I'm going to take a crack at this. I can't necessarily know what Cenobi was meaning so these are just my thoughts. (And I don't know Ludo and can't make a comparison.)RicardoRix wrote:What kind of risk management? You have 2 dice to choose, there is not much in the way of choice. It plays as a slightly more advanced version of ludo.Cenobi wrote:That would change the game considerably. I'd say that it would be detrimental, as it would slow the game and encourage people to have pawns lying in wait. It would also decrease the risk management aspect if you can ignore dice.RicardoRix wrote:Could there be an option of 'pass' if you don't want to use 1 or both dice?
More decision choices = more strategy.
Two dice, four pawns. There's 12 combinations of moves you can make with that, just with the basic single pawns. In those moves you may have decisions about doubling up, hitting on a bridge so you can move down, moving one that's already on a bridge, getting closer to a bridge, capturing another pawn, getting closer to another player to try to capture them, having to pass by a bridge... so it's 12 combinations that involve different consequences. You could have a double pawn or two, which reduces the combinations, but you still have all those types of moves, plus possibly splitting the double back out. I don't see this as just "having 2 dice to choose," and you aren't choosing these moves independently - you're looking at the overall set of 2 moves. If you don't allow doubles to cross bridges, that creates yet another type of situation. I'm sorry, but I just don't see this as not having much in the way of choice.
As to risk management, I'm not sure I know exactly what Cenobi was thinking there, but some things occur to me. For instance, someone is coming up on your tail and you want to move them, but you have another pawn that can be put on a bridge, or already on one than can move down. You really want to move down that level but you risk a capture. Or you are deciding whether to use a big dice roll to get behind someone else in the hopes of capturing them, but risk losing the opportunity of getting on a bridge and moving down. "Lying in wait" might mean sitting on a pawn waiting for the perfect dice roll to come up, either to move to an inner circle or to get into the center or to capture someone in front of you. If you're forced to use both dice, you might have to bypass those opportunities, or be forced to jump over another player's pawn and put yourself in harm's way.
While not using a dice gives more choices, I think it makes it a bit easier and therefore overall less strategic, or I guess less tactical.