[Board/Tactical Game]: Carcassonne: The Castle, reviewed by ShannonA (4/5)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10059.phtml

Shannon Appelcline's Summary:

This standalone Carcassonne game by Reiner Knizia highlights two-player strategic play. It's perhaps the best game in the series for the serious game player.

Go to the full review for more information.

Post originally by Merric Blackman at 2004-01-28 19:16:32
Converted from Phorums BB System

Another excellent review, Shannon. Thank you very much for writing it!

Hmm - interesting. I've been playing a bit of the original Carcassone (w. King & Scout + Traders & Builders), and some of C: Hunters and Gatherers recently. This looks quite different - especially with the changes in tile placement.

H&G is my favourite version by a fair way (although I prefer the look of the tiles in the original), and I don't know if the Castle could compete - but I'm very happy to know about it.

Thank you again.

Cheers,
Merric

Post originally by Seth Ben-Ezra at 2004-01-29 09:32:13
Converted from Phorums BB System

The change in tile placement makes a *huge* difference. While I have not played H&G, I regularly play the original Carcassonne (with all the expansions), and Castle feels very different.

In addition, I've noticed that it is harder to get your meeples back. This is due to the lack of "endcap" pieces in Castle. Carcassonne (and, I'm assuming, H&G) has the frequent possibility of the "quick points" through the use of two endcaps. For example, in Carcassonne, it's possible to lay a city endcap tile and meeple it in Turn 1, and the following turn, draw another endcap and close the city, picking up some quick points. In Castle, this sort of play is rarer. It's possible to play a tile to close a terrain feature in Turn 1 and grab the points, but usually, if you've played a meeple, it will be at least two turns before you can get it back. This is because nearly all the terrain features border on two sides of the tile, whereas in Carcassonne, an endcap only borders on one side of a tile.

Now, I'm oversimplifying a little here, since paths do have endcaps. However, in general, this is a major difference between the games.

Seth Ben-Ezra

Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2004-01-29 10:35:10
Converted from Phorums BB System

I think you just have to be very careful in your placements and purposefully keep it easy to close your terrains, else they can sprawl all over.

I'll often play a 1-tile terrain that closes immediately by cornering it.

Also, if I'm able, I'll usually put an open terrain I'm working on down against the tile I'm playing it adjacent to in order to minimize the tiles required by closure. (This often limits it to one.) Some tiles make this more difficult and will sprawl anyway, but it's not an inevitability for every placement.

My general feeling is that large terrains are only favored in two conditions: if you're trying to build up your keep; and if you have a x2 tile of that type. Beyond that I see no reason not to keep terrains as small as possible. It recycles your meeples quickly and makes it easier to hit the wall tiles (which I tend to capture 80% of when I play like this).

Shannon