Author Topic: Clarification of rules - with HiG - 08 10 2015 (Read 69328 times)

Hounk · « **Reply #120 on:** October 27, 2015, 12:27:02 PM »

I think Barn Placement in the middle of the long edge is the biggest issue of the "2-Tile"-version, considering the game mechanism. Because it gives a huge advantage to whoever has the right castle or placing the barn. Tactics to not place the 3rd tile for a nice barn spot are a main concern when playing with A&M, and this gets obsolete, when you can place "3rd and 4th tile" as one.

Carcking · « **Reply #121 on:** February 10, 2016, 07:33:10 AM »

Here's a bump to this thread of an obvious sore subject

Has this been answered somewhere? : If I extend a feature containing my Builder with a German Castle tile, do I get to draw another tile?

@Guy - I like your document. There are a couple of examples that could be better clarified and those are regarding the "around the corner" feature for Tower Range and Flier placement.

Also, your document did not address Gold Mines.

Christopher · « **Reply #122 on:** February 18, 2016, 07:12:38 AM »

Reading this thread has been great fun!

I like the idea of what they are trying to do. Stating that the double tiles are considered as one tile is consistent and allows most of the rule interactions to be deduced from that. However, I think it falls apart in practice as the reduced points for cloisters does not seem intuitive (I would not have thought of that just working from the 'one tile' statement' and features such as jumping dragons and plague, towers catching round corners and strange Flier patterns make this ruling odd.

For me, I have fallen into the 'two-tiler' camp. If the tile was considered to be two separate tiles that were placed at the same time with a castle across the two of them, I think this makes for more workable rule interactions.

Dragons, plague and towers would require two moves, tokens or pieces to cross the tile length-ways, and would only affect features depicted on that side of the tile. The side of the tile off of the tower's orthogonal line is safe.

A follower in the castle is considered between the two tiles and is therefore safe from dragons, plague, towers, etc. This is also consistent with the castles from Bridges, Castles and Bazaars (I like this consistency, because I consider it to fit with the aesthetic of the game. I told myself the BC&B castle follower was safe because he could barricade himself in his castle and defend himself from dragons and towers and quarantine himself to prevent the plague. It wouldn't make sense to me if the castle follower from GC wasn't safe in the same way).

The castle tile would count as two tiles for road, city, cloister or monastery scoring. A cloister with two spaces occupied by a castle would still score nine points, a road staring on one side of the castle and finishing on the other would get a point for each side.

Barns are still tricky, it depends on whether the original rules for barns stated four corners because they explicitly wanted it to need four corners or just because at the time of release there wasn't any way it couldn't be four corners. But, if you stick to two tiles, barns could be placed on the long edge, because two tiles would have two corners.

Fliers can only land on the feature depicted on the side of the tile they fly over. Then I was going to say that the flyer can land in the castle from either side, when I thought that it should probably be consistent with the BC&B castles, and I realised I don't know the answer to that! Can a flyer land in a BC&B castle? Whatever the answer is, these castles with the two-tile rule should be consistent.

For me, I think two-tiles works the best. It's how I'll probably play them.

kettlefish · « **Reply #123 on:** April 20, 2016, 02:59:07 PM »

question 13 has been answered now - see here:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29587#msg29587

kettlefish · « **Reply #124 on:** April 20, 2016, 05:02:59 PM »

question 9 has been answered now - see here:

http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29585#msg29585

SRBO · « **Reply #125 on:** April 20, 2016, 11:28:43 PM »

Quote from: kettlefish on April 20, 2016, 02:59:07 PM

question 13 has been answered now - see here:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29587#msg29587

Soo 13 is a "yes"

kettlefish · « **Reply #126 on:** April 21, 2016, 12:25:10 AM »

Quote from: SRBO on April 20, 2016, 11:28:43 PM

Quote from: kettlefish on April 20, 2016, 02:59:07 PM
question 13 has been answered now - see here:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29587#msg29587

Soo 13 is a "yes"

Thanks SRBO - I've updated the YES in the posting - see the link above.

totor66 · « **Reply #127 on:** April 21, 2016, 12:26:11 AM »

I do believe that question 9 needs a better explanation

We have similar tile positioning and sometimes barn is crossed and sometimes not

kettlefish · « **Reply #128 on:** April 21, 2016, 02:54:38 AM »

Quote from: totor66 on April 21, 2016, 12:26:11 AM

I do believe that question 9 needs a better explanation

We have similar tile positioning and sometimes barn is crossed and sometimes not

Hi totor66,
I've updated the question 9 and put another attachment to that posting.

Here is the link to question 9:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29585#msg29585

kettlefish · « **Reply #129 on:** April 21, 2016, 03:02:41 AM »

For question 2 - I have also some more examples, but first I like to talk with Georg Wild from HiG before I upload the pictures.

here is the link to question 2:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29572#msg29572

SRBO · « **Reply #130 on:** April 21, 2016, 08:39:34 AM »

Quote from: kettlefish on April 21, 2016, 03:02:41 AM

For question 2 - I have also some more examples, but first I like to talk with Georg Wild from HiG before I upload the pictures.

here is the link to question 2:
http://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=2125.msg29572#msg29572

Whats the problem with it?

claudio_ferra · « **Reply #131 on:** July 11, 2016, 05:00:45 PM »

In my opinion if the German Castle is considered "two tiles" it's all very easy: all the Old rules doesn't change, the meeple in the Castle is placed between the two tiles, so the Dragon, Tower and Plague doesn't affect him. I think is the better and simple solution to preserve the mechanic of this great game.

Hounk · « **Reply #132 on:** July 12, 2016, 04:29:26 AM »

I still think, this would break the barn mechanics.

claudio_ferra · « **Reply #133 on:** July 12, 2016, 05:35:27 AM »

The mechanic is not broken, but you have an advantage for placing it. In my opinion is not a good combination the german castle and the Barn. But if you use both, you can consider this advantage for all the players.

danisthirty · « **Reply #134 on:** July 12, 2016, 06:03:37 AM »

Quote from: claudio_ferra on July 12, 2016, 05:35:27 AM

The mechanic is not broken, but you have an advantage for placing it.

Whilst there isn't a formal definition of "broken" in this context, different people will have different ideas about what it means for something to be broken.

I happen to agree with Hounk on this one. I think it is broken because it disrupts the original intentions for Barn placement which says that they should be placed at the intersection of 4 tiles. Even though it doesn't make sense (to me) HiG have been quite insistent that German Castles are 1 tile so we're now agreeing that Barns can be placed at the intersection of 3 tiles if one of them is a German Castle. This makes it considerably easier to place your Barn and harder to block others from doing the same. This spoils a lot of the strategic play in this area, hence breaking them (for me).

Obviously players are free to play with any combination of expansions and to interpret the rules as they see fit. There is no doubt in my mind though that including Barns and German Castles in the same game and attempting to follow the "official" rules could lead to a broken game.