Post originally by S. Ben Melhuish at 2003-10-01 09:41:36
Converted from Phorums BB System
I've played this a handful of times, always as a two-player game. It strikes me as a very "zen garden" kind of game -- it's very non-competitive, and is easy to play as a "cooperate to build an aesthetically pleasing landscape" kind of game. The competitive aspects are very passive-aggressive (e.g. making it difficult for another player to complete a city), which (in my experience) tends to enhance its relaxing nature.
Post originally by Matthew Gabbert at 2003-10-01 09:58:38
Converted from Phorums BB System
This game sounds like a lot of fun. One of my RPG groups recently spun off a once-a-month board game group. Thanks to that, I've been introduced to the likes of Settlers of Cataan, Iron Dragon, History of the World, Robo Rally, Puerto Rico, and others. I, in turn, have brought Formula De, Wiz War, and other games to the group. One of the guys has Carcassonne, so thanks to your review, I think I'll request that we try it at our next gathering.
BTW, what is the recommended age range? I have an 8- and a 6-year old at home that I'm slowly exposing to non-mainstream games like this.
Post originally by Weber at 2003-10-01 10:32:42
Converted from Phorums BB System
I agree that Carcassonne is a great game. If
you like Catan, then check this one out.
My group has played several games, and we
were quickly attracted to the "aggressive
farmer" strategy. We had a player who got
good at connecting most or <I>all</I> of the
cities, while indirectly adding his farmers
to the single giant field. We learned that
you have to identify these players early and
counter them continually to keep up. We have
since had a couple of games where fields
weren't the deciding factor.
This is one reason I like the river tiles.
They set up a lot of play points right away,
but the adjacent fields are not all
connected. In the regular game, starting from
a single tile, a careful player can be more
effective at keeping the fields connected,
extending his monopolistic (communistic?)
control.
I disagree somewhat about the cloister tiles.
In the first few games I played, I always got
4 or more of the cloister squares, so I can
tell you that I became sensitive to their
value. I would say that they are valuable,
but not unbalancing because (a) Unless you
manage to complete the cloister, your meeple
is permanently invested there. He thus tends
to become less valuable than the meeple you
keep around for 2-point roads and castles.
(You can get those guys back immediately.)
(b) My group will play aggressively to "lock
out" the tiles around your cloister, ie, they
play surrounding tiles such that it would be
difficult, if not impossible, for you to
complete the cloister. This not only limits
the point value, but ensures your man is
trapped there.
I thought the review was good, although I
don't think all of a game's rules needs to be
given away, especially if you want to tempt
the reader to buy it. But that's just me.
Post originally by Scott at 2003-10-01 11:54:50
Converted from Phorums BB System
I agree, great review. I got this game for Christmas last year and began playing with an 8 year old nephew (as 2 player game). After a couple of games he went to bed and I played a few more two player games (with my adult brother).
The next day I played with three others (one my young nephew). He felt competitive throughout and wasn't out of it at any point.
The game works well for any number as the reviewer stated. With "Inns and Cathedrals" you can play with up to six, and it remains fun and involving. The feel is different-- with fewer players, it feels quite controlled (since you play such a large fraction of the pieces), while larger games reward maximizing your (fewer) plays by getting involved in other people's projects more often.
Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2003-10-01 12:56:28
Converted from Phorums BB System
<i>BTW, what is the recommended age range? I have an 8- and a 6-year old at home that I'm slowly exposing to non-mainstream games like this.</i>
The box says 8+, though to be honest I generally find those age ranges dubious, which is why I don't include them in my reviews any more.
What the game really requires is:
* An attention span of 30-60 minutes
* Very simple pattern matching skills
* The analytical ability to correlate the placement of a piece with the acquisition of points down the road
Probably either of your kids will be able to do the first two tasks, and enjoy them. I don't really know where the third one comes in, developmentally, though I'd take Scott's response that he played with his 8-year-old.
Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2003-10-01 12:59:48
Converted from Phorums BB System
In my original review of Carcassonne I was actually a bit more strident about the cloister tiles. I do generally agree with your assessment here, that your meeples can get stuck in cloisters. Particularly as you add on supplements, cloisters seem to become less important, as the value of both cities and roads get revved up.
I've never had the issues you describe with huge, giant fields, but I can see how the river would be very useful if that were an issue.
And as for giving away all the rules: that's just the general style I've been using for these strategy game reviews, to try and really offer a big picture of the whole game.
Post originally by Matthew Gabbert at 2003-10-01 14:29:47
Converted from Phorums BB System
Well, this review was so good that I went out and bought the game at lunch. I think that $20 is a very good price.
I like that it works well for 2 players. This means that I can play it with my wife first, then we can each add a kid as a teammate, and then ease the kids into their own positions as they get the hang of it. I'm using the same method with Robo Rally and it's working out quite well.
Post originally by BlackSheep at 2003-10-02 04:32:49
Converted from Phorums BB System
Personally, I'm a big fan of Shannon's tell-all reviews. Plenty of reviews will tell you that a game is fun or complex or whatever, but these are the only ones which really get across how they play.
Post originally by Weber at 2003-10-02 09:57:55
Converted from Phorums BB System
I think that it is possible to write reviews that convey the essential points the reviewer wishes to make, providing support with rules and stuff, without giving away too much of the milk for free. I admit this is an arbitrary standard, and I'm just sharing my view point. Shannon has clearly put some thought into the content and scope of his (her?) reviews (as opposed to just brain dumping), and I think that is at least as important.
I'd be interested in hearing other players' experience on the "aggressive farmer" strategy and the value of cloisters.
--Weber
.
Linear Mode
