Back to 3 for Arena Please!

[bdonuga]

Appreciate the folks running the game and trying something different on arena going from 3 to 4. Also enjoy the change in strategy that comes with 4 vs 3.

That said the logistics of the 4 vs 3 makes it much harder to just play the game. Takes longer to match a game and I’ve found more people time out at start (maybe bc it takes longer to match a game they are doing something else). That also plays out in game adding non play time to the actual game.

Other options could be making a much faster version for people who are willing to sit and play at speed?

[lesleyCinNC]

Completely agree with this. Was there a request or reason to change to 4P?

Thank you for all of your hard work on Space Base!

[Remkar]

Arena seasons are not set by the game programmers/maintainers.

The people who play the game the most are given a designation called "guru" for each game, and they're given a place they can talk with each other and vote on the settings for the next arena season.

I'm not a guru for Space Base (although I have been a guru in the past for other games), and generally, people tend to vote for certain settings for one of the following reasons:
1-they want it to be more competitive (for many games this results in 2p)
2-they think the game plays best with certain settings
3-they want to mix it up and experiment with something they don't get to play as often

Some guru groups are pretty consistent and organized, and others barely talk, change a lot, and don't really agree much anyway, haha!

No idea where the Space Base gurus fall on this continuum, though.

But it is the result of a player vote, so speaking at the devs won't be helpful.

[NinePointOh]

It's a matter of personal preference with various trade-offs. 4p was actually the norm for Space Base in Arena for a long time, and 3p was a more recent change of pace option.

It's definitely faster at 3p but also seems more randomly swingy. In a 4p game there are more dice rolls so the probabilities get closer to a normal distribution because of the sample size. For competitive play I think a lot of people tend to favor less randomness.

That's just one factor, though. As Remkar said it's up to a vote of the most active players and I'm sure we have lots of different priorities.

[RainStormPanda]

Arena seasons are not set by the game programmers/maintainers.

The people who play the game the most are given a designation called "guru" for each game, and they're given a place they can talk with each other and vote on the settings for the next arena season.

I'm not a guru for Space Base (although I have been a guru in the past for other games), and generally, people tend to vote for certain settings for one of the following reasons:
1-they want it to be more competitive (for many games this results in 2p)
2-they think the game plays best with certain settings
3-they want to mix it up and experiment with something they don't get to play as often

Some guru groups are pretty consistent and organized, and others barely talk, change a lot, and don't really agree much anyway, haha!

No idea where the Space Base gurus fall on this continuum, though.

But it is the result of a player vote, so speaking at the devs won't be helpful.

Thank you for explaining this - I had no idea about the guru system.

[Solarman9]

I was the guru who suggested the 4p format instead of 3p and the gurus voted for it. Each guru gets one vote. The second most popular option was to stay at 3p. The reason I wanted to go back to 4p was that 3p was too brutal when you lost. The top players were getting to scores and just sitting at the top. It's because when you get to 1700/1800 losing 12-13 points for coming in second and then gaining 6-9 when you win makes it rough, so people just would quit being satisfied at like top 20. That means when you get to 1700 a lot of times you were playing people with ranks of 1400ish and you lose to them because of random dice, you lose 32. Or you lose two games in a row and you lose 50-60 and you free fall after that. The que time is longer, but has been more competitive from the games I have played. I also rarely see anyone keep 12 to buy the 14 cost 6 with the 3 points. Much harder to play that strategy in 4p.

[JediMasterPhooki]

thank you for explaining, @Solarman9

Here's something I've felt as someone who's new to this game on BGA.
The ELO swings are large in the 4p too, if the people I play with have a big diff in ELO. This is controllable using the settings but it means finding games are that much harder since we need 4 players on the table.

Since there are 4p on the table - the dynamics are now focused on maximising the return from other players turns. So the sectors with the highest probably are always highly contested and its almost impossible to catch up with anyone who has a favourable set of starting cards to choose from. There's also less games where anybody now chooses higher sector cards (sector 11 and 12 go uncontested almost always even in a 4p).
I've now seen more games where the Colonies are the preferred way to win rather than deploying the right ships since the earning potential is now much higher.

I may be in the minority of the gamers who feel this way, but I'd be in favour of moving to 3p which is more dynamic and sees more playing styles.

[richyfourtytwo]

I'm only playing my 8th game and the 1st one with 4 players, so probably you shouldn't give much weight to what I say, but so far I like it to play with 4 players.

[TarAldar]

4p is a lot better, 3p was so random I stopped playing.

[zachzombiehc]

I am feeling the exact opposite, I am close to stop playing arena this season. Seems like all my games have a runaway winner and it feels lucky af if I manage to win. Normally I get to the elite level rank real quick but now I cant make it out of the silver I started at.