Does anyone actually play this game for fun?

[Meeplelowda]

but I promise you that the fun comes back when you embrasse this defending aspect of the game (and use probabilities like with poker of what tiles left in the pile etc to do so.)

The issue here is that people have different concepts of what is fun, and some people on both sides of this debate keep trying to impose on the other side what "fun" is supposed to look like. Neither side is correct on that point because what's personally fun for someone is subjective.

On the other hand, what is objective is what legal moves the game allows you to make. Your side of the debate (which I happen to be on) allows all legal moves to be made. Period. The other side of the debate requires additional ambiguous and/or occasionally contradictory norms outside of the rules.

But just because I'm on your side of the debate doesn't mean I think it's appropriate to tell someone that if they don't like playing with all legal moves being allowed, then they just don't know what fun is.

[JoysJoy]

Just create a circle of friends that play the way you want to play. Every time you play this game with someone who plays it the way you prefer, suggest a Rematch and friend them. Start limit playing to those people who play the way you like playing.

You could also go to the community tab and start a group for Carcassonne players who don’t use blocking as a main strategy. Then you could all Limit to any game, you start to only that group of people.

[ScreamingWheels]

It is a very competitive game, in strategic form this moves to a higher level as much of the luck is removed with effective play. If you choose to play in a global community such as BGA then I don't think it is reasonable to expect anything other than people playing to win (and being polite). Ultimately most find satisfaction in doing so, whether they choose to block their opponents or not, which of course is a key component of this game.

[Bereta]

The discussion can be summarized as: "I hate it when my opponent won't let me win". If you can't handle the mechanism that the game itself provides, maybe this game isn't for you.

In the chess that has already been mentioned, for example, one of the basic strategies that every beginner player learns is that you need to have control of the center of the board. It doesn't matter if you want h3 to be a good opening move, that's not how the game works if you want to win.

Removing the Carcassonne blocks makes the game merely a draw to see who gets the best pieces. Maybe you should look for games that focus more on this or only play with 4 or more players and then the game become less combative.

[Snotrod]

The frustrating part is there are players who can see the tiles. It is not random on BGA. I have seen it with my own eyes from another player. There are a few who control the game (moderators or whoever is cheating) that have a problem with players threatening their rank.

[Meeplelowda]

The frustrating part is there are players who can see the tiles. It is not random on BGA. I have seen it with my own eyes from another player.

Describe exactly what you think you saw.

[Kaladry]

The arguments here are exactly the same as in the Ticket to Ride forum...

There's blocking 1-2 strategically and then there's maliciously blocking for the sake of blocking. What I've learned on BGA is that some people here have fun in just antagonizing others.

[Mr_Magic]

The arguments here are exactly the same as in the Ticket to Ride forum...

There's blocking 1-2 strategically and then there's maliciously blocking for the sake of blocking. What I've learned on BGA is that some people here have fun in just antagonizing others.

Both games are far more combative than they appear, which upsets people who just want to build nice cities or make a peaceful railway.

[satibel]

basically it's the same as commander players in magic, there's power level for decks (in that case playstyle) where player interaction (e.g. destruction/counterspell) is basically frowned upon at lower tier, but completely expected at higher tiers.

some people like just playing big dinosaurs while others want to win on turn 3 or earlier and expect to prevent the others from doing that.
in the first case, it's usually seen as more fair because bigger number is better. while the more effective solution of building a combo that wins by using a specific card that says win the game and fulfilling its condition without interacting with the combat mechanic or even hit points is seen as unfair except by people who play the same kind of mechanic.

also something that is missing when playing the game on BGA compared to playing with friends is that there's usually no rematches, so blocking has lower negative consequences, while if you're playing multiple games in a row blocking people, you're gonna get ganged up on (in a similar way that if you're playing a deck full of counterspells in commander in a casual game, you'll probably be playing 1 vs 3.)

usually scoring big points is more fun than making other people score less, at least if you're playing casually, like if someone else is gonna score big you might want to throw a wrench in their plans, but you try to develop your own plan in general.

tbh I think having a realtime unranked/casual mode might be a good idea in general. though just making a group for casual play could be fine.

[Mr_Magic]

tbh I think having a realtime unranked/casual mode might be a good idea in general. though just making a group for casual play could be fine.

Friendly games exist which are exactly that.