2 things: A) there are ways to mitigate some of that with the god cards and B) if there's no difference to using a 4 or a 2,, as your example, you're better off holding onto the 2 for later, when the board is even tighter. So using the 2 just to lock someone else out, may backfire on your next play when you're stuck with the 4. So, to me, you seem more incentivized to use your higher dice on the actions you really want, and your lower dice on the less desired actions, where they fit. Just my 2 cents, as someone who also doesn't like direct confrontation.
i would agree with that at higher than 2p count, but at 2, every point you deny me is equal to a point you gain, and it's often the most efficient move to do what you need to do while denying me what i need to do if you can :)
Im afraid i have to totally disagree with this assessment of Cuzco. This review makes the game out to be a ‘take that’, screw your opponent at every chance game which I dont believe it is. As a game that relies completely on dice rolls with zero mitigation, there are definitely times where you have no choice but to thwart an opponents plans but as for players who LOOK FOR those opportunities, that is a player issue. Not a game issue. Ive played this game at all player counts and have never played with someone who intentionally tried to destroy my game just because they could. Besides, with some planning, the awesome God cards can get you out of a tight spot almost EVERY time. Not sure who you are playing with but I suggest get some nicer opponents.
if you've got a 5 or a 2 and you could use either to accomplish what need to do, and you know i need to go there as well, then you'd use the 5 specifically to block me as that would be your best move in a 2p game, where every point denied me is a point gained by you. this of course is only an issue in 2p because once there's 3 or more players, making aggressive moves puts both you and the person you're purposely blocking behind the 3rd player who's not involved. zero sum 2p makes most games implicitly more aggressive if you're trying to play to peak efficiency, and we always do :)
Well, I don't really see how is this more cutthroat than - let's say - Castles of Burgundy, a top 10 game for you. In CoB, if there are equally valuable tiles for me on the display, I will always choose the one that my opponent needs the most. I could literaly deny him/her a ton of points by taking - let's say - a 3 pigs tile instead of a 4 cows tile. I even lose 1 point with this action, but I stole at least 10-12 points from my opponent. Or how about taking the only available building which he needs to complete the 7 or 8 hex sized town? And this could happen multiple times in each game and you can't do anything about it.
plenty of games have players blocking each other inadvertently in the furtherance of their own goals, and we're totally fine with that (including burgundy). but this game often gives you the extra choice to further your goals in a way that would block your opponent or would not block your opponent. this option to "denial attack" is totally optional, and in 2p it's generally wisest to do it if you can, especially for crucial moments. that makes this much more aggressive, because it's a conscious choice to screw your opponent not inadvertently in the course of your own pursuits, but actively to hurt them and their goals.
Thanks! Where can we find your current Feld list? I remember there being a TH-cam comment from you once... But who's going to search for that really?!?!
fortunately i can search through all my comments, so i just did and found i posted this list 10 months ago: 10. vienna 9. kokopelli 8. bonfire 7. notre dame 6. amerigo 5. marrakesh 4. forum trajanum 3. macao 2. trajan 1. burgundy haven't gotten to play civolution, kathmandu or nassau yet, but hoping to within the next month or so. but i'd be surprised if any of those pushed into the top 10
oh, also worth noting that if ravensburger hadn't screwed with the design for the 2nd printing of carpe diem and left things as originally created by feld, it would have come in at #2
@rahdo screenshoted as a guide for life. Thank You so much for your kindness and effort. Our group has just embarked on our field journey and are really struggling to get our bearings, with bonfire being the only hit so far while all Hamburg did was get us itching for Bruges. Strasbourg and Rialto next! Though looking at the list maybe we should review our approach...
Dont understand your problem. You can easily deduce that if you take this die or that die then your opponent will have those die's left and then next turn you could be screwed and then it is best to do the most important thing now. Without it the game would have 0 interactions and tensions. The game as it is make you pick a suboptimal option to not risk getting a worse deal.
I haven't played Cuzco but have played Bora Bora. Despite being similarly care bearish in attitude I must say that I don't find the game to be mean at all 2p. There are so many things that you can do in terms of game actions and god card mitigation that for me the game feels just fine. Die values are public knowledge and the game is all about planning. Both players will have to take a few sub-optimal moves throughout the game and i have never felt like being blocked has won the game for one player or another. I feel like because it's a direct choice to take a die from a small pool that an action can feel more like an attack than intended. Carpe Diem has exactly the same choices at 2p. It can be incredibly mean as taking one or two specific tiles can totally swing a scoring round in a devastating fashion. You can even hate draft the scoring round. Both are really two sides of the same coin and i think Bora / Cuzco just feels meaner on the surface but isn't really.
the difference with this system is it often puts me in a place where i could make a move that would block you if i went with dice A but that you'd still be able to do what you need to do if i use dice B. it's no difference to me, but it can really hamper you. and so the smart move is to go with A. carpe diem isn't like that... if i take a thing you need, you at least use it... i don't make a conscious decision to do a thing in an aggressive way soley to hurt you
@rahdo Fair enough. I think we all have different takes on games. After a few dozen plays of both titles at 2p my impression is that CD is an Agricola like knife fight in a phone box whereas Bora is pedestrian in comparison. However during my first few plays I would have agreed with you that Bora / Cuzco is the mean one of the pair.
it's funny you mention agricola, as it's a parallel i often draw to stuff like cuzco. agricola lets me collect sheep to keep you from having them when they're important to you, even if i don't have a stove or fences, so the sheep are effectively "set free". i.e. the ONLY function of me doing that is to deny you... i don't benefit at all. that's a true mark of nastiness above all else in my eyes, and cuzco/bora bora is the exact same way with the "i could do this action with a die that doesn't hurt you, but nope, i'm going to do the exact same action in a way to maximize your pain". just horrible stuff IMO :)
@@rahdo Indeed! I think we will just have to agree to disagree. Anyway, thank you for your many years of insightful and thoughtful comments on board games. In some ways I miss the 'golden years' of when you were in Malta but I'm glad that the channel has grown and has attracted a more diverse range of co-presenters.
2 things: A) there are ways to mitigate some of that with the god cards and B) if there's no difference to using a 4 or a 2,, as your example, you're better off holding onto the 2 for later, when the board is even tighter. So using the 2 just to lock someone else out, may backfire on your next play when you're stuck with the 4. So, to me, you seem more incentivized to use your higher dice on the actions you really want, and your lower dice on the less desired actions, where they fit. Just my 2 cents, as someone who also doesn't like direct confrontation.
i would agree with that at higher than 2p count, but at 2, every point you deny me is equal to a point you gain, and it's often the most efficient move to do what you need to do while denying me what i need to do if you can :)
Im afraid i have to totally disagree with this assessment of Cuzco. This review makes the game out to be a ‘take that’, screw your opponent at every chance game which I dont believe it is. As a game that relies completely on dice rolls with zero mitigation, there are definitely times where you have no choice but to thwart an opponents plans but as for players who LOOK FOR those opportunities, that is a player issue. Not a game issue. Ive played this game at all player counts and have never played with someone who intentionally tried to destroy my game just because they could. Besides, with some planning, the awesome God cards can get you out of a tight spot almost EVERY time. Not sure who you are playing with but I suggest get some nicer opponents.
if you've got a 5 or a 2 and you could use either to accomplish what need to do, and you know i need to go there as well, then you'd use the 5 specifically to block me as that would be your best move in a 2p game, where every point denied me is a point gained by you.
this of course is only an issue in 2p because once there's 3 or more players, making aggressive moves puts both you and the person you're purposely blocking behind the 3rd player who's not involved.
zero sum 2p makes most games implicitly more aggressive if you're trying to play to peak efficiency, and we always do :)
Agreed…… saw this review and expected it to be brutal and cut throat ….. but it isn’t really- fantastic game.
@@Tokengesture i do agree that it is a fantastic game :)
Well, I don't really see how is this more cutthroat than - let's say - Castles of Burgundy, a top 10 game for you. In CoB, if there are equally valuable tiles for me on the display, I will always choose the one that my opponent needs the most. I could literaly deny him/her a ton of points by taking - let's say - a 3 pigs tile instead of a 4 cows tile. I even lose 1 point with this action, but I stole at least 10-12 points from my opponent. Or how about taking the only available building which he needs to complete the 7 or 8 hex sized town? And this could happen multiple times in each game and you can't do anything about it.
plenty of games have players blocking each other inadvertently in the furtherance of their own goals, and we're totally fine with that (including burgundy). but this game often gives you the extra choice to further your goals in a way that would block your opponent or would not block your opponent. this option to "denial attack" is totally optional, and in 2p it's generally wisest to do it if you can, especially for crucial moments. that makes this much more aggressive, because it's a conscious choice to screw your opponent not inadvertently in the course of your own pursuits, but actively to hurt them and their goals.
I‘d give it a look at a 50-60 bucks price point. At 100-110? No way
eco-conscious green production in europe instead of wasteful production in china is always going to cost more.
Thanks! Where can we find your current Feld list? I remember there being a TH-cam comment from you once... But who's going to search for that really?!?!
fortunately i can search through all my comments, so i just did and found i posted this list 10 months ago:
10. vienna
9. kokopelli
8. bonfire
7. notre dame
6. amerigo
5. marrakesh
4. forum trajanum
3. macao
2. trajan
1. burgundy
haven't gotten to play civolution, kathmandu or nassau yet, but hoping to within the next month or so. but i'd be surprised if any of those pushed into the top 10
oh, also worth noting that if ravensburger hadn't screwed with the design for the 2nd printing of carpe diem and left things as originally created by feld, it would have come in at #2
@rahdo screenshoted as a guide for life. Thank You so much for your kindness and effort. Our group has just embarked on our field journey and are really struggling to get our bearings, with bonfire being the only hit so far while all Hamburg did was get us itching for Bruges. Strasbourg and Rialto next! Though looking at the list maybe we should review our approach...
Dont understand your problem. You can easily deduce that if you take this die or that die then your opponent will have those die's left and then next turn you could be screwed and then it is best to do the most important thing now. Without it the game would have 0 interactions and tensions. The game as it is make you pick a suboptimal option to not risk getting a worse deal.
I’m with you. I hate a cutthroat dynamic in games. Gives me monopoly flashbacks.
I haven't played Cuzco but have played Bora Bora. Despite being similarly care bearish in attitude I must say that I don't find the game to be mean at all 2p. There are so many things that you can do in terms of game actions and god card mitigation that for me the game feels just fine. Die values are public knowledge and the game is all about planning. Both players will have to take a few sub-optimal moves throughout the game and i have never felt like being blocked has won the game for one player or another.
I feel like because it's a direct choice to take a die from a small pool that an action can feel more like an attack than intended.
Carpe Diem has exactly the same choices at 2p. It can be incredibly mean as taking one or two specific tiles can totally swing a scoring round in a devastating fashion. You can even hate draft the scoring round.
Both are really two sides of the same coin and i think Bora / Cuzco just feels meaner on the surface but isn't really.
the difference with this system is it often puts me in a place where i could make a move that would block you if i went with dice A but that you'd still be able to do what you need to do if i use dice B. it's no difference to me, but it can really hamper you. and so the smart move is to go with A. carpe diem isn't like that... if i take a thing you need, you at least use it... i don't make a conscious decision to do a thing in an aggressive way soley to hurt you
@rahdo Fair enough. I think we all have different takes on games. After a few dozen plays of both titles at 2p my impression is that CD is an Agricola like knife fight in a phone box whereas Bora is pedestrian in comparison. However during my first few plays I would have agreed with you that Bora / Cuzco is the mean one of the pair.
it's funny you mention agricola, as it's a parallel i often draw to stuff like cuzco. agricola lets me collect sheep to keep you from having them when they're important to you, even if i don't have a stove or fences, so the sheep are effectively "set free". i.e. the ONLY function of me doing that is to deny you... i don't benefit at all. that's a true mark of nastiness above all else in my eyes, and cuzco/bora bora is the exact same way with the "i could do this action with a die that doesn't hurt you, but nope, i'm going to do the exact same action in a way to maximize your pain". just horrible stuff IMO :)
@@rahdo Indeed! I think we will just have to agree to disagree. Anyway, thank you for your many years of insightful and thoughtful comments on board games. In some ways I miss the 'golden years' of when you were in Malta but I'm glad that the channel has grown and has attracted a more diverse range of co-presenters.
I just wish Queen Games would stop making these Feld games needlessly swallow up your entire table.
the "essential" editions tend to be a bit more managable, size-wise :)