Lost Cities | BoardGameGeek

New Image for Lost Cities

Tommy_M — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:14:39 +0000

Lost Cities at the top of the mountain.

]]>

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: Ties?

iklinck — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:51:24 +0000

One more round for the tiebreaker would seem to be the way to go... Unless calling it a tie is better for the relationship. :)

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Blocking variant

yardapeJV — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:26:50 +0000

by yardapeJV

You're right. And making a rule that the first card played may not be discarded doesn't really help... The problem is, when I posted this after a couple of plays, I didn't know you could discard!!! :whistle: That's two rules I messed up!

So the variant was under the assumption that there is no discarding, and with discarding, it's broken. Sorry to waste your time...

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Blocking variant

cymric — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:07:25 +0000

by cymric

I hate to say this, but this variant is silly and not worth playing. It is susceptible to a degenerate strategy where either both players just discard, or just one discards because you can always put cards you do not want on the central playing area. So it is never a problem for at least one player to completely block the other. Agreeing what constitutes a 'valid' block and what not is a fruitless discussion.

Under the original rules, discarding in many cases helps the opponent unless you're very careful about it. But at times you have no choice. That is what makes the game tense. (And, regrettably, once you've figured it out, boring, as there is nothing else to this game and it becomes a matter of luck of the draw between players of more or less equal skill.)

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Blocking variant

yardapeJV — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:07:11 +0000

by yardapeJV

You could do that I guess...it would be like a soccer game! zero-zero tie! But if you want to win instead of tie, it gets more interesting...

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Blocking variant

feydjm — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:01:52 +0000

by feydjm

In other words, I could play every card to the board, instead of starting expeditions and we'd tie at 0 since my opponent would be unable to score any points. :sauron:

Thread: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Blocking variant

yardapeJV — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:43:49 +0000

by yardapeJV

So I just played my first few games online of Lost Cities, and I misunderstood the rules in an interesting way. I thought the rules said that if an expedition is not built by a player, then BOTH players score that expedition zero. I have since realized that this isn't the case, but I think I like this version better, and here's why...

It allows you to try to block your opponents high scoring expedition by leaving it unbuilt, but you have to make the decision early (and it's hard to tell early on which expedition of your opponent's will be high scoring), thereby rewarding players who can hold off on building to not tip their hand. Thus it requires the player to be even more delicate with the timing of the game, and try to rush a high scoring expedition at the end of the round! I think it adds a bit of excitement to the game and some interesting strategy...

Can someone try playing this way and let me know what you think?

Or maybe this is already a variant that everyone's already thought of and I'm out of the Knizia-loop. Which would be some sort of Jordan curve or an n-dimensional torus or whatever...damn mathematicians!

New Image for Lost Cities

zaphod b — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:47:02 +0000

by zaphod b

]]>

Session: Lost Cities:: Lost in the Arctic

Oni Chikara — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:14:14 +0000

by Oni Chikara

Session of Lost Cities

My friend introduced me to Lost Cities. I love this game, it’s quick, it’s easy to play, and it is very easy to pick up at a fast pace.

The Game
It is very simple, you line up cards in sequential order, and try to get deal cards before them and then it counts points if you complete, or have not completed an adventure to some lost city. There really isn’t much to it; the strategy is in getting the bigger bonuses. Also, in trying to prevent or stop your opponent from finding their respective city before you. The person with the most points wins the round, and the first person to a certain value wins the game.

My friend and I can’t play a full game in the time it takes to eat lunch, so we usually play a hand or two. This past time we only had time for one hand.

Our Session
Players: Matt and Brian

We started out pretty slow, placing a couple of deal cards at first and discarding at first, trying to get a feel of what the other one was doing, and seeing if we had a basis for starting. I started off with Atlantis (Blue) because I had a deal, the 7, the 8, and the 10. It was simple; I was short on yellow and white. So the yellow and the whites were my discard cards. After a couple of discards I got a few reds to play with and a couple more blues.

Brian was already placing the Aztec (Green), he had a bunch to start, so it really worked out well for him.

We were trading discards back and forth trying to get something going.

By the end of it I was playing Blue, Red and White. Brian was playing Green Yellow and White.

I just couldn’t find any deal cards to save my life, and the few I was able to come across were always too late.

I had two deals on the board, one under white and one under blue. The red I couldn’t get, I was just lucky to get that one done. I only got 2 points out of a stack of 4, Brian was hanging onto the high red cards. The blue I was in better shape for, I had 7 cards for a total of 40 points. The whites are what killed me, I was only able to pull off a 13 and had a deal sitting on it. It was bad. I lost 14 points from it.

Brian was able to get a big win off. He was able to pull about 20 points from green, about 25 points from yellow, and about 10 points from white.

So in the end, it was a total trouncing of yours truly.

Play Time: 14 minutes
Matt: 28
Brian: 55

Ouch!

For the future it is a good idea to try and get more small cards in your hand to manipulate what is on the board for later.

New Image for Lost Cities

R3sp4wN — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:49:44 +0000

by R3sp4wN

Image of the Lost Cities Tile Board for use with the Roman Numeral Til...

]]>

File: Lost Cities:: Lost Cities Tile Board

R3sp4wN — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 13:14:10 +0000

by R3sp4wN

Lost Cities Tile Board for Board Game: Lost Cities ]]>

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: Card sleeves?

Eeeville — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 22:01:16 +0000

by Eeeville

I bought some sort of plastic slip, they may have been for photographs because the texture of the plastic reminds me of those old photo albums where you pull back the plastic and put the picture on the page. I don't think they were advertised as card sleeves in any case. I also had to trim off the top of them, but they work alright for Lost Cities and Blue Moon. This was like almost 2 years ago and I don't have them at my current residence.

If I can find the info again I will post it.

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: Card sleeves?

GeoMan — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:56:07 +0000

by GeoMan

Card sleeves for large cards like these (and Blue Moon) are so far only available in Korea. Let's hope that Mayday Games will produce this size sleeves soon...

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: Card sleeves?

tmredden — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:15:29 +0000

by tmredden

tryp09 wrote:
I apologize ahead of time if this has already been asked but since it's a quick question: are there card sleeves for this game? I love card sleeves and I love Lost Cities so I have a feeling I might love card sleeves for my Lost Cities.

I've never seen such big sleeves advertised but I invested in another Lost Cities so when the cards wear out I'll be good-to-go.

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: So...it really IS true what they say about this game!

tryp09 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:43:15 +0000

by tryp09

Haha! Great to hear you found a gate to our twisted world of games that fit her (not implying anything about her weight). I bet you must be feeling anxious to nudge her deeper in. Your self control is commendable!
:D

Thread: Lost Cities:: General:: Card sleeves?

tryp09 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:39:17 +0000

by tryp09

I apologize ahead of time if this has already been asked but since it's a quick question: are there card sleeves for this game? I love card sleeves and I love Lost Cities so I have a feeling I might love card sleeves for my Lost Cities.

Review: Lost Cities:: Reviews:: Lost Cities: Discovering a game of unsophisticated beauty

tryp09 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:01:58 +0000

by tryp09

Lost Cities: Discovering a game of unsophisticated beauty

Introduction
Lost Cities is a one-on-one card game in which you try to earn more points than your opponent by the end of the round/game. It is a well-designed game of unmistakable simplicity that may turn many gamers off. In this review, I will not be directly describing the game’s particulars and instead discuss why I would play this game again and what this game is not.
In-game Impressions
This game plays very intuitively. Once you get the rules for scoring, there is very little confusion as to what to do next. My girlfriend understood the game after one quick play-through and there were no missteps after that. Though luck is a factor, you find yourself making a lot of risk-reward-tradeoff decisions that keep this short game exciting. The theme is not very engaging, which does have the benefit of allow you to concentrate on the most important task at hand: increasing your point total while preventing your opponent from doing the same. I will admit, initially, I was not impressed with the very crudeness of the setup. Yet, there is something altogether absorbing about using basic math skills working you towards victory. I can’t help but be reminded of the satisfying feeling of triumph after finishing math problems as a kid (sans the actual math problems). [This may sound very strange, but I really feel like there is an inert sense of gratification whenever someone finishes a math problem]. Once play was underway, I instantly felt ownership for my side of the board (and all of the “expeditions” I committed to). There are very few “screw your opponent” scenarios here, but if you time your cards well enough with the constantly decreasing draw pile, you can potentially lure your opponent into making mistakes. These cases are very rewarding and leave me coming back for more.
Why I would play this game again
This game is very much like gin rummy and solitaire put together. It’s fun, it’s quick, and it prompts meto employ simple math skills that I picked up in school but barely ever use in real life. This is not a brain burner but it does enough for the old ‘noggin to not make me feel like I wasted my time. I can teach this game to basically anyone in less than ten minutes and the game itself moves very fast. I appreciate the easygoing competitiveness that this game generates and how it is portable enough to play in a lot of public places. I want to avoid using the term “filler game” because such an expression implies it is a game that is used solely to pass time until you can get back to the “main games” which would be unjust to this game. The game is fun from start to finish for me and the significant other. Yet, this is not a game for everybody and I believe once you start laying down a couple cards, you will know whether or not this game is for you.
What this game is not
This game is not an adventure game or a heavily-themed board game. The theme is a bit misleading as it may lead some to think that this game is something but a card game in the most traditional sense. This game is also not a game you want to pull out during a party or a gathering (as it is not very fun to watch). Lost Cities only works with two people.
Final verdict
If you ever felt enjoyment (maybe in your younger days) after finishing a math problem or playing a math game, then try this game out. Or if you like playing traditional card games but want something a little bit more robust and aesthetically pleasing (face it, the queen of spades is no spring chicken), try this game. But if you are a hardcore gamer that does not like to spend any precious time on anything that is not heavy with strategy or theme, then you might want to avoid this game.

For how well this game does what it does: 4.5 stars

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: A Tale of Domestic Strife

jefftang — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:22:35 +0000

by jefftang

I really like Lost Cities and my wife likes the game as well. Nice filler game with that little "take that" attitude.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Reviews:: Re: Lost Cities, or as I like to call it "an overproduced set matching card game"

ohbalto — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 03:14:00 +0000

by ohbalto

I actually like the "fiddly" scoring -- I think it makes the game much more interesting than a lot of other card games.

I also think the scoring adds to the "pasted on" theme -- you're mounting an expedition and there's going to be cost. If you get more investors, they're going to be expecting more returns on their investment. That -20 points each expedition incurs, coupled with the threat of getting destroyed by multipliers if one plays too cavalierly is something I find quite interesting (and, as stated, on theme).

We tend to play three rounds, which helps negate the, "I got bad cards" complaining. My wife has, sadly, discovered the "I will horde cards I think you need" strategy. Quite gleefully.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: A Tale of Domestic Strife

ohbalto — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 03:01:07 +0000

by ohbalto

Futsie wrote:
Wife: You're just sore, because I beat you. Minus 30 points for your Egyptian expedition
Husband: Its either the calculator or I'm going to need to take my socks off.
Wife: Oh please no, anything but that.
Husband: Well if you hadn't horded all those cards until the end I wouldn't have to figure all these minus numbers

It's uncanny. My wife and I played this weekend and, after reading the above passage, I had to double-check to make sure I hadn't written it.

Eerie.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: A Tale of Domestic Strife

Eric Brosius — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 02:44:04 +0000

by Eric Brosius

There's nothing to increase the interest level in this game like having your wife beat you five or six times in a row.

Session: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: A Tale of Domestic Strife

Futsie — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:52:29 +0000

by Futsie

Wife: Lost cities dropped through the letterbox today.
Husband: (unenthusiastically) Oh yeah. I was kind of hoping for "Lost in the Post Cities"
Wife: Nothing on TV tonight, so we might as well have a game later.
Husband: Maybe, still think we should have put the money towards a proper game.
Wife: What do you mean, proper? It has loads of good reviews.
Husband: I've a pack of playing cards somewhere, you can play patience with those - it's just the same.
Wife: Yes, I’ve had the misfortune of seeing those so-called playing cards. Its best you keep them to yourself.
Husband: Actually, they are very artistic.
Wife: OK, Picasso lets leave it there or you could end up wearing your dinner.

Later

Wife: Gorgeous artwork on the cards
Husband: They are pretty, but not a pretty as you, dear.
Wife: What are you after?
Husband: Actually, I'm sure there are some files on BoardGameGeek where someone has put together some even prettier cards.
Wife: You had a look at the rules?
Husband: I have, nothing too taxing - just suit matching
Wife: Actually it’s organising archaeological expeditions.
Husband: Is that right? Well you must admit the theme feels a bit of an afterthought.
Wife: I agree, I can't hope feeling that they could have done a bit more to incorporate it into the game.
Husband: It's a good idea, and an evocative one too. All those bewhiskered Victorian gentlemen organising expeditions to the four corners of the world. Pity it comes down to a game of patience.
Wife: Anyway, lets give it a spin.

10 Minutes later

Husband: Where's the calculator, the scoring is making my head hurt.
Wife: You're just sore, because I beat you. Minus 30 points for your Egyptian expedition
Husband: Its either the calculator or I'm going to need to take my socks off.
Wife: Oh please no, anything but that.
Husband: Well if you hadn't horded all those cards until the end I wouldn't have to figure all these minus numbers
Wife: Maybe it’s the curse of King Tut.
Husband: Tut, well come to think about it I do have a paper cut on my finger that I didn't have before.
Wife: Never mind.
Husband: Shall we make it best of three?
Wife: See I knew you would like it.
Husband: Still think it's patience
Wife: Careful , I'm beginning to loose mine.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Play Lost Cities with a normal poker (french) card deck

clearclaw — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 19:04:59 +0000

by clearclaw

Loss of the fifth suit changes the game significantly.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Play Lost Cities with a normal poker (french) card deck

Kwyjibo — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:49:14 +0000

by Kwyjibo

Although the theme is completely tacked on, this game loses most of its appeal as soon as you take away its pretty cards. I tried it with a standard deck of cards, and was terribly underwhelmed.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Play Lost Cities with a normal poker (french) card deck

Kaikus — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:38:35 +0000

by Kaikus

Upss! I can see this is not an original idea. :p

I can see some people here have tried it before. Even have used a marked suit from another deck to play the 'fifth expedition'.

This hapens for not reading all the threads before posting mine. I ask for your indulgence :)

Thread: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Play Lost Cities with a normal poker (french) card deck

Kaikus — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:21:22 +0000

by Kaikus

Yup, You can perfectly play Lost Cities with a french 52 card deck. The only difference is that you only can start four expeditions (clubs, spades, diamonds, hearts) instead of five. I think the game complexity doesn't loose very much by having only 4 expeditions instead of 5. In any case, if you can find ANY five suits deck in the market (as it was StarDeck) you can play a full Lost Cities game.

Setting the board would be simple: just put the four aces on the table, one side by side the other. That is your board

And the cards? Cards numbered 2 to 10 are the expedition cards. Jack, Queen and King are played like investment cards.

Simple. Spend an extra money in buying the original game, or play with your poker deck card (you get the rules in http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/186) is up to you. ,

Bye!

PD: On this way I must somehow agree with Branko ( http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/322911) in his opinion this game is a 'close cousin to traditional card games', a sort of solitaire game for two with a 'pasted-on' theme. But, in my case, I like the game. It's much more deep and strategical than its simplicity in rules and presentation makes you suppose at first glance. I highly recommend playing it. At least try the experience with your poker deck

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Roman LC with wooden TILES!

Drew1365 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:26:33 +0000

by Drew1365

Or becomes a Tile Ghoul, and buy up copies of Scrabble at your local thrift stores. :cool:

Thread: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Roman LC with wooden TILES!

franchi — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:16:08 +0000

by franchi

A few months ago I came across these pieces at spielmaterial:

]]>
I used them for a home-made version of LEXIO but, before they went out of stock "forever", I bought some more and thought about making a tile version of Battle Line!

Indeed, I like wooden tiles more than cards: smaller, easier to "shuffle" (put them in a bag, or in piles), more robust (even if I have laminated my BL cards)... Since they are smaller, I just wanted to put the color and number, and then I thought roman numbers would look better (and no 6/9 confusion):

]]> ]]>

Then I thought that, adding just a few tiles, I could make a "Roman LC" at the same time. I have uploaded the FILE on the BL page, in which you will find the additional pieces to play LC too. I have used the wooden circles for the expedition discards, added the contracts with 2 tiles symbol (x2 points), and added the (2,3,4)x5 tiles needed for the official 4 player variant:

]]> ]]>

The wooden squares I bought are no longer available at spielmaterial, but you may find similar ones elsewhere. Or print the labels on thick cardboard and cut the tiles yourself!

New Image for Lost Cities

franchi — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:19:45 +0000

by franchi

My "Roman Lost Cities": the contract and expedition tiles (file upload...

]]>

New Image for Lost Cities

franchi — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:17:19 +0000

by franchi

My "Roman Lost Cities" with wooden tiles! (file uploaded)

]]>

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

Carmilla — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:25:38 +0000

by Carmilla

Hmmm. Boy, I never thought of LC as a screwage game. I mean, no, I'm not going to go out of my way to HELP my opponent by discarding the cards he needs, but out-and-out screwage? I'd put this way at the bottom of the scale. And I've never seen any animosity in this game. You might want to stay away from, say, Sticheln, or even Coloretto.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

andreww — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:54:33 +0000

by andreww

Undermining the other player doesn't have to lead to animosity. It's play, that's all, no different from capturing a pawn or building the last Small Market. One player decides to hold on to a card, sacrificing an action and a spot in his hand, hoping it will lower his opponent's score enough to be worth the trouble it's costing. You also learn to try to have enough cards in a suit to give you a fair chance at a good score before you commit, so your opponent can't block you - or rather, his risk is greater that the blocking effort is a bigger cost to him than the block is to you.

It shouldn't be personal, for goodness sake, like someone holding on to Indonesia in Risk just so you won't get the two army bonus...

Andrew

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: Wading into familiar waters.

fbeukema — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 02:28:50 +0000

by fbeukema

I don't think this warrants a separate session report (though it would speed my session reporter microbadge; ah, well), but my wife and I played a game of Lost Cities this evening and it was great fun. Very competitive, but she ended up trouncing me. I was never able, until the last round, to really pull off anything beyond breaking slightly-above-even on a given expedition. My second round score was 6. Final scores: Melissa 226 to Fred 120.

What makes me really happy is that we now have another Euro-style game that either one of us can win. It is no damn fun reliably trouncing or being reliably trounced, and especially if you're gaming with a spouse or significant other, parity is important. I know Lost Cities has sort of a stereotype around here as "the game to play with your girlfriend," but I'm happy to say that more than that stereotype suggests, it is enjoyable for both parties.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

Anjohl — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 23:27:13 +0000

by Anjohl

Well, the 8/12 occurence rate was an idea. Perhaps a D20, with 5 different event cards, which is a 25% ratio. Either way, we will be trying out some of the ideas, just to mix it up a little.

We have found lately that Lost Cities can create some animosity, as it seems like the best strategy is to intentionally play not to score, but to screw over your opponent. This can create a fiar amount of tension...

New Image for Lost Cities

thirdeye333 — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:58:29 +0000

by thirdeye333

Still thinking......

]]>

New Image for Lost Cities

thirdeye333 — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:52:58 +0000

by thirdeye333

My daughter preparing her opening card

]]>

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: Wading into familiar waters.

mshapiro — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:56:59 +0000

by mshapiro

I love this idea! Call it Lost Economies. Competing corporations would race for, hmm, debt mitigation, TARP funding, year-end bonus payouts, Ponzi-scheme money, and Foreign Direct Investment. Each color would have three Lobbyist cards.

Two small rule changes:

* A negative score will be bailed out until it is a respectable (though still losing) positive score.

* If one player wins the game by too many points s/he must surrender all relevant bonuses.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: Wading into familiar waters.

fbeukema — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:06:53 +0000

by fbeukema

Brilliant.

And nice to see a familiar face on here, I gotta say.

The game could be adapted for all kinds of situations. A simple makeover or custom edition would be trivially easy to make. Skin it for investment & capital allocation for business types. Maybe a version for project managers.

If we were still in school, I'd suggest to a local psych 101 student a potential study of correlation. Perhaps a personality self-test followed be a series of game sessions.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Sessions:: Re: Wading into familiar waters.

mshapiro — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:56:59 +0000

by mshapiro

The fog of war in Lost Cities reveals psychology more effectively than nearly any other Eurogame, I think. I've played a dozen games with my girlfriend and anyone looking on would be immediately able to tell which one of us tends towards caution and which towards impulsive risk-taking. From our record, it seems that Lost Cities rewards both approaches more or less equally.

How long will it be until Wall Street employers eschew those personality tests and just ask applicants to play a dozen games of Lost Cities?

Session: Lost Cities:: Wading into familiar waters.

fbeukema — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:12:44 +0000

by fbeukema

I picked up Lost Cities last weekend, and last night my wife and I had our first go at the game. We quite liked it.

We ended up playing six rounds and not really aggregating our scores. For the first few rounds, I majorly lucked out in my hands, having reasonably clear-cut paths to follow in terms of which expeditions to pursue, and seeing my subsequent draws support the choices I made.

A few thoughts:

Predictably, we struggled at first with spreading ourselves too thin, trying to do too much. As our hands went on, we were attempting fewer of the sites, sometimes ending up with two trips completely unattempted by either of us.

We were surprised by the sudden rush at the end of each hand, when suddenly you find yourself sprinting to get the cards down that you need to prevent expeditions from costing you points.

The game seems a good mix of luck and discernment. Going first seems in some ways to be a disadvantage, unless an expedition can spring fully-formed from your first hand (like Athena from Zeus' skull). You don't want to throw down on an expedition on which you might not be able to cover the cost. But you also don't want to give your opponent overly-valuable cards right off the bat with a series of discards. Choice!

Luck really can turn a hand dramatically. In one round, I had cleared red ("Lava Stonehenge"), and was just about to clear green (The Amazon) with a 10. But on my last usable draw, I got a red 10. Since red was already a little profitable, and had seven cards, two of which were investment, I was able to put down the red 10 for major profit including the 8-card bonus. You cannot plan for that.

Late in our session, I discovered how you can slow the game down as the end of a hand approaches. I was ending up not-quite (or barely) profitable on red and blue (weak-ankled Neptune), and had gone as far as I could with them. Neither of us had touched yellow (Egypt), and I had a 4, 7, 10 (or something similar) in the color. But there was also a size able yellow discard pile. With few cards in the draw stack, I was nonetheless able to prolong the round long enough to eke out a decent profit on yellow by drawing only from the yellow discard. My wife beat me handily on that round, but I managed to avoid a loss of points.

It's funny how foreign the concept of play-then-discard is to this American. I cannot think of another card game where your hand at the end of your turn is all you'll have to work with in the next one. Granted, I'm somewhat new to Eurogames, but it still struck me.

At the end of six hands, I had won four, and while my wife's scores generally went up over the course, mine got smaller round-by-round. But we remarked at how nice it was that even when a hand was going badly, the game was still enjoyable. We look forward to playing more.

New Image for Lost Cities

arminger — Thu, 28 May 2009 17:42:33 +0000

by arminger

Polish version cover. Published by Galakta.

]]>

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

andreww — Wed, 27 May 2009 16:06:21 +0000

by andreww

A few thoughts...

Battle Line is quite different from Lost Cities but quite fun. It's derived from Schotten-Totten, which you may be familiar with. The tactics card have an extra spin, though: you can only play one more than your opponent. So if you play one you cannot play another until I have played one. If I've played one and you've played none you could conceivably play two before you can no longer use them, until I play a second. You can *draw* all you like*, but you can't use them beyond this limit, and they do take up a regular draw. If you have a separate draw pile for events you might want to consider such an option so a player that's behind doesn't turn the game to chaos by playing events every turn.

You mentioned the pacing of LC: adding events will give people a *lot* more options, which they will need to consider. Expect the game to slow down if the event cards give them any choice at all, including when to play it.

As for the die, having an event two turns out of three seems a little much. If you want a madhouse, that will give it to you.

Andrew

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

kentreuber — Wed, 27 May 2009 05:14:06 +0000

by kentreuber

You might consider getting Lost Cities: The Board Game. You play cards which allow you to advance down the different color paths like the card game, but several spaces on each path have special effects (like getting bonus victory points, advancing a bonus space on any path, and gaining artifacts) which sound a lot like the effects of your event cards.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Re: Lost cities expansions?

Quarashi — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:58:45 +0000

by Quarashi

Have you looked into Battle Line? It's another Knizia card game that is very similar to that of Lost Cities with special tactics cards. You might like it.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Reviews:: Re: Lost Cities, or as I like to call it "an overproduced set matching card game"

Anjohl — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:28:18 +0000

by Anjohl

I got it today, and we loved it! Very much a game of "Risk/Reward". We played a total of seven full games! Our favorite aspects were the freedom of play style, the ability for a player to come from behind, as well as the SUPER speedy gameplay!

Thread: Lost Cities:: Variants:: Lost cities expansions?

Anjohl — Wed, 27 May 2009 01:25:26 +0000

by Anjohl

Ok, bear with me. A friend and I who are just getting into board games cut our teeth on the Catan Card game, and now have picked up lost cities.

Well, we played a total of seven games (LOVE the pacing!!!), but had some ideas afterwards.

The basic idea was this: Incorporate the event card idea from Catan Card into LC.

Two ways to accomplihs this were discussed:

1) Print out cards the same size as the stock ones, and insert X number of event cards in the deck. Let's say that they count as a card play, and instantly draw you a card. We thought 6 would be a good number.

2) My preferred idea was to create a seperate event deck of about 8 cards, or better yet, draw up a template with 8 different occurences, and use a 12 sides dice rolled every turn for the event. 1-8 are events, 9-12 means nothing happens.

Examples of possible events:

1) "Runaway win" All players count their current scores. The player with the lesser score must randomly shuffle 3 cards from his hand back into the deck, drawing 3 to replace them.

2) "Double back" Each player may choose one expedition and discard a numbered card from it.

3) "Cover your Tracks!" Play this card on a discard pile, your opponent cannot access any cards under this one.

Thoughts?

Reply: Lost Cities:: General:: Re: Average score?

jammasterjake — Sat, 23 May 2009 04:18:00 +0000

by jammasterjake

My girlfriend and I have kept track of all of our game scores. Up to 234 of them now.

For Player 1:
Avg: 43.175
Median: 40
Max: 135
Min: -16
Std. Dev.: 27.4

Player 2:
Avg: 36.49
Median: 37.5
Max: 111
Min: -26
Std. Dev.: 24.42

I'll let you decide which player is which.:)

I am reasonably certain scores are correlated as well, though my idea was shot down on here a year or two ago. Hope this helps.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Reviews:: Re: Basically solitaire where you share the deck with another person...

thelawnet — Sat, 23 May 2009 00:27:07 +0000

by thelawnet

drunkenKOALA wrote:
If this is the first game, I think the yellow handshake may very well be the best play. If this is the third and final game and I am winning, then probably not.

There are 54 points in every color, or 27 per player on average. So chances are good to break even. (yes I do realize that if you start the game with zero yellow points cards your expected value would be less than that, but it

Don't think so. There are 9 yellow points cards out of 51 remaining, and 21 pick ups to look for them.

I did a million trial simulation and the average points value is 22.2. This is actually very close to 20, and certainly not 27 (which is obvious really - there's no way you're going to get half the points when you have zero already and the expected value of the other player's points is clearly greater than zero.

While 22.2 is greater than 20, and hence not in itself proof that this is a bad play, this assumes you are able to play all the cards, and that you don't get them in a bad order. The reality is some turns you will play a 5 and then immediately get a 4. Clearly with the impossibility of knowing what's coming, having to manage your other suits, etc., the 22.2 expected value cannot be realised. I tried the following strategy: play all cards in turn for yellow, i.e., 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, but when there is one more card left than you have yellows, play a yellow. (i.e. if you have 5 yellows and there are 6 draws left, play your lowest yellow), the EV is 20.8 points. This is a fairly simple strategy (note, if you play your lowest yellow when there are an equal number of cards left as yellows, the EV is 19.2). I feel that this is close enough to 20 points (bearing in mind that you may have other cards to be played, especially in late game), that playing a handshake with no other cards in that suit is I feel a net losing play. It should only be played if you are behind and need to take a risk to win.

Reply: Lost Cities:: Reviews:: Re: Not my cup of tea but she likes it a lot

thelawnet — Fri, 22 May 2009 23:07:07 +0000

by thelawnet

grouchysmurf wrote:
16 hands so it seems to me, taking the randomness into account, not that improbable.

Or to put it another way, losing 8 games is a 1/256 chance - it's 99.5% likely that you are worse at this game, and it's not luck.

New Image for Lost Cities

Annkelia — Fri, 15 May 2009 14:40:53 +0000

by Annkelia

Staged

]]>