I saw that the game requires three persons to play, but anyway, is there a posibility to play this game just with two players? I'm very interested in this game, but have only one player (my son:) who wants to try it, so the answer is very important to us.
Thanks in advance.
|Page 1 of 1 (7 messages)||1|
will be getting this tomorrow, (i.e for Christmas), so ican't say for certain, but i'd be very surprised. Even to play with three requires a lot of the map to be under neutral control.
More to the point, the negotiation, shifting alliances, and the general unpredictability of attacks seem to be a large part of the game- with 2, that would be lost.
Perhaps you could devise some system, where you randomly gain/lose the support of neutral factions, but it would take a large amount of house-ruling.
Never leave home without your Direwolf...
Thanks for your answer. Hope, we'll find more players soon, so it worth to order the game, I guess. Thanks again.
Tried the game with two players yesterday. It worked ok. The diplomacy is of course missed but we enjoyed it. We played with four factions Baratheon/Tyrell against Martell/Lannister. We placed neutral-tokens on the map before we draw teams to make the map as fair as possible.
Typically with other games that have this issue in the past (even Risk), I've always done it so each player controls 2 factions.
So I would set up the game as if it were a 4 player game, but each person controls 2 houses. I haven't tried it with AGOT yet, but it usually works well. Luckily we haven't had enough people flake out on the game night yet for this one, but I'm sure one day it will happen. If we run into that, I'll post a follow up on how it goes...maybe everyone should post who tries it and come up with some house rules everyone can use.
i havn't played risk in years, but i use to play it all the time 2 players. You just had a third (neutral) player. Each player got half the neutral player's starting units and put them where he wanted.
as for this game, I played 3 players just fine, but not sure i would try with 2.
my friend and i tried it the other day. we set it up as a 4 person game (starks, greyjoys, lannisters, baratheons) and each of us chose two houses out of a hat.
it ended up perfectly with the starks and the lannisters vs. the greyjoys and the baratheons.
the only way i would modify it is to block off the south as if it was a 3 player game in order to make baratheon come fight everyone instead of winning the game down south without ever engaging anyone (this is a huge problem with a 4p game too.)
it's basically as if the two houses on each team are just steadfast allies that never go littlefinger on each other.
it takes a long time and gets difficult when you're planning strategy in the later rounds with huge armies and two huge factions to look over, but it's still fun.
well what I have noticed in a 4 player game is lannister should go south as well. If lannister and greyjoy fight too much over land early then neither will win.
|Page 1 of 1 (7 messages)||1|