Discards face-up?

[FrankJones]

The last sentence on page 9 of the Wingspan rulebook, in the section on "Managing the Bird Deck", is "The discard pile is kept face-up."

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/cfbnrvnw ... brl3a5wl7b

ETA: And in my experience, face up discards are more common than face down. Some good examples of exceptions have been mentioned in this thread, but going back to card games with a standard 52 card Poker deck, plenty of games like Gin Rummy, etc have face up discard piles.

Well, I'll be danged. I never saw that in the rule book. My apologies to the thread; it is I who got this one wrong.

I feel like kicking myself for assuming that the steam version got something right and the BGA version got it wrong.


Also, my thanks to everyone in this thread who was polite to me when I was wrong. Sometimes people aren't nearly as kind.

[FrankJones]

ETA: And in my experience, face up discards are more common than face down. Some good examples of exceptions have been mentioned in this thread, but going back to card games with a standard 52 card Poker deck, plenty of games like Gin Rummy, etc have face up discard piles.

Well, to some extent, the game mechanics matter. Obviously, the discards in Gin Rummy are face-up, how else would anyone know whether to draw it or not?

In Terraforming Mars, they have to be face-down, otherwise you would know exactly which of the drafted cards the opponent bought, and that is definitely NOT how the game is intended to be played.

I suppose my question would be: In games where the face of the card does not need to be known, do game designers typically lean toward face-down or face-up discards? I'm still going to say that I think face-down is more common, but again, the number of games I have not played greatly exceeds the number of games I have played.

[FrankJones]

Not all games have the "all information is priveledged" aspect like TfM does.

True, but quite a few do, right?

And "back in the box" i guess is just my playgroup. In 7 wonders, that last card in the round is indeed hidden (NONE of us pitch a card for money), but it doesnt go into a discard, it literally gets chucked into the box, same with TfM

I'm perhaps being a bit obtuse here, but what is the difference between "discard" and "back in the box"? In either case, if someone needs a discard (which can happen in 7 wonders with Halikarnosis), the "discard" pile is the same as "the back in the box" pile, right?

Also, NOBODY in your play group has EVER sold a card for 3 dollars in 7 wonders? Don't take this the wrong way, but I can't help wondering about the skill level of such a group. One very strong strategy is to discard (when building a stage of a wonder) and draft in such a way that a player ends up with no playable cards. (For the record, I very much doubt that you meant that as literally as it was written. Yes, obviously in 7 wonders, we try to never make such a horribly bad play. But if someone burns one of the double production cards in a 3-player game, there ARE going to be a handful of unplayable cards, and sometimes they all end up grouped together in the round 3 deal. And whoever gets stuck with the hot potato has to sell it, so to speak.

[Suoivax]

Not all games have the "all information is priveledged" aspect like TfM does.

True, but quite a few do, right?




I'm perhaps being a bit obtuse here, but what is the difference between "discard" and "back in the box"? In either case, if someone needs a discard (which can happen in 7 wonders with Halikarnosis), the "discard" pile is the same as "the back in the box" pile, right?

Also, NOBODY in your play group has EVER sold a card for 3 dollars in 7 wonders? Don't take this the wrong way, but I can't help wondering about the skill level of such a group. One very strong strategy is to discard (when building a stage of a wonder) and draft in such a way that a player ends up with no playable cards. (For the record, I very much doubt that you meant that as literally as it was written. Yes, obviously in 7 wonders, we try to never make such a horribly bad play. But if someone burns one of the double production cards in a 3-player game, there ARE going to be a handful of unplayable cards, and sometimes they all end up grouped together in the round 3 deal. And whoever gets stuck with the hot potato has to sell it, so to speak.

so, we went from a discussion about the wingspan discard pile (of which you were wrong), to insulting how my group of friends plays a different game?

.... you have a good day.

[FrankJones]

?

All I said was, "I can't help wondering about the skill level ...."

I did not make a declarative statement one way or the other. It is highly unusual for literally NOBODY to EVER sell a card in 7 wonders. Hence, my wondering about what is happening strategically in those games. No insult, just curiosity and wonder about how a relatively commonplace occurrence (having unplayable cards in the final couple of turns of the final round) could literally never happen, ever.

I mean, the way you phrased it almost sounded like an insult toward me, implying that I must be bad at the game if I ever had to make the terrible play of selling a card.

Maybe my group plays more defensively than your group, who knows?

[Fromper]

ETA: And in my experience, face up discards are more common than face down. Some good examples of exceptions have been mentioned in this thread, but going back to card games with a standard 52 card Poker deck, plenty of games like Gin Rummy, etc have face up discard piles.

Well, to some extent, the game mechanics matter. Obviously, the discards in Gin Rummy are face-up, how else would anyone know whether to draw it or not?

In Terraforming Mars, they have to be face-down, otherwise you would know exactly which of the drafted cards the opponent bought, and that is definitely NOT how the game is intended to be played.

I suppose my question would be: In games where the face of the card does not need to be known, do game designers typically lean toward face-down or face-up discards? I'm still going to say that I think face-down is more common, but again, the number of games I have not played greatly exceeds the number of games I have played.

I haven't played most of the games mentioned in this thread. The one that I have played, other than Wingspan obviously, is Race for the Galaxy, and I completely understand why discards are face down there. And I'll take your word for it that it makes sense for those other games, as well.

But just thinking of all the other games I've played with cards, I'm thinking of CCGs (Magic: The Gathering, Star Wars: Destiny, Lorcana), deck building games (Dominion, Legendary, Thunderstone, Star Wars: The Deckbuilding Game), and board games like Ticket to Ride and Gloomhaven. And in all the games I've played, RftG is literally the only game I can think of with face down discards.

[FrankJones]

I haven't played most of the games mentioned in this thread. The one that I have played, other than Wingspan obviously, is Race for the Galaxy, and I completely understand why discards are face down there. And I'll take your word for it that it makes sense for those other games, as well.

But just thinking of all the other games I've played with cards, I'm thinking of CCGs (Magic: The Gathering, Star Wars: Destiny, Lorcana), deck building games (Dominion, Legendary, Thunderstone, Star Wars: The Deckbuilding Game), and board games like Ticket to Ride and Gloomhaven. And in all the games I've played, RftG is literally the only game I can think of with face down discards.

Fair point. I did list a number of games with face-down discards, but I'll trust that maybe that's less common overall than face-up.

But, why have discards faceup unless it is necessary (such as Gin Rummy)? Wingspan without expansions does not have a large number of bonus cards. Seeing what bonus cards and bird cards my opponent is discarding can give a lot of intel. I'm puzzled as to why the cards are discarded face-up by rule. Why? How does that help the game? I thought hidden information, such a personal bonus card objectives, was not supposed to be something people could infer from face-up discards.

And with the expansions, some of which allow you to go through the bonus card discard pile, they are a lot stronger if the entire discard pile is face up.

My personal philosophy is that unless the game mechanics require face-up discards (gin Rummy), etc.), they should be face-down. Why should I have to show my opponents which cards I kept and which ones I am throwing, while also revealing my strategy and synergy to them?

[Jellby]

Seeing what bonus cards and bird cards my opponent is discarding can give a lot of intel.

Yes, and part of the game is using that intel to your advantage.

I'm puzzled as to why the cards are discarded face-up by rule. Why? How does that help the game?

Because the game is designed to have this public information, and the designer thought it made the game better.

I thought hidden information, such a personal bonus card objectives, was not supposed to be something people could infer from face-up discards

You were wrong. You can try to infer the cards in other players' hands based on what birds and food they pick, and what they discard. As in many other games, guessing other players' intentions from their past actions is part of the game.

[FrankJones]

Seeing what bonus cards and bird cards my opponent is discarding can give a lot of intel.

Yes, and part of the game is using that intel to your advantage.

I'm puzzled as to why the cards are discarded face-up by rule. Why? How does that help the game?

Because the game is designed to have this public information, and the designer thought it made the game better.

I thought hidden information, such a personal bonus card objectives, was not supposed to be something people could infer from face-up discards

You were wrong. You can try to infer the cards in other players' hands based on what birds and food they pick, and what they discard. As in many other games, guessing other players' intentions from their past actions is part of the game.

Thanks for repeating what everyone else already said.

I explicitly said I was wrong regarding the official rule about face-down discards. It is not necessary for people to keep reminding me of this. I even apologized to the forum for being wrong and wasting people's time. Was I supposed to grovel further to appease the high-and-mighty in this thread?

Regarding your other remarks, well, I think those were poor design choices on the part of the game designer in an otherwise excellent game.

Also, inferring from past actions is not the same thing as inferring from needlessly face-up discards, but good job equating two different things to try to make your somewhat condescending point.

Anyway, that's my opinion. If anyone wants to further embarrass themselves by saying my opinion is "wrong", go ahead and do so. Or, we could just allow one another to have our own opinions and not be so judgmental and condescending.

[Cos-]

And yes, part of discarding cards in a card game is that they are no longer in the deck, and only one person knows that information.

"And only one person knows the information" was never true, though, even if the discard pile were "face down" - the game log also tells you what people discarded. If you couldn't see this by clicking on the discard pile, you could always have gotten all of the same info by scrolling through the game log. But that's more annoying to do, so it's nice that there's an easier way to do it.