by jgoyes
vins wrote:
Not the first print for sure, and I think the second print doesn´t too.
Ahhh gracias por la información!
Ahhh gracias por la información!
Ahhh gracias por la información!
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Does anyone know if the Spanish edition comes with Le Grand Hameau expansion?
Ahhh gracias por la información!
↧
↧
Thread: Le Havre:: Rules:: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by jgrieve81
During setup 6 special buildings are randomly selected and then placed face down. In a full version two player game the town only builds 4 special buildings. Am I doing something wrong or is this just part of the game? I just thought that all six would eventually find their way into the game.Thanks
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: Rules:: Re: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by Desiderata
Yeah, I think up to 5 are built in games with more players, and the 6th is so there is always a choice when visiting the Marketplace.↧
Reply: Le Havre:: Rules:: Re: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by mogust
Desiderata wrote:
Yeah, I think up to 5 are built in games with more players, and the 6th is so there is always a choice when visiting the Marketplace.
That is correct - for 2 players only 4 special buildings come out, and the max that ever come out are 5. The 6th is there so that there are always two to choose from when you take the action that allows you to look at the special buildings and decide on their order.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Lowest Scoring 4-Player Game Ever?
by Ezel
Well frakk of all of you.I just played my first 4 player short game. The game consisted of 3 n00bs (including me) and one 'veteran'.
The scores ended up being:
Veteran: 26p
Me: 20p
n00b: -1p
looser: -6p
You know NOTHING about Le Havre until you have played it like we did. :angry:
↧
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: Rules:: Re: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by nachof
Honestly, I don't see why the rule to select six special buildings is there. It seems like there's a variant of this question every couple of months. I feel like the rule only generates confusion.I just place the whole special buildings deck and that's it. It seems to me the end effect is the same.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: Rules:: Re: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by TwentySides
nachof wrote:
Honestly, I don't see why the rule to select six special buildings is there. It seems like there's a variant of this question every couple of months. I feel like the rule only generates confusion.
It's like the green meeples in Keyflower. People think they're missing something, but they're not. Just do what it says and everything will work out.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: Rules:: Re: Special Buildings - 2 Player
by Ponton
nachof wrote:
I just place the whole special buildings deck and that's it. It seems to me the end effect is the same.
If they said that in the rules, people would constantly ask why they should put all the cards on the board when only a few are used. The only way to make it right would be to tell you how many cards you need for every number of players exactly instead of a generic 6 which is sufficient for all player counts.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
It depends on your gaming group. I just played it yesterday for the first time with two others (no one had played before). We made a couple early rules mistakes, but caught them quickly. Definitely play the app before you invest in the game. The game did not go over well. It is incredibly long (we had to call it after 16 rounds). Both of my opponents basically said that they would never be interested in playing it again. If you like Caverna over Agricola, you may not like Le Havre. It can be brutal to fall behind in a 100-200 minute game with no chance of recovery (as happened to one player, making sub-optimal choices early in the game). I found the game to be punishing and relentless, as you slowly and agonizingly put some kind of engine together. If that's your thing, then it is the game for you. I have not yet played the solo game, so I can't tell you if it worth it for that.Personally, I will probably never play it again. I have other games with similar mechanics and half (or less) of the playing time, and aren't quite as tough on new players (usually have one or two of those every time I play games with a group).
↧
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by grant5
aolimpi wrote:
It depends on your gaming group. I just played it yesterday for the first time with two others (no one had played before). We made a couple early rules mistakes, but caught them quickly. Definitely play the app before you invest in the game. The game did not go over well. It is incredibly long (we had to call it after 16 rounds). Both of my opponents basically said that they would never be interested in playing it again. If you like Caverna over Agricola, you may not like Le Havre. It can be brutal to fall behind in a 100-200 minute game with no chance of recovery (as happened to one player, making sub-optimal choices early in the game). I found the game to be punishing and relentless, as you slowly and agonizingly put some kind of engine together. If that's your thing, then it is the game for you. I have not yet played the solo game, so I can't tell you if it worth it for that.
Personally, I will probably never play it again. I have other games with similar mechanics and half (or less) of the playing time, and aren't quite as tough on new players (usually have one or two of those every time I play games with a group).
Personally, I will probably never play it again. I have other games with similar mechanics and half (or less) of the playing time, and aren't quite as tough on new players (usually have one or two of those every time I play games with a group).
From the description of your experience, I'm guessing your group didn't take many loans and treated them as something to be avoided. They're not, and once you recognize that the game really opens up.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
We took out loans, but we couldn't get any engines going.The final scores were 50, 36, and 32. We all fell way behind the food curve, because we had no way of generating food (or much income) for half the came due to the card spread.
Maybe we missed something, but there's really no way I'm ever going to get my wife to play it again. Maybe I'll try it solo. From what I've heard, these scores are pretty low. My one friend actually managed to never build a ship (He also ended with 5 loans)
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by tumorous
aolimpi wrote:
We took out loans, but we couldn't get any engines going.
The final scores were 50, 36, and 32. We all fell way behind the food curve, because we had no way of generating food (or much income) for half the came due to the card spread.
Maybe we missed something, but there's really no way I'm ever going to get my wife to play it again. Maybe I'll try it solo. From what I've heard, these scores are pretty low. My one friend actually managed to never build a ship (He also ended with 5 loans)
The final scores were 50, 36, and 32. We all fell way behind the food curve, because we had no way of generating food (or much income) for half the came due to the card spread.
Maybe we missed something, but there's really no way I'm ever going to get my wife to play it again. Maybe I'll try it solo. From what I've heard, these scores are pretty low. My one friend actually managed to never build a ship (He also ended with 5 loans)
I'd review the rulebook, as it sounds like you got at least one rule wrong. Feeding workers is not that difficult in Le Havre, even for first-time players.
In fact, the abundance of resources in Le Havre is usually seen as a point of contrast with Agricola's scarcity (see, e.g., Uwe's Twin Titans, Or: The Olympian's Playground and the Stalwart's Obstacle Course.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
It's possible. We just could not get a food engine going, and couldn't stay ahead of the food curve. I'm sure what rule we got wrong. We just had no access to a building that generated much food. Both wharves were at the bottom of the card stacks.↧
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by texasjdl
aolimpi wrote:
It's possible. We just could not get a food engine going, and couldn't stay ahead of the food curve. I'm sure what rule we got wrong. We just had no access to a building that generated much food. Both wharves were at the bottom of the card stacks.
That makes it sound like you setup the cards wrong. You shuffle, split the deck into three stacks, and then order the cards by their numbers before placing them on the board. The wharf generally will end up a little toward the middle but it is almost impossible (if not outright impossible) for them to end up at the bottom.
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
Ah, I see. That could change the game. It was really tough to get more than 10 food together in a round without ships.↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
Yes, so lesson learned. Always set the deck correctly. Otherwise the game is a miserable 3 hour beat-down.↧
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by aolimpi
Oh, what are you supposed to start the game with? I was a bit fuzzy on that.↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by tumorous
aolimpi wrote:
Oh, what are you supposed to start the game with? I was a bit fuzzy on that.
Players start with 5 francs and 1 coal; the offers start with 2 francs, 2 fish, 1 wood, 1 clay; the town starts with Construction Firm and 2 Building Firms already built. Pages 2-3 of the rulebook is a step-by-step setup diagram. I recommend following it... very carefully. ;)
↧
Reply: Le Havre:: General:: Re: Should I get it?
by tumorous
aolimpi wrote:
Yes, so lesson learned. Always set the deck correctly. Otherwise the game is a miserable 3 hour beat-down.
I told my wife about the mistake. She's still not going to try it again. I think that the extremely large amount of options by the end of the game is a little overwhelming and brain-burning. And 100-200 minutes is just too long for my group, and I don't know if any worker placement/euro game is fun enough to justify such a long playing time (even playing it correctly). Had I read the side of the box first, I would have never suggested it. I felt like after the game was over I just had to apologize to my group for making them play it.
Again, playing by rules would have yielded a better result, but still, the cards were overwhelming.
I told my wife about the mistake. She's still not going to try it again. I think that the extremely large amount of options by the end of the game is a little overwhelming and brain-burning. And 100-200 minutes is just too long for my group, and I don't know if any worker placement/euro game is fun enough to justify such a long playing time (even playing it correctly). Had I read the side of the box first, I would have never suggested it. I felt like after the game was over I just had to apologize to my group for making them play it.
Again, playing by rules would have yielded a better result, but still, the cards were overwhelming.
It sounds like it might not be a good game for you and your group anyway, but for what it's worth, a correct setup will probably also help diminish the overwhelming experience of the end-game. When buildings come out in their intended approximate order, each player will be able to specialize and develop their own plans over the course of the game (rather than trying to scrape together enough to survive the next harvest). That means that the later turns are spent finishing the execution of your overall strategy. Yes, there are many options on the table in the final turns, but you can easily eliminate most of those from consideration based on your previous choices and final plans.
↧
