Skip to Content

Poll: About "Downgrading" resources

6 replies [Last post]
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

For lack of a "better" term, I have called the action of taking a higher resource and converting it to a lesser resource and calling it "Downgrading".

For example: If you have 3 Favor, that is worth 9 points. And you decide that you need Income instead (worth 1 point). Could you convert one of your Favor cubes to an Income (effectively losing 2 points).

Or would it be better if "downgrading" would get you the round down of that resource. Eg. 1 Favor = 3 Income or 1 Favor = 1 Renown.

Here is a link to a BGDF Poll on the matter (concerning this ability/skill) to how it should be possible to "downgrade" resources:

http://www.bgdf.com/poll/should-downgrading-resource-be-ability

Please take a look and vote. I'd like to know what you as designers feel is the better option. At this point in time, I'm not sure which is better. So I'll see what people think and then formulate a solution around that...

Thank you!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Bump...

Just *bumping* this thread... Please if you have the time, review the OP and vote what you think is best.

Thank you!

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I should maybe explain a bit more...

Based on some of the comments, I wanted to add that each player is building his "own" engine (with the cards he plays onto the table – The Realm.

So while it depends on which cards you build into your Deck (because of Deck Construction) will affect how your engine behaves. The idea is basically how and if I should allow for "downgrading".

As of this moment, Upgrading is a "ability" of some Nobles. Notice I say "some" not all, meaning it's a selection factor while building your deck: do you use a weaker Noble but this one allows "Upgrading" or do you ignore this a focus on a mix of stronger cards (building/producing resources)?!

This means that ultimately how you build your cities and play your Nobles will affect on your performance and the capabilities of defeating your opponent. This sometimes will be affected by the Deck (think card order) and other times just by the constructed Deck (think card types).

Fri
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2017
Standard downgrade that nobles can improve

You could establish a standard downgrading. Then allow certain nobles to improve upon this standard downgrade. Like some technology tiles in Castles of Burgundy or the ports in settlers of Catan.

IMO, the standard downgrading will help allow players to always take an meaningful action turn.

Terra Mystica has a similar concept to your downgrading they call it conversion, but that doesn't seem like the best term either.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I see an emerging pattern

With @Mosker's E> Option and @Fri's & @Let-Off concept "universal" downgrading ... Lead me to allow ALL Nobles to be able to "downgrade" as a "last option" where it's 1:1 downgrade any resource for another. So if you are stuck, you can have the "default" option (or universal) "downgrade" to convert a resource to another.

1. So every Noble can do "universal" downgrading.

The next point that you designers have brought up @Jay and @X3M is that having a "terrible", last option downgrading may be only in desperate times, where this is needed. But have a way to balance this with SOME Nobles being able to do a better barter (so-to-speak).

2. Some Nobles have the option to do an improved downgrading (maybe call this ability "Barter").

In this scenario ("Bartering") 1 Favor = 3 Income or 1 Renown. 1 Renown = 2 Income. So as to be a more "performing" action taken by the engine.

This seems like it's covering "most" of your opinions on the subject.

Have I excluded anyone's concerns??? This seems like the unanimous direction expressed by all designers.

I would have never thought up such an in-depth option which is having BOTH "universal" and select "Bartering" (depending on the Noble).

But I was definitely inclined towards having an "Ability". Just makes more sense the way everyone seems to have expressed it.

Additional Comments/Suggestions/Feedback/Questions all welcome.

Cheers and many thanks...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
"Barter" is a bit confusing...

Again just some "terminology" issues. The concept of "downgrading" is perfect as unanimously described.

But I'm having some difficulty with the "terms":

1. Stockpile: Ability to keep resources from previous turns.

2. Trade: Ability to send resources to a neighboring Location/City.

3. Upgrade: Ability to transform a resource up to the next resource.

4. Convert: Ability to transform a resource down to the next resource.

I don't want to use "Barter" because it's too similar to "Trade". The opposite of "Upgrade" is "Downgrade" or "Degrade"...

I could use "Convert" (I thought of this before @Fri's suggestion).

So which is BETTER: "Degrade" or "Convert"???

Note: Stockpile ability works similarly in that each Noble may "keep" multiples of 3 resources. It depends on the number of "Orange" Cubes and the allowable limit per Noble. The "default" is only 3 resources and Nobles without the "Stockpile" ability can only preserve 3 resources per turn.

Note #2: With regards to the Stockpile ability, if the Noble has both the "Stockpile" ability and has (for example) a "3", this means (3 x 3) + 3 = 12 resources. It's an important ability and present on certain Nobles only.

Fri
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2017
Terminologies that I like

Here's the terminologies that I like the most. Feel free to disregard, use or improve upon.

Stockpile = Stockpile
Trade=Transport
Upgrade=Refine
Convert=Spend

Other terminologies I considered:
Trade=Ship
Upgrade=Build/Assemble
Convert=Dismantle/Use/Barter(if you change trade)

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut