There is one part of the game, I think is under-developed. That is the division of trading cards and what to do with them. At that point we don't use the system to its full extend.
I'm talking about these 9 sets, as you can see they contain both E and W symbol:
Bone, Wax, Ceramics, Grain, Glass, Lead, Herbs, Obsidian and Amber.
Let's call these 'Split-Commodities', just to label them.
The problems:
When you play with up to 9 players, there is no problem. You play on one side (on either west or east areas.)
When you play with 10-11 players you actually take one or two civilization from the other side and regard them as the same side you play on. You play with 3 sets of commodity cards per stack. No problems so far.
When you play with 15-18 player the game is fun. You divide the game in east and west where each block uses its own set of tradcards-stack.
You might get trade cards that don't make a full set on your own side, so for these cards you HAVE TO trade with players from the other side.
PROBLEM 1:
But there is this mid-range. A range I tend to refrain from. I'm talking about when you play with 12-14 players.
You divide the game into east and west, where each side uses its own set of tradecards-stacks. But in this range there are NO split-commodity sets. So in fact you NEVER HAVE TO trade with the other side. It's even a downside to do so, because you get totally new cards you don't already hold a single one of. This downside counts as well for your trading partner. In fact you are playing two seperate games of civilization next to eachtother. Each game with its own commodities and calamities.
PROBLEM 2:
When you regard each single set of commodity cards.
Some sets are worth less than others of the same stack number. Not because of the total amount available but just because they are divided over west and east. These sets are unwanted in the first place.
For example, When you hold an Oil and a Grain. Both face value 4, both full sets are worth 256. But Grain is a split-commodity. You will rather go for the set of Oils. Why? because the players you are trading with, will want the other cards you hold. Because you are a west player, you draw west cards. Players who drew Oil, are also west players, so they will more likely go for a set of west-commodities.
This system will contain, that the least trading between east-players and west-players as possible is being made.
BONUS CARD:
I've played a full 18-player game once where the Bonus-card option was included.
This means that if you turn in a set of commodities from the other part (west or east) then your starting location, you may count the set value as if you held one additional card.
This was a lot more fun, because now players actually started trading between east and west. Most of the time, though, players were NOT interested a thing in cards from the other side. They were only trying to complete their own set of commodities.
It actually seemed very strange to me, when I read the rules, that this bonus-card rule, wasn't included as official rule at all. I see no reason why.
All players I've spoken with, complained about the downside, that in fact we were playing two seperated games rather than one big game. And regarded this bonus-card addition as a base for heating up E/W trading.
MY PROPOSAL:
Let's change the trade rules this way:
Quote:
9-11 players: No change. You use 2 or 3 sets of commodity cards per stacknumber, BUT regard the total set of 9 stacks to be strictly West or strictly East, depending on which side you play.
Quote:
12-18 players: From 12 players up you have to divide the game in East and West. Depending on the number of players you pick the number of sets of commodity cards per stacknumber.
Quote:
For EVERY turned in set of commodity cards containing one or more cards from the other side (east or west), you may count the set value as if you held one card more. Regardless of the commodity-set being a split set or a normal set. You can never gain more set value than printed on the cards, or you require one less card to complete a set this way.
This will result in the following:
- Players might first try and complete a set of their own set and during the end of the trading sessions, they will hold excess cards or calamities, and will try to trade them away with the other side. Previously there was no need for trading two Iron (W) for two Stone (E) for they are worth the same, you might only risk a calamity. Now, both trading gain the benefit, for the west player can gain 18 points for two Stone instead of 8 for two Iron and the other way round.
- Some players might take the risk and try to get a full set of 6-s or 7s from the other side immediately. This makes them require one less card to complete a set.
- The amount of calamities in the game will not change. It is likely that an evenly amount of W-calamities are traded to the east and E-calamities are traded to the west.
- The total wealth in the game will not grow, but for some players it might become easier to get it. (a full set stays a full set)
- There will be more trading.
- As long as you stick to a time limit for trading, it will not take more time.
(A GameMaster for dividing and reshuffling the cards afterwards is required anyway in my opinion if you play divided blocks.)
I would really like to see this a an official rule rather than an optional rule, for in the first place it brings much more interference in the game. And that's what boardgaming is all about. Especially when you feel the need to play a game with 18 players rather than a game of chess.
So let's put it into playtest
