GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
9,282 Supporters
$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
17 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
18 Posts

Condottiere» Forums » General

Subject: 2nd or 3rd edition victory condition? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Dill Bear
msg tools
So I've seen pretty mixed opinions on which edition's ruleset to use, but one thing I can't figure out is if people use the 3rd editions victory condition with the 2nd edition card rules/set.

Obviously, there's a big difference between 2nd edition (three adjoining regions or whoever has the most at the end) and 3rd edition (three adjoining or five total) victory condition.

If you play with 2nd edition cards, do you also play with the old victory condition? Also the 2nd edition comes with 10 cubes per color, and the 3rd edition only six... does that matter for using the 2nd edition ruleset with 3rd edition components? Seems like they did that in light of the new victory condition.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
BearDot25 wrote:
So I've seen pretty mixed opinions on which edition's ruleset to use, but one thing I can't figure out is if people use the 3rd editions victory condition with the 2nd edition card rules/set.

Obviously, there's a big difference between 2nd edition (three adjoining regions or whoever has the most at the end) and 3rd edition (three adjoining or five total) victory condition.

If you play with 2nd edition cards, do you also play with the old victory condition? Also the 2nd edition comes with 10 cubes per color, and the 3rd edition only six... does that matter for using the 2nd edition ruleset with 3rd edition components? Seems like they did that in light of the new victory condition.


Burn the 3rd edition rules in their entirety, along with the ridiculous courtesans and strategically deaf bishop rules.

There was nothing wrong with the game as it stood, including the end game victory conditions.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Flo
Germany
Munich
Bavaria
flag msg tools
http://cpc.cx/jEa Made in Savoie
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryucoo wrote:
BearDot25 wrote:
So I've seen pretty mixed opinions on which edition's ruleset to use, but one thing I can't figure out is if people use the 3rd editions victory condition with the 2nd edition card rules/set.

Obviously, there's a big difference between 2nd edition (three adjoining regions or whoever has the most at the end) and 3rd edition (three adjoining or five total) victory condition.

If you play with 2nd edition cards, do you also play with the old victory condition? Also the 2nd edition comes with 10 cubes per color, and the 3rd edition only six... does that matter for using the 2nd edition ruleset with 3rd edition components? Seems like they did that in light of the new victory condition.


Burn the 3rd edition rules in their entirety, along with the ridiculous courtesans and strategically deaf bishop rules.

There was nothing wrong with the game as it stood, including the end game victory conditions.


How does the bishop differes in the 2nd edition?

I own the 3rd, is there a link with the rules difference listed?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Ahearne
United States
Ayer
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryucoo wrote:
Burn the 3rd edition rules in their entirety, along with the ridiculous courtesans and strategically deaf bishop rules.

This made me laugh out loud.

I have the 3rd edition, which is the only one I've played. I've played it with player counts of 6,5,4 and 3*. Every group I played this with raved about how great the game is.

Not having any experience with the 2nd edition, I can't compare, but really. Purists.

*Not recommended for 2, though. With 2 it is basically the card game War.
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
The 2nd edition is much richer in strategy and depth. The 3rd edition is practically broken. FFG tried to ‘jazz’ it up by adding additional, unnecessary cards and then nerfed the bishop into something random and without strategy.

This game with 2nd edition rules is an easy 8. With 3rd edition its basically an advanced game of snap, so for me becomes a 4.

3rd edition adds courtesan cards, which are just inane. The essence of the game is trying to steal power from the ‘leader’ through the encouragement of alliances. Having a card that does that just rips a whole layer off the game. It also takes focus away from the whole thrust of Condottiere – winning battles. To become Condottiere you must win (or help someone else win) a battle. Not a random side bet of who drew the most courtesans which steals the focus away and also dilutes the deck with low, boring cards. All they do is remove the entire jeopardy of winning a battle, which was a twofold advantage of gaining a territory AND becoming the Condottiere. Take the second advantage out and you just make people uninterested in contesting, which makes for a very boring game in comparison.

They also added the Spring card, which essentially nerfs the Winter card, making it far less interesting. The mathematical fiddliness of Spring is also annoying.

Worst is the change to the Bishop rules, which for me destroys the game completely. In the 2nd Edition, when someone played the bishop the whole battle ended immediately as a draw, all cards discarded. Which added a huge layer of strategy, as well as thematic depth, in that you could tease opponents out into the open and play all their strong cards, then withdraw yours and null the battle with the Bishop, weakening your opponents for the next fight. The fear of the bishop was what drove the game, the tension of playing a top card that might be lost for nothing was immense. The new rule the bishop is practically useless – it just removes the highest card on the table. Big whoop. Half the time the leader (the only person you have any interest in taking out) hasn’t played the highest card. So your bishop hits the player in 2nd or 3rd place, which is pointless. Having no way to stop a leader makes the game insipid. And stripping all that strategic depth to something that just cancels a random card makes the game so light I’ve no interest in playing it.

As for the ‘keeping cards’ rule of the 3rd edition – Christ, way to break the game. It just creates stalemates and is a terrible rule. It also robs the game of the strategic depth of folding, teaming up together to rush hands, flood battlesfields with cards, so you could fold and catch the ‘leader’ out, forcing him to fold his strong cards. Him being able to keep them strips another layer of depth from the game, and turns Condottiere into a filler at best.

If you want to play a rich, strategic area control game with alliances and backstabbery play 2nd ed. If you want to play a light filler card game that is prone to breaking, play 3rd ed.

You can ‘convert’ 2nd to 3rd edition easily enough.

Just remove 1 scarecrow, 3 bishops, all the springs (3) and all the courtesans (12) from the deck*. Then use the Eurogames rules here:

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/710/condottierehtm

*You could keep 5 Courtesans in the deck to use as 1 strength mercs for an EXACT card count match, but for visual simplicity we always leave them out Entirely and haven’t noticed an issue.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Ahearne
United States
Ayer
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ryucoo wrote:
You can ‘convert’ 2nd to 3rd edition easily enough.

You mean the opposite.

I'm intrigued, so we will give the 2nd edition version a go, using this conversion.

Still -- I haven't seen the downsides you describe (again, I laughed, the disparagement is so hyberbolic). Although, I admit we don't have alliances, really (aside from saying, for example, "Joel's getting ahead - we can't let him win the next one.") I haven't looked at the 2nd edition rules, but in 3rd edition there's only a few things you can do to help someone else win, and we've only used them in an emergency situation (for example, throwing a round to Paul because Andrew would win the game if he took it).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan Arnold
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To get back to your original question - I can't see why it would be better or worse to use the 2nd edition victory conditions instead of the third. It sounds to me like a nearly arbitrary change, much like it seems in the rest of the 3rd edition.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dill Bear
msg tools
jdarnold wrote:
To get back to your original question - I can't see why it would be better or worse to use the 2nd edition victory conditions instead of the third. It sounds to me like a nearly arbitrary change, much like it seems in the rest of the 3rd edition.


Thanks for answering, appreciate it! It seems like people play this game 10 different ways so it can be confusing to keep track of all the little details of what rule from what editions is the "best" way to play (if there even is a "best" way).

The other question I had was regarding the cubes: 2nd edition comes with 10 for each player, 3rd edition only six. Does this matter at all? Say, if you're playing 2nd edition rules with the 3rd edition game? I haven't played the game yet so apologies if this is a silly question.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
elcoderdude wrote:
Ryucoo wrote:
You can ‘convert’ 2nd to 3rd edition easily enough.

You mean the opposite.

I'm intrigued, so we will give the 2nd edition version a go, using this conversion.

Still -- I haven't seen the downsides you describe (again, I laughed, the disparagement is so hyberbolic). Although, I admit we don't have alliances, really (aside from saying, for example, "Joel's getting ahead - we can't let him win the next one.") I haven't looked at the 2nd edition rules, but in 3rd edition there's only a few things you can do to help someone else win, and we've only used them in an emergency situation (for example, throwing a round to Paul because Andrew would win the game if he took it).


You haven’t played 2nd ed. So no, you wouldn’t really see the alliance aspect. And The changes made in the 3rd ed are fact, not my opinion.

Spring nerfs winter.
Bishop no longer nullifies battles.
You can keep cards for the next round.
Courtesan cards exist, and the most courtesan cards wins control of the condottiere.

If you can’t see how this robs the game of strategic depth right from the off, then maybe try the 2nd ed out. Heck, you may still prefer 3rd ed - but I prefer my games to have a bit of meat to em.

But quite frankly I would refuse a game of 3rd ed. It’s just so toothless in comparison.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Ahearne
United States
Ayer
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The opinion I'm disagreeing with is that the 2nd to 3rd edition changes leave the game bereft of significant strategic options, rather than arguing about exactly which mechanics changed from the 2nd to 3rd edition.

Spring nerfing Winter (and vis versa) means you have to think carefully about building your strategy around either.
I think you're exaggerating the effect of holding cards -- only the last player eligible to continue the round can hold cards, and they can only hold 2. This isn't necessarily the person in the lead. In practice, cards rarely end up being held, in the 3rd edition games I've played.
Also, you're exaggerating the impact of Courtesans. If there's a tie for the number of Courtesans played, it's exactly as if no Courtesans were played. Again, in our games the result is that less than 20% of the battles result in a player gaining the Condottiere token because they played a Courtesan (guesstimating).
It's an odd thought to have a card that makes everyone discard all the cards they played. My immediate reaction is this is OP. I prefer the Surrender card, which ends the battle immediately with the current leader being the victor. It's the most powerful card in 3rd edition, but it's not TOO strong.

We will try the 2nd edition rules, though, just to see what's what.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Kyo
Japan
Osaka
flag msg tools
Forward 1, Forward 2, Forward 3... siege attack 5?
badge
Why for this life there's no man smart enough, life's too short for learning every trick and bluff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
2nd edition is clearly much better. Sure, Ryucoo is being hyperbolic, but I'm pretty sure the only people that can't see this are those who have only played 3rd edition and/or have "invested" in 3rd edition to the extent that they can't appreciate the 2nd edition when they try it (sure, you can argue that this could equally apply to players of 2nd edition, the only difference is that players of 2nd edition are right =P)

The one and only change that 3rd edition made that I like is that you only get +1 card for each held city in a new round. This I use.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Kyo
Japan
Osaka
flag msg tools
Forward 1, Forward 2, Forward 3... siege attack 5?
badge
Why for this life there's no man smart enough, life's too short for learning every trick and bluff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
elcoderdude wrote:
Spring nerfing Winter (and vis versa) means you have to think carefully about building your strategy around either.

It makes winter much less significant, and spring is a dead card until and unless winter is played in a fight you care about, where it makes winter a dead play. More dead cards, more dead plays, more emphasis on whoever got dealt the highest cards winning. No upside.
elcoderdude wrote:
I think you're exaggerating the effect of holding cards -- only the last player eligible to continue the round can hold cards, and they can only hold 2. This isn't necessarily the person in the lead. In practice, cards rarely end up being held, in the 3rd edition games I've played.

I think you are missing the point. The issue is not that cards can be held, but that the pressure to empty your hand at just the right moment no longer exists. Being stuck with cards in 2nd edition is usually a bad thing, and the pressure to use them (effectively) is important. Again, it's not whether or not players end up holding cards in 3rd edition that is significant, it's that holding cards too long is really risky in 2nd, and that tension is important.
elcoderdude wrote:
Also, you're exaggerating the impact of Courtesans. If there's a tie for the number of Courtesans played, it's exactly as if no Courtesans were played. Again, in our games the result is that less than 20% of the battles result in a player gaining the Condottiere token because they played a Courtesan (guesstimating).

Courtesans are just a bit lame. I can see little point to them. No upside, small downside, best cut.
elcoderdude wrote:
It's an odd thought to have a card that makes everyone discard all the cards they played. My immediate reaction is this is OP. I prefer the Surrender card, which ends the battle immediately with the current leader being the victor. It's the most powerful card in 3rd edition, but it's not TOO strong.

Yes, the bishop is OP, but that's the point. It shapes play in a significant way that benefits the game. It's also non-trivial to play well, because you have to hang in on the fight until the person(s) you need to sabotage are over-invested, while hoping they can't simply use a surrender card if you scarecrow out. It's also the best (only?) real way for a big swing in game state. It really is a crucial part of the game, and I think the only reason FF missed this is by misapplication of a "modern" design philosophy that dictates that draws and null results are bad, which shows a very flawed understanding of what makes this card (and Condotierre) great.
elcoderdude wrote:
We will try the 2nd edition rules, though, just to see what's what.

Please do.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mavis
England
A Fine City
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
elcoderdude wrote:
We will try the 2nd edition rules, though, just to see what's what.


After similarly posting a defence of 3rd Edition (a game our group has played over 500 times) and being 'shouted down' by hyperbolic 2nd Edition players we tried the conversion to 2nd Edition. We gave it about 10 plays. The consensus was that it was boring, lacking the depth of our 3rd Edition games.

Each to their own.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Mavis101 wrote:
elcoderdude wrote:
We will try the 2nd edition rules, though, just to see what's what.


After similarly posting a defence of 3rd Edition (a game our group has played over 500 times) and being 'shouted down' by hyperbolic 2nd Edition players we tried the conversion to 2nd Edition. We gave it about 10 plays. The consensus was that it was boring, lacking the depth of our 3rd Edition games.

Each to their own.


I expect after 500 plays of the lighter 3rd ed you would be a hard convert - maybe it would take more than 10 plays of the deeper 2nd ed to undo old habits? I expect if I played 2nd ed the same way I played 3rd it would be a bit boring and the few light strategies that I had engrained in me from the new version would be kinda absent - so I might mistake that for the version having less strategy. But I would be mistaken.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
elcoderdude wrote:
The opinion I'm disagreeing with is that the 2nd to 3rd edition changes leave the game bereft of significant strategic options, rather than arguing about exactly which mechanics changed from the 2nd to 3rd edition.

Spring nerfing Winter (and vis versa) means you have to think carefully about building your strategy around either.
I think you're exaggerating the effect of holding cards -- only the last player eligible to continue the round can hold cards, and they can only hold 2. This isn't necessarily the person in the lead. In practice, cards rarely end up being held, in the 3rd edition games I've played.
Also, you're exaggerating the impact of Courtesans. If there's a tie for the number of Courtesans played, it's exactly as if no Courtesans were played. Again, in our games the result is that less than 20% of the battles result in a player gaining the Condottiere token because they played a Courtesan (guesstimating).
It's an odd thought to have a card that makes everyone discard all the cards they played. My immediate reaction is this is OP. I prefer the Surrender card, which ends the battle immediately with the current leader being the victor. It's the most powerful card in 3rd edition, but it's not TOO strong.

We will try the 2nd edition rules, though, just to see what's what.


1) How can you build strategy around whether your winter card may randomly be nerfed or not? How can you build strategy around whether your spring card will randomly be given a winter target or not? You can’t, really. Spring simply reduces the strategic opportunities of winter and replaces it with little.

2) The essence of the game is timing. If players can hold onto thier best cards by being the last person to fold, this removes the strategic layer of rushing your hands to spoil a player’s hand that they have been holding back. That’s a huge part of the jeapardy of 2nd ed. Do I keep my best cards back and try to carry them over to the next round? Or have the others worked out what I have and will force me to fold and I lose them without ever having used them? It’s a great mechanic that’s lost in 3rd ed. Also the new rule breaks the game. If two players refuse to fold - stalemate. I’ve seen it happen enough times for it to ruin the game.

3) the threat of the bishop is what drives the whole atmosphere of the game. It’s not overpowered. It’s the balance of making people think twice about playing strong cards. Without it there is no jeapardy so people just blindly play there best cards. The game becomes “who has the high3st cards?” I don’t see the fun in that personally, but everybody is different I suppose.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dill Bear
msg tools
Appreciate the back and forth here, but still curious about my question posted a couple times now if anyone can answer :

2nd edition comes with 10 cubes for each player, 3rd edition only six. Does this matter at all? Say, if you're playing 2nd edition rules with the 3rd edition game?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Kyo
Japan
Osaka
flag msg tools
Forward 1, Forward 2, Forward 3... siege attack 5?
badge
Why for this life there's no man smart enough, life's too short for learning every trick and bluff.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, there are 17 spots on the map, and it is a 3+ player game, so the chances of needing more than 6 tokens is slim. It could happen though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.