by Pintsizepete
curtc wrote:
I don't get the discussion on flares. I've played the game many times (and love it), but flares seem pretty clearly to be a catch-up mechanism. With no apology necessary. I strongly disagree with calling them inelegant. They work beautifully. It forces players to play for objectives, not to stomp the opponent(s) into the ground. In fact anecdotally, I think in my games the team that flares more often than not wins. Don't want the other team to flare? Don't stomp them so hard! But you don't know exactly how hard is too hard since flare cards are hidden. Seems perfectly elegant to me.
BTW, no mention of team play. 2v2 is exclusively how I play this, as there is sadly a dearth of good team games. This game is so good as a partnership game. It does drag a bit, but it's fun to watch people squirm. And choosing when to punt and hand things over to your partner is a really interesting decision.
BTW, no mention of team play. 2v2 is exclusively how I play this, as there is sadly a dearth of good team games. This game is so good as a partnership game. It does drag a bit, but it's fun to watch people squirm. And choosing when to punt and hand things over to your partner is a really interesting decision.
It's because "catch-up mechanism" is normally meant in terms of catching up when someone is behind in points, but flares "catch up" when someone is behind in board position, not necessarily correlating with points at all. Creating the decision of gaining points without gaining overwhelming board position, or only gaining the overwhelming board position when you can get good points off of it.
A catch-up mechanism would be something that gave someone an advantage when they were behind in points, I believe.