Return to the Strategy of... Battle Line

Dear all,

Since my original post on the strategy of Battle Line, many such games have come and gone. Greater exposure has inspired  many further thoughts, which I am now minded to share with you all. This article has been rather difficult to lay out, as the concepts at work tend to run into one another. I shall separate it into hand management, where to place, and when to place, and hope that this structure proves helpful. Again, the tactics cards will not be discussed here... though I have had thoughts on that subject as well...

Thinking about the contents of your hand

As discussed in the original article, one should always start by playing for a straight flush (since they can be easily converted to a straight or a flush), and play a higher-value (preferably centred around an 8) against a lower-value, or (if not possible) a lower-value (preferably centred around a 3) against a higher-value straight flush. From these considerations, the following definitions of cards in hand at the beginning of the game can be thought of in two ways:

High in value: higher cards beat lower cards with the same formation. That's easy to grasp. Slightly more subtle is the concept of...

High in probability: the chances of a successful formation being completed. At this beginning of the game, this refers to the likelihood that a straight flush is possible. Two cards of the same suit with adjacent values (henceforth a "double") are high in probability; provided that neither is a 1 or a 10, there are two cards which can complete the straight flush. By comparison, a "split" (i.e. two cards with a number in between, such as 7 and 9) require a single specific card to complete the straight flush; in short, there are fewer ways of completing the formation. (Note that this is also the reason why, considering single cards, an 8 is better than a 9; there are more ways to complete the formation around an 8, as it has three potential straight flush formations, whereas a 9 can only be in two formations.) At the beginning of the game, a double has a better-than-average chance of completing; a split has slightly less than a 50/50 chance (as cards still in the deck will be evenly split, but there are those in the opponent's hand, as well as those which will never be picked up, which reduces the odds of acquiring a specific card).

These considerations are crucial when deciding what to play in a certain position (given the priorities below). If one wishes to win a position where the opponent has already placed, it is generally best to play something higher in value (if possible); however, depending on the game state, you may decide you have better odds of success by playing something low in value but high in probability (i.e. if, given what is in your hand and already played, you think it is unlikely the opponent can complete their higher-value formation). By contrast, when playing to an open position, high in probability is generally better than higher in value.

The junk pile: At the beginning of the game, any card has the potential to form a straight flush. As the game proceeds, this will no longer be the case. Those cards which are no longer valuable for completing straight flushes should be considered separately - I call it the "junk pile", though that is rather glib, as these cards actually play essential roles. Specifically, they are the cards that will be used to fill out straights and flushes where the straight flush has failed, as well as collect three-of-a-kind to defeat the opponent's failed straight flushes. Thus the "junk pile" is really the second string, where unbroken straight flush cards as the first string. Try to keep track of which cards can be used to complete which formations!

Trash: finally, we have cards which cannot be used for any purpose. In practice, these won't accrue until the late stages of the game - until you have played cards to every position, and as least some of these are closed, most cards will still have potential (in the junk pile at worst). Cards only become useless trash when they cannot contribute to any hypothetical position. Trash cards have a single potential purpose - to demonstrate, where possible, that the opponent's formation cannot be completed (and therefore that you have won the position). Generally, try to keep them in hand until the opponent has lost the position, and then reveal by playing on a position with the lowest possible priority (you'll lose that position, so try to hold back until you can win essential positions by revealing the opponent's failure).

Placement priority

... that is, which are priorities to win (and hence positions where you will want to play high probability and value), and those which are lower priorities. These considerations mainly come into play when considering which open position to begin strongly, but may be relevant where a single card may be used in more than one active formation, or where timing is important. In practice, this will usually be a judgement call, and depends on the current game state, but I would generally prioritise positions in the following order:

1. Positions which win you the game (usually by breakthrough). This much is self-evident.
2. Positions which prevent the opponent winning, again usually by breakthrough. If an opponent has won two adjacent positions, you must prioritise winning one of the next adjacent positions to prevent their success.
3. Positions which will build towards a breakthrough. If you are strong in one position, try for the adjacent positions.
4. Positions which will impede your opponent's breakthrough; that is, play strong to an adjacent position, particularly if it fills the gap between positions in which your opponent is already strong. (At this point in the list, game state becomes increasingly important in choosing priority... depending on the board, your hand, and deductions about your opponent's hand, it may make sense to increase the priority of this).
5. Anything from here is a judgement call between playing against positions your opponent has begun, or opening strongly at positions where you may build towards a breakthrough.

When to place

Advice often given to beginners is that Battle Line has a second-player advantage, as the second player can choose the most relevant card to play after seeing what the first play has placed. I do not necessarily agree with this; sometimes, I believe it is better to choose to play to an open position, even when there is the option to play responsively. Of course, if you are the first player, you may have little choice; however, even when you are the second player, you might want to start a new position rather than responding to the first player. This is because, if you are lucky enough to have a starting hand which is strong (particularly in probability), it may be smart to establish a potential breakthrough position at the beginning. By the same token, if you only ever play in response to the opponent's starting card, you may end up giving away a breakthrough (i.e. by playing three lower-in-value cards where the opponent succeeds in delivering their higher-value formation). Thus, deciding whether to open a new position or play in response to the opponent is a judgement call based on your own hand and the opponent's placings. All I can offer as guidance are the hand considerations and placement priorities above.

Arkham Horror: Allow Me To Introduce The Neighbours

Picture by Stuart Dawson

If there is one word to describe the game Arkham Horror, it would be "overhelming". The base game comes with a positive avalanche of cards, tokens, chits, and rules. Game expansions are numerous and, in some cases, large. The game is so overwhelming, it has an expansion just to expand the other expansions. It even has a monster power called "overwhelming".
There is far too much to the game to squeeze into one article. For today, we shall consider a single domain - the Investigators which act as the players' avatars. We shall split them into four broad types: monster sweepers, explorers, spellcasters, and all-rounders. (We will restrict ourselves to the investigators in the base game for the moment, or this already-long article would be impossibly drawn-out.)

Monster sweepers

Monsters sweepers spend most of their time on the streets of Arkham, slaying monsters to keep the town navigable and hold down the terror track. High Will and Fight are crucial, being the basis for the Horror and Combat checks these characters will be making frequently. Speed is generally less important (as monster sweepers will mostly be moving between street areas), and luck/lore do not much come into play (Luck is most useful during card encounters, while Lore is primarily used by spellcasters). Let's look at each of the monster sweepers in turn:

The Bad: Michael McGlen

On the face of things, Michael seems like an excellent slayer - he starts with one of the best weapons in the game by default, his special power soaks up combat damage, and his Stamina is a massive 7. However, this last point is part of his downfall - with a Sanity of 3, he will go immediately insane on failing a Horror check against the game's tougher monsters, fleeing to the Asylum before even opening fire, thus undermining the entire point to his existence. This problem isn't helped by the fact that Michael has only an average Will. This weakness to Horror makes Michael my least-favoured monster sweeper.

The Fair:

Bob Jenkins

Bob's low Stealth, but high Fight/Will, make him well-suited to street fighting rather than movement and exploration. On the other hand, Bob's power to draw additional Common items is mostly activated by encounters, the usual department of explorer-types. On top of this, Common items are generally less powerful than Unique items, ranking his power below that of Monterey Jack. Ultimately, Bob's drawback is that his skills favour a monster sweeper role, while his special ability favours exploration - a split purpose which makes him sub-optimal in either role, but does give him some flexibility.

Ashcan Pete

Pete is a slightly better choice. His Fight and Will are both strong, and supported by a very high Sneak in a pinch. With Sanity/Stamina of 4/6, he can take big hits and stay in the fight. On top of this, his Scrounge ability (despite, as with Bob, being more suited to an explorer) maximises his odds of obtaining useful items, and Duke acts as a powerful bulwark in support of Horror rolls. Pete is just an all-round solid choice, and recommended as a strong arm in any investigator group.

The Good: Joe Diamond

Joe Diamond has probably the best special ability for combat of all investigators. Rolling two dice for each Clue token expended greatly increases his odds of passing any given check, including Horror and Combat. Since Clues can be expended after the initial roll, Joe can manage risk far more effectively than other characters. Normally, spending Clues for rerolls is a sub-optimal strategy, as they should be used for sealing gates - if you're on monster duty, however, this consideration does not apply.
Joe's flaw is that, like Michael, Joe suffers from poor Will. On the other hand, at least he has 4 Sanity so can afford to lose a Horror check, even against a tough monsters. In short, Joe is a decent fighter, with the best special ability for combat, and also has the flexibility to be a fair explorer.

Explorers

Picture by Frank Strauss

The next type of investigator are those I will call "explorers". These are the characters best suited to exploring otherworld areas and closing gates. To facilitate these tasks, they benefit from high Speed to help them acquire vital Clues for sealing, and good Stealth to move past monsters to reach Clue-bearing areas rather than having to stop and fight. High Luck is handy, as it is commonly used in otherworld encounters, and special abilities which complement Arkham and otherworld encounters are a must.

The Poor: Sister Mary

The good Sister is widely regarded as the weakest investigator in the base game, and with good reason. Other than Luck, her skills are all average-to-weak. Her starting items are nothing to write home about, and she has no cash to improve that situation. Starting with a Blessing isn't too great either - in the first few rounds, Blessings are generally less important, so by the time the Blessing would become seriously useful it may well have already expired.
But most of all, her special power is next to useless. If we value special abilities by frequency of use times impact when used, it's just terrible. Investigators frequently navigate the entire game without once becoming LITAS. Even if she were to be otherwise LITAS, saving a single round of play is of minimal impact. Multiply those two factors together and this power is comically pointless, making Sister Mary significantly weaker than any other character in the game.
That being said, there is one circumstance where Sister Mary can pay off; that is, when Yog-Sothoth is the Ancient One. Probably the most frequent circumstance leading to becoming LITAS is become incapacitated while in an other world; with Yog-Sothoth devouring those who do so, otherworld exploration becomes extremely fraught. Sister Mary can avoid this risk entirely, suddenly making her a very attractive option as an explorer. That said, Kate Winthrop's power is a good alternative anyway, as unexpected incapacitation is most frequently a consequence of monsters appearing.
In all other circumstances, avoid.

The Fair:

Monterey Jack

High Luck, useful starting items, and a handy special ability which improves Jack's ability to acquire Unique items - the most useful type of item, and one which often arises in encounters. Jack's main drawbacks are his low Will and Sanity, flaws which would be fatal in a monster sweeper but is forgivable in an explorer.

Kate Winthrop

Kate's special power can be a bit of a head-scratcher for new players. Given the number of potential locations for gates, the ability to stop gate opening at just one seems marginal at best. However, by the mid-game, the board will look very different - once a couple of seals are down, and a few gates are open, the number of potential gate sites is much more constrained. Placing Kate on a high-frequency location that doesn't have a seal or portal makes a big difference to the probabilities of gate opening. There is another side to her power as well - preventing monster appearances is very useful during encounters (particularly otherworld encounters, where a surprise Dhole can be catastrophic). Thus Kate's usefulness in managing risk is actually quite powerful.
Her Lore and Sneak are pretty strong too. Poor combat abilities aren't much of an issue when monsters can't spawn on her, and she should be avoiding rather than fighting monsters in the streets. Her only drawbacks are her merely average Speed and Luck.

Darrell Simmons

And then we move onto the true exploration specialists. Darrell is one such, as a consequence of his special ability - the ability to draw two Arkham encounter cards and choose one is very powerful, given that, as explorers rush around picking up clues, they tend to spend about half the game taking Arkham encounters. His Speed isn't bad either. The things that hold him back are his poor Sneak (though his combat abilities are good, explorers shouldn't waste their time having fights) and merely average Luck. Thus he is pipped to the post of "best explorer" by the estimable...

The Good: Gloria Goldberg

Gloria takes the tiara for finest explorer due to one factor: her phenomenal ability. Though otherworld encounters are probably drawn slightly less often that Arkham encounters, they have much more risk/reward attached to them. Being able to draw two and pick is a colossal advantage. On top of that, you can add Glora's good Luck and Will. Her biggest weakness is when facing monsters - not only are her combat abilities weak, she doesn't have the Sneak to get past either. She works best as a member of a team, with others clearing the streets while she uses her power to avoid monsters in other worlds by not picking that card.

Spellcasters

Spellcasters are those whose initial setup doesn't particularly push them into either a combat or exploration role. Instead, their starting spells are likely to define the role they take. Spellcasters require high Lore for their spell checks, and preferably have spell-related special abilities as well.
Regrettably, the base game contains a mostly weak selection of spellcasters - with one shining exception.

The Poor: Dexter Drake

When discussions about the worst investigator in the game have exhausted the shortcomings of Sister Mary, they invariably move on to Dexter Drake. His ability to draw extra Spells isn't terrible, but given that Spells are generally drawn less often than Common or Unique items, it's pretty weak. His Lore, the key to spellcasting, is above average, but still not the best. He starts with a guaranteed combat spell - but his weak Will makes him a liability in combat. Above all, his Sanity is only 5 - he's going to run out of the ability to power those spells far too soon.
You may get some great spells on the draw, but otherwise, it's hard to find a use for Dexter.

The Fair:

Vincent Lee

Vincent is, on the face of it, nearly identical to Dexter. Same 5/5 Sanity/Stamina split, same lore, and

Picture by the author

so forth. He's a bit slower, and a bit luckier, and has a better Sneak to help avoid combat situations. While his special ability might, on the face of it, be less useful to a spellcaster than Dexter's, it will come into play more frequently and generally make itself more useful. Overall, Vincent isn't much better than Dexter, but comes in a nose ahead.
(As an aside, the most effective monster sweeper I ever had was a Vincent. He amassed over a dozen monster trophies before the game concluded. His secret? A "Feeding the Mind" spell, which he used to recuperate Sanity at the cost of Stamina, and then promptly healed back the lost Stamina. He became a constantly-regenerating juggernaut, able to take the punches and keep on coming back. On the other hand, in every other time I've played Vincent he's been a complete liability.)

Harvey Walters

Old Harv has got a lot of pluck for an older gentleman. With the highest Lore in the game, and a huge 7 Sanity, he is much better at actually casting Spells than Dexter or Vincent. His combat abilities are the weakest in the game, but he should be using spells to close the gap, and he has a strong Sneak if he can't. His special ability to reduce Sanity costs doesn't apply to Spells, but at least it reduces other costs, helping ringfence his Sanity for powering Spells. As a pure caster, Harvey is the best, and would be the best spellcasting character if it weren't for:

The Good: Carolyn Fern

Oh Carolyn, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways. Your Lore is strong, and your Luck its equal. Should it come to a fight, your combat abilities are superior to any other spellcaster. True, as a lady, you do not sneak, neither do you hurry; however, you should be able to acquire the Spells to overcome at least one of those shortcomings. Above all, you have by far the finest special ability for a spellcaster - you may heal the very Sanity you use to cast Spells. You may just cast, and cast again, a never-ending font of thaumaturgic splendour.
Carolyn is not merely a strong character, but, being a spellcaster, one of the most interesting to play. If only she were not a fictional personage, I would be contacting her father with regards to potential matrimonial union.

All-rounders

Finally, we have the elusive class of all-rounders, whose skills and special abilities do not strongly favour any of the roles above. All have 5/5 Sanity/Stamina, and average skills. They generally have flexibility, but by that token lack strength in any particular job.

The Bad: Amanda Sharpe

I'm sorry, Amanda, but you're just terrible. Your skills are all exactly average. Your high Focus should give you flexibility, but big skill shifts rarely arise in practice, and since you lack any extremes in your skills in the first place this Focus largely goes to waste. Furthermore, you have probably the weakest special ability of any investigator bar Sister Mary - Skill cards are rarely drawn, and in any case, your flat skill distribution means you don't really care that much which Skill card you get anyway.
Amanda isn't just weak; she's also boring. Avoid.

The Fair: Jenny Barnes

Picture by Tomas Naslund

From one of my least-favourite investigators to one of my most cherished. Already, compared to Amanda, she's better in a fight and luckier - thus she can take a few more chances in locations than Amanda can. Sure, she's a bit sluggish, but her starting cash and constant income means that faster movement is only a few visits to a shop away - visits that Jenny can keep on making. Her access to items can often overcome her lack of other special ability, and her acquisitions can make her a strong player in either slayer or explorer roles. Plus, she's a great team player, as she can pass off excess items to other players. Jenny's both strong and fun to play - easily my preferred all-rounder.

The Good/Worst: Mandy Thompson

Mandy is an absolute beast. Good Sneak and Will make her resilient, and she doesn't have any glaring weaknesses. She starts with 4 Clues, putting her into a great position for an early gate seal. But the thing putting her over the top is her incredible special ability. Arkham Horror is a game about risk management; being able to reroll any skill check is massive, and made positively overwhelming as only failures are rerolled. It's hard to fail anything with Mandy.
And that's a large part of my problem. Mandy just makes it too easy to win. She adds far too much power to the strategic side of the game. At the same time, she isn't a particularly interesting character in herself; in a game which is about theme and story rather than hard strategy, lack of character is unforgivable. Unless you're playing a single-investigator game (and hence need the power boost), I beg you, don't pick Mandy Thompson. She undermines the game itself. Just say no.

Mage Knight: Some Advice To My Fellow Beginners

Sir or Madam, I challenge you: can you look me in the eye and honestly state that there exists any game of the last few years to have received the universal acclaim of Mage Knight? It's ruleset may be dense, but the layers upon layers of strategy woven perfectly into the theme make it one of the most gloriously satisfying gaming experiences one can obtain, together or alone.

There is no denying, however, that it has a precipitously steep learning curve. I myself am no expert.

Picture by Gareth Lloyd

However, I have learned much in my dozen or so games (all successful, I am pleased to report, with the exception of one I quit two turns in after the most absurd starting hands imaginable). Since the discussion chambers of the automatic telegraph service are constantly filled with requests for tips for beginners, I will herewith provide my own humble suggestions.

1. Try to do something every turn

 Though this may seem outrageously patronising, I am making a point about how one should think about the options available to oneself. Even in the first turn, with a paltry five-card hand and no mana crystals, there exist a very large number of permutations of actions; it is a fool's errand to calculate the most effective way to use the cards together, then try to find a place to deliver this "killer combo" (just as it is pointless to build a seven-letter word in one's Scrabble rack when there is nowhere to place it). Instead, look to the board, and consider:

1. What enemies are there that I might be able to reach? Is there the possibility of acquiring a Spell (from a mage tower) or an Artifact? If not, how about a keep? 
2. If I have Influence rather than Attack cards, can I reach somewhere to recruit; if so, do I have space for a unit/a wounded unit to replace/a better unit available?
3. If I can't realistically gain anything through combat or interaction, can I reach a glade/mine or explore a new tile?

First look at each potential target in order of priority (which may vary by current needs), then check your hand to see whether it is achievable (bearing in mind that some enemies may have random aspects). In short, just as with almost anything involving a hand of cards (or, again, Scrabble), consider the game state first, and how to exploit it in the current turn, rather than focusing on just getting "biggest play" from your current hand or waiting for the "perfect hand" that never comes. Advance planning is all well and good if you are very familiar with your deck, but is more the province of expert players; at first, focus on getting what you can get right now.

2. Don't be afraid to take Wounds

This is probably the single most frequently made suggestion from experts to beginners, and it works in support of the above. Beginners (myself included) tend to play safe in the early turns, trying to pick off rampaging monsters and being very wary of tougher, fortified enemies in keeps and mage towers. When considering which actions are achievable this round, your immediate question should be "can I produce enough movement and attack power to defeat the enemy?" If the answer to that question is "yes", you should probably take them on unless the cost is extremely high. Even at the beginning of the game, a Wound or two is not such a big problem - you will have ample opportunity to Heal. Even three wounds is worth considering in early rounds if you'll get a good Spell or Artifact out of it (and particularly if it is near end of round, so the Wounds won't stay in your hand long). It is entirely possible to storm a mage tower in the first turn or two, even without improving your deck in any way beforehand. Blocking is nice if you can pull it off, but if you wait for that perfect hand containing all the attack, block and movement you need, it will most likely never happen; better to take a Wound or two, enjoy the spoils of the battle, and heal up later. Linked to this point is the suggestion that you should...

Picture by Marco Martellucci

3. Use your Units as damage sinks

Probably the biggest mistake I made as a beginner was unwillingness to sacrifice my Units. Units are unquestionably one of the best assets you can acquire in the game; they effectively exist as cards outside of your hand, each providing multiple options. Even a level 1 unit is the equivalent of an unimproved basic action, and will have greater flexibility to boot. Since Units are so useful, it is easy to attach too much value to them. Remember, that Influence you used to buy them in the first place is going to come back into your hand later to buy new Units with, and the Unit offer may well be better when it does. If a Unit is already exhausted for the round, do not hesitate to drop a Wound on it. This is particularly relevant to cheap units available at Villages that provide Movement - use the Movement to get to a mage tower or keep, provide the attack power yourself, ignore block, and drop wounds on your exhausted Unit(s). It's much better to stop that Wound from clogging your hand. You can heal the Unit later if you really desire; and you can replace it later anyway (and most of the time, you probably should). By the same token, don't be afraid to use a weak hand to visit a village and buy a unit you don't really want, if that is the best option available to you right now (following point 1); that poor unit can soak up damage even if it's not good for much else.

4. Mana is key

This was probably my other biggest flaw when starting this game. As a beginner, I tended to consider powering cards with mana as a "nice bonus"; in fact, it is the key to success with the game. A quick check of the various play-by-forum records on boardgamegeek.com will show just how much expert players utilise mana. Even in the first round, one should attempt to use at least one mana every turn. Those cards and (particularly) skills which provide mana tokens and crystals may seem boring by comparison with alternatives, but they are absolutely essential to success; if one is going to storm a City, one will need several mana-powered cards (crucially, including Spells) to have any realistic chance of success. Mana management is an essential skill to master. Take mana-granting skills that complement the cards in your deck; select cards to add to your deck which complement the mana sources you have available.
For example, when selecting a Spell from the offer, consider the crystals and skills (and possibly Source dice) you have available right now. Since any given card will only be played a small number of times over the course of a game, if you know you can power a Spell you are about to acquire in the following turn (and benefit from its effects), it may be better take take that Spell rather than a (possibly more exciting) Spell that you may not be able to fully exploit next turn.

Picture by Jaroslaw Czaja

Other points

The above four points are definitely my "take-home" messages; they are some of the most common tips given by experts, they are the mistakes I made the most as a beginner, and they are the suggestions that will probably improve your game the most. Following are a number of suggestions which, while of lesser magnitude, could improve your game.

• Try to use most of your hand each turn: even playing solo against a dummy player, that player will be averaging more than three cards per turn. That means you need to be averaging around four of your starting hand of five to keep pace (as you will most likely increase deck size faster than the dummy player). Point 1 above remains the priority - if the best target right now only needs one or two cards, then do that rather than emptying your hand for the sake of it - but in general, "churn" your hand, playing cards sideways if helpful this turn, rather than clinging onto a lot of cards and hoping for the perfect combo in a later turn (unless you really know your deck well and are pretty sure what's going to arrive next turn).
  
• Don't over-value Advanced Actions: a big error I made as a beginner was hogging Monasteries and buying up Advanced Actions, with the logic that they were better than the basic actions, and hence I could only be improving my deck. In fact, I was just fattening it, and I ended up having trouble keeping pace. While it's not wrong to pick up a bonus Advanced Action if a monastery provides something you really want, it's better to have a slimmer deck filled with Spells and Artifacts. 
• Don't under-value Keeps: they seem weak at first, particularly compared to mage towers which provide a Spell for one's deck rather than a mere temporary hand-size boost. However, a canny player can get a fair bit of use out of a Keep. For one, the extra card in the following round softens the impact of any Wound taken in the attack. For another, you can often utilise the bonus for two turns running, by using one turn to move one step outside the keep and attacking a local rampaging monster, and benefiting from the bonus in the following turn. Finally, remember the effect of Keeps is cumulative; a two-card bonus from a second Keep is huge, particularly as a prelude to a City assault. Keeps are still, on average, less useful than mage towers, but they are nonetheless a good option and should not be overlooked.
• Ranged attack isn't as useful as it looks: because more often than not, the enemies you are attacking will be fortified, either by their site or their own abilities. Reading the manuals makes it look amazing - you can kill an enemy without worrying about blocking or taking Wounds - but in practice, it's rarely an option, particularly in the early game. Even when not fortified, most enemies have more than 3 armour, so a single mana-powered Swiftness won't be enough, and it's highly unlikely you'll have both Swiftness cards and the ability to power them in the same turn at the beginning of the game. Since ranged can't be improved with normal attack (though normal attack can be improved with ranged attack), you need a lot of ranged (and/or siege) attack to kill anything worth fighting. I did once play an extremely successful game with a ranged-based deck, but I had acquired two separate powers which nullified fortification early in the game. In summary, unless you can remove fortification (or improve ranged attack to siege) AND have a lot of ranged/siege in your deck, don't expect to get much value out of ranged attack. Attempting to hold on to a ranged attack card and hope to combo it later is one of the easiest traps to fall into; better to use it as part of a normal attack unless you are sure you will be able to exploit it soon.

On The Strategy Of Kingsburg: Part The Second

(the first half of this series may be found here: http://lorddicely.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/on-strategy-of-kingsburg-part-first.html)

In the previous section of this discussion, I presented some ramblings on the general strategy of Kingsburg, mostly with a view to enlightening the beginner. This post takes a slightly more scientific approach than mere "expert opinion" - I have procured a number of strategies publicised by the estimable chaps at BoardGameGeek.com, and tested out each strategy several times.

I'm afraid I didn't have the stomach to perform too many tests, so this survey lacks true statistical power. However, in each case I tested in 2, 3 and 4 player games at minimum - most strategies were tested around half-a-dozen times. Experimental protocol was as follows:

• Plays were performed using Thomas Arnold's excellent Java software implementation. Plays were against computer intelligences. This spared human players the tedium, as well as providing a fairly consistent level of opposition. For reference, the artificial intelligences play fairly well, and I lost more often than won when learning this game.
• Another advantage of this approach was that I had access to a range of statistics at end of game. Thus I could determine how my rolls had compared to my opponents, and hence how sensitive each strategy is to poor luck.
• I played each strategy with 2, 3 and 4 players. Most of these were then retested at least once.
• Winter support from the King followed the standard rules (i.e. roll a die, receive 1 to 6 soldiers). Most variants provide less combat strength, which may sway the game towards more defensive strategies.
• Only the five rows present in the base game were used. The number of potential strategies provided by the expansion is huge, and far beyond the scope of this article.

I now present each strategy in turn.

1. The Strong Fortress strategy

This strategy involves building the Market, and then pushing directly to the Fortress, before buying towards the Cathedral. Thus the build order is usually Inn/Palisade/Market in the first year (if possible - the high cost of the Market may cause it to be missed in the first year), then buying Stable/Stone Wall/Fortress as soon as possible, then the Cathedral row. Having the Market can give the flexibility and reach to buy the high number of resources needed early in this plan.
This strategy provides a fair degree of combat strength at the beginning, before rushing for points. I did also try this strategy including buying the Crane - this didn't make much difference either way.
When playing this strategy, I won approximately half the time, coming second in all other cases. However, those second places were all accompanied by poor rolls (all-dice averages under 10 through the game). With average rolls, this is a surprisingly robust strategy, despite it's lack of Crane and defense in the later game. You will, however, have to remember to buy soldiers (and make use of the Stables) in later years; I once built a Cathedral, only to lose it in the final battle.

2. The Weak Fortress strategy

This strategy involves a more rounded strategy than the Strong Fortress, buying more of the low-value buildings:

• Year 1: Inn/Palisade/Guard Tower
• Year 2: Barricade/Crane/Blacksmith
• Year 3: Stable/Stone Wall/Fortress
• Years 4 and 5: buy row 1 to the Chapel level, then either fill the Wizard's Guild or Cathedral depending on preference and/or how much more combat strength is required, depending on the nature of the King's support.

In practice, the Strong Fortress strategy rarely reaches the Fortress by the end of Year 2, typically having to wait until the beginning of Year 3 anyway; hence it often has little advantage over the Weak Fortress, unless you are very lucky/have very accommodating opponents who will not block you. The strategy above actually produces more total combat strength; while it lacks the flexibility and power provided by the Market, it produces a more solid basis for combat support through the game (as with all strategies, though, remember to buy soldiers in the later game!).
When testing, this strategy delivered on a consistent basis. Not only did I win all but one attempt, but on several occasions I won despite having the worst die rolls of all players.

3. The Strong Embassy strategy

The main alternative for reliable VPs over time is the Embassy. As the Embassy provides points every season, it will produce three times the VPs of the Fortress; however, it provides no combat strength, hence requiring other routes (particularly the buying of soldiers) to support it. Furthermore, the Embassy provides more points the earlier it is constructed; this strategy involves building as soon as possible.

• Year 1: Barricade/Crane/Town Hall (6 resources in total thanks to Crane power, achievable in year 1)
• Year 2: Embassy/Guard Tower (7 resources in total, also entirely possible. By building the Embassy in the summer of year 2, it will provide 11 VPs over time, in addition to the 4 for constructing it)
• Year 3: Inn/Guard Tower/Blacksmith (fill in defense and flexibility in the year things tend to become tough)
• Years 4/5: buy Statue for easy VPs, then fill row 3 or buy row 4 for defense (depending on preference for Stable vs Barracks; note that, even though you have two buildings in row 3, it only costs 2 more resources to build all of row 4 at this point, which will give more combat strength and bonus VPs for battles, though fewer VPs for building value).

This strategy is more sound than it looks at first; though it ignores defence for the first couple of years, this gap is filled later. The main risks with this strategy are receiving little support from the King in early years, and the possibility of being blocked as the lack of an early Inn limits flexibility. The latter problem is slightly relieved by the cheapness of the buildings in this strategy. Overall I won consistently with this strategy, but nonetheless this strategy is risky.

4. The Weak Embassy strategy

This strategy involves more defense in the early stages, leaving the Embassy until later; this sacrifices some VPs from the Embassy, while taking fewer risks in battle.

• Year 1: Inn/Guard Tower/Palisade
• Year 2: Stable/Blacksmith/Barricade
• Year 3: Crane/Town Hall/Embassy
• Years 4 and 5: Buy as much of the Cathedral row as possible.

This strategy also won consistently, even with poor rolls. In one four-player game, I still won with an all-die average roll 1.4 less than the next-worse rolls.

5. The Magic strategy

This strategy is focused on filling the Wizard's Guild row. It is an interesting strategy, focusing on buying many of the lower-value buildings, and using Cathedral row buildings to buffer against disastrous rolls.

• Year 1: Guard Tower/Palisade/Barricade
• Year 2: Crane/Statue/Blacksmith
• Year 3: Chapel/Barracks/Wizard's Guild
• Years 4 and 5: Church/Stable/Stone Wall/Town Hall

This strategy provides good defense, uses row 1 for VPs, relies on inexpensive buildings, and mitigates disaster through the Statue/Chapel. However, it lacks the flexibility of the Inn/Market. Overall I came first only slightly more often than not; however, on one occasion I won despite losing the combat on round 3, and on other occasions despite having lower-than-average rolls. This strategy also brought one of my biggest wins (by a margin of 16 points over the second-placed player). Overall I found this strategy satisfactory, but not as consistent as some of those above.

6. The Farm strategy

As discussed in part one of this series, players rarely use strategies around the Farms, as the high reward is usually more than counteracted by the cost and downsides. Nonetheless I did attempt one strategy based around the Farms for comparative purposes.

• Year 1: Inn/Guard Tower/Palisade
• Year 2: Market/Blacksmith/save resources for Farms next year
• Year 3: Farms/Barracks (consider buying soldiers for defense using Barracks)
• Years 4 and 5: buy Wizard's Guild, then Cathedral row

This was the least successful strategy tested in this experiment. I only won once, and even then only by 3 points. I also suffered my worst loss (14 points below the next-placed opponent). I suffered my losses when I had worse rolls than opponents; this indicates the dependence of this strategy on dice rolls. Even where I survived all winters, and had comparable dice rolls to opponents, I still came second (4 VPs behind the winner). Consequently I cannot recommend this strategy.

Final thoughts

The most consistently successful strategies were the Weak Fortress/Embassy strategies. These strategies were also reasonably flexible, and relied largely on inexpensive buildings, thus mitigating the consequences of poor dice rolls. With alternative methods of Winter support, I suspect the Weak Fortress will only become stronger.
One other implication is that the most successful strategies open with Inn/Guard Tower/Palisade in their first years. This is a good plan for beginners, irrespective of how they then play out the game. Thus players should probably take Wood as their free resource at the beginning of the game; buying three wood in the first year is usually more difficult than obtaining two gold or one stone.
I hope this series has been useful to you, and wish you all the best with your future games.