Closed 317070 closed 7 years ago
I would love to do this as it is a simplification, but it is unfortunately not that uncommon to have 3 units but no money. It happened multiple times in our last test play.
How about an alternative: the first 2 or 3 units are free?
TBH, even if it happens, it is not a terrible punishment if they need to mute and restart. They end up with the same units, except somewhere else on the map. I would still remove those 2 rules. If #152 is done, it should become even more rare to end up without money.
Solving with another exception ('first units are different than others') I wouldn't do either.
It's not super necessary though, but I feel this is something which could be filed off.
it is not a terrible punishment if they need to mute and restart
They might be occupying a strategic region, in which case it can be vital. In fact, if you take away all coins from seaside strategic regions, you make it very hard for a reviving opponent to be relevant. That person would also become a liability for the team.
Having thought about it, I don't think this will be fun.
Both this and #152 will help with #135, so I'm pro.
I will veto this unless we fix the irrelevant revival concern
How about an alternative: the first 2 or 3 units are free?
Let's do that then? I would pick 3 free units. Design wise it is just a question of shifting the military compared to the coins on the board.
I'm actually worried that coins will become too cheap to the point that money-exhaustion strategies no longer work.
I think it causes more confusion than necessary. Just remove the minimum 3 coins income. If you cannot pay your units, there will be mutiny. Especially after moving around the mutiny but still requiring the units to be paid, I think it makes less sense.
So I would get rid of these 2 exceptions. They resolve eachother, at the cost of an extreme edge case where someone has 3 units and still cannot pay them. From now on, they would be forced to mute and restart. Which is only reasonable and should be extremely rare anyway.
This is also connected to #152 . Although I think it is applicable anyway.