After 5 plays now i have some doubt about balancing:
1) the 2 buildings, which give you something for sets are much too weak. These building can give similar benefits as others, but you need to sacrifice a lot for them (for others not). I think the reward for sets should be increased by 50% at least (maybe more) to make them interesting.
2) the building that give pure points for certain kinds of cards, all give 4 VP per card of that type (except the one for scientists) . But for hunters, painters and craftsmen it should give only 3, cause you can collect a lot, while with shamans and gatherers, it doesnt make sense to get a lot.
3) going for several craftsmen and then buying a lot of buidlings seem too dominant strategy, the 2 times i did this, i won with huge margin (Last game i scored 139, all others betwen 50 and 75)
What about allowing tu use the craftsmens discount only once per round? So you cannot use the discount for multiple buildings in the same round. And introducing a minimum price of 1.
1) the 2 buildings, which give you something for sets are much too weak. These building can give similar benefits as others, but you need to sacrifice a lot for them (for others not). I think the reward for sets should be increased by 50% at least (maybe more) to make them interesting.
2) the building that give pure points for certain kinds of cards, all give 4 VP per card of that type (except the one for scientists) . But for hunters, painters and craftsmen it should give only 3, cause you can collect a lot, while with shamans and gatherers, it doesnt make sense to get a lot.
3) going for several craftsmen and then buying a lot of buidlings seem too dominant strategy, the 2 times i did this, i won with huge margin (Last game i scored 139, all others betwen 50 and 75)
What about allowing tu use the craftsmens discount only once per round? So you cannot use the discount for multiple buildings in the same round. And introducing a minimum price of 1.