Difference between revisions of "Scoring: A Historical Perspective (1st edition)/en"

The '''1st edition''' rules were scored from the perspective of the cities themselves: that is, you picked a city, and counted the number of farmers on all the farms touching that city. The player with the majority of those farmers scored 4 points. Then play moved on to the next city.

{| cellspacing="10" style="border-collapse: initial;"

|- valign="top"

{{ColorBlue|Blue}} has the majority of fields around this city.<br />

{{ColorRed|Red}} scores no points.

There are 3 fields around this city.<br />

{{ColorRed|Red}} scores 3 points.

There are 3 fields around this city.<br />

{{ColorBlue|Blue}} scores 3 points for each farmer = total 6 points.

]]

While 3rd edition rules have been used in Germany since 2002, [[Rio_Grande_Games|RGG]] initially chose to stick with the 1st edition rules. The usual arguments for this decision revolved around consistency (it would confuse people to change the rules) and authenticity (1st edition rules are the ones that won GotY, after all).

None of this was really a problem — although it did generate heated discussion — so long as players were informed about the two possibilities and agreed on which to use...

The release of the fifth major expansion — [[Abbey and the Mayor (1st edition)|Abbey and the Mayor]] — may well have been the decisive factor. It was nearly inevitable that at some point [[Hans_im_Glück|HiG]] would release an expansion which would simply be incompatible with 1st edition farmer scoring; and here we have an expansion that potentially simplifies farmer scoring at the end of the game if you're using 3rd edition rules, but will easily double the complexity if you're still using 1st edition rules. I'll explain.

Compare that with the effect of the barn if you're using 3rd edition rules for everything: the mechanic is consistent, there should be fewer farmers in play (and so less counting) and fewer wars for the majority. The barn should actually simplify the game... This is all purely speculative, of course, but my feeling is that this was the catalyst behind [[Rio_Grande_Games|RGG]] abandoning the 1st edition rules in favour of those of the 3rd edition. My advice to players has always been to move to 3rd edition rules anyway—they're simpler, and allow you to play the expansions as intended. And there's very little excuse not to change now that all publishers have adopted 3rd edition scoring.

Initially, small cities were also scored differently than they are now. With the original release of the game, completed small cities (defined as a city made up of only 2 tiles) scored only 1 point per tile and pennant instead of the usual 2 points per tile and pennant. Thus, a small city would score only 2 points total. The intent was to penalize players for completing such an easy feature and to decrease the number of cities that would produce farming points at the end of the game. However, more exceptions to rules makes for a more complicated game, and in 2002 (the same time as the switch to 3rd-edition farm scoring), the special rule for small cities was eliminated. From this time on, all cities were worth 2 points per tile and pennant (plus or minus the effects of other features such as Cathedrals and Sieges). This notably changed some of the strategy of the game, as a small city now produces a reasonable number of points for minimal potential effort, and this can accelerate the number of cities on a farm, which can lead to very high-scoring farms at the end of the game.

* '''2000:'''

[[File:Scoring_History_C1_Example_02.jpg|300px|thumb|none|The back of the box from the original English edition of Carcassonne. Notice that the 3 farmers are standing up. Additionally, the scoreboard depicts gray cobblestones and counts above 50.]]

[[Category:Completed]]

[[Category:First Edition]]