Race for the Galaxy | BoardGameGeek

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Strategy:: Re: Two player advanced countering ConsumeX2-Produce with military

Velusion — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:34:15 +0000

sdiberar wrote:
You have to end the game BEFORE the Consume player gets a half-decent set up. Once they're set up, it's the rare game where you can beat them anyway.

I know. My point is that in a 2-play advanced game isn't that uncommon for players to start out with worlds that can let them get setup extreamly quickly (ala 2-3 turns). Alien Toy World is a great example. Throw in a single other blue prod/consume world and they basically are unbeatable from turn 1.

With Alien Toy world it goes something like:

1) Settle (Alien Toy World)+Trade
2) Settle (any other Produce/Consume) + Prod
3) Dev/Set (anything) + Consumex2 (6 Points)
4) Prod + Consumex2 (6 Points)
5) Prod + Consumex2 (6 Points)
6) Consumex2 + Dev/Settle (6 Points)

Done.

Now thats a an extreame example - but it isn't all *that* uncommon. You can get combos like Doomed World/Galactic Trensetters out very quickly. When this sort of stuff is setup in 3-4 turns it's almost impossible to stop them.

Of course this only applies to the adv 2-player games.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Strategy:: Re: Two player advanced countering ConsumeX2-Produce with military

sdiberar — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:13:08 +0000

by sdiberar

You have to end the game BEFORE the Consume player gets a half-decent set up. Once they're set up, it's the rare game where you can beat them anyway.

Session: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Join the Rebel Alliance! Takeovers finally proved their worth.

jullevi — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:04:55 +0000

by jullevi

Howdy!

Another amusing round of RvsI, another huge victory. This time it was takeovers that won the game for me. For the previous 40 or so games of Rebel vs Imperium, our group had witnessed a total of 3 takeovers. This time, I pulled 4 in a single game.

I was playing Rebel Cantina with Primitive Rebel World (1-cost blue windfall, the one that looks like Endor from Return of the Jedi) and Rebel Alliance in my starting hand. The number in brackets indicate Worlds' defence for those that do not remember all the cards from memory...

Turn 1: Settle Primitive Rebel World
Turn 2: Explore 1+1, leech 2 cards from Produce
Turn 3?: Develop Drop ships to play Rebel Underground for free.
Turn 4: Develop R&D Crash program, leech 4 cards from Produce
Turn 5: Develop Rebel Alliance using R&D. I had Rebel Miners(2) in my hand, but noticed Rebel Fuel Cache on Separatist Colony's tableau next to me. He had just developed Galactic Imperium and settled Rebel Warrior Race, but I was 7 (drop ships + 2 rebel military planets) vs. 6 for takeovers and took over Rebel Fuel Cache.

Next turn I took over Rebel Warrior race(3), while the opponent played Rebel Base(6). What he didn't realize was that each Rebel Planet I stole from him increased my takeover-power by two. Despite defence of 11 (6+4 for Galactic imperium + 1 from Separatist Colony), I took over Rebel Base on the next turn with equal power of 11 after bribing ewoks to war for +1 military).

After losing 3 Rebel planets, he finally realized that he couldn't play any more Rebels. Of course, I could have taken any military planets and not just Rebels, but Rebels were obviously my primary target. Meanwhile, I came across Terraforming Guild and Imperium Seat from huge Produce draws and Explore +5 and finally played the Rebel Miners that had been in my hand for several turns. On the last turn, I was one army short from taking over Rebel Homeworld(7) from New Sparta, despite having takeover power of up to 19. New Sparta had been collecting a huge army for New Galactic order. I ended up conquering Lost Alien Warship instead, which happened to be a windfall planet, earning additional points for Terraforming Guild. It is also possible that I miscalculated my takeover power or Spartas defence at the moment and could have taken over Rebel Homeworld, not sure.

With 21 pts on tableau, 43 points in 6-devs (17 for Rebel alliance, 16 Imperium Seat and 10 for Terraforming guild) and 8 points in Goals (First to discard down to hand limit and Most Rebel Planets) I won the game easily with 72 points.

Ruining the game of my friend felt a bit bad for a while, but we both got over it pretty soon.

Weird fact: At the time I conquered Def6 Rebel Base from my opponents tableau, I had only 4 military and couldn't have played it (for free) if it had been in my hand! Of course, I could have bought it for 4 cards.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Strategy:: Re: Two player advanced countering ConsumeX2-Produce with military

Kester — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:02:29 +0000

by Kester

The most common mistake I see people make is trading too much. Ideally you want to perform just one trade, then get your cards from other sources from then on. With the cards you get you should be able to set up to get cards from either produce, consume, or develop. Settle is a bit more risky because it can help the produce/consumer too, but with the right Terraforming setup using settle for card draw also works.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

crasstopher — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:00:30 +0000

by crasstopher

I strongly recommend LoTech Games. I preordered with them, and i have a tracking number already for saturday delivery of both this and dominion: intrigue.

Very happy with their customer service, fantastic communication, and speed of shipping. They have a great pre-order policy too, where you pay $10 immediately, then the balance when the game comes in

I'm stoked for the weekend now!

crass

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Discarding and then settling DoomedW in same turn with ImproLog (and super luck!)

GreedyAlgorithm — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:58:53 +0000

by GreedyAlgorithm

DW has an explore power, can massively increase your effective hand size, and blunts Settle. It's a great earlyish stalling play if your opponent's low on cards and filling up on a Trade or something.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Guantanamo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:55:18 +0000

by Guantanamo

jediwashuu wrote:
thoughthammer put this up
"Please Note: Rio Grande Games has allocated the initial shipment of this game. We have not received enough to cover all pre-orders to date and but should be able to cover most of them. We apologize for this inconvenience. (Updated July 8, 2009)"

i preordered with them, but i dont know whether mine is allocated or if i am waiting :(

How much have you spent with them in the past ;)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

Kester — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:53:06 +0000

by Kester

Try this: it's deliberately a bit patchy to show you don't need a perfect draw. It also includes a fair amount of cards seen.

Homeworld: Separatist Colony

Turn 1: Dev/Dev
+Investment credits, +Space Marines, +Rebel Miners = 4 VP
1 card on hand

Turn 2: Explore +1,+1/Trade
Still 4 VP
6 cards on hand

Turn 3: Dev/Dev
+Public Works, +New Economy, +1 chip = 10 VP
2 cards on hand

Turn 4: Settle/Trade
+Pirate World, +1 chip = 13VP
8 cards on hand

Turn 5: Dev/Dev
+Galactic Federation, +Research Labs, +1chip = 26 VP
5 cards on hand

Win by tie-break.

I think it's right anyway...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Strategy:: Re: Two player advanced countering ConsumeX2-Produce with military

Velusion — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:52:26 +0000

by Velusion

Having played 30+ two player games online now I've come to the conclusion that 2-player is just too advantagous for a consumex2 strategy provided either player starts out with decent consume cards.

Galactic Trendsetters & Alien Toy shop are very, very strong early on.

I love it when people tell me I just need to end the game faster. Uh? If the consumex2 player has half-way decent setup (fairly common) you can almost never end the game fast enough unless you get an incrediably lucky card draw.

Seems like about 1/3rd of my games end extreamly quickly by a consumex2 player and the other player really never had a chance.

The other 2/3rds of the games are still fun - but overall the 2-player RftG has been a big disappointment for me.

File: Race for the Galaxy:: Listing of 6 Special Deveolpment cards

BigMacRepair — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:47:29 +0000

by BigMacRepair

Listing of 6 Special Deveolpment cards for Board Game: Race for the Galaxy ]]>

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Discarding and then settling DoomedW in same turn with ImproLog (and super luck!)

Stunna — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:22:42 +0000

by Stunna

You can do it, but my general rule is that if you have to settle doomed world, you are...

Oversimplification, but I would never pick Settle to settle that world.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

hahnarama — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:16:28 +0000

by hahnarama

BoardsAndBits wrote:
For some *stupid* reason, "street date" means different things to different people. For board game publishers, it means that retailers cannot let the game out of their shops until that date.

What it *should* mean is that no *customer* receives it before that date. I would love to be able to ship games to arrive on that date, but it probably won't happen in my lifetime (though I will keep trying!)

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

I'm sorry but this street date is CRAP.My FLGS just called and said my game is in but I cannot buy it until tomorrow. WHY? Is it to create hype? Hell this game is already a must buy if you own the other two.

I guess I am just lost/confused about it.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Severian596 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:01:32 +0000

by Severian596

I'm learning that I have a lot to learn about this game, all thanks to the experience this website has made possible for me.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Severian596 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:58:02 +0000

by Severian596

Lady Solitas wrote:
If you're as tired of refreshing your games list as I am, and you happen to be using Firefox with Greasmonkey, you might find this little script that I whipped up earlier today useful...

I'll try this, thanks! So far so good as I see a little "(0)" prepended to the page's tab.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

Benwa — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:55:58 +0000

by Benwa

Here is a totally unprobable Rebel variant (Hope the name of the cards is right because my game is in french, so i retranslate it)
Start World : New Sparta
Start Hand : Improved Log + Alien Drone Sentry + 2 xxx

1) Devel / Settle : NS/IL/ADS --> 5 VP(1 card in hand: Galactic Imperium)
2) Exp 11 / Trade : (draw Adv Rebel Post + Rebel Base + 5xxx) : same tableau -->5 VP
3) Devel / Settle : Devel Gal Imper + settle the 2 rebel worlds -> NS/IL/ADS/GAL IMP/ADV REB POST/REB BASE ---> 22 VP + 1 card (Rebel World) in hand from the settle
4) Settle / (Produce) : settle Rebel World (draw Rebel Network)/ settle rebel network --> NS/IL/ADS/GAL IMP/ADV REB POST/REB BASE/REB WORLD/REB NETW ---> 37 VP...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Replacement Victory Points - Any Interest? PART II

Voxen — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:51:05 +0000

by Voxen

maka wrote:
I sent all the paypal requests. If anyone hasn't got theirs or finds there's a mistake in the amount requested, just sent me an email...

As soon as all 21 orders are payed I'll order the methacrylate to start making the sets and shipping them...

Got my request today. Thanks again.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

PseudoPserious — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:49:50 +0000

by PseudoPserious

jhagen1908 wrote:
Terraforming Guild does it in style.

Jerry's idea is fairly low-luck.

Starting World: New Sparta
Initial Hand: Terraforming Guild, 2-mil windfall, XXX x2

It's realistic for NS to Settle / Trade on the first turn.

When he sees the dreaded ATS Settle / Produce, he now knows what he has to beat (28 VP in 4 more turns).

New Sparta has 8 actions left and 8 cards in hand (TG, XXX x7).

One of these must be a Develop. Let's give him one more Trade in order to find more cards, and say that he is lucky enough to always have at least one windfall he can Settle each turn (that's not excessive luck).

2: Develop / Settle
3: Settle / Trade (~9 cards in hand)
4: Settle / ???
5: Settle / ???

With fairly low VP worlds (mix of 2s and 1s), that's 20 VP -- 8 for worlds and 12 for the TG.

He needs 9 points with his last two actions. This is attainable with quite a few card combos. For example:
- Terraforming Robots (worth 6 - 2vp + 2 bonus + 2 vp chips) plus a 1-vp windfall
- SETI (at least 7) + any card worth 2 vp
- two of the better windfalls (base vp totalling 5 or more, or with powers that provide vp)
- Deficit Spending (worth 5 - 1 vp + 2 turns of 2 vp) plus a 2-vp windfall
- Two consumption worlds with base vp totalling 6 or more (leeching the other 3 points from the Consumes)

The key cards are Terraforming Guild and an initial military windfall. After that, all you really need are 5 windfalls in ~20 cards, plus cards worth an additional 9 points.

This isn't a guarantee, of course, but it's probably one of the more realistic scenarios to beat ATS/ELC.

Cheers,
PP

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

jhagen1908 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:02:42 +0000

by jhagen1908

Terraforming Guild does it in style.

Home World: New Sparta
Start with Terraforming Robots, Alien Robot Sentry, +2 cards
R1: Develop/Trade
Develop Terraforming Robots (-2 cards)
Settle Alien Robot Sentry, +1 card
Trade Alien good for +5 cards (one of which is Terraforming Guild)
End of turn: Terraforming Guild + 5 cards

R2: Explore+1/Develop
Explore(+2 cards)
Develop Terraforming Guild
End of turn: 2 cards

R3: Settle/Settle
Settle Aquatic Uplift Race, draw 3 cards
Settle Reptilian Uplift Race, draw 3 cards
End of turn: 6 cards

R4: Settle/Settle
Settle Last of the Uplift Gnarssh, draw 3 cards
Settle Avian Uplift Race, draw 3 cards
End of turn: 10 cards

R5: Develop/Settle
Develop Pan-Galactic League (-5 cards)
Settle Pilgrimage World, draw 3 cards
Consume 4 goods on Pilgrimage World for 3 VP

Tableau: New Sparta (1), Alien Robot Sentry (2), Aquatic Uplift Race (2), Reptilian Uplift Race (2), Last of the Uplift Gnarrsh (0), Avian Uplift Race (2), Pilgrimage World (2), Terraforming Guild (14), Pan-Galactic League (10) = 35+3=38 points.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

PseudoPserious — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:46:19 +0000

by PseudoPserious

This one is more realistic. I won't write out the entire script, but it achieves parity with the ATS at the end of Turn 2; all you need to do is find 1 more VP by the time the VP pool is depleted at the end of Turn 4.

Starting World: Doomed World
Hand: Galactic Trendsetters, Prosperious World, XXX, XXX

1) Settle / Settle
- Play Galactic Trendsetters (pay 0, discard DW, +1 card)
- Play Prosperous World (pay 3, +1 card)
- Hand: Any Production World costing 2 or less (let's say Spice World)

2) Explore / Settle
- +2 cards from Explore
- Play Spice World (pay 2, +1 card)
- +2 VP
(The score is now 8 to 8.)

3) Explore / Consume x2
- +2 cards from Explore
- +6 VP

4) XXX / Consume x2
- If you found something to play, do that for XXX. Otherwise, Explore or Produce.
- +6 VP

Final score: 20* to 20. Doomed World wins by the VPs played during Turn 4, or on the tiebreak due to the extra cards from Exploring.

Cheers,
PP

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

cosine — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:45:09 +0000

by cosine

5 prizes given away. 5 more to go.

For the big prize, remember the fewer unique cards you need to win, the better off you'll be... that's believability; not requiring a lot of luck to win.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

FunkCracker — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:30:30 +0000

by FunkCracker

How about an obnoxious Doomed World and Colony Ship combo:

(* = you call it)

Hand: Galactic Studios, Galactic Trendsetters, Colony Ship, Artist Colony
Tableau: Doomed World

Turn 1:
*Settle: Galactic Studios, discarding DW, gaining X
*Settle: Artist Colony, discarding X, gaining X
Produce: gain X from GS

VP: 4 (0 chips)
H: GT, CS, Xx2
T: GS, AC

Turn 2:
*Develop: Colony Ship, discarding X
*Settle: Galactic Trendsetters, discarding CS, gaining X
Consume: 3 VP, 1 card: X
Produce: gain 1 card: X

VP: 10 (3 chips)
H: Xx4
T: GS, AC, GT

Turn 3:
*Explore + 5: gain Galactic Renaissance
*Consume: 6 VP, 1 card: X
Produce: gain 1 card: X

VP: 16 (9 chips)
H: Galactic Renaissance, Xx6
T: GS, AC, GT

Turn 4:
*Develop: GR, discarding Xx5
*Consume: 6 VP, 1 card: X
Produce: 1 card: X

VP: 22 (15 chips) + GR:13 VP = 35
H: Xx3

Game ends on exhaustion of chips.

You: 35
ELC + ATS: 20

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available in UK

Philip Thomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:29:19 +0000

by Philip Thomas

Twenty one pounds and ninety-nine pence. A bit pricey for an expansion but seems worth it so far.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

PseudoPserious — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:27:55 +0000

by PseudoPserious

Here's an all-green script:

It wins 25-22 in the 4th round, and wins on the tie-break if the "1st to 5 VP chips" goal is available.

==========

Starting World: Ancient Race
Starting Hand: Contact Specialist, Avian Uplift Race, XXX

1) Develop / Consume Trade
-- Play CS and AUR
-- Receive 4 cards from Trade
-- Hand: Pan-Galactic League, Reptilian Uplift Race, XXX x2

2) Settle / Consume Trade
-- Play RUR (pay 1 / receive 1)
-- Receive 4 cards from Trade
-- Hand: Pan-Galactic League, Last of the Uplift Gnarssh, XXX x5

3) Develop / Settle
-- Play PGL (pay 5) and TLofUG (pay 0 / receive 1)
-- Receive 4 cards from Produce
-- Hand: Tourist World, XXX x 4

4) Settle / Consume x 2
-- Play Tourist World (pay 4 / receive 1)
-- + 6 VP; Receive 4 cards from Produce powers
-- Hand: XXX x5

Total score: 25 vs 22

Tableau: 8
Pan-Galactic League: 11
VP: 6

==========

Cheers,
PP

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

jediwashuu — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:22:00 +0000

by jediwashuu

thoughthammer put this up
"Please Note: Rio Grande Games has allocated the initial shipment of this game. We have not received enough to cover all pre-orders to date and but should be able to cover most of them. We apologize for this inconvenience. (Updated July 8, 2009)"

i preordered with them, but i dont know whether mine is allocated or if i am waiting :(

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

bcs_ — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:13:11 +0000

by bcs_

I set out to do this, and I was really worried about making every action count, and when I tallied scores up at the end I realized I way overdid it. :) Taken at face value, this script is unrealistic, but hopefully the large margin of victory demonstrates that you don't have to pull this off perfectly to win. Just getting better than half the cards out there will be enough to do it.

This is an Alien military victory. Starting position: New Sparta start world. 4 cards in hand: Alien Robot Sentry, Improved Logistics, 2 other cards

First turn: Develop, Consume/Trade. Discard the other 2 cards to play Improved Logistics. On Settle, play Alien Robot Sentry and draw one card as a bonus. On Consume/Trade, draw Alien Robot Scout Ship, Deserted Alien World, and three other cards. You now have six cards in hand. The opponent script now gets two extra VPs out of the Consume phase.

Second turn: Settle, Consume/Trade. Settle Deserted Alien World, discarding a card to pay for it, and then draw a card as a bonus. Use the Improved Logistics Settle power to also settle Alien Robot Scout Ship. Trade the new good to draw Lost Alien Warship, Alien Rosetta Stone World, and three other cards. Your hand now has eight cards total.

Third turn: Settle, Consume/Trade. Settle Alien Rosetta Stone World, discarding three cards to pay for it, and then draw a card as a bonus. Use the Improved Logistics Settle power to also settle Lost Alien Warship. Trade the new good to draw Lost Alien Battle Fleet, Alien Robotic Factory, and three other cards. Your hand now has nine cards total. For the Produce Phase, Alien Rosetta Stone World lets you produce an Alien good.

Fourth turn: Settle, Consume/Trade. Settle Lost Alien Battle Fleet and draw a card as a bonus. Use the Improved Logistics Settle power to also settle Alien Robotic Factory. Thanks to Deserted Alien World and Alien Rosetta Stone World, you only have to discard two cards to play it. Trade your good from the last Produce phase to draw Alien Tech Institute, Deserted Alien Library, Rebel Homeworld, and two other cards. You get to produce three Alien goods when the time comes. Your hand now has exactly ten cards total.

Fifth turn: Develop, Settle. Develop Alien Tech Institute and pay 5 cards for it. Settle Deserted Alien Library and Rebel Homeworld, thanks to Improved Logistics, your -6 Alien settle bonuses, and your +8 normal military. Draw a card as a bonus, bringing your hand to three total. You get to produce another Alien good on the Produce phase, bringing you to four total.

Total score: 36 in your normal tableau, plus Alien Tech Institute is worth another 20. You could be missing several of these, or even Alien Tech Institute itself, and still win handily. I know having -6 Alien settle bonuses seems unlikely, and strictly speaking it is, I've seen it happen more than once.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

TrojH — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:07:39 +0000

by TrojH

Mega military wins in a landslide.

Start world: Doomed World

Starting hand: Lost Species Ark World, Public Works, Space Marines, any 4th card

Turn 1: Call Develop/Develop. Develop Public Works (1 pt) for free. Develop Space Marines (1 pt), pay the 4th card, draw Improved Logistics.

On the opponent's Settle, settle Lost Species Ark World (3 pts), replacing Doomed World. On the opponent's Produce, LSAW produces a good, and two cards are drawn.

At this point, I have Improved Logistics and two irrelevant cards in hand.

Turn 2: Call Develop/Settle. Develop Improved Logistics (2 pts), toss the two irrelevant cards, draw New Sparta. Settle New Sparta (1 pt), draw Aquatic Uplift Race with the settle bonus, settle Aquatic Uplift Race (2 pts).

On the opponent's Consume, consume the good on LSAW for 1 point. On the opponent's Produce, LSAW produces a good; draw Alien Robot Scout Ship and Rebel Underground.

At this point: two cards in hand, 1 VP chip, and the military is at 4.

Turn 3: Call Settle/Settle. Settle Alien Robot Scout Ship (2 pts), draw Lost Alien Warship, settle Rebel Underground (4 pts). Second settle phase: settle Lost Alien Warship (3 pts), draw Rebel Colony, settle Rebel Colony (4 pts).

Good on LSAW gets consumed, as does one of the windfalls. LSAW produces, and 3 cards are drawn (the third comes from Rebel Underground). 2 VP chips this round; 3 total so far.

Turn 4: Call Settle/Settle. I have 4 settles available, and I settle Lost Alien Battle Fleet (4 pts), Rebel Outpost (5 pts), Rebel Base (6 pts), and Rebel Homeworld (7 pts). Three of those cards came from the last produce; one came from one of the settle bonuses.

Two goods are consumed for 2 points; everything else is irrelevant.

Game over; 14 cards in tableau. Total: 45 points from cards and 5 VP chips, for a total of 50. Poor ELC/ATS player ends at 20. Too bad.

I know, this military run is like winning the lottery. But the scenario didn't have to be realistic. ;)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

PseudoPserious — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:00:21 +0000

by PseudoPserious

Here's one:

It wins 28-22 in the 4th round. All it takes is a lucky draw of 6 cards, spaced at the right intervals.

==========

Starting World: Alpha Centauri
Starting Hand: Runaway Robots, Mining Conglomerate, and 2 random cards

1) Develop / Consume Trade
-- Play Mining Conglomerate and Runaway Robots
-- Receive 1 vp and 4 cards from Trade
-- 4 card hand: Mining Robots, Volcanic World, Rebel Fuel Cache, and XXX

2) Develop / Settle
-- Play Mining Robots and Volcanic World
-- Receive 1 card from Settle and 3 cards from Produce powers
-- Hand: Rebel Fuel Cache, Mining League, XXX, XXX, XXX

3) Settle / Consume x 2
-- Play Rebel Fuel Cache
-- +4 VP; Receive 1 card from Settle and 3 cards from Produce powers
-- Hand: Mining League, XXX x 7

4) Develop / Consume x 2
-- Play Mining League
-- + 8 VP; Receive 3 cards from Produce powers
-- Hand: XXX x5

Total score: 28 vs 22

Tableau: 6
Mining League: 9
VP: 13

==========

Bonus: The ATS is only eligible for the "First to 5 VP chip" goal (+3), which isn't enough to win. This script is eligible for "Most Rare/Novelty Worlds" and "First 6-Dev" goals (but doesn't need them).

Cheers,
PP

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

cosine — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:37:47 +0000

by cosine

Just for fun, here are two variants on the script. It would be neat to see solutions that beat these as well;

Variant script 1; Adding in Galactic Studios

1) Settle/Trade - 2 VPs, 6 cards in hand
2) Settle/Produce - 5vps, Put down Galactic Studios, leaving 2 cards in hand by the end of the turn
3) Consume * 2/Produce - 13 vps, max remaining pool is 16, at least 4 cards in hand
4) Consume * 2/Produce - 21 vps, max remaining pool is 8, at least 6 cards in hand
5) Consume * 2/Produce - 29 vps, max remaining pool is 0, at least 8 cards in hand

Note, with the extra cards in hand, it is likely that the script can leech another Settle or Develop for even more points. If you hit New Earth instead of Galactic Studios here, you get fewer cards, but there's a chance of hitting the "world of every color" goal.

Variant script 2; Adding in Galactic Renaissance

1) Settle/Trade - 2 VPs, 6 cards in hand
2) Develop/Produce - 2vps, Put down Galactic Renaissance, leaving 0 cards in hand
3) Consume * 2/Produce - 8 vps, max remaining pool is 18
4) Consume * 2/Produce - 14 vps, max remaining pool is 12
5) Consume * 2/Produce - 20 vps, max remaining pool is 6
6) Consume * 2/Produce - 26 vps, max remaining pool is 0 - final score 32 (24 / 3 = 8)

This situation is more tenuous as missing points may mess up the GR score, but this is about the best increase for a single card. Note, with the 6 cost development goal in play, this would be likely to get that.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

Benwa — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:28:18 +0000

by Benwa

I know i'm out of your conditions (i don't fight for GG, though i'd like to buy myself an avatar...) , but, if you're interested, i just actually played today a similar setting on the new RftG genie online site.

I started with Doomed world + in hand : Galactic Studios/Alien Toy Shop + 2 other cards.

turn 1 : Settle Galactic Studios (discard doomed) + Settle Toy Shop (discard the 2 cards of starting hand + the one from the first settle) - engine was set /// Oponent had AC so he traded the first turn - so my good on ATS was consumed for ===> 1VP+1 card

turn 2 : Explore (1/1) + Produce ===> 1VP + 4 cards (2 from explore, 1 from the first turn and one for produce on GS)

turn 3 : Consume + Produce ===> 7 VP + 6 cards

from there, I had the opportunity to settle on my opponents actions and to make this engine even better.

BTW i never did anything else than Consume + Porduce after turn 2.

Game ended on turn 5. We didnt play with goals (i don't like them in 2 players setting)

I think my setting was even better than yours because the Galactic Studios gives you 2 cards/turn (one for produce and one for consume), which enables you to leech on your opponent's other phases.

If you want to check what the end position was like, just follow the link : http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=3843 (maybe you'll have to register on genie game server, which is done in like 10 seconds...)

I advice you to read the commentaries at the bottom of this game page... My opponent was quite upset (though very fair-player)

File: Race for the Galaxy:: Player Aid - Card Symbols

BigMacRepair — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:24:14 +0000

by BigMacRepair

Player Aid - Card Symbols for Board Game: Race for the Galaxy ]]>

File: Race for the Galaxy:: Card List with symbols (fit in box)

BigMacRepair — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:10:07 +0000

by BigMacRepair

Card List with symbols (fit in box) for Board Game: Race for the Galaxy ]]>

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

cosine — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:09:05 +0000

by cosine

Sure. Use goals. Standard rules apply. Note that if the script gets a goal, it gets the points.

EDIT: Of course, if you can't win any way other than a perfect draw of goals, that isn't very interesting. But goals are a legit part of the game, so puzzle on sez I.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: Re: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

Zambo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:08:03 +0000

by Zambo

Can we use goals? :)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:04:14 +0000

by Philip Thomas

hibikir wrote:
Something that IMO makes Y lose a lot of value is the fact that it doesn't take into account the number of VPs that you can actually get in 12 cards.

I can't quite say about the relative value of the number in RvsI, but with just GS, some of the numbers seem 'off' as far as a card's VP potential. Look at Terraforming guild vs SETI. Most of the time, the guild will outscore SETI, and it will definitely get a higher VP value in a best case scenario. Why? The guild gets 2 points per card that it hits, while, for the most part, SETI only gets 1. So, even if it is more likely to see a SETI scoring card, the lower values per card make its huge Y advantage become a mirage. For the most part, in GS, it only produces more when there's more worlds out there that are not windfall, and that will more commonly occur in a production strategy, which will most likely not hit 12 cards to begin with. On an aggressive card laying strategy that plays 12+ cards, the chances of windfall being near 50% of all worlds are quite high, making the two cards, at worst, equivalent in their VP creation power alone

As I observed in my 3rd paragaph of the OP, yes. High average point value per card that scores something is good, and not measured by Y.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: General:: A puzzle for a GeekGold prize - Beat ELC + ATS any way you like

cosine — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:55:34 +0000

by cosine

Here is a script for a 2 player advanced game. Give an answering script that finishes the game with more points than this script.

The script will not change no matter what you do. You cannot use in your answer any card that appears in the script, but you may use any card in any order you like. Yup, that's right, you can pick everything from the entire deck face up in any order you want, start any world or opening hand you want. You may end the game sooner if you like, which may adjust the script's final score down if necessary. The script will never put another card in play, no matter what you do.

The first 10 meaningfully different answers will get 2GG each, 7GG extra to the best of the first 10 answers. What is a meaningfully different answer? I'll be the judge of that. What is best? I'll be the judge of that too; creativity and believability matter.

The Script

The opponent starts with Earth's Lost Colony and Alien Toy Shop and 3 random cards in hand.

1) Settle/Produce - 2 VPs, 1 card in hand (We will assume they never use it. It doesn't matter what it is.)
2) Consume * 2/Produce - 8 vps, max points remaining in the pool is 18
3) Consume * 2/Produce - 14 vps, max remaining pool is 12
4) Consume * 2/Produce - 20 vps, max remaining pool is 6
5) Consume * 2/Produce - 26 vps, max remaining pool is 0 - Game ends.

Why are you doing this, cosine?

Some friends are disappointed with Alien Toy Shop currently; they think it is too good. So, I'd like a thread reference from other people showing examples of how to beat a basic ATS game. Is this the best that ATS can do? Perhaps not, but this is what this game is, for better or for worse. Suggesting Settle/Trade as a first action for the script opens a can of worms I'll deal with later, outside the context of this puzzle.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Pellbort — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:46:46 +0000

by Pellbort

Are you willing to relocate to Scranton? I hear good things about Dunder Mifflin...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

elfrododumbo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:29:13 +0000

by elfrododumbo

So, first expansion would allow me to play solo ? But, I would still need the base game.
Wow ! Not exactly cheap :(

Thanks, Robert. I would have made a blunder if you had not clarified what is needed for a solo variant.

Regards.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

InfoCynic — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:25:48 +0000

by InfoCynic

I think you're right that they're separate unless you're using IL to grab a second world. Of course now I'm starting to think about really evil cases where you snag a production world using RvI cards... I think it won't be an issue as long as it's clear:

2pAdv: 2x dev or 2x settle are separate phases
IL: same settle phase as first world (in case you have multiple settle phases from 2pAdv)
Conquer powers: remember not to check/update goals until the end of the phase, after all players have used conquer powers or placed a world, including possible improved logistics settles/conquers.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

hibikir — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:18:26 +0000

by hibikir

Something that IMO makes Y lose a lot of value is the fact that it doesn't take into account the number of VPs that you can actually get in 12 cards.

I can't quite say about the relative value of the number in RvsI, but with just GS, some of the numbers seem 'off' as far as a card's VP potential. Look at Terraforming guild vs SETI. Most of the time, the guild will outscore SETI, and it will definitely get a higher VP value in a best case scenario. Why? The guild gets 2 points per card that it hits, while, for the most part, SETI only gets 1. So, even if it is more likely to see a SETI scoring card, the lower values per card make its huge Y advantage become a mirage. For the most part, in GS, it only produces more when there's more worlds out there that are not windfall, and that will more commonly occur in a production strategy, which will most likely not hit 12 cards to begin with. On an aggressive card laying strategy that plays 12+ cards, the chances of windfall being near 50% of all worlds are quite high, making the two cards, at worst, equivalent in their VP creation power alone

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

kusinohki — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:25:55 +0000

by kusinohki

InfoCynic wrote:
In 2-player advanced, if one player calls 2x develop or 2x settle, are these considered separate phases?

Scenario:
4+ production worlds is out

Player A: Has 2
Player B: Has 3

Player B calls 2x settle

Both play a production world. (B now meets the goal)
During second settle, only Player A plays one. (A now meets the goal)

Assuming nothing changes before the end of the game, it's clear that Player A gets 3 points, but does Player B get 5 or only 3?

They are considered separate phases, so B should get the goal card after the first settle and keeps it when A matches on the 2nd. Thus, B gets 5 points, A gets 3.

Improved logistics throws a monkey wrench in to the works though. Playing 2 worlds through IL is still considered one phase. To take the above example. B and A both play a world with B meeting the goals requirements and A 1 short. A then uses IL to play a 2nd world (which B can't do) and now ties B and meets the goal requirements. Since this was all the same phase, the goal card should stay on the table and both players get 3 pts if nothing changes. I'd ask Tom or Wei to confirm this though.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

nazdr3g — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:20:55 +0000

by nazdr3g

meh I dont need solitare, there are always opponents on. I don't have an issue finding moves to make, but then again I usually have 3-5 2p adv and 2-3 4p games running simultaneously

when are we going to see the rebel vs imperium cards? even if the takeover mechanic is not enabeled right away, it would be a nice change :)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

entranced — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:20:14 +0000

by entranced

InfoCynic wrote:
In 2-player advanced, if one player calls 2x develop or 2x settle, are these considered separate phases?

Yes.

InfoCynic wrote:
Assuming nothing changes before the end of the game, it's clear that Player A gets 3 points, but does Player B get 5 or only 3?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:11:56 +0000

by Philip Thomas

Broadly Speaking, Genes Worlds and Military Worlds have higher X values, if you are looking for a guide. Rebel Worlds are even better (but perhaps risky if playing with conquests).

With that in mind lets turn to the new cards. Starting with the 6-devs, we can now turn to Pan-Galactic Research, the fixed value 6-Dev. While it doesn't allow you to claim the 6-dev goal, it does count for Galactic Federation. It also benefits from Seti. And that is it. It has an X value of 4. Of course, it has pretty good abilities which compensate for that.

Turning to Prospecting Guild, this benefits from Seti, Trade League and New Economy, giving an X value of 8. Its Y value is also high so this is a good points card. Imperium Seat and Galactic Exchange have X value 5, Galactic Bankers 4 and Rebel Alliance and Uplift Code 3. Uplift Code also has a low Y value. (I do not count any points towards X value for 6-devs that score for themselves, which I see as the equivalent of the fixed points value for other cards. If you do count those points towards X value Imperium Seat goes up to 7 and Galactic Bankers and Rebel Alliance go up to 5, with the others unchanged).

There are 4 new Blue Worlds in R vs I, all low cost or low military. 2 are Military Worlds, with X values of 14- one is a Rebel (Primitive Rebel Race) and the other an Uplift world (Devolved Uplift Race.. The two non-militart worlds have X values of 7 (Dying Colony) and 8 (Smuggling World). The latter gives a bonus when settling other blue worlds.

There are also 4 new Brown Worlds, but at rather higher cost. The cheapest, at 2 Military is Rebel Convict Mines, which at 15 is slightly behind its close relative Rebel Miners from the base game (16). Then we have 3 non-military Worlds. Gem Smugglers, which gives a bonus when settling other Brown Worlds and clocks in at 8, Interstellar Prospectors, which produces on itself and a Windfall at 9. Finally the mighty Imperium Blaster Gem Consortium, with one of the best Consumer abiltiies in the game and +1 military to boot, is worth 14, a very high value for a non-military world.

3 new Genes World: Insect Uplift Race which is identical to all the other Uplift Races except for its name and so scores 15; Universal Symbionts which produces on another Genes Windfall World and is worth a respectable 10, and Gene Designers, a non-military World costing 6 with a great Consume ability which also scores 10.

3 new Alien Windfalls/Producers. Alien Uplift Centre gets a healthy 14 with its two key words and Military status (But no Chromosome symbol so 2 from Uplift Code not 3) and has a bonus to settle Genes Worlds.
Alien Data Repository is a non-military producer with cost 7 and an explore power, the new mix and match. It scores 9. Alien Monolith, an 8 defence 8 points windfall, is worth 11.

Turning to non-coloured Worlds, we have 3 Cost 1 and 1 defence 1 Worlds, the military world being Blaster Runners, which gives +1 military, making it the first link in the chain through Penal Colony up to Rebel Outpost, and scoring 8. The new Gambling World is worth only 6 even with the specific points for it from Galactic Bankers. Trading Outpost is a bit like Export Duties, and both have X=4. Abandoned Alien Uplift Camp is 7, (Again no Chromosome Symbol), the 2 keywords again signalling a bonus to settle Green Worlds.

There are 3 Cost 2 Worlds, all Home Worlds. Rebel Cantina would be worth a lot more if it was a military world (but then it would be vulnerable to takeover), as it is its worth 4. Imperium Warlord scores highest of the 3 at 8, with Galactic Developers lowest on 3.

The Worlds conclude with two high defense Military Worlds, Rebel Stronghold (11), and Hiddden Fortress. Hidden Fortress's X value is slightly tricky. Ignoring New Galactic Order it is worth 6, but as its bonus to military is keyed to the number of military worlds it could be worth anything from 1 to 14 bonus VPs with NGO (Hidden Fortress increases your max Tableau size by 1, and you could be tableau size 13 and settle a military world and develop NGO in the last turn.

Turnng too Developments, Rebel Pact is a specialised development for settling non-military worlds and defending against conquests. It also has an Explore ability which with the Rebel keyword makes 5. Imperium Troops is akin to Space Mercenaries, giving 1 base military and another in specialised situations (here vs Rebel Worlds). The Imperium tag makes its X value 7 to Space Mercenaries' 3.

Galactic Adversters have a Development Bonus and a Trade Bonus, which gives a relatively high X value of 6.Imperium Cloaking Technology, which can be discarded from tableau to get another world (in 2 different ways) also has X value 6- with both Imperium Lords and Imperium Seat out you might not want to discard the Cloaking Technology...

Mercenary Fleet, a bigger and better Space Mercenaries, and Galactic Salon, which gives a VP during Consume without bothering with Cards or Goods, clock in at 4, along with R&D Crash Programme, a sort of Colony Ship for Developments (Colony Ship is worth 2 though- R&D also has a Consume ability while you wait).

Finally a special mention to the third copy of Research Labs, which versatile tech now has X value 8.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

InfoCynic — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:25:57 +0000

by InfoCynic

In 2-player advanced, if one player calls 2x develop or 2x settle, are these considered separate phases?

Scenario:
4+ production worlds is out

Player A: Has 2
Player B: Has 3

Player B calls 2x settle

Both play a production world. (B now meets the goal)
During second settle, only Player A plays one. (A now meets the goal)

Assuming nothing changes before the end of the game, it's clear that Player A gets 3 points, but does Player B get 5 or only 3?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

AndersGabrielsson — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:29:44 +0000

by AndersGabrielsson

I think X is much more useful than Y.

With the 6-devs, you rarely decide to play them without clear information about what strategy to follow. Very rarely will someone play a 6-dev without at least one or two cards that fit it (unless it has some very juicy powers that complement your strategy otherwise).

With the worlds choices are usually much more open. In the early game and mid-game I find that I often pick which world to play based on how many cards I can afford to spend (assuming they fit approximately equally into my strategy and the choice doesn't have heavy impact on the goals in play), but if I knew their X values I could make better estimations of their future point value.

Of course, the X is no substitute for detailed knowledge of the 6-dev cards themselves, but I'm not competitive enough (nor do I have the memory required) to keep all that in mind.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Neil Thomson — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:11:41 +0000

by Neil Thomson

Blind Reality wrote:
Neil Thomson wrote:
Classic Geek Thread we've got here. Great stuff Richard. :D

I was worried back on page one, but by page 3 I feel good again.

Well I sell paper for a living so I should know. Well at least I sold paper until today, when I got fired! :( Seems there really is a crisis after all.

Ah man that sucks. Hope you find something to bounce back into quickly.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:52:18 +0000

by Philip Thomas

Y is indeed flawed. So is X, to which I now turn.
X is the sum of what a card is worth extra with each 6-Dev. In a sense it measures what a card is likely to be worth when paired with a random 6-Dev, and as such also vulnerable to the criticism that RftG is not played at random. X does not included the fixed points value of the card.

In the case of Galactic exchange, I have abitrarily assigned a value of 1 to each coloured World. The actual value of playing a coloured world for Galactic Exchange would range from 0 to 4, but 0 is a good deal more common than the higher values, so 1 seems about right.

In the original game, certain attributes attracted a high X value. Being a Production World was very good, attracting from 5-6 points just by virtue of Seti, being a Production Worlld and its colour. Windfalls were slightly less good, at 2-3 points just by virtue of Seti, being a Windfall and their colour. Military Worlds had at least 3 points. A non-coloured non-military world was worth 1 point from Seti and maybe an extra point for any explore, trade or consume powers. 6-developments in themselves were worth 2 for Galactic Federations and possibly more from themselves. The Alien and Rebel Keywords were valuable, as was military strength and a number of specific cards.Just about the best X value in the entire deck was Lost Alien Battlefleet with a stonking 11. Poor X-values were attached to Developments without explore, trade or consume powers, such as Investment Credits, Interstellar Bank and Replicant Robots which all had X value 1.

Enter the Gathering Storm. Suddenly Windfalls were almost as good as Production Worlds (blue, brown and Yellow windfalls scoring slightly less on their colour-specific 6-dev), Gene Worlds got a 2 point boost, and Military Worlds a further 1 point boost. The small number of Terraforming and Imperium Cards also benefited. Lost Alien Battlefleet still had the highest X value, at 12, but was being caught up by Rebel Warrior Race, on 11 and much easier to get into play. The typical Uplift Race was worth 9.

With the new expansion, every card in the deck has X value increased by at least 1- Worlds from Prospecting Guild and Developments from Galactic Bankers. On the basis I explained above, all Production and Windfall Worlds gain 1 point from Galactic Exchange (and Diversified Economy gains 3 points of course). Prospecting Guild gives a further 1 point boost to Brown Worlds (2 points per Brown world as opposed to 1 per normal world).

Rebel Alliance gives 1 point for military worlds, the 4th 6-Development to do so (No 6-development gives any bonus for non-military worlds as such). Rebel Alliance also gives 2 points per Rebel Card, and Imperium Seat gives 2 points per Rebel Military World, so Rebel Military Worlds get a big boos in this expansion, possibly reflecting their new vulnerability to conquest. A further boost for Imperium cards from Imperium Seat, possibly reflecting the new dangers of having one in your tableau. Terraforming cards are further boosted by Prospecting Guild for no very good reason.

Turning to the Uplift Code, a juicy 3 points per Uplift card with the Chromosome Symbol: that is all the Uplift cards in the first 2 expansions. You remember an Uplift Card in Gathering Storm had an X Value of 9? In RvsI his X value is increased by 1 for Prospecting Guild, 1 for Galactic Exchange, 1 for Rebel Alliance and 3 for Uplift Code to a total of 15, the same as Lost Alien Battlefleet. The top slot however goes to Rebel Warrior Race at 17.

Again comments welcome. Will have a look at some of the new cards' X values in a later post.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Replacement Victory Points - Any Interest? PART II

maka — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:45:22 +0000

by maka

I sent all the paypal requests. If anyone hasn't got theirs or finds there's a mistake in the amount requested, just sent me an email...

As soon as all 21 orders are payed I'll order the methacrylate to start making the sets and shipping them...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Blind Reality — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:39:00 +0000

by Blind Reality

Neil Thomson wrote:
Classic Geek Thread we've got here. Great stuff Richard. :D

I was worried back on page one, but by page 3 I feel good again.

Well I sell paper for a living so I should know. Well at least I sold paper until today, when I got fired! :( Seems there really is a crisis after all.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

AndersGabrielsson — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:37:50 +0000

by AndersGabrielsson

NOTE: These are just some random thoughts that are not meant as criticism of the OP's work or anyone's opinions. Take it for what it is: the random blatherings of some dude on the Internet.

For most of the 6-devs, the Y metric is basically a measure of "how many points does this dev get from a random card". (It doesn't work for Galactic Exchange and probably a couple of others, but for the purpose of this discussion it's close enough.) It's an interesting value to begin the discussion, but I think that ultimately it doesn't help that much with judging a card's value since the cards in your tableau isn't random (assuming a reasonable player) with the notable exception of when it is drawn very late in the game, but by then it doesn't really matter how good it is in general since it's just a question of counting up the points it will give you right then.

I don't think assuming an ideal tableau is a good measure either, since some cards are much more likely to achieve that than others (Galactic Exchange vs. Galactic Renaissance, for example).

Factoring in the costs of the scored cards is definitely a step in the right direction.

I think a good metric that could be realized with a bit of work* would be to approximate the number of points a specific 6-dev can gain per turn, with reasonable assumptions on number of new cards drawn, preferably relating these to the cost of the cards as well.

For example, assuming a player on average draws three new cards per turn (just a wild guess - someone who's played more should be able to make a better one) one could estimate the average number of points a specific 6-dev brings in by calculating the odds for each point-level of card being among those drawn. I think that with properly formatted input one could purely mechanically calculate these numbers for varying number of cards drawn.

This would likely reveal that some 6-devs are very likely to bring in some points even with very few cards drawn but not gaining much from drawing more cards (SETI) while others will function much better when drawing many cards while being hampered by a more limited drawing capability (Alien Tech Institute).

Another problem is that some cards are much easier to play late in the game. For example, you can't play the Alien Monolith on your first turn, but for a player who invests heavily in alien and military it can be played in the mid-game and most military tableaus should be able to play it (perhaps at the cost of a few discarded cards) near the end. However, I think this goes beyond what can reasonably easily be mechanically calculated and moves into the realm of subjective modifications of the hard numbers.

* in the sense "quite a lot of work, probably more than one wants to do without getting paid or being really into it"

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Yargo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:26:16 +0000

by Yargo

BoardsAndBits wrote:
Rebel will arrive here on Friday, the 10th, but not in time for us to ship anything out. So orders waiting on Rebel will ship on Monday, the 13th.

Yay! Thanks for the update Tom!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:06:10 +0000

by Philip Thomas

Ursus Corvus Lapis wrote:
If you assume a virtual tableau of all cards, Hidden Fortress should have a military strength equal to the total number of military worlds, shouldn't it?

Which only emphasizes the principal flaw of the 'tableau of all cards' approach. How about creating the theoretically possible tableau for each card where it scores best? That tableau would usually be of size 13 - basically the 6-cost card in question plus one world (since your starting world could have been Doomed World, this may be a non-starting world) and 11 arbitrary other cards - and if the tableau contains hidden fortress, even two more.

Way more difficult to calculate, but also more fun... and of course, now luck is overemphasized - and the cost is still no factored in. But I think it still gives you a better impression.

Yes, Hidden Fortress should have a value equal to the total number of military worlds. I fudged it because I'm also measuring X, which is the number of bonus points a given card is worth if it and all the 6-devs are in your tableau and nothing else. In those circumstances, Hidden Fortress is worth only 1 bonus VP from New Galactic Order. Calling it at 3 Vps is probably too low though.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Neil Thomson — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:02:29 +0000

by Neil Thomson

Blind Reality wrote:
Since all the reports seem to focus on the new cards being more bendable, could it be that the grain direction of the paper the cards were printed on was reversed? If that's the case they should be harder to bend along the other edge than base cards.

Look at the image. If the cards have parallel grain direction they should be easier to bend along the long side. If they have cross grain direction they should be easier to bend along the short side.

Classic Geek Thread we've got here. Great stuff Richard. :D

I was worried back on page one, but by page 3 I feel good again.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Blind Reality — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:52:08 +0000

by Blind Reality

Since all the reports seem to focus on the new cards being more bendable, could it be that the grain direction of the paper the cards were printed on was reversed? If that's the case they should be harder to bend along the other edge than base cards.

Look at the image. If the cards have parallel grain direction they should be easier to bend along the long side. If they have cross grain direction they should be easier to bend along the short side.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:49:38 +0000

by entranced

Starting hands have been selected.

See your respective team's geeklist for Turn 1 phase choice.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Aubigny — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:34:13 +0000

by Aubigny

bsushort wrote:
Even still, I'd imagine that 0.03 grams could easily just be the grime and oil that has accumulated on the cards over the course of a year or two of play.

Let's quote myself:

aubigny wrote:
This has nothing to do with the age of the cards. My test yesterday included only new cards.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

bsushort — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:20:12 +0000

by bsushort

Aubigny wrote:
byronczimmer wrote:
Get equal numbers of old and new cards and weigh them on a scale.

German cards, but they should weigh the same as English ones:

32 new base game cards weigh 55.64 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new first expansion cards weigh 55.59 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new second expansion cards weigh 54.68 grams (1 card = 1.71 grams).

If you bend a single card it's possible to distinguish the cards from the second expansion from the other cards (if you're trained). For me it's not possible to feel a difference in normal game play.

As a comparison where I can cleary feel the difference:
Catan card game, older German editions, 32 cards: 55.23 grams (1 card = 1.73 grams).
Catan card game, newer German editions, 32 cards: 51.36 grams (1 card = 1.61 grams).

Even still, I'd imagine that 0.03 grams could easily just be the grime and oil that has accumulated on the cards over the course of a year or two of play. I don't have mine yet, so I haven't seen for myself. But I play unsleeved, so the wear and tear is going to be more distinguishing that any tiny weight variance could be (at least until we start to wear the new ones out as well).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

flapjackmachine — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 06:01:02 +0000

by flapjackmachine

entranced wrote:
elfrododumbo wrote:

I am eager to get this game, but I think that it will not work as a solo :(

The solo game is quite elaborate and does work well imo.

If you have the first expansion Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm which has rules and components (markers, special dice, playboard) for a solo game. The base game doesn't include solo rules.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Competing Mining Conglomerate

pussykatz — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:37:19 +0000

by pussykatz

Yeah, I was hoping for something like the "most" goals, i.e. when two players are competing for it and neither gets it definitively, they both still get 3VP goal chips at the end, just not the full 5.

I was hoping that perhaps if two MineCongs are tied and everybody else produced strictly less that maybe they each get only 1 card or something.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Learithe — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:26:31 +0000

by Learithe

Mine was scheduled to arrive in the store on Friday, but it actually arrived this afternoon!!! :ninja:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Neil Thomson — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:03:49 +0000

by Neil Thomson

Got mine today. House painting may see it unplayed till next week though...:shake:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

ScottE — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:55:27 +0000

by ScottE

Hope I got my order in to Boards & Bits early enough. I was waiting for my gaming group to give me their final orders so delayed until tonight and hope I didn't miss the window.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:44:04 +0000

by entranced

rrenaud wrote:
Gambling world is now present in the deck, but it doesn't actually do any gambling.

A general FYI, i contacted the developer, and he says this now:

"Gambling world sneaked in by misktake. It's gone from the deck again."

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Competing Mining Conglomerate

MasterDinadan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:25:11 +0000

by MasterDinadan

If someone else produced the same number of brown goods as you, you can't invoke Mining Conglomerates produce power. It doesn't matter whether they also have one or not. You can't do it unless you are single-handedly produced the most brown goods.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Competing Mining Conglomerate

pussykatz — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:26:42 +0000

by pussykatz

Yep, that's what the words say. I'm just wondering if there are further clarification/correction to it.

For example, the way I understood it, the wording on Diversified Economy can be improved (e.g. it's better to word it "for each kind of good you produced SO FAR this phase", in case you want to invoke it early to pay for Damaged Alien Factory, whose good no longer qualify for DivEc since that power would've been already invoked).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Competing Mining Conglomerate

rrenaud — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 03:08:10 +0000

by rrenaud

No, they both canceled each other out, neither produced more than every other player.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Competing Mining Conglomerate

pussykatz — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:57:53 +0000

by pussykatz

If two players both have MC, and they both produced the highest number of brown goods during V with other players producing strictly less, do neither get the +2 cards bonus?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

entranced — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:48:02 +0000

by entranced

elfrododumbo wrote:

I am eager to get this game, but I think that it will not work as a solo :(

The solo game is quite elaborate and does work well imo.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

elfrododumbo — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:34:49 +0000

by elfrododumbo

I am eager to get this game, but I think that it will not work as a solo :(

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

red turtle — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:53:48 +0000

by red turtle

good luck everyone.
Thanks for doing this Serge...
In the words of Tom Vasel... fun fun fun fun fun...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

entranced — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:47:03 +0000

by entranced

Yet another obscure rule we were evidently doing wrong for the longest time. Luckily it comes up very rarely, maybe once per 100 games.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available in UK

sir_tonyx — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:35:34 +0000

by sir_tonyx

wow, I know the store, picked up my copy of Robo Rally when I was over in London. I have a friend coming over from London in a month. how much did you pay for it?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

crushedguava — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:10:00 +0000

by crushedguava

I agree.

Not an issue for me as well.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

kusinohki — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:54:46 +0000

by kusinohki

Ursus Corvus Lapis wrote:
If you assume a virtual tableau of all cards, Hidden Fortress should have a military strength equal to the total number of military worlds, shouldn't it?

I found that a bit odd as well. Especially considering every world in the deck counts for Seti. Setting the hidden fortress military equal to every military world seems more consistent. I don't particularly agree with the metric, but I understand the OP was going after something simple.

To go 'hardcore', some metric like the ideal 12-14 card tableau (14 for improved logistics) divided by total cost might work. The next step after that might have to include card ordering if there are any discount powers. If all this wasn't ridiculous enough, I'll throw out taking into account a time factor. The number of turns it would take to acquire the cards to pay for everything.

Ow, I have a headache now.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:47:09 +0000

by entranced

For the earlybirds that missed it:

Starting hands, worlds and goals have been dealt.

See your respective team's geeklist for starting hand decisions.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Ursus Corvus Lapis — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:06:43 +0000

by Ursus Corvus Lapis

If you assume a virtual tableau of all cards, Hidden Fortress should have a military strength equal to the total number of military worlds, shouldn't it?

Which only emphasizes the principal flaw of the 'tableau of all cards' approach. How about creating the theoretically possible tableau for each card where it scores best? That tableau would usually be of size 13 - basically the 6-cost card in question plus one world (since your starting world could have been Doomed World, this may be a non-starting world) and 11 arbitrary other cards - and if the tableau contains hidden fortress, even two more.

Way more difficult to calculate, but also more fun... and of course, now luck is overemphasized - and the cost is still no factored in. But I think it still gives you a better impression.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

Tom Lehmann — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:52:56 +0000

by Tom Lehmann

Yes. Second example, page 3, TGS rules (given above).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:51:14 +0000

by entranced

morningstar wrote:
Is it necessary to use the genie site to play, or will all information be on the geeklists? One thing I can't find now is the start worlds.

It is necessary to use the genie site in order to see the current game state as it changes. Start worlds and goals are currently visible there. The game's link can be found in the top post in your teams's geeklist, or here it is directly:

http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=3514

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

tool — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:38:33 +0000

by tool

What if A has 4 and takes the goal. Then B and C both go to 5 while A stays at 4. Does the goal now go back into the center?

Yes, in accordance with the rule

If more than one player satisfies or exceeds a goal (possibly held by another player) by the same greatest amount, then that goal remains unclaimed (or is returned to the center).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

Eric Brosius — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:29:04 +0000

by Eric Brosius

What if A has 4 and takes the goal. Then B and C both go to 5 while A stays at 4. Does the goal now go back into the center?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

InfoCynic — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 22:12:54 +0000

by InfoCynic

Thanks, Tom. FWIW that's how I thought it worked but like I said, I ran into someone who disagreed. :D

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

scwont — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:47:02 +0000

by scwont

Philip, thanks for posting this - I've been tracking the same information in a spreadsheet and have been meaning to post a similar overview, so you've saved me some effort ;)

Looking forward to the 'X' values - the new leader (by my reckoning) has been hugely favoured by the 6-devs in both expansions!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Reviews:: Re: Choose Your Own Adventure review of Race for the Galaxy

gren doogan — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:32:45 +0000

by gren doogan

yeah but saying it's recursive isn't as cool. despite your cool face thingy there.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:23:13 +0000

by ackmondual

rrenaud wrote:
It's all the way on the right, it's the 14th card I placed.

I could've sworn the horizontal scroll bar wasn't there before. THx

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

overtheboard — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:02:45 +0000

by overtheboard

Funagain now says it will be available July 10.

http://www.funagain.com/control/product/~product_id=020072

Hope they got enough for preorders, I only got mine in about 2 weeks ago.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Sessions:: Re: Rather amusing tableau with eight(!) 6-devs

jullevi — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:59:51 +0000

by jullevi

TrojH wrote:
I have just one question for Hannu:

Did you win? :D

Seems like an obvious yes, but given how crazy the game is now, one can never be sure.

Yes, I did :D. It was a 4-player game. Although I remember losing a 4-player game with 48 points and the highest non-winning score I can remember is 63-ish.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: Card sleeves?

Bobby4th — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:37:57 +0000

by Bobby4th

joshp wrote:
I remember when I was a MTG player, I used sleeves with a pebbly kind of texture that I really liked. Don't remember the brand. Can anyone help me out? It's impossible to tell the texture of the cards on a website.

The Ultra Pro standard solid colors have a textured back. I was using them until I decided that I no longer wanted to use card sleeves for RftG because the deck was too thick.

The URL is:

http://www.ultrapro.com/page.php?pname=gaming/deck_protector...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Sessions:: Re: Rather amusing tableau with eight(!) 6-devs

TrojH — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:36:43 +0000

by TrojH

I have just one question for Hannu:

Did you win? :D

Seems like an obvious yes, but given how crazy the game is now, one can never be sure.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

onigame — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:24:03 +0000

by onigame

One problem with this metric is that it doesn't factor in the cost of the cards that work with that 6-dev. ATI may overtake ML but those Alien Worlds are much more expensive. Galactic Bankers vs. Galactic Federation has a similar issue.

Philip Thomas wrote:

Galactic Renaissance 9,9,9: The card gets worse relative to the others as the increased deck size makes it less likely to find the 3 cards it scores for.

Technically, 4 cards, although you can only bring out 3 of them.

New Galactic Order: 16, 18, 29: Includes an abitrary value of 3 for Hidden Fortress.

If you have New Galactic Order, Hidden Fortress, and only two other military worlds, something is seriously wrong with your strategy.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: Card sleeves?

joshp — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:19:38 +0000

by joshp

I remember when I was a MTG player, I used sleeves with a pebbly kind of texture that I really liked. Don't remember the brand. Can anyone help me out? It's impossible to tell the texture of the cards on a website.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Marty S — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:15:17 +0000

by Marty S

Just got an email from my FLGS saying he would have SOME copies in on Friday, but he did not get the full number that he had ordered ; supply is expected to be tight til August. Luckily I had reserved one . So if you didn't reserve one at your FLGS, you might want to call, since it will probably quickly sell through and then there will be a dry spell til the reprint arrives.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Discarding and then settling DoomedW in same turn with ImproLog (and super luck!)

onigame — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:10:16 +0000

by onigame

Yes. Note that doing it in the reverse order (settling Doomed World for your first settle, then discarding it to pay for the second world) is not allowed because powers on a card have no effect on the phase in which it appears.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:50:34 +0000

by ackmondual

Here are the rules concerning this. I need to get back to this later, but am curious to see how to resolve this. In the meantime, you guys can hash it out

From the rulebook

“Most” goals: each of these tiles is worth 5 VPs and is held by the player who satisfies its condition by the greatest amount. Th ey can be lost. Th e first player to satisfy (or exceed by the greatest amount) a goal’s listed condition at the end of a phase claims its tile returning it to the center if he ever fails to satisfy its condition). If another player later exceeds the amount by which a player holding a goal currently satisfi es it, then he takes the tile.

Example: Alan plays a card that brings his Military in tableau to 6, which satisfies the Greatest Military goal’s condition, so he claims its tile. (If Alan later placed a -1 Military card, reducing his Military below 6, he would return it.) Betty later obtains 6 Military, but since this doesn’t exceed Alan’s total of 6, Alan retains this goal. Carol then reaches 7 Military and takes this goal tile from Alan.

If more than one player satisfi es or exceeds a goal (possibly held by another player) by the same greatest amount, then that goal remains unclaimed (or is returned to the center).

Example: Alan and Betty both reach 6 Military during the same phase. Neither can claim the Greatest Military goal. Carol then reaches 7 Military and claims it. Alan and Betty later both achieve 8 Military on the same phase, so Carol then returns this goal to the center.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

rrenaud — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:50:27 +0000

by rrenaud

It's all the way on the right, it's the 14th card I placed.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

Tom Lehmann — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:29:18 +0000

by Tom Lehmann

A continues to retain the goal. Emphasis added below.

*Another* player (B) has not exceeded the amount by which A *currently* satisfies it (see last sentence of first paragraph of Most Goals).

*Another* pair (or more) of players (B + ???) have not exceeded the amount by which A *currently* satisfies it by the same greatest amount (which is what would shift the goal from A to the center).

Gláucio Reis' answer is correct. Thanks.

The OP's parse breaking up the rule cited is not correctly matching the non-parenthetical and parenthetical clauses:

... [unclaimed] goal ... -> ... remains unclaimed ...
(... held by *another* player ... ) -> (... is returned to the center... )

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:29:01 +0000

by ackmondual

rrenaud wrote:
I believe Gambling world is now present in the deck, but it doesn't actually do any gambling.

http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=3440

?? Is Gambling World supposed to be on someone's tableau? I dont' see the card anywhere?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

morningstar — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:25:54 +0000

by morningstar

Hi, I joined the yellow team.

Is it necessary to use the genie site to play, or will all information be on the geeklists? One thing I can't find now is the start worlds.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

InfoCynic — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:25:49 +0000

by InfoCynic

Barticus88 wrote:
InfoCynic wrote:
And we can all argue personal interpretations until the sun sets. Where's the designers? :D

Amazingly they often go several hours at a time without logging into BGG,

Heresy! :devil:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:00:47 +0000

by Philip Thomas

rrenaud wrote:
How about some subjective statements about the 6 devs?

Free Trade Association and Galactic Renaissance are going from powerhouses in the base game to just full of uber suck in Rebel Vs Imperium and they are bringing Earth's Lost Colony down with them :P.

Your Y value drastically underrates the Galactic Exchange, which is quite easy to put down for 10 points. You could reasonably easily fix the Y value by say, forcing a tableau size of 12 by dividing by the appropriate constant.

Galactic Renaissance, yeah. Free Trade Association is a typical monocolour card, scoring comparably with Mining League, Alien Tech Institute and Galactic Genome Project.

Yes, Galactic Exchange is underrated. Instead of dividing all the other values by a constant we could multiply its value by the same constant, excluding the points for Diversified Economy.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

DKahnt — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:57:24 +0000

by DKahnt

Thanks Tom (and everyone).

I know there are discrepancies about release date v. available date and I appreciate you taking your time to answer my forum post.

-DK

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

rrenaud — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:45:29 +0000

by rrenaud

How about some subjective statements about the 6 devs?

Free Trade Association and Galactic Renaissance are going from powerhouses in the base game to just full of uber suck in Rebel Vs Imperium and they are bringing Earth's Lost Colony down with them :P.

Your Y value drastically underrates the Galactic Exchange, which is quite easy to put down for 10 points. You could reasonably easily fix the Y value by say, forcing a tableau size of 12 by dividing by the appropriate constant.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

cferejohn — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:40:58 +0000

by cferejohn

yosz wrote:
For me it's clear that in this situation the goal will return to the center of the table unclaimed.

The rules pretty explicitly state that this is the case. If the game ends with a most goal in the center, all players who have attained the minimum requirement and who are tied for the highest amount of whatever it is get 3 points (i.e. the goal going to the center doesn't mean nobody scores).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

Barticus88 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:31:00 +0000

by Barticus88

InfoCynic wrote:
And we can all argue personal interpretations until the sun sets. Where's the designers? :D

Amazingly they often go several hours at a time without logging into BGG,

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: Re: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:27:13 +0000

by entranced

Interesting.

Philip Thomas wrote:
Galactic Bankers [...] has an ok consume ability (discard up to 2 goods for 1 card each)

It's discard up to 2 cards for 1 vp each.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

InfoCynic — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:18:11 +0000

by InfoCynic

And we can all argue personal interpretations until the sun sets. Where's the designers? :D

Thread: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Strategy:: 6-cost developments, old and new, a numerical take.

Philip Thomas — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:13:08 +0000

by Philip Thomas

There are 6 new 6-developments in the expansion. One of them (Pan Galacitc Research) I'm going to leave out of the discussion for a moment, because it doesn't have a variable points value, which is the thing I'm analysing here.

All the other 6-developments vary in points value according to your tableau. In order to track this I have a spreadsheet which lists all the cards in the game and the number of points each card is worth with each 6-dev. Adding up the number of points each card is worth with a particular 6-dev generates a number I will call "Y". Y is the amount of points you would get from that 6 dev if you had somehow managed to play the entire deck as your tableau.

Y is inherently biased towards 6 devs that give out a small amount of points for lots and lots of cards, as opposed to 6 devs that give out many points to a small number of cards. For example, in the original game, Galactic Survey Seti had the highest Y value, at 69, while Galactic Renaissance had the lowest Y value at 9.

Y is also (of course) biased towards 6 devs that provide tableau points as against 6-devs that have cool in game abilities (such as consuming for points). Also, I have made no attempt to factor in that there are twice as many ordinary developments as worlds.

First, a quick glance at how the old 6 developments are affected by the new cards in the expansions. The 3 values listed are the Y values with, respectively, just the base set, the base set+ Gathering Storm and the base set+ both expansions. I have not provided Y values for the base set+RvsI only, but you can work out if you want to.

Pan Galactic League 41, 50, 64.

Mining League 23, 26, 32.

Galactic Renaissance 9,9,9: The card gets worse relative to the others as the increased deck size makes it less likely to find the 3 cards it scores for.

Galactic Imperium 30,38,50: More rebels in the expansions.

Galactic Federation 41.49,72:More 6-developments in the expansions.

Alien Tech Institute 20, 27, 36: Over-taking Mining League.

New Economy 39,47,66:

Trade League 15.17,24: A fair boost from the 2nd expansion, but still not very lucrative.

Galactic Survey Seti: 69, 87, 122: much of the increase is just world, but the expansions do have more explore powers.

Merchant Guild: 42, 52, 64.

New Galactic Order: 16, 18, 29: Includes an abitrary value of 3 for Hidden Fortress.

Free Trade Association:27, 31, 37.

Gathering Storm 6 devs: Two values only of course.

Terraforming Guild: 60, 78.

Imperium Lords:33, 54.

Galactic Genome Project: 29, 35.

Ok, lets look at the new 6 devs from Rebel vs Imperium.

Prospecting Guild is a sort of cross between Seti and Mining League. It gives 2 VPs per Brown world (either type, so better than Mining League with Brown windfall worlds), 1 VP for other worlds, and 1 Vp per Terraforming card. There are still only 2 Terraforming cards in the game and Terraforming Guild was really good enough already...

Prospecting Guild has a Y value of 121, the highest of the new-6 devs and the second highest overall, with Galactic Survey: Seti beating it by a whisker at 122. Prospecting Guild does not score for itself while Seti does. Since Prospecting has 3 powers to Seti's 1, I think its probably a better card overall.

Imperium Seat is one of the new Conquest 6-devs. It gives 2 VPs per Imperium Card (synergy with Imperiun Lords) and 2 Vps per Rebel Military World (synergy with Galactic Imperium), and has a Y value of 40, a respectable value for a card with a good ability (howerver, if you are playing without conquests this card suddenly sucks).

Galactic Exchange is an intriguing new 6-dev which offers points for having several colours of world in your tableau, up to a maximum of 10 for all 4 colours. It also gives 3 Vps for having Diversified Exconomy in your tableau. Its Y value is therefore 13: like Galactic Renaissance the low value conceals lucrative Vp chip earning potential, with a consume ability that allows up to 4 cards to be exchanged for 1 card and 1 VP each.

Rebel Alliance is the other new Conquest 6-dev. It gives 2 VPs per Rebel card and 1 VP per other military world. I emphasise card, beacause other 6 devs give points for Rebel military worlds not cards. Its Y Value is a healthy 55.

Galactic Bankers can be compared to Galactic Federation in that it 1 gives 1 point per development. However, for this card 6-developments are still only 1 point, and instead 2 points are awarded for 3 specific cards (Investment Credits, Interstellar Bank and Gambling World). This has the net effect of lowering its Y value relative to th Federation- at 54 compared to 72. It has an ok consume ability (discard up to 2 goods for 1 card each), but its develop ability (draw 1 card) isn't quite as good as Galactic Federation's if you have developments to play.

Finally we have the mysterious Uplift Code, which gives 3 VPs per Uplift world with the chromosome symbol, and 2 VPs per other Uplift card. Notwithstanding that there are 4 new Uplift cards in this expansion (including Uplift Code itself), Uplift cards are still pretty rare, which explains the low Y value, at 25. On the other hand, if you do find Uplift Worlds to go with the Code you benefit from the souped up ability to draw 2 cards per Uplift World (with the chromosome symbol) each produce phase- a more specific version of Pan-Galactic League's ability with a better return per card in tableau.

Comments very welcome. Will have a look at ordinary cards and their "X" values in a further post.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Discarding and then settling DoomedW in same turn with ImproLog (and super luck!)

AnakinOU — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:55:43 +0000

by AnakinOU

Sure.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

GSReis — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:52:52 +0000

by GSReis

I disagree with that interpretation and think you are reading too much into the rule. To me, it just follows the most common rule in games that use the same mechanic of giving a benefit to the player that has the most of something: that player holds the goal until he is surpassed by another player. The rule simply clarifies that if more than one player surpass him at the same time and by the same amount, the goal is returned to the center of the table. As I see it, if the current holder of the goal is still tied at the end of the relevant phase, he keeps the goal.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Discarding and then settling DoomedW in same turn with ImproLog (and super luck!)

pussykatz — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 17:45:32 +0000

by pussykatz

Let's say I've already settled DW on my tableau previously. I choose settle, and as my first settle I discarded DW to settle something. Now I draw my settling (and perhaps terraforming) rebate(s) before I settle my additional world, but the draw pile is empty. So the discard pile is shuffled into a draw pile, and lo and behold I drew DW again.

Can I settle DW for my second settle?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Aubigny — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:36:40 +0000

by Aubigny

crushedguava wrote:
Maybe cards get stiffer with more plays?

This has nothing to do with the age of the cards. My test yesterday included only new cards (base game, 1st and 2nd expansion), and the RvI cards were more flexible (not much, but if you know it you can tell).

But really, it's not an issue.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:32:08 +0000

by entranced

rrenaud wrote:
I believe Gambling world is now present in the deck, but it doesn't actually do any gambling.

http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=3440

Ah, thx. Maybe by the time someone plays it it'll have full functionality. :)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

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

by Deathstroke

crushedguava wrote:
Maybe cards get stiffer with more plays?

So...many...jokes....must....be....good!

Sorry, can't: That's what SHE said!

:D

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

rrenaud — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:21:42 +0000

by rrenaud

I believe Gambling world is now present in the deck, but it doesn't actually do any gambling.

http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=3440

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Poruchik — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:20:53 +0000

by Poruchik

BoardsAndBits wrote:
DKahnt wrote:
Board & Bits (where I pre-ordered it) has it August 2009... :soblue:

-DK

...

Many times, if our dates disagree with other retailers, it's either because we have received different information, or because we are just chicken#%&* and don't want to get people's hopes up, so we post what we think is a conservative date.

...

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

Gotta be careful and post more information rather than less - I almost cancelled the pre-order when I saw the 'in stock' date shift to August...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

BoardsAndBits — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:08:18 +0000

by BoardsAndBits

DKahnt wrote:
Board & Bits (where I pre-ordered it) has it August 2009... :soblue:

-DK

David, sorry to confuse things, but release dates have *always* been a headache for one reason or another.

In this case we updated the release date to match the next printing, since we (thought we) had sold through our first batch.

Many times, if our dates disagree with other retailers, it's either because we have received different information, or because we are just chicken#%&* and don't want to get people's hopes up, so we post what we think is a conservative date.

The bottom line is that we will always carry major publishers' games and receive them around the same time as everyone else, just as most of the other retailers will.

So you should order from your favorite retailer, but the longer you wait for a popular title such as Rebel, the more chance that you'll have to wait a little longer.

For Dominion: Intrigue, Rio Grande seems to have printed enough copies so nothing to worry about there.

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Sessions:: Re: Rather amusing tableau with eight(!) 6-devs

Poruchik — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:08:16 +0000

by Poruchik

I've had something reasonably similar (obviously a win) although I ended up with 6 6-devs IIRC.

However, last turn stood out: start the turn with 10 cards in hand, play 2 6-devs, end the turn with 12 cards. (2 p advanced).

Opponent calls explore, I keep 2 cards. I call develop/develop -
draw 3 cards (Galactic Developers, Investment Credits, Pan-Galactic Research), play a 6-dev for 3, get a refund, draw 3 cards, play a 6-dev for 3, get a refund. Net + 2 cards.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

BoardsAndBits — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:00:59 +0000

by BoardsAndBits

Poruchik wrote:
BoardsAndBits wrote:

Rebel will arrive here on Friday, the 10th, but not in time for us to ship anything out. So orders waiting on Rebel will ship on Monday, the 13th.

Hope that clears everything up, but if not, you know where to find me :)

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

What about orders with RvI AND Dominion:Intrigue together? Are they still expected to ship on Monday?

Correct.

Tom

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

crushedguava — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:57:24 +0000

by crushedguava

I just got my copy today, and the new cards definitely do seem more bendable/flexible when sleeved (with Ultra Pro sleeves). Not really thinner, but just more flexible.

Again, I don't know if I'd notice it if not for this thread though. I might just have put it down to the cards being new and would have forgotten about it. If I gave someone 2 cards and asked if they could tell any difference, then the answer might be "No", but if I asked specifically whether they could tell which was more flexible, then they would be able to pick out the new cards from the old immediately.

Maybe cards get stiffer with more plays?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Poruchik — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:53:39 +0000

by Poruchik

BoardsAndBits wrote:

Rebel will arrive here on Friday, the 10th, but not in time for us to ship anything out. So orders waiting on Rebel will ship on Monday, the 13th.

Hope that clears everything up, but if not, you know where to find me :)

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

What about orders with RvI AND Dominion:Intrigue together? Are they still expected to ship on Monday?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

ejcarter — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:49:36 +0000

by ejcarter

Tom, I hugely appreciate the solid info. Even though it's not going to arrive this friday, just knowing when it's shipping is enough to make me happy.

And now I know that I have time to add more stuff to my order. Blessing? Curse? Only the gods of Kobol know for sure.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:34:42 +0000

by entranced

Green Team Action Geeklist - (do not peak unless this is your team!)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44078

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:34:26 +0000

by entranced

Red Team Action Geeklist - (do not peak unless this is your team!)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44077

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:34:14 +0000

by entranced

Blue Team Action Geeklist - (do not peak unless this is your team!)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44076

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:33:47 +0000

by entranced

Yellow Team Action Geeklist - (do not peak unless this is your team!)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44075

Thread: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.5 - Yellow Vs Blue Vs Red Vs Green

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:33:11 +0000

by entranced

Welcome to the fifth installment of...

Race for the Galaxy - The Geeklist Game.

How it works.
I am going to moderate a 4 player (team) game of RftG through http://genie.game-host.org and 4 geeklists, 1 for each team.

Players may join at any time in the game.
Don't look at the team threads before you join, pick a team first and then stick to that team's thread.

The YELLOW TEAM thread is here:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44075
(no peeking, only go here if you want to commit to the YELLOW TEAM)

The BLUE TEAM thread is here:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44076
(no peeking, only go here if you want to commit to the BLUE TEAM)

The RED TEAM thread is here:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44077
(no peeking, only go here if you want to commit to the RED TEAM)

The GREEN TEAM thread is here:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/44078
(no peeking, only go here if you want to commit to the GREEN TEAM)

Nominate the team you are joining by thumbing the reply below.
Yellow Team - [url=]Reply 1[/url]
Blue Team - [url=]Reply 2[/url]
Red Team - [url=]Reply 3[/url]
Green Team - [url=]Reply 4[/url]
(then we can see team numbers on this page and hopefully new players that join can help to balance the teams)

Some detail on how the game functions:
This thread will be used to display turn information that is available to all teams, as it happens. General, public discussion can also be posted here.

Moderator information
This header will be used to give any moderator information regarding the state of the game or a change in the rules etc.

I will also try to give a warning on the time frame for decisions, though this will be flexible. This game basically works like a play by email game so expect game choice/actions/forward motion to be between 1-4 per day. This game will generally not play over the weekend.

I am going to use thumbing comments as the voting system.
To vote for your team action, thumb the appropriate comment. Do not get sucked into group think. If you believe in a particular action, thumb the comment. Remember thumbs can be removed so you can change your mind. Strategy discussion within each team thread is highly encouraged.

Majority vote wins, I will add my vote to break ties (in the rare case that this might happen).

Good Luck to all teams and may the Race begin.

The Fine Print.
If a bug occurs with the online game, it stands and the game moves on.
If i misclick, it stands and the game moves on.
We will be playing random start worlds and 1 phase per player as specified in the regular rules. We will be including The Gathering Storm and Goals.
The RftG service on genie.game-host.org differs from the official version on some points.
1. The Gambling world is not present in the deck.
2. When you are about to pay for a card in settle/develop you normally can see what the other players have chosen but on this server these choices remain hidden until the next phase.
3. Goods are not cards taken from the draw deck and placed on worlds. This means the draw deck is depleted more slowly than in the official version.

---------------- Older games ----------------
Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game Blue vs Red
Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.2 Yellow Vs Green
Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.3 - Yellow Vs Green Vs Red
Race for the Galaxy - BGG Game No.4 - Cyan Vs the Robot

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

BoardsAndBits — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:09:23 +0000

by BoardsAndBits

ejcarter wrote:
It's probably unreasonable for me to hope that Boards and Bits will have shipped my copy of RvI and Dominion already so that they arrive this Friday, isn't it?

Unreasonable, not really. But not gonna happen.

For some *stupid* reason, "street date" means different things to different people. For board game publishers, it means that retailers cannot let the game out of their shops until that date.

What it *should* mean is that no *customer* receives it before that date. I would love to be able to ship games to arrive on that date, but it probably won't happen in my lifetime (though I will keep trying!)

As for our August date, that is for the reprint which has already been scheduled. We were able to get enough copies to cover all of our pre-orders, and perhaps a few more.

Rebel will arrive here on Friday, the 10th, but not in time for us to ship anything out. So orders waiting on Rebel will ship on Monday, the 13th.

Hope that clears everything up, but if not, you know where to find me :)

Tom
Boards & Bits
www.boardsandbits.com

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

megasquidd — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:35:02 +0000

by megasquidd

I'm in the same boat, snake. I've had race on my shelf for months now, but couldn't get anyone to play w/ me. I finally got some crew to play it and I thought it was a blast. there was a lot of head scratching to begin w/ but they picked it up by the end of the game.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: New Galactic Order

Bobthesnake — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:27:11 +0000

by Bobthesnake

Thanks for the info, that's how I counted it.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Re: Most goals

yosz — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:19:48 +0000

by yosz

For me it's clear that in this situation the goal will return to the center of the table unclaimed.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Rules:: Most goals

InfoCynic — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:09:38 +0000

by InfoCynic

This thread ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/389688) covers the case where a player catches up to another. What it doesn't cover for me is the case where these players, who are now tied (but A was initially ahead and holds the goal) then simultaneously exceed the goal by the same amount (typically 1).

Example: A builds 4 developments first and claims the goal while B has only 3.
B builds his 4th and ties, the goal remains with A. [This is covered by the first paragraph under "most goals" in the rules.]
A & B now simultaneously build their 5th development.

I've always played that A holds onto the goal, but there's certainly room in

Rulebook wrote:
If more than one player satisfies or exceeds a goal (possibly held by another player) by the same greatest amount, then that goal remains unclaimed (or is returned to the center).

to say the goal returns to the center, because
"more than one player" : specifically A & B
"exceeds a goal" : most developments with minimum 4
"by the same greatest amount" : by 1
"then that goal ... is returned to the center."

There are three states we could be looking at:
previously unclaimed goal -> clearly the goal remains in the center
previously claimed by another player now not tied for the lead -> goal returns to center
previously claimed by a player who is now tied for the lead -> rules are ambiguous as written (see the last post on the previously-mentioned thread, which went unanswered).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:03:29 +0000

by ackmondual

Blind Reality wrote:
spearjr wrote:
:wow::what: Know something we don't?

No I don't. I meant to say that if you want to play real time you should go to BSW and the fact you can't play RftG there is just too bad.

Or in other words, accept this great site for what it is and stop trying to turn it into something else.

As great as it is, it can still be even better. Add goals (recently added), custom cards and goals (in the works), 5p games, and the official solitaire mode against the "AI robot" are all some suggestions I'd like to add.

Besides, it seems the developer welcomes comments, compliments, and complaints. Main thing is, he doesn't have to follow our suggestions, so it's not like that should be a huge thing for him :cool:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

ejcarter — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:44:30 +0000

by ejcarter

It's probably unreasonable for me to hope that Boards and Bits will have shipped my copy of RvI and Dominion already so that they arrive this Friday, isn't it?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: New Galactic Order

Gwash — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:40:56 +0000

by Gwash

Bobthesnake wrote:
TermiGator wrote:
No - somewhere (either on the card or in the rules) it is mentioned that only durable and unlimited military force is counted. So nothing from "use and discard" developments and also nothing from "only against alien/minerals/rebels etc."

I'm new to this also and yesterday I played a military strategy. I played a card which gave me +4 military only when building military worlds and not general military force. I played a 6? card that for every military world, I had +2 vp and it was +? vp which ? equal to my total military force. I didn't count that +4 military since it was not a permanent bonus.

Did I count my bonus 6 card right?

If it was a card that gave a military bonus for only settling one type of world (like a +4 military for settling rare earth military worlds) then you do not count it. If it is a card that just has a +X permanent military bonus, then it is counted.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Available in UK

Philip Thomas — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:34:09 +0000

by Philip Thomas

Probably has been for some days, but I couldn't see another post about it.

I picked up mine from Playin'Games in Museum Street. The guy at the desk said they were selling very well, they got 3 copies in yesterday and my purchase was the last of the three...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Sessions:: Re: Session report

spokeeffe — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:22:16 +0000

by spokeeffe

Hey Paul, wherabouts is your London gaming club?

Is it private or a public kind of thing?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: New Galactic Order

Bobthesnake — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:58:13 +0000

by Bobthesnake

TermiGator wrote:
No - somewhere (either on the card or in the rules) it is mentioned that only durable and unlimited military force is counted. So nothing from "use and discard" developments and also nothing from "only against alien/minerals/rebels etc."

I'm new to this also and yesterday I played a military strategy. I played a card which gave me +4 military only when building military worlds and not general military force. I played a 6? card that for every military world, I had +2 vp and it was +? vp which ? equal to my total military force. I didn't count that +4 military since it was not a permanent bonus.

Did I count my bonus 6 card right?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:53:58 +0000

by Blind Reality

spearjr wrote:
:wow::what: Know something we don't?

No I don't. I meant to say that if you want to play real time you should go to BSW and the fact you can't play RftG there is just too bad.

Or in other words, accept this great site for what it is and stop trying to turn it into something else.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Sessions:: Re: Rather amusing tableau with eight(!) 6-devs

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:49:28 +0000

by entranced

Even in TGS, dev is my fave strategy, though i can't pull it off very often. I can't wait to try it with the amazing new dev cards in RvI (homeworld, 6 devs).

Edit: i had a pretty cool TGS dev game on the test server the other day, the last 3 turns i went dev/dev playing a 6dev on every single phase, starting with GF, winning 57-23.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

Neil Thomson — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:16:56 +0000

by Neil Thomson

I see you registered in April of this year...

Welcome to our Galaxy Mr. Snake. :)

Session: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Rather amusing tableau with eight(!) 6-devs

jullevi — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:15:45 +0000

by jullevi

Hi.

If you play Race for the Galaxy a lot, every now and then someone ends up with a really amusing tableau. I had one of these "WTF-rounds" yesterday.

I was playing Galactic Developers. Since I didn't have anything interesting in my starting hand (apart from Galactic Advertisers), I decided to Explore 1+1. The deck showed me Galactic Federation, Pan-Galactic Research and Public Works, which was obviously discarded even if it is usually a rather good card for Galactic Developers. The direction after that was pretty obvious. Play Pan-Galactic Research as soon as possible, get some cards by Exploring and leeching from other player's Produces, play Federation and find something to develop. And it appears that I did find something...

The final tableau:

Planets:
Galactic Developers
Rebel Miners (played on last turn to end the game)
Developments:
Public Works
Galactic Advertisers
6-Cost Developments:
Pan-Galactic Research(4pts)
Galactic Federation(18!)
Galactic Bankers(11)
New Economomy(11)
Galactic Reneissance(0)
Galactic Survey Seti(6)
Prospecting Guild(3)
Rebel Alliance(4)

Goals: FIRST to discard down to hand limit (ended up braking 12 card hand limit after playing a 6-dev!), MOST developments(!), MOST explore powers

Tableau 9pts, 6-devs 53pts, Goals 13pts = 75pts.

I have drewn Galactic Federation and Pan-Galactic Research early on with Galactic Developers before, but failed to benefit from them because of not getting any good developments. This time I was lucky to draw Galactic Bankers and New Economy, the two best development for this tableau after P-G Research and Federation. Getting 2 to 3 cards on Explore, 2+1 cards on Develop with 2 cards on Consume and 2 on Produce allowed me to play without playing any planets until the very last turn. To be honest, I was tempted to not play the planet and have one more turn to play another 6 dev "just because I could", but the others had called Produce and were looking forward to what looked like 10+ points consume and I decided to end the game by playing the small rebel planet (which happened to be worth 1+1+2+2 points) because I was not too aware of the scores at the moment.

This round was crazy.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

spearjr — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:06:12 +0000

by spearjr

Blind Reality wrote:
Benwa wrote:
BTW, you can't play RftG on BSW...

Oh really :devil:

:wow::what: Know something we don't?

Thread: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: My first 3 games last night - What a beautiful little gem this game is!!!

Bobthesnake — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 12:02:55 +0000

by Bobthesnake

So last night, my friend opened up his new game of RftG. He has played a couple of games before it so at least, we had someone a little experienced to explain the rule to 3 players that never had played a type of game that everyone does the action choosen (like San Juan or Puerto). I told my friend that when a game as a lot of stuff to learn and cards with lot of stuff on it, it usually means there are tons of different strategies that opens up which usually is a good thing. I wasn't wrong about this game, it's awesome.

The first game went a bit slow since we asked a lot of questions and processed and applied all the new symbology.

2nd and 3th game was a blast. Some basic strategy came out but it was hard to do some deep strategy since we don't even know what are all the cards yet in the deck. My friend won the second game just by doing a quick build strategy, he won with 18 points. In that game, I was going with an Alien build strategy which I needed a lot of more time (ended up with 15 points).

First game, and third game, points averaged 35.

Earlier this evening, we played a game of Dominion since we were waiting for a friend. I know there is a lot of thread about Dominion vs RftG but in my opinion, RftG is better for me since there are tons more strategies you can do. There are more roads then Dominion (I still love Dominion though).

I can't wait to play it again and to try it out someday with an expension which I read that opens up another whole can of strategies!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

kennylibido — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:11:28 +0000

by kennylibido

There was a copy sitting on the shelf at a game store in Minneapolis last night. Bought by a fellow gamer. The new Dominion was there as well.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

iklinck — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:05:21 +0000

by iklinck

Fun Games Cafe has the 10th listed, too.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Yargo — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:45:44 +0000

by Yargo

Thats essentially what THE man says :)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/3646688#3646688

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

qwertymartin — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:13:53 +0000

by qwertymartin

AndAgainMA wrote:
Sometimes I click on a card in my hand when I should be clicking on an action. I click on the card that I want to develop or settle. Next thing I know, I am considered to have chosen an action. It's not (usually) the action I intended. For example, I've clicked on a development and found myself exploring, and clicked on a world and found myself developing. I'm using Chrome, btw.

This has happened to me, in Firefox, and damn it was annoying! Wanted to Develop/Develop to end the game in the lead, but ended up Develop/Consume with no goods :(

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

entranced — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:26:20 +0000

by entranced

Blind Reality wrote:
My suggestion would be to give the options
-real time (5 min)
-normal (12 hours)
-slow (3 days, what's being set up now)

I agree with your post, and the above is similar to what i had suggested to the site operator. He chose, however, to go with the 3 day thing. My suggestion was choice on game creation of:

-real time (5 min)
-normal (36 hrs) i.e. check daily
-slow (10 days) i.e. check weekly/on weekends
-no limit

The buffer is necessary, similar to 20hr cooldowns in WoW. E.g. for weekly players, say one weekend you check on friday evening. Say next weekend you want to check on Sunday evening. That would not work with a 7 day buffer. Having 10 days allows you to still check on a weekly basis without being stuck checking earlier and earlier, into the weekdays eventually, defeating the purpose.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:07:58 +0000

by Blind Reality

Benwa wrote:
BTW, you can't play RftG on BSW...

Oh really :devil:

Benwa wrote:
I don't know if it's the right place, but I whished to say 1000 times thanks to the daring creator of this server... I was waiting for this for such a long time. This site is a blessing, indeed... Hope it will stay open forever (or, at least, till an "official" online interface opens)

Totally agree with you on this one!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Benwa — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:03:47 +0000

by Benwa

BTW, you can't play RftG on BSW...

I don't know if it's the right place, but I whished to say 1000 times thanks to the daring creator of this server... I was waiting for this for such a long time. This site is a blessing, indeed... Hope it will stay open forever (or, at least, till an "official" online interface opens)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:54:25 +0000

by Blind Reality

Freich wrote:
A good idea is to choose gamespeed on gamecreation, so joiners know what they're getting into from the start.
'Fast' would be my choise then, with a roundlimit of +- 4 min. That way you have to focus on 1 game and can easily play it in a fast pace.
Other options are ofcourse 'normal' 'slow' and 'none' for example.
for example: 'normal' would be +- 10 min, 'slow' 30 min, 'none' like it is now...
Freeze or kick the player who exceeds, and give win to leftover player if < 2.

I like the idea of setting game speed at the start of the game. I don't like your options however. I would define all the options you have given as fast. For me it makes no difference if the limit is 4 or 10 minutes or even 30 minutes. It still means I will have to stay at the pc and play continuously. That's not an option for me because I rarely have the opportunity to keep playing for more than 15 minutes.

My suggestion would be to give the options
-real time (5 min)
-normal (12 hours)
-slow (3 days, what's being set up now)

In my opinion you're looking for a realtime server. Which this gameserver just is not. If you want realtime, go play on BSW.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Freich — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:26:57 +0000

by Freich

Blind Reality wrote:
Freich wrote:
Thats why I also said to put it on a timer aswell or something ;)

I know you said that. But the timescale that's going to be set up now to kick out a late player was something like three days! I imagine you would not want to wait three days before you could start another game.

What sort of timelimit would you want to put on a turn?

A good idea is to choose gamespeed on gamecreation, so joiners know what they're getting into from the start.
'Fast' would be my choise then, with a roundlimit of +- 4 min. That way you have to focus on 1 game and can easily play it in a fast pace.
Other options are ofcourse 'normal' 'slow' and 'none' for example.
for example: 'normal' would be +- 10 min, 'slow' 30 min, 'none' like it is now...
Freeze or kick the player who exceeds, and give win to leftover player if < 2.

File: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm:: Race for the Galaxy: GS - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja

muka — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:00:57 +0000

by muka

Race for the Galaxy: GS - Polish Rules/Polska Instrukcja for Board Game: Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm ]]>

File: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Rebel vs Imperium Goals (card-sized)

vxl119 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:51:19 +0000

by vxl119

Rebel vs Imperium Goals (card-sized) for Board Game: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium ]]>

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

AndAgainMA — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:08:07 +0000

by AndAgainMA

A couple of things, one on the interface, and one on the pace of games.

Sometimes I click on a card in my hand when I should be clicking on an action. I click on the card that I want to develop or settle. Next thing I know, I am considered to have chosen an action. It's not (usually) the action I intended. For example, I've clicked on a development and found myself exploring, and clicked on a world and found myself developing. I'm using Chrome, btw.

As for the pace of games, I wish there was a way for players to identify their usual pace. There are the BSWers, the PBEMers, those who play in bursts but don't alway complete a game at a single sitting,...

New Image for Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm

josephc4 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:02:05 +0000

by josephc4

Houston Boardgames Meetup - Fuddrucker's - Meetup.com

]]>

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Sessions:: Re: Race with a three year old

Noun Sequitur — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:54:22 +0000

by Noun Sequitur

Thanks to all for the kind words. We try to include him in our activities as much as we can, so yeah...there's always a story to tell. I often feel like the dutiful bard documenting the hero's every adventure in epic poems for the entertainment of grandparents, in-laws etc.

And that's not counting the terabytes of photos his mother takes.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

BrokenNails_NZ — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:11:04 +0000

by BrokenNails_NZ

DKahnt wrote:
Board & Bits (where I pre-ordered it) has it August 2009... :soblue:

-DK

Although they have appended a note to the RftG:RvI page which says "Note: This item has been allocated, but we have secured enough copies for *all* of our pre-orders. Sorry to get your hopes down."

So one might assume that the August ETA is only for those who didn't pre-order. One might also be wrong of course... :what:

*EDIT* Mike got in first... :)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

Guantanamo — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:04:54 +0000

by Guantanamo

Time Well Spent announced it will be ready Friday too.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

DKahnt — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:03:46 +0000

by DKahnt

Board & Bits (where I pre-ordered it) has it August 2009... :soblue:

-DK

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

ackmondual — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:56:14 +0000

by ackmondual

GameSurplus has them (Intrigue too) pegged at mid-July. July 10th sounds about right.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

Sappington — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:43:02 +0000

by Sappington

ackmondual wrote:
Yeah, I kinda wish(ed) the icons for those discounts (brown and yellow windfall and production worlds, and in exp #2, also for green and blue worlds) also had the color on the inside AND outside of the cirles to make them more explicit and consistent with the rest of the iconography. Otherwise, it's still a great system.

Agreed. I just re-read the rules, and it's not until page 9 (Card Powers by Phase) that it explicitly links the -1 specific settlement symbol to BOTH production and windfall. On page 7, it alludes to the relationship between a name ("Genes" for example) and what it can describe (production OR windfall).

I think my group stopped reading once we hit the credits on page 8, so we never got to that later explanation. :whistle:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Re: Available this Friday?!

bharath — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:37:35 +0000

by bharath

CoolStuffInc as the same date as well. They have it for Dominion expansion:Intrigue too for July 10th.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Sessions:: Re: Race with a three year old

Stunna — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:51:14 +0000

by Stunna

Noun Sequitur wrote:
molnar wrote:
Noun Sequitur wrote:
I chose Epsilon Eridani as my home world, he chose Terraforming Robots as his,

Good choice.

He originally chose the green Consume: Trade action card as his home world. Then he saw Terraforming Robots, asked me what it was and I read it to him. He said "WALL-E!" and laid it down. I'm glad he changed his mind or I would have really been in trouble. :)

Haha, I keep ruining this by thinking about ways to actually legitimize the three-year old's actions. Maybe an optional Consume:Trade phase 4 each turn? I'm pretty sure a three-year old would break me if that were possible...

Good report though; I never read these normally, but this one brought a smile to my face.

Thread: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: News:: Available this Friday?!

briand72us — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:47:03 +0000

by briand72us

Just saw that Thought Hammer has this posted to be available on July 10th! Sweet!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Reviews:: Re: 50 Games of RvI in 6 days.

ackmondual — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:31:21 +0000

by ackmondual

roxon wrote:
He probably used Colony Ship. That's exactly what I did in my first RvI game (turn 3, IIRC). Tasty, I must say. :)

Over 100 plays IRL and I have yet to get the "Royal Flush" (Colony Ship/Doomed World + Contact Specialist + Rebel Homeworld). Perhaps one day. Or, I could just try to actually get a royal flush in poker :ninja:

Colony ship 'll do. I'm assuming that turn means phase and not round in a 2pa game. Otherwise, yeah, all it would take is...

II:
play Colony Ship for 1 or 2 cards

III:
discard Col Ship to place Rebel Stronghold.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Reviews:: Re: 50 Games of RvI in 6 days.

roxon — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:38:29 +0000

by roxon

He probably used Colony Ship. That's exactly what I did in my first RvI game (turn 3, IIRC). Tasty, I must say. :)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Reviews:: Re: Choose Your Own Adventure review of Race for the Galaxy

Thothmaatre — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:35:24 +0000

by Thothmaatre

gren doogan wrote:
AWESOME!!! I SHOOK BUZZ'S HAND!!!

BUZZ'S HAND!

(you realize you have made a game out of reviewing a game on a website about gaming. that is so much meta-something, it's one of those infinity loop thingies.)

Actually, innit, like, uh, recursive? :cool:

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Reviews:: Re: 50 Games of RvI in 6 days.

ackmondual — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:43:19 +0000

by ackmondual

Poruchik wrote:
Settling Rebel Base (9 cost military) with rebel cantina power on turn two (2p advanced) of the game.

?? I think you meant Rebel Stronghold. Rebel Base has a def of 6

Also, how would that work anyways?

You start off with Rebel Stronghold, so you have 3 other cards in your hand...

turn 1
Explore +1 | 3 to 5 cards
Produce | 5 to 6 cards

turn 2
Explore +1 | 6 to 8 cards
Produce | 8 to 9 cards

Turn 3 is where you'd be able to build Rebel Stronghold with Rebel Cantina as a start world.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

ackmondual — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:28:29 +0000

by ackmondual

Sappington wrote:
ackmondual wrote:
Sappington wrote:
Which card is the OP referring to? I'm thinking of the starting world that only gives a bonus for Rare Elements production worlds.
Mining Robots. Cost/VP = 2/1

Okay, I feel dumb, but how did you know it was Mining Robots? I don't see that anywhere in the original subject or post.

Also, where did you get that card image to post here? Is there a repository on this site or did you scan/upload it yourself?

Thanks!

I've played the game with exp #1 enough times that I've memorized all the cards which give you discounts towards brown worlds. There's just the 2, Mining Robots and Alpha Centauri.

The images are linked off of user galleries here on BGG.
Whenever you want to find out more about a image on BGG, just click on that image. In this case, this one is from a BGG user who uploaded all of the cards into his personal Gallery.

Your own gallery can be found here...
At the very top of each BGG page....
hover your mouse cursor over My Geek. Click on Gallery. You can submit your own images that you'd like to reference or perhaps safekeeping.

I have exp #1 cards uploaded in my gallery since there was a period of time where exp #1 card images were not in that other guy's gallery. I still use my own gallery for RftG exp #1 images since mine are in reverse alphabetical order and easy to find.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

Gwash — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:23:47 +0000

by Gwash

If you notice the text at the bottom of a card like Alpha Centauri in the picture below, you will see that is says the reduction in cost applies to windfall worlds as well as regular worlds. Mining Robots most assuredly works the same way.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Sessions:: Re: Race with a three year old

ChrisBinSEA — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:15:44 +0000

by ChrisBinSEA

Does he give lessons?

Or will he be writing a strategy guide instead? :D

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Deathstroke — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:51:40 +0000

by Deathstroke

Barticus88 wrote:
Aubigny wrote:
32 new base game cards weight 55.64 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new first expansion cards weight 55.59 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new second expansion cards weight 54.68 grams (1 card = 1.71 grams).

Wow.

I agree.

Also, with that, I feel better about picking up the expansion when it becomes available at my FLGS (*glee* my first every use of BGG's acronym for local game store).

However, since I am such a slave to RftG, I had planned on picking up the expansion regardless. :D

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Reviews:: Re: 50 Games of RvI in 6 days.

Poruchik — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:38:06 +0000

by Poruchik

From the crazy card combo department:

Trading a blue good for 10 cards, and have 4 cards out that let you discard for vp, on consume/trade get 10 and discard 7 for vp.

Settling Rebel Base (9 cost military) with rebel cantina power on turn two (2p advanced) of the game.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

Sappington — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:30:03 +0000

by Sappington

ackmondual wrote:
Sappington wrote:
Which card is the OP referring to? I'm thinking of the starting world that only gives a bonus for Rare Elements production worlds.
Mining Robots. Cost/VP = 2/1

Okay, I feel dumb, but how did you know it was Mining Robots? I don't see that anywhere in the original subject or post.

Also, where did you get that card image to post here? Is there a repository on this site or did you scan/upload it yourself?

Thanks!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Barticus88 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:18:58 +0000

by Barticus88

Aubigny wrote:
32 new base game cards weight 55.64 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new first expansion cards weight 55.59 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new second expansion cards weight 54.68 grams (1 card = 1.71 grams).

Wow.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Aubigny — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:15:30 +0000

by Aubigny

byronczimmer wrote:
Get equal numbers of old and new cards and weigh them on a scale.

German cards, but they should weight the same as English ones:

32 new base game cards weight 55.64 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new first expansion cards weight 55.59 grams (1 card = 1.74 grams).
32 new second expansion cards weight 54.68 grams (1 card = 1.71 grams).

If you bend a single card it's possible to distinguish the cards from the second expansion from the other cards (if you're trained). For me it's not possible to feel a difference in normal game play.

As a comparison where I can cleary feel the difference:
Catan card game, older German editions, 32 cards: 55.23 grams (1 card = 1.73 grams).
Catan card game, newer German editions, 32 cards: 51.36 grams (1 card = 1.61 grams).

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

ackmondual — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:48:07 +0000

by ackmondual

Freich wrote:
I like to play here, but the fact that almost all people are playing 2,3 games at the same time ruins it for me totally, because games drag on and on...

Are you playing 3 games at the same time in real life?
NO

So why do it here...

Edit: Why not make the max games someone on 1 IP adress can have, to the maximum of 1 or maybe 2?

One game at a time!?
For my first game, I had every intention of playing only 1 game at a time. I was relatively new to the interface (tried a couple of solo games to get the hang of misc. powers like Space Mercenaries, Doomed World/Colony Ship, and the way Consume works) and the fact that I tend to think longer than others meant I didn't want to chew more than I can swallow.

So I joined a game which turned out to be game #183, a 4p game. Everyone choose an action..... and that was that. This game was started about a week ago, and it stopped as soon as it started. I waited, and waited, and waited, but the last person the 3 of us remaining were waiting on just never got back to the game. It was only a few days ago that he finally made his 2nd move, so it was a whole week between just 2 turns! :angry: Within that 1 week or so time span, I've managed to squeeze in 16 games or so. If I had to wait for #183 to finish, I'd be pissed for sure, b/c now I can't start and finish another game all b/c of one person.

One game at a time would be expected if games only took 20 to 30 minutes online. But the problem is, games indeed can drag on for weeks. Limiting the # of simultaneous games per player doesn't help. If one person is holding everyone up, it just hurts everyone else instead. The one person who's holding up the game is probably 'passive quitting' or not putting in good effort to keep the game moving along. In this case, it has nothing to do with # of games at the same time.

Benefit of the doubt, weeding out deadbeats, giving time to regulars
If we had the option of quitting, that still needs to be done with caution and not in haste. Some people really do have emergencies. As such, they otherwise have every intention of finishing the game, win or lose.

As for me, I am eager for this game to end. All my singular opponent needs to do is to settle something, or decline settle. Next step would be to complete the Consume x2 process. But, last time he moved according to the site was 2009-07-01 12:28:25. I hope the "Freeze slow players" will be available mid-game, b/c I'm willing to bet this game will never finish.
http://genie.game-host.org/game.htm?gid=1311

One game per IP address won't work either...
In some areas of the world, college campuses or whole regions or countries use the same IP address. It wouldn't be fair if only 1 person in that whole place got to play, shunning everyone else.

I used to play on Sea3d alot. It's an unofficial, personally developed application used to games of Settlers Of Catan and Seafarers Of Catan online vs other players. The site and app has a feature which shows the IP address of all players. If multiple players have the same IP address, there's a good chance they're being played by the same player. However, the admin of the site will NOT forbid and ban players of same IP playing in the same game. Why? Because it wouldn't be fair to everyone else. See above for reason...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

nazdr3g — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:18:05 +0000

by nazdr3g

not like a slow player stops you from starting new games. I guess it doesnt bother me much because I play 2p adv and those games tend to only take 20-30 minutes. if I want to take turns more often I just play 3 at a time and refill the que as fast as they clear

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:43:03 +0000

by Blind Reality

Freich wrote:
Thats why I also said to put it on a timer aswell or something ;)

I know you said that. But the timescale that's going to be set up now to kick out a late player was something like three days! I imagine you would not want to wait three days before you could start another game.

What sort of timelimit would you want to put on a turn?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

harris_family — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:25:02 +0000

by harris_family

Freich wrote:
Thats why I also said to put it on a timer as well or something ;)

In fact, a well implemented timer approach would negate the need for a concurrent games limit. Once people who were too slow for their game's timescale because they had too many games on the go they'd soon stop signing up for so many. It would be self-policing.
Anyway, as others have said, let's not get *too* bogged down in wishlists - let's just be grateful that someone has taken the time (for free!) to do this.
:D

Simon

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Freich — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:49:28 +0000

by Freich

Blind Reality wrote:
Freich wrote:
Only solution is limit maximum games someone can play, and put games on a timer or something like already is spoken about in this thread above.

This is not a solution. What you're suggesting would result in people not being able to start/play another game when their one game is being blocked by a non-responsive player. I know this is not your intention, but it would be the result of your suggestion.

If you'd excuse me know. I'm wasting time here as people are waiting for me on the server.:p

Thats why I also said to put it on a timer aswell or something ;)

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:15:12 +0000

by Blind Reality

Freich wrote:
Only solution is limit maximum games someone can play, and put games on a timer or something like already is spoken about in this thread above.

This is not a solution. What you're suggesting would result in people not being able to start/play another game when their one game is being blocked by a non-responsive player. I know this is not your intention, but it would be the result of your suggestion.

If you'd excuse me know. I'm wasting time here as people are waiting for me on the server.:p

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Freich — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:32:27 +0000

by Freich

Blind Reality wrote:
Freich wrote:
I like to play here, but the fact that almost all people are playing 2,3 games at the same time ruins it for me totally, because games drag on and on...

Are you playing 3 games at the same time in real life?
NO

So why do it here...

Edit: Why not make the max games someone on 1 IP adress can have, to the maximum of 1 or maybe 2?

I think the main reason people play more games at the same time is that the other games don't move quickly enough. So I think you have cause and effect mixed up.

Maybe so, but then it's an unending circle. Other games are slow, so they go play others aswell, and you get more slow games again.

Only solution is limit maximum games someone can play, and put games on a timer or something like already is spoken about in this thread above.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: Replacement Victory Points - Any Interest? PART II

maka — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:00:17 +0000

by maka

Quick Update

I've been very busy these last few days and will be today, so I'll try to send the paypal requests either tonight or tomorrow.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Blind Reality — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:48:03 +0000

by Blind Reality

I think the main reason people play more games at the same time is that the other games don't move quickly enough. So I think you have cause and effect mixed up.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

Freich — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:30:46 +0000

by Freich

I like to play here, but the fact that almost all people are playing 2,3 games at the same time ruins it for me totally, because games drag on and on...

Are you playing 3 games at the same time in real life?
NO

So why do it here...

Edit: Why not make the max games someone on 1 IP adress can have, to the maximum of 1 or maybe 2?

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Rules:: Re: rebel alliance and rebel pact

entranced — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:04:27 +0000

by entranced

This made me notice a mildly ambiguous interaction in the iconography of Rebel Pact and Rebel Alliance.

Notice the Rebel Pact reminder text ("-2 cost when using a O > O power") shows the plain white military icon.

Now look at the Rebel Alliance settle phase power and/or reminder - it uses the rebel-only darker colored circle.

Obviously Rebel Pact works on Rebel Alliance settles, and the Rebel Pact white military just means any type of military conversion power. Same idea as how Contact Specialist can be used to settle Rebel worlds despite having the white military icon.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

entranced — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:27:32 +0000

by entranced

ikolev wrote:
Unfortunately, this doesn't work well with Check4Change.

I think it will still work perfectly if you select the text in the *first 3 columns of the first row* of your games list.

I can't confirm yet since the site was reverted to a previous version as there was a serious bug with the update i posted above.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Reviews:: Re: Choose Your Own Adventure review of Race for the Galaxy

Barticus88 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:07:09 +0000

by Barticus88

wsean wrote:
onigame wrote:
Buzz Lightyear was named after Buzz Aldrin.

Actually, thanks to an unusual temporal event at the time of Aldrin's birth, the reverse is true.

And the starship Enterprise is named after five earlier ships, one of them a prototype Space Shuttle.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

ikolev — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:04:17 +0000

by ikolev

entranced wrote:
Time info in game listings changed. Now the time for last action shows 'Time since last action'.

Unfortunately, this doesn't work well with Check4Change. I used to mark the table with my active games on the "Your Games" page and would get notified when anyone made a move (and eventually it was my turn). Now the column with elapsed times also changes, even when no one has made a move. I'll have to open each of my games in a separate page and track my status there.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Variants:: Re: Post-RvI community created cards

onigame — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:03:05 +0000

by onigame

chrdona1970 wrote:
I figure if the player who has this plus Contact Specialist in his tableau can play a takeover game without worrying about being attacked, presuming he doesn't have any developments with military bonuses.

A player who plays Contact Specialist but who doesn't play Imperium cards or Rebel military worlds is already immune from attack...

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Reviews:: Re: Choose Your Own Adventure review of Race for the Galaxy

onigame — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:50:05 +0000

by onigame

wsean wrote:
onigame wrote:
Buzz Lightyear was named after Buzz Aldrin.

Actually, thanks to an unusual temporal event at the time of Aldrin's birth, the reverse is true.

Well, yes, but most people don't know that Buzz Lightyear's real first name is Edwin.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

entranced — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:33:52 +0000

by entranced

090707: Goals are now available as an alternative to 'the Gathering Storm'.
Freeze slow player feature now available. When 'FREEZE SLOW PLAYERS' is pressed in a game
the game continues with the frozen players totally inactive. Their tablau is counted in scoring though.
Time info in game listings changed. Now the time for last action shows 'Time since last action'.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

nazdr3g — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:26:52 +0000

by nazdr3g

3 2p adv games up ;) lets get it on!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

wwscrispin — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:27:35 +0000

by wwscrispin

Yargo wrote:
This is no laughing matter if there's a problem. Fortunately, so far, it looks like the cards are the same (aside from the 1 report).

The original game (and first expansion) cards are EXCELLENT quality. I know someone who has a set that has literally over 200 plays (yes, he's tracked the # of plays) and while they definately show wear, they are in surprisingly good shape and definately stilll playable. It typically gets several plays a week on it. I don't belive any of the cards have split or had bent corners or anything like that that would identify a specific card from damage.

Finding out your pacemaker has been mis-manufactured is no laughing matter, I suspect we can have a sense of humor about the thickness of cards in a card game.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: General:: Re: RFTG Online Genie Server intros and discussion

entranced — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:47:37 +0000

by entranced

ikolev wrote:
There's an add-on called Check4Change, it notifies you when a selection of the page has changed.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: Reviews:: Re: [VIDEO] Let's look inside the box of second expansion

Yargo — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:50:40 +0000

by Yargo

Great video! I just wanted to compliment your English, its a lot easier to understand than a number of my college professors. I really appreciate a peek into the game (it hasn't started shipping in USA yet). I also liked your use of jokes throughout. Thanks again for posting a English version!

Reply: Race for the Galaxy: Rebel vs Imperium:: General:: Re: New cards much thinner than old ones, why?

Yargo — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:38:11 +0000

by Yargo

This is no laughing matter if there's a problem. Fortunately, so far, it looks like the cards are the same (aside from the 1 report).

The original game (and first expansion) cards are EXCELLENT quality. I know someone who has a set that has literally over 200 plays (yes, he's tracked the # of plays) and while they definately show wear, they are in surprisingly good shape and definately stilll playable. It typically gets several plays a week on it. I don't belive any of the cards have split or had bent corners or anything like that that would identify a specific card from damage.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

dawgfish — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:16:32 +0000

by dawgfish

The English rules specifically say that the color specific cost reductions apply to both production and windfall worlds.

Reply: Race for the Galaxy:: Rules:: Re: Bonus for Rare Elements: applies to windfall worlds, right?

ackmondual — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:15:04 +0000

by ackmondual

Sappington wrote:
Which card is the OP referring to? I'm thinking of the starting world that only gives a bonus for Rare Elements production worlds.

Mining Robots. Cost/VP = 2/1