Another new champion in the reign
of Ewan
Numbers were slightly down, to 65 this year (from 80 last);
strong competition from other games, especially Princes of
Florence and Puerto Rico, I suspect, were the main
reasons. Not really a bad thing - more games at WBC that I like
to play can rarely be bad. Overall standard of play seemed definitely
up, which may have been another side-effect. However, I did get
several complaints of novice players, who were unclear even on
fairly basic game elements. This has always been run as an 'A'
event, and if that is the case next year I will be tougher about
enforcement; I'm interested in feedback on whether that or moving
to a 'B' event is a preferred solution.
A total
of 17 games in the heats: seven in each of the first two, but
only three in the third. I don't intend to abolish that third,
however, as several folk only arrived in time for that one. Plus,
the small numbers made it easy to be an only intermittently present
GM. Heats were a mix of five-player (11 of 17) and six-player
(the other six, to accommodate numbers) games; no Hamburg advanced
from a six-player, I believe, which supported my choice of five-player
as preference. Bids were relatively low in the five-player and
high in the six-player - this was even more true in the semis
and final, where I know of at least two players (including Bill
Crenshaw) who were saddled with Hamburg for a bid of 3.
* I am thinking of including my own house rule next year:
that the player choosing capital last pay zero for that capital
regardless of the amount bid. Comments strongly welcomed.* The
smaller field led to five six-player semifinals, advancing winners
plus the closest second place. I like this format and intend
to repeat it next year. This year's finalists were myself, Ted
Mullally (who had the best second-place finish, in my game, tipping
Jim Jordan for the qualifying spot by 99% to 98.5% (!) ), Ken
Gutermuth (who had won his game over Jim on the final die roll),
George Sauer, Chris Byrd (who had defeated perennial favourite
Bill Crenshaw in the semis) and Ted Simmons.
Not many truly different events in the heats; my favourite
happening was the play of War! by Ted Mullally's Paris on Brooks
Beyma's Barcelona in Turn 1, after the Spanish had played Crusades.
Paris won 5-2 and so was now in both Barcelona and the near East!
Beautiful (for Paris at least)! The heats also saw the highest
score I have ever seen, of 3036, in a game where second place
was at around 1050!
In
the final game I bid 4, rather than the 5 I had been bidding
all tournament, not wanting to get Barcelona again and have the
'leader' mantle. Bids were 6 (Ted S.), 5, 5 (Ted M. and Chris),
4, 4 (Ken and I) and 3 (George oops). I win the die roll for
choice with Ken and take London 4th (after B, Ted S.; V, Chris;
G, Ted M.) leaving Ken with Paris and Bud in Hamburg surprise.
The early game was miserable, oddly not helped by religion being
banned in BOTH turn 2 and turn 3 (by Paris, who wanted to buy
SV, and by Hamburg, respectively). That meant that only V/G,
who had bought Patronage on turn 1, had even one tier and so
could reduce misery. I managed to get a wool payout but stay
out of the 'leader' role which was held by V/G, with B perhaps
close behind (especially after purchasing Institutional Research;
alas, for him, he then drew Prince Henry but did not own Printed
Word). I also benefited in an odd way from the Turn 1 expansion
deals. Genoa arranged what seemed the odd combination of ceding
Milan to Venice but taking Montpelier rather than Marseilles
- hence not getting four Stone but not getting the Wine either.
The side-effect was that Barcelona did not take the usual five
cities on turn 1, leaving me as the first to get four and hence
win the expansion card; I managed this on turn 2 also, less surprisingly,
taking Waterford/Iceland/ Bergen/Chester/Fez and Oran, and glad
that V/G were off to a fast start. This card haul was key - I
got good cards, including both OE leaders and Civil War, which
was protection for the later game, and were generally playable
which meant that my stabilization costs were not too high. Paris
suffered from trying to take Metal while I held a Metal card
and took them back; it transpired that he held a Wool card and
would have been happy to trade, which would have made us both
much better off! We should have talked more; in any case, he
was well into the usual AoR propaganda of 'Oh, my game is over.'
Hamburg had been making extremely militant threats (like, to
me, "If you prevent me from getting the expansion card this
turn I will buy all my tokens every turn and invade your home
area"!) but generally getting away with it due to poor standing;
this was to a fair degree self-inflicted, though, as he played
Crusades but bid only 7 and did not take a single extra domination,
preferring to place single tokens in many areas to force others
to roll. This only hurt himself while not really affecting others.
Midgame, Venice and Genoa were still leading, Barcelona was dropping
back (I think largely due to bidding for too few tokens) and
in particular Venice had a sizeable Misery advantage while Paris/Hamburg
had a Misery deficit. No-one is making an overwhelming break,
however; Chris was the leader but keeping very quiet. Paris had
again taken a Metal majority and came back to parity with a $96
payout; on turn 7, I made the foolish error of thinking that
his payout was down to $54 and gave him a further payout in exchange
for my Wool card (eventually!) being played. I would probably
have done this anyway, but extracted more for my side of the
deal; that same turn I also played Cloth for Venice in exchange
for more Wool - helping Paris also, of course - and he played
more Cloth for himself; I think that that turn set the three
of us into a separate tier as there were several leaders on whom
to spend money - disappointing for Genoa, whose lack of payouts
that turn despite strong Silk holdings probably eliminated him
from winning chances. Unfortunately, the leaders available for
patronage were Venetian and Parisian! I saved a lot of cash,
buying Laws of Matter via Venice's Newton but not patronising
Ken's leaders - at least that was a smart move after the previous
misstep.Throughout the game, a lot of leaders had been placed
into the box including all the Printed Word folk, but I finally
had the cash to buy PW; key, as Iwas holding Galileo and Vesalius,
and could play them turn 8 for both payouts and their own credits
rather than having to pay Paris.
During turn 7, Chris bought a 9-card to leave three cards
remaining; after an expansion card, if there were two shortages
in majority-owned commodities then he would win (and I'd have
been a distant fourth, as the cash hoard would not have been
converted to advances). Most commodities had a majority owner,
so it was maybe a 20% winning chance. If he'd made a deal with
Ted M., however, for Ted to buy the 9-card and let him buy the
12-card (in exchange for a Silk payout) it would have been maybe
a 70% chance and would indeed have transpired. Tough choice,
though: I plagued Italy in turn 7, and both Chris and Ted M.
had bid only 12 tokens each. Hamburg gained three $81 Spice payouts
to come close but not really contending; I was hugely down on
advances, being roughly behind by Enlightenment, Master Art,
Renaissance to Paris (but ahead by Improved Agriculture), but
I had managed to buy New World with the help of Hamburg's Columbus
and had maybe $120 to almost zero cash for Ken. He had also discarded
Revolutionary Uprisings with his MA purchase in turn 7, making
it safe to buy Commerces!
So to the final turn. Ken bid 40; Barcelona 41, but Ken used
Renaissance to be moving last in expansion. To counter this,
I Civil Warred Venice, placing him last - and, critically, after
Ken! - for expansion. This was a tough choice; the misery from
CW would have hurt Ken more, and it may have been the wrong move
- I'm still not sure. Certainly, though, by hitting him with
both CW and Black Death in successive turns, I took Chris out
of contention from a strong position. Sorry, Chris. I want to
note that he took this extremely well (which only made me feel
worse!); he got his revenge in an unusual manner, though, as
you'll see shortly.
Cards remaining: 3 misery burdens, all held by Hamburg who
has just drawn the final card of the game as Papal Decree to
complete his set(!). Famine, Grain (both in Barcelona), Metal
(Genoa), Timber (me), Silk (Venice). Ken's Metal holdings are
still the strongest payout on the board, and after a couple are
taken he takes S. America from me to solidify as well as Nuremberg,
giving him four metal again. I hold four Timber - having taken
them in Turn 7 also, only to have them all immediately removed
by Genoa who was also holding a Timber card. One of many missteps
that cost me the game, ultimately. Genoa has a Silk majority
but is not in the running; Chris has the doubly-important Grain
majority. And it's Chris' expansion as the final player (and
the only one holding Cathedral). I have more cities than Ken,
and also I&P which he does not, so that gives me roughly
a $40 cash advantage. If nothing changes, he'll get $96 from
Metal while I'll get $48 from Timber; I'll also get small Silk
and Metal payouts while he'll get small money from Timber and
Grain. However, Chris is going after Grain, and he also Cathedrals
both a Parisian Metal and a British Timber. Net result is that
if nothing changes during S/S rolls, I win by $7. Not that I
know this. Ken and I have removed ourselves from the table to
allow Chris to take his turn in relative peace, and we're still
trying to talk through the math - we just know that it is close.
As it turns out, I think Chris also took back one of the 2-value
cities that I had just that turn taken from him; again, that
was enough to cost me the game.
Final dice. Chris first rolls a surplus in Wine - no big effect,
but I am the largest holder (!) and lose $3. Still OK. Then a
surplus in Silk, which reduces my payout from $8 to $0 but does
not affect Ken. He wins by $4.
Aargh!
But, it's been a great game, and much too good to spoil by
trying to recheck the accountancy for an error that might help
me out.. That $4 is 0.2% of score and Bud notes that earlier
in the game, we had found money on the floor under my chair which
I returned to the bank. Coulda been a contendah I can kick myself
for probably doing more than anyone to bring Ken back into the
game, but it's been a heck of a day - I've already played in
both the semi-final and final of Britannia, so by this
time I've been in intense multi-player games for about 16 hours
solid. Excuses, excuses. Congratulations to Ken, who becomes
yet another first-time WBC AoR champ but is also reigning PrezCon
champ and in the PBeM final? And his rise up the AREA ratings
takes yet another step
Many thanks to all the players, and especially to those in
the final, all of whom deserve congratulations on getting there.
At least five of us had chances to win, and I didn't hear a single
whine, or prolonged barracking in negotiation, a single complaint
above the normal 'But, but, but, I'm not winning!' level. Especial
note of superb behaviour to Chris, as noted above, who must have
had at least a little thought that he would be going for the
win but did a superb job of balancing the game between two other
players in the final turn. My best day of gaming ever, I think.
|