Carcassonne

[music]

Welcome to "Replayable" where we go into depth on our favorite tabletop games that keep us coming back again and again. I'm the star player Todd, and today I'm joined by Megan and Greg. For our 30th episode, we will be visiting the double laureate game Carcassonne. It was designed by Klaus Jurgen Reed and released by Hans M. Glueck in 2000. Are you two ready to compete in the French countryside? I'm gonna steal your farm. I mean, it's your title, it's right there.

I am ready to cost your travelers on the road. There you go. Carcassonne is a tile placement game where players draw and place a tile with a piece of southern French landscape on it. The tile might feature cities, roads, monasteries, or fields. Players then decide if they want to place one of their followers on these features to score points. These followers were later renamed to, you guessed it, meatballs. City score points when completed, roads when finished, and monasteries when surrounded.

Fields, however, score at the end of the game based on connected, completed cities. The game ends when all tiles are placed and the player with the most points wins. This particular game, at the end of our last pod, which was on Carnegie, I hinted that we would be discussing a classic that is easily overlooked. And I think, at least when I'm talking about playing a classic game, I'm often thinking about maybe Catan or El Grande and like Carcassonne doesn't really come to mind as often.

Do you feel the same way about it, Megan? Yeah, I do feel like you are correct in that in conversation, it doesn't come up the same way that Catan, that to get to ride does. And I don't understand it because I love Carcassonne and I think it has influence. I mean, you just said, you know, it has this piece that was renamed The Meatball. And obviously that has an outsized influence on the board game industry. Oh yeah. This hobby that we enjoy. But also, I just think the game is fun.

I enjoy it every time I play it and it's a game that once you know it, you can sit down and play with very little refresh of the rules needed. And that's exactly what I love in an old, stamped-eye game. I have played Catan in so long. I think if I sat down, I would need a rules refresh. But for Carcassonne, I don't. So I love it. I think it should be right up in there in the pantheon. And I'm ready to debate people who feel otherwise. I'm with you, Megan.

I put it above a lot of the games that people talk about as like the best games from the early days of this board gaming renaissance we've been having here. You know, if you talk about Catan or what was the other one you mentioned? Todd Elgrand. I don't think of those as games that I want to play anymore. They're games that I mean, Elgrand I never played a lot to begin with. And Catan, I'm just not interested in anymore. It's a solid game I would play it if somebody else wanted to.

But I would never even bother suggesting it. Carcassonne though, it's still a game that I would suggest. And it's a game that I'm happy to have in my library. It's in a very visible, easy-to-reach spot. I don't get it to the table as much as I probably should, but I enjoy it. It's fun. I've played a lot of it on apps and I've played it a fair number in person. And it's a game that I won't say I've always enjoyed it.

But even when I've had my gripes, it's always been with the players stealing my farms. Not with the game itself. Right? So what the mechanics enabled them to do? Yes. Let's talk about that for a moment. So this game can be played in a very cutthroat fashion. Or it can be played more carefree. You think it's worthwhile to play destructively and use your turns to limit what other players are able to do? Yeah, absolutely. It needs to be played cutthroat.

If you're not getting in each other's way, if you're not making problems for other people, you're up doing it right. It's the only way to play. Right? But what about placing a tile such that you are removing the opportunities for someone else as opposed to setting yourself up to share in the opportunity? Oh, yeah. So I'm not a big share in this game. I will absolutely try to make a placement if I can. That will block something.

You know, my first interest is always going to be bettering my own position. Right. But you know, a lot of times you get a tile that's just almost useless for you. But maybe you can cause some pain for somebody else by making it hard for them to finish off a road or make a city. You know, I've even given people points. You know, you get that city tile that's all city on all four sides. Right. And plop that on somebody. And now they're never going to close that city. And that maple is stuck.

Right. You know? So yeah, you gave them two points. But they're never going to see that maple back. Exactly. Megan, I see you nodding your head there. I mean, Greg, we have never been this aligned on something. It makes me think you're maybe a wolf, but that's a whole different game. But yeah, absolutely. This is not a cozy game where you're just building out your little French country side. No, no, no, my friend. You guys need to be fighting.

This needs to be ruthless to me in terms of like the feeling that this game might end your friendship. It should be diplomacy is number one and Carcazone should be number two. You should be fighting. And now, thankfully, you know, I have wonderful friendships that can handle that kind of antagonistic fight in Carcazone. I love to play that way.

I think, you know, as Greg was talking, I was like, oh, I wonder if I could provide a different perspective and say, you know, at the beginning of the game, there's so much opportunity and potential. And so there you want to focus on building out, you know, cities and things for yourself to score. And then later you go after the opponents. But no, I think that's all wrong. I think that is what younger kinder Megan might have said.

I think that mature, sophisticated, experienced Megan knows you fight from the start. I think this is post-law's Megan talking because I saw a lot of cooperation on that road with Paul. Angry Megan? Yeah, in the game we played Monday night. But yeah, I think you've got to fight. I think the game, it is what people say it is. If you just pay, if you're just playing to achieve your own objectives and you're not paying attention to what other players are doing or trying to share or steal.

Yeah, absolutely. But I think that is what makes it interesting and what keeps the game engaging now that it's been out for a million years is that you are playing the game. But the game is the venue in which you are playing the people you're playing with. Whereas I think a lot of the games we like, you're playing the game. Right. But this, you're playing the group you're playing with. Absolutely. Interesting. So you mentioned younger Megan might have more naive, friendly Megan.

Might have played more constructively and not tried to get in the way. Do you remember what your first time or first exposure to the game was? That's a good question. I was exposed to some strategy board games in college. And I played Catan and I think I played Parker's zone in college, which I'm revealing how young I am compared to my two other guests. You know, no one's saying that it was a new release. Call it out here, Megan. But I think it was this exciting new game. When I was in college.

It was new to you. No, it was new. I'm trying to give you an out here. I know my age. It's totally fine because I'm younger than both of you. I think the point is you and I were well out of college when this came out. Correct, correct. I'm trying to make you feel bad, rather than wasting on myself. I'm starting to notice a lot of collaboration on that road there. But I remember, I think I played it then. There were a few games that I had experience with before.

I think I've told this on the pod before, but I had a friend who recommended Shadows Over Camelot to me. And that was really what started my board game journey. But I have played a few other games before, but I played, there were some years in my late 20s that there was unemployment and depression and a lot of BSW. And I played a lot of Carcazone on BSW at that time. Yeah, I sure, of course, I have funness for it because of that experience as well. Right, how about you, Greg?

Yeah, so this came out during a time that I wasn't playing a lot of board games. You know, it was more video game time of my life, but it was ready and waiting and a popular game when I jumped back into board games and early odds, as they say. So, you know, there were so many things to try at the... When I first played it, I didn't love it. It was okay, you know.

It wasn't until a few years later, and a lot of that was, I think, because we kind of played it more that almost cooperatively, where everybody kind of does their own thing. And then, you know, I didn't really understand how to score farms. You know, it was just kind of like, you know, somebody would win farms. And it wasn't until after our Monday night game group got started, and there was a guy, Mike, that showed up early every day.

And he got me to sit down and play two-player Carcassonne with him while we waited for other players. And his only requirements were that you draw your next tile as soon as you've played, and you play quick. And we were playing, you know, two-player games in, like, 15 minutes. And it was great. It, like, it revealed whole new levels to the game to me.

You know, just partially because, you know, playing fast and loose, you know, you kind of get a messy board a little bit, but you also start seeing these opportunities develop where, oh, wait, yeah, he's got that farm that's going to score four cities, but I've got it. I can, if I play some maple right here with one more tile, I can be on his farm. And, oh, and I've got that other one.

You know, you start, like, seeing some of those things that, you know, I didn't see in the game at first, where there's a lot of, like, positioning you can do, and trying to outmaneuver the player. It's not just about building your own road. It's about, like, we've discussed getting and really playing against the other player more than playing for yourself, especially in a two-player game, where there's only one other person to worry about.

You can really focus on, like, oh, he's building a big city. Let's, let's make, let's spoil that city. You know, you know, let's not, or at least let's tie down the maple, or let's make it so, oh, he needs that one tile. Let's, let's make it so that it's a harder tile to find. Okay, so let's put a pin in that. I want to come back to that topic here in just a second. First, experiences for me, I got back into board games after I had kids, right?

Because I wanted an activity that didn't require screens. And so suddenly this, you know, nascent love, and I had played through high school and some in college, and then got really into a kick with cards, but not really board games. And then I found board game geek and Euro games after I had kids, and there used to be a shop at the main place mall in Santa Ana called The Gamekeeper, I think it was. And when they went under, they had a sale.

And so I went and looked in inventory, and here's this game, Parkasone, that they had, and I was like, oh, okay, I'll pick that up. That looks interesting. And totally rocked my world as far as the way that it was so simple in its construction, and yet the way that you could use these meatballs, and then the timing of it, and then wondering if you could find that perfect tile to close off your city and surround your monastery at the same time or whatever the case may be.

It was brilliant. I absolutely fell in love with it. And as the game aged for me and my taste changed, you know, it lost a little bit of that luster, but I still have really fun memories of learning how to play it. So I wanted to come back and touch base on what you said, prevent them from finding that tile. I mean, you can't really prevent someone from finding a tile, especially when they're in face down stacks.

Do you have any thoughts about either knowing or keeping track of the tile composition? Like how many tiles have three road exits in one field, or two cities on a side, or cities on two sides? Well, I don't know if they still have it, but I know in the first edition, they had a tile list. They showed you every single tile that was in the game. So I think the game is kind of meant. I got it in my hands right now. Show it to camera.

Okay. I remember finding a PDF of it and printing it out and putting it in my game. I don't remember that I had a tile in the corner. I don't know if this is first edition. The game I have is first edition rules, though, but it might be Jay Tummelsen. Right. Rio Grande edition. But anyway, I don't remember ever looking at that when playing the game, but I think you get a feel for like what kind of tiles are common and what kind of tiles

are hard to get, like something that has cities and roads on it. And so if you see somebody trying to build something and it's already got a road, you know, they're trying to build a road and it's going by a city, you place another open city tile next to it. And well, now there's only a couple tiles in the stack that are going to fit there. Right. So you make it harder for them. Of course, I did that on Monday night to Paul and he immediately

placed the exact right tile. And his next draw was the next tile to finish off his monastery. So it doesn't always work, but, you know, because there is luck in the game, but you know, you can try to play those odds a little bit and make things difficult for people. Like I said, you try to lock down their meatballs and yeah, they're still going to score points for it at the end of the game.

But that means that, you know, the worst thing you can do to yourself in this game is not have meatballs to play when you've got an opportunity. Right. And if you can take away those opportunities from other people, you know, you're playing well. I agree. What do you think, Megan, about keeping track of tile composition and how many are left? So many years ago, when I was playing Carcazade on VSW all the time, we were playing so frequently that we just kind

of did know the tile composition. Okay. And I was always playing with the same person. So there were similar levels of knowledge. And so that kind of made it okay. I think where that feels uncomfortable is when there's that big disparity, right where it's a new player that you're teaching

the game or whatever. And then you know that, hey, they've already built something that they're never going to be able to complete because I know that tile either doesn't exist in the set we're playing or has already been played elsewhere and there's only the one or something like that. And so I think that's my whole kind of statement on that, is that I think that feels fine when it's a level playing field and it's

uncomfortable when there's that difference. And I think it's something that is going to make the experience less fun when there's that disparity. Though I also think the player with greater knowledge can be cool and not keep saying like, well, you're never going to be able to close that because I know that helps them to know what you really want them to know for their own benefit so they can stop saying, well, if I can only draw that one tile.

Yeah, I don't think there's any any good comes from you being like, you know, I know this and you don't. I don't think that helps anyone.

But I don't think it is it certainly didn't take away from the fun when my gaming partner and I both knew what the tiles were and we would know, the thing I needed just got played by the I mean, in a way that was so much more fun and it was exciting for both of us. When I would get the tile that they needed and would get to play it and they'd be like, you are so happy right now. And I'd be like, I really, I really, really am and it made

it almost more adversarial, right? Yeah, but you have to have knowledge of the tiles to recognize that moment when it happens. Exactly. And it sounds like in your game, that was the case as opposed to someone who continues to draw, even though you know they're drawing dead, right? They're never going to have a shot at finding that tile because it no longer exists. Yeah, the app that I think it was the Apple and Android app that I was

playing for a while. It made it really easy to see what tiles were still available and it would even gray out areas that were no longer playable. So yeah, I mean, it does kind of add a level of planning to the game when you have that information that you can really play a little more strategically. And I think it does add some fun to the game. It does slow the game down though when you're starting to think at that level.

And that's what was my concern. So I really liked the initial suggestions that was it Rob told you about? His name was Mike. That Mike had told you about take your tile at the end of your turn and then play quickly when it becomes your turn.

I really liked that idea. And the one thing I don't like about having the tile inventory and trying to plan ahead and recognize what's been played and what could be left is the AP that it induces in the the lengthening of the game because that's just not fun, especially if you're in a four player game and everyone's doing it or or more player. If you, I think basically it scores up to five and with what was it ends in cathedrals, I think it introduced the ability to

add a sixth player. And I mean, at that point, it just starts to get silly. A thousand percent agree. This is a game that's meant to be played quickly. Right. All right. So scoring, there have been some changes to scoring over time. I mentioned this was a double laureate game. And by that, I meant that it won both the Spiel de Yaris and also the Deutre Spieler Priest in 2001. Very few games have managed to accomplish that feat.

And we've talked about a couple of them already in Catan and El Grande. Under those first edition rules, small cities. So cities that were just two segments, right? So two tiles, each of them have a city on one side, complete the city. And those were only worth two points. Whereas if you complete a city that's any larger, it's worth two points per segment.

So a city made of four segments would be worth eight points. And they later changed that so that even two segment cities scored two points per segment and would be worth four points. And that wasn't even the big change. The big change was in fields. And heck, sometimes that scoring is still confusing. What are your thoughts on scoring? And do you have a preference as to which way it should go? I know as soon as I say something here, someone's going to say Megan, you just said

BSW works this way. But instead, it works this other way. Oh, no, we're talking about how we played Monday night. So it's all good. There's no one in the fact check you here. Well, what I'm going to say is I think the only way I've ever played is third edition scoring. Okay. And so to me, the thought of doing these others seems ridiculous. But we were playing small cities were only worth two points on Monday night. Right. Oh, okay. Yeah, I've played with them being

worth four points. But I didn't fight because that's just not I'm ready to fight in the game. I'm not ready to fight about the game. So can we look at it? Oh, yeah, I wasn't going to fight over that. To me, they all just changed the balance of the game a little bit. I don't have a huge preference towards one. I think my instinct is to say that, you know, score fields the way they're scored in third edition.

But scoring small cities for four points seems like that encourages people to build a lot of small cities. Well, it does. But it happens anyway. So I don't know. I mean, I don't really have a strong preference as long as you just agree on it ahead of time. It's all good. Right. Well, I don't like the first edition rules of scoring the cities individually at the end of the game for fields. I felt like that was really confusing and hard to keep track of versus just scoring

each field, however large it was. Right. Yeah, I agree with that. But I do prefer the small cities scoring because you're right to allow a small city to be worth four points, just encourages more small cities. And then the knock on effect is that when you do the fields, the fields suddenly are worth even that much more because people have built more cities. Right. And it also, it makes it, it makes big cities harder to finish. Right. May I interject with a counterpoint?

Sure. I will say you can be wrong. I think a nice thing about having the small cities be worth four points is that at the end of the game, there can be times where you draw a tile and it's not helping you do maybe some of the bigger move you're trying to do, like connect that farm or finish that road, finish that cloister, whatever. And so you look around the board and you're like, I can't interfere with anyone else. I can't join the city. All this is going to let me do is,

yeah, close off a small city. And sometimes those end like your last two turns can almost feel like you're just drawing tiles and placing them and they aren't doing anything for you or anything to hurt your opponents. And there's something nice about being able to get a four-point city at that point that feels beneficial to you in a way that I think a two-point city

doesn't. And so I think it gives the possibility for those last couple of turns to feel not as, like if you don't get the really big thing you want, you're still able to get something that seems more valuable, I guess. Sure, but two points is still better than no points. Yeah, it changes the balance of farmers and cities in other ways, though, because like, you know, when they're worth two points, I might not want

to finish that city. I might not want to do that small city because it's going to give the person who's controlling that field four points at the end of the game. And so it makes me go build somewhere else. But if it's worth four points, to me, or sorry, three points at the end of the game to the farmer. But if it's worth four points to me, well, of course I'm going to finish it. And I think that was the intent of it.

Of the rules change is they want to encourage people to finish things up, but I don't know. I like the incentive of having people want to build decent-sized cities. I think that that adds something to the game. I can't really explain exactly what it is, but seeing people invest in a large city and either or doing it yourself and being able to finish it is like, it's a fun part of the game, and something that you get to kind of fight over and hope that you're going to be able to finish the

city off before the game ends. And I think that when you're scoring four points for small cities, why am I going to ever try to make a big city? Any tile that has more than two city sides is just trash. It's like, give it to somebody else. I don't want it because I'm not going to ever finish that city. And it's only a one-point tile. Right. Okay. I would agree with that. And I'd like the idea about it being worth four points to you and three points to the person who owns the field.

So you're at least netting something positive. I'm not sure I'm convinced, but I do appreciate that. I mean, ultimately, I'm happy to play the game either way. I just think one of them is more right. Okay. Audience, if you wonder what playing games with Greg is like, that comment right there told you everything you need to know. I told you she was a wolf. Right? She's suckering me in with saying how much she agreed with me, just so she can come back and

turn the whole audience against me. No. Editors, note, listen to Megan Beowulf on our January 1st episode. So with that, let's move on to the prompts. The first one waiting complexity on board game geeks scale of one to five. How would you rate the complexity of Carcassonne? Megan, I'll let you start. I rated this a two. I think there's a reason that this is called a gateway game, right? And that means it's easy to learn.

There's there's a reason there's all those memes and jokes and whatever about how painful it is to be taught a board game. Carcassonne is not painful to be taught, which is great. You know, that's great. I think especially the base game is a nice two. I think potentially if you're playing with a bunch of the expansions, maybe you could there's an argument there that it bumps up just because there's that many more mechanics and tile types and let a rookie track

of. But I think as is, it's a two. Okay. Greg, what did you have? I totally agree. Well, with the one caveat that, you know, the first time somebody plays, I think even with the simpler field rules, I've still seen people's eyes glaze over when you're trying to explain to them what area majority is and you know, how it applies to fields and end game scoring, you know. But that's usually just because they don't know the difference between end game scoring and scoring during the game, you know.

But yeah, I mean, it's a simple game to teach and easy to play. You don't have a lot of decision depth. You're just drawing a tile and playing it, right? So and then deciding if you want to put a meatball on it, right? Doesn't get much easier than that.

And there's a reason that like you mentioned, it's, you know, kind of one of the quintessential gateway games of it's the reason that that meatball became, you know, iconic for the whole gaming industry, you know, board gaming industry is that I mean, obviously it's because it's a cool icon and it's because this game was that influential at its, you know, in its peak. Yeah, I also secretly suspect that like Hans M. Glueck mass produced

gazillions of these, right? You've got your four basic colors, your three primaries plus green. And they then started adding them to every other game they possibly could. Hey, but good call. It is a wonderful playing piece. I also had the weight of carcass on down as a two and for largely all the same reasons, right? The four basic meatball placement options are fine.

And if they weren't situational and how they get removed and maybe they aren't really it's when a road gets completed, you pick it up when a city gets completed, you pick it up. But knowing the timing of that is another issue. And so I think it makes it more than just a one. And I think it's a perfect wait for what the game is. So then strategy. How much opportunity is there for strategy and long term planning in this game on the same scale?

Greg, why don't you start us out? I mean, I don't think it's that deep. I would love to rate it a three. I think in like at its peak, it can edge over there, but most of the time it's a two because you just don't have a lot of choice. And that's okay. It's not meant to be a deep game. You know, you can try to if you learn all the tiles, like Megan, you can, you know, try to spoil the game for other people. But wow, just repeated shots fired. You know, it's a two. All right, Megan.

I've read it as a one, actually. To me, I associate planning with this game, and I'm totally willing to be corrected on this. But to me, I associate planning with that kind of if you want to turn Carca's own into like an role playing game and you're imagining that you're the, I don't know, member of the royal family or some sort of lord or some nobility who is constructing cities and roads and whatever and you're trying to plan out what your version of Carca's own is going to look like.

And it's just kind of world building and not really a game. I think that's, you can make a plan for what you want your Carca's own to look like. I don't know that there's any way to actually plan gameplay in this game. I don't see a way to do it. But again, audience, feel free to absolutely destroy me in the forums over that. I welcome it. I will say, I don't think it's planning on that level.

I think it's more planning on, in the sense of like, you want to get in on a farm, you've got to place a tile in a position that you can put a meeple on it that's not connected to the farm, but then in one or two moves can be connected to that farm. So, you know, it's not, it's not long term planning, but it is planning ahead two or three moves maybe. Greg, I'm still surprised that you're letting her slide with audience corrector. But you and I, no, we don't have a shot.

Both times I've stepped up. You have. So, I had this down as a two as well. And for a similar reason that some strategy is required, especially if you're playing the meaner game, and to know what's the best way to utilize that one tile. And yes, Megan, you're right, you're drawing a tile and you're placing it. And, you know, talking and shake doesn't make a difference if you're drawing it at the end of your previous turn. So, you have more time to think about it.

Maybe, maybe not. But I do think that when it comes down to how you're going to deploy your meeples and how quickly you think you're going to be able to recover them and make them available again, I think that ratchets the strategy up to it too. So, audience, feel free to agree with me and let Megan know. So, luck. How much do you think luck plays a factor on same scale one to five?

And by the way, strategy and luck don't have to add up to six. No, they're not, they're not inversely related, perhaps. I actually put this as a three. I know it should probably be a four, but again, I just, I feel like you have control over things. Even though you might not get the tile you want, you always have something you can do with the tile, right? Well, not always, but you often have things you can do with the tile.

And if you're letting the tile you drew, control your game, then again, you're not, you're not playing it, right? You're, you've got to, you know, have contingency plans and, you know, you've got to have, and that's just experience, though. I mean, that's, you know, you get, you get a feel for like, or even count the tiles and you know what's going to come up and what can't come up anymore. And so, you can play that to your advantage. Okay, I can see that.

Greg, just like I want to share your city and the game, I'm going to share your rating here and say that I think this is a three. I think it's luck with higher. I would win more often. So, I think your tile drawn, just like you said, is huge, it's huge, but there is also a skill component. And I know that because I don't win as often as I should, if it was just luck. You don't win 25% of the time. And no. For four player games? Yes. The time for two player games? No, I do not.

Okay. Well, you may have me rethinking my score. I did have it down as a four. And largely because of, it's not just your luck I'm thinking about, but it's also the luck of your opponents. For example, that situation where Greg, you tried to edge, pull out, and then he turned around and drew the exact tile that completed the city and and surrounded his monastery, even though you didn't think that he would be drawing it any time soon, much less the very next opportunity.

Right. Well, and that, and that was a, you know, for raiding it, that was definitely a four luck moment. You know, I mean, that's the kind of moment that makes it feel like, okay, that that's where it feels like a four, but it could have just as easily gone the other way. And it wouldn't have been luck that gave it not didn't give him the tile. It would have been the fact that I made it a harder tile to draw. Right. Okay. So then moving on to theme. How much do you think the

theme has been integrated with this game? Same scale one to five? I'll go ahead. I gave it a two. I didn't feel like it was very teeny, but I did give it an extra point for the meatball because that was pretty amazing. What did you have, Megan? I gave this a one. I think at the base game level, this could be anything. The expansions maybe add a little something to it. And when we played this the other night, we played this in conjunction with heaven and ale.

And so there was like a monk connection. And so there was a discussion of Hey, Megan, it's a theme night for you because apparently that's that's my thing. Were there birds? No, no birds. But yeah, I feel like this could be anything and it would be equally as enjoyable. Yeah, you're probably right. I gave it a two.

And it's more along the lines of what you were saying earlier about how you can kind of imagine, you know, you're building out these farms, you know, you can pretend you're a lord and planning you should. I mean, obviously when we play it, I'm not thinking about that kind of stuff at all. But I do think some people get that from the game. And it's a theme that kind of gives rise to the reasons why you're doing it. Although, you know, I don't understand why the lord's putting thieves on the road.

The locals call the Tolwin, you know, right? Yes, correct collectors or something. Yeah. Okay, that's funny. Although if you look at a map of Carcassonne, there's a teardrop shaped castle in the middle. So at least that part looks similar in some awkward shaped fields around it. I mean, like, it's not strong enough of a connection to make me change my mind on the theme here. But at least that part's mildly similar.

Yeah, I wonder if that maybe was what makes me wonder what the origin of the theme was, you know, if they were making a tile lane game and then thought it, oh, hey, that kind of looks like whatever. Right. I don't know. Maybe interesting to find out. I think this is also one of those games where you often will find pictures on the board game game page of people playing the game in the city. The game was in Carcassonne. Right. St. Petersburg and St. Petersburg sort of thing.

In the year of the dragon, in the year of the dragon. Okay. Now, have you been to any, I've been to Bruges and I've been to Paris for Paris, Paris. I'm trying to think what other board games cities have I been, I've been to New York, I think California and California. Nice. There you go. Does St. Petersburg, Florida count? Sure. All right. Favorite player count? What is the, what is the best player count for Carcassonne, do you think, Megan? Two. I like that head to head fight.

That's what I want. I think when, well, I don't want to get into the negative yet. So I'll just say for the positive, I love, I love the head to head experience. And I checked and I saw how that BGG there people have said that two is the best count. So I think that other people are having a similar experience to me. And I think that's also been mentioned earlier in this pod by the two of you that there is something to the two player experience of this game. And yeah, I just really love it.

Well, you also mentioned that on your PSW plays, you only mentioned really playing against one other person, or at least regularly. Yes. So I agree. I also had two players down, Greg. Same here. I mean, like I said, the most fun I had playing the game was those quick games that I was playing back in the early days of Monday nights. It just, it's all the best parts of the game, especially like if you're playing at equal level,

it's just, you don't really need a third or fourth let alone a fifth player. Right. I will say though that when I played in the against an app, three player was more fun than two player for some reason. Okay. And you can't quite put your finger on it. That was against two bots. Maybe it's because I didn't feel like it was enough of a challenge to play against one bot. Okay. So then least favorite player count. Sticking to the base game here,

not including player counts that might be supported with expansions. What do you have down as your least favorite player count, Greg? Five slows the game down, comes to you. Okay. It's just way too chaotic. I totally agree that chaotic and then even more point sharing. So then the luck is definitely a four. You're a good point. Yeah, absolutely. And suddenly those small cities start making a big difference, right? Yeah. Because you can close them off and take it while it's still yours.

Oh, yeah. You can't feel big in a five player game. You have to, you have to build small. Yep. Greed. Megan. I absolutely agree. Five. I think the only thing I would have to add here is that I think sometimes it can be easy for someone to kind of not be part of the fight and I think there's times where people can be focused on, hey, someone is trying to steal the city from me.

And so I'm so focused on getting that city back or closing it off that I can't go deal with this other, like I can't go try to steal this other person's city. And the other two are in a fight over a farm over here. So they're not, they're also not focused on stopping that person. And so suddenly that person is having the like Disney princess, the birds are singing, there's a rainbow shining on them. And they're just out there building their little carcass own.

And it's like, well, everyone around them is in this knockdown drag out fight. And I don't think that's a great experience for anyone. Yeah, I think that that was part of what happened on Monday night. Dave walked away with the game easily. And I think a lot of it was, he was just doing his own thing and nobody was stopping him. And somebody was stealing my farms. Well, one of my farms. But I know I was, I had two different, because I went for farms early.

And so I was spending too much time defending them, you know, worrying about that. And so that's all I spent half the game on is worrying about farms that when I should have been scoring cities. Oh, that's interesting. Do you think there's an ideal stage of the game when you shift your focus from city building to farms? Absolutely. There's, it's worthwhile to get down on a farm early, but don't over invest.

I mean, because that meatballs not coming back to the end of the it's never coming back, at least if it's on a, if it's on anything else, it can come back. But right on a farm, it's set there for the end until the end of the game. And somebody can steal that farm from you and make that investment completely worthless. Right. So we covered the different scoring rules, which I think also covers the additions.

And we reached a consensus on which edition of the game was the best. First, second, third combo, something different. I don't know about collectors edition with wood tiles. I mean, I'm fine with third is the best, because second technically didn't fix the farm rules all the way. So okay, same. All right. Like I said, I prefer the small city. I know there's been a lot of art, and I will say this, and this was probably goes back to the theme discussion. They all look the same to me.

I know that there's differences, that they all look the same to me. I'm particularly fond of the first edition, or at least the art from the first edition, which carried through to the Rio Grande Games edition that I got. Yeah. And once again, we're talking art by Doris Matos. So we, she had done the original artwork on St. Petersburg and also El Grande. Here's going to be the fun one, expansions. Now we're, we're not going to try to address all of them. There's like over a hundred of them.

We can, we can talk about the catapult though, right? So your favorite one, maybe two, which expansions do you like or love? And are any of them must include for you? So Megan? Okay. So just like telling someone your favorite pizza order, this is my preferred Carcazone setup, is base game with River 2, Inza Cathedral, traders and builders, princess and dragon. That is my preferred Carcazone play. That's what we used to play on BSW all the time. I love the big meeple from Inza Cathedral.

I think that adds a really interesting decision point to the game of trying to determine when to play that. And there is nothing worse than like having that get stuck in a city or something that then someone builds something weird so you're never going to be able to complete that city. And you can't really use that big meeple tactically. And you're just like, ah, and that's, that's fun, right? That's cool when the game does that.

And because I like to play fiercely, the dragon and the fairy from princess and dragon and those volcanoes, they just add such a delightful wrinkle and like having your dragon go out and and eat up other meeples, especially farmer meeples is just, it's maybe the most satisfying thing that can happen in Carcazone. It's so good. So that's me. Was that short enough, Todd? Oh, no, no, it was perfect as I may be leading the witness, but now I'm going to be very interested

in what games remind you of. And I'm hoping for a particular answer there from you. But how about you Greg? I haven't played with a lot of the expansions, so I don't have a ton of depth here, but I have played with ins and cathedrals. I've played a couple times with traders and builders, builders. I liked ins and cathedrals. I think that that does that little extra risk

reward to everything. You know, you double the value of cities or roads and but they're worthless at the end of the game if you don't finish them. And then like Megan was saying about the larger meeple, I like that, you know, being able to like, oh, yeah, I'm, I'm committed to this one. You know, I'm going to finish this, right? Or I'm going to own this and you can't, and you can't take it from me kind of thing. I like those, but I haven't played with a lot of the other things. So it's, I can't

really speak to it. And of course, the river I've played with. I've played with River One and River Two. And yeah, I like River Two a lot. I don't know if it's necessary in a two player game, but I definitely think in a three player game or more, you got to play with that because it opens up the board a little bit. So people aren't just sitting on top of each other and, you know, finishing things off right away. Got it.

Got it. Okay. And Megan, I'm not familiar with the differences between the River One and the River Two. So you called out River Two specifically. Why was that? It forks, it branches off. River One is just a straight shot. You know, I mean, it curves a little, but that that's it. River Two has has two end points. Okay. If I remember it correctly. Your choice. Okay. The set that I purchased had River One, like included in the base game.

Mine too. Same here. I've always played with it and wouldn't imagine not having it be in a game. And I'm in a similar boat with you, Greg. I mean, I've played and enjoy ancient cathedral, ancient cathedrals and traders and builders. And then if you like the meanness, then I've gone as far as the fourth expansion, which is called the tower. And on your turn, you have an opportunity to add a tile to the tower.

And when you do, you can capture other people's meatballs who are connected orthogonally to the tower. And if the tower is one piece high, then it can only capture meatballs that are immediate, you know, one tile away. And if it's two pieces high, two and so on and so forth. And not only do players lose the points that middle people would have scored for them, but they have to pay three victory points if they want to free their meatballs from the tower. So it's an extra level of meanness.

But those are the only ones that I know of. And I really haven't played much with Princess in the Dragon. So aside from knowing that it has a really cute dragon meatball that used to show up in a lot of pictures and people would have there, you know, showing up in other games even. Yeah, I'm looking forward to playing a few times with that expansion added. Do we want to take this time just to talk about this space

idea spawned a family of games? And while we could probably do a pot on any one of them, are there any of the Carcassonne families that you particularly have enjoyed? So this is the same thing as the expansions for me. I just haven't played a lot of the Carcassonne branded games. I've owned hunters and gatherers, but I've never actually played it. So, yeah, I know. I know. It's something that I've been wanting to get to the table. It's still sitting on a shelf. But it's a good one.

I had the opportunity of playing that with our friend Valerie and her husband Mike when they came out to California to visit. And they introduced me to that one. And I thought, oh, that was a really interesting, you know, different take on the base game. How about you, Megan? I should have looked before we started recording. I think I've played hunters and gatherers quite some time ago. Okay. I just once. But I did just this past fall play Miss Over Carcassonne, which is a spooky Carcassonne

variant that is co-op. And both times I played We got trounced. But you can use the tiles in it. I mean, it's a totally different game, but you can use the tiles in it along with a regular Carcassonne set and have to deal with the fact that there's like this mist and ghosts and other things in a regular Carcassonne game. And I love a spooky variant and would love to play more of the co-op game, just because it would be nice to win and not

feel so humble by game. Also to add in some of those mechanics to a traditional Carcassonne game is something that I would like to explore. All right. The other one that I've played that I'll mention is Carcassonne the Castle. And this is a two player game that was actually developed by Reiner Kenizia. So he took the base mechanism of tiling, but then he created the idea of a castle wall frame.

And so all the tiles have to go inside the castle walls, which constrains where you're able to build to. Sometimes when you're up against the wall, that's it, right? You're running out of options. So it's the board doesn't grow as organically as the original game. So most recognizable comparison, what's the highest ranking game that reminds you the most of Carcassonne? And Greg, I'm going to give you the honor of going first.

Oh, good. I'm going to call out something relatively new because I played it first as a computer game and spent more time than I probably should have playing it. But it reminded me of Carcassonne in a number of ways. It's like solitaire Carcassonne. It's Dorfromantique. Oh, yeah. Because, you know, it gives you that feeling of when you complete a big city or whatever. That's what that game's all about. So fun game. Absolutely. Yeah, good choice. Megan, what did you have?

I have a game that I mentioned a little bit earlier, unintentionally. Alhambra, I think that Carcassonne, if we were playing some game where you had to respond to a prompt super quickly and someone said, "Tileling game" or "Tile placement game," the game that would come to 99% of gamers minds first would be Carcassonne, right? It just kind of feels like the the "Tile placement game." And so I feel like that's what I so strongly associate with it.

And so as I was thinking about other recognizable comparisons, I was like, "Are there things I can even think about that don't have tiles? " And it was just no. The answer was no. It feels so intrinsic to me. So Alhambra, just such an enjoyable game. Obviously, you know, there's not that shared field for building the tiles. You're just building your own. But I think a super enjoyable game, another one that kind of has a history has been around a while and has kind of stood the test of

time, I think, for gamers. And I do have some others in mind, but they weren't quite as highly ranked. And maybe you're about to say one of them. So I'm not going to say any of my other thoughts, but I did have other thoughts. I have a couple of backups. So let me get my one out there and then let's see what else you had. So I had Cascadia, right? So placing tiles and then putting something on top of the tiles that based on patterns and

things helped you score points. It was the first one that came to mind when I thought of this, although others also came up later. You didn't say the one I was hoping, and that's fine. We'll get to that in a moment. What else did you have? Oh, the other one I was thinking was, and I'm not sure if I'm pronouncing this correctly, but Attica or Attica. I'm not sure how you should say it. But again, there is that tile placement. Now they're not square, but right. And you are.

It's also a fight, I think, and that is something that I enjoy. So another one, but I know that's just outside of the 750. That's like a thousand something right now on BGQ. But you could have had it for your last recognize, which we'll get to. Yeah, but it still feels recognizable to me. Okay. And that's Attica with a K for those who are interested. So Megan, the one I was wondering, you would say just because of the meanness and you even said volcanoes was downfall of Pompeii.

Oh, yeah. Which, have you ever played it? I don't think of that as a tile lane game. I realized that there's a tile lane component to it, but there's... So the first half of the game, you are building out the city and placing your family members, and then the second half of the game, you're laying lava tiles. It just waited a few weeks ago. I mean, tile lane, meanness, and volcanoes would

have me thinking a different game. And it's not one that I have as my lesser recognizable comparison either, but that would be Mondo, which, you know, okay. Yeah. But yes. I was thinking, I was wondering if Mondo was going to make an

appearance in this podcast. Well, there we go. There you did. What's funny about downfall of Pompeii, at least the version I have, is that the family members are those octagonal cylinders, because when you put a lava tile on one of your opponent's houses and their family members can't escape, you drop their family members into the volcano. And so they're, like, permanently gone. Amazing. And I feel like if they had actually done that with the meatball,

you know, it would have been too brutal. So let's recognize the comparison. What is your game outside of the top 750 that reminds you of Carcassonne and Megan, I'll let you go. So I think there are people who play Carcassonne, and maybe they're listening to the pod right now, and they're thinking, I don't want a fight. I don't want aggression. I just want to be in the French countryside building my little city. And for them, I recommend a gentle rain, which is a lovely

little you can play it solo. You can play with people. It's more experienced than game, but it's very delightful. It's a little puzzle, kind of tiling game that you can play very quickly, very easy to learn. It's a very easy game to travel with, and it's very aesthetically pleasing. It's calm, it's chill. It's everything I don't

want Carcassonne pretty. And if that is what you are looking for, if you're thinking, I would like to place tiles and have it look pretty, and have it be chill, and you were thinking that you could get that from Carcassonne. I encourage you to play a gentle rain instead. Okay. Well, I was never going to come up with that one. Right? What did you ask? I put down, I misspelled it, but I put down Babylonia. Yes. I was trying my best to think, and I feel like there's a game out there that I'm

just not remembering. I was trying my best to come up with something that had that organic growth that you were mentioning. And I couldn't find that, but then I thought about other aspects of the game and went to the more conflict and area control, and getting in each other's way, and all that stuff. And Babylonia has all that in spades, you know. Oh, that's a great pick. Yes, and it has a relatively quick playing time, too.

Relatively quick playing time. And this one, that one supports four players, no problem. Right. The one I picked was another classic by this point from 2003, and that's Santiago. So you're laying the tiles to build out your fields, and you're auctioning off the fields. But the person who comes in last gets to be the canal overseer and gets to determine where the water canal is going to go, and you're trying to get water to your fields, and you can bribe the overseer.

So there's definitely an extra level of meanness and underhandedness that goes with the game. I think it's absolutely brilliant for tiling, and also being completely cutthroat. Which is why, Megan, I said, I would never have thought of a gentle rain, because my mind wasn't even going there. Yeah, I got my puppies and rainbows comparison out with Dorford Mantique, you know, I mean, it's a co-op. And I even had another backup.

If you are looking for something that is more of a game than a gentle rain, which is a game, it's got a listing in DGG. But if you're looking for something that's a little more game, there's one I got this past holiday season and just actually got out of shrink and played this past weekend called Beacon Patrol. And it's a tiling game, you can play solo and up to, I think, maybe four players, and you are exploring as you are laying out your tiles.

Essentially, you're patrolling with the North Sea and checking the buoys and kind of the beacons and the lighthouses are all functioning. So it, again, is very friendly, very chill. It's cooperative if you're playing with more than one person. So again, for people who want Carcazone to be something other than what it is, which is ruthless then. I'm giving you some opportunities here with Beacon Patrol and a gentle rain to have a kind of different experience. Nice. Very thoughtful of you.

So house rules, how would you improve this game? Do you have any ideas here or thoughts or is it perfect as it is? Play a tile, draw a tile immediately. Don't wait till it's your turn to draw a tile. You've just slowing the game down. I agree with that. I also think, as I've mentioned before on the podcast, that you should play what is fun for you. So if some combination of second edition and third edition scoring is what works

best for your group, great do that. If you're like, we want the big needle from instant cathedrals, but not the tiles from instant cathedrals, pick the mechanics and the fits that work for you, play that, celebrate it. Who cares for board game purity? How ridiculous, play what can be it? I mean, I do think it says something about the quality of the backbone of this game that you can do that.

You can tweak the scoring a little bit and it doesn't change the nature of the game so much that it's not still really enjoyable. And you can add large meatballs or the whole expansion and they add different flavor to the game. They might make the game take a little longer. That's my big complaint about the expansions in general, is that it's hard to play fast unless you're already an expert at the base game. But yeah, I mean, the game plays well when you

with and without those. And they just add a variability. Yep, I agree with everything that's been said. So then if this game is being played a game night, what do you want to play afterwards? I put down Isle of Sky. Okay. It's another tile lane game, different flavor to it. And you know, you're building your own little kingdom though. So now you get the experience of trying to plan out your own little kingdom and you get a lot more choices.

But now all those choices come with a nice weighted decision of first off, how much are you going to try to squeeze out of other players for the tiles that you are selling and how much are you willing to pay for the tile you want? Or is it even going to be available by the time it gets around to you? There's a lot of fun decisions there. And the one thing you don't have to worry about like you do in Carcassonne is you never have to worry about somebody else placing a bad tile.

But sometimes you have to place a bad tile. Because it's the only way you can afford. Right. I like that. Megan, what did you have? Well, I did have Mondo. There it is. Just because it is another tile placement game, but speed is so much a factor. And I also think something that I can get swept up in in Carcassonne is that there's something nice about building a pattern. Like there's something nice about seeing the cities get closed off and whatever. But sometimes it's not what's best for you.

But actually having the pattern work for you is what scores you points in Mondo. So you can kind of get that satisfaction in that game. I will say another fun idea is maybe to play like a Paris, Paris, so you're kind of time traveling through France. Yeah. Which I could be a kind of fun theme for a game day. Okay. I thought when you said time traveling, you were going to say something like, I don't know, some of the other games that were contemporary to it like Catan or Trans America.

Oh, right. You know, something along that line where you're playing kind of time traveling back to those early college days of gaming. Or as we've done in the past, a BSW themed game. Yeah. Yeah. I had riffed off of the idea of drawing one thing and playing one thing. And so that would be Kingdom Builder, right? Draw a card and then play on that terrain on the map. And just like Carcassonne, it's so easy to describe and sometimes even be dismissive as to how complex that decision actually is.

And then the game, to me, had surprising depth. So at first, I thought it was really too simple. I'm going to have a card and play it. But suddenly, ideas opened up and getting to the different castles and then getting that special power. I was like, oh, okay, this actually is a lot more interesting than I originally thought. And it opened in a way similar to Carcassonne. What feature of the game still stands out to you? What has aged the best thoughts?

Do you not answer questions first anymore? I can. I'm just curious. This one is rhetorical for me. So it's the Meeple. I don't even have to go beyond that. So for me, it's the Meeple. But I was leaving it out there in case one of you also had that answer. Okay. For me, if you like, I still like this format if you like. But so for me, I think it's just the fact that for such a simple game, you have to think about how you're investing those Meeples and have a conscious plan of what

you want to have happen. You know, you can't just play a Meeple on every tile that you play. You have to really think about like what you're going to do with once you've placed a couple Meeples. Now you've got an investment there. You either need to bring that investment home or if you don't draw the right tiles, you've got to be really careful about what you do with your other Meeples.

And for me, those decisions are still as good today as they were when I first really discovered the game, you know, and there as good as any other game out there and in such a tight package too. All right. I agree, Megan. Yeah. What stands out the most to you? Absolutely, the Meeple. I mean, I can't wait to come on. But also, I think the fight. If you look at the other games of this generation, I don't think any of them have this really head-to-head opportunity to

really push your opponents. And I just think it's exciting is what keeps this game fresh and exciting for me even now. All right. So then what feature of the game do you now look back on and is either disappointing or has lots, some of its luster for you? I mean, I think we all know that there's expansions that we would never consider life, right? There's expansions that have terrible reputations that everyone's like, and I think that kind of thing to the community is very frustrating.

Seeing people kind of make things that are Carcazone that are tarnishing the reputation of the brand of the game. You know, that's frustrating. Catapulting the Meeple. But that's all right, exactly. But that's all kind of peripheral. That's not about actual Carcazone the game, right? To me, there's nothing about the game that is disappointing. But some of that kind of anti-consumer, anti-player Carcazone stuff I didn't love. Okay. I had the feeling of trying to keep track of which tiles have

been played and if I was drawing dead. Like, I can't shake that feeling when I play this game. And I have, I guess the tile inventory is printed on the rulebook, but I have another one that I've printed out as well. And I still, when I play it, I just have to shed that so I can enjoy the game for what it is instead of trying to make it be something that it's not. Yeah, I agree with that.

I think for me, it's the thing that has aged the worse is the fact that ultimately your cane can get can get spoiled by a bad tile draw by not getting a tile that you need. And getting your, you just keep investing your Meeples out there and they never come home. You know, and you can't get the home because you can't get that another road end. You can't get another close, you know, can't close that building, you know, and you're just watching people score at points over and over.

And yeah, you've got a nice long road, but you'd rather have that Meeple back to invest somewhere else. Right, exactly. That's what's age worse. And I think there are games that still have a lot of that cutthroat fight and that tight resource management that play in a short time that have over time, there's been some other options that have come out that also give that. And so, I'm not going to say I'm going to choose those over this, but there's other games to play that do that.

Got it. Yeah, good point. So did this game replace a previous one for you? And I'll just go ahead and say for me, no, because I was getting back into the hobby. Greg, what did you have? No. All right. You know, it was the same here. I was getting back in the hobby. It was a new experience, a new, new type of game that I never played. And Megan? Absolutely the same, same experience.

You know, I mean, asking if Kirk is on replaced another game for you, it almost feels like asking a little kid like, Oh, did the nursery rhyme to replace some other story, you know, like it's just such a burling. This is how you start kind of game. This is one of those games you start with. Yeah, I agree. So it hasn't since been replaced. And if so, by what, Megan? No, I say no. What? No. I say no. I love Kirk's own. I, in our group, you know, it's not like all of

us attend every game night, right? Right. We're adults with lives and other responsibilities and obligations, whatever. And so even if the group is playing a game very regularly, it's not that everyone in the group is playing that game as regularly. And so because of that, we spent a lot of time either teaching or refreshing people on rules.

Man, I could not tell you of the people that were there this past Monday night, how many of us, you know, how long it's been since each individual one of us have played Parker's own. We took no time. Like, I mean, there was a little, a little bit of how are we scoring the two tile cities? And then it was off to the races. And we were able to just play. And even with a member of our group complaining that we were playing this, it was done so quickly. And we were able to

move on to another game. And it's super easy to set it up and put it away. I mean, what a great game for what it is. I had no, it can't be replaced, won't be replaced. Wow. Okay. My drop. How about you, Greg? This one was hard for me to answer, because it's a kind of a little bit of what Megan's saying there that, you know, it still has a place in my collection. It still has a place that I want to play it sometime soon, always, you know, right?

What makes it hard, though, is that I don't play it that often. I mean, when we played Monday night, I had forgotten a lot of the specifics of the rules, like, you know, exactly what is which version has are we playing? And what was that three points for cities or four points per city on a farm? You know, and it's not my go-to game for new players anymore, either. It is a go-to game. It's one of the games I will bring them to. But that said, there's not a specific game that replaced it.

It's just kind of in the pool. It is so in that sense, it hasn't been replaced. It's still in the pool games that I will play with new players or when I want a quick filler. I think that's probably one of the challenges of it, though, is that the people that I end up playing with it aren't the ones that are playing cutthroat and playing it the way that I have most fun. And so, right, and then the people that we do play with tend to want something deeper, longer, meatier. Right.

So, yeah, this is interesting, because I feel like Carcosón has enjoyed a bit of a renaissance here. Let's just overload the pod with, you know, French terms. But I feel like it's been replaced by just about any polyamino tiling game as far as what we would actually play with one of the more recent ones being Wild Tiled West, which was fun and had a fun Western theme about it. Still, there is something that's attractive about the simplicity of Carcosón.

And now that I can have dragons and eat other people's farmers, I really want to do that. While I'm really curious about that miss of Carcosón, that sounds fun. But I will say, though, I think for our game group, Babylonia is probably the current closest to Carcosón that we play that we would actually play on a game night. That's true. That's one that we can often reach to as a nightcap at the end, because it can be played pretty quickly. So, soundtrack.

What music would you want to listen to while playing? So, thanks to Melodice.org, I found an album called This Is Bardcore by an artist named Algo, A-L-G-A-L. And so... Bardcore. I like it. Bardcore, he has taken like common songs and played them on a string instrument or a lute or something like that. For example, Nothing Else Matters is absolutely fantastic when played by a bard. So, take a look at This Is Bardcore.

What did you have, Greg? I went with a YouTuber/ you can find them on, I think, SoundCloud and Bandcamp and Spotify called Medieval Lo-Fi. It's lo-fi music, kind of like Lo-fi girl, but it's all, you know, so it's got a beat like that, but then it's all lutes and zithers and other stringed instruments, you know, with a kind of a medieval vibe to it. It sounds like you feel like you're sitting in a tavern along that road not wanting to leave because the thieves are out there. Nice.

A good story too. Way to keep it on topic. So, that was Medieval Lo-Fi? Medieval Lo-fi. Okay. And Megan, what did you have? I went in an entirely different direction and I have one song that I'm wanting to say here. And this is a song for when someone else gets their stupid people in your city or on your road or they share your farm or steal your farm and you're so mad. And the song I want you to cue up in that moment is called Who Invited You by the Donna's. It's really good.

And it's your way of saying, I don't want you here and I'm not happy about it. All right. I'm going to have to listen to that after we're done recording. Okay. So, rating on Board Game Geek Scale of 1 to 10 now. How would you rate Carca Sone, Megan? It's a seven for me. I'm happy to play it, especially a preferred player count. I think for how long it takes to play for the ease of play that it doesn't take the rule of refresh, that it's so easy to set up and put away.

I think it really delivers at that level. Is it an all-time favorite game for me? No, but I'm always happy to play it. And I will say with my old BSW friend, I mean, I think it's rare that we play games and don't play around with Carca Sone. So, there's also just that affection for it, right? All right. And Greg, what did you have? You know, I want to give it a seven. That was the first thing that I thought of.

But if I'm honest about the amount that nostalgia weighs into that and the fact that it just doesn't hit the table, I have to give it a six. You can talk, Megan. Yeah, be vocal, Megan. I mean, okay. Hold on. Hold on. I'm listeners. I am going to be internet. I'm going to... I'm going to fight Greg on that. No, I'm not going to fight him, whatever. But I want to... I need to look up something more. Okay, hold on a moment. Okay, great.

So, we've talked before that on BGG, they give you a short description for the ratings. And a six is good, usually willing to play. Whereas a seven is very good, enjoy playing, and would suggest it. And I'm curious, Greg, for your six, that usually willing to play means that there could be times where someone else suggests Carca Sone, and you would say, "I'm not willing to play that. " Is that the case? Man, I didn't realize we were going to have to have this kind of scrutiny.

I didn't think we'd have to defend it. Yeah, geez. Judge a little less, why don't you? I wasn't looking at the ratings strictly speaking. I don't know. I think of it more on the level of like, when I'm looking at games that I want to suggest, because it says, "I would suggest it. " It's not a game that comes out of my mouth. It's just... It isn't. And I like it. I would say I'm always willing to play, but I don't suggest it. And it's kind of... It is kind of on that borderline.

Yeah. I mean, I don't suggest it for our group. Well, I'm not saying that's part of the problem. It's like the people that I play with, you know, my family and our Monday night group almost exclusively at this point. Yeah. My family's not interested, and either is our Monday night group most of the time, you know? So it just doesn't hit the table. Now, if we have other family members come over and, you know, we're looking for a game to play, and they want to try something new, yeah,

I'll put that out there. I mean, I know my wife has played it and enjoyed it, and I know it's easy to teach and fun to play. So yeah, at that point, I will, but it just doesn't happen often enough for me to feel comfortable giving it a 7. I'm not advocating for it. Yeah. Okay. I'll allow that. So with that, our final question is... What? Did you rate it? Did I rate it? He's trying to duck out of this question. He's afraid of the making shame he's going to get.

I know. I've got nothing to be afraid of. I haven't even made an edit. I had this down as a 7, so there you go. I'm in the Cool Kids Club. No, but I mean, I think with the right blend of expansions, it could be an 8. That's what I was trying to find from you, is like, in the ideal situation where you could choice pick the components out of the expansions that you really like and play just a two-player game with them. Like, in that ideal scenario, that feels like it's more than a 7. Sure. Yeah.

Right. But I'd say that the game overall is a 7, but Greg, we're going to catch up to what you were saying here on the next one. So is it replayable, and how soon would I want? How soon would you want to revisit the game? There we go. And I had it down as it's definitely replayable as a family game or something that I'm introducing to new players, but I'm afraid it's not going to see a whole lot more play with our specific group. Yeah. So what did you have, Greg? Yeah.

I mean, it's replayable. I've played this game probably hundreds of times. You know, I mean, most of those are going to be an app. Still, I played it. I had fun. I played it dozens of times with real people, and I've enjoyed most of those games, even the one on Monday night with somebody who wasn't happy to be there and somebody stealing my farms. You know, it's still fun. You know, I felt so rusty, you know, and I kind of wanted to play again under other circumstances.

I would have been suggesting a second play because I wanted to it was like, okay, yeah, now I remember. Now I want to play this right, right? But so, yeah, it's replayable. Absolutely. But I don't know how soon I'm going to revisit it. All right, got it. Megan, you and I need to have a Carcassonne night. We do. Hey, I'm in for it. You make it three play. All right. Have your own Carcassonne night. Have fun, you two. Get out of my city. All right, and I'm taking my podcast and going home.

I think it's absolutely replayable. You know, we have a shared tool that Tom rigged up for us, where we can see all of the games that we all own in our game group. And everyone owns Carcassonne except for the person who did not enjoy playing on Monday night. And I was honestly shocked to see that they didn't own it because it just feels like a game you have to own. And I realized they don't like it, but I just somehow expected them to own it as well.

But the fact that, you know, so many of us own it that says something about this game, you know, and our willingness to play it, I think. And so while I don't see our group prioritizing this when there's three, four, five, six of us, seven of us, whatever on a game night, I absolutely see in other circumstances where we're doing, you know, we do special occasion game days or something. And hey, two of us have shown up and are, we're available a half hour before anyone else.

I can see, you know, plopping out Carcassonne and really enjoying it. So I think it is absolutely replayable. Just it kind of depends on the circumstances, but isn't that every game? Yeah, absolutely. It's not every game. By the way, that person you're talking about used to own it. If you tick the switch for previously owned, we don't know anybody getting docs just because they don't like Carcassonne. Right? No, or gave it a six. Yeah.

I own Carcassonne. And so with that, we've placed our final tile and the game is now over sending you an invite to play on BGA, Megan. Perfect. There it is. Hey, thanks for being available tonight, YouTube. That was a lot of fun. I think for our next episode, we're taking a stroll through a forest. We'll see. I'm not quite sure yet. We'll have fun with that. All right. We'll do. Thank you. Thanks, Dad. Thank you for listening to replayable support for our podcast comes from listeners like you.

You can find us online at replayable. fm on Twitter as replayable FM and on Instagram as replayable FM. You can also join our team at patreon. com/replayable. Thank you for your support. We welcome your feedback, which is the only way that we are going to get better. You can get in touch with us via email at feedback@replayable.fm. And if you're interested in sponsoring us, then please contact us at sponsors@replayable.fm. [MUSIC]