Regarding the notation of anti-playing situation

[bousi]

The rule was added to that “Blocking play by retaining all pearl and gold tokens is an anti-playing practice",
How many turns does it take for the player to lose the game?

I assume this is a BGA-specific rule,
But it is not clearly stated on the game's rules page.

[thoun]

You'll be ask to buy a card on the third consecutive turn you retain all gold and pearls.
If you don't, your opponent then has the opportunity to win instantly.

[OwnerOfTheIronThrone]

Would it be possible to adjust the rule, not to start the countdown untill both players hold 10 gems and the board has been refreshed?

1. I makes no sense to spend a pearl before you collect 10 gems if your opponent has 10, because your opponent can't do anything during that time anyway. It's always better to aquire up to 10 gems first.

2. Even if you have 10 gems you might wanna force your opponent to refresh the board first to gain 1 privilige before refresh.

After both player have 10 gems and board has been refreshed, blocking player can't justify waiting with explanation that he wants to aquire more scrolls, because blocked player can force him to refresh the board assuming he makes rights moves (it's always the same position of 5 gems).

[N_Faker]

If you don't, your opponent then has the opportunity to win instantly.

Shouldn't this be a tie rather than a win?

[OwnerOfTheIronThrone]

If you don't, your opponent then has the opportunity to win instantly.

Shouldn't this be a tie rather than a win?

Check out the other post about prison scenario and the official reply. Theoretically there will be no rule regarding it. However the solution introduced to prevent infinite games acts a rule rn, because it changes the way the game is played by player utilizing blocking strategy to win (he has much less time to take advantage of his control).

[The Recogniser]

You'll be ask to buy a card on the third consecutive turn you retain all gold and pearls.
If you don't, your opponent then has the opportunity to win instantly.

Sorry to ask this, but why does it be the 3rd turn? Can we make them lose 1 turn?
This strategy is still too dominant even after the anti-play rule was out. I am still a rookie but while I studied the top players, this anti-play strategy is still being used more than often.
I understand resource control is key to Splendor and so does Splendor duel, I love Splendor a lot, but Splendor duel makes it to a different level with the scarcity of pearl.
Consider a lesser anti-play of hoarding all, where they hoard 2 pearls, 2 gold, leave other guy a gold to hold and play in and out, that is inefficient enough to makes the other guy lose for sure.
And the hoarding strategy is so dominant that there's so counter strategy. In Splendor for 2 people, there are multiple counter tactics when our opponent play hoarding.
So my suggestion is to make anti-play style lose at 1 turn.
Thank you.

[marieroussel]

I've just played again a player who kept the 2 pearls and 3 gold for way more than 3 turns but did not get the win.... I told the player to release either gold or pearls but he boasted that it was my mistake and a fun way for him to win... so disappointing!

[Mark_Elders]

I've just played again a player who kept the 2 pearls and 3 gold for way more than 3 turns but did not get the win.... I told the player to release either gold or pearls but he boasted that it was my mistake and a fun way for him to win... so disappointing!

Hi Marie, I'm the player you played against.

You only win if your opponent goes three turns without buying a card. If your opponent buys a card, their timer is reset. It is extremely difficult to win if you let your opponent take all the gold and pearls early. I recommend spending your first turns taking pearls and gold, and be very judicious about what you spend them on.

As I said in our chat, I think the game is fun, especially when playing against someone else who highly values gold and pearls. Spending pearls/gold can provide short term gains at the expense of some control. When both players understand the threat of losing control, the game transforms and becomes about finding the opportune ways to pressure your opponent. Maybe you try to force them to spend a pearl on a subpar card. Maybe you spend a pearl to threaten victory, or a big crown turn. I think it's really fun to play this way!

A lot of players seem to want to pick up more tokens than their opponent and win through purchasing efficiency, like they would in vanilla Splendor. These players won't refresh the board even to get a pearl or a gold. If you do this, you have to play in a very specific way to be competitive. You have to pressure your opponent immediately. Keep them from getting the tokens they need to purchase a level 1 card without spending gold, etc. If you aren't trying to do this, you're just not playing optimally. You will lose to a more experienced player, and it won't be fun for you.

If you don't want to meet the game where it's at, recognizing that gold and pearls are extremely powerful, then maybe this game isn't one you should come back to. I would never keep playing a game if playing against the most skilled players upset me.

[Etoilemagique]

Basing your strategy on retaining the strongest pieces is not fair-play. It's just taking advantage of a flaw in the game that was not anticipated by its creators.

[PleaseAGB1]

This thread reminded me of a thread on the Ticket to Ride forums about players 'blocking' routes from players being banned or such. The game clearly allows it (blocking a route by playing it first in Ticket t R, in Splendor you are allow to prioritize and draw pearls and golds). I don't understand what the people complaining about don't understand - you may find the gameplay boring or unfair but the game rules allow it (as I understand it). I suggest finding a game that you enjoy to play under the rules it is written. I guess you could also find fellow humans who are willing to play a social contract that goes 'beyond' the game rules but... this seems unlikely? See this thread. Hope this is helpful, thanks for reading.