Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
Cuba is a game which rewards those players who are good at choosing a strategy which differs from and complements the strategies of the other players (similar to Puerto Rico), and who can get a victory point engine created quickly and running with little interruption (because of the short game length of only 6 rounds in which to make points).
I've spent some time looking at the major VP engine strategies I've seen in my games so far, and attempting to assign relative values to each of them.
Of course, one of the other interesting aspects of the game is that none of these strategies are that expensive, meaning that players usually end up striving choosing primary strategy and at least one secondary strategy (e.g. being a Cigar producer, but also picking up the Inn for some bonus points, or the Small Branch Office to help guarantee 3VP shipping opportunities for cigars). So none of these are exclusive directions -- simply overall "flavours" of the game. That's part of what gives the game a lot of replayability for me.
I'd be interested if anyone has found other combinations which are effective.
 Black Market and Shipping: Black Market (product good) + Branch Office (ship 1 or 2 items during Foreman phase)
Initial resource cost: 5/3/0 or 5/4/0 = 8 or 9 resources. Slow to start.
 Flexible. Most resilient to other player's evolving strategies.
Quick shipping to get best ships. You're already shipping while most other players are still using their Foreman to process their merchandise
Save the Mayor. If you desire, you can ship and still save the Mayor for Start Player or Parliament phases.
 Depends solely on shipping. If the ships fill up (especially in 4-5 player games) your point return is going to drop considerably. Having a direct conversion building like the monastery can help offset this problem.
An easy strategy to subvert. Once players are "on to you," they can start stockpiling merchandise and picking Mayor on the very first round of future turns to block you out of the best ships.
Rum: Distillery (sugar=>rum) + Rum Cafe (3x rum=>2VP) = 4VP per turn (or 6 if using Tradeswoman to acquire a 3rd sugar)
Initial resource cost: 3/3/1 = 7 resources
Rum doesn't spoil
Rum can often be placed on a ship for 3VP instead of 2, often uncontested since it is rare compared to the products
Cigars: Cigar Factory (tobacco=>cigar) + Cigar Cafe (3x cigar=>2VP) = 4 VP per turn (or 6 if using Tradeswoman to acquire a 3rd tobacco)
Initial resource cost: 3/3/1 = 7 resources
Cigars don't spoil
Cigars can often be placed on a ship for 3VP instead of 2, often uncontested since it is rare compared to the products
 Straight VP: Hotel (2VP) + Inn (1VP) = 3VP per turn
Initial resource cost: 3/3/2 = 8 resources
Cannot be blocked. There's almost nothing an opponent can do (change the duty, use up shipping spaces, etc) to prevent you from getting those 3VP every turn.
Not dependent on any merchandise (any additional merchandise can be shipped or used for duties, for additional VP as icing on the cake). If you've got the resources to double up, this makes a great pair strategy with many of the others in the list for supplemental income.
Single action (Foreman) needed. Most other strategies require Worker + Foreman.
Duties and Subsidies: Town Hall (2 extra votes) and Bank (for extra money to bid higher)
Initial resource cost: 3/4/0 = 7 resources
Flexible. If the first subsidy you've locked in doesn't work for you or is depleted, bring in a replacement.
Can be combined with some of the cash-generating buildings to raise a high Duty and block people out of the 5VP duty. Or similar strategies with a particular resource or product you're strong in.
If you're able to produce the right resources, a subsidy maxes out at 7VP per turn, much higher than most of the VP buildings.
No direct VP engine. You're basically angling to get the Duties and Bills which help you the most and others the least. There's a bit of luck involved here which can lead to delays in getting a good duty and subsidy in place.
Water: Dam (2 water) + Golf Course (4x water=>1VP) = 3VP per turn (or 4 if taking another water from Tradeswoman)
Initial resource cost: 0/2/2 = 4 resources
Water doesn't spoil
Can use spare products for shipping / duties
Well-positioned to make a killing on water subsidy when it comes up
No opportunity to ship water for more than 1VP
Spends 2 VP of your conversion resources to build the building
Stone: Cement Factory (4x stone=>1VP) = 2VP per turn (or 3 if taking a stone from Tradeswoman)
Initial resource cost: 1/2/0 = 3 resources
Stone doesn't spoil
Can use spare products for shipping / duties
Cheap (only one inexpensive building). Easy to combine with a product/good strategy to generate two parallel streams of VPs.
No opportunity to ship stone for more than 1VP
Spends 2 VP of your conversion resources to build the building
Difficult to crack into the rum/cigar business
Wood: Saw Mill (4x wood=>1VP) = 2VP per turn (or 3 if taking a stone from Tradeswoman)
Initial resource cost: 2/1/0 = 3 resources
Wood doesn't spoil
Can use spare products for shipping / duties
Cheap (only one inexpensive building). Easy to combine with a product/good strategy to generate two parallel streams of VPs.
No opportunity to ship wood for more than 1VP
Spends 2 VP of your conversion resources to build the building
Difficult to crack into the rum/cigar business
Generic Products: Monastery (2x any product=>1VP) = 2 VP per turn
Initial resource cost: 2/1/0 = 3 resources
Products can often be placed on a ship for 2 or 3VP instead of 1
Complements specialization in citrus, which is usually a fairly uncontested item
Cheap (only one inexpensive building). Easy to combine with a resource strategy to generate two parallel streams of VPs.
Spoilage. Requires frequent use of warehouse to prevent any overflow products from spoiling before they can be converted in a future round.
Gives similar VP conversion as cheapest ships. In a game of less than 4 or 5 players, ships are not full enough to justify using an alternate conversion strategy
Other ideas which look good on paper, but just don't really work out, in my experience:
Lighthouse: In a game of only 6 rounds, it takes 3 whole rounds for your custom-selected ship to make it to the 3VP slot. Assuming you're able to build and activate the lighthouse in the very first round, it means you only have control of the 3VP ships in rounds 4-6. Paired with the fact that this only really works if you have a monopoly of a specific product or good, it's really difficult to execute in combination with one of the monopoly strategies (e.g. you're either a turn late with building your primary engine, or a turn or two late with building your lighthouse). It's really tempting to play the lighthouse the way many people seem to misinterpret it from the icon, namely, that it allows you to swap the order of two ships already in port rather than swapping the ship at sea with one from the deck. Seems like a more viable strategy, but should probably be accompanied by an increase in building cost.
[i]Edit: Devalued Branch Office strategy, and increased value of Duty and Subsidy Strategy.
-
John Brier
United States
Aventura
Florida
-
I always appreciate a good strategy article- it's a real shame that we're flooded with unnecessary reviews, images, etc, but there are almost no strategy articles.
I only played Cuba once, and found it mildly enjoyable; but after reading this I am curious to try it again.
-
Alex Bove
United States
East Lansdowne
Pennsylvania
-
I too appreciate your work here, Matt, but I disagree with your conclusions. First, the black market/branch office strategy only generates 3 VP per turn if you ship on the best boat (if you have a large branch office, it could be 6 VP, but that's optimistic). So it's roughly the same as cigars or rum, though perhaps a bit more flexible. Second, the two buildings you're relying on cost a ton of resources to build. The black market is especially costly. I don't see how you can have them up and running before the 3rd round, while cigar/rum players are churning out their wares by round 2.
More importantly, you're not considering the great importance of several subsidy bills. The water strategy only generates 3/4 VP per turn if you water your golf course. If, instead, you hoard your water, buy a bank to generate cash, and get the water subsidy passed, you can now earn 7 VP per turn. Even if you can only employ the water subsidy for three rounds at max capacity, you average almost 4 VP per turn over the course of the game. Then, when the subsidy runs out, you use the water on the golf course for extra VPs. The huge downside to this strategy, of course, is that the water subsidy must come up before round 5, but the advantage is that it doesn't cost much to build the dam, so you can spend your time/money while waiting for the subsidy building the bank, hotel, etc., and/or shipping to stay in the race.
Other subsidy-based strategies are possible (cash, building, etc.), though they're not as strong as water because it's hard to outpace opponents by 4 or 5 buildings, resources, etc., or by 12-15 cash, every turn (as you note in your final point above). It is relatively easy to have 4-5 more water than opponents, however, since without the dam they're only able to make one water per turn, assuming they never use it for more crops.
The key point here is that there's a lot more to Cuba than shipping.
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
montu wrote: I too appreciate your work here, Matt, but I disagree with your conclusions. First, the black market/branch office strategy only generates 3 VP per turn if you ship on the best boat (if you have a large branch office, it could be 6 VP, but that's optimistic). So it's roughly the same as cigars or rum, though perhaps a bit more flexible.
You're right. I didn't consider that the Branch Office strategy is limited by ships and doesn't have an alternate conversion mechanism. That certainly bumps it down a notch or two. An edit is probably in order.
Quote: Second, the two buildings you're relying on cost a ton of resources to build. The black market is especially costly. I don't see how you can have them up and running before the 3rd round, while cigar/rum players are churning out their wares by round 2.
Great point, and one worth noting. Resource cost and earliest round likely are good variables to consider, so perhaps I'll find a way of including that in the analysis.
Quote: More importantly, you're not considering the great importance of several subsidy bills. The water strategy only generates 3/4 VP per turn if you water your golf course. If, instead, you hoard your water, buy a bank to generate cash, and get the water subsidy passed, you can now earn 7 VP per turn. Even if you can only employ the water subsidy for three rounds at max capacity, you average almost 4 VP per turn over the course of the game. Then, when the subsidy runs out, you use the water on the golf course for extra VPs. The huge downside to this strategy, of course, is that the water subsidy must come up before round 5, but the advantage is that it doesn't cost much to build the dam, so you can spend your time/money while waiting for the subsidy building the bank, hotel, etc., and/or shipping to stay in the race.
Other subsidy-based strategies are possible (cash, building, etc.), though they're not as strong as water because it's hard to outpace opponents by 4 or 5 buildings, resources, etc., or by 12-15 cash, every turn (as you note in your final point above). It is relatively easy to have 4-5 more water than opponents, however, since without the dam they're only able to make one water per turn, assuming they never use it for more crops.
The key point here is that there's a lot more to Cuba than shipping.
I've yet to see a subsidy strategy work as a primary strategy as opposed to a tactic, primarily because it's either based on luck (you're praying that your targeted subsidy will come up early enough) or reactive (you respond to the earliest subsidy which is a good one, but then are a turn or two late getting an engine up), but with a max of 7VP per turn, perhaps a person can make up for lost time in the duration of only the last 2-3 turns. It's very possible that my opponents so far simply didn't know how to do this effectively, so now I'm tempted to think about it and try it myself next game.
Thanks for all your contributions.
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
verandi wrote: I always appreciate a good strategy article- it's a real shame that we're flooded with unnecessary reviews, images, etc, but there are almost no strategy articles.
I've noticed the same thing. It's almost as if the strategy-analysis sort of folk are afraid of offending the "oh no! spoiler! let me figure it out for myself!" folk, and so just play it safe by not posting anything.
But a game like Cuba, especially with its short turn length, can seem really pointless and random the first game if you aren't actually generating points in any structured manner. It feels like it's over before you really got to do anything. As opposed to some other heavier strategy games which tend to adjust their length a little while people are still figuring out what to do (I find that Puerto Rico tends to go more rounds when most players are new and still exploring because the VPs / colonists run out much more slowly).
Quote: I only played Cuba once, and found it mildly enjoyable; but after reading this I am curious to try it again.
Great!  I hope I've inspired you to take another crack at it. I liked it infinitely more the second time than the first, and it continues to grow on me each time after that.
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
I think I may have a rule wrong... why does the Water subsidy top out at 7vp/turn? I know that in my last game we did play incorrectly, allowing the water player to take water even after the cubes ran out - we assumed that was the rule because otherwise he would have locked the rest of us out of water for the rest of the game. He was pulling in 12/14/16 points in the last few rounds from the water subsidy, while buying buildings and earning money (at Market) to ensure that subsidy stayed in play.
But even without the incorrect rule, he only had 5 "vitual" water cubes - he would have pulled in 11 points on the final turn. Is there a limit tot he number of points you can get off the Subsidy?
I'm a little disappointed in Cuba because the Water strategy dominates the game (even if it doesn't always win), the Vote building and the Corruption Act similarly affect the game (possibly by the same player as the water strategy, ensuring the water subsidy enters and remains in play), and many of the buildings are a Non-issue either because they're terrible in general, or there's not enough time in the game to really use them. I feel like 6 rounds might be too short for the game or something.
it's too bad, because before I played it I thought Cuba would be my new favorite game, based on all the descriptions.
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
sedjtroll wrote: But even without the incorrect rule, he only had 5 "vitual" water cubes - he would have pulled in 11 points on the final turn. Is there a limit tot he number of points you can get off the Subsidy?
Yes, probably the most frequently forgotten rule of the game is that the maximum points you can achieve via any subsidy card are 7 points per turn (you can get an additional 7 points next turn, if the subsidy is still in place, and so on, but no more than 7 on any one turn).
It perplexes me why this isn't printed on the cards themselves (e.g. "up to a maximum of 7 VP").
Here's another thread on the topic: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/316636
Quote: I'm a little disappointed in Cuba because the Water strategy dominates the game (even if it doesn't always win) . . . it's too bad, because before I played it I thought Cuba would be my new favorite game, based on all the descriptions.
Try it with the limit in place and see if you like it better. The water strategy is competitive, but it's only landed the player who uses it about 2nd place in the games I've played, far from a killer strategy. But forgetting the 7VP limit rule, the water strategy definitely runs away with the game.
Incidentally, it seems that Cuba has more rule clarification threads than almost any game I've played. It's unfortunate that such a great game is spoiled by such unclear rule documentation (both in the rulebook and on the board, as you had pointed out with the min/max market price issue)....
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
mussels wrote: probably the most frequently forgotten rule of the game is that the maximum points you can achieve via any subsidy card are 7 points per turn (you can get an additional 7 points next turn, if the subsidy is still in place, and so on, but no more than 7 on any one turn).
It perplexes me why this isn't printed on the cards themselves (e.g. "up to a maximum of 7 VP").
Holy crap! Really? wow, that's horrible! there's a stupid rule about the free product from the tradeswoman that is also ridiculous that we don' even play with.
Man, I've just dropped Cuba like 2 points in my rating :/
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
sedjtroll wrote: mussels wrote: probably the most frequently forgotten rule of the game is that the maximum points you can achieve via any subsidy card are 7 points per turn (you can get an additional 7 points next turn, if the subsidy is still in place, and so on, but no more than 7 on any one turn).
It perplexes me why this isn't printed on the cards themselves (e.g. "up to a maximum of 7 VP"). Holy crap! Really? wow, that's horrible! there's a stupid rule about the free product from the tradeswoman that is also ridiculous that we don' even play with. Man, I've just dropped Cuba like 2 points in my rating :/
I guess that's why everyone's different. In my opinion, the 7VP subsidy maximum keeps things balanced. On the other hand, it seems like Cuba has a few too many "brute force" checks and balances added in to control things like that which may have had a more elegant solution with more time (and which generate a lot of the confusion for new players as well).
I do agree with you that I think I like the Tradeswoman's alternate action better without the "cheapest product" limitation. Otherwise it's not very valuable at all compared to the architect's 2VP or the mayor's $4.
Someone on another thread commented that it was to prevent you from turning around and selling that product for a huge profit, but you can't use both the Tradeswoman's primary and secondary action in the same turn anyway.
So, yeah, if there were one of the adjustment rules I considered needless and confusing, it would be that one.
But the 7VP limit for water? Without it, the Golf Course + Dam becomes a runaway strategy and reduces the legitimate paths to victory.
-
Seth Jaffee
United States
Tucson
Arizona
-
mussels wrote: sedjtroll wrote: mussels wrote: probably the most frequently forgotten rule of the game is that the maximum points you can achieve via any subsidy card are 7 points per turn (you can get an additional 7 points next turn, if the subsidy is still in place, and so on, but no more than 7 on any one turn).
It perplexes me why this isn't printed on the cards themselves (e.g. "up to a maximum of 7 VP"). Holy crap! Really? wow, that's horrible! there's a stupid rule about the free product from the tradeswoman that is also ridiculous that we don' even play with. Man, I've just dropped Cuba like 2 points in my rating :/ I guess that's why everyone's different. In my opinion, the 7VP subsidy maximum keeps things balanced. On the other hand, it seems like Cuba has a few too many "brute force" checks and balances added in to control things like that which may have had a more elegant solution with more time (and which generate a lot of the confusion for new players as well). I do agree with you that I think I like the Tradeswoman's alternate action better without the "cheapest product" limitation. Otherwise it's not very valuable at all compared to the architect's 2VP or the mayor's $4. Someone on another thread commented that it was to prevent you from turning around and selling that product for a huge profit, but you can't use both the Tradeswoman's primary and secondary action in the same turn anyway. So, yeah, if there were one of the adjustment rules I considered needless and confusing, it would be that one. But the 7VP limit for water? Without it, the Golf Course + Dam becomes a runaway strategy and reduces the legitimate paths to victory.
I'm not sure whether I am for or against there being a strong water strategy, but I'm annoyed by rules like that. It's like the water strategy was dominant, so they said "ok, let's cap the amount of points you can get from the subsidy!"
-
John Brier
United States
Aventura
Florida
-
mussels wrote: verandi wrote: I always appreciate a good strategy article- it's a real shame that we're flooded with unnecessary reviews, images, etc, but there are almost no strategy articles. I've noticed the same thing. It's almost as if the strategy-analysis sort of folk are afraid of offending the "oh no! spoiler! let me figure it out for myself!" folk, and so just play it safe by not posting anything.
I think a major contributing factor to the problem is that this hobby has turned into a "cult of the new", where people always want to play the newest "it" game and never play the same game more than a couple times. Thus the big thumb-getters here are reviews and any other articles related to the latest greatest game; it's so overwhelming that I've stopped using the "hot" category to filter articles, and instead rely on the "notify of content" feature for games I'm potentially interested in + my geekbuddies interests.
I guess the phenomenon is just a manifestation of consumerism, although it's also true that many games can't even withstand repeated plays and ensuing analysis. The games I tend to like though are precisely those that are deep enough for this activity, and there are at least dozens of those...
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
verandi wrote: I always appreciate a good strategy article- it's a real shame that we're flooded with unnecessary reviews, images, etc, but there are almost no strategy articles.
Another possible contributing factor for the relative lack of strategy articles occurred to me this morning:
There are bronze/silver/gold microbadge awards for reviews, session reports, and images, and even geeklists, but no microbadge for Strategy contributions.
Perhaps this should be remedied if they're considered valuable on the site....
-
Troy Davis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
-
Matt, I've subscribed to this link and I eagerly await any further revisions you might have to your current strategy analysis based on feedback. Great job!
-
Matt Musselman
Canada
Burnaby
BC
-
This weekend I played a 3 player game. The rough strategy choice breakdown (as I wanted to test some things out):
Me: Straight VP strategy + Generic Product (Monastery) strategy
Emil: Cigars + Large Branch Office
Ian: Cigars + Bank
Thoughts:
The Straight VP strategy kept its spot as a strategy, possibly with an upgrade to - I had both buildings up and running by the second turn. I had to sacrifice almost all other goals to get enough resources (my worker placement and tradeswoman choices were both solely focused on acquiring enough wood, stone, and water), but from that point on, as long as I activated those buildings with the foreman, I had 5 whole turns of 3VP/turn that was completely unblockable and used no action that I wouldn't have otherwise used.
It was kind of a dull strategy (admittedly) but effective, because the 3VP (plus anything I added on from the 2VP architect here and there, or shipping points on a couple of turns) on average still beat out the1 or 2 large shipments the other players made, and they were spending a lot of their turns on production, trading, and shipping to get them.
The downside: for the other half of my strategy I chose the generic product one, just because I'd never done this at all. The result? Useless, but primarily because of my own mistake. I didn't think to make sure my Warehouse was in the line of fire of my VP buildings, and I lost a product every single turn, many of which could have been effectively shipped for 2-3VP in the next turn or used for a future duty or traded for cash (which I was entirely without for the last 2-3 turns of the game, losing out on a lot of duty VP). So I can't really comment on the effectiveness of the strategy itself, but having the warehouse is indeed critical, so I'm going to highlight it more. Without the warehouse, I think I made maybe 4 VP this way total.
The end result was that with the Straight VP strategy, and despite the disaster that was my attempt at the Generic Product co-strategy, I came in 2nd place by only one meager VP. So the Straight VP strategy is definitely a keeper.
-
Dexsting Indemnikuck
United States
Milwaukee
Wisconsin
-
This was great to see other way people might go laid out nicely. I've only played 3 times, but each time pretty much ended up with the VP building Strategy and churning out 2 and then 3VPs a turn, and then just adapting every year to whatever was out there without setting myself up to any secondary engine.
-
|
|
Posted Mon Jun 2, 2008 8:22 am
