This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - danisthirty
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 405
46
« on: January 27, 2023, 04:22:25 AM »
If I'm the starting player, this is always the tile I hope I'm going to draw, especially if I also get a city cap on my next turn. Great way to start the game!
47
« on: January 19, 2023, 09:44:12 AM »
So, as a recap.
I honestly don't understand a rule
but I also refuse to extend the game surface by adding more tables or similar and I think this should be the same for official toournaments.
Fantastic.
48
« on: January 19, 2023, 06:00:12 AM »
Congratulations post men and women all over the world! The wonderful goodies you've been bringing us over the last 8 and a bit years have now been appreciated over a million times by the Carcassonne fans you've been delivering to! Thank you!  
49
« on: January 18, 2023, 07:15:45 AM »
Hello all. Back in the dim and distant past, we played a 5-player game of Carcassonne here on the forums. It took around 2 months to play but there was so much banter and tomfoolery between those of us who were playing, and the community in general, that it became quite an event and was certainly something of which I have a lot of fond memories. I recommend having a read through the original thread if you're interested to know more about how it panned-out. I would love to see something similar being run again as it really brought the forums to life while it was running, not just for the players but for the spectators as well. Before we get bogged down in the detail though, I'd be interested to know how many people would be keen to take part if something like this were to be run again. Just to give you an idea though, the game would work as follows: 1. Players are determined, meeple colours are assigned and a starting player is chosen. 2. Starting player has a tile drawn for them at random (by me) and takes their turn by recreating the existing landscape at home and adding their newly drawn tile to it, placing meeples as required and then sharing the newly updated landscape back to the forum. Their turn is now over. 3. Scores are adjusted, then I draw a random tile for the next player and play continues in this way until all tiles have been placed. It can be a bit of a chore recreating the landscape each time (especially towards the end of the game with so many tiles and meeples in play) and it was easy for mistakes to creep in so you'll either have to build out the game somewhere where it won't be disturbed for a number of weeks/ months or be good at putting it back together again in order to share each of your updates/ turns. Like I say though, before I get too far into the detail it'd be good to know if anyone here would be interested in being part of the next game. So please, if this sounds like fun to you, give me a thumbs up below and we'll see what happens...
50
« on: January 17, 2023, 09:05:54 AM »
Have you? You haven't claimed anything, so it's a tie with us both scoring 0 points 
Yes, but I always play with the houserule that the starting player wins if nobody else can place any tiles. It's better this way because of the extra strategy. I recommend everyone else should do the same, especially the world championships.
51
« on: January 17, 2023, 09:03:25 AM »
Thanks Leven. BTW, does the "Rematch" button work the way it used to? Since last summer there was no automatic change of the starting player in case of a rematch. (That's why last year's WTCOC final was played in 10-game tournaments.)
It certainly seemed to work as expected in the games I was part of and didn't hear any complaints from any of the other guys. So I think it does still work. The main reason for switching from simple games to tournaments in the WTCOC last year was to allow a specific amount of time per player per game, rather than starting with a small amount and having extra added after each move. It made things a lot more complicated, but I didn't realise it also negated the usefulness of the Play Again button.
52
« on: January 17, 2023, 04:41:41 AM »
As much as I'd love to continue our chat here, it doesn't feel like we're ever going to agree and I don't think this is going anywhere helpful or productive. No hard feelings though; you're always welcome to a game of Carcassonne at my table:  Oh look, I've won!
53
« on: January 17, 2023, 04:35:45 AM »
...but I just couldn’t imagine that the rules would demand an unequal number of turns no matter how many players were playing!?
It's fine for games with 71 players! 
54
« on: January 16, 2023, 08:21:29 AM »
I think we can only agree to disagree. Only thing I'm really not comfortable with is that "game played as intended" since from the very first day I started playing the "Rule 0" of Carcassonne was: "Play as you like"... so that's true, until someone tells me I *have* to play in a certain way instead, otherwise I'm playing wrong?
I certainly can't disagree with this. KJW has always been very clear that the purpose of his games is to help people find fun and provide entertainment for themselves and the people they play with. If adapting the rules, or creating your own, heightens the pleasure of your gaming experience then you can be sure that he would approve! So the second sentence seems to nullify the first one, but if so, what is the point of the first one?
I don't follow your logic behind this. To me, it seems that one is an extension of the other in the same way as Scott explained previously. You can continue to misunderstand this, deliberately or otherwise, but that's your decision and isn't a problem with the rules or the wiki. So, everyone play as they like so different people use different rules. Mine are more strict, and I think that's better because they add a solid layer of strategy, that's all.
This isn't all. This is a big thing. I'm very happy for people to play whatever rules they like; it's a personal thing for you and your group. You do you. But don't expect everyone else to do you too just because you think your rule is better. For me, and for everyone I play with, at every level, it isn't better and it doesn't add anything that's in keeping with the spirit of the game. I just think telling people the game must be played "as intended", and then having a rule that is not even fixed by the creator of the game is a little silly.
There's nothing to fix.
55
« on: January 16, 2023, 05:25:13 AM »
It's been a while since the last World Team Carcassonne Online Championships, but 2023 will see the running of not just the annual World Teams Championship but also the bi-annual European Teams Championship. After months of hibernation, the UK team have been attempting to prepare ourselves for these upcoming championships by embarking on a series of friendly matches against opposing teams; the first of which took place yesterday evening with five of our members taking on five members of the team from Portugal. To recap on the rules, a match consists of five "duels" with each duel being a best of three games between two players. 24 hours before the match is scheduled to be played, both teams submit a numbered lineup listing the names of their five players, and each of these players plays their duel against the similarly-numbered player from the other team. The match is decided based on whichever team wins three or more duels. All games are basegame only and the starting player alternates between the first two games, and is chosen randomly for the third game (if one is required to settle the duel). Everything is played online at BGA and all duels are played simultaneously, starting at a mutually convenient time that has been agreed between the two team captains (and their teams). Portugal have always been a team that the UK has struggled with. They have some great players, including one who - somewhat confusingly - was declared UK champion in 2020 when there was no in-person Carcassonne championship so the UK Games Expo decided that that year's MSO Carcassonne championship should also serve the duel purpose of being the UK's championship. But this aside, when I first saw their lineup for our friendly I was unfamiliar with the majority of their players and assumed it should be a fairly safe win for us based purely on the Elo ratings and Win percentages of the players we were playing against. Oops. Duel #1: FanaticalLime93 (1) vs. Priskus (2)  #1: 99 - 67 to Priskus ( watch game here) #2: 100 - 79 to FanaticalLime93 ( watch game here) #3: 103 - 84 to Priskus ( watch game here) Duel #2: statmatt (2) vs. sisi (0)  #1: 111 - 78 to statmatt ( watch game here) #2: 102 - 91 to statmatt ( watch game here) Duel #3: ted the notty bear (0) vs. JMargarido (2)  #1: 100 - 82 to JMargarido ( watch game here) #2: 91 - 76 to JMargarido ( watch game here) Duel #4: danisthirty (2) vs. Paiva (1)  #1: 84 - 80 to Paiva ( watch game here) #2: 97 - 95 to danisthirty ( watch game here) #3: 103 - 80 to danisthirty ( watch game here) Duel #5: wallaceprime (0) vs. Glovir (2)  #1: 114 - 79 to Glovir ( watch game here) #2: 115 - 113 to Glovir ( watch game here) (you probably need to be registered at BGA in order to be able to watch the game replays linked to above)This made the final scores 3 - 2 in Portugal's favour. Not quite the result we were hoping for, but it was still a great evening of international Carcassonne for us and we enjoyed the games and the experience very much despite the outcome. Thanks to the awesome Portuguese team, and congratulations on your win. My next aim is to setup a match against our rivals from the Netherlands, and then hopefully Hungary next month. I'll be sure to share news of these friendly matches as soon as I'm able.
56
« on: January 09, 2023, 01:23:34 AM »
if that tile is 1mm out then maybe a player is disadvantaged simply because the tile doesn't fit.
Exactly. And since this is valid for all players from the start of the game, it's a fair rule. Adding a table because player X needs more space when her opponents managed to stay in the play area is fair only to player X
Or you could just say, before the game begins, that table space will be afforded to anyone who needs it at the time it is required. This way the game can be played as intended and it doesn't matter if one player is advantaged more than the others because it could equally have been anyone and it was agreed upon by all players at the start of the game.
57
« on: January 08, 2023, 03:29:10 PM »
I'm a little bit extremist on this, as long as you can be an extremist talking about a game  Not only I consider any open feature at the edge of the table open by default, but I also refuse to extend the game surface by adding more tables or similar and I think this should be the same for official toournaments.
I'd be interested to hear why you think this should be the case for tournaments too? Serious players are 100% interested in seeing the game develop over the course of the full 72 tiles and I think many/ most would be frustrated by imposing such limitations purely for the sake of it. If it isn't how Carcassonne was designed to be played (and this isn't) then it's not going to be a preference for people who love the game for what it is. I'll try to make a similarity here: once you start a game with 7 base meeples, you play the whole game with 7 base meeples, and you don't add one more just because you've depleted your stash: maybe you were unlucky, maybe your opponents were better than you, maybe you're a disaster at managing resources, it doesn't matter: you don't have base meeples to play anymore and you have to deal with it. Why should it be different for the table space?
For the sake of answering your question, because your meeples are a resource that is pre-determined by the game, and table space isn't. They're both resources, sure, but one is strictly allocated according to the rules and the other is assumed. It would be just as valid to invite people round to play Carcassonne at your house, and then to not play your first move (because you're still "thinking" and they mustn't rush you) until all of your opponents had either resigned or starved to death because you refused to feed them anything but fed yourself. Food is a resource after all, and Carcassonne is a strategic game, so if they can't manage food resources then they deserve to lose, right?
58
« on: January 05, 2023, 04:00:33 PM »
Why would anyone want a book about Carcassonne?
Oh, wait...
59
« on: January 04, 2023, 01:27:35 PM »
Yo dudes, hope you're all settling into the new year nicely. The UK Games Expo is on this year between Friday 2nd June and Sunday 4th June. This is always a big highlight of the year for me as the UKGE hosts the UK Carcassonne championships each year, but there's much more to it than just this. It's definitely worth a visit as long as you're into boardgaming, and especially if you happen to live anywhere near the NEC in Birmingham where it's hosted. Plus there's usually at least 4 or 5 members of CarcC in attendance so it's a good excuse for a meetup! Please post below if you think you might be interested in attending. Hope to see as many friendly faces there as possible!
60
« on: January 04, 2023, 01:03:20 PM »
Thanks for sharing Bumsakalaka. Over €25k is an impressive amount of money to have raised; kudos to HiG for their initiatives!
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 405
|
Show Posts