xingao wrote:Though starting later gives an initial disadvantage in the game. Since the game is in multiplayer, those effects naturally balance out during game play. The most determining factor for success is mainly other players contributing to the same inventions you do. Not contributing to the leaders inventions is the most natural move in that sense, thus balancing occurs during the entire game
The problem with going last is not just the potential lost turn (this is only a very minor disadvantage). The primary reason it is so harmful is because you lose out on the number tiles (specifically 2s) in the first age. Some inventor sets stall out completely without them, yet every set can use them well and wants them as soon as possible as their highest priority. Even if you pick up a 3 or 4, you can't play them until you get a 2 and even then it is often not as helpful (inventions don't have open spots in the 3/4 range and, if someone has already placed cubes on it, it is even less likely to be helpful). In the second age, those who got the early 2s can safely progress their inventors and use the greater inventor strength to ensure they can claim many of the age 2 number tokens as well. Even if you don't really need any more 2s, it is still a good strategy to take them anyway because you can just convert them to 1s which you also need. You could pick up numbers in age 3, but then you lose out on a lot of points because the cards are worth so much more in age 3 and upgrading inventors is worth so much less because you are doing it just for the (below average) points they provide (relative to actions needed to gain all the tiles) and no longer have time to leverage them to win majorities. In other words, it is always better getting tiles early and cards late and if you don't do that, you will almost certainly lose against a good player.
Special tiles, like knowledge cubes, are just not efficient enough to counter balance this problem since they are a one time use and effectively requires two turns to generate points (points that could have otherwise been earned with a single action if you built up inventors early). Perhaps if knowledge cubes could be contributed to multiple inventions (a different one than you assign your inventor to) they would see more use as something other than a "1" token. As it is, they are mostly a "new player" trap; beginners get tricked into using two actions to do something they could have otherwise accomplished with one action.
Last place is particularly bad with the yellow set because you can't do anything without 2s because of how that set is designed and you really suffer if starting last, making it almost impossible to win. On the other hand, going last with red is not too bad since they don't really need number tiles to be effective because the 6-VP and 3-VP ones only need 1s in the first and second ages; something any tile can become.
The reason blue and purple are the two strongest sets is because they do fine without early twos and threes and, as a result, can do well regardless of seating order. They are flexible early, like Red, but worth more points because you can safely upgrade their 9-VP inventor. You can freely start upgrading their 9-VP inventor in age 1 because they both have two "any tile" upgrade spots on their strongest inventor which is enough to get majorities in age 2 and claim any numbers you missed out on. While blue has some tiny disadvantages (for example, 2 inventors with only a single starting skill), it turns out this is so minor of a hindrance that it doesn't come close to counterbalancing the strengths.
The simplest (but most boring) way to fix this imbalance is to just let yellow go first and green go second. I think I will do this with the physical board game. This ensures all players have a reasonable chance to get the "2" tiles they need to be competitive. UPDATE: I like the idea proposed in a different discussion. Let the players choose their set, starting in reverse turn order. That would require no changes to game mechanics or physical components.
In regards to purposely taking worse moves to avoid helping another player (the supposed leader). I think this is almost always a losing strategy in this type of cooperative game. Denying yourself points to harm another player just helps the other two players (who don't do this) gain advantage over you and you end up in third or fourth instead of second place. You might harm the leader a bit, but you also harm yourself. This only works in 2 player games where hurting your opponent is just as beneficial as helping yourself.
For choosing inventions to contribute to, It is helpful to always consider the tie-breaker for the reward selection order. Generally, you want to place cubes on the inventions of players to your left (the player who plays after you) and avoid those of players on your right (the player who plays right before you). Often there will be no existing open inventions for the player to your left so you must predict their next move based on their best moves and available inventors and tiles and avoid a move that the player on your right can take advantage of. This is most important in the first age where most invention rewards are determined by a two-block tie-breaker most of the time. Another way to win the tiebreaker is to be the one to close out the invention (tactic often used in second and third age) I feel like a lot of players don't consider that subtle, but important, game mechanic when considering their move.
Yeah, I'm sure it was to some extent, but it's nice to know it might not have been totally me. (In my first game I had blue and was first on turn and still only came in 3rd place, so that was obviously all my doing. LOL. Although I also kept forgetting some rule details. But, I'm happy to say I was already considering the reward-taking tie breaker, so at least something was occurring to me.)