Showing posts with label Game Central Station. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Game Central Station. Show all posts

Thursday, March 20, 2025

Game Central Station: Lost & Found Rules

Here's another piece of Game Central Station history - for those not in the know, GCS was my long-time pre-blog gaming website. I was sharing a story over on Bluesky and realized I'd never moved this over... so I decided to put this up on the blog.

Games are listed alphabetically by their original title from the late 90s/early 2000s.

I'll be the first to acknowledge that these are mostly older games - anyone who wants to email me more recent "lost & found" rules at fluffdaddy@gmail.com is welcome to do so - if I get enough, I'll create a new version of this post.

Frankly, creating this page is depressing. Is it not punishment enough that I forget these rules? Now I have to go and do something silly like publicize that to the Internet gaming community.

But mine is a cautionary tale... hopefully, the rules that I (and others... thank God I'm not alone) have missed will help our faithful visitors play these classic games right the FIRST time.


1830
Bas van der Meer

The very first time we played 1830 we thought that once green, and later brown tracks were available, we thought you could just play start building such a tile on an empty hexagon: very soon the map was covered with the most complex tracks. Of course, with the rules written in that famous classic Avalon Hill style it's hard to get every rule correct, even after multiple times of playing and multiple re-reads of the rules.

[Editor's note: my first - and only - play of 1830 was aborted at 6 hours less than halfway through the game. Bas is not kidding about AH rulebooks.]

Acquire
Dennis Matheson

In Acquire, once all seven chain markers are in use you cannot start a new chain or place a tile that would start a new chain. For some reason when I first started playing I learned it as you *could* place a tile to start a new chain even if there were already seven chains on the board. This lead to some interesting strategies where you could build a large "unnamed" chain and then connect it to a chain you controlled at an opportune time, instantly jumping it from three or four tiles to a dozen or more on a single play. Definitely a difference in strategy.

Adel Verpflichtet
Craig Berg

Try a game of this where no one gets a starting hand! Fortunately we figured out something was wrong by the 4th turn when everyone was still in the starting square and rapidly running out of checks.

Airlines
Steve Thomas

Not a misunderstanding as such, but pretty funny.

In the game Airlines, you start by shuffling some number (3?) "Wertung" cards into a large pile of cards, and hold a scoring round when one turns up, and another when the pile is exhausted.

Naturally, we once forgot to add the Wertungs. Our comments were all along the lines "we must get one soon" but none of us twigged the true explanation until there were too few cards left in the pile for the necessary Wertungs to be present.

Al Cabohne
Doug Adams, Mark Jackson, and a host of others...

Due to an early rule mistranslation, none of us could beat the Bean Mafia. Despite what the first translation of the rules say, the Bean Mafia does not EVER get the top card of the discard pile.

[Editor's Note: Ah, rules translations - back in the olden days when they were done by erstwhile gamers feeding Babelfish one line of German text at a time.]

Attika
Rodney Somerstein

I completely missed the part about placing the top four buildings (one from each stack) on your mat at the beginning of the game. (Previously I had missed the fact that you CAN place new tiles and leave enclosed holes/spaces in the playing area). It only took my 9 plays to learn this last one about the starting buildings. This is certainly the easiest to learn game that I am aware of my reading the rules incorrectly, though.

Luckily, the game turned out to be very playable even with these errors.

Awful Green Things From Outer Space
Matthew Baldwin

The first time I ever played "Awful Things From Outer Space", we missed the rule about spreading the initial aliens throughout the ship; my opponent dropped all ten or so monsters into a single room. The entire game, then, just consisted of this huge alien mob careening from room to room, completely decimating out any and all human forces it encountered. By the end we were convinced that we had just found the most unbalanaced game of all time ...

Babel
Doug Orleans and a host of others

Due to a mistranslation, we had been playing Babel with the rule that the game only ended if the score were 15 or more to 9 or less, or if one person had 20, whereas the real rule is that the game can also end if either player has 9 or less after either player gets to 15 (i.e. you can be ahead 15-10 and then lose 10-9). (Note: Thanks to Greg Aleknevicus for pointing this out to so many of us!)

Big Boss
Dave Arnott

A "3 stage" card, eg. allows you to add a single stage to a stack that already has two stages. It does not allow you to add 3 stages. It is not a "three stage" card, but rather a "third stage" card.

When we first played Big Boss, we took the Etage cards to mean "add that many stories to a chain." So when we played a 4 Etage card, we'd stack 4 new pieces on the board. This created some MAJOR towers - you couldn't see parts of the board anymore - and since the game ends when the last piece is played, some of our games were under 30 minutes! Interestingly, we still enjoyed it, though we all agree the correctly played game is MUCH better.

The tip off, by the way, was something I think Peter Sarrett posted. He was Mr. Big Boss Poster in those heady days (of a few years ago) and was always the first to answer questions about the game. He was, once again, explaining about how it's okay to start a company on, say, the 15 space if you also have the 16 card - the whole tricky "may not" v. "need not" bit of translation - and somewhere in the e-exchange, someone offhandedly mentioned running through the card deck and trying to balance your endgame building versus still being able to buy a card, and I thought...

Huh? How could you possibly get through the card deck? The game ends so quickly. We're lucky if we get through half the deck.


Bohnanza
Greg Aleknevicus

We missed the rule that you can't harvest a 1 bean field. Even after discovering this we continue to play it "wrong".

Craig Berg

More of an oversight than an error, really. Everyone always seems to forget about the "donation" rule. That is, until the first time someone uses it. Then, after the inevitable "Can you do that?", there is always a flurry of donations.

Greg Schloesser

For at least a dozen playings, we didn't know you could plant a second bean from your hand if you desired.

Doug Orleans

We played Bohnanza (the Rio Grande edition with all the extra beans) with 3 players, and played 3 rounds instead of 2 like it says. The game took almost 3 hours! Ugh!

Buried Treasure
Mark Jackson

It's not so much a 'lost' rule as it is a forgotten one... I always (and when I say "always", I mean *without* exception) forget that you can play cards you pick up on opponent's piles as well as your own.

Russ Williams

The first few times we didn't realize you kept your cards between rounds! That made the game worse, and not much point to the "steal 4" cards...

[Editor's note: this classic Sid Sackson design was most recently re-published as "Berried Treasure" from Restoration Games.]

Can't Stop
Mark Jackson

I was mortified to discover that I have been playing this wrong for nearly two years. Somehow, I missed the rule that you MUST place a white marker if you can. We played that you place a marker for both pairs on your first roll, then you must move OR place one marker per roll after that. (A fun game... but certainly NOT what Sid Sackson intended.) I was equally mortified to realize that changing to the correct rule did not keep my wife from clobbering me yet again... in our house, this game is know as "Can't Win" as she beats me 75% of the time!

Update: this only gets worse... now I discover that we've called you "bust" if you couldn't mark both pairs on the first roll - which isn't right either! You can mark only one if that's an option. Sheesh.

Canyon
Mark Jackson

I was shocked, nay, stunned, to find that I'd screwed up yet another rule (since this hardly ever happens... heh, heh, heh...). This time, it's the waterfall movement rule... we'd been playing that you moved as normal as long as you nailed your bid. We were surprised, nay, shocked to discover that you only get to move your bonus.

Carcassonne
Neil Carr

Played about a dozen games where you could place your meeple on ANY tile other than the one you PLAYED THAT ROUND. Still find those games to be more satisfying than the more "simplistic" way it is supposed to be played.

Cartagena
Jim Pulles

We also played Cartagena where each player only took one action per turn, instead of three. The game plays r-e-a-l s-l-o-w when you only get one card play per turn... it also gave most of us a bad first impression that's going to be hard to shake.

Clash of the Lightsabers
Matthew Baldwin & Mark Jackson

We hadn't seen/noticed/paid attention to the rule that being tied in points is broken by the number of cards, making standoffs less frequent. Well, we were the kings of standoff, if you get my drift.

Corsairs
Robert Rossney & Don Woods

From the "read carefully" department: these guys overlooked the rule that you remove 8-14 galleys from the deck (depending on the number of players) at the start of the game. In the words of Don, "It would still have a lot of luck, but the "painful and long" part would have been ameliorated."

Cosmic Encounter
Greg Aleknevicus

We played (and continue to do so) that you can attack ANYONE'S base on the system that you draw. Amazingly, while you'd think this would make the game last longer, our games are usually SHORTER than some of the times I've heard reported.


Dragon Delta
Joe Schlimgen, Richard Hutnik, Russ Williams, Richard Dewsbury, & a host of others...

In the first game of Dragon Delta, we were trying to figure out the starting villages for each player. THREE of us were looking at the color of the roofs, windows, lawn, etc., and couldn't for the life of us figure out any pattern that would work for all six colors. This probably went on for three or four minutes. Finally, I saw the coloredborder on the edge of the board and really felt like a fool.

Elfenland + Elfengold expansion
Derk Solko

We missed the whole bit about getting either your gold or two cards on a per TURN basis, instead of per city. If you think there needs to be a card limit with the correct way, try it this way...

En Garde
Derk Solko

What to do when the cards run out during a retreat. I didn't know that retreating was actually your turn, with the only thing you can do is move back a certain distance...

Entdecker
Doug Orleans

We played Die Neuen Entdecker assuming that you had to specify the direction of ship travel before you picked a tile; instead, you just pick a tile and place it in any legal spot next to your ship, which may end up moving your ship to somewhere you didn't want it to go. (I have no idea which version of this rule is in the old Entdecker.)

[Editor's note: It's the same in the original/better version of Entdecker.]

Joe Schlimgen

In the first two games, we played the scout acquired by the "Natives" event near the hut on the tile, not near the huts in the jungle.

Euphrat & Tigris
Derk Solko

During an external conflict in Red, the losing side doesn't lose every temple tile, just those not connected to leaders...

Richard Dewsberry

Our first game of Euphrat & Tigris was taking much longer than the stated 90 minutes. We knew the game was due to end when the bag ran out of tiles, but no matter how long we played, we didn't see the bag getting any lighter. Empires came and went, mighty civilisations fell in battle against other mighty civilisations, treasures were collected in abundance, but no end to the game. Then we realised that tiles taken out by conflict were discarded _from the game_, and should not have been returned to the bag as we were doing! Still, it made for the most fascinating game.

Mark Tyler

I recently got a call from my brother-in-law, Lee, regarding the proper way to play Euphrat & Tigris. Our phone conversation went something like this:

LEE: "The game was great fun until someone pointed out that the game can end in another way besides exhausting the tiles in the bag."
ME: "Yes, it can also end when there are only one or two treasures left on the board."
LEE: "Well, now all our games end in 15 minutes or less."
ME: "Hmm, I've never seen a game end in 15 minutes. Tell me how that is possible."
LEE: "Everyone immediately goes after the treasures until only two are left."
ME: "Okay, but that still takes longer than 15 minutes. It usually takes some time to connect the kingdoms so that the treasures can be taken."
LEE: "Connect the kingdoms? Don't you get a treasure by placing a leader next to a temple with a treasure?"

After learning that they collected treasures by placing a leader (and it didn't even have to be the green trader) next to a treasure spot, my only question for him was, "How did your games last as long as 15 minutes?"

Richard Hutnick

We had it so that leaders were NOT movable. That was yet another oops.

Expedition
Mark Jackson

I'm still not sure how it happened... but I've played Expedition (and taught it a number of people) while totally missing the rule that says you can only make one loop per expedition per turn. Man, can you *smoke* across the board with multiple loops... but sadly, no more.

Formula De
Greg Aleknevicus

Completely missed the rule that turn order is the same as race position. Caused so much trouble in the corners that I had to write up a whole set of special "swerving" rules to deal with it.

Mike Caprio

My friends and I had played Formula De a number of times before going to a tournament game when one of the new people we met there pointed out that on a roll of 20 on the 5th gear die or 30 on the 6th gear die means that *ALL* players in fifth or sixth gear must roll for engine damage. All of us thought previously that it was only the player who rolled the 20 or 30 who rolled for damage.

Needless to say, it added an entirely new dimension to the game. It became much more thrilling to see people on their last engine point praying desperately that they'll make the next lap without blowing up. Very Speed Racer. Now when making custom cars, we won't be skimping down to one engine point - or we'll at least think about it a little more.

Rick Jones

The Formula De rule mistranslation that screwed me up for a while was about having to stop on a straight between corners in order for your first stop in a corner to count. I now understand that you CAN go directly from one corner to the next without stopping in-between.

Fossil
Mark Jackson

The exchange by the finishing researcher MUST be accepted... we played the player could refuse.

Freight Train
Mark Jackson

I missed the rule about the first player "engine" switching... essentially skipping the first player each round. We just played that the first player was first player that whole round. (Much better game with the change!)


Get the Goods/Reibach & Co.
Tim Reddy

Until recently, we've played the 2X to double the number of cards played for a suit. For example, 3 oil cards along with a 2X card would be equivalent to 6 oil cards. The 2X card actually doubles the score obtained from the cards it is played on. So in the above example, if the oil card meld were the only oil card meld on the table and would normally garner 4 points, the 2X card increases the meld's value to 8.

Gnumies
Doug Orleans

We got *three* rules wrong in Gnumies:

1. The Copycastor (the wild card) goes to the low bidder, not the high bidder.

2. The Copycastor only copies your lowest scoring card, not just any card of your choice.

3. If you have 3 or more Walluhwakas (the bad dudes with the shovel), EACH ONE OF THEM makes you discard one card of your choice.

Hera & Zeus
RSTLoup

My girlfriend and I have just discovered that we've been making a huge error in playing Hera and Zeus.

I was explaining the rules to a friend last night and when we got to the Sirens card, I was elaborating a bit on how important it was, and he noted that it could only be used to retrieve a card with value 1 to 7, not a mythological card. I said, "What?" We have been allowing ourselves to use the Sirens to pick up ANY card -- and we've played a LOT of games.

Needless to say, many games have turned on this mistaken use of Sirens. Just imagine: You Sirens the other player's Hades, and then use it to retrieve your own Persephone. Getting to play both Persephones adds a lot of critical moves!

Another twist that would come up from time to time would be Sirensing the other player's Sirens, and then using that Sirens to get the newly exposed card underneath (foiling the strategy of covering a good card in the discard pile.)

Honeybears
Mark Jackson

I missed the rule about the player who moved the winning bear getting 6 points... which made the game much more of a "wait'n'see" snoozefest. Playing it with the right rules (finally!) took it off my trade pile and back into my "I Like Reiner" fan club!

Illuminati
Greg Aleknevicus

Actually we play this correctly but a VERY common oversight is that you can immediately transfer money to a newly acquired group from the controlling group as part of the "take-over". Also, lots of groups forget that play is COUNTER-clockwise around the table.

Iron Dragon
Joe Schlimgen

We played for YEARS being able to drop off multiple chips for a single demand (multiplying the demand by the number of chips). Great for cash flow, but simply wrong.

Java
Doug Orleans

We played Java without noticing the rule that you can't stand on top of a palace tile. We spend most of the game guarding palaces, only leaving them if we could return to them by the end of the turn. It was still an interesting game, but I imagine there's much more freedom when you aren't able to (and hence don't need to) guard the palaces like this.

Katzenjammer Blues
Mark Jackson

When a joker is turned over, each player gets a new card. (We've NEVER played with this rule... but it would certainly help the game)

[Editor's note: I have since played K. Blues with the correct rules - I was right. The game is much better. And it's recently been republished as "Cat Blues".]

Kill Dr. Lucky
Marianna

The game would not end... two hours (!) into it, my daughter showed up and pointed out that we were not discarding the failure cards separately but were recycling them back into the deck. We could have been there next week and still be playing! (Strangely, it was the best game of Kill Dr. Lucky we've ever played and the most hysterical we'e ever got.)


Lost Cities
Mark Jackson

The rules are play THEN draw, not draw then play. (It's interesting how something so simple changes a game so much.) Once again, my wife continues to beat on me even after the rule change. Sheesh.

Joe Schlimgen

The first game we played with a SINGLE discard pile that you couldn't draw from. Still good, but LOTS of luck. MUCH better the right way.

McMulti
Bob Rossney

We threw in the towel on our first game when the market crashed and gas prices went into a spiral from which they never recovered. Then it turned out there was a word missing from the English rules, which say that when economic conditions change, move the price of gas up a number of spaces equal to the number on the new economic conditions card. In fact, it's move it up a number of RED spaces. Very strange to play an economic game where *everyone* is going broke.

Metro/Iron Horse
Derk Solko

For the first several months we Metrogamers played this game, we didn't know this rule: the only valid placements for a tile is either against the outside of the surface or against a previously played tile.

Mark Jackson and others

Thanks to a less than stellar rules translation, many of us played that you MUST play the tile in your hand unless it was unplayable - then you could draw a replacement tile. In truth, the rule give you the choice of playing the tile in your hand or drawing and placing a different tile.

Meuterer
Mark Johnson

I would point out that I never really understood the rules clearly from a read of Adlung's traditionally horrible English translations. It wasn't until I played the game on BSW that the mechanics really clicked. Furthermore, about half the people that first played Meuterer with me on BSW had learned the game incorrectly. The errors I most often see are:

1. Thinking that the wares are sold at the port where the ship is, and the one where it goes on this turn. Makes sense, right? However, the wares are actually sold at the port where the ship is now, and where it was *last* turn. The destination port is determined through the play of the captain's (or mutineer's) ware cards--that is, the cards left in hand--but no wares are sold there until the following turn. (And the one after that.) Though a bit counter-intuitive, you get used to it, and it permits greater planning of accumulating and selling wares.

2. The determination of a majority at the "wild card" ports (Hochland and Piratennest). It's not that a majority in each type of ware is sold--it's that the ware with the single largest quantity is sold. Ugh, that's awkward, best shown by example. When at Hochland, John tries to sell 2 Cloth, Paul tries 2 Wine, George tries 1 Ruby, and Ringo tries 3 Cloth. Only Ringo will sell his wares for victory points. If Paul had tried to sell 3 Wine, he would've tied with Ringo and they both would sell for the lesser amount (unless one took the Handler).

[Editor's note: I tried valiantly to come up with a Beatles joke that referenced Meuterer... but I failed.]

Mexica
Jonathan Degann

We've played Mexica twice and only in the middle of our second game did we discover that you may not only move along the canals, but you may also move along the LAKE - the perimeter of the board - if canals flow into it. What a difference that would have made!

Modern Art
Chux

The 1st time that we played Modern Art everyone paid the bank for purchases that they had made. It wasn't until I read the rules again that I realised my mistake. Actually, it turns out that this is not a bad way to play when you have inexperienced players, as the only person who gets punished by rash overbidding is the overbidder... Strange thing, even though everyone agrees that the game can work this way, they prefer to play it the 'proper' way.

Money
Mark Jackson

We haven't let people bid "0", which is legal in the rules. As well, we've ended the hand when we can't fill both sets, although the rules say that's the beginning of the final round.

[Editor's note: Evidently, we - by which I mean ME - need to get our act together.]

Papua
Mark Jackson

A weak rules translation made the end game of this "run from the cannibals" game a crapshoot. We played that natives reaching the last totem could make a solo break for the beach (square spaces) and that any natives left by themselves on a jungle (circle) space were stuck until another party of natives showed up. The ACTUAL rules require that natives travel in groups until they BEGIN a turn on a beach (square) space.

Pepper
Greg Schloesser

For nearly a dozen or so playings I didn't know that the Pepper cards could be traded over and over again. This was mainly due to a poor rules translation. Most of my family still prefers to play this way!


Pig Pile
Greg Schloesser... sort of!

I, the Conductor, sat down to play Pig Pile at Gulf Games IX with Gail Schloesser, wife of the Nicest Guy on the Planet, Greg Schloesser. What I discovered was a Lost & Found entry of epic proportions. Greg had been taught and/or misread a number of rules - so, this one's for you, Greg. You CAN play multiple cards off your face-up slop piles (if they're identical)... and you CAN play more than 3 cards to wash the deck.

Princes of Florence/Die Fursten von Florenz
Rob Legood

I've now realized my group has been playing with a HUGE omission. When we counted the work value we did not count the number of personality cards in the hand -- we thought the points were only for personalities that had already completed a work. Whoops.

Quandary
Richard Hutnik

I remember getting Quandary, and thinking the rules said that you pick up the SAME COLOR scoring tile as the color of the number tile you put down. I played it once or twice and thought it was cute little, light weight game. When I figured out the real rule regarding this, the game took off.

Ra
Mark Jackson

The second time I played, I missed the "once around" bidding rule and allowed bidding to go around until someone was forced to drop out. Interestingly enough, the game still worked pretty well.

Samarkand
Mark Jackson

I didn't realize you shuffle the deck & discard pile every time a sale is made... whoops. BTW, the game works when you play it wrong, too.

Samurai
Derk Solko

Two majorities = insta-win...

Greg Aleknevicus

Missed the part about the game ending after the last of any one figure is collected.

Ian Borthwick & others

Living in the frozen north (Scotland) and not reading German at all, I am often amazed that I get anything right. The most noteable mistake came at Gulf Games 5 when I was in a game of Samurai, a game I had played many times before. I was a little confused as to the tactics that my opponents were using, but using a Samurai with a value of 7 I was able to pick up a town easily. This seemed to confuse my opponents who thought that someone else had won the town. So we all counted the tile values and when I said "seven" everyone else (including Jay Tummelson) said "one". We then had a debate over what the figure was. It appears that this was a European one, which as the only European at the table I hotly disputed.

Strangely enough playing this broken way the game works perfectly well, which is why it was such a shock that I was doing it wrong.

Settlers of Catan
Greg Schloesser, Craig Berg, Mark Jackson, Bill Nitsche...

For years we played that one had to trade FOR the commodity shown at the port by trading in other resources. (This seems to have been a VERY common error... I wonder if something in the first Mayfair edition rules caused this?)

K. Jeffrey

K. was very kind to let me post this one... he's been playing that no matter how many settlements you have adjacent to a hex, they only produce one resource. No big deal, right? Well, he's managed to win EVERY game he's played so far, so this "little" rules change may be his downfall! :-)

Erich Schneider

Among my local crowd of gamers, there is one who learned to play Settlers wrong (the other group he first tried it with thought you played with all resource cards exposed, rather than hidden). He taught the game to a whole bunch of people in this crowd (before I showed up), and of course they all played that way. Even though they've had the real rules shown to them now, they still prefer to play that way, and will discourse at length on how it makes the game so much better.

Settlers of Catan: Cities & Knights
Scott J Di Bartolo & Naz

Scott: The other mistake was not making all knights inactive after a barbarian attack (regardless of the outcome). This seemed logical enough, we just missed it in the rules. It makes the games longer as well and keeps wheat important throughout the game.
Naz: This sent me scrambling to the rulebook after seeing this one. Looks like our group was playing this wrong too. It makes much more sense this way as the knights just tend to sit around like decorations after the first barbarian attack. LoL. Thanks for posting about this gaffe.

Settlers of Catan Cardgame
Errol Elumir

Somehow missed the rule that you're required to have the most windmills AND a city to get the windmill token. (Heck of a lot easier when you don't need the darn city.)

Judson Cohan & Mark Jackson [though I figured it out a little quicker than Judson]

For our first 25 games of the Settlers card game, we didn't realize that yellow cards are removed from the game when played.


Shark
Richard Hutnick

I assumed that the rules allowed a player only 5 transactions TOTAL during their turn, this included selling. This meant a player could only sell up to 5 shares in a turn. Since we played two players, we didn't notice. This variant does work well for a 2 player game of Shark.

Showmanager
Derk Solko

I totally missed the 'you can't take loans out on a show that all players have produced' rule the first time or two...

Craig Berg

We didn't realize that actors were removed from the game once they had been in a production. We put them into the discard pile and, when the deck ran out reshuffled it. Created some pretty high scores since all those '9's came back into play.

Spacebeans
Kevin Maroney, Russ Williams, Huw Morris, & a host of others...

A close reading of the rules indicates that we were doing something wrong: The cards get passed to the *right*, but the turn rotates to the *left*. We had both rotating to the left. Anthony Rubbo's otherwise excellent rules translation omits the text formatting from the original, in which "right" and "left" were both emphasized.

Stratego
Matthew Baldwin

Steve: He always thought the Bombs were gone when they were hit. We got the rules out and I showed him he was wrong.
Matthew: The bombs aren't removed when they get hit? Whaaaa-?
---Matthew checks Stratego rules online---
Matthew: Holy Moly!
Steve: Only by a Miner (8). Then the bomb goes but the Miner stays. Otherwise the bomb stays and the attacking piece is destroyed.

Taj Mahal
Jim Pulles

We recently had a game of Taj Mahal in which two us had to be corrected on the rules... and both rules were different. I had always played that the white special cards were discarded after use, and not kept in hand. Another player had never scored for palace chains on a player's turn but instead waited and scored them at the end of the game.

Tikal
Derk Solko

I completely muffed the scoring round the first time through. I simply interpreted it as an El Grande type thing where we just scored all positions and continued.

Titan
Dave Kohr

For 10 years we played Titan wrong, by permitting you to recruit the weakest creature available in a given terain type without requiring that you already have a creature of that type. Ten years of Titan, down the drain!

Don Woods

Well, this one isn't mine, but a friend's. (No, really!) This friend always did terribly at Titan. One day we discovered that at least part of the reason was that he had misunderstood the rule about not moving stacks through other players' stacks on the masterboard. He thought he was also prohibited from moving through his OWN stacks.

Gilbert Benoît

In university, I was taught to play Titan by a friend, who badly misinterpreted the way battles work. The way we played was:
- attacker moves
- defender moves
- strike phase (i.e. one strike phase per battle round instead of two).
Needless to say, this made battles very static, and the attacker was always under pressure from the strong possibility of a time loss.

Even after I had bought the game for myself, I still played that way (the fact that the rules mention a "common" strike phase re-inforced my mistake). One day, two friends of mine, Denis and François, were supposed to come over to my house for a game. As I spoke with Denis on the telephone to confirm that they were coming, he mentioned that François had read the rules, and that he thought that we had been playing wrong all along. I was very dimissive ("no way, he does not know what he is talking about, etc..."). Now, even when biased, I am still fair minded; I thought I would re-read the rules, so I could point out to François exactly what his mistake was. However, reading the rules in this new light, it became obvious that he was right, so when they rang my door bell, I was wearing a paper bag over my head, and I had written "François is right" on it... Was that ever embarassing!

Alan Kwan

Most new groups I get to play Titan with, they play some major rules wrong. And reportedly they have been playing that way (such as /years/) for a long time.

The other day, a group played that the attacker can summon an Angel only if he slays a defending unit in the first battle turn, and that carry-overs have to be predesignated and can only be applied to a target adjacent to the first target.

Torres
Thorbjörn Engdahl

For a very long time we played that if you entered a door with your knight, you could exit through any door, not only those on the same level or lower. The action card that allowed the same move was considered rather lame..

Union Pacific
Greg Schloesser & Don Woods

I still keep forgetting the rule wherein players play one share of stock at the beginning of the game.


Vino
Eric Amick (although we played it wrong, too!)

When we first played Vino, we had players lose 'grapes' from their cellars equal to the number of bottles sold. The game lasted MUCH longer than it's suggested 60-90 minutes. Turns out we were not reading the rules carefully enough. Here's the relevant section:

Losing vineyards
When a player sells wine, he must return vineyards to the bank based on the amount of wine he sold. To find the number, the player looks in the column with the number sold to the row labeled ""lost vineyards" ".. . . After he picks up the chips [on the returned vineyards], he adjusts his wine cellar for that variety, subtracting the number *returned* [emphasis mine].

Wettstreit der Baumeister
Greg Schloesser

Since acquiring the game when it was first released, we have always played that a player MUST complete a town in order to generate a score. That means a player's town must contain at least a town hall and two end towers. If a town was missing one of these components, then the player would not score any points and, thus, could not win.

However, it was pointed out to me after a recent session report that this was incorrect. In reality, the only penalty a player suffers if he does not build a complete town is that he is ineligible for any of the scoring bonuses. He still receives points for each piece he has in his town. Ahem.

You know, I kinda like it the way we used to play. This made acquiring a town hall and end towers vital, and it was neat to see the desperation setting in on those players who had not yet acquired a vital piece as the game approached an end. Further, this made the use of the saboteurs much more powerful, as a player could target one of these vital pieces late in the game, often extorting huge bribes from the intended victim (we use the saboteur variant as published on the Westbank Gamers site). I think we'll continue to play our former (incorrect) version in future playings.

Wyatt Earp
Richard Borg (via Scott Alan Woodard)

Photo cards may be played out-of-turn if a set is melded by ANOTHER player and you posess the matching Photo card. According to the Rio Grande rules, use of a Photo card may only take place on your own turn and counts as a Sheriff card. Playing so that Photo cards may be played out-of-turn works much better, in my opinion. <I>(Conductor's Note: This is the way Richard taught us to play in March 2001... and I'm with Scott - I think it works better.)

According to Jay Tummelson, the head of Rio Grande Games, both Richard Borg and Mike Fitzgerald approved the English version of the rules before they were published - not including the Photo card rule. "You are welcome to play that way, but it is not in the rules," says Jay. Stefan Bruck of Alea, the German publisher, agrees with Jay... and suggests, "If somebody wants to keep on playing with the 'photo op' rule they should decrease at least the 4 sheriff-points down to 3."

Jim Pulles & others

We played you can never play more than one sheriff card on a turn, even though the rules explicitly state that you can play two if one is retrieved from the discard pile (with a Wyatt Earp sheriff card).

Zirkus Flohcati
Mark Jackson

It's easy to miss (for me at least) that when a player turns up a matching card to the table, not only is his turn over BUT the card that was just drawn is discarded.

====

In the words of Derk Solko: 
"All of this really makes me wonder if I should ever be put in charge of reading rules, no?" 
I'd like to think that the reason this list is so freakin' long is because I'm quite often the person that does the rules reading, so an unhealthy portion of the errors would happen to me. But I don't know that that's necessarily true...

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Game Central Station: Detroit/Cleveland Grand Prix

Here's another piece of Game Central Station history - for those not in the know, GCS was my long-time pre-blog gaming website. Since Daytona 500 is about to show up in my top 100 (spoiler alert!), I decided to put this up on the blog.

Starting with Niki Lauda's Formel 1, continuing with Top Race, and preceded here in America by Daytona 500, Detroit/Cleveland Grand Prix is simply the latest in a series of card-based race games. D/C Grand Prix is that rarest of gems, an excellent 3 player game, and a lot of fun as well. The tips offered here help 'goose' the game a bit.

The Auction Problem

Using Daytona 500 to fix it!

One of the difficulties of Detroit/Cleveland Grand Prix is that the smallest bill available in the game is also the smallest payoff. So, if you buy the last car for $10,000, the worst you can do is break even.

My thought? Use the payoff chart from Daytona 500 make the auction more interesting... higher bids make more sense and you have a much bigger stake in working the auctions (rather than just taking the cheapest cars that match your cards.)
  • 1st place - $300,000
  • 2nd place - $200,000
  • 3rd place - $150,000
  • 4th place - $100,000
  • 5th place - $80,000
  • 6th place - $50,000
Viva Las Vegas

Betting (a la Top Race)

One way to spice up Detroit/Cleveland Grand Prix is by borrowing the gambling mechanic from Top Race.


Three points are marked on the racetrack. When the first car crosses each of these marks, players may "bet" by secretly choosing a car. Players don't have to bet every time, and may bet on the same car more than once or choose different cars. You do not have to bet on a car you own. Bets are kept secret until the end of the race.

At the end of the race, bonuses and penalties are assessed based on the time of the bet and the order of the finish, using the following chart.


Location of Betting "Points"

On the Top Race board, the points come after the 12th, 23rd and 35th spaces, with 20 spaces between the 3rd betting point and the finish. Some proportional assignment of betting points on the D/C Grand Prix board would probably also work. I notice the Top Race betting points are before, and definitely not inside, narrowed sections of track.

End of the Race

When a player has got all of the cars they own past the finish line they still continue to play cards - after all they may well still have bets outstanding on other cars. Play continues until either all cars are past the finish line or all cards have been played.

What to Do With the Switch Cards

Probably the least loved part of the game design are the switch cards...

Variant Ideas

Here are some other options (besides using them as written in the Mayfair rules)...

  • reversal of fortune - physically switch the two cars on the board (seems a little over the top, if you ask me)
  • catching up - move the following car (on the card) even with or behind the lead car (on the card)... if there is a blockage, the car doing the catching up will halt behind the blockage.
  • breakdown - The foremost of the two cars is moved to the side of the track (off the track), it can no longer move (points on cards for this car are now wasted when played) until the other car on the card has reached or passed the broken down car's position. It then returns to the track where it came off, or to the side if that space is taken or behind if this is not possible.
  • power switch - color switch as written in the rules... but you are immediately allowed to play another card

The next set of suggestions - Spin Out, Mechanical Failure, Burst of Speed, Careful Passing, & Defensive Driving - are from ever-creative mind of Steffan O'Sullivan.

  • spin out - A switch card represents a spin out. In this case, one of the two cars is chosen to spin out - turn its counter backwards, off the track, adjacent to the space it was on when it spun out. Other cars may move through the space it was on when it spun out. When five points worth of movement have been burned off, turn the car around again and place it on the track, on the space it occupied before spinning out. (Keep track of how many spaces have been burned off by stacking cards with its numbers next to the car.) If the original space is occupied when the car is to return to movement, place it in the nearest open space behind that space. On its next card, it moves normally. If a card is played which brings it to more than five spaces worth of movement while it is spun out, it moves the difference immediately.
  • mechanical failure - A switch card represents a minor mechanical failure, which can cancel up to five points worth of movement of one of the cars whose color is pictured on the switch card. This is played out of turn, when another player plays a card. So if another player plays a Move 6 card, playing the appropriate switch card will cause that car to move only 1 space, though it is still the first car moved on the movement card. It may be used to cancel a move of less than 5, but the excess is lost. That is, if a switch card is used to cancel a Move 3, for example, there is no of two spaces to a future turn.
  • burst of speed - A switch card may be used to move both cars pictured on the switch card two spaces forward. The car in the lead moves first, then the other car. Both cars must be able to move two spaces or the card cannot be played for this purpose.
  • careful passing - A switch card may be played *with* a movement card. In this case, the two cars' turn orders are swapped, but not the movement values. It must be played with a card with both colors on it. Thus if you play the Red-Green switch card with a movement card which has Red moving 4 spaces and, later, Green moving 2 spaces, the Green car will move its 2 spaces at the time the Red car was supposed to move, and the Red car won't move until the Green car was due to move, but will attempt to move its full 4 spaces when it does move.
  • defensive driving - A switch card may be played as a defensive driving maneuver to prevent passing. It may only be played just after a car has passed one of the cars pictured on the card and finished its move one space ahead of the pictured car. Note that this may be played out of turn. It cannot be played this way if a car ends up two or more spaces ahead of the car in question. In this use of a switch card, the car which just passed the pictured car is moved back one space, to be as close to even with the pictured car as possible.

Switch Card Clarifications (for the rules as written)

The switch lasts until the person who played the switch plays his next card. A switch card can still be played when one of the cars has finished, but it does nothing at all.

Switch Misdeal

Anyone who gets dealt two or all three switch cards may declare a misdeal if desired. All cards are then thrown in, reshuffled, and redealt. Even though all players continue playing cards after their cars cross the finish line, it is too much of a disadvantage to have two, possibly three of cards with no movement on them. (This house rule is written for the original rules... not the variant uses of the switch cards mentioned above.)

Other Stuff

Tighter Movement Deck

Remove the three 5 movement white cards and the switch cards from the deck. This drastically reduces the effect that can happen in a game with a large number of players if one player gets dealt all three 5 movement white cards. (It often doesn't matter so much which car they take so they just get the one which is the cheapest.) It also has the advantage of making it just a bit tougher to get across the line.

Down with the King(maker)

When playing the original rules, players who have already finished have an inordinate amount of influence on the finish of the race. In order to combat this "kingmaking" tendency, players whose last car has crossed the finish line must turn the remainder of their cards face and shuffle them. When it is their turn, they draw randomly from the pile in front of them to "blow" other players' cars across the line. If there is a white number with multiple valid choices, the car that is farther behind gets to use the white number. (Again, this variant is useful only with the original rules. With the betting rules, players should be able to play cards down to the end of the game.)

Slipstreaming

Whenever a car moves and a second car is directly behind it, move the second car forward one space. If there is a whole row of cars and the front one moves forward then all those directly behind it will move forward one space. This rule is borrowed from Daytona 500.

This helps make it less of an advantage to get ahead of the pack, and adds some interesting twists to the game play.

Open Auction

In order to keep players from sitting on their cash & waiting for a cheap car, eliminate car ownership limits. (This variant is for 2 & 3 player games.)

Thinking Seriously about the System

A Great Conversation

What follows is a not-quite-verbatim conversation from rec.games.board, which gives you some very good information about the Formel Eins series of games, including the "grandfather", an abstract game called Tempo.

Tim Shippert:

The Daytona 500 box and rules say that the game is only for 2-4 players. How does it work for 5 or 6, like Detroit/Cleveland Grand Prix claims to handle? I think the suggested number of players is odd for both games, because D500 should work with more players fairly easily, while DCGP becomes very unwieldy with more than four. Three is probably the best number for DCGP, because the chicanes become a lot easier to manage, and even if you do get jammed up you'll have another turn to try and right things pretty soon.

Steven Pedlow:

Any difference in number of players among Niki Lauda, Daytona 500, Top Race, Detroit/Cleveland is mostly due to how much the game company wants to get away with. They can all have six cars, and can therefore handle 2-6 players, but my experience shows that they work best with 3-4. If you play with 5 or 6, you seem to lack control of how well your cars do.. you are completely dependent on other players moving your car. 2 player games work fine, but it does seem to lack the multiplayer aspect. So it sounds like Daytona 500 agrees that it isn't as good with 5 or 6, and reports 2-4 as the "best" number of players, while Detroit/Cleveland reports only that it can be played by 2-6 players.

My experience with Top Race is limited, so it might be true that the betting element better allows 5 or 6 players to enjoy this version rather than the others. Anyone have any comment on this?

Bob Scherer-Hoock:

I've never tried any of them with fewer than 4 players. I still find the games enjoyable with up to 6, but you're right about the control. I think the key there is to save what you can control for the finish, or also in the case of the road course for the chicanes, but indeed you are limited by lack of cards. I don't think the betting in Top Race addresses any of the control issues at all. In fact, more than 4 players and the resulting fewer cards in hand makes the betting more of a wild guess.

By the way, I finally got around to translating the Tempo rules (the forerunner of all these games) this past weekend. I think I played the game once years ago with someone describing their understanding of the rules, but I'd long since forgotten them. Turns out a betting component was key to the original game system, so much so that the blurb on the box describes it as a betting game rather than a racing game. In this version the track is merely a large "U" and the pawns (no car theme) have their own identical (save for the color) tracks. The pawns never switch lanes, so there is no blocking in the game. The betting is in the form of six cards, one for each color pawn, that are given to each player. Each player looks at their race cards (which are quite a different mix than the race car versions) and decides which of the six pawn cards to select as their bets for first, second, and third place. The cards are placed face down as secret bets. Then the players get points at the end of the race for all three colors they've selected depending on their finish, plus bonus points for finishing any of them in the correct order in which they were bet. In a sense then, each player owns three "cars" in each race (without bidding for them) and several players can end up owning the same car. (And in the unlikely event that two players happen to put out three cards in the same order at the outset, then they can't do anything but tie at the end.) There's a variant suggested in which all the bet cards are turned face up at the start of the race.

Mark Jackson (the Conductor):

In my ever-so-humble opinion, D/C Grand Prix works best with 3 players (if playing "strategically") and 6 players (if playing "with chaos")... while Daytona 500 works well with 3 or 4 players.

Your "mileage" may vary. :-)

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

The Strategies of Catan: Trading

Overall Strategies
Initial Setup
 
Early Game
End Game & Ports

Largest Army, Longest Road, Development Cards, The Robber & The Pirate

TRADING

People seem pretty split on trading. It seems that some will only trade kicking and screaming, as they see big problems with helping other players. Others don't seem to mind, as long as they make sure to look out for number one. I have always tried to trade as much as I can in the early game, primarily out of one big fear -- if I don't trade with Player X, Player X is going to trade with Player Y. In this case,Player X and Player Y will have a better distribution of resource cards (and hence will build more) than me. This is especially bad if X or Y is an adjacent and direct competitor with me for future resources. If you don't trade with X, someone else will. This leads me to take the position that trading is necessary, and instead to focus on the question of how to make the trade as advantageous to you (and as disadvantageous to others) as possible, as long as it is going to happen anyway.

The benefits from trading are not always equally distributed. I would take the position that they seldom are. So how does one make sure they are distributed more in your favor then the other person?

1) Try to trade as close to your turn as possible, and preferably on your turn. 
 
Why? If you trade on your turn, you will have a much greater chance of using that card you just got.

For example, you need one more grain to make your city, so you trade a wool to someone for a grain. Trading on your turn means you KNOW where that grain is going -- to your city. However, the other person does not know they are actually going to use that wool on their turn. They might be trying for a settlement, and when their turn comes around do not have a clay. Or maybe the robber stole a card. Or a monopoly card was played. Or they wound up producing a wool themselves on that 12 they didn't think they would roll. In any case, when their turn comes around, they may or may not be using that wool for something. If they don't use that wool, that trade was a bust for them, and you were the one who got the greater benefit from that trade.

The farther from your turn you make a trade, the greater the chance that something will happen that will make that card you got worthless, or of losing the card entirely. And that means the other person probably got more benefit out of that trade than you.

If the person the who plays the turn ahead of you is trying to make a trade with you, try to wait until your turn instead, if you can. They will have to wait another turn to produce what they wanted. Of course, if they really want to they will trade 4 to 1 or through a port, and then you are stuck...

To stop a trade, you can always promise the player who turn it ISN'T that you will trade with them when their turn comes around, by arguing how they will benefit from this and how the player whose turn it is will be hurt, by the reasoning above.

2) Conversely, try to trade with others who are farther away from their turn, all other things being equal. 

Of course, you don't have much of a choice if it is not your turn, as you have to trade with the person whose turn it is.

Comments 1 and 2 are probably a lot less useful for those of you who play with the Kosmos or (later edition) Mayfair 5-6 player build rules, where anyone can build on any turn.

3) Trade with people who are losing, or are no threat to you. 
 
This is a no-brainer.

4) Trade early on as much as possible.

You don't want to fall behind on that exponential growth race.

I once played a game in which another player made a four-to-one trade with the bank early in the game, rather than trade one-to-one with me. I thought she was nuts, but then I was a little biased. However, in order for me not to have the benefit, she fell on the sword herself. I made a two-to-one port trade to get that resource instead, and was therefore two cards ahead of her. The real winners were the other two players. Losing this many production cards this early on did not help her growth rate at all, and I wound up winning in a very close battle that she might have very well won instead.

5) Remember, you can always trade for stuff besides cards, though it isn't binding. 

How much is it worth to someone for you to build a road and block off a potential port of their immediate competitor? This is useful when you REALLY need a card or cards and have no cards to trade that the other person wants. And you can always trade wood and brick in unequal trades to the person whose turn it is, to stop someone from getting the longest road (or whatever) when you can't build there yourself.

6) Think of other players as 1:1 ports.

7) It isn't necessarily bad to trade two cards to someone for one you really need (2:1 trade), it just sounds that way. 
 
You are saving cards as your only other options was presumably 3:1 at a port or 4:1 with the bank. If it was a 3:1 port, you are one ahead. As the other player gained one card too, they are also one ahead. You are both ahead in my book, and the real losers are the players who were not in on the deal.

You are probably trying to figure out the catch here. You are correct, there is one. The above only assumes the number of cards are important, not the type. The problem comes in if the other player was also planning to do a port or bank trade to get that resource you just gave them. That means they are not just one ahead, they might be two or three ahead. In a worst-case scenario they were going to need to do a bank trade at 4:1 for both of those resources you just gave them, meaning they are now SEVEN ahead (it cost them one card instead of eight).

It is up to you to figure out how many cards they are really saving. If you can appeal to their greed and give them two cards they don't really need, or that they could have traded 1:1 for themselves, then go for it. In general, try to do 2:1 trades with people who are behind, those will use those extra cards to screw someone else, those who were going to do a 1:1 trade with someone else to get those resources, those who were not going to need to do port or bank trades to get those resources, those whose turn it just was and therefore have to wait the longest (see 2 above) and have a good chance to get those resources you gave them anyway, those who already have a lot of cards and may attract the robber because of your trade, and of course those who are not just going to use those cards to hurt you. If you do it right, it is a very powerful tactic. If you mess it up, it could come back to bite you.

In most cases, a generally good 2:1 trade with someone is if you give them two resources for which they have a 2:1 port. It's a great trade for them, and they often jump at it. They will trade them in to get one card. So now they wound up trading a card to you, for two cards, which they converted back into one in their port. It's the same as making a 1:1 trade with you for the resource they really wanted, which they might have made with someone else anyway. Or think of it as you "borrowing" their port for a turn. And you are still one ahead. Just make sure they actually will trade them in at their port, or you might have the same problem as above.

8) It's amazing how many people don't have any particular idea of what to build their next turn. 
 
For those people who just react to what cards are in their hand in deciding what to build (instead of going out and getting what they need), you can force their strategy a bit. Want them to build a settlement instead of that road that is going to cut off your port? Make sure they get a grain and wool to go along with that brick and wood. Or make sure they draw cards instead of building those ships to that island you want.

9) Don't blindly follow trade embargoes on the person that is ahead.

Chances are, they were set up by a single person for a reason that will benefit them the most, or were set up too early. This is your opportunity to make some very good trades with people that no one else is trading with. I assume you will make sure they won't win because of that trade, although.
 


CREDITS

This guide is a compilation of many people's ideas. People's comments are included as separate paragraphs, with attribution (hopefully all of them). If the paragraph is un-attributed, I wrote it. That is not to say I came up with the idea; obviously I didn't invent the ore-grain strategy and other common ideas. If I have thoughts on other people's comments I add to the paragraph after the attribution. Using this method, you can email whoever came up with the appropriate idea to discuss it further. I don't know if any programs can find email addresses inside posts, so I played it safe. Remove the "DE" and "LETE" in each email address.

Please email me with your comments, other tips, criticisms, or request to be put on the mailing list for the next version at scotDEscot@pacLETEbell.net. If you don't want your name and email included in later versions, let me know. Later versions will also be posted on rec.games.board.

For the next version, I really need info on the Stadt and Ritter, Cheops, and Alexander expansions.

Yeah, I know no one is going to remember all of this. But maybe certain bits will be useful.This is for all experience levels. For those of you that think you don't need help on the basic stuff, you can probably skip a lot of this guide. But remember, Richard Feynman used to teach freshman physics because he said it was essential to go back to the basics every once in a while.

You are free to copy, publish, or reprint this guide in any form, as long as it is whole and unedited (yes, that includes everything from the title to the end of the version notes). You can format it any way you like. If anyone wants a text file, email me.
  • November, 1997 This version derived from a post and replies made on rec.games.board.
  • January 13, 1999 Added new strategies, more emphasis on the robber, more tips on trading, and various odds and ends.
  • January 18, 1999 Major editing. Added info on the Wood-Brick strategy, info on six and eight hexes, formula for ranking intersections.
  • July 29, 1999 Minor edits and changes in overall strategy. Other odds and ends added. Updated some email addresses.