Comments on: Why Settlers of Catan isn’t the perfect game (but Cities and Knights is)

By: JCfreely

JCfreely — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:49:10 +0000

Of course Seafarers is inessential for three or four players (It is absolutely essential when playing with more than four people) – its primary purpose is simply to make the board bigger while fixing the problem of undervalued sheep. C&K exists to make the game deeper and longer (yes, that was a GOAL of the expansion: there are those of us who desire a longer game sometimes, and it still clocks in way under a relatively brief game of Risk). If anyone is getting five points ahead at any point in C&K, Yehuda, then you are playing with the inexperienced or the generally challenged, because it’s strikingly more balanced than “vanilla Catan.” “Speed Catan” sounds awful, Rae – just play yahtzee, man. Board configuration is crucial for getting the best Catan experience (that might actually be Yehuda’s problem, in fact), and I recommend letting Better Settlers generate your boards (just google it). “Elegance” is not a word I would use to describe anything I’m looking for in a board game, but it sure makes for some goofy-sounding blog posts.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:56:16 +0000

Seafarers does seem to be a “half” expansion, especially when compared to Cities and Knights. But what I do like about Seafarers is that there is more than one way to play the game. You play it one way one night than choose another way to play the next night.

Have you tried playing both seafarers and cities together?

By: Rae

Rae — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:18:50 +0000

I tried a variant of vanilla Settlers that seemed to really make the game go more smoothly (as well as more quickly) – Speed Settlers. Using 4 dice (similar to the game “Can’t Stop”), each player chooses the pairs they want to use. In the first two rounds, no 7′s are allowed, and if one of the pairs chosen (say two 2′s) leaves a 7, the 7 is re-rolled and whatever lands (other than a 7) has to be taken. There is a building phase every round, for every player, to make up for the fact that two many cards are given out to wait for each player’s turn. Whoever gets to 10 points first wins, no matter whose turn it is.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 23:53:03 +0000

Oh, and if you think knights are weak or not-very useful, you’re not using them properly

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 23:51:47 +0000

I agree with the above poster, I think the original is a more “elegant” game. I think C&K’s adds a considerable amount of luck to the game. And C&K’s takes a lot longer, to the point where my family often gets frustrated toward the end of a C&K’s game, whereas we often play a 2nd game of the original. Playing online takes care of the time problem, and to be honest, I play C&K’s almost exclusively online because I like the additional complexity. Just waiting for games.asobrain.com to come back online….

By: Yehuda

Yehuda — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 06:18:55 +0000

Huh. I find falling behind in C&K far more easy, to the point that we added a rule that anyone 5 points ahead of everyone else simply wins automatically.

The game is no more balanced than Settlers: paper is a far better commodity than the others, and some of the progress cards are useless (displace a knight with one of yours if you can reach it), while some are killer (steal a knight).

It also makes the game far longer. Most people feel Settlers is a far more elegant game.

But I know where you’re coming from. We played vanilla Settlers for about a year and a half, and then played C&K for a year, thinking it was better than Settlers. After that we moved to other games, such as Puerto Rico, El Grande, and so on, and wouldn’t play either of the Catan games.

After some distance, I play Catan occasionally, and find Settlers the more elegant game, with C&K still fun, but not quite as much.

I agree with your Seafarers assessment.

Naturally I disagree with your Puerto Rico assessment: after over a thousand games, Puerto Rico is still fascinating every time I play.