3- and 4-player table focus?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

I wonder if anyone ever tried to organize a tournament or during a vtes
night with some friend, using a 3- and 4-player tables maximizing the
3-player tables, instead of the usual 4- and 5-player table with focus
on 5-player table?

It's not my objective to put people angry with this discussion, but it
has some beneficts:
- faster games;
- better control for judges...maybe...;
- more predictiveness... maybe... (is this positive?);
- 3-player table players compete directly among them all the time;
- 3-player table has no cross-table rush problems (read below);
- keep multiplayer and current strategies.

Some negative aspects also:
- less interactivity in the table;
- 3-player table have no Ally concept (non-prey, non-predator);
- no cross-table actions influencing results;
- more predictiveness... maybe... (is this negative?);
- Bleed bounce-only cards (like Deflection) can loose relevance;
- Combat rush decks become dominant... maybe...;
- Parity Shift, KRC and DC loose its power in 3-player tables;
- Deck sizes are reduced... maybe...

What do you think?

..- LD

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Also:

- Wall decks are overpowered in 3 player games, since they can block
almost everything that happens.
- Bloat walls are particularly overpowered, as are any strategies that
seek simply to be the last one standing.

The problem with 3 players is that table balance is not a
consideration. All you have to do is oust one prey and survive and
then you have won. Note that the Rapid Thought style of play is not
just "smaller decks." It also removes some key survival strategies to
make the entire game more hectic.

Eric Simon
Prince of Chicago
Anarch Newsletter

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Luis Duarte - Powerbase:Lisbon" <luis.paleta@netcabo.pt> wrote in message
news:1120830373.746985.40980@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I wonder if anyone ever tried to organize a tournament or during a vtes
> night with some friend, using a 3- and 4-player tables maximizing the
> 3-player tables, instead of the usual 4- and 5-player table with focus
> on 5-player table?
....
> What do you think?

I think a 5-player game is much more fun than a 3-player game.

Every different configuration is a different "game": 2-player, 3-player,
4-player, etc. The game rules are written to be played for 3-6 players
but the tournaments (and what is widely acknowledged as optimal play) is
the 4-player and 5-player game so I suspect the game is designed and
tested in that configuration. Three-player games, however much fun some
people might find them, are at least a little bit warped by that standard.

Fred

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Luis Duarte - Powerbase:Lisbon wrote:
> I wonder if anyone ever tried to organize a tournament or during a vtes
> night with some friend, using a 3- and 4-player tables maximizing the
> 3-player tables, instead of the usual 4- and 5-player table with focus
> on 5-player table?

My main problem with 3 player games is that, inevitably, two players
clash heavily with each other, leaving the third to claim victory. That
seems completely out of the spirit for a multi-player game so 4 or 5
seems to be best.

Jeff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

Luis Duarte - Powerbase:Lisbon wrote:
> I wonder if anyone ever tried to organize a tournament or during a vtes
> night with some friend, using a 3- and 4-player tables maximizing the
> 3-player tables, instead of the usual 4- and 5-player table with focus
> on 5-player table?

You mean like Rapid Thought?

http://www.thelasombra.com/variants/rapid_thought.txt

------------------------------
Ethan Burrow - the pre/vic guy
http://monger.vekn.org

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad (More info?)

"Luis Duarte - Powerbase:Lisbon" <luis.paleta@netcabo.pt> schreef in bericht
news:1120830373.746985.40980@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I wonder if anyone ever tried to organize a tournament or during a vtes
> night with some friend, using a 3- and 4-player tables maximizing the
> 3-player tables, instead of the usual 4- and 5-player table with focus
> on 5-player table?
>
> It's not my objective to put people angry with this discussion, but it
> has some beneficts:
> - faster games;
> - better control for judges...maybe...;
> - more predictiveness... maybe... (is this positive?);
> - 3-player table players compete directly among them all the time;
> - 3-player table has no cross-table rush problems (read below);
> - keep multiplayer and current strategies.
>
> Some negative aspects also:
> - less interactivity in the table;
> - 3-player table have no Ally concept (non-prey, non-predator);
> - no cross-table actions influencing results;
> - more predictiveness... maybe... (is this negative?);
> - Bleed bounce-only cards (like Deflection) can loose relevance;
> - Combat rush decks become dominant... maybe...;
> - Parity Shift, KRC and DC loose its power in 3-player tables;
> - Deck sizes are reduced... maybe...
>
why does KRC lose it's power?

more negatives:
* 3 player games usually go to the fastest deck: a lot of deck types are not
suited for a 3 player game.
* weenie decks are almost unstoppable on a 3 player table, especially weenie
rush.