburg

josephc4 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 05:09:04 +0000

by josephc4

Bay Area Games Night - Webster, TX - Cafe Express - Meetup.com

]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Peasants ?

frog213 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:36:02 +0000

by frog213

Peasants: and spot 5 w/stables and spot 6. How does it work?

I really like Artists, and I'm trying to figure out how to exploit Outlaws. Also, thanks for these scenarios Luca. You guys are awesome. I check BGG everyday for news on the expansion release. A lot of retail sites say July. Any info on that? Also, any more teasers ie. characters or events? Okay I'm done.:p

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

reapersaurus — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:39:00 +0000

by reapersaurus

Oh - also it mentions that each player should place one of the building tokens "near" the roles on the card.

Problem is - there is no area on the card to really do that.
There is no easy-to-see line of demarcation between the 8 roles on the card.

Do you think a little table could be inserted to the left of the rules text to give a place to put the building tokens?

Wait - the building tokens are circular - would they be too large to fit on the scenario card?
How large is the scenario, printed out? (edit - the pdf shows 7" x 4.3")

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Goblin Valley

reapersaurus — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:33:18 +0000

by reapersaurus

Luca -
on average, how could most players win Year 5's battle?

What are the average Year 5 monster strengths?
When doubled, I don't see how anyone would win unless they play an ultra-defense strategy, and were the ones to get the most of Advisor 10's benefit.

It seems to me at a quick glance that this scenario would be too overwhelming to the gameplay - it would be all about the soldier acquisition, and anyone who couldn't recruit a lot would be decimated (and be more likely to lose next year) -

wouldn't this lead to a downward spiral?

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

reapersaurus — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:27:18 +0000

by reapersaurus

Very, VERY interesting scenario, Luca.
Again, you guys are showing how much extra efforts you are providing to fans of the game, free of charge. I really hope people are seeing how much added value you are providing.

This particular scenario is the most-impacting yet, with the most powerful modifications that would significantly impact the gameplay. I'm surprised it's not part of the expansion.

For any group that has gotten their fill of the standard gameplay, this would certainly provide a new tableau to try their hand at mastering.

The Aristocracy, Military, Secret Society, and Craftsman seem at first look to be on the stronger side.
Even though it would be hard to optimize (unless there is something in the expansion that allows someone to lower their die rolls), I really like the idea behind the Clergy - having little wealth but gaining in eternal favor (VP) is quite reminiscent of the Bible verse about

The Bible wrote:
"Harder it is for a rich man to enter the gates of heaven
than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle"

The Clergy may be poor (in dice pool, therefore resources) but they grant a nice VP effect.
So thematically brilliant! :thumbsup:

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:31:18 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

Kamakaze wrote:
looks good. Where did the picture come from? the expansion? :P

Yes. ;)

Kamakaze wrote:
Some of the roles seems much more powerful than the others, at least at first glance, though I guess some are more dependent on luck than others.

I've tested it a bit, but a very rigorous playtesting would have required a lot more time (given how some roles vary in power based on the number of players, for example). I hope the difference in power is not too great. If your games should prove otherwsie, I'll be glad to hear your feedback.
Thanks for playing, in any case.
(...and if you're going to play this scenario just a couple of times, consider the ability to identify the "best" role to pick as part of the challenge! :) )

Eeeville wrote:
I'm really liking all of the scenarios that you're making for this game. Great work!

Thanks, my reward is hearing that the effort is appreciated! :)

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Eeeville — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:16:47 +0000

by Eeeville

I'm really liking all of the scenarios that you're making for this game. Great work!

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Kamakaze — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:04:49 +0000

by Kamakaze

looks good. Where did the picture come from? the expansion? :P

Some of the roles seems much more powerful than the others, at least at first glance, though I guess some are more dependent on luck than others.

Thread: Kingsburg:: General:: New Scenario: Wheel and Deal

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:56:38 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

For those interested, there's a new scenario for Kingsburg (designed by me) freely available at FFG website; click here to see its page or click here to open the .PDF file.
This time a bit of "role selection" is added to the game.
Have fun!

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

Mr_Nuts — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:43:16 +0000

by Mr_Nuts

Nice to see Kingsburg getting some love. My wife and I love it.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

Jugular — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:12:59 +0000

by Jugular

I must admit Caylus finds it difficult to make it to the table when Agricola is still the new kid on the block but if I were to order them it would be to ignore the weight. Caylus and Agricola are similar in play length and weight whereas Stone Age, Pillars of the Earth and Kingsburg are all lighter. Cuba neatly fits between which is one of the reasons I like it. So for me Caylus > Agricola and Stone Age > Kingsburg >>> Pillars of the Earth.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: News:: Re: Any new estimate on availability in the U.S.A.?

kobayashi.issa — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:58:11 +0000

by kobayashi.issa

Finally indeed!:laugh:

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

cathal — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:25:14 +0000

by cathal

Jugular wrote:
A minor thing Cathal, when breaking ties surely those tied on most VPs are all Champions, this will mean that at the end of turn one you don't have a huge round of Ro Sham Bo to contend with AND noone gets stuffed for an early lead. I guess the problem then comes with bonuses given out...
Perhaps the pillagers should get some selection of the spoils of war (i.e. invert the green and red for traitors). I think we'll have to play this variant at some point in the future and see how hard we can break it :whistle:

Making all the tied players champions is not a bad idea. I wasn't really that serious about the last tiebreaking option. ;)

I was wary of giving the traitors a bonus in case it made treason too attractive. After all they already gain the "bonus" of not losing what the loyal players and champion have lost. A double bonus could turn this into Judasburg. You're right that it needs testing to destruction to find this out though.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

Jugular — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:12:55 +0000

by Jugular

A minor thing Cathal, when breaking ties surely those tied on most VPs are all Champions, this will mean that at the end of turn one you don't have a huge round of Ro Sham Bo to contend with AND noone gets stuffed for an early lead. I guess the problem then comes with bonuses given out...
Perhaps the pillagers should get some selection of the spoils of war (i.e. invert the green and red for traitors). I think we'll have to play this variant at some point in the future and see how hard we can break it :whistle:

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: News:: Re: Any new estimate on availability in the U.S.A.?

tanis — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:01:00 +0000

by tanis

Aging One wrote:
Duglis wrote:
Hi.
I'm just curious if there is any new estimate of when this expansion will be available in the U.S.A.?

Sincerely,
A fan :)

The FFG website shows it to be "[BGCOLOR=#ccCC00]on the boat[/BGCOLOR]" with a July, 2009 release date. Boardgame News' "Gone Cardboard" says July, 2009 and Thought Hammer says Summer, 2009.

My friend Roberto (one of the designers of War of the Ring) sweared he saw the expansion being charged on the boat a few weeks ago, so I guess mid July is a trustable release date. :) Finally. ;)

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: News:: Re: Any new estimate on availability in the U.S.A.?

Aging One — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:45:29 +0000

by Aging One

Duglis wrote:
Hi.
I'm just curious if there is any new estimate of when this expansion will be available in the U.S.A.?

Sincerely,
A fan :)

The FFG website shows it to be "[BGCOLOR=#ccCC00]on the boat[/BGCOLOR]" with a July, 2009 release date. Boardgame News' "Gone Cardboard" says July, 2009 and Thought Hammer says Summer, 2009.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

tanis — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:39:40 +0000

by tanis

WhiteKong wrote:
How about making the usurper's average role a 13, but allow him to use as many +2 tokens on a turn as he wants?

Or, you could make a rule that since he is attempting to usurp the king, neither the king nor the queen will grant an audience to him.

But I think perhaps the best way to make the usurper work might be the following:

The usurper gets two tokens to place on advisors, but only places one each round. When he places a token, that advisor is the one that is blocked for the following turn, for everyone including the usurper. Each player then places dice. The usurper then chooses a new spot, and takes his previous token for the old spot. This would mean that a usurper wouldn't be able to take the queen that often, because taking it would block it for himself the following round. I think this would make competing for the soldier slots very competitive, especially later in the game. It also means that nothing would be blocked on the very first productive season of the game.

The balance of the six player game would be that the usurper always places his token last. I don't think you'd see a ton of queen influence as you will most certainly have at least one farm player for a six player game, if not two.

It's somehow less interesting for the usurper, since now he has one single, heavy choice to make on every season, instead of two separate choices.

On the other hand, it seems a great way to fix the problem of the Usurper influencing too often the Queen.

I would like to see some session report with six players, just to start reasoning about it.

Thanks for sharing your idea!

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Armies from the king?

tanis — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:35:54 +0000

by tanis

losmadden wrote:

So, basically, the only "permanent" troops you get are the Guard Tower, the Palisade, and other building bonuses...

Ironically, yes.

In the upcoming expansion at least one building will allow you to keep some soldiers from one year to another, though.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Armies from the king?

losmadden — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:40:46 +0000

by losmadden

I'm so glad that pretty much every question we have is already answered here on BGG. We were playing 1) without the die roll and 2) without returning soldiers to 0. People almost never lost a battle (there were a couple of losses).

So, basically, the only "permanent" troops you get are the Guard Tower, the Palisade, and other building bonuses...

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

joshp — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:21:37 +0000

by joshp

Both times I have tried to introduce other players to Caylus it has flopped horribly. My fiancée, who loves Stone Age and Kingsburg, said Caylus was way too long and dry. My friend Matt said Caylus was trying to hide a lack of depth with unwanted complexity. While I enjoy all worker placement games, I have kind of given up on this one. It just won't get played in my house and that's okay. There are better games available to keep us occupied.

File: Kingsburg:: Clean player card / buildings

Tommy_M — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:55:47 +0000

by Tommy_M

Clean player card / buildings for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

File: Kingsburg:: Karta budynków PL - Buildings Card PL

Tommy_M — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:55:31 +0000

by Tommy_M

Karta budynków PL - Buildings Card PL for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

Jon Gon — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:20:57 +0000

by Jon Gon

How about a new small board with new extra advisors #5,#6,#7,#10 or others. These would require balancing tests of course.

The possibility of influencing these advisors could be one of several:

1- Only one player can influence the advisors of the extra board each season. A rotating mechanism
2- A player can only influence advisors of the extra board if he built a level 2 (or 3?) building.
3- A player can only influence advisors in the main board or in the extra board.
4- No restriction at all.

These new advisors could even be called something else, nobles or aristocrats for example.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

WhiteKong — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:27:57 +0000

by WhiteKong

How about making the usurper's average role a 13, but allow him to use as many +2 tokens on a turn as he wants?

Or, you could make a rule that since he is attempting to usurp the king, neither the king nor the queen will grant an audience to him.

But I think perhaps the best way to make the usurper work might be the following:

The usurper gets two tokens to place on advisors, but only places one each round. When he places a token, that advisor is the one that is blocked for the following turn, for everyone including the usurper. Each player then places dice. The usurper then chooses a new spot, and takes his previous token for the old spot. This would mean that a usurper wouldn't be able to take the queen that often, because taking it would block it for himself the following round. I think this would make competing for the soldier slots very competitive, especially later in the game. It also means that nothing would be blocked on the very first productive season of the game.

The balance of the six player game would be that the usurper always places his token last. I don't think you'd see a ton of queen influence as you will most certainly have at least one farm player for a six player game, if not two.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

tanis — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:28:34 +0000

by tanis

I am familiar with Verrater, of course, so I like your variant idea.

We've been trying to have a Traitor between the expansion Governor cards, but at the end the balancing process was unsuccessful so regretfully we had to cut it out.

Thanks for sharing your idea!

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:40:07 +0000

by tanis

reapersaurus wrote:
If the main problem with having a 6th player is that too many spots get filled up, you could just have each player receive a King's Envoy at the start of each year.

The only question would be whether they would be cumulative, or if you could only have one at a time.

This would give each player a limited resource to use when they really needed to place dice on a contested adviser.

Nice idea but one every year would be too much imho. Maybe just one for each player at the beginning of the game, and that's it (you can still receive the "normal" envoy).

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

cathal — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:59:54 +0000

by cathal

I may sound a little tricky but it's not that complex when you play it. (maybe it's just the way I explain it, doh!) As for not being able to compete with the official scenarios... well hey, you can't win 'em all :D

You don't HAVE to reward other players if you're the champion. The idea is that you can reward them if you want to. Sometimes the champion will feel strong enough not to feel the need to bribe...ooops I mean "reward" anyone to join them. Also the reward isn't the only incentive. Backing the invaders means you miss out on any bonus for defeating them and you miss the king's bonuses the following year. Sometimes that alone is enough to bring people onto the king's side.

None the less, I get where you are coming from. Like I said, this variant may not be to everyone's taste. Thanks for the feedback.

SDSUChemTA wrote:

This sounds way too complicated and complex, especially compared to the official scenarios made by the makers of this game. In addition, I don't like the idea of having to force myself to give rewards to other players if I am leading in VPs.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

SDSUChemTA — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:55:49 +0000

by SDSUChemTA

cathal wrote:

Irrespective of whichever side wins the battle the players who sided with the invaders may not receive any of the kings bonuses the following year. The bonus goes to the relevant player from among those players that sided with the king. This only applies to the year immediately after a player sides with the invaders.

This sounds way too complicated and complex, especially compared to the official scenarios made by the makers of this game. In addition, I don't like the idea of having to force myself to give rewards to other players if I am leading in VPs.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Java-Kingsburg with A.I.

AndyP123 — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:03:24 +0000

by AndyP123

Pogle wrote:
Would love to try this but unable to download anything.

If I click on the link to your site it refuses to open in a new tab, I just get an error saying Internet Explorer cannot open the page.

Finally managed to get to the site by right clicking on your link and selecting open in a new window.

However if I now click on the link to download the java program it simply tries and tries and eventually I just get a blank page saying Internet Explorer cannot open the web page.

Have tried on both my laptop and netbook, both of which run Windows XP and same thing each time.

Any ideas as I'm longing to give this a try ?

Thanks

EDIT : Have finally managed to get a download on my netbook. The only problem now is that the game size doesn't seem to fit my screen. The top is off screen so I can't drag it about and the bottom I can just see where you out in player names. Is there anyway to resize it as there don't appear to be any handles for size dragging.

Ditto for me. Link has some sort of error on it that stops me opening the page. Open in new window didn't help either!

Thread: Kingsburg:: Variants:: "Traitor" variant for Kingsburg

cathal — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:56:14 +0000

by cathal

If you've ever played the card game called "Traitor" (Verrater in German)

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/72

then the following variant may sound oddly familiar.

The idea is to allow the players to choose whether they support the king and kingdom or secretly ally themselves with the invaders.

The king has no soldiers of his own and so no dice are rolled to add soldiers to the defence. Instead the player with the most VPs is considered to be the king's champion and must side with the king (if two ore more are tied for VPs then ties are broken by number of buildings, resources or rock, paper scissors if all else fails). All other players must secretly decide whether they side with the king or the invaders. The king's champion can offer rewards to other players to get them to side with the king. These rewards can be resources or victory points and will come from the champion's own resource pool or victory point total. The champion doesn't need to pay out the reward until after the players have revealed which side they are on.

After the king's champion has made any offers they want to make all player present a closed hand and then reveal what is in that hand simultaneously. If the hand is empty they side with the invaders. If the hand contains on of their dice then they side with the king. If the champion offered a reward to a player for siding with the king and the player did side with the king they must pay that reward at this point.

Players who side with the invaders add their soldier strength to the power of the invaders. Defensive bonuses from buildings cannot be added in this way.

Players who side with the king add their soldier strength to the power of the defenders. The player with the highest defensive bonus from buildings also adds that bonus to the defenders as well. If the player whose buildings are added to the defence has built the Stone Wall then the defending players win draws.

The enemy card is revealed and the totals for the two sides are calculated.

If the invaders win any players who sided with the king suffer the penalty indicated on the invaders card. Players that sided with the invaders do not suffer any penalty but neither do they gain the bonus on the card (since the invaders were not defeated).

If the defenders win the players who sided with the king receive the victory bonus indicated on the card. Any defender with a Fortress also receives their additional victory point. There is no bonus victory point for the strongest defender.

In the event of a draw the defenders do not gain any bonus or suffer any penalty.

Irrespective of whichever side wins the battle the players who sided with the invaders may not receive any of the kings bonuses the following year. The bonus goes to the relevant player from among those players that sided with the king. This only applies to the year immediately after a player sides with the invaders.

And that's the whole idea. I'll admit that we've only played this variant once and so it's very likely we haven't balanced it perfectly to work with all numbers of players. As such I welcome anyone with a stronger math ability than mine who wants to suggest any modifications or reworking of this idea.

We had a lot of fun with this. The negotiations over who is siding with the king, the offers of "rewards" and the twist when everyone actually reveals which side they are on adds a little spice to the winter phase. Nothing wrong with the way the original rules work, we just liked mixing things up a little.

Hope you enjoy it too.

Cathal

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

wispwalker — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:09:56 +0000

by wispwalker

Regardless of how "balanced" 6 would or wouldn't be, a "supports 6 players" tag on the expansion box would increase how often I play it, as well as improve purchase sales. Working in game sales, I know- family's want 6 player support, and not enough board games that are good for a family are offering it. (Power Grid, Elfenland, Scotland Yard, Pillars of the Earth, Arkham Horror, and Carcassonne being a few of the exceptions).

New Image for Kingsburg

josephc4 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 03:52:48 +0000

by josephc4

Caylus meets To Court the King?

]]>

New Image for Kingsburg

josephc4 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 03:37:41 +0000

by josephc4

This is one of the few semi-complex games that I have gotten a decent ...

]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

reapersaurus — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 03:14:07 +0000

by reapersaurus

If the main problem with having a 6th player is that too many spots get filled up, you could just have each player receive a King's Envoy at the start of each year.

The only question would be whether they would be cumulative, or if you could only have one at a time.

This would give each player a limited resource to use when they really needed to place dice on a contested adviser.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

Slick! — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:54:16 +0000

by Slick!

How about making one player out of the 6 have the new abilities each turn, but that that player varies each turn.
So the lowest dice roll (or the highest).
It could just pass round each turn clockwise, or be the player with the lowest/highest score (first turn could be random).

I think blocking a position after dice rolls could get very nasty.
At least being "nasty" based on your roll is acceptable, but choosing to block an advisor on the last turn could create a kingmaker issue.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

tanis — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:04:17 +0000

by tanis

reapersaurus wrote:
Good reply.

I'm just worried about the Usurper getting the Queen 2 times a year.
Getting 6 VP's a year just from the Queen would be an unbalancing equation.

If the Ususrper had this guy available:

]]>
it would be awfully easy to get the Queen repeatedly.

True.

Actually, the "Usurper" is not meant to be played with that module of the expansion, because of such kind of possibile combos...

Now that I think about it, if it turns out that is still overpowered, it may become playable if the other 5 players have one Governor card power each, and the Usurper has none.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:59:24 +0000

by tanis

Barticus88 wrote:
I think the assymetry will turn too many people off. For a sixth player I would take this approach:

]]>

Really cool.

The "+2" token only is a very poor reward, imho, for one die.

The alternate # 7 and the # 20 are really interesting.

As I wrote above, I would instead give alternative advisors to numbers 5,7,12 (and maybe 6 and/or 10).

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

Barticus88 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:23:10 +0000

by Barticus88

I think the assymetry will turn too many people off. For a sixth player I would take this approach: ]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

pino65 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 06:23:22 +0000

by pino65

tanis wrote:
Being one of the designers of Kingsburg, I have been toying with the idea of introducing rules for a 6th player in the game, since I very often are asked by players: "is it possible to play Kingsburg with 6 players?".

Until now, our answer has alyways been negative, since our playtest always stated that with 6 players the Council becomes overcrowded with dice and some player may end up with a totally wasted productive season, and we wanted to avoid that at all cost. So, just adding a sixth player with his/her own dice doesn't work, and we did not tried to implement anything like a 6th player in the expansion.

I then said to myself: time to change perspective. Why if the sixth player is playing with a different style? So I came up with this little "Usurper" idea. Maybe it can turn into a "scenario" like the ones Luca made recently.

The sixth player is a Governor like all the other players, (so you have to give him/her a sixth province board) but he doesn't use "influence points" generated by dice, instead a different ways to influence advisors.

After dice rolls, but before any player can influence advisors, he can (but doesn't have to) block one single advisor, making it unavailable for this season (he cannot choose to block the same advisor in two consecutive seasons, however). The blocked advisor cannot be influenced during this season by anyone (including the Usurper)

Then, after all players have influenced advisors following the normal rules, (s)he can influence a free advisor with an influence token. The Influence Token can take any value from 1 to 14. You can add a +2 token to it, as well as using the Market. This means the only council member the Usurper cannot influence is the King.

The Usurper won't have any advantage by building the Chapel or the Church, still the option to influence only one advisor but of middle/high range shoud allow the Usurper to be competitive.

I haven't got many chances to test this idea, so I am calling to you, bbgers for help.

I would like to have some feedback from you players, keep in mind this variant is unlikely to become officiali inserted in any expansion set, but may become an "official variant" if people like it and it works the way i am expecting it.

Enjoy.

I think adding a 6th player would not be as difficult as it seems.

When inflencing along the bottom row only, allow 2 players (max) to influence 1 adviser (no penalty) or be allowed to go up or down 1 advisor with a penalty of a point or resource(their choice).
If they wish to influence a taken adviser on the 2nd row (if the bottom is all taken) they need to pay 1 point and a resource.
As for the top row, forget it, if your lucky enough to get alone, no sharing.
The penalties (if any) may vary but i think it can work out without getting too complicated.

What does everybody think?

cheers

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

reapersaurus — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:09:28 +0000

by reapersaurus

Good reply.

I'm just worried about the Usurper getting the Queen 2 times a year.
Getting 6 VP's a year just from the Queen would be an unbalancing equation.

If the Ususrper had this guy available:
]]>
it would be awfully easy to get the Queen repeatedly.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

XehutL — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:56:49 +0000

by XehutL

tanis wrote:
MainManDetroit wrote:
Andrea, I love your 6th player variant, but what if you changed the 6th players goal but used your same rules for the 6th player.

What if he was indeed an advisor,but instead of helping the kingdom, he was trying to help the invaders.

1.His defense could add to the invaders attack.
2. When the defenders win against invaders, this advisor gets the penalty, but when the invaders win, he gets the prize.

Just an idea. Everyone seems to love games with traitors these days.

I thought about it.

And yes, since everyone seems to love games with traitors it looks like a clichè :)

I fear it would make things too difficult for the other players, but again, it should be tested to say anything more. So, why not?

I would propose something else... a variant where the 6th player would represent a rivaling King from a neighboring, smaller Kingdom. He will get his own and unique building chart, he will be standing aside the courtyard chaos (i.e. no direct dice placement), his dices will be somehow representing his available resources in a running out matter (something like "one-time" advisors for the current year) AND he will have to defend against the same invaders also - but his buildings could alter the VP of all other players, decreasing the strength the main King could send or increasing the strength of the invaders; and he could be even corrupting some of the advisors through some buildings (so the players will lose some VPs when they influence them)... etc.

I could think of many effects that can be non-directed at one player but at all of them together only. And these secondary King's resources could be balanced to the number of actual players also - so one could use him with even less than 6 players if he wishes so....

The most complicated/important thing would be how to balance his gains against all the possible damage to the other players... i.e. the point where he could compete to their VP and not be penalised (or favourised) toooo much. Probably another easier and quicker way would be analogy to a traitor play - I either win or lose, nothing else.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:44:23 +0000

by tanis

GSReis wrote:

This way you add interesting choices instead of just say to the players "place the dice with no problem, since two players can influence the same advisor".

Again, as explained above, this is absolutely not what I suggested.

Sorry then, if I misunderstood.

Now it's clearer what you propose, sounds interesting, altough would slow down a little further the game flow.

Anyway, this one is an interesting idea, thanks.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

GSReis — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:48:33 +0000

by GSReis

tanis wrote:
I thought about that, but it would change the importance and balance of buildings like the Market or the Farms that are expensive but give you flexibility in dice placement.

So, I am not convinced that the "double track" advisors would work nicely.

That is not what I proposed and it would not change balance in any way. Each round, you would just have a few advisors that could be influenced by two players - and not more than two. The rules would be like this:

1. Roll a set of 3 dice.
2. Place an envoy (get any pawn to represent them) on each advisor corresponding to the results. If you roll a double or a triple, add the numbers together.
3. Each advisor that has an envoy may be influenced by two - and only two - different players. (The normal envoy may be used for a third placement.)

So, only a maximum of three advisors (and often less) might be influenced twice, and by different players. If it makes it easier to place your dice, balance is restored by having an extra player.

Better it would be to add more advisors, instead of just allowing two players to influence the same one.

That was the obvious solution (and I think someone has already done that), but that would simply require a totally new board (unless you are glad with stickers or any other inelegant solution).

And I'm not sure it would be better. You are giving players more choices, but you are making dice placement easier in the same way - and probably even easier than in my idea. How many alternate advisors would you have? In my idea, I repeat, the "doubled" advisors would be one to three per round, and they would be different each round.

Of course, if you prefer more of those advisors, you may just add more dice to select them, even two different sets as in the two-player game.

Anyway, I wouldn't play the game with six players, as it already takes quite some time with five. I just wanted to offer an elegant and easy-to-implement solution that would not change the game too much. Feel free to use it as you see fit.

This way you add interesting choices instead of just say to the players "place the dice with no problem, since two players can influence the same advisor".

Again, as explained above, this is absolutely not what I suggested.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:37:36 +0000

by tanis

MainManDetroit wrote:
Andrea, I love your 6th player variant, but what if you changed the 6th players goal but used your same rules for the 6th player.

What if he was indeed an advisor,but instead of helping the kingdom, he was trying to help the invaders.

1.His defense could add to the invaders attack.
2. When the defenders win against invaders, this advisor gets the penalty, but when the invaders win, he gets the prize.

Just an idea. Everyone seems to love games with traitors these days.

I thought about it.

And yes, since everyone seems to love games with traitors it looks like a clichè :)

I fear it would make things too difficult for the other players, but again, it should be tested to say anything more. So, why not?

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

MainManDetroit — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:27:43 +0000

by MainManDetroit

Andrea, I love your 6th player variant, but what if you changed the 6th players goal but used your same rules for the 6th player.

What if he was indeed an advisor,but instead of helping the kingdom, he was trying to help the invaders.

1.His defense could add to the invaders attack.
2. When the defenders win against invaders, this advisor gets the penalty, but when the invaders win, he gets the prize.

Just an idea. Everyone seems to love games with traitors these days.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

tanis — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:12:05 +0000

by tanis

reapersaurus wrote:
Thoughts -

I like how you are trying to expand the gameplay, but this sounds like it is giving the 6th player a significant unfair advantage.

Since he can average a roll of 14, this is way above the normal player's average roll. Every season he can get 1 of each resource (with Market, which I think is the most important/automatic building in the game).
Plus, every year he can easily influence the Queen at least once, and likely twice (with the Inn and the 12 spot).

Add in the debilitating effect of him blocking off a crucial advisor every single season, and it seems to me he'd be in a significantly more powerful position to win the game.

A critical question would be:
Can the 6th player influence an advisor that has already been taken up by one of the other 5 players?

Also - what happens if the Usurper builds a farm? I'd guess that there would be no benefit, since his influence doesn't come from the dice roll (in fact, he shouldn't even have any dice).

Answers:

No, of course the 6th player cannot influence an advisor already taken. And not even the one he blocked himself. This makes up (mostly) for having an "average 14" that is so better than the "average 10,5".
So, it's up to the other (5!) players to prevent him to play on the Queen or other powerful advisors like # 12 too often, since the 6th player influence a free advisor only after all the other 5 players have finished using their dice.

Also, Farms, Chapel, Statue are useless to him (another disadvantage).

Also note that the King's Envoy can be used to influence the adivsor "blocked" by the 6th player.

You may still be right, and being an unfair advantage to the 6th player this flexibility. That's why I would like players to give it a try and provide feedbacks... :) ;)

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:06:49 +0000

by tanis

GSReis wrote:
It sounds to me like a completely artificial way to add a sixth player. And it doesn't seem much fun to be that player.

A simpler solution would be to allow some advisors to be influenced by two players. This might work like the neutral dice in the two-player game, but with a reversed effect. To make things clearer, you might place an "envoy" pawn on the proper advisors, instead of the dice.

I thought about that, but it would change the importance and balance of buildings like the Market or the Farms that are expensive but give you flexibility in dice placement.

So, I am not convinced that the "double track" advisors would work nicely.

Better it would be to add more advisors, instead of just allowing two players to influence the same one.

I try to explain better (it's just an example, I don't know how and if it would work):

- new advisor # 5 gives you a good of your choice, but costs you a VP. So, one player can influence the "old # 5" and get the soldier, another one can influence the "new # 5 and pay the VP for the good.

- new advisor # 7 gives you a stone and a VP. So, one player can influence the "good old #7" and get a good of his choice and a +2 token, and a second one the new # 7 to get the stone and the VP.

- new advisor # 6 gives you a soldier and a +2 token

- new advisor # 12 gives you one good of your choice, a soldier and a VP.

This way you add interesting choices instead of just say to the players "place the dice with no problem, since two players can influence the same advisor".

Of course, goods, soldiers and VP distribution should be recalculated (this would be a job for Luca... ;) ), but to me it looks more interesting than just allow the double influencing on some adivsors.

It's also more complex to make up a new board with the new advisors, but I am sure there are many people skilled with photoshop here... :D

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

reapersaurus — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:30:01 +0000

by reapersaurus

Thoughts -

I like how you are trying to expand the gameplay, but this sounds like it is giving the 6th player a significant unfair advantage.

Since he can average a roll of 14, this is way above the normal player's average roll. Every season he can get 1 of each resource (with Market, which I think is the most important/automatic building in the game).
Plus, every year he can easily influence the Queen at least once, and likely twice (with the Inn and the 12 spot).

Add in the debilitating effect of him blocking off a crucial advisor every single season, and it seems to me he'd be in a significantly more powerful position to win the game.

A critical question would be:
Can the 6th player influence an advisor that has already been taken up by one of the other 5 players?

Also - what happens if the Usurper builds a farm? I'd guess that there would be no benefit, since his influence doesn't come from the dice roll (in fact, he shouldn't even have any dice).

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

frog213 — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:47:26 +0000

by frog213

Nice idea Andrea, but I think it's too "odd man out-ish." GSReis has a good point w/ the 2 people can influence the same guy. Makes me think of Ticket to Ride and the the 2 and 3 wide tracks only used for 4 or 5 player games. There could be certain advisors that are "double spots," but not all of them. Mainly on the bottom row.

Of course you also need a 6th player board, dice, and bldg markers.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

UnknownParkerBrother — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:34:55 +0000

by UnknownParkerBrother

If it's so crowded with 6, maybe allow players to manage if they want to get ahead in the order by putting one dice on the turn order track like in Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery?

First player to put a dice there would be #1 next round, 2nd would be #2, etc. All those who didn't chose the turn order track would follow in order of dice sum, as by the current rules.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

GSReis — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:57:12 +0000

by GSReis

It sounds to me like a completely artificial way to add a sixth player. And it doesn't seem much fun to be that player.

A simpler solution would be to allow some advisors to be influenced by two players. This might work like the neutral dice in the two-player game, but with a reversed effect. To make things clearer, you might place an "envoy" pawn on the proper advisors, instead of the dice.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

ackmondual — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:21:23 +0000

by ackmondual

Only one of my gaming groups will this be likely to be tested. Perhaps at one of my larger get-together of mixed gaming (euros, party games, heavier euros, and other strategy games) that meets once a month or less. For the former, having a 6th player is not that uncommon. They usually prefer games less than an hour, but Kingsburg is a nice and (relatively) deep enough game that it lasting 2 hours (typical for our 5p games of that group) isn't really horrendous (at least they're doing a very good job of hiding it if they found it too long).

Components-wise, We'll have to print out a copy of the playmat for a 6th player, and a penny or whatever I supposed could be used as an influence token.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Variants:: Re: 6th player variant (unofficial)

wwscrispin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:25:38 +0000

by wwscrispin

I think that is a good way to handle it.

I am unlikely to try it with 6 because it seems slow (relative to the weight) even with 5 and I say that as a fan of the game.

Thread: Kingsburg:: Variants:: 6th player variant (unofficial)

tanis — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:01:16 +0000

by tanis

Being one of the designers of Kingsburg, I have been toying with the idea of introducing rules for a 6th player in the game, since I very often are asked by players: "is it possible to play Kingsburg with 6 players?".

Until now, our answer has alyways been negative, since our playtest always stated that with 6 players the Council becomes overcrowded with dice and some player may end up with a totally wasted productive season, and we wanted to avoid that at all cost. So, just adding a sixth player with his/her own dice doesn't work, and we did not tried to implement anything like a 6th player in the expansion.

I then said to myself: time to change perspective. Why if the sixth player is playing with a different style? So I came up with this little "Usurper" idea. Maybe it can turn into a "scenario" like the ones Luca made recently.

The sixth player is a Governor like all the other players, (so you have to give him/her a sixth province board) but he doesn't use "influence points" generated by dice, instead a different ways to influence advisors.

After dice rolls, but before any player can influence advisors, he can (but doesn't have to) block one single advisor, making it unavailable for this season (he cannot choose to block the same advisor in two consecutive seasons, however). The blocked advisor cannot be influenced during this season by anyone (including the Usurper)

Then, after all players have influenced advisors following the normal rules, (s)he can influence a free advisor with an influence token. The Influence Token can take any value from 1 to 14. You can add a +2 token to it, as well as using the Market. This means the only council member the Usurper cannot influence is the King.

The Usurper won't have any advantage by building the Chapel or the Church, still the option to influence only one advisor but of middle/high range shoud allow the Usurper to be competitive.

I haven't got many chances to test this idea, so I am calling to you, bbgers for help.

I would like to have some feedback from you players, keep in mind this variant is unlikely to become officiali inserted in any expansion set, but may become an "official variant" if people like it and it works the way i am expecting it.

Enjoy.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

tanis — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:57:46 +0000

by tanis

Being one of the designers of Kingsburg, I have been toying with the idea of introducing rules for a 6th player in the game, since I often receive this question from players "is it possible to play Kingsburg with 6 players?".

Until now, our answer has alyways been negative, since our playtest always stated that with 6 players the Council becomes overcrowded with dice and some player may end up with a totally wasted productive season. So, just adding a sixth player with his/her own dice doesn't work, and we did not tried to implement anything like a 6th player in the expansion.

I then said to myself: time to change perspective. Why if the sixth player is playing with a different style? So I came up with this little "Usurper" idea. Maybe it can turn into a "scenario" like the ones Luca made recently.

The sixth player is a Governor like all the other players, (so you have to give him/her a sixth province board) but he doesn't use "influence points" generated by dice, instead a different ways to influence advisors.

After dice rolls, but before any player can influence advisors, he can (but doesn't have to) block one single advisor, making it unavailable for this season (he cannot choose to block the same advisor in two consecutive seasons, however). The blocked advisor cannot be influenced during this season by anyone (including the Usurper)

Then, after all players have influenced advisors following the normal rules, (s)he can influence a free advisor with an influence token. The Influence Token can take any value from 1 to 14. You can add a +2 token to it, as well as using the Market. This means the only council member the Usurper cannot influence is the King.

The Usurper won't have any advantage by building the Chapel or the Church, still the option to influence only one advisor but of middle/high range shoud allow the Usurper to be competitive.

I would like to have some feedback from you players, keep in mind this variant is unlikely to become officiali inserted in any expansion set, but may become an "official variant" if people like it and it works the way i am expecting it.

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Re: Question about Number of Players

ColtsFan76 — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:49:44 +0000

by ColtsFan76

Doubtful. Neither the "number of players" or list of included components mention anything.

Thread: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: Rules:: Question about Number of Players

nhoward1101 — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:20:46 +0000

by nhoward1101

Hello,

Does anyone know if the expansion will increase the number of players to 6 or not? I really am hoping it will since we regularly play with 6 people and someone always misses out and everyone in the group adores this game.

Thanks.

File: Kingsburg:: Goblin Valley - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja

muka — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:00:15 +0000

by muka

Goblin Valley - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

File: Kingsburg:: Kingsburg Official Scenario: Goblin Valley (Russian)

bretteur — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 16:16:10 +0000

by bretteur

Kingsburg Official Scenario: Goblin Valley (Russian) for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Goblin Valley

Kalidor — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:55:20 +0000

by Kalidor

This one looks fun, for sure.

They all do, actually...but this scenario, specifically, seems less calculating.
A bit more risk involved! ;)

Keep 'em coming!
And I eagerly await the official expansion...

Thread: Kingsburg:: General:: New Scenario: Goblin Valley

Luke the Flaming — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:59:31 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

For those interested, there's a new scenario for Kingsburg (designed by me) freely available at FFG website; click here to see its page or click here to open the .PDF file.
This time it merely makes Winter harder, for those feeling the battles were not bloody enough.
Have fun!

New Image for Kingsburg

dougbass68 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:14:32 +0000

by dougbass68

David is pleased with the way things are progressing, but John remains...

]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Java-Kingsburg with A.I.

Pogle — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 19:35:55 +0000

by Pogle

Would love to try this but unable to download anything.

If I click on the link to your site it refuses to open in a new tab, I just get an error saying Internet Explorer cannot open the page.

Finally managed to get to the site by right clicking on your link and selecting open in a new window.

However if I now click on the link to download the java program it simply tries and tries and eventually I just get a blank page saying Internet Explorer cannot open the web page.

Have tried on both my laptop and netbook, both of which run Windows XP and same thing each time.

Any ideas as I'm longing to give this a try ?

Thanks

EDIT : Have finally managed to get a download on my netbook. The only problem now is that the game size doesn't seem to fit my screen. The top is off screen so I can't drag it about and the bottom I can just see where you out in player names. Is there anyway to resize it as there don't appear to be any handles for size dragging.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Am I the only one?

joedogboy — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:11:32 +0000

by joedogboy

I would rather not reset the armies, but have the attackers grow much stronger each year (or use a "D3" system instead of a D6 for the king's assistance). This would allow players who invest in military building early to have the opportunity to build more buildings later.

You could even take away a number of armies to match the strength of the attackers (possibly minus the defense bonuses). This would give an advantage to the player/s who have the strongest armies.

It's not like you reset your buildings every "year".

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

UnknownParkerBrother — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:34:48 +0000

by UnknownParkerBrother

JoshtheGamer wrote:
Caylus does not fit into your worker placement game hierarchy?

That's because it's so far above the rest it's on it's own. :cool:

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

JoshtheGamer — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 20:56:16 +0000

by JoshtheGamer

Caylus does not fit into your worker placement game hierarchy?

I did like the review. A thumbs up for this thread!

New Image for Kingsburg

josephc4 — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 20:18:31 +0000

by josephc4

Bay Area Games Night, Cafe Express, Houston, TX

]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Question on the Market Building and + 2 token.

ackmondual — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:14:59 +0000

by ackmondual

bobm174 wrote:
Understand that the market allows you to influence an adviser either 1 greater or 1 less then your dice total.

My question is, can you use the market along with a +2 token?
Example: I roll a 9, use a +2 and make it an 11 and then use the market to influnce the number 12 adviser. Is that legal?

Thanks,

Bob

That's perfectly fine. Let's you get to the Queen with as little as a natural roll on 14.

Also remember that you can use the +2 token and Market power independently.

e.g.
6 + 5 + Market = Duchess (#12 spot for 2 any resrc + 1 +2token)
6 + +2 = Treasurer (2 gold)

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

Rob in Richmond — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 15:22:49 +0000

by Rob in Richmond

I really enjoy Kingsburg. And it's one of the few games that my 11 year-old daughter will play with the family. For some reason she loves it when she hates shorter games like Ticket to Ride and Carcassonne. She also doesn't like other worker placement games (like Stone Age). Interesting.

For me it's a real close battle for #2, but it's:
Agricola
Stone Age
Kingsburg

For Kingsburg, play the solo computer JAVA app before buying. It totally hooked me. And for Stone Age try the BSW online game (has great visuals and sounds) before buying.

One last thing..... I think that all three games scale down to 2-players well, but I think Kingsburg might do it the best (easy to adjust, feels like "regular" game, and takes a much shorter time to play with two). My wife and I have played many, many games of all three games and we've loved every minute of them.

Don't think you can go wrong with any of the three. {I've never played The Pillars of the Earth, although I loved the book.}

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

joshp — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 07:01:15 +0000

by joshp

I would only consider a game to be a worker-placement game if selecting an action stops someone else from selecting the same action. Puerto Rico is an awkward fit. True, only one person can select an action, but selecting an action allows everyone to take that action, so no one is really screwed out of being able to do that action. Now only the person who selected it gets the privilege and money on the card, but this just does not hold the same feel as getting screwed out of a spot on a board in a worker-placement game. Cuba is also borderline. You can pick the same actions as other players, but you can't all take the same bonuses on the board with your chosen roles. And the person who chooses first gets the better action. These aren't really in the same league as other worker-placement games, but I do see the similarity.

What I tried to do in this review is to compare Kingsburg to other similar games that people might be considering buying instead. I seriously doubt anyone is considering Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition over Kingsburg, but they may very well be debating between Kingsburg and The Pillars of the Earth. These are much more similar, IMHO.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

Bubslug — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:21:12 +0000

by Bubslug

My first impression is: apples to oranges? Puerto Rico introduced us to "role selection" or "action selection" which is what I think is happening here. In Puerto Rico, and many of the others, you may not actually "place a worker," rather you snatch a role tile or choose an action, but it all accomplishes essentially the same thing.

As such, you have to open your comparison to a rather wider range of games than you've chosen: Caylus, Puerto Rico, Age of Steam, Galactic Emperor, Twilight Imperium...the list could go on - in fact this might have been a better entry as a Geek List?

Review: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Kingsburg compared to other worker-placement games

joshp — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 03:23:20 +0000

by joshp

I see these questions all the time on this site: What is the best worker-placement game? If I like Stone Age, will I like this? If I like The Pillars of the Earth, will I like that? How does this compare to Agricola?

Well, I can't answer all these questions, but I wanted to do a little compare/contrast along the worker-placement genre and show how some of my favorites stack up to Kingsburg.

I like worker-placement games a lot. I have not played them all, but I certainly intend to. I enjoy the idea of selecting roles, gathering resources, and racing to get the most victory points. They are fun games, but they do have their weaknesses.

Here's some of the common weaknesses:

Not enough luck: Some worker placement games have a limited selection of cards for each phase and the phases become easy to memorize. Every game of Pillars feels a bit like Chess, because I am planning out moves several turns ahead. I already know what is coming and there is little surprise. Other worker placement games have strategies that become revealed after only a couple plays and the game just becomes a race to see who can get their system working faster. These games generally have little luck to them and they often reward experienced players far too much.

Fiddly bits: Many worker placement games have lots of cards, cubes, pawns, dice, etc. However, they are nowhere near the level of most wargames and are lots less fiddly than big box Ameritrash games like StarCraft: The Board Game or Descent: Journeys in the Dark. The most fiddly that I have played is Agricola, but Pillars of the Earth is a close second.

Multiplayer solitaire: Many worker placement games have little interaction between players. You can screw someone out of a coveted spot on the board, but you can't destroy their buildings or make them discard cards. While there are exceptions, these are generally true Euro games, and have very little conflict.

Runaway leader: Some worker placement games allow someone to collect so many resources or build so much infrastructure early on that catching up is impossible. The winner can be determined mid-game and there just seems like no reason to finish the game. I have often felt this way playing Agricola or Caylus and this causes the last few rounds to really drag.

So how does Kingsburg compare?

Luck and Replayability: Kingsburg allows you to roll three dice every productive season to determine which of eighteen people you might call on aid from. There are different buildings you can make that will affect your roll, but there is still a large element of luck to it. Stone Age is another worker placement with dice, but I always felt like the addition of more workers and the tools you could obtain reduced the luck too much. In Kingsburg, there are some ways around the luck, but the dice still get their say. However, it is not random chaos. It just feels "right." And it is a welcome change from other worker placement games.

Some of the game is lost with rehearsal. It does not pack the sheer variety of Agricola or even that of Stone Age when you add Stone Age - The New Huts. However, the luck of the dice makes it so that you can replay it a lot without getting bored.

Setup: Not too bad. Only three resources to keep track of, some clean player sheets for showing what you have built, and a very well-organized board with a scoring track. The year marker seems irrelevant since the game already has a deck showing you what year it is. However, you never feel overwhelmed by all the stuff on the board. The game sets up quicker than most worker placement games and that is why it gets played more often in my house. (It plays quicker than most other games in this genre too.) It has replaced Stone Age as my favorite under-an-hour, worker-placement game for two.

Interactivity: The interactivity in this game is not as high as I would like, but there are some nice options to screw people over for the spots they need if you are paying attention. Paying attention to what other players roll on their dice allows you to snag the primo spots before your opponents get their turn. So while the dice make this game feel like Ameritrash, it is still a Euro at heart.

Runaway leader: Not an issue in this game. The game rewards the person who has made the least number of buildings twice a year with some powerful bonuses that allow that person to catch up quick. Furthermore, the low-roller in the game gets to pick their spot on the board first, which works out nicely. Scores among experienced players are often neck-and-neck until the very end. I saw tight scores in Cuba as well, but this was even closer.

Should I get it?

Rather than assign an arbitrary score to this game, let me explain when you might want to play this game.

First of all, Kingsburg plays 2-5 players, so if you have 6 consider Pillars and The Pillars of the Earth Expansion Set. It is a great game, but it does suffer from most of the weaknesses I've pointed out.

If you don't mind a fiddly setup or a long game then I just want to say that Agricola is the current #1 on Boardgamegeek for a reason. It is the best in the pack, but it does take awhile to play and it has a lot of components to deal with.

If you want a quick game and like a bit of luck then Kingsburg and Stone Age should be the ones you are looking at. They are both good games, but I prefer to play Kingsburg over Stone Age.

I have played Caylus and Cuba and I didn't absolutely hate either, but they were just not my thing. I found Caylus too long of a game and I found Cuba to be frustrating in the fact that I always felt poor and unable to do any effective actions. However, if you want to add some bidding to your worker placement game then you might want to give Cuba a try.

I also own Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery and Leonardo da Vinci, but have not played them yet.

My current personal favorites (in order):

Agricola
Kingsburg
The Pillars of the Earth
Stone Age

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Question on the Market Building and + 2 token.

Luke the Flaming — Sun, 31 May 2009 18:55:52 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

bobm174 wrote:
My question is, can you use the market along with a +2 token?
Example: I roll a 9, use a +2 and make it an 11 and then use the market to influnce the number 12 adviser. Is that legal?

Yes, it is.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Question on the Market Building and + 2 token.

mexilplif — Sun, 31 May 2009 06:51:23 +0000

by mexilplif

you sure can...

Reply: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Re: Question on the Market Building and + 2 token.

GlenTraff — Sun, 31 May 2009 06:22:17 +0000

by GlenTraff

My understanding is that you can.

Glen

Thread: Kingsburg:: Rules:: Question on the Market Building and + 2 token.

bobm174 — Sun, 31 May 2009 06:13:10 +0000

by bobm174

Understand that the market allows you to influence an adviser either 1 greater or 1 less then your dice total.

My question is, can you use the market along with a +2 token?
Example: I roll a 9, use a +2 and make it an 11 and then use the market to influnce the number 12 adviser. Is that legal?

Thanks,

Bob

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

tanis — Fri, 29 May 2009 13:40:11 +0000

by tanis

Yes, all the credit for the scenarios go to Luca.

Maybe I will have a good idea for some scenario of my own, who knows.

And yes, we still develop "stuff" together, at times. But that's our business ;):D

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Kingsburg vs Stone Age

tanis — Fri, 29 May 2009 13:16:54 +0000

by tanis

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, and for appreciating the game.

As I wrote before, they're so different that both games could deserve a slot in a gamer's collection, unless you suffer of some weird allergy to dice.

According to your judgement, it seems you rate Kingsburg a better game when it comes to strategies and gameplay, but not so polished as Stone Age and a little too expensive for the materials you're given.

It's an opinion shared by many players here in Italy too, so I won't disagree ;)

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: Kingsburg vs Stone Age

DBliny — Fri, 29 May 2009 09:25:32 +0000

by DBliny

I agree with the general opinion, they're both great games, and different.

Let's see if I can draw an analytical and fair comparison.

COMPONENTS

Stone Age wins by far. Shaped resources, smooth dice, the workers, etc...

SA-KSB= 1-0

GRAPHICS

To me it's a draw. I like Kingsburg cover more, but the love for details in Stone Age is again astonishing.

SA-KSB= 2-1

LENGHT

Another score for Stone Age. Plays faster, ends quicker.

SA-KSB= 3-1

SCALABILITY

Both games works equally well with different numbers of players. Kingsburg can accomodate one more player at the table, but that just compensate the fact that it needs an extra rule to be playable in 2.

SA-KSB= 4-2

MECHANICS

I found Kingsburg more innovative. Roll your dice and then place them as workers is a fresh and new idea. While place your workers then roll sounds more dull.

SA-KSB= 4-3

LUCK

I think it's a draw, again. What the designer is saying here about Kingsburg having more balancing tools against bad luck in gathering resources may be true, but the pure luck of the battle reinforcement roll is rude, and rolling a 1 in a battle it is the equivalent of the disappointment given by "we both place 3 workers on wood in SA, I roll 3 and get 1 wood, you roll 18 and take 6 woods".
With the expansion preview and the soldier tokens, Kinsgurg would likely prevail, but we're comparing the basic games here.

SA-KSB= 5-4

REPLAYABILITY

In other words, how many different winning strategies and ways to play are available. Apparently, there are more strategies in SA (starving, going for the huts, going for the cards, etc...) than in Kingsburg.
But if you look deeper you will realize that starving in SA is not a viable strategy if not under exceptional circumstances, and that set collecting of cards vs going for the huts it's basically a binary choice. And, the "winning strategy" is simply (99% of the times) the strategy neglected by other players at the same table.
On the other hand, not only Kingsburg offers you different strategies (the farm, the embassy, going military on two different lines), but also gives the opportunity to two players to choose the same strategy and still compete for the final victory.
Adding also the recent effort by the designers to support the game replayability by offering alternate Scenarios, this point is scoren by Kinsgburg

SA - KSB = 5-5

PRICING

SA is sold at about 30 €, while Kingsburg can be found at over 40 €. Stone Age wins this round hands down.

FINAL SCORE:

STONE AGE 6 vs KINGSBURG 5

Altough as a game, I like Kingsburg mechanics, strategies and gameplay more, Stone Age is the winner because it's easier to access (cost and playing time) and offers better components for a lower price.

With the expansion that will likely be released soon, I believe Kingsburg will add a lot to its longevity, and will likely get the upper hand.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

Luke the Flaming — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:29:16 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

DBliny wrote:
Question: FFG website says "by Luca", does this means your co-designer has nothing to do with those scenarios? So the two of you don't develop stuff for Kingsburg together anymore?

These three scenarios are mine alone, but "stuff" about Kingsburg is still (and will be) made with Andrea (it's his baby as much as mine... even a tad more his, since he had the original idea of the game).

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

DBliny — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:59:46 +0000

by DBliny

:thumbsup:

Very cool scenarios, Luca!

I tried this one yesterday and it was really making the game deeper and with more thoughtful choices.

So, waiting for the expansion, this is a welcomed addition to the game.

Question: FFG website says "by Luca", does this means your co-designer has nothing to do with those scenarios? So the two of you don't develop stuff for Kingsburg together anymore?

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: News:: Re: To Forge A Realm - Preorder

DBliny — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:48:57 +0000

by DBliny

Anyone knows when it will be available in Europe? Which languages?

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Joshuaaaaaa — Wed, 27 May 2009 19:41:49 +0000

by Joshuaaaaaa

Luke the Flaming wrote:
Joshuaaaaaa wrote:
I just prefer that my frustration with a game result from bad play, rather than bad die rolls.

I totally understand, but if you play with dice, you have to expect that sometimes you'll get a lot of poor rolls (that's why I tend to prefer games with as little randomness as possible... yet there are some games with dice/cards/randomizers that I enojy a lot, go figure!).

True, sometimes it happens...yet in Kingsburg it seems to follow me around. :)

I was playing some Roll Through the Ages recently and won the game handily even though I only had 5 dice and the other players had 7. I just happened to roll the pestilence (I think that's it, the one where I roll 3 skulls and it costs them points) 3 times during the game and build up trade goods and big developments. That doesn't happen often.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Luke the Flaming — Wed, 27 May 2009 17:45:38 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

Joshuaaaaaa wrote:
I just prefer that my frustration with a game result from bad play, rather than bad die rolls.

I totally understand, but if you play with dice, you have to expect that sometimes you'll get a lot of poor rolls (that's why I tend to prefer games with as little randomness as possible... yet there are some games with dice/cards/randomizers that I enojy a lot, go figure!).

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Joshuaaaaaa — Wed, 27 May 2009 14:09:31 +0000

by Joshuaaaaaa

I like what I've heard about the expansion, and will probably give it a try. I just prefer that my frustration with a game result from bad play, rather than bad die rolls.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

tanis — Wed, 27 May 2009 12:54:23 +0000

by tanis

pino65 wrote:
(I'll play the game and enjoy the game, and if I average 9 on 3 dice for the entire game, don't expect me to be in a great mood when its over. I want to like this game more than I do, I just haven't found a compelling reason to do so.)

But, the average is 9, what more were you expecting?

cheers

You may found it in the upcoming expansion, that will give you many ways to overcome continous bad dice rolls.

This thread is funny to me, because I designed the game to play a light game without having to always complain against bad luck or stupid choices by opponents like in Settlers... and after i found out that some players feel frustrated about Kingsburg as well.
I guess it happens with D&D too :)

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Joshuaaaaaa — Tue, 26 May 2009 18:31:44 +0000

by Joshuaaaaaa

Luke the Flaming wrote:
Sphere wrote:
Luke the Flaming wrote:
The average of 3d6 is 10.5 (thus he was expecting one point and half more per season, I suspect).

Correct. Which does make me wonder why anybody would throw the dice after failing to roll over 10 with 3 of them - a 50/50 chance.

He reported to have rolled above 10 once in the whole game (i.e. 15 rolls). That's a little less likely (still not justifying throwing dice around, in my opinion... but "his game, his rules" or something similar ;) ).

Okay, the throwing dice was childish...I'll be the first to admit that. Its not like I got upset on the first turn of the game. As you note, in the entire game I rolled above 10 once...IIRC, it was a 13, and it was the lowest roll (or tied for lowest) on the table that round.

As for it being "a little less likely", lets strike the 13 and one of the low rolls as canceling out. That means I rolled below 10 13 times. The odds of that on a fifty/fifty are 1 in 8,192. That's terrible. I think that anytime the "above 10s" outnumber the "below 10s" by more than 5 (i.e., 15-0, 14-1, 13-2, 12-3, 11-4), it can kill the game. By the same token, anytime the "over 10s" outnumber the "under 10s" by more than 5, I think one would have to consciously try to lose the game in order to avoid a victory.

Now, those are all "less than 1%" chances, and they seem to follow me around the game board.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 26 May 2009 17:08:59 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

Sphere wrote:
Luke the Flaming wrote:
The average of 3d6 is 10.5 (thus he was expecting one point and half more per season, I suspect).

Correct. Which does make me wonder why anybody would throw the dice after failing to roll over 10 with 3 of them - a 50/50 chance.

He reported to have rolled above 10 once in the whole game (i.e. 15 rolls). That's a little less likely (still not justifying throwing dice around, in my opinion... but "his game, his rules" or something similar ;) ).

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Sphere — Tue, 26 May 2009 16:10:53 +0000

by Sphere

Luke the Flaming wrote:
The average of 3d6 is 10.5 (thus he was expecting one point and half more per season, I suspect).

Correct. Which does make me wonder why anybody would throw the dice after failing to roll over 10 with 3 of them - a 50/50 chance.

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:42:41 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

pino65 wrote:
But, the average is 9, what more were you expecting?

The average of 3d6 is 10.5 (thus he was expecting one point and half more per season, I suspect).

I still think the game is winnable with such rolls, but I do not blame anyone for feeling frustrated in those cases (but if dice rolls under the average have such a bad impact on your enjoyment of the game, maybe you should seek something... diceless?).

Have fun! :meeple:

Reply: Kingsburg:: Reviews:: Re: I hate this game I love so much

pino65 — Tue, 26 May 2009 13:31:36 +0000

by pino65

(I'll play the game and enjoy the game, and if I average 9 on 3 dice for the entire game, don't expect me to be in a great mood when its over. I want to like this game more than I do, I just haven't found a compelling reason to do so.)

But, the average is 9, what more were you expecting?

cheers

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: General:: Re: Translation of the Alternate Building Tracks

tanis — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:43:54 +0000

by tanis

Ineffable wrote:
May's almost over, yay.

Fantasy Flight announced it for July. Better late than never, I would say :)

Reply: Kingsburg - To Forge a Realm:: General:: Re: Translation of the Alternate Building Tracks

Ineffable — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:38:52 +0000

by Ineffable

May's almost over, yay.

File: Kingsburg:: Kingsburg Player Mat/Plansza Gracza

muka — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:45:16 +0000

by muka

Kingsburg Player Mat/Plansza Gracza for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

File: Kingsburg:: Scenario for Kingsburg: Shifting Aliiances (RUSSIAN)

bretteur — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:48:37 +0000

by bretteur

Scenario for Kingsburg: Shifting Aliiances (RUSSIAN) for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

File: Kingsburg:: Shifting Alliances - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja

muka — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:45:57 +0000

by muka

Shifting Alliances - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

Luke the Flaming — Tue, 19 May 2009 12:41:53 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

I suggest to use the building tokens; you should have enough of them (only 4 of them - per colour - are needed in this scenario... 3 with 4 or 5 players).

gheintze wrote:
@Luca -- these scenarios look fantastic. How many do you expect to release?

Thanks.
I've currently written three of them (the two already uploaded by FFG plus "Goblin Valley") and I've the idea for a fourth one... but I'll have to polish it (and give it a quick playtest) to choose if it is worthy or not.
If more ideas should hit me, I'll add them to the list. :)

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

godfeather — Tue, 19 May 2009 03:56:10 +0000

by godfeather

reapersaurus wrote:
What token markers have been used in your games? Is there any way to add token markers on the pdf so that we could print out the tokens along with the scenario?

Usually, I don't run out of tokens that are supplied with the game (those that mark what buildings you've built).

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

gheintze — Mon, 18 May 2009 21:20:11 +0000

by gheintze

That's a good point about the tokens. I'm not sure where to get tokens in five different colors. Maybe at www.boardgamebits.com.

@Luca -- these scenarios look fantastic. How many do you expect to release?

BTW, we had a great five player game of Kingsburg yesterday. Three of the players were new to the game and had a great time. Unfortunately, my last roll wasn't so good, so I was unable to build the Wizards Guild for the win. Oh well, it's a fantastic game...

Geoff

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

reapersaurus — Mon, 18 May 2009 21:09:52 +0000

by reapersaurus

So there's 5 tokens for each player during the course of the game.... one is removed after Year 3 of a 3 player game, another removed after Year 4 of a 4 and 5 player game.

This looks to make for lots of decisions about careful token placement, and in no way affects or gets in the way of the normal building strategies.

Looks like a truly superior scenario!!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

edits : Any way we'll get these on an easy-to-print multiple-scenarios-per-page pdf?

Also -
What token markers have been used in your games? Is there any way to add token markers on the pdf so that we could print out the tokens along with the scenario?

It'd be awesome if a graphic designer could whip up tokens that match the colors and art design of the base game for these.... (I know I'm swinging for the stars with this request, but who knows? You guys are over-the-top stupendous designers, it may be able to happen...)

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: The Demanding Capitol - Luca Iennaco Kingsburg Scenario

Luke the Flaming — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:43:56 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

The second scenario: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/407914 .

waddball wrote:
I wonder how many game authors have similarly "expressed their creativity," but didn't have a channel to distribute it through.

I wonder it too, but in the last years there has been at least BGG as a good (and free) channel. If FFG wouldn't have been interested, I had already planned to upload the files here.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: The Demanding Capitol - Luca Iennaco Kingsburg Scenario

waddball — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:22:04 +0000

by waddball

This scenario idea is great, sort of "official variants" that never quite made it into the rulebook. Fantastic, low-cost way to support a game; well done, FFG and Luca.

I wonder how many game authors have similarly "expressed their creativity," but didn't have a channel to distribute it through.

Reply: Kingsburg:: General:: Re: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

amberaleman — Mon, 18 May 2009 18:05:30 +0000

by amberaleman

These scenarios are great. The differences they bring to the game will keep me satisfied until I can get the expansion.

Thanks.

Thread: Kingsburg:: General:: New Scenario: Shifting Alliances

Luke the Flaming — Mon, 18 May 2009 17:50:07 +0000

by Luke the Flaming

File: Kingsburg:: Kingsburg Quick Reference in Slovak

Joeyeti — Thu, 14 May 2009 21:17:17 +0000

by Joeyeti

Kingsburg Quick Reference in Slovak for Board Game: Kingsburg ]]>