Sorry again for messing up that move. I think I did that last time I played!
Quality posting as ever...
My friend Steve *really* likes two player Stone Age. He says it has hidden depths. I haven't tried it, so can't comment for myself.
I found that Stone Age works well with 2 or 3, not just 4. Anna and I played a lot of games with 2.
Just to check the obvious: was your 3-player group playing correctly with the 3-player rules, and only using 3 instead of 4 hut stacks, and restricting the number of players allowed at a resource to 2?
Aye, and verily. It just felt like the end would never come, and that seemed to be the general opinion. The much deeper stacks of buildings seemed to be the culprit. I certainly intend to revisit it...
"The much deeper stacks of buildings seemed to be the culprit."
Um... and you say you were following the rules correctly? Why were the stacks of buildings deeper? Perhaps it behooves your group to read page 3 of the rules again?
"Shuffle the building tiles and place in 4 face down stacks of 7 buildings each. With 4 players, place all 4 stacks on the game board; with 3 players, place 3 stacks; and with 2 players, place 2 stacks"
...and that would be the problem. I'm pretty sure we had stacks of 10/9/9. Well spotted...
Commenting by HaloScan
