I remember reading it a few months ago and thinking the guy was wrong for criticising Agricola for requiring players to diversify. I still think so- there are some specialist strategies in Agricola that pay off very well as long as your cards support them. With Endeavor I agree with him more: you can't really ignore any one facet of the points opportunities.
Reading through the link - I think I agree with one of the comments further down - Specialisation with Endeavor comes with the path you chose to get the points - not with the points you get.
Basically I won the first game by targeting shipyards and shipping more than any one else - I came a very close second yesterday by going down a building route and getting the better buildings (though i did end up double shipping with the Cartographer in the later turns)
The real issues is the method by which you manage to accrue VPs - not what tracks the VPs are scored on.
2 comments:
Playing this again reminded me of this article:
http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/tom_rosen_the_joy_of_specialization/
I remember reading it a few months ago and thinking the guy was wrong for criticising Agricola for requiring players to diversify. I still think so- there are some specialist strategies in Agricola that pay off very well as long as your cards support them. With Endeavor I agree with him more: you can't really ignore any one facet of the points opportunities.
Reading through the link - I think I agree with one of the comments further down - Specialisation with Endeavor comes with the path you chose to get the points - not with the points you get.
Basically I won the first game by targeting shipyards and shipping more than any one else - I came a very close second yesterday by going down a building route and getting the better buildings (though i did end up double shipping with the Cartographer in the later turns)
The real issues is the method by which you manage to accrue VPs - not what tracks the VPs are scored on.
Post a Comment