Joe Pastuzyn
United States
Midland
Michigan
-
chally wrote:
Why would you intentionally not buy buroughs? This seems to me like asking whether more family members in Agricola increases your chances of winning. There is no benefit to having fewer buroughs, and the actions you save won't be as efficient because buroughs are the most effective way to draw cards. I've never played in a two-player game where either player ended with fewer than 8.
Lovely data presentation, but I wholeheartedly agree with Ben above. I don't think you can win this game without staying up in buying buroughs. You will eventually lose to poverty points if you have any reasonable sized city (card stacks), or if you have few card stacks, you are allowing your opponent to run a much larger city and not be penalized by poverty. That can only mean more victory points in the end for her.
By the way, when you play two player, do you use the variant posted on BGG where you block a burough when you sweep cards from the board? This tightens the game and brings back the tension of poverty into the game.
.
