Talk:Catan

message: The amount of information coming for the 360 version of Catan was becoming unweildly, so it made sense to give it its own article: Catan. JAF1970 20:20, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS. Especially since it has achievements, upcoming rules, unique AIs which will be given names, etc. JAF1970 21:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Image that accompanied this topic on the page was marked for speedy removal, and has been removed. GnomeWorks (talk) 23:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Xbox 360 of Catan given own article

message: There should be a strat section. Other game entries have them. JAF1970 19:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Strategy sections violate WP:NOR and WP:V unless you can source them (ie. we can only reference existing published strategy guides from reputable sources).  And WP:BTG is somewhat against strategy sections by that principle. kelvSYC 07:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Strategy section

message: We need a section for after-market addons like the YuCatan Custom Board like the one now available commercially.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Todobemcara (talk • contribs) 21:15, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: After market section

message: Someone has deleted references to the online jsettlers game and the open source Sea3D. These are valid links, and should not be deleted.--Bcnstony 07:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Those aren't references; they are links to pages not about The Settlers of Catan, but rather about apparently non-notable unlicensed computer implementations of the game, and IMO WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. -- JHunterJ 11:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A number of people on this discussion board have already mentioned sea3d and jsettlers as worthy of inclusion. Concern about confusing licensed with non-licensed versions is valid, so I have included links to these games at the bottom, under External Links - Non-Licensed Versions. I hope this satisfies what appears to be the dual goals of providing a reference to these versions with the desire to have then not listed alongside official, sanctioned implementations.--Bcnstony 21:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They skirt too close to WP:SPAM, and at best are only indirectly related to the subject of this article, the non-computer version. -- JHunterJ 23:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am confused by your definition of both SPAM and indirectly related. Unlike the XBOX game, these games attempt to derive no profit, making the SPAM argument questionable. Additionally, these games are complete implementations of Settlers of Catan, in every detail, except that they do not have the same name for legal reasons. I nominated that we either add these, or remove the links to the XBOX version under your argument of WP:SPAM. Additionally, I would like more people to comment on this issue, as I am beginning to feel that decisions are being taken unilaterally by a single user, despite multiple users on this discussion page commenting on both jsettlers and Sea3D.--Bcnstony 00:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia spam doesn't require a profit motive; see WP:SPAM. If they are not Settlers of Catan games (whether for legal reasons or not), then IMO they don't belong on the Settlers of Catan article.  Agreed about the XBox version, though. -- JHunterJ 02:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To answer your concerns about unilateral actions, I fully support JHunterJ in removing these links. Percy Snoodle 12:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

text: JHunterJ, I believe that you're referring to EL3, links that exist to promote the site. I don't think these fall under that category: they provide a way for people to familiarize themselves with the game without having to pay first. It wasn't until after I spent some time on Sea3D that I actually wanted to start buying the game -- the Card game that I had initially bought didn't grab my interest, and the last similar game I bought, El Grande, was way too complicated. After I learned the rules playing online, though, I bought my own copy of Settlers, and plan to pick up a couple more expansions this summer.--SarekOfVulcan 03:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are confusing "exist to promote the site" with "exist to take business away from the legal owner".  That, in your case, the software did not take business away from the legal owner does not change whether the links exist to promote the site. If there were a site "www.buyalegalcopyofsettlerstoday.com", it would still be inappropriate to add the link here to promote it.  If the unlicensed version(s) are notable, create WP articles for them and Wikilink them from this article instead.  So far, none have been notable enough. -- JHunterJ 06:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's got nothing to do with whether the copyright holders "like it" or not.  Wikipedia is not a place to advertise online services, even one with a few thousand users. Percy Snoodle 10:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So then take out the info about the comercial versions that are officialy licenced.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.124.240.82 (talk) 11:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: You misunderstand Wikipedia's guidelines on WP:SPAM -- it doesn't have to be for-profit. See also WP:EL for guidelines on external links and WP:AGF for guidelines on assuming good faith. -- JHunterJ 10:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia may exist to make information available, but spam links don't count as "information".  Anyway, if a user is seeking out computer implementations of a game, they're only a click away via the BGG link. Percy Snoodle 11:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Quelt42, please see WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NOT#DEMOCRACY. The goal is not to make all information available to people, but rather to compile previously written, verifiable facts (which the unlicensed site does not provide).  There are reasons for not linking the unlicensed, unnecessary site, because Wikipedia is not a collection of links.  And please sign your comments by using ~~~~ -- JHunterJ 11:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted References

message: I was thinking that it would be a good idea to create a new article titled Settlers of Catan (series) and make this article just about the original game.  I'd be glad to do it if people support the idea. -Chunky Rice 16:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would keep the expansions and editions info here, but the rest of it looks worthy of its own article. --Rindis 17:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a rough version of the proposed article here:  User:Chunky Rice/Sandbox - Settlers of Catan (series).  Feel free to comment or improve it.  I just need to clean up a few more entries and add some cites and I will move it to the main article space. -Chunky Rice 18:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at that article, I think List of Settlers of Catan games or List of Catan games would be a better title; but the content looks good.  It would be worth adding the word "official" somewhere in the lead sentence to make sure the article doesn't end up being farmed for exlinks. Percy Snoodle 10:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  good work, you have my vote Feroshki 01:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Settlers of Catan (series) 

message: Seems to be a lack of citations on this article, in particular I cannot find confirmation of the Nintendo DS version being announced for 2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.195.140 (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources/Citations

message: The fourth English edition has renamed the expansions to "Catan: Seafarers" and "Catan: Cities & Knights" (which are closer to the style of the German, I believe). The logo has "Catan" in large type, then below it separated by a rule, "Seafarers" in smaller type. All other references on the box and manuals use the style "Catan: Seafarers" with a colon. I suggest the relevant articles and other references be changed to "Catan: Seafarers" or just "Seafarers" as appropriate. --KJBracey (talk) 12:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: When (if) those become the WP:COMMONNAME, sure.  Until then, they don't need to change just because the boxes did. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New names for expansions 

message: I expanded the info on this game. In particular, I made it clear that the game isn't available for sale any longer and that the reason for this is that Microsoft withholds it, only offering the version that requires MSN. 
At the same time I moved the images around a bit so the header "Video Games" got left justified (and not squeezed between two images reducing readability). I used bold to separate the three main sections of the video game section, feel free to reformat if there's an established Wiki way to do this. 
I am aware the list of settlers games reproduces some info on each game, including this one. But I haven't changed that page - better then to await Catan: the computer game getting its own page and then moving all info there instead. 
Cheers,
CapnZapp (talk) 15:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catan: the computer game 

message: Checking with WikiScanner, it was learned that Microsoft Corporation was the one who put the information about the Microsoft Catan Products up to begin with and has made more than 150 edits on Wikipedia. There were also a number of electronic and computer companies who likewise have been involved. Using Wikipedia to push an agenda and to remove content that could compete with that agenda is against the rules. 
The only people who are participating in the deletion of content are not users, but companies. For example, the most recent change in deleting content was made by "Performance Systems International Inc (Brookline, Massachusetts)" and other companies, such as "Beethoven Pc Support Services (Melbourne, Victoria)" (aka Percy Snoodle)
While yes, it is possible that in some cases, someone within a company acted on his or her own using a company computer as an individual, for a Microsoft Computer to focus on it's products, and for only computer related companies to focus on the deletion of information about any Non Microsoft Computer product is suspicious to say the least. 
People need to know this is going on.
http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/f.php?pagetitle=settlers+of+catan  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.25.28 (talk) 18:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You state one thing (Microsoft put info on Catan here) and then leap to another implication (the removal of content).  I am not a company, and I participate in the deletion of content here, so I disagree with your claims. And if Percy happens to edit from some support services office, that doesn't make him a company, and it certainly doesn't make him Microsoft.  Your suspicious are far-fetched. -- JHunterJ (talk) 23:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, he's right, he's got me.  In my capacity as a shill for Microsoft, after I've worked for nine hours here in Cambridgeshire, UK, I get on a twenty-four hour flight to Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.  There I go to Beethoven support services, which is really a front for Microsoft's German Board Game Wikipedia Article Editing Division, log in and ruthlessly delete non-Microsoft content.  Then I get on another twenty-four hour flight to come home and sleep for eight hours.  I do that 65 hours a day, five days a week.  Either that or, and please don't think I take this option at all seriously, some random IP editor doesn't know how to use wikiscanner.  Sheesh.  Percy Snoodle (talk) 08:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Corporate Participation in this Article

message: I have wood for sheep.  Ok...immature but I couldn't resist.  Unrelated:  Would a basic strategy section be appropriate?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.32.227 (talk) 06:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Important news

message: You're joking but I don't think it's a joke! I think they specifically changed the name of the resources by now anyway: ore, lumber, wool, brick, and wheat.  Should that be checked and edited?  The "I've got wood for sheep!" was a not-uncommon cry during the game and it was embarrassing.  204.92.65.10 (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Resource names

message: Please see :commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Settlers of Catan images.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  15:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion of images

message: Quoting from Gameplay section.  "The players in the game represent the eponymous settlers."  Why use eponymous there? All it does is make you have to think for a minute what that sentence means.  In fact, in all fairness, the entire first section is confusingly written.  I'd rewrite it but I've never played the game -- was just trying to get a basic sense of how it works, but that didn't happen.  Sorry to be a Debbie Downer, but the point of this stuff is to introduce concepts clearly, not to use fancy words. 173.51.249.200 (talk) 04:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Unnecessary use of 'eponymous'

message: I'm not familiar with this game, but Wired magazine has a feature article about it. Perhaps it will prove a useful reference, especially about Teuber's invention of the game. K8 fan (talk) 03:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wired magazine article on this game 

message: I would think people looking this up would like to know they can play it online at BrettSpielWelt. I know I'd want to know that. 68.167.161.182 (talk) 03:36, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's notable (if the ability to play SoC on BSW has been covered in a reliable source), then we should add it. But we'd like to find that source first. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: BrettSpielWelt

message: I love board games in general and love Catan in particular, but the introductory paragraph about the game mechanics is unusually positive and makes unwarranted statements. I'd suggest removing the paragraph entirely.
The original paragraph: "The game has rapidly become popular in part because its mechanics are relatively simple, while its dynamics are quite complex.[4] The game is well suited for family play, since at no point in the game is any player eliminated, and players who are behind can strive towards goals that are within their reach."
# The game mechanics are NOT relatively simple. While I have introduced the game to many people and have become better and better at explaining it over time, it's a very complicated game and requires substantial explanation. Particularly when adding in the expansions. I know it's a sourced statement, but it's wrong. It's more complicated than almost any mainstream boardgame. It only becomes relatively less complicated when compared to niche games like Arkham Asylum.
# The assertion that the game is well-suited for family play reads like an advertisement, and if not wrong is certainly debatable. Game conditions often "box out" one or more players - they can't build the roads outside a small area, they lack a crucial resource, etc., and there is sometimes little that can be done. While I don't think it's necessarily bad for families, the assertion that it's good because players are not eliminated doesn't seem to be logical.
# It also says that players who are behind can strive towards goals within reach - but there aren't any other goals to strive for! It's a point-based system and the one with the most points wins.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.110.195 (talk) 06:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introductory Paragraph on game mechanics - just plain wrong? 

message: Is it just me, or is this game also called Hexagon? Itscalledhexagon (talk) 13:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's obviously just you. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:31, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Hexagon

message: 60 to 90 minutes seems very much on the long side.  Most people I know are finished in 45 to 60 minutes.  And ten minutes for setup is also rather long.  Where did those information come from?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.200.22.2 (talk) 01:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Playing Time and Setup

message: In the manual p.15 , extension would refer to the 5-6 player variations where expansion would refer to the 3-4 player gameplay variations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tombcinchy (talk • contribs) 01:23, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension, Expansion 

message: Just wondering whether people think Catan should redirect to this article as the primary topic for the term, with the current Catan article moving to Catan (2007 video game)? I'm not familiar with the game but the board game seems like the most common usage of the term. --Muchness (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes and done. Reywas92Talk 21:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect [[Catan]] to this article?

message: Does someone knows variant of the game (can be added in the article?) for two player rules? How can they be valued, statistical analyses maybe?
I have developed a variant for 2 players trying to reusing all the 4 players game rules, i tested it on over 50 games but still i cannot produce a proof that they are valid, plus it should be recognized as original research, nothing good for the wiki article i suppose. Anyway for who is interested (i don't like who said 'i did this about this problem' without sharing) i'm writing them below. Pier4r (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 players rules variants 

message: Here i use color or colors meaning the faction that is playing and not the player (because in a 1on1 each player controls two factions).
* For the first two turns (that is: each color will play two times) the robber can't be triggered, so a roll of seven means: re-roll.
* The robber can't be placed again in the same hexagon if a seven is rolled.
* Both the development cards or the ports (if the color just builds a colony attached to a port) can be played/used in the next turn of the color after their construction. In one turn a color can play one development card (except victory points). Moreover if a settlement is built by a color it cannot be upgraded to a city in the same turn.
* At the start of the game the colonies can be placed only on crossroads where 3 roads intersect, so no all ports at the start can be directly used.
* Each player will play two colors as they were independent (except for trading, we will see this after). So, at the start, when the players set the cycle of colors during the turn, the player that will play first will play as first and as third (deciding which color is first and which is third), the player that will play as second will do the same, playing as second and as fourth. The placement of the colonies and so on will follow the original rules for the game with four players.
* Remember that even if a player controls two colors each color is independent of the other and can block the other color as well, as they were enemies or better 'selfish' allies (so the player should be careful in the developing of the game). If a player that control two colors has both with a road of seven segments, no color gets the reward "the longest road". Because it is like that the color are allied but not willing to let the other color "took prizes just to win the war". So the player should play carefully to not play against himself.
* The trading between the colors of the same player is without costs, but since each color is independent the benefit of a port of the color A can't be shared with the color B (in the case that both are controlled by the same player) if the color B is playing (that is: except for the trading cost, you follow the rules of catan with 4 players).
* Victory conditions: the player that reaches with a color 10 or more points wins if and only if the other color that is under his control has at least 5 points (else the game continues), and, to raise the difficulty (just try and see) you can require that the other color needs 6 points at least (instead of 5). Warning if a color reaches ten or more points, it becomes inactive, that is:  it doesn't collect any new resource  as if the game is ended with four players (but the color with 10 or more points can use the remaining resources and trading with the ports); else a player can just develop one color to help, afterwards, the other.
* Settlements or roads can be built only if there is a clear conjunction with a previous settlement of the color. A road or a city, of a given color, can be built, following the basic rules of the games, only if the place of construction is directly connected with (at least) one existing road of the same color that is not interrupted by any other color (the allied color is not ok). That is: (i) all the segments of the road are connected each other as the game requires; (ii) the road is connected with at least one village/city of the color (from which the resources, to build the new structure, come) and there is no village/city of other colors that stands between two segment of the road and that is nearer to the construction site than any other village/city of the color itself (it is like that if there is a village/city of another color, this city stops all the traffic to the construction site. Even if the other color is an allied color).
* Handicaps: if a player is too strong the other can get a bonus (don't look down to handicaps/bonus, the point of a game is have a challenge and not won with ease / lose without hope). For example: a player can place, at the start, cities instead of villages for each 2nd choice of each color. Still getting one resource card for every adjacent hexagon at the very start but, during the game, having since the start a city for each color. Another alternative can be place a city instead of a village for the 2nd choice of the 2nd managed color of the player (this because the 2nd choices for each color normally can use spots that are not so good as the 1st choices, and the 2nd managed color place the 2nd choice before the 1st managed color so more good spots are available). And so on, you can test out your own bonuses/handicaps.
* Suggestions to define the best player: the two players should play 4 subgames, rotating the colors sequence. This to allow a better distribution of the result of the dice, because in some games the dice can show very few "probable" numbers. So if the first subgame sequence is red, blue, white, yellow , then the second subgame sequence will be blue, white, yellow, red (or the alternative shift, i mean yellow, red, blue, white), the third subgame will be W, Y, R, B (or the accordingly alternative shift) and the last subgame will be Y, R, B, W (or the accordingly alternative shift). Each subgame is assigning one point, one entire point to who has more highest score at the end of the subgame (as sum of victory points of each controller color) or half a point if the subgame ends and both players have the same score. Who has more points at the end of the four subgames, wins. In case both players have the same score (for example 2-2) a tiebreak can be applied, like the following. In every subgame each player has a certain percentage of the total sum of victory points, for example if in the 1st subgame the player, for now called P1, with Red and White makes 17 points (remember: the minimum is 15) and the other player, P2, makes 12 points; then the percentage of P1 in the subgame is 17 out of 29, where 29 is 17 (from P1) plus 12 (from P2). Then in the second subgame P1 (always controlling the same colors) makes 14 points and P2 (again, controlling the same color of the 1st subgame) makes 15 points; in the 3rd subgame P1 makes 16 points and P2 makes 14; in the 4th subgame P1 makes 11 points and P2 makes 18 points. Then the sums are: P1 = 17/29 + 14/29 + 16/30 + 11/29 ; P2 = 12/29 + 15/29 + 14/30 + 18/29 ; where P1 = 862/435 < P2 = 878/435 , therefore P2 wins the tiebreak.
Pier4r (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  A variant for 2 players 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Catan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.profeasy.de/Settlers_Boardgame/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080420084955/http://www.originsgamefair.com/awards/1996/list-of-winners to http://www.originsgamefair.com/awards/1996/list-of-winners
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130119180403/http://mayfairgames.com/goody.php?id=351 to http://mayfairgames.com/goody.php?id=351
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've deleted the section on online tournaments. Most board games have tournaments and without citations for why the listed tournaments are particularly notable from independent sources (i.e. not the tournament website), I don't think they should be included. 71.162.2.195 (talk) 07:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online Tournaments 

message: I temporarily downgraded this to the C class due to numerous problems. Numerous paragraphs comprise merely one sentence, with refs to the company, not independent, secondary sources, including:
"Catan: Explorers & Pirates, the fourth large expansion, was released in 2013. which introduces new elements for the game including moving ships, new resources, and pirates.
The Catan line was rebranded in 2015 for the 20th anniversary of the series, with the original Settlers game renamed simply Catan."''
Cn tags are common, e.g.,
"1995: Spiel des Jahres Game of the Year[38]
1995: Deutscher Spiele Preis 1st place[citation needed]
1995: Essen Feather[citation needed]
1995: Meeples' Choice Award[citation needed]
1996: Origins Award for Best Fantasy or Science Fiction Board Game[39]
2001: Origins Hall of Fame[40]
2004: Hra roku[citation needed]
2005: Gra Roku Game of the Year[citation needed]
2006: Games Magazine Hall of Fame[41]
2015: GamesCom Vegas Game of the Century[citation needed]"
The video game section is poor in prose, with sections only one paragraph, and numerous CN tags. The tournaments section is reliant on either its own website or the unreliable Mashable (with no consensus and generally unreliable according to RSP at this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Mashable. I will try to cleanup and would candidly appreciate if contributors could also fix those issues. Many thanks. VickKiang (talk) 02:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  C Class 

message: I propose merging  Catan: Traders & Barbarians into Catan. I tried to cleanup that article, but found that GNG isn't met. The first ref is a non-significant listicle (but an RS from IGN）, the Dicebreaker one is generally to marginally reliable (see BTG WikiProject Sources), and might be SIGCOV, but it's more like a rule overview. The third ref is equally questionable. Comic Book Resources and  Polygon (website) have trivial mentions, there are also single-sentence mentions: 1, 2, but they aren't significant. I'd probably take this to AfD, since at best, there's only one (barely significant or reliable) ref and other very trivial mentions, GNG isn't met. But given if this is at AfD, its similarity to Catan would probably result in merging. I am also pinging  and , active contributors to BTG related articles; and , who's involved in in the Catan article and sometimes in the BTG WikiProject, many thanks for your help! VickKiang (talk) 22:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge to List of The Settlers of Catan products, which already has a brief blurb about it and a link to this page. There's so much unsourced content here that simply redirecting to the target might be preferable. Mindmatrix 23:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your reply, I think that's probably a better target. VickKiang (talk) 00:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks, I probably agree that the list's a better target. The dice game seems borderline notable, IMO Pyramid is an excerpt, and is a full review (SIGCOV), same with Rebel Times. So I won't nominate it for AfD, and support (very weak) keep. VickKiang (talk) 08:31, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

text: *Comment - there is a reception section now, if that helps. BOZ (talk) 02:05, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks, but they're non-RS. At best, they are marginally reliable, no indication of editorial expertise, sadly. VickKiang (talk) 05:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal from [[Catan: Traders & Barbarians]]