Alles anzeigenIch fand das ja sehr interessant - vor allem auch, weil sich sonst scheinbar keiner darüber beschwert:
Alles anzeigenIt’s simultaneous play, at your own pace, but a couple of the actions involve you passing a resource to the player sat next to you.
In other words: At any point during your turns, your neighbour might pass you a brick (because he took his trading action). Or a soldier (because he took his scouting action). And that brick/soldier is immediately yours to use, however you want to, in the current round.
Huh??!
With my game theory head on for a moment -- this looks like a classic deadlock situation to me. If you want to maximise your strategic choices… then you need to wait and see if anybody is going to send you bonus brick(s)/soldier(s) to factor into your plans. And this aspect makes it entirely in an individual’s interests to act late in the round, rather than early in the round. There’s no first mover advantage. And there is no rule at all … no first player … no order of actions … to break that deadlock. If everybody decides that they want to be the one who acts last, then… well… good luck with that. The rules aren’t going to save you. You might be in for a long night.
And I have nagging doubts that something similar haunts the way that you set up your defences in the game. Suppose I’ve NOT taken any precautions to defend against the Picts who attack from the west. As long as my opponent(s) also fail(s) to defend from the west … that’s kind of OK. Because when a band of picts DO turn up from the west, everybody suffers the same penalty. But if they defended, and I didn’t … well … that’s a significant points difference. So it’s not in my interest to commit my last soldier to defending/not defending from the west until I find out exactly what my opponent is doing with THEIR western cohort(s)
And, meanwhile, my opponent is thinking exactly the same thing about me, and my use of soldiers. Another deadlock.
I’m pretty sure somebody is going to swoop in at this point and say “well… just don’t play with people who take things too seriously like that”. But isn’t that… kind of… exactly how games are supposed to be played
Das klingt sehr schlüssig und würde mich vermutlich sogar stören. Allerdings erwarte ich persönlich gar nicht, dass viel mit anderen zu spielen.
Der Effekt tritt durchaus ein, dass man "aus dem Nichts" mal einen Soldaten, mal eine Ressource bekommt. Der Effekt hat in meinen bisherigen Spielrunden niemanden großartig gestört. Vielmehr glaube ich, dass das Einführen einer Zugreihenfolge den zeitlichen Rahmen von Hadrianswall sprengen würde. In den ersten Partien ist man ja schon 90 Minuten dabei, wenn alle gleichzeitig vor sich hin prüddeln.
Aber ja, Hadrians Wall ist kein Schnäppchen, aber ich bereue den Kauf definitiv nicht.