Gaining higher ELO by ending games faster

[Romain672]

I will try to be more clear:

About the strategy:
Yeah you should goes for the first two lines, try to finish at least one of them in 5 rounds. Alternatively, you could lose your 2 points extra for the line and be in a position where you think you will score more than the opponent(s) in 6 rounds. If that's the case, you don't have to finish a line in 5 rounds. But that mean that nearly everyone else should be in a position where they would lose in 6 rounds, so they should try to finish a line in 5 rounds. And that's what you should be doing if you want to win.

About the design of the game:
I feel like if per example you decide that the game is played in 6 rounds, then at every round you are still incentive to play in your first two lines to be able in rounds 4&5 to still have the choice between playing on those lines on that round or not (else if you skip your first line round 2, then in rounds 3/4/5/6 you are forced to play in that line or to lose 2+ points).
Furthermore, going for all in one color give you much more time to try to get the +10 bonus, I don't have enough experience to know if that would be better or not, but my instinct said that it's too rare with 5 rounds to be able to put pressure on that bonus at high elo.
(+ what I said in my previous post about how weird is it to put a rule (unknown number of rounds) with in my opinion no effect (5rounds every game))
edit: not to mention that with 6 rounds, you could have some rare spots where you want in purpose to not finish/not do a line to score more points with it later on.

[Aeneas90]

It's a "trend", in the sense that 90% of games end that way because that is how the game is designed. If you place a tile on the row easiest to place a tile on every round, the game ends in 5 rounds.
Occasionally, you will get a situation where all the players skipped placing a tile there - but that is very rare. The game is absolutely designed to go for 5 rounds, with additional rounds being the exception. That has nothing to do with "players with ELO", but just a virtue of the game itself. You would have to go out of your way in most games to NOT have it last 5 rounds (again there are exceptions of course).

[FrankJones]

Furthermore, going for all in one color give you much more time to try to get the +10 bonus, I don't have enough experience to know if that would be better or not, but my instinct said that it's too rare with 5 rounds to be able to put pressure on that bonus at high elo.

Getting the color bonus in 5 rounds is almost impossible. It would take some severe blundering to allow it to happen. If the game goes 6 rounds, then I suppose anything is possible. The opponent will likely use 3 of each color on the first two rows, meaning, getting the color bonus requires somewhat precise placement and timing of the other 17 tiles of that color. It would not take much effort for the opponent to make moves that cluster that color in the center, making it difficult or impossible. Also, going for the color bonus might end up costing more than 10 points elsewhere.

But, as has been said - if a player CAN end the game in round 5 with a win, what reason would that player have to not do so? It's just turning a 100 win into a possible loss. If a player is behind and would lose by ending the game in 5 rounds, well, then try to extend it, but doing so (if it's even possible; usually it is not) probably means penalty tiles and falling further behind.

[FrankJones]

Furthermore, going for all in one color give you much more time to try to get the +10 bonus, I don't have enough experience to know if that would be better or not, but my instinct said that it's too rare with 5 rounds to be able to put pressure on that bonus at high elo.

Getting the color bonus in 5 rounds is almost impossible. It would take some severe blundering to allow it to happen. If the game goes 6 rounds, then I suppose anything is possible. The opponent will likely use 3 of each color on the first two rows, meaning, getting the color bonus requires somewhat precise placement and timing of the other 17 tiles of that color. It would not take much effort for the opponent to make moves that cluster that color in the center, making it difficult or impossible. Also, going for the color bonus might end up costing more than 10 points elsewhere.

I have yet to see either myself or my opponent get the color bonus in a game here on BGG. (I'm rated around 300, for whatever that is worth).

But, as has been said - if a player CAN end the game in round 5 with a win, what reason would that player have to not do so? It's just turning a 100 win into a possible loss. If a player is behind and would lose by ending the game in 5 rounds, well, then try to extend it, but doing so (if it's even possible; usually it is not) probably means penalty tiles and falling further behind.

[Aeneas90]

Furthermore, going for all in one color give you much more time to try to get the +10 bonus, I don't have enough experience to know if that would be better or not, but my instinct said that it's too rare with 5 rounds to be able to put pressure on that bonus at high elo.

Getting the color bonus in 5 rounds is almost impossible. It would take some severe blundering to allow it to happen. If the game goes 6 rounds, then I suppose anything is possible. The opponent will likely use 3 of each color on the first two rows, meaning, getting the color bonus requires somewhat precise placement and timing of the other 17 tiles of that color. It would not take much effort for the opponent to make moves that cluster that color in the center, making it difficult or impossible. Also, going for the color bonus might end up costing more than 10 points elsewhere.

I have yet to see either myself or my opponent get the color bonus in a game here on BGG. (I'm rated around 300, for whatever that is worth).

But, as has been said - if a player CAN end the game in round 5 with a win, what reason would that player have to not do so? It's just turning a 100 win into a possible loss. If a player is behind and would lose by ending the game in 5 rounds, well, then try to extend it, but doing so (if it's even possible; usually it is not) probably means penalty tiles and falling further behind.

I should find the link to a arena game I played - my opponent got TWO colors. (I won).

https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=84997847;

[FrankJones]

I should find the link to a arena game I played - my opponent got TWO colors. (I won).

https://boardgamearena.com/archive/repl ... s=84997847;

Wow. That's quite an unusual game. You BOTH got two colors, but you got your two colors while also completing two rows and a column. Your opponent's Blue and gold did not cost you anything; you still got your column and top two rows. But your red and black cost your opponent a lot.

[ExaltedAngel]

I saw fastly that ending in 5 turns was great, and so good that everyone should goes for it, and so all games have 5 rounds.
But then the point of rules look weird. Instead of saying 'it's 5 rounds' they said that once a player finished a line that's the last round'.

I'm not an Azul expert, but by analogy with other games, I think this is done on purpose because it leaves the responsibility to end the game fast on the player who is winning, if they fail to do so, the other player can take advantage of it and make a comeback in the following round(s). It's a common mechanic in games, Ticket to Ride has the same

[FrankJones]

I saw fastly that ending in 5 turns was great, and so good that everyone should goes for it, and so all games have 5 rounds.
But then the point of rules look weird. Instead of saying 'it's 5 rounds' they said that once a player finished a line that's the last round'.

I'm not an Azul expert, but by analogy with other games, I think this is done on purpose because it leaves the responsibility to end the game fast on the player who is winning, if they fail to do so, the other player can take advantage of it and make a comeback in the following round(s). It's a common mechanic in games, Ticket to Ride has the same

Exactly. In games with conditional end-points (Azul, Terraforming Mars, maybe even Splendor, to some extent), one player benefits from ending the game, and the other player(s) do not. Each player should strategize accordingly.

It seems rather bizarre to me that anyone would call it unsportsmanlike to end a game when winning. That's ... the point of the game.