Poll

How do you the view German Castles and Halflings?

Cardboardism: Both are 1 tile
Squarism: German castles are 2 tiles; 2 matching halflings are 1 tile
Some other view (please specify)
Not sure

Author Topic: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?  (Read 11556 times)

Offline asparagus

  • Count
  • **
  • Posts: 346
  • Merit: 11
  • I am a meeple not a sheeple.
    • View Profile
    • Fan Expansion Wiki
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2016, 02:12:29 AM »
I can reword the questions if necessary. I thought my descriptions where 100% accurate but it's not an issue for me. Just suggest some better wording.

Offline jungleboy

  • Viscount Chevalier
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • Merit: 89
  • Nine points!
    • View Profile
    • Spirit of the Camino
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2016, 02:43:45 AM »
I can reword the questions if necessary. I thought my descriptions where 100% accurate but it's not an issue for me. Just suggest some better wording.

Just take out this part: yielding unexpected conclusions and unresolved questions. Let people vote how they want and then the pros and cons of each position can be debated in the thread.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 02:49:16 AM by jungleboy »

Offline jungleboy

  • Viscount Chevalier
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • Merit: 89
  • Nine points!
    • View Profile
    • Spirit of the Camino
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2016, 02:48:16 AM »
And the triangle tiles - I personally don't like to talk about this expansion. OK how many points are two Halflings worth if on two Halfling is a road segment and the road extends?

According to the CAR footnote 406, this would be 1 point. I personally agree with that as making the most sense. It sounds like that has been overruled to be 2 points now.

This is a tough one. Say you have an unfinished road consisting of 3 regular tiles. It's currently worth 3 points. If you add a halfling to one end that continues the road, it's now worth 4 points. Then you add a second halfling to make the whole square. You've extended your road again, so you should get an extra point, shouldn't you?
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 02:49:52 AM by jungleboy »

Offline hunnymonster

  • Duke
  • *
  • Posts: 226
  • Merit: 11
  • An ugly bag of mainly water
    • View Profile
    • The Shaving Room - a UK-based community for traditional grooming
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2016, 02:53:40 AM »
Consider these cases... a road (unfinished at the end of the game) comprising ½-R-½ : should that be scored any differently from one comprising R-½-½?
Whatever it is, it's probably in the post from Germany...

Offline Clownfeet

  • Nobleman
  • ******
  • Posts: 116
  • Merit: 11
  • I have updated my profile now!
    • View Profile
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #19 on: April 18, 2016, 02:56:29 AM »
We play that every piece of cardboard is a tile. no matter the shape or size. That way there are no messy decisions or controversy. We did, however, try out two different ways but eventually settled on a tile is a tile is a tile.

the other ways we tried but always one tile is one tile no matter the shape for scoring purposes:

- put a halfling triangle down, you can put another halfling triangle down. ie a halfling tile is "half a turn".
- similarly putting down a german castle is a double turn, ie you miss a go.

both were interesting and added different elements but now we play as mentioned above.
must...collect...more...tiles....

Offline asparagus

  • Count
  • **
  • Posts: 346
  • Merit: 11
  • I am a meeple not a sheeple.
    • View Profile
    • Fan Expansion Wiki
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #20 on: April 18, 2016, 02:59:16 AM »
I can reword the questions if necessary. I thought my descriptions where 100% accurate but it's not an issue for me. Just suggest some better wording.

Just take out this part: yielding unexpected conclusions and unresolved questions. Let people vote how they want and then the pros and cons of each position can be debated in the thread.

I've done this. But it looks increasingly clear-cut to me.

Cardboardism pros: It's official and possibly makes the game more tactically interesting.
Cardboardism cons: It is counterintuitive, hard to remember, complex and some situations are unresolved.

Squarism pros: It's simple. It's what the current CAR implies. If it's not broke why fix it?
Squarism cons: Are there any?


We play that every piece of cardboard is a tile. no matter the shape or size. That way there are no messy decisions or controversy. We did, however, try out two different ways but eventually settled on a tile is a tile is a tile.

the other ways we tried but always one tile is one tile no matter the shape for scoring purposes:

- put a halfling triangle down, you can put another halfling triangle down. ie a halfling tile is "half a turn".
- similarly putting down a german castle is a double turn, ie you miss a go.

both were interesting and added different elements but now we play as mentioned above.

This is really not what the argument is about. In fact you really should not want to divide up the turns. It is enough that you are playing from a limited resource.

If you just play the base set and one of these expansions then the only question is how monasteries are scored. The really big questions is how are things like fliers, the plague and towers supposed to interact with them when those expansions count tiles already laid on the board.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 03:03:50 AM by asparagus »

Offline jungleboy

  • Viscount Chevalier
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • Merit: 89
  • Nine points!
    • View Profile
    • Spirit of the Camino
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2016, 03:30:36 AM »
Squarism cons: Are there any?

Here's one, as I see it: as soon as someone places a cloister and a monk, the other player can put down a halfling somewhere around the perimeter as a way of trapping the monk (if the player who played the monk doesn't have the right combination of halfling to complete the square), because another halfling would be needed to complete the cloister. Trapping is a pretty negative strategy to begin with, so to make it this easy does not benefit the game, in my opinion. You would be scared every time you played a monk that another player would put a halfling down to thwart you.

Offline Decar

  • Owner
  • Chatelain Grand Officier
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 6719
  • Merit: 317
  • Shut up and take my money!
    • View Profile
    • tehill.net
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2016, 03:32:47 AM »
A merit to Clownfeet for considering different approaches to the problems which have been introduced.

Quote
If you just play the base set and one of these expansions then the only question is how monasteries are scored.

...and the length of roads.

Offline asparagus

  • Count
  • **
  • Posts: 346
  • Merit: 11
  • I am a meeple not a sheeple.
    • View Profile
    • Fan Expansion Wiki
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2016, 03:49:48 AM »
Squarism cons: Are there any?

Here's one, as I see it: as soon as someone places a cloister and a monk, the other player can put down a halfling somewhere around the perimeter as a way of trapping the monk (if the player who played the monk doesn't have the right combination of halfling to complete the square), because another halfling would be needed to complete the cloister. Trapping is a pretty negative strategy to begin with, so to make it this easy does not benefit the game, in my opinion. You would be scared every time you played a monk that another player would put a halfling down to thwart you.

I thought it was pretty clear from CAR 7.4 that you don't need to put both halflings in for that square to count towards completion. I never understood why this was the rule but thanks to you I now understand. So this is not really a cardboardism/squarism question or at worst it would be a more extreme form of squarism than anyone is proposing.

Quote
If you just play the base set and one of these expansions then the only question is how monasteries are scored.

...and the length of roads.

Fair point. And actually theoretically cities as well.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 04:04:31 AM by asparagus »

Offline Whaleyland

  • Great Khan
  • Global Moderator
  • Marquis Chevalier
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 2743
  • Merit: 101
  • Toulouse: Carcassonne's insignificant neighbor.
    • View Profile
    • Derek R. Whaley, PhD | Librarian, Historian, and Writer
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #24 on: April 18, 2016, 04:44:05 AM »
Squarism cons: Are there any?

Here's one, as I see it: as soon as someone places a cloister and a monk, the other player can put down a halfling somewhere around the perimeter as a way of trapping the monk (if the player who played the monk doesn't have the right combination of halfling to complete the square), because another halfling would be needed to complete the cloister. Trapping is a pretty negative strategy to begin with, so to make it this easy does not benefit the game, in my opinion. You would be scared every time you played a monk that another player would put a halfling down to thwart you.
I also consider the space "occupied" for the purpose of counting the Cloisters. But two Halflings do not add another point. Cloisters score a maximum of 9 points. Period. No debate. You can surround one with eighteen Halflings and you are still only getting 9 points total. I like to think of Halflings as 51% of a tile (and if you measure them, they really are about that size or slightly more).

Offline jungleboy

  • Viscount Chevalier
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • Merit: 89
  • Nine points!
    • View Profile
    • Spirit of the Camino
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2016, 04:45:13 AM »
So this is not really a cardboardism/squarism question or at worst it would be a more extreme form of squarism than anyone is proposing.

It seems to me that the cloister issue is exactly cardboardism vs squareism, at least as it relates to halflings. If you think a cloister can be complete with only one halfling on one of the surrounding squares, you're a cardboardist. If you think both halves of the square need to be complete, you're a squareist.

If I understand correctly, the original rule was that one halfling was enough to complete a cloister (cardboardism - i.e. a halfling tile counts as a full tile) but the new rule is that both halves must be filled in (i.e. squareism - the whole square must be filled even if that requires two small tiles). I prefer the original rule.

Offline asparagus

  • Count
  • **
  • Posts: 346
  • Merit: 11
  • I am a meeple not a sheeple.
    • View Profile
    • Fan Expansion Wiki
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2016, 04:49:23 AM »
So this is not really a cardboardism/squarism question or at worst it would be a more extreme form of squarism than anyone is proposing.

It seems to me that the cloister issue is exactly cardboardism vs squareism, at least as it relates to halflings. If you think a cloister can be complete with only one halfling on one of the surrounding squares, you're a cardboardist. If you think both halves of the square need to be complete, you're a squareist. 1 point would be squarist. 2 points would be cardboardist.


Cardboardism means that for scoring and movement purposes piece of cardboard is a tile.
Squarism means that for scoring and movement purposes a square is a tile.
If I understand correctly, the original rule was that one halfling was enough to complete a cloister (cardboardism - i.e. a halfling tile counts as a full tile) but the new rule is that both halves must be filled in (i.e. squareism - the whole square must be filled even if that requires two small tiles). I prefer the original rule.


No this is completely wrong.

It has always been the case that only halfling per tile space is required for completion.
The question is if there happen to be two halflings in a tile space does that contribute 1 point or 2?

Cardboardism is the idea that for the purposes of scoring and movement, a tile is a piece of cardboard.
Squarism is the idea that for the purposes of scoring and movement, a tile is a square.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 04:57:19 AM by asparagus »

Offline dirk2112

  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
  • Merit: 43
  • Filled with caffeine and hyperbole
    • View Profile
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2016, 04:51:55 AM »
We play that a halfling can be used to complete a cloister as long as one side of the halfling is adjacent to the cloister.  If the empty space side is adjacent to the cloister you need another halfling to fill it in. 

I suppose it is ok to be a scoring cardboardist, but a squarist for everything else
« Last Edit: April 18, 2016, 04:53:35 AM by dirk2112 »

Offline asparagus

  • Count
  • **
  • Posts: 346
  • Merit: 11
  • I am a meeple not a sheeple.
    • View Profile
    • Fan Expansion Wiki
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #28 on: April 18, 2016, 04:54:17 AM »
We play that a halfling can be used to complete a cloister as long as one side of the halfling is adjacent to the cloister.  If the empty space side is adjacent to the cloister you need another halfling to fill it in.

That seems intuitive but as jungleboy pointed out it makes blocking too easy (though possibly at an excessive cost of halflings). This is not what the debate was about.

Offline jungleboy

  • Viscount Chevalier
  • ****
  • Posts: 3045
  • Merit: 89
  • Nine points!
    • View Profile
    • Spirit of the Camino
Re: Are you a cardboardist or a squarist?
« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2016, 05:15:50 AM »
If I understand correctly, the original rule was that one halfling was enough to complete a cloister (cardboardism - i.e. a halfling tile counts as a full tile) but the new rule is that both halves must be filled in (i.e. squareism - the whole square must be filled even if that requires two small tiles). I prefer the original rule.

No this is completely wrong.

It has always been the case that only halfling per tile space is required for completion.

According to this post, it is not completely wrong.
 
Cardboardism is the idea that for the purposes of scoring and movement, a tile is a piece of cardboard.
Squarism is the idea that for the purposes of scoring and movement, a tile is a square.

I am aware of this.


Share via delicious Share via digg Share via facebook Share via furl Share via linkedin Share via myspace Share via reddit Share via stumble Share via technorati Share via twitter

  Subject / Started by Replies / Views Last post
xx
Just when you thought YOU were winning...

Started by danisthirty

9 Replies
6344 Views
Last post November 21, 2014, 05:54:18 AM
by BabyGamer
sad
Do you own expansions you never play yet still rush out to buy new ones?

Started by Gerry

27 Replies
13568 Views
Last post October 15, 2014, 10:47:05 PM
by henrysunset
xx
Are You Italian? Why didn't you tell me!

Started by aenima

5 Replies
3123 Views
Last post September 07, 2018, 10:57:12 PM
by aenima
xx
Goldmines - can you claim gold bars on the same turn that you placed them?

Started by jungleboy

4 Replies
4767 Views
Last post September 18, 2015, 12:18:28 PM
by jungleboy
xx
Can you get Message when you get negative points?

Started by Bumsakalaka

8 Replies
1368 Views
Last post August 14, 2022, 10:49:21 PM
by Scott