Thoughts on the new edition

[doctorchris]

I played one game of this by accident today as it was the default and I didn't know how to get to the original version.

I didn't enjoy having to try to learn about the many changes in real time during a fast game!

Once people have played this a few times, I would be very interested in your views about whether it is an improvement (or even a reasonable alternative) to the original version.

[MarioMinaccia]

TL;DR this is like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Kristall Skull. see what Cartman/Kyle/Kenny/Stan think about it.

First impressions on the new 7w:

- I find the new graphics pretty confusing. i can't find a list of the deck composition (which should be easily available) and the "chain" diagram at the bottom of the game doesn't represent the cost of the cards anymore. The combinations of the new colors and small texts makes it really difficult for me to read the cards with respect to the previous edition. Also, having the cards "floating in 3D" while you read them by passing over the mouse makes this upgrade reminiscent of Master of Orion 3...

- now the wonders tend to produce resources that aren't directly useful for them, making it less clear what is the resource focus of the other players (in order to consistently attack them by resource deprivation).

- some wonders are even LESS useful than in the previous version. Olympia, never the sharpest knife in the box, is now ridiculous.

- some wonders are now even MORE OP. Nice trick (balancing wise) to have Halikarnassus use wood instead of gold and reducing its overall costs.

- The new chains make no sense: one of the things I really appreciated about the game, was the overall consistency of its rules. Things were ordered and meaningfull and consequantial. Now you can have 1st era cards coming back to haunt you in the 3rd by making chains out of the blue...

Overall I think this edition is MORE randomized than the one before. When you have something that works, rigging it again and again doesn't make it better. It makes it like a corporate patchwork project in which nobody has responsibility.

[petercordia]

I like it overall, but I feel Olympia gets a really bad deal
- wonder stages 2 & 3 just aren't worth it.

The new Babylon feels like it could be powerful, and changing the age-1 cards to be worth 3 points makes them actually desirable
The aqueduct still costing stone is a bit weird though, it's not like it's much better than the temple

[frogstar_A]

I really don't like the graphics of the new version - the resource icons on cards and the wonder stages are too small and hard to read.

I don't think I will play the new version again.

[doctorchris]

My two pennies worth having played the new edition once:

Hali side B works the same. The second stage is now easier to get with manufactured goods that you probably want anyway if you are pursuing a science strategy, which I do 90% of the time with this wonder. The third stage is harder to get with 3 wood, but I often don't need this anyway if the science strategy is working well, and you need 2 wood to get the scientists guild (unless they have changed that too).

I also didn't like the graphics at all. I found them hard to read and understand. This could just be unfamiliarity, but I don't think so. For instance, lots of information was missing from the discard pile graphic in particular.

[JohnConcrete]

Here are my first thoughts after some games.
I will focus on the playing part, not 'how it looks'. This will take some time to adapt I guess, but the most important is how does the change impact the gameplay & balance of the game imo.

So here go's:

- Starting resource not complementary to first wonder stage: good change, some wonders could take a very easy head start in the old game. Now more effort is needed to 'play and complete' the wonder.
This however makes the trading post's even better cards. Alltough I will still favor picking any double resource over trading post if both are in my hand.
Taking the double resource cards in 2nd age will be more off a fight now maybe, which is good for balance. For example: If you go 'red' neglecting to take enough resources could hurt you more than before.

- Stone is now much more important that it used to be: more wonders needing stone which is good. Before stone wasn't that important to most wonders.

- The strateguist guild ("hero-guild") removed from the game: From a balancing point of view this looks good.
Since in the competetive scene red was the winning strategy (see Pistolero guide...) and it's still gonna be very strong and important.
So removing a card that emphasis this by adding more points to this strategy looks good for balance.

Over to the wonders:
- Olympia: I don't like the change. It increases the variance/random a lot, which is good I guess for a family game but not if you want to play 7wonders competetive. Especially with the B-side you will need a lot more luck with the card distribution to have good (expensive) cards in your first and last hand.
You could play B-side and only go for stage 1, but that way you will miss out on the 'Decorators Guild'.
I think this wonder got nerfed very hard and this was not really needed (it was somewhere in the middle off the pack, now close to bottom)
- Babylon: A good buff for the B-side, this looks good. It was one of the worst wonders now it will be in the middle of the bunch or higher.
Stages are much more accessible. I guess this adds 6-9 gold for you.
- Rhodos: no change is understandable, I guess this is a hard wonder to finetune. The wonder is very strong in 3player (close 2nd to hali), but in other player formats it's not that good.
In general I think a buff would have been 'ok', but that would make it too strong in 3player probably. Alltough by removing the strateguist guild, I think a slight buff would have been good for this wonder.
- Gizah: Basically untouched, unless you wanna play A side (small buff). However the buff to blue cards (more points, better chains) are good for this wonder since with gizah most of the time you will be taking a lot of blue with all the resources you need for the wonder.
Since Gizah was one of the worst in competetive play, it might be a bit better now.
- Alexendria: They killed the B-side. It was a very strong wonder, but the nerf is a bit too much imo. It's very expensive now, and I think a lot of players will switch to playing A-side. But the A-side compared to other wonders isn't that good either, it's just better than the B-side now.
It was one of the stronger wonders, I think now it might be the worst wonder.
- Ephesos: Very small change, a slight nerf for the B side (more difficult last stage) is good however, since this is one of the strongest wonders.
- Halikarnassos (B) was and is still the best wonder. I don't get why they nerfed Alexendria B this hard and Hali only very slightly.

A= day
B = night

Very early to rank the wonders, but I'll give it a try for the 4player. Maybe others can give their ranking as well.
Ranking in my opinion off course:

Old game 3p: Halikarnassos > Rhodos > Alexandria > Olympia > Ephesos > Gizah > Babylon
Old game 4p: Halikarnassos > Alexandria >Ephesos > Olympia > Rhodos > Gizah > Babylon

NEW game 4p: Halikarnassos > Ephesos > Babylon > Gizah > Rhodos > Olympia > Alexandria

[MononcGeek]

I think they should have added extensions like Leaders and Cities rather then change the version. Would have been more fun.

[Waterd103]

Alexandria and zeus wonders seem to have been overnerfed making the overall balance worse than previous version imo.

[Otava]

Alexandria and zeus wonders seem to have been overnerfed making the overall balance worse than previous version imo.

This. I don't know how they managed to make Olympia even worse than before. It was already one of the worst wonder (at least in 4 player games). And Halikarnassos is now actually easier to get the first two stages built. So the best wonder got better and worst got even worse, seems legit.

[Foppeke]

True... I have the same opinion about this after some games and talking with some strong players.

Alexandria and Olympia without a question really got nerfed hard.

Olympia feels very very weak now, but with correct card distribution playing night (B-side) you can be 'lucky' and compete. But all around I'm pretty sure it's the worst wonder now.

Alexandria I can't decide playing A (day) or B (night).
It looks like the increased need of resources on B side hasn't changed THAT much. But it just seems so wrong nerfing Alex B when comparing to let's say Hali and Ephe.
And playing Alex A just isn't strong enough and stage 3 can be ackward.

Hali and Ephe imo stand out now as the strongest wonders , Ephe prolly taking over first spot from Hali. All the rest is in middle of the pack and Olympia (unless lucky card distribution) is last.
This is for 4 player speaking...

Overall I think the balance is better, both on wonders and cards- more options. If only the change to Olympia was else they would've almost nailed it...