Laszlo Molnar
Hungary
Budapest
-
After the first try the 2-player game felt a bit lacking, as if it had less tension than the 3- and 4-player games. Of course it’s the same hard (or easy) to win but it’s a lot easier to score high points than in a 4-player game. I mean, if you count with using all the 55 tiles, even distribution would mean something like
in a 4-player game: 13.75 tile per player (4.58 for each color if you have 3 columns, 3.44 if you have 4)
in a 3-player game: 18.67 tile per player (6.2 for each color if you have 3 columns, 4.67 if you have 4, 3.73 if you have 5 columns)
in a 2-player game: 27.5 tile per player (9.2 for each color if you have 3 columns, 6.88 if you have 4, 5.5 if you have 5 columns)
As you have maximum score for a column when it has 6 stones it seems the numbers aren’t that fine
So I’m thinking what should be done.
*In all the other Keltis games you use 30 cards less when playing 2-player, because of the same reason. So one thing you could do is taking 15 tiles off of the 55 and play the game with the remaining 40. But since this version is the most luck-dependent of the series, I’m not sure if it works.
*So what if in case of a 2-player game we stuck to the scoring of the original game instead?
1 tiles of a color: - 4 points
2 tiles: - 3 points
3 tiles: - 2 points
4 tiles: +1 points
5 tiles: +2 points
6 tiles: +3 points
7 tiles: +7 points
8 tiles: +10 points
Changed, based on experiences: 7 tiles: +6 points
8 tiles: +7 points
9 tiles: +10 points
Scoring of the stones can remain as it is.
As I’m just learning the game I can be totally wrong. I also know that in the upcoming weeks I won’t have the possibility to try the alternative scoring at home. So if you try this one please let me know how it felt  And when I have time to try this version I’m also going to post how it went here.
-
Huzonfirst
United States
Manassas
Virginia
For the second time in five years, the G-Men are Super Bowl champs! Woo hoo!!!!!
-
I certainly think the scoring for 2 players should be changed, Laszlo. In fact, my friend and I have come up with some altered scoring that we want to try out to see how it plays. The publisher stated that they wanted to keep the game simple, so they didn't change the scoring for different numbers of players. But with the rules in the box, with 2 players there's no reason not to collect tiles in all five suits every time and that takes a lot of tension and strategy out of the game, IMO.
Whenever my friend and I get a chance to try out some of our new scoring rules I'll report the results here.
-
Laszlo Molnar
Hungary
Budapest
-
Thanks for the response! I guessed the reason behind the scoring might be keeping things simple. I just think I'll add O'Lava's scoring help of the Card game
to the box ad use this one for 2-player games. (actually even if it's for simplicity I don't understand why this could not be done in the original, printing a double-side scoring aid with different scoring for 2 than for 3 or 4).
-
Laszlo Molnar
Hungary
Budapest
-
I have played the game 2-player with both scoring options. I still didn't really like the original one; I'm not sure if I find the new one perfect though, as getting 9 stones in a color is close to impossible (it's possible only if your opponent is not collecting that color, but even then quite probably you have to wait for all the tiles to appear - and by that time your opponent has quite probably collected the stones). I think one of the numbers should be left out and then this one could work pretty well:
1 stone (tile) of a color: - 4 points
2 stones of a color: - 3 points
3 stones of a color: - 2 points
4 stones of a color: +1 points
5 stones of a color: +2 points
6 stones of a color: +3 points
7 stones of a color: +7 points
8 stones of a color: +10 points
-
|
|
Posted Tue Sep 7, 2010 2:23 pm
