Can we please stop the Friendly Robber BS and get back to real Catan?

[peterawk71]

Over the last couple years this app has evolved so that in every unmatched game, players play Friendly Robber, but everyone plays it differently and it is unenforceable.
"No Robbing until all players have 3."
"No robbing until one player has 3."
"I won't rob you until you rob me."
The optional rule in the board game is "No robbing a player with 2 points", but no one ever plays that version.
In my opinion, this is another example of how play has gone downhill on this app.
Let's play REAL Catan!

[Virsai]

I do wish they'd instill an option to make it a rule or not so there are set guidelines. I'm sick of playing friendly then being hit or not playing friendly and targeted as if I'm the devil. Takes a lot of fun out of the game :/

[peterawk71]

Virsai eredeti hozzászólása:

I do wish they'd instill an option to make it a rule or not so there are set guidelines. I'm sick of playing friendly then being hit or not playing friendly and targeted as if I'm the devil. Takes a lot of fun out of the game :/

Agreed! It would be fine to play if there were agreed upon and enforceable rules.

[Teddykrieger_Michel]

"Friendly robber" is an option since the "Barbarians&traders"expansion (many years old, perhaps many todays players wear "pampers"). A clear rule. A board game ever only could be played if all players agree with all. Which scenario want we play, what options we choose.
My opinion: A good option. The first settlement or first city is the most difficult to get. The player who get it first is a favorite for victory. But it is not good for the game if everyone knows after 5 minutes who will win. Because of that it makes sense if all robb the favorite. At the other side, if someone stay at 2 VP till end, the game is not really funny for him. (I´d never see a "her" with this faith.) Because of that it is better no one can robb 2VP-players.

In every PC-game: Allowed is all the software allows.
In single games I ever choose this options. In custom-matches this option can be choosed if all players want it.
In auto-matches isn´t this option. Sure, per chat it can be arrranged, but, can you trust strange people? I didn´t chat. Because the others robbed me, or if I dice 7 first, I know they would robb me, I robb them also they have 2 VP. Same rights for all.
But if someone have 3 VP, I robb him/her. I ever robb the first. Why? I want to win. And I do. With this policy.

Little story: In a tournament game after 20 minutes all were at 2 VP. Because most of the time 7 was diced. I wasn´t able to stop laughing. Then, I diced 7, and put the robber back in desert. All were happy. It maked no sense to do that, but I had to done it. :)

[peterawk71]

Teddykrieger_Michel eredeti hozzászólása:

"Friendly robber" is an option since the "Barbarians&traders"expansion (many years old, perhaps many todays players wear "pampers"). A clear rule. A board game ever only could be played if all players agree with all. Which scenario want we play, what options we choose.
My opinion: A good option. The first settlement or first city is the most difficult to get. The player who get it first is a favorite for victory. But it is not good for the game if everyone knows after 5 minutes who will win. Because of that it makes sense if all robb the favorite. At the other side, if someone stay at 2 VP till end, the game is not really funny for him. (I´d never see a "her" with this faith.) Because of that it is better no one can robb 2VP-players.

In every PC-game: Allowed is all the software allows.
In single games I ever choose this options. In custom-matches this option can be choosed if all players want it.
In auto-matches isn´t this option. Sure, per chat it can be arrranged, but, can you trust strange people? I didn´t chat. Because the others robbed me, or if I dice 7 first, I know they would robb me, I robb them also they have 2 VP. Same rights for all.
But if someone have 3 VP, I robb him/her. I ever robb the first. Why? I want to win. And I do. With this policy.

Little story: In a tournament game after 20 minutes all were at 2 VP. Because most of the time 7 was diced. I wasn´t able to stop laughing. Then, I diced 7, and put the robber back in desert. All were happy. It maked no sense to do that, but I had to done it. :)

LOL
Of course, I am only speaking of Automatch games — I know it is an option in custom matches.I have no problem with the REAL Friendly Robber rule, if players agree.
The rule is "No robbing a player with 2 points".
In the board game, you can block but not rob a player with 2, but online, if you choose the option, you can neither rob nor block.
I am fine with players agreeing to follow THAT rule.
"No robbing until all layers have 3, though"?
No....just no.
It defeats the point of the rule which is to stop the early leader getting too far ahead, as you said.
So, a player can have 7 points and the others 2, but you can't rob the one with 7? Or if you do, he can rob you even though you are still at 2?
This results in the OPPOSITE of the intent of The Friendly Robber Rule, as the player with the early lead gets farther and farther ahead.
Sio I have come to believe that in Automatch games playing without the Friendly Robber is the only sensible option.
I am asking players at the start of each game if they are ok to play No Friendly Robber:
I am trying to start a trend!
Usually they don't look at chat of course, and so if I rob on the first seven, I will be gang robbed all game.
I have noticed that Friendly Robber is now expected, even though the way most play it (as I said above) makes no sense. Many games are ruined because of it (as I also said above).
No one seems to care though, and toxic chat is mostly accepted and even expected.
"You robbed me, ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥"...the common refrain...
I have lost many games lately, due to trying to get back to sensible Catan. Players think I am being a jerk and rob me all game.
But, my quest is a noble one - if likely, futile.
Like Don Quixote I will continue to tilt at windmills in an attempt to "Make Catan Universe Great Again!"

[Teddykrieger_Michel]

peterawk71 eredeti hozzászólása:

In the board game, you can block but not rob a player with 2, but online, if you choose the option, you can neither rob nor block.

Sorry, but that´s not right.
A 2VPplayer can´t be blocked. It´s not allowed to put the robber on a hex with a settlement or city of a 2VPplayer.
In "Seafarer" it isn´t allowed to put the pirate on a sea hex with a ship of a 2VPplayer. (But it is allowed to put the pirate on a sea hex without a ship, and at the right place you can block the way.)
If you don´t believe an old veteran - look here: www.catan.de (This side is also in english.) Many questions and answers. And much other about .

[peterawk71]

Teddykrieger_Michel eredeti hozzászólása:

peterawk71 eredeti hozzászólása:

In the board game, you can block but not rob a player with 2, but online, if you choose the option, you can neither rob nor block.

Sorry, but that´s not right.
A 2VPplayer can´t be blocked. It´s not allowed to put the robber on a hex with a settlement or city of a 2VPplayer.
In "Seafarer" it isn´t allowed to put the pirate on a sea hex with a ship of a 2VPplayer. (But it is allowed to put the pirate on a sea hex without a ship, and at the right place you can block the way.)
If you don´t believe an old veteran - look here: www.catan.de (This side is also in english.) Many questions and answers. And much other about :cubrock:.

I'm speaking of the base game only.In the base game, using the Automatch option there is no "official" way to play Friendly Robber.
I don't play the expansions.
Nothing but the "classic" for me.
Enjoy your variants!

[Teddykrieger_Michel]

"Friendly robber", "harbour master" (or "port master") are variants, part of the "Traders&Barbarians"-expansion (copyright 2007 KOSMOS Verlag, licence Catan GmbH, Autor Klaus Teuber). Variants you can use with the most scenarios, also the base game.
In this RL-moment I hold the game guidance in my RL-hands.
At the Catan homepage you can download all rules, also in english.

"Paper is patient". If all players agree, they can play how they want. In PC games are the possibilities limited by the software. P.e. it is not possible to play until more VP.
If a group of people often come together to play , its possible to make agreements. Also it´s possible in Custom matches.
But in auto match, with hundred thousands strangers from everywhere, this makes no sense.

I don´t take pleasure in the behaviour you describe. In my CU time I saw rare that at the beginning the players don´t attack another. Most times was hard fight from beginning. The behaviour you describe is a reason for me to don´t come back to multiplayer.
I would like an option/filter to play automatch with friendly robber. But if it´s not a part of the rules, it´s ok to rob 2VP players, until one of the opponents have more.

I only hate it, if all players without one have more than 2 VP and they rob the only with 2VP. In one game they do that with me, and then, the rest of the game my behaviour was "toxic". (Most times I was a friendly player.)
My strategy was and is to rob the player with most VP, and with this strategy I had much success.
Unfortunately many others do that. They think: "This player has brick, if I rob him, perhaps I get it." My strategy is better, "success give right".
I also often had your "Don Quichote"-feeling. But when at the end it called "CosMichel wins", I was indemnified.

[permanent666]

Playing the robber too early can destroy someones game and can make the game one sided and boring. Especially if a lot of people lost their cities after the first barbarian invasion I tend to not use the robber. Also if I am clearly in the lead I avoid using the robber or cards which will damage weaker players.

[Teddykrieger_Michel]

permanent666 eredeti hozzászólása:

Playing the robber too early can destroy someones game and can make the game one sided and boring. Especially if a lot of people lost their cities after the first barbarian invasion I tend to not use the robber. Also if I am clearly in the lead I avoid using the robber or cards which will damage weaker players.

You are really a friendly person. But many would rob city-loosers. If all other players would loose their cities, I would rob the one with 3 setllements, or if all have 2, the one with most knigths, the most streets, ressources, short the strongest of the weak.
Surely you know: You can loose your city at begin and can win the game.

[sirkel_a]

this version is just fu*ked anyways- the people who grab your money for buying this crap are the utmost despicable humans. Up there with Pol Pot and Julius Ceaser