Do you really need to Consume?

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/#!bugs
Post Reply
ALA----IN
Posts: 13
Joined: 27 December 2020, 23:44

Do you really need to Consume?

Post by ALA----IN »

Good morning friends,
I would like to offer you a reflection. :)

I have found that practically no player (from the rank of good player) uses the Consume Goods action to score Victory Points.

Instead everyone uses the action (in my opinion exaggerated) of "Abandon tiles" (especially in the last rounds) to remove and then place as many tiles as possible and therefore make points exclusively through the cost (value) of the tiles placed.

I find it strange that this way of playing is in line with the author's desire, since in doing so the action of Consumare is practically unused ..

So is there something that escapes me?

Also, isn't the action of "Abandon Tiles" a bit exaggerated?

For example, wouldn't it have been better that when a player Abandon a tile, he has to use another Explore action, instead of being able to draw more tiles with the same action he Abandoned?

At least this practice would be limited.

Is this way of playing really the correct and intended by the author?

Thank you for your attention and I hope you can make me want to play this game (which I initially liked so much). :)
MoiMagnus
Posts: 351
Joined: 17 March 2020, 20:15

Re: Do you really need to Consume?

Post by MoiMagnus »

I've had (IRL and online) multiple games in which I've win from a Consume strategy.
However, it requires much more luck in early drawing, while mass colonisation is pretty much a safe bet.

Second, something that I've tried IRL or when playing with friends (but not with strangers) is to share information.
For example, if I see that another player might be interested by a produce/consume strategy, I will say in the chat "I am producing this turn, is anyone making a trade/consume?" or "I am consuming this turn, is anyone making a production?".
Why? Because the production/consume strategy works much better if both phases take place each turn, rather than alternating between the two. And if anybody follows the suggestion, we're both making a lot of points/money, so that's a win/win.

The produce/consume strategy has for main weakness that if you're the only one doing it, you're probably losing. So that's one of the strategies that work better if you publicly state your future action rather than keeping it secret.

I've never tried it with strangers as (a) a lot of peoples would probably be pretty vocal against this kind of strategies, possibly considering it as cheating (b) nothing complies you to be truthful, and I'm never sure how much it would be socially acceptable to lie about such informations, as Roll is not supposed to be a bluff or diplomacy game.
User avatar
Patapouf1
Posts: 9
Joined: 28 March 2020, 03:16

Re: Do you really need to Consume?

Post by Patapouf1 »

I've played like 50 games on bga, mostly 2 players game in arena and I also never saw anyone use the produce/consume strategy. Never. Which I think is sad because in Race its a very good strategy.

I think the problem with it is dice management is key in Roll. The more your dices are being used the more likely you are to win, so dormant dices as goods on world are slowing you down. You need those dices.

I think maybe in 3-4 players games it would be more viable, but in 2 players game its just not a sound strategy.
User avatar
effaraitsch
Posts: 5
Joined: 16 April 2020, 16:57

Re: Do you really need to Consume?

Post by effaraitsch »

It's actually the weakest in 3 player games. In 4 and 5 it is about the same strength as 2 player - that is viable in like 10% of setups while still risking a lot. The issue has been brought up several dozens of times, yet no one has ever found a solution to the problem.
Ruddger
Posts: 1
Joined: 17 December 2015, 17:43

Re: Do you really need to Consume?

Post by Ruddger »

The produce consume cycle can not be run efficiently in the base game of Roll which is why it is not part of the meta. There are a number of contributing factors to this including:

1) You must run settle actions to accrue enough dice and planets to make the cycle profitable, so the cycle is only viable late game.
2) It is difficult due to tile draw randomness and expensive due to planet tile weight to get enough dice to make the cycle profitable.
3) Not all dice are created equal, with red dice being the most action efficient, cheapest, and favoring develop/settle.
4) Significant endgame points come from 6+ developments which favors develop/settle, and most 6 point scoring is geared towards awarding points for developments.
5) Develop/Settle players are better situated to dictate endgame tempo (load up cheap planets/devs to get to 12 when they see a consume player about to turn on their engine)
6) Develop/Settle players gain a free rider benefit from the trade action at a low cost (2 dice) investment as opposed to the high free rider cost for the consume player when they try to piggyback on the less predictable develop/settle actions (cost = full cost of the tile they are taking the free ride on)

All of these issues would need to be addressed to begin to deal with the efficiency imbalance, which would then still leave the inequality of inherent tile value (which is why dev is generally stronger than settle).
Post Reply

Return to “Roll for the Galaxy”