Fences

[Gwommy]

The original idea started in the thread for Barriers And City Walls.

I originally thought of fences to be used to seperate fields, which could be useful late in the game to cut down the size of an opponent's farm if he/she has monopolized the farm land.  The expansion would add fence pieces(similar to Catan's wooden road pieces) that can be placed on existing fields to seperate farmland.  The fence pieces would be colorless so anyone can use them.  There'd be a max of 12 fence pieces and I'd want the players to have to earn them.

So, there's 3 ideas for ways to earn fence pieces.  Which way sounds more reasonable to people?

IDEA 1:
You earn a fence piece when you are the player that completes a city with at least one pennant in it.  I originally had a requirement of two pennants, but then you wouldn't get very many pieces per game.  Once the 12 fence pieces are gone, then the players don't get any more fence pieces.

IDEA 2:
Elmendarenda thought of adding Sawmills.  If you played a tile with a sawmill on it, then you get a fence piece. This would add 12 new tiles to the game.  I did some artwork for this as well:


IDEA 3:
Expanding on Elmendarenda's idea, I was thinking of a 15 tile expansion.  3 sawmills and 12 small forest pieces.  The forest pieces would only have a small forest in the field, not to extend to the edges of the tile.  If you place a small forest in the same field as a sawmill, then you get a fence piece.

Finally, there's the tunnel idea.  This is a small chit that can be placed over top of a road to connect fields.  Each player would start with one.  This tunnel does not seperate a road, and can not be used as a tunnel for the new Spielbox Tunnel expansion.


Thoughts?

[Novelty]

I'm concerned that everyone will not get an equal number of fences if Idea 2 or 3 is used.  That may skewer the game a bit for whoever draws more of the necessary tiles.  I like idea 1 better, it forces people to build - i.e. complete a city (as opposed to creating holes).

Have you considered bridges instead of tunnels to connect fields?

[elmendalerenda]

Sincerely I like the Idea 3. Sounds the fairest and most real of all.

I´m so jealous of your tile creation ability   lol. So far only been able to cut features from tiles, still dont know how to make them.

Also there could be a sawmill water powered, just get the water mill and add the log carrier next to it.

For the wood you can ask Novelty and use the logs and stumps from the log cabin expansion.

The tunnel seem ok, but can only be placed on straight roads?

Regarding not all people getting same number of fences, well is luck. Not everybody get the same number of trading goods either. Guess depends how big the fences are (they will separate just one tile field, or all the fields in a straight line?)

[Gwommy]

That sawmill took me like 3 or 4 hours to do.  I originally drew it by hand and colored it with colored pencils.  Then I took a pic of it and imported it to Paint Shop.  From there, I sharpened the lines and smoothed out the colors.  I was also watching TV, which probably slowed things down a little as well.

==EDIT==
Whoops, accidently pressed Submit rather than preview.   Anyway, could I include both options in the rules?  One as a simplified version with no extra tiles, and the other as more of an advanced version of the rules?

[elmendalerenda]

Hum, my drawing skills are terrible (unless underwater drawing  )

Thought you draw them in computer and then add it to a tile, that´s what I have in mind.

Anyway, apart from getting fences for putting wood tiles in a sawmill field, have you think in the possibilty of getting wood trading goods if there is a meeple on the sawmill?

Other option can be choosing between fence pieces or wood tokens, this way there are more options. Not just fences.

[Novelty]

Regarding not all people getting same number of fences, well is luck. Not everybody get the same number of trading goods either.

Well, you score from the trade goods so it's OK to get luck there.  Not so with the fences, which is used strategically.  Generally in Carc, stuff like that (tower pieces, abbeys, etc.) are dealt equally to all players.

Whoops, accidently pressed Submit rather than preview.   Anyway, could I include both options in the rules?  One as a simplified version with no extra tiles, and the other as more of an advanced version of the rules?

You could do it, it's your expansion.  But it might be rather confusing to have an expansion and a variant of it in the same document.

[elmendalerenda]

Well, every single tile is used strategically.

Regarding the fences, all depends how are used: Can you placed them in an already existing tile or only in just drawn ones? Do the fences separate only one field side of the tile or a straight line until finding other feature?

[Gwommy]

The fence pieces should be 7/8inches long(which is half the length of a tile).  A fence piece can be placed on a seam between two tiles from the corner to the center of a tile.  It will seperate a farm as long as both ends of the fence touch either a road or city.  More than one piece of fence can be used to seperate the farm land.  Fences don't split roads and can't be placed on or in cities.

As for the bridges, I still think the tunnels look better making it easier to see the combination of the fields.

[elmendalerenda]

ok, but the fences can be placed in previously placed tiles or only in new ones?

[Gwommy]

Yes, fences can be placed on any previously placed tile.

[Novelty]

Yes, fences can be placed on any previously placed tile.

Sort of like tower pieces?

[CKorfmann]

I'm not really feeling the tunnel idea.  I think I might buy it a little more if it weren't for the recent tunnel expansion.  Also, I've been playing recently with a few bridge tiles I printed from the Math Guy expansions and they really open up the fields.  It makes it difficult to find unclaimed farms.  These tunnels would make it more so. 

[Gwommy]

Perhaps a couple play tests are needed.  Here's just a small random example of a game with I&C + B&T:

There's the orange farm and the yellow farm.  Farmers are indicated by the "+" sign.  The purple lines are a single fence piece.  The orange field only loses a 1 possible city in the lower right from placing a single fence.  The yellow farmer loses 2 completed cities just by placing a single fence piece.

If you had two fence pieces, then you can place them where the pink rectangles are and prevent orange from scoring on 2 cities.  Or if those two pieces were placed just above the orange farmer, then that would cut off over half of orange's farm, at which point you better hope that the hole can't be filled or gets filled with an Abbey.

The black circles indicate legal places where you could put your mini tunnel/bridge tile.  I think the placement should be limited to a straight road tile that has no intersections or crossovers.  Of course, in this example, it's not very helpful to either farmer.  Each player only gets one mini tunnel/bridge tile, so you'd want to use it wisely.  I believe it was Meepleater that said it'd be unbalanced if you only took away from the farms.  I thought about it and I think there should be a little more balance for changing the areas of the farmland.  You lose some, you gain some.

So I think this'll need to be play tested.  I think it'll make the 'farming' game a little more agressive.

[Whaleyland]

So I think this'll need to be play tested.  I think it'll make the 'farming' game a little more agressive.

Not...more...aggression...want...peace...*shoots himself*

Just joking! Just joking. I like the idea overall. I think a bridge would be preferable to a tunnel due to the new expansion. But overall I think the idea of adding fences or walls of some sort to divide fields using wooden pieces rather than tiles is a good one. I haven't read this entire thread but I assume you sacrifice placing a follower to place a fence and that fences don't in themselves amount to any points (?). Also, do the fences only cross half the tile, as it seems in the image? Does that mean you need two, as it the pink fence seems to imply, to successfully block an entire tile off? Doing that is fine, but why not just use a tile-length piece and each player only gets one, instead of each player getting two half-tile-length pieces? Just a thought.

[Gwommy]

I'm currently working on writing up the rules for this and I'm wondering: Should the fences be worth extra points if not played at the end of the game? Or perhaps just points to the player that has the most unused fences at the end of the game?

And I'm making an adjustment to the advanced rules.  When placing a small forest, you have to place a follower in the small forest and once that small forest has a sawmill in the same field, then you get a fence piece.  If you place the small forest in a field that already has a sawmill, you still have to place a follower, but you'll get him back right away.  A follower can not be placed in a sawmill.

==EDIT==
Also, it seems more people seem to prefer the small bridge tile over the tunnel tile, so I'll use the bridge tile.  Although I need another opinion.  Should the small bridge tile be played instead of a follower, or should it be played instead of drawing a land tile?  If it is played instead of drawing a tile, then you won't be able to place a follower, but you can still move the fairy or capture with a tower if playing with those expansions, or you could play a still play a fence piece.