I just got my hands on the new CE after years of playing the West End Games version. It looks fantastic. I have one question though - we always played that you could not negotiate your way to a fifth base.
I was surprised not to see this in the rules - was this an omission, or are negotiated wins officially fair game now?
negotiating a win?
We've always played that you CAN negotiate to a fifth base, but it's not easy to do, unless the other guy is also getting a 5th base... With the markers that track how many bases everyone has, it will be harder to sneak the last base without everyone knowing. Still possible though... heheh
It's a bit deflating if you're a defensive ally trying your darndest to prolong the game and the lady you're defending compromises her way to victory. I've never played with flares or technology though, and both those elements will hopefully add enough agency for the other players that a compromised (negotiated) win doesn't happen too often.
I miss the oddness of the original game, I must confess. Edict cards still sounds better than "Artifact" cards. And there was a certain ultra cool 70's je ne sais quoi about the overall design that's no longer there. C'est la vie.
I have no qualms with a negotiated win, and there never was a rule against it, so it's not like this is some change FFG made. My only pet peeve is when players ask each other before the battle, "I am going to play N. Are you?" The rules in the original game say you can't tell anyone what's in your hand or another player's hand, so if you say you are going to play N, you are saying you have an N. I can't remember from my brief look through FFG's rules if this rule was retained, but I intend to stand by it regardless. It takes all the surprise out of the game if you have very trusting players who constantly announce what they're playing, and it makes it less exciting when one player does anticipate an unannounced N and plays one himself. Then again, I've never had this problem with the board game; it's mostly a Cosmic Online phenomenon in my experience.
Adam said:
I have no qualms with a negotiated win, and there never was a rule against it, so it's not like this is some change FFG made. My only pet peeve is when players ask each other before the battle, "I am going to play N. Are you?" The rules in the original game say you can't tell anyone what's in your hand or another player's hand, so if you say you are going to play N, you are saying you have an N. I can't remember from my brief look through FFG's rules if this rule was retained, but I intend to stand by it regardless. It takes all the surprise out of the game if you have very trusting players who constantly announce what they're playing, and it makes it less exciting when one player does anticipate an unannounced N and plays one himself. Then again, I've never had this problem with the board game; it's mostly a Cosmic Online phenomenon in my experience.
I find it confusing that anyone would tell their opponent what they're going to play, even if they're bluffing, not to mention asking their opponent what they'll play. You'd never find that in a poker game, online or otherwise.
Some players are just very trusting. I guess they value honesty in real life and think it should therefore transfer to board games, too...
And it works. Most of the time I see people say "N?" the other person will agree or answer honestly that he doesn't have one. It's bizarre to me and a tad frustrating. Though I must say I have done my part to try and disillusion these players, constantly telling people Yes if they ask me to deal and then plopping down a 4.
Adam said:
Some players are just very trusting. I guess they value honesty in real life and think it should therefore transfer to board games, too...
And it works. Most of the time I see people say "N?" the other person will agree or answer honestly that he doesn't have one. It's bizarre to me and a tad frustrating. Though I must say I have done my part to try and disillusion these players, constantly telling people Yes if they ask me to deal and then plopping down a 4.
I had a particularly mirthful time on Wednesday evening playing as the Vacuum - By the 4th or 5th go around, I was the only person in the game that didn't have a majority of their ships in the Warp. Unfortunately the Parasite got his 4th foreign colony, which usually means victory unless people are willing to fail encounters willingly until a Cosmic Zap becomes available, or the Parasite loses his 3rd home colony.
joester5 said:
I just got my hands on the new CE after years of playing the West End Games version. It looks fantastic. I have one question though - we always played that you could not negotiate your way to a fifth base.
I was surprised not to see this in the rules - was this an omission, or are negotiated wins officially fair game now?
There's never been a rule in any edition of CE that prohibited negotiating for a fifth base ... so it's been "fair game" for about 30 years now. This is most definitely not new to the FFG edition.
Big Head Zach said:
Adam said:
Some players are just very trusting. I guess they value honesty in real life and think it should therefore transfer to board games, too...
And it works. Most of the time I see people say "N?" the other person will agree or answer honestly that he doesn't have one. It's bizarre to me and a tad frustrating. Though I must say I have done my part to try and disillusion these players, constantly telling people Yes if they ask me to deal and then plopping down a 4.
I had a particularly mirthful time on Wednesday evening playing as the Vacuum - By the 4th or 5th go around, I was the only person in the game that didn't have a majority of their ships in the Warp. Unfortunately the Parasite got his 4th foreign colony, which usually means victory unless people are willing to fail encounters willingly until a Cosmic Zap becomes available, or the Parasite loses his 3rd home colony.
You could also attack where Parasite already has a colony, though this is harder to do with more planets in play. Not that it matters, but I don't see what that has to do with my message you quoted or the topic of negotiating a win?
Adam said:
Big Head Zach said:
Adam said:
Some players are just very trusting. I guess they value honesty in real life and think it should therefore transfer to board games, too...
And it works. Most of the time I see people say "N?" the other person will agree or answer honestly that he doesn't have one. It's bizarre to me and a tad frustrating. Though I must say I have done my part to try and disillusion these players, constantly telling people Yes if they ask me to deal and then plopping down a 4.
I had a particularly mirthful time on Wednesday evening playing as the Vacuum - By the 4th or 5th go around, I was the only person in the game that didn't have a majority of their ships in the Warp. Unfortunately the Parasite got his 4th foreign colony, which usually means victory unless people are willing to fail encounters willingly until a Cosmic Zap becomes available, or the Parasite loses his 3rd home colony.
You could also attack where Parasite already has a colony, though this is harder to do with more planets in play. Not that it matters, but I don't see what that has to do with my message you quoted or the topic of negotiating a win?
Yeah, I was just slipping in a game session. I should've done this in its own topic or on BGG.
Adam said:
Some players are just very trusting. I guess they value honesty in real life and think it should therefore transfer to board games, too...
And it works. Most of the time I see people say "N?" the other person will agree or answer honestly that he doesn't have one. It's bizarre to me and a tad frustrating. Though I must say I have done my part to try and disillusion these players, constantly telling people Yes if they ask me to deal and then plopping down a 4.
First; the rules allow, and I'm OK with negotiating a win. There are ways to counter it, and there's nothing wrong with joint wins. We don't use the counters, so you can get away with sneaking a win in also. Hey, you have to pay attention!
I'm a CE fan since Eon, and one of the most universally held house rules (by every player/group I've ever met) is: No Crossboarding!
Communicating what cards you, or any other player (if you found out via card/ability) specifically have or will play, is strictly forbidden!
Eon and Mayfair editions had many powers/cards that could give you knowledge of what other players had. Telling other players the information was considered absolutely wrong, as well as strategically foolish. Why share intelligence?
Even telling what cards you yourself specifically held, is off-limits. You can tell the Pacifist you'll trade him 2 cards he'll "really like" in a deal, but saying you'll give him "2 Negotiate cards" is a no-no.
As far as transmitting what will be played: General hints would be used at best: "Don't worry about joining me as an ally, I'm feeling pretty confident". Among my gaming groups over the years, if someone told you what they were playing, odds are they're lying through their teeth.
Unexpected events and last-second reversals are a HUGE part of the Cosmic Encounter game. Bluffing, cut-throat tactics, and yes, even out-right lying (within the limits of game rules) can be too.
On the subject of honesty in the game, I think if a little friendly back-stabbing or bluffing in the context of a board game is a violation of someone's moral principles, then they should probably play something else. That's like playing poker with everyone's hand face-up.
Adam said:
. My only pet peeve is when players ask each other before the battle, "I am going to play N. Are you?" The rules in the original game say you can't tell anyone what's in your hand or another player's hand, so if you say you are going to play N, you are saying you have an N.
hum... in our group we will ask another player if they are feeling "agreeable", no one is upset by it. but for cosmic we corssboard as much as possible. we just never allow players to show each other cards or hidden items. the cosmic court accepts only testimony not evidince.
but this is somthing about cosmic, groups tend to each play with there own slight adjustments and taste.
i know a few people who would snub this new edition because vampire as written is not functional with non reversable tokens
Definitely to each his own way of playing. I love that about Cosmic. And I don't think sharing information (is that what "cross boarding" is?) is expressly forbidden in the new edition, from what my brief read of the rules, so it will just be a house rule I play with. Guess I'll find out when the game comes in later today!
Adam said:
Definitely to each his own way of playing. I love that about Cosmic. And I don't think sharing information (is that what "cross boarding" is?) is expressly forbidden in the new edition, from what my brief read of the rules, so it will just be a house rule I play with.
I've always taken the rule that you can't show your hand to other people to mean you also can't TELL other players what is in your hand (EON/FFG flares being the only exception, since they go back into the hand after showing them to everyone). Otherwise, why is there a separate step in the challenge where you have to both play your cards face down? Also, lying about what you're going to do kind of takes away some from powers like the Gambler.
As for the original topic, I've only ever seen a negotiation happen when the main players were both about to win. Usually, it meant that the defender only had Negotiate challenge cards in his/her hand; the offense often just wanted to extend the play a little longer, or couldn't beat the mass of defensive tokens (allies' + defensive player's).
TylerT said:
hum... in our group we will ask another player if they are feeling "agreeable", no one is upset by it. but for cosmic we corssboard as much as possible. we just never allow players to show each other cards or hidden items. the cosmic court accepts only testimony not evidince.
Our "no crossboarding" rule doesn't mean no communication at all. There's plenty of wheeling and dealing, and implied actions. And none of it binding
Crossboarding as we define it, is primarily relaying (or showing) specific card names/values:
"I'm not worried about the Parasite", is allowed instead of: "Don't worry about the Parasite gaining a base with the offense, I know the defender has the Wild Shadow flare."
"I think you have a good chance" is OK, but not: "I saw his hand, he only has an attack 4."
"Can you help a lot if you're an ally?"; instead of: "My highest attack card is an 8, how much in reinforcements do you have?"
"I'll make it worth your while to ally", not: "Don't worry, I'm going to Cosmic Zap him and play Mobius Tubes next challenge."
"Feeling agreeable" would be fair game (if it's understood such promises are NOT binding), but "Let's both play Negotiate to get a joint win. Show me you have one" would not be OK.
Those are great examples- very near what we do in our games. I think because we actually use the Zilch a bit, and part of his power is that he can not only look at anything, but say whatever he wants (even lie). And that is really what makes it so much fun to play.
The Warp said:
Those are great examples- very near what we do in our games. I think because we actually use the Zilch a bit, and part of his power is that he can not only look at anything, but say whatever he wants (even lie). And that is really what makes it so much fun to play.
Agree totally. He can go on about how unbeatable of awful a player's hand is (true or otherwise). We just omit actual cards by name.
We've always played that you can't show anybody your cards, but you can say anything you want. Showing a card is absolute knowledge, but what people say? You guys must be pretty honest most of the time! I know I don't trust my friends!
joester5 said:
I just got my hands on the new CE after years of playing the West End Games version. It looks fantastic. I have one question though - we always played that you could not negotiate your way to a fifth base.
I was surprised not to see this in the rules - was this an omission, or are negotiated wins officially fair game now?
This is perfectly legal in games we have played. Just as the assertion that the subsequent winners were weasels is legal, and expected.
When this version came out the group of people that I played with decided that you could only talk specifically about the cards in your hand if you were offering them to an opponent as part of a deal. You can't ask for specific cards (unless it's a flare that has already been used).
As far as negotiating for a win. The fool that allows you to negotiate a solo when basically get verbal abuse for the next week.
Furthermore we decided that you can't negotiate a tied win unless you both have 4 foreign colonies already
i.e. Red, Blue, and Green all have 4 foreign colonies and Yellow and Purple have 1 foreign coloy. Yellow and Purple may not negotiate with each other for 4 colonies apiece. However if Blue and Green are negotiating they can negotiate for a shared win.
Bill Nukem said:
Furthermore we decided that you can't negotiate a tied win unless you both have 4 foreign colonies already
i.e. Red, Blue, and Green all have 4 foreign colonies and Yellow and Purple have 1 foreign coloy. Yellow and Purple may not negotiate with each other for 4 colonies apiece. However if Blue and Green are negotiating they can negotiate for a shared win.
I'm not sure i understand your example regarding Yellow and Purple. In a negotiation you are limited to offer only one colony. They can't offer 4 colonies to each other.