Discussion: Age 1 Military Cards

[Osimani]

Last year, I started playing with the BGA implementation of this game (no expansions). In all of those games, there was always one common factor, the military cards from Age 1 were always discarded or used to build a wonder. Building one of those cards in Age 1 means losing the chance to start Age II. It's kind of sad to see a card that is never used for what it was really designed for. They could perfectly be replaced by blank cards and it would be the same.

Wouldn't it be nice if the red cards from Age 1 were more useful? Agora achieves something like that with the blue cards from Age 1.

My proposal to improve this would be to change the rule that defines the first player of the next age. Instead of having the player who is losing in the military track decide who goes first, let the player who is winning make the decision.

This would create some advantages and disadvantages that I will list below.

Pros:

1- Players don't have to hold back from building those cards, enabling an early assault

2- Red cards will be more contested because they will help you start the next Age.

3- Military wonders will also be more desirable for all the above.

4- It would reduce the First Player Advantage. This is because the second player can counter the trick that the first player does when he builds an extra wonder on his last turn in order to start Age II.

Neutral:

1- The game would shift to a more militaristic focus from the beginning of the game.

Cons:

1- Military defeats at the beginning of Age III would be more prevalent.

I tested this change with my physical copy and it improved the experience in those matches. The only negative aspect might be the one I listed above. But both players are aware and should not neglect the
military field.

What do you think about this? Anything I missed in my analysis?

[Sacha2142]

Military cards in Age 1 are, as many options, a lever you can pull against your opponent. Is it the less used lever? Probably. Is it useless? No.

[ShaPhi7]

You could potentially have some of the first age cards being worth 2 conflict points, whilst keeping everything else the same.

Part of why it's not worth building them in the first age, is that any progress you make on conflict in the first age is undone pretty quickly in the 2nd and 3rd age.

They don't need to have high resource costs to build them. You could also add conflict points on to other cards, or increase the punishment for hitting the 5 point barrier (which Agora does nicely).

Or perhaps there should be an extra conflict punishment token that is easier to reach (though making sure the 1st player can't hit it on the 1st turn).

[Jake330]

I think just making the age 1 military cards like free and blank for wonders because we never use them and if we do the opponent starts age 2 earlier which gives a advantage to your opponent.

[Osimani]

Or perhaps there should be an extra conflict punishment token that is easier to reach (though making sure the 1st player can't hit it on the 1st turn).

I like your idea of ​​adding a reward/punishment token in the military track.
To prevent players from accessing the token on their first play, it should be activated upon reaching the 2nd space of the military track.
The second token should activate at 4th or 5th, while the third at the 7th space.

Among the things that could grant the tokens, I can think of:
Coin reduction
Destruction of a brown or gray resource card.
Yellow card destruction
An extra turn

The military track points would remain the same.

I think that could generate more interest in the Age 1 military cards. The rewards proposed could be wrong, but it's a matter of trying it out.

At the moment, when I play with the physical version of the game, what I have been trying is the following:

For Age II (Military Age):
The player with the strongest military chooses which player begins Age II.

For Age III (Civilian Age):
The player who has constructed the most civilian buildings (blue cards) chooses which player begins the next Age.

For both instances, in case of a tie, the player who makes the decision is the last active player.

This somewhat reduces the disadvantage I had listed in my post above (losing to military supremacy on the first turn of Age III).
With blue cards one could start Age III even if you are losing on the military end.

[Osimani]

Military cards in Age 1 are, as many options, a lever you can pull against your opponent. Is it the less used lever? Probably. Is it useless? No.

I've probably been a little harsh in calling them useless. There are some cases where it might be advisable to buy them.
For example, if you build the library early and get the strategy token. Another example is if you have already assumed that you will not start in Age II, but I think I would still prefer to grab some other card or discard for money.
However, as ShaPhi7 wrote, what you got from that card can easily be undone in Age 2.

[Oxmeister]

Some interesting thoughts. 7WD is my favourite board game, I think it's superb, but overall I agree with the OP. Despite all the strengths of the game, I feel the game would warrant a 2nd edition, which could also address the wonder balance which sees most players across ranking groups (correctly) select them in the more or less the same order.

How it could be done would need careful thought. The age starting mechanism is one of the more strategic elements of the game, so it would be easy to lose something important here.

2 shield cards might unbalance the cards in Age 1, especially with regards starting player advantage. The idea of playing with punishments(or even rewards) for making progress on the Military track could be a good way to give them a gentle nudge. Perhaps instead of destroying 2 coins, the 2 coins are stolen.

[Andrei3009]

I agree that red cards are almost never played in the first age, but they are useful from time to time.

I recently played a game where they were almost essential for me to have any chance of winning.
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=672063549

[Osimani]

I agree that red cards are almost never played in the first age, but they are useful from time to time.

I recently played a game where they were almost essential for me to have any chance of winning.
https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=672063549

Coincidentally, today I had a game and adopted the Military approach from Age 1. I had the same three Wonders as the ones you had in that game. I'm talking about the Mausoleum, Zeus, and the Colossus. They're probably the best ones to adopt that strategy (potentially 5 to 6 shields).

I won that game, but it was by being on the edge. My opponent could have beaten me in a moment, but she forgot to use an extra-turn Wonder that would have allowed her to win by science. Here's the link to the game: https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=673922778

Your game was much more unusual than mine. That game started with a front row that had four red cards and only one resource, plus you were second player. There's an important moment at the beginning of Age II. Your opponent had the option of choosing a red card worth 2 shields or a brown card worth 2 clay. He chose the bricks to suffocate your economy, but leaving you with the 2 shields. It's a nice situation to think about what would one have done.

It was fun to follow this strategy, but I think a lot of things have to fall into place to win the game. Also, if your opponent denies you a Military victory, it's almost impossible for you to win by VP.

Thanks for sharing the game; very interesting!

[Salazar-1019]

I also tested your suggestion with my phisycal game and it works beautifully. Being 2nd player in a game is a huge disadvantage if ur opponent knows what they're doing