by qwertymartin
bradandmary wrote:
Do you think that having more people play would help to remove the apparent lack of meaningful choices?
If anything, I think probably the opposite. We played with 4 and 5 and you didn't get much control over which space you'd end up with your next turn. With 2 players, it's zero-sum, so heavy blocking potentially becomes a more viable strategy.
How tight is money in the game?
You have to be careful not to run out. If you have less than 3 coins on hand, it becomes dangerous to go to the inns late, because you may not be able to afford the meal. The coin spots are the most commonly blocked, and a lack of coins causes a lack of flexibility.
Would it help or hinder the game to play with a dummy player regardless of the number of people playing? They do this in Glen More and it works for that game. I wonder if it would add a slightly greater amount of strategy or if it would simply take up too many locations...
There is a dummy player in the rules for 2p which sounds kind of interesting. It's controlled by whoever's furthest ahead on the track at the time, and it does compete in the temple area majority contest.
In your game did you attempt to create a balance between the different scoring areas, or did you try to focus on only a couple. Would collecting a larger amount of souvenirs, for example, offset losing out in other areas?
The special powers and the scoring are set up to reward a certain amount of specialisation. For example, the panoramas score in triangular numbers and the souvenir sets in square numbers. But those max out at 3-5 cards, so there's plenty of time to 'specialise' in several different scoring paths.