I also agree with everyone who said that once you’ve played with add-ons, plain old Settlers isn’t as entertaining. I like Cities and Knights. We have Seafarers too, but in my opinion, that doesn’t add as much to the game as Cities and Knights does. Elbereth is visiting us though, now, and she has pointed out that what we really lack is any of the expansions, so we still have to play on the small board with only one wilderness.

Pinochle anyone??

Not only do we have Cities and Knights AND Seafarers, but we also have the 5-6 player expansions for all 3.

Plus, we have the Settlers Card Game (and 6 expansion decks), Starship of Catan (2-player), Settlers of the Stone Age and Candamir. Beat that!

My only gripe about SoC (aside from my lousy starting position choices) is that it takes forever to set up and put away. I can’t believe someone hasn’t made a tray for all the cards and stuff to fit in. We ended up using little plastic bags that beads come in. Still takes forever.

I almost never win, and if I do, it’s usually because of overwhelming luck. I don’t actually care if I win, as long as I have some fun playing. If someone wins and I only have like 4 VPs, though, I get grumpy.

For the lone naysayer up there, we’ve taken some of the contention out by removing the robber from play. Also, there are lots of opportunities for goodwill with trading. “Oh, your city’s about to be stormed by the barbarians? Sure, I’ll help you build a knight.” I hear other people are a bit more ruthless. *glances accusingly at HP*

But the basic game has gotten a bit stale for us. If we add the Knights expansion, we’re good.

In a way, the staleness of the game is good for us. It means that we can focus on socializing with our friends and family when we play it without worrying about whether we have enough cards to build a city.

It also frees us up to size-up our company. You’d be surprised how much you can learn about people just by watching them play a couple rounds of SoC.

But we’re increasingly moving on to different games.

We found that the game “Lord of the Rings” by Reiner Knizia is a fun one. The unique thing about it is that it’s cooperative (the players play against the board). This probably limits its replay value, but we haven’t had enough chances to play it to get to that point yet.

“Starfarers of Cataan” is another fun one. Just be gentle with the game pieces, as they tend to break easily.

If you’ve got a bunch of people who are sufficiently thick-skinned and of a mercenary mindset, Diplomacy can be a rewarding game (but it is a long game).

But our new favorite is “Puerto Rico.” The board setup and game pieces aren’t much like SoC. Neither are the rules. But the gameplay is similar. Gaming enthusiasts lump this game and SoC into the category of German Games (because the game designers are German and gameplay is similar). There is a very small amount of luck involved in the game – namely, turn order and which plantations you draw. But after that, it’s pure skill.

If you’ve played Settlers a gazillion times, you’ll have no trouble picking up Puerto Rico. And you’ll probably actually like it better than Settlers. I do.

I’d like to try out “Tigris and Euphrates” sometime as well…

If you want game reviews and strategy discussion, check out “Gamegeek.com.” For die-hard gaming fanatics.

P.S. I always liked Risk as a kid, but could never find anyone to play for the simple fact that it was TOO FREAKING LONG. And once a player got eliminated, they had to either sit there for three hours watching the slow painful process of world domination, or they’d just leave and do something else – which just killed the group dynamic. It didn’t help that games could easily take all afternoon.

Well, FYI, the “Lord of the Rings Risk” solved these problems. Each time a player takes a turn, the Ring moves one territory closer to Mount Doom. When the Ring hits the fire, the game is over, and everyone tallies up the score to see who won.

I still prefer other games to Risk generally, but this version is a VAST improvement. And the gameboard is really classy too, which helps.

I think one of the other factors that makes Settlers so engaging is that you’re at least potentially involved in every turn. Games like Monopoly can get very slow while you’re waiting for everyone else to go, especially if there are a lot of people in the game. (This has led to a method of play in our family in which you grab the dice as soon as they’ve hit the board, leading to general chaos but a bit less boredom.) With Settlers, except for those awful games in which your numbers aren’t getting rolled at all, things stay more interesting.

-It is based on an economy, but saving much is very hard to do, and so it presses players into having to make hard choices. This also means that trading is very important. If you could just save till you got 40 resource cards, then sixes and eights would dominate. But you can’t. Your seven sheep are worthless if you don’t use them soon because someone’s bound to roll a seven.

-The mix of different needs and different ways to get victory points means that no one can lock up all of the ways to win.

-Related to the inability to save — the relative values of the resources fluctuate quickly and drastically. This turn you’ve got an ore, someone wants to build a city, and you’re being offered a king’s ransom for your ore. Next turn, someone rolls an 11 and suddenly there’s no more demand for your ore. Again, this creates a trade-now bias that makes the game more fluid. You _can’t_ just sit around and try to maximize the buying power of your resources.

-Everyone’s different needs leads to fun and wacky trades. “Can I turn two lumber into a soldier? Let’s see, she wants a lumber and gives two sheep for it, he wants a sheep, and then if I trade that one for ore . . .” and so forth.

All reasons why it’s a fun game. Plus, as you note, the nice mix of skill and luck.

Perhaps at the next bloggersnacker, someone will bring Settlers . . .

I’m sorry you don’t like Settlers. I can see where you’re coming from, though. It can be hard to not enjoy an activity that your community can make almost mandatory (per Jenny’s comment #11). The one that gets me is camping. I don’t like to camp, but wards where I’ve lived have always had lots of camping activities.

Hi, my name is Ziff. I’ve been a Catanoholic for three years.