I've been looking all over the forums and I see that everyone pretty much universally says that the Cylon’s win more, probably by about a 4 to 1 ratio. I'm very much aware of the greatness of the game and even though the humans loss more I still want to play a lot. Also I know that each gaming group is different, but I’ve done the math.

But, if there’s a build in mechanic to balance the two out why not use it?

More importantly, has any one?

The official rules balance is to add two to all of the resources. That seems like a lot to me sense whenever I’m a human I usually only loose by just a few turns. So I’m going to add just one to all the of resources.

Thoughts?

Sorthlador said:

I would have to question your math. Oh, I'm sure you can add, but there's a variable missing from your equation. WHEN were these games played? The more new players you have, the more likely the Cylons will win. Once everyone's got a grip on the game, you'll find it evens out.

Official alternate rule is not to use the Sympathiser. It is in the Variants donwload on the site. For a variety of reasons, I don't like sympathiser. Try the official no sympathiser variant. Also, make sure Humans are scouting, and managing their resources. Sometimes, early jumps are OK if you have the population to sacrifice. A macabre thought¨, but it is effective

The Human:Cylon victory ratio also seems to depend on how many players you're playing with. I've only played extensively with either 4 or 5 players, but it seems like the humans have a much easier time in the 4 player game.

Dan said:

The "No Sympathiser" variant is not intended to make the game easier - the variant states that you should reduce the resource dials to even out the difficulty again. And anyway, how would this help in 3 or 5-player games?

Trump said:

You clearly didn't get what I was saying, This wasn't just my games, it was all the games posted on this forum. I added them up and it came out to about a 4 to 1 ratio. I totally agree that Cylons have it easier with new players, but I'm talking about across the board. Look at the page listing everyones win and loss record. I

Also I know all about scouting, and thank you for the correct comment about the sympathizer card, that is not what I'm talking about. Honestly I'm a smart player, and can convince the humans to do what I want when they KNOW I'm a human, and still Cylons have it easy if they know what they are doing. This is more a post about ALL games more so then MY games.

So the answer to my question is NO, no one has tried the official rules variant to add resources to the humans to balance it out? I challenge everyone who reads this to try it out.

Sorthlador said:

Actually, I DID understand you completely. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I didn't understand you.

Your stats are biased. Gathering stats "across the board" skews the results. Have you eliminated all games played with new players? I think not. You agree with me that those games will play differently, yet you're keeping them in your stats. Granted, it may very well be impossible to correct your stats since you can't be expected to know which games had new players, but you have to acknowledge that your 4 to 1 ratio will erode significantly.

As for accepting your challenge....why? There's no need for balancing. Everything's just right as it is. Gathering everyone's stats on the forums doesn't matter to me since I don't play with these people. I'd roughly guess that I play BSG with 12-20 different people. I'm seeing a very nice win/loss ratio. Nothing to balance.

I think the game is balanced well. A cylon advantage makes the game more challenging and ultimately exciting.

Sorthlador said:

Co-op and semi co-op games tend to be unbalanced in order to present a challenge. The game is favored on the Cylon side in this case because they are in the minority and sided with the game itself. If the game were balanced so that each side had an equal chance to win, the result would probably be that the collective influence of the humans would tip the scale to the human side more consitenly winning. The game would grow stale and be shelved after a few plays.

Instead, the great equalizer is experience. the more the humans play,t he more they should be able to bring about a truer balance to the game and extend its longevity. So games like this and Arkham Horror, Red november, Shadows Over Camelot, etc. I expect to favor the game so that we can collectively come up with a strategy that will win against the odds. The more I "almost win" the more I want to try again. If each game is a 50-50 toss-up, then it's not really a game worth owning.

You what both of you just said makes a lot of sense to me.

And as I sit down (Right now) to play another game, I'm not going to change the starting stats.

It does feel like the show that the humans are up against impossible odds. So Bring it on Cylons!

Sorthlador said:

I think you'll find that the game odds don't seem impossible. In fact, even if you have many Cylon victories at first, you'll keep saying "Oh, if only THAT skill check had gone our way!" And that's why you'll keep coming back.

Sorthlador said:

My group (6 - 15 people) started increasing the resource dials by 1, then increased it to 2 after we found the humans continued to consistently lose. In the last game we played, I was dealt a Cylon card in the Sleeper Phase with all resources up between 10 and 12... that was almost depressing. Almost. The humans still lost, but it made for a great game and I felt the game really pushed my limits. (I know, that sounds corny... that my "limits" were "pushed"... in a board game Whatever, I feel I'm a better player for the experience.)

All in all, I like increasing the resource dials. My group will continue with the inflated resources until we as human players are able to get a better handle on them. Right now, we still have new people joining our group (everyone that hears about this game wants to give it a try!), so growth and development of the players and their strategies varies with the humans getting the short end of the stick with each new player joining the board. It's okay, the game is a blast and almost everyone who comes can't wait for the next game night.

That was a exactly what I wanted to hear about.

I think I agree with you, the Cylons have won my last 5 games in a row (and could be even more cant remember) and even if it is because of my constantly training new players, I think adding one resource is a fair deal. At least until the human plays are as good as cylon players.

and as you said, you where half way threw the game and still had resources at 10...and won! so makes for some good frakin fun.

Thanks

Sorthlador said:

The point is, do what you think is right! The variant is for +2 in each category. So try it at +1 for a few games and see if that gets the level of balance you are looking for. If not, go up tot he full +2. If that still doesn't do it, keep adding +1 until you are comfortable.

One human tactic that works really well for us is as much trust as possible. The cylon can only betray an excutive order once and even if its done well, you've already used a lot of excutive orders and thats a lot of extra actions. If anything, in our games the humans win more that the cylons. Also we always make sure the sympathizer is on the human side. With those two tactics extra resources would just [ut the cylons in a even bigger hole.

Utheran said:

Are you implying there are people who hold back on executive orders because of fear of Cylons? That's nuts. If the orders aren't flying, the humans are going to have a heck of a time.

As far as the sympathizer goes, I'm very much opposed to your tactics. It's WAY too gamey and detracts from enjoyment of the game. Nobody does that where I play. Is the sympathizer so bad anyway? Essentially, the humans get an extra player for the first half of the game and the Cylons get a weakened player for the second half. Is that so awful?

Trump said:

Haha I just know that in my first few games I did hold back executive orders for fear of cylons but I would agree with you it was a bad idea.

I don't think playing for sympathy detracts from the game at all. Even ignoring the sympathizer, the humans still don't want to do too well or they might be in trouble if they become cylons. And if anything it makes it more tense since the humans are trying to not do too well or too bad, its a fine line to tread and is often very tense.

As to to the power of the sympathizer i'm not certain how important it is, but consider that on one hand the end game will have 4v2 or 3v3. Now 4v2 seems like a much better plan for the humans, one less player with negative cards, plus more positive cards. It seems like a pretty decisive difference to me.

Utheran said:

??? That way of thinking is just BAD for the humans. The odds are that you'll be human... although Baltar and Boomer will have a slightly different opinion there. The humans screw up enough on their own without the Cylons needing the extra help of Cylon-maybe-bees. Holding back because you MIGHT become a Cylon isn't good business sense... and is against the theme of the game too, and we already know what I think about that, eh?

Let's consider those endgame stats with ALL of the facts. 4v2 but with at least one dial in the red already. 3v2.5 but all of your dials looking good. I don't think it's so decisive. However, since you favor a strategy of the humans holding back in the first half of the game so that the dials will generally be lower, you may indeed wish to avoid that sympathizer and you probably won't have to do as much to get a red dial anyway. If you're going to play games with the rulebook, why not plan your jumps better? A good admiral can get you to 3 and then jump to 6. That leaves only two more jumps to end the game. That's a good idea whether you're playing with a sympathizer or not. But it does go against your strategy of having the humans hold back because they might end up as a Cylon in the endgame.

The humans have two foes : the game itself and the Cylon players. I consider the game to be the greater enemy and that's who you need to beat. Holding back during the first half of the game and intentionally driving a stat into the red is purely assisting the game in winning.

I think its truly dependant upon who's playing. Its been very 50:50 when I've played. But the majority of the times I've played it has also been with 4 players, hence that strange luck that the 4 player groups seem to get.

Unless I play with my roommate Ben. He has consistantly /Always/ gotten to be our cylon. Not only is he capable of beating us down easily, but he is, as a person, a charismatic and fairly deceptive person. We got beat down hard. Big time. And the last time we played, we had Pegasus. Still beat us down.

I myself have played around a dozen or more times and I've not been a cylon once. Things just go weird in this game.

Personally I'm still running about 90% cylon for some strange reason. 2 out of the 3 games I played last night I was a cylon from the beginning. So overall I'm 9 for 11 being a cylon, 8 for 11 being a cylon from the beginning of the game. Unfortunately for me the game I was a human for we lost, so I'm only 50-50 for winning as a human.