Season 19 thoughts, 2p vs 3p Terraforming Mars

[Sarevain]

I guess if we go by sport analogy, the best arena format would be solo TM game with same seed. The majority of sports created being solo or pseudo-solo record breaking based.

As to go back on topic, rotation between format would be a great idea to please everyone. And i would gladly play 2p arena but i wouldn't like to have it as the only competitive format.

I wish the actual arena format leads to the growing of the 3p community to offer more interesting matches between same skill level player. The more player, the more balanced. So i wish good 2p only players would give it another try to makes for more interesting games.

I do like the idea to split Elo between different format or maybe makes arena not impact classic elo, to encourage 2p community to join arena. As i understand it can be frustrating to lose elo in a more volatile format when you spend precious time to climb slowly by playing elite 2p games.

[RicardoRix]

This is a recurrent bug that seems to have popped back into play, it had been fixed previously.

I don't know if it's a bug, but it seems like that's just how the BGA system works. I've played a lot of 3p games in the last 2 seasons. That's half a year. And it's been like this all this time. If it was a bug, it should have been fixed in that amount of time.

That's not a correct assumption. It's been going up and down for years.

Either way, you cannot use this as an argument. It's not something that should be happening.

[HighlanderKG]

I guess if we go by sport analogy, the best arena format would be solo TM game with same seed. The majority of sports created being solo or pseudo-solo record breaking based.

As to go back on topic, rotation between format would be a great idea to please everyone. And i would gladly play 2p arena but i wouldn't like to have it as the only competitive format.

I wish the actual arena format leads to the growing of the 3p community to offer more interesting matches between same skill level player. The more player, the more balanced. So i wish good 2p only players would give it another try to makes for more interesting games.

I do like the idea to split Elo between different format or maybe makes arena not impact classic elo, to encourage 2p community to join arena. As i understand it can be frustrating to lose elo in a more volatile format when you spend precious time to climb slowly by playing elite 2p games.

Speaking for myself, ELO doesn't matter to me. Quality games matter. With all due respect to all of you, there are not enough players willing to play 3p on the site to make the format worthwhile for a person who played this game for 5+ years such as myself. I play 3p with my friends OTB once-twice weekly, and that's enough for me.

But Arena practically motivated me to play more 2p games, become a guru and vote for 2p format next time.

[SuperPikasso]

That's not a correct assumption. It's been going up and down for years.

Either way, you cannot use this as an argument. It's not something that should be happening.

So this has been happening for years, but it can't be used as an argument? The fact that it shouldn't happen doesn't change the fact that it is reality. Already in the new arena season, 3 out of 10 of my first games ended like this. This ruins my gaming experience more than bad matchmaking. This problem exists here and now. Only on BGA, only in 3P+ games. If this is a bug, then this format is broken for a long time. How can it be used in a competitive arena format? This is absurd.

[RoyalRook]

I will say this and bow out - not predictable - sane. You pick cards in draft you need, thinking the 2nd player will cut Terraforming Ganymede from Saturn. You play the game without any mistakes, hated but enduring and leading at the end, just to get beaten by one point because the second player in early draft picked Solar Power because they really needed energy to dump into Cupola City, and passed TG to Saturn. That player ofc ended 25 points behind both players. And yes. Similar things happened to me many times, because I played at least 2000 3p games and I know what I'm talking about. If I lose, I don't want to lose because a noob interfered.

But you are the noob who trusted a low level player to cut TG from Saturn after over 2000 3p games played. I would simply cut TG in a Saturn game in that situation. Especially in early drafts in late draft that's even a worse mistake while you are leading. You can't even be that mad with the TG passer, bc what if he needs the science tag for AI or Anti grav? You didn't know it was only for cupla. Finally, You were the strongest player on the table, therefore, you should have trusted in your skills to manage the rest of the game and hate draft TG for good with Saturn in town.

It's the constant weakness of your game, even in 2p. I mentioned this to you before, in drafts you tend to leave unnecessary outs for your opponent(s). I am a control, I grind my opponents down and leave them little or no outs, so I am always in the best position to win. You need to play more 3p arena games, that way you are not always single minded and understand sometimes losing is winning in a long season.

Sure, so I take useless TG for myself, and pass Giant Ice Asteroid, that makes sense. This whole discussion is pointless at this level, whoever believes 3p or 4p or 5p is better for whatever reason by all means play it, I will play the best format and we won't cross paths and all good.

Highlander sorry if I drag this discussion out a bit, just want to say there is nothing but love. This is just the perfect topic for me to talk about this.

So guys this is so important to be successful in 3p. What Highlander is talking about is the draft priority, which you HAVE to understand in order to get better in TM. T4Mars had a wonderful article on BGG on this topic, I will try to find it again. The short version is if there are two AAA cards in the draft you take the one that can benefit you both or benefits you, that way you both have a good card instead of hate draft the AAA card that benefits your opponents, which resulting your opponent have a good card and you drafting a card that is good but do not benefit you. This is the foundation of your game...to be an above average player in 3p; what elite 2p players don't understand is this: in top level 3p, you have to constantly manipulate others according to their skill level. I call it TM Daycare, because in practice it's babysitting.

At the TM Daycare, you can't draft the same as you draft in 2p. In this situation for example, Highlander in early draft have GIA, Solar Power, TG, and useless card passing to a novice, with a Saturn as the 3rd. Solar Power and Uselss Card value the same in this draft. In 2p Higherlander is right, you take GIA, it's the undisputed TR champion benefits anyone who plays it and a potential disaster if played on him, a major swing in 2p, TG only benefits his Saturn opponent, IF the novice pass TG to Saturn.

But this is 3p, you are not playing heads up. If you are 600+ playing against other 600+ take the GIA, you have to out effecient your opponents, and they are probably TR frenzy anyway, a good'o wild wild Mars shootout. Highlander is probably a far higher ranked player than most people in a 3p game by 2p skill metric, and if that's true, then he shouldn't take GIA. The reason is this: if you are soooo much better then you don't really need cards to win. In fact, your main consideration should be: "What Beats Me(WBM)?" How to achieve that? You open TM Daycare and babysit the novice. I check my 3p opponents' ranks at the start of the game, you should too, you need that piece of info to make draft decisions. Highlander should ask himself, What Beats Me? Is there a RoyalRook on the table that can beat me via pure skill? I better take that hate card and play on him. Oh there one novice and one regular, both pose no threats to me directly, but the regular player is playing Saturn, What Beats ME... In TM, jovians are the hardest to evaluation, they are the ineffecient, but if aligned just right became super effecient with jovian multipliers. The answer is clear here, Jovians can beat you, and in fact with such skill differences only Jovians can beat you(it takes very little skill to play jovs, that's why your friends in real life play them all the time). With WBM in mind, Do I want to take GIA but possibly losing to Jovs later because the novice may pass TG down to Saturn, OR I simply cut TG and just skill those low ranks out? It's pretty simple right? You cut TG since the game is no longer zero sum but rather Nash equilibrium. It's fun to see how 2p players do the same things in 3p and expect the same outcomes, I LOVE exploit those weaknesses in a match, because my edge is often slim after RNG in 3p.

P.S. I haven't run into any quiting during a match for a long time, maybe it's b/c people just like the chance to play me now because I did have a lot of those bad experience in season 17 when I starting to play on BGA. I also play mostly turn based, but I don't remember any of my real time game has player quit on me recently.

[HighlanderKG]

If you play 3p predominantly, take the cards the best for you, unless the difference is two tiers (passing AI central because you have no science tags to take Acquired Company gen 2 as Teractor, or something similar).

That's how you will learn to draft. If you do pvp you will never learn how to evaluate cards properly, because ultimately, you are making a bad move to avoid the third player making a bad move (and you have no idea what they'll do).

You can do that if the cards are borderline and similar, and you don't need them. In every other situation, take the cards better for you.

[jorolelin]

I can also vouch for 2p and 3p being vastly different games. I mainly play 2p and I ventured into 3p once and got so thrown off because I'm so used to the pace of the 2p game. I also agree with 3P being really fun only if all 3 are similarly skilled or at least know what they are doing. I play 5p IRL, in a group where there are 2 strong players, one okay player, and 2 weak players. The card quality that you get each game varies wildly depends on who is passing to you, and whoever sits in between the two weaker players will always get a bonkers draft.

Anyway I prefer 2p on here because I get the least downtime between turns and given that most of the time I play on my phone having less things to keep track of is better for me given the small screen. As for the "most competitive setting"? IMHO in any game it has to be 2P. Not only does it make targeted attacks viable, whereas in 3+P other players get off free and thus you can't be as aggressive as possible with this strategy, but there's no kingmaking in 2P. Plus, if it is clear who's going to win, we can concede early to save time instead of having to play it out. Yes there are merits to getting 2nd but a heads up game is more clear cut and you have full control of the outcome rather than having a non-related third party screw up your standings.

Well said. It is truly frustrating when king making happens to you in an intense game. In my last game for example, I somehow was in a winning position against a turn 1 earth cat, early AI then Anti grav monster that also supported by protected hab and media group. Yes, you guessed it, the third put a greenery during the final conversion next to this player's city and I come in 2nd place by a point. It's maddening right?

I love 2p, you certainly have more control over the game without worrying about silly stuff like a king maker. BUT, what I was trying to argue is that if all three players are equally skilled and in a fair competitive environment; I believe 3p TM is a better game and has a higher skill ceiling. And if a format has a higher skill ceiling, then it is actually the superior competitive format. Imagine if there is a referee will disqualify a player for obvious kingmaking actions, and only certain elo are allow to participate. I am championing 3p theoratically is the superior competitive format. Of course, in our non Xmaslanding and all inclusive BGA arena world, 2p is certainly a fairer test of skill than 3p. If you don't have th stomach for it, sometimes 3p will drive you crazy.

A higher skill ceiling implying a superior competitive format is nonsensical. The decathlon clearly has a higher skill ceiling than the 100m dash but that doesn't make it a superior event; the 100m dash is one of the most popular events in the world despite its overwhelming simplicity. 3p has issues that other people have outlined pretty well and I think 2p is complex enough to where it doesn't need to be made more complex. 2p > 3p imo.

[RoyalRook]

Your logic is nonsense, and you are making nonstatements. No one is asking you to compete in 10 different games. We only care about TM here.

[teallite]

Happened to me many times. Why do I get 0 points and the other player gets a lot of points? Because the game counts tie between the two remaining players.

This is a recurrent bug that seems to have popped back into play, it had been fixed previously.

No, unfortunately it's intended. Bug happens when someone gets negative points in this situation.

[RoyalRook]

There are cards that is good for 2p, but ok for 3p. Bushes, for example, it's almost an always keep in 2p, but I found increasingly unplayable for 3p in your initial draft. While "trash" cards like plant producing building tags are surprisingly efficient for 3p if played mid game. Both Mosses are just straight trash in most cases for 3p. What do you guys find so far in the season?

Tempo could be way faster with competent players in 3p, so if Bushes is niot activated by gen6 why do I even bother? I would rather just SP greenery whenever I want, than holding bush in my hand for 5+ gens. If I have a plant prod tempo then +1 early plant prod from a building tag all of sudden feels amazing if I don't buy much cards with a back door gardener or builder. On Tharsis 3p plant tags feel underwhelming if I am looking to end on gen8 or even 9 in certain cases. In so many games u found myself selling Bushes and convert near ocean before my opponents plant package get paid.