Victory Point cards...

  • To me those Vic Point cards cheapen the game. One spends 30 or 40min building and such, and then out of the blue someone throws a Vic Card down and says, "Sorry you wasted your time!" Should be an option to turn them off. Played a guy that bought 15 of the 25 cards. Other than that, my patience is getting better with all of this. See you on the island...

    "As a thousand commanders before me on a thousand battlefields, I await the dawn..."


  • It's part of the game and always has been.
    My beef with victory cards is that if I get one it's always at the beginning of the game when I would rather have a card that gets me resources. Victory cards are generally the worst cards to get.

  • It is part of the game, and I accept that. I only mean that they are very frustrating as the true score can never really be known. As such, making decisions toward the end of the game most important. Thanks for commenting...

    "As a thousand commanders before me on a thousand battlefields, I await the dawn..."


  • If you take away the development cards, it becomes really hard to win the game. Especially in a 4-player game. Most of the times there is not enough room to win only by building the settlements and cities. Only one person would get the longest road and this would mean that the other players have a big disadvantage. Building development cards and getting those VPs balanced out this thing. Removing the VPs would mean there is one less viable strategy to win the game.

    Building development cards and cities is actually one of the best strategies. Try it yourself.

    I really hope the admins don't take this suggestion seriously. So far they have taken some of the worst suggestions and implemented them without any further thought. (Timer which makes your move automatically when you run out of time... Seriously?)

  • No, I do not really want an option for removing them. I just think they should be played like any other card and visible so players can keep an accurate scenario of how the game is really going. Getting snowballed after 30min of tedious set up is nothing short of aggravating. I played a game where a guy bought 15 of them! He still lost. I know players love those development cards. Thanks for your input...

    "As a thousand commanders before me on a thousand battlefields, I await the dawn..."


  • You have to deal with non-played development cards as if it's the worst case scenario. Usually you can even predict if someone has a VP or not. The robber is on his 6, he has 2 development cards and doesn't play them? 2 VPs. The person has used 2 knights and has another unused development card? He uses it next turn as a knight and gets 2 VP.

    This is just another observation you have to make during the game, not really a brain surgery is it?

    Also, that's the basic rules. VP cards do not have to be played. Otherwise they would be quite weak.

  • administrators

    @NoResources32 Or try playing the C&K expansion. The VP Cards there get played emeniatly after one player draws them. On the other hand ... there are even cards in play ;)

    On the topic of changing game rules: We are developing the game following the official rules invented by Klaus Teuber. We will not add or remove something to or from the game which hasn´t been approved by our partners over at the Catan GmbH.

  • Then why is the random map maker placing two of the same numbers together? Use the randomiser which places the numbers spirally by the letters behind the chits. :)

  • Dude there is nothing wrong with 2 same numbers being together. Only exeption they should not be 6s or 8s. Maps are different and there may be 2 same numbers together sometimes :P

  • Sir is right. Two numbers next to each other just another one of those quirks we endure to survive a game. No 6s or 8s together though! Lot of good thoughts posted here. You expert players need to put a tournament together...

    "As a thousand commanders before me on a thousand battlefields, I await the dawn..."


  • The variant rule in the base game rule book says how to create the random map assigning the chits in a spiral fashion.

    Yes, it mentions that you can be completely random, but why not use the spiral? I have not seen any tournament map which would have 2 of the same number together. Is it because it was done like this in PlayCatan and you don't want to copy any good features of it?

    The spiral will make sure that the high and low numbers are evenly distributed. It does not make sense to not use the clear cut set-up variant, especially since it is so easy to implement by the developers. (I guess the devs will still mess it up and place the chits on desert somehow but whatever)

    With total randomness, usually players rearrange the numbers even more to not have completely unbalanced maps. Online it's quite impossible. You might get 5,6,8,9 cluttered in one region and the first 2 players monopolize these locations. This does not happen in spiral. The spiral might get bad hexes under good numbers but overall the maps are more often playable.

    Having 5-5 together is bad because you can get a big high-risk-high-reward thing going and it will make the game less fun. A city on that place also makes the end game chaotic.

  • I have noticed that Stroom seems to have an incredible and intuitive grasp of this game and it's intricacies. No doubt an expert player...

    "As a thousand commanders before me on a thousand battlefields, I await the dawn..."


  • administrators

    @Stroom The original rules are implemented so that no 6 and 8 or 2 and 12 get shuffled next to each other. It is true that there are tournament rules evolved out of the standart rule set of Catan. These include e.g. not the same numbers are to be shuffled next to each other.

    We understand that players on a competitive level try to minimize the factor of luck as far as the gameplay goes. Currently we are focusing on the core elements of the game.

    That doesn´t mean that we are not thinking about the players who want to play the game more competitive. But let us take this step by step and not all at once. The tournament we are currently testing internatly should give you a hint that we are taking these things serious.

    Also please try to minimize your side blows against the developers. This isn´t very helpful or nice.

  • The original rules also say that you should arrange the numbers spirally. The more random arrangement is more obscure. I'd say you did not implement them the correct way.

    I see you are focusing on core elements but they are always breaking. Why work on tournaments when the games keep crashing? I'd say the criticism is OK in this case. I'm not really criticizing developers but the people who make the big decisions. Especially since you refuse to open registration to PlayCatan. People want to play on a working environment and this is what PlayCatan does. Your development is still at least half a year from being ready.

  • @Stroom well I don't think original rules say that you have to have spiral numbers. They are only suggesting that you may do it, the only exeption are the tournaments where there have to be spiral. Speaking about ordinary games it is only question whether you want to have more luck involved or not. I think you don't like the luck factor involved where there is possibility of 6/4/4 spot? So why don't you also fight for replacing dice for event cards? For those who don't know even cards are cards that allocate numbers almost completelly fair.
    I think luck is one of the important factors in this games and I like little bit more randomness in ordinary games.
    But on the tournaments there should be spiral, since we want to really see who is good and not who has more luck :D

  • Dice luck and map luck are completely different things. I prefer dice. When it comes to a map then that should be made correctly. Spiral is much more balanced than random numbers. Also, in real life people would manually switch numbers around if the board seems too out of balance. You can't do that effectively online. So spiral is the better choice.

Log in to reply