Forum of
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:42    Post subject: Official rule changes, versus the one I would like! Reply with quote

I see the author of the game summy has posted a few rule changes. As stated in my response to the news item, I would be interested to hear what he is hoping to improve/change about the game by altering the rules.

These changes have prompted me to offer up a variation of my own.

I appreciate that this game has some luck involved; people who've played the game regularly have doubtless sat there and groaned as low number after low number, followed by stacks of operators appear relentlessly in the row of ones tiles. This is fair enough, I think, as many decent games rely on a balance of luck and skill.

However, I do feel there is one issue where luck plays too much of a part in the game - and that issue is...


Yes, the equals sign!

See, if I pick up a bunch of low numbers, maybe I can employ them along with the higher numbers on the board to get a half-decent sum.

Or.... if I pick up a lot of operators, again maybe I can use several in one sum and get rid of several of them.

The *key* point about the = sign is that I can only use *one* in each turn, at most.

So, if I pick up a rack with a many = signs in it, then either I'm forced to work with fewer scoring tiles and get rid of them slowly over potentially many moves, or I *have* to exchange my tiles. No alternative beyond those two.

What rule change would I like to see then that might help overcome this situation?

How about if instead of eight random tiles, we are given a random selection of seven operator and number tiles plus *always* exactly one = tile.

This way the game would still have a luck element in terms of numbers and operators picked up, but there would always be precisely one = sign in the rack of tiles to try and make a sum with. Also, there would be no more situations where lots of equals signs are picked up at once, at which point I'm pretty sure most good players must groan and exchange their rack of tiles.

Apologies for the long post! As I've mentioned before, summy is an excellent game which I have enjoyed playing far many more times than is sensible. This issue with the equals sign has been something I've thought about for a while, and decided it might be worth posting my ramblings about it to see what other people think!

Back to top
PostPosted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 22:51    Post subject: =s too many Reply with quote

My first game =s are more than numbers so you need a luck of the draw and good numbers. Rich D
Back to top
PostPosted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 18:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really like that idea!

Better yet, have the numbers and operators as two separate piles, and choose which to draw from, with a minimum of, say, 2 of each required (like the mechanic used in Oregon)
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic All times are GMT + 2 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group