"Putting a player in the center of the board is putting them at a disadvantage",

 ...but I would counter with...  How is that any different that starting on the same continent with 4 other civilizations surrounding you in the Computer game?  SM's Civilization has been a challenge since it's beginning, and often times, it wasn't "fair" either.  Remember, in the BG you're usually playing against your friends and associates, and the game doesn't have to be about combat.  You can be a diplomat too...

Just seen the 5 player map (who came up with that?), but I'mwondering whether having a void space in the middle is such a good idea...

And still no British civilization? I'm begining to wonder whether this is some sort of US prejudice playing up, it always seems to me that Britain is never promoted in the Civilization games even though they built the biggest empire in the world.

ballpark7 said:

Drinkdrawers said:

I think this is a poor justification for starting one player in the middle of the board.

First of all, the differences between playing a board game with 5 people and a video game with 5 people are that you are in the same room instead of spread all over, and you are in that room for a set period of time. All of the conflict, decision making, and emotional investment are crammed into those two or three hours that you're all playing the game together. This means that disadvantages are perceived as more disadvantageous, players who are losing badly will complain more vocally, and if someone's not having much fun, it greatly affects everyone else's experience. Starting a player in the middle of the board could easily result in a feeling of hopelessness that would cause that player to have less fun, which would in turn cause everyone else to have less fun.

Second of all, just because the game doesn't *have* to be about combat doesn't mean it *won't* be. I guarantee you that in the groups I play with, if one player started in the middle of the board, we would all go after him. And he would have less fun because of it. Which sucks. Games shouldn't force that upon their players.

Of course, you justification for calling my justification is Poor as well, because you didn't offer any alternatives yourself....

So, basically what you are saying that the guys you game with are a bunch of jack-arses... ... and that you prefer an "Artificial Hole" in the board rather than a challenge?  I can accept that...  I've played against players that wanted the game handed to them on a silver platter before...  Remind me never to play a game against your Gaming "Buddies" any time soon...

Alright, I'm going to refute your proposition, because it is poor.

• Boardgames aren't like Computer games. You can drop out of a game of Civilization IV in the first five minutes if you don't like your starting area. Civilization the Board Game? Nope. You're stuck with it for 2+ hours. That's completely unfair to the middle player.

• Putting someone in the middle is indeed a challenge and this is not balanced. Said player is in a position where he has to fend off attacks from four other players. Any other position is just 3.

Basically, it's cool if you want a challenge. But don't imply other peoples' playstyles are wrong simply because they care about a balanced setup. I don't think that  makes them weak or "jack-arses" - in fact, quite the opposite.