The Bidding Mechanism

[RivaRain]

When I first played Five Tribes, I thought the bidding-for-turn-order mechanism was an unnecessary and stress-inducing complication. On BGG a lot of people complain that this mechanism detracts from the meeple placement gameplay. Some of them ignore the rule and play with regular turn order.

Over time the mechanism has grown on me, and now I love this aspect of the game. It is a simple mechanism that adds enormous strategic depth and complexity. Once you get accustomed to its function, it feels like diplomatic manoeuvring - positioning yourself each round to optimally exploit the terrain. You need to assess the opportunities, and predict how your opponents will react to particular bets.

I think the inclusion of this mechanism was a stroke of genius. It makes for a much more more 'dimensional' game than it would otherwise have been (wait for each turn and do the best you can with the current board state).

3 player games are my favourite, and this is where bidding really shines. I do, however, find that in 2 player games, the bidding mechanism becomes too significant (specifically, you can bid for sequential turns, and use the first one to set up a killer move on the second). In time I may come to love this too.

How do you feel about the bidding mechanism?

[Patrick of the Isles]

I do not enjoy the game as much as some people, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, but there are some parts of the bidding system I think are not great. Often the final player on a round can set up a very strong move for the first player on the next round. Then the opening bidder on that subsequent round is in a bit of a pickle. They can bid 18 for that very strong move, but that is quite a lot of money. If they bid 5 or 8 or 12 then another player might just outbid them, take the great move, and then leave them having paid for nothing with no other strong moves at all. My point is that it seems a bit like a game of chicken that way, which to me isn't necessarily the most interesting thing in isolation.

That said, I don't think you could meaningfully play the game with more than 2 players without the bidding system, as otherwise players with moderate skill differences could swing things wildly in what moves they leave for the next round.

[Jontia]

...but there are some parts of the bidding system I think are not great. Often the final player on a round can set up a very strong move for the first player on the next round. Then the opening bidder on that subsequent round is in a bit of a pickle. They can bid 18 for that very strong move, but that is quite a lot of money. If they bid 5 or 8 or 12 then another player might just outbid them, take the great move, and then leave them having paid for nothing with no other strong moves at all. My point is that it seems a bit like a game of chicken that way, which to me isn't necessarily the most interesting thing in isolation.

I guess you're worried in particular about the times when there's one great move on the board, and a lot of less great moves. But ultimately to my thinking, this is literally the point of the bidding mechanism. Forcing the person who gets the great move to pay enough for it, that it makes it closer to equal to the second available move.

[Ranior]

Patrick is correct, high level in person tournament play of Five Tribes often comes down to someone setting up a very good move on the board, much better than others, and it puts the player who has to bid first in a tough spot. This can be a mild downside to playing first in a round, you later have to bid first, and that can be tricky.

Regardless, I'm with the OP in that bidding is required for this game to work, and the bidding does add some fun bits for the last player in a round to leave behind strong moves for others to bid on, etc. There's a good amount of skill expression and interesting decisions that come from the bidding, that you would lose if you just had everyone going in turn order. Heck, in rare spots the flip of merchandise of a djinn can be worth bidding for.