B Side vs. A Side

[dschingis27]

I haven't read interesting comparisons between B Side and A Side yet, so I write about it myself.
(Disclaimer: I only play 2p games without nature spirit cards, so that's what I am focused on.)

Luck factor: I think it's fair to say that B Side has a higher luck factor (by that I mean less influence of players to control who wins the game). Because the game is longer and more cards are drawn, it happens more often that lucky cards occur. Basically the game has more time to shift in not foreseeable ways. On A side, it's usually very good to concentrate on certain 3-4 cards, and really try to complete them, follow some plan that you layed out early. On B side, it's a little more important to keep your options open, play for cards that are not on the board yet, and overall play and adapt. On B Side, you will more often get points from a higher number of (more likely uncompleted) cards.

The role of water tiles: I feel that water tiles are even more overpowered on B Side than on A Side. This also adds to the higher luck factor. While on A side, the next water tile usually gives you a flat 3 or 4 points, on B Side it provides you either 0 points or 5 points, making it similar to yellow tiles. Who gets the next blue tile can be crucial at times.

Card values: It is clear that "base values" for certain cards are very different on B Side than A Side. Playing B Side makes you better understand why certain cards and combos are in the game in the first place. I'd say the most obvious buffed card is the parrot, but generally all these cards with 'triangle' water surrounding get some buff. Other cards got nerfed because of the way the board is shaped, less space in the vertical direction.

Placement strategy: As mentioned before, B Side incentivizes a little more open and adaptable play. Because the board is slightly larger, there is more space to do that anyway. Particularly sometimes it can be crucial to hope for a good water card and leave some open space around your water tiles.

Card tactics: This is more of a feeling. I feel it is more viable on the B Side to postpone to take a card and leave your card spots open. While on A side, I would usually take a card that guarantees me +4 points (of course it depends), it is more challenging to decide for that on B Side. Particularly early in the game, you want to keep your options open and rather not let your opponent get good cards while you are stuck with some moderate point cards.

Conclusion: I really like the variety that the B Side injects into the game. The board is both bigger and smaller at the same time, hence it produces new placement challenges. I don't really like the higher luck factor, the fact that card draws can screw or favor you more often. I'd prefer A Side if I were forced to choose, but overall both versions have their charm.

NOTE: For those of you who enjoy my tournaments, I am thinking to change to B Side more often, probably having every 3rd edition of the major tournaments on B Side (each month having one of Brave and Bold, Spiritless Spectacle, Champions League on B Side).

[LeLion92]

Great post!

I agree with everything.

I would only add that the extra hex on Face B often causes an extra round compared to Face A (in average, 10 rounds rather than 9). This makes animals with complex patterns, for instance tall trees such as squirrels or tall mountains such as eagles, be slightly better. Indeed you have more time to complete them.

More generally, it is easier to outrun your opponent by quickly filling the board on Face A. I usually say that Face A favors "filling" a bit more when Face B favors "planning and building" a bit more.

Like you, I enjoy that we have these 2 options and I have fun with both of them.

[tbhp]

I agree with LeLion92, I tend to associate games being longer with being less luck based, because it gives more time for the taller strategies to compete against the lower ones. Often times one more turn is all you need for your tall strategy to come to fruition, whereas low strategies tend to run out of steam towards the end.

I have limited experience with the game without spirits on side B, but I will say with spirits the game feels a lot more balanced to me, because the map makes most spirits OP in their own right. Dragonfly becomes much better for obvious reasons, and Stag and Goat have more time to express their potential. Even Cat and Stork tend to work out better with the wider map. So strangely enough, the "secondary" version of the game is the one that feels like it allows all spirits to shine in the way they were intended.

I'm also not sure about water being more OP on side B. It can be, but generally I feel that water points are more equal across all players. That's because on side A, someone can build a long river and after a while add 4 points for every water tile they get. On side B, it's generally 5 points per 2 tiles, so it's never going to be viable to just mindlessly add water tiles to your board. You need the animals to go with it.

[I Love You More Than]

In my opinion water tiles feel stronger on side B due to their high base points and high potential for harmonies. The water harmonies feel easier to build on side B than on side A.

I think the water harmonies are more highly contested on side B which proves the point that water tiles are stronger on side B.

However, they are simultaneously well balanced since very few are required to obtain a good amount of points. All players can get a decent score out of them. Even solely from the base points.
(I think it's mandatory to go for at least two water tiles for 10 points.)

Their scaling is not as strong as on Side A and they can even come back to bite you if you have too many. For instance if an island gets filled up and that leads to a loss of points.

I also feel like side B is more balanced ( both with and without spirits) since there is more build diversity. Side A is not balanced with rush builds. I enjoy trying to get the highest possible score and side B favors this so I am biased.

[pahakuukkeli]

(I think it's mandatory to go for at least two water tiles for 10 points.)

Actually, two water tiles on Side B is only 5 points. All players start with one island (i.e. score starts from 5, not from 0 like on Side A). This is explicitly written in the rulebook.

Personally, I have a slight preference for Side A. I haven't played nearly as much Side B, though, so I'm not dead set on this.

With spirits, Side B's biggest issue is that Butterfly is even stronger than on Side A. It's a perfect fit with the corner islands. All the other spirits feel a little closer to each other in power.

With animals there are some clear winners on side B. Macaw (parrot) becomes A tier due to corner islands. Kingfisher becomes playable (and comboes quite nicely with Alligator). Fish becomes one of the better water animals. I may forget something (I haven't played on Side B in ages).

Other than the few animals above, I don't think the overall strength of animals shifts that much. What changes, though, is that the narrower board makes it harder to align multiple patterns together. I have an impression (not backed by data) that less animals are completed on Side B. There are more tiles along the sides making them less available. I feel that on Side B it's much more common to start two completely different patterns on the opposite sides of the board, hoping that you can fit at least some random cubes in the middle where they meet.

Take all that with a grain of salt. I haven't played on Side B in a long time.

[tbhp]

With spirits, Side B's biggest issue is that Butterfly is even stronger than on Side A. It's a perfect fit with the corner islands.

I would agree that Butterfly's only flaw on side A is that it's tricky to exploit the two water tiles you start with. However, that problem mostly remains on side B. None of the water animals ideally fit with the pattern.

Of course, the map allows you to place a lot of yellows, but this only has an impact in the games where you end up having excess yellow tiles. Before reaching that point, you're not going to place your yellows in the corners, you're going to place them in the center where they can be used for animal cards.

Personally, I haven't felt that Butterfly is particularly OP on side B, but maybe that's because I play almost only 4 players games, so even if it is OP, the person with Butterfly still wouldn't be winning very often.

With animals there are some clear winners on side B. Macaw (parrot) becomes A tier due to corner islands.

You're the second person who says this. I wouldn't put parrot in A tier (especially if that's the highest tier). Sure, the card fits the map neatly, but this doesn't change the problem that the card doesn't offer a great return of points per tiles.

What makes parrot viable on side A is that you can combo it with hedgehog or panther, or you can fill the river you built with animals. But those combos are not possible when you put parrots in the corner islands on side B, and the water is going to be hard to exploit if you place parrots all around it.

Sure, you'll get points more quickly from the water tiles, but on side A you get 8 points from 4 water tiles, versus 10 on side B (the initial 5 don't count since everyone starts with them). So it's not a very big difference.

I see the parrot more as a convenient than a great card. It can be a safe way to start, it's probably not going to ruin your chances, but you'll need to find better cards quick. And when you get it later in the game, it can be an easy way to add points, but it's not going to be the card your strategy relies on.

I feel that on Side B it's much more common to start two completely different patterns on the opposite sides of the board, hoping that you can fit at least some random cubes in the middle where they meet.

Yeah, that seems to be how some of my games went when I played the map without spirits. With spirits though, I almost always manage to keep my build connected to the spirit.

I haven't noticed less animals being completed, but certainly the way to think about things is different.

[pahakuukkeli]

I would agree that Butterfly's only flaw on side A is that it's tricky to exploit the two water tiles you start with. However, that problem mostly remains on side B. None of the water animals ideally fit with the pattern.

I kinda disagree. Fish, Frog and Duck are all more or less ideal for Side B. The main reason I consider Butterfly stronger on Side B, though, is the fact that there is only one animal that fits in the corner island, Macaw (Macaque fits, but the mountain won't score). Butterfly solves these dead corners with zero effort.

You're the second person who says this. I wouldn't put parrot in A tier (especially if that's the highest tier). Sure, the card fits the map neatly, but this doesn't change the problem that the card doesn't offer a great return of points per tiles.

There's potentially S tier above. I don't have enough experience with Side B to know if some animals deserve to be S tier, but on Side A I consider at least Duck and Manta to be S tier.

I don't consider Macaw's slightly below average scoring to be an issue because outside spirits, it's the only option to score extra from corner islands. You're always building towards the pattern anyway.

And about 4-player games, don't they usually end because tiles run out? I'm sure that kind of a "clock" will change things quite a bit. I've only played 2-players myself.

[tbhp]

I kinda disagree. Fish, Frog and Duck are all more or less ideal for Side B.

I meant the butterfly pattern. I don't think there's a card that allows you to fill both water tiles in a quick and efficient manner. Frog might work but you'd need to also have ladybug to justify using all those greens.

In most of my butterfly games, whether it's on side A or side B, at least one of those initial water tiles remains without animal, which I consider a flaw. I don't like having more water than what is needed by my cards.

And about 4-player games, don't they usually end because tiles run out? I'm sure that kind of a "clock" will change things quite a bit. I've only played 2-players myself.

Yeah, it seems that most of our disagreements come down to this. In the games I play, the tiles run out before we can fill the map, so there isn't really a consideration of which animals would be best to fill the corner islands. They just never get filled.

I had never really thought about it before, but I suppose all extremities of the map can become tricky to exploit when the game lasts longer.

[pahakuukkeli]

Yeah, it seems that most of our disagreements come down to this. In the games I play, the tiles run out before we can fill the map, so there isn't really a consideration of which animals would be best to fill the corner islands. They just never get filled.

I had never really thought about it before, but I suppose all extremities of the map can become tricky to exploit when the game lasts longer.

I agree. I think the diferences in our evaluations are because of the player count. If the games regularly end before players can fill their board, the utilization of weaker hexes becomes less meaningful (even undesirable). I've never thought of that before but now it seems obvious.

[I Love You More Than]

Someone needs to make a tier list of all the animal cards for side A and side B!