Shared information stalling/guessing issue

[Skrybowiedzma]

I've read the instruction from BGG. The way I understand it, in 2-players game, both players are supposed to pick their own code and the one who guesses the opponent's code wins. So there is no shared information, just a race to guess a different code before your opponent does.

Now I wonder, have I understood it the wrong way, or does the BGA adaptation differ from the official rules. I thought that BGA doesn't allow houserules, so that's weird

Edit: Apparently the it's the publisher who doesn't allow this change (https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=171993), so there is really not much to be done about it.

[peaceful-gorilla914]

+1. I've lost that way because I was playing the game while my opponent was asking useless questions we both knew the answer of.

I've also won several times when my opponent tried to guess randomly because if they asked for a clue they knew I'd get it right. So when their guesss was wrong I tried to guess what their guess was, guessed the opposite and won.

This is seriously annoying and unfun.

[MasN]

I think BGA should be a place for GOOD games, or at the very least, somewhat playable games.

A game implementation where the optimal strategy is stalling is not fun for anyone, clogs up the search results, and makes it harder for new players who join BGA and are looking for an actually fun game.

If a new player joins BGA and their first experience is this game and stalling, it seems fairly likely they would leave the site.

If the publisher rejects all changes that would make the game at the very least, somewhat playable, it should be REMOVED from the site, and at the very lead, not advertised in the headlines.

[Serilo]

I think BGA should be a place for GOOD games, or at the very least, somewhat playable games.

A game implementation where the optimal strategy is stalling is not fun for anyone, clogs up the search results, and makes it harder for new players who join BGA and are looking for an actually fun game.

If a new player joins BGA and their first experience is this game and stalling, it seems fairly likely they would leave the site.

If the publisher rejects all changes that would make the game at the very least, somewhat playable, it should be REMOVED from the site, and at the very lead, not advertised in the headlines.

I don't think stalling is always the optimal path, due to having two chances.... you just need to try to get it before it's clear what is true and what isn't. So no one auto-loses, at least. You want to be on the turn with 3 options left, or stall until your opponent is forced to pick on 4 options left, or in rare cases you don't want 4 options on your opponent.

[Fenrir7]

I think BGA should be a place for GOOD games, or at the very least, somewhat playable games.

A game implementation where the optimal strategy is stalling is not fun for anyone, clogs up the search results, and makes it harder for new players who join BGA and are looking for an actually fun game.

If a new player joins BGA and their first experience is this game and stalling, it seems fairly likely they would leave the site.

If the publisher rejects all changes that would make the game at the very least, somewhat playable, it should be REMOVED from the site, and at the very lead, not advertised in the headlines.

Agreed, the game very much intrigues me and I would love to see how it plays with 2 players, but the current implementation is boring. The nuance of the game isn't the logic, but in figuring out which questions to ask. The current implementation removes that strategic depth and just becomes a game of pure logic. There are better games out there if you're just looking for a pure competitive logic puzzle.

[Skrybowiedzma]

I think BGA should be a place for GOOD games, or at the very least, somewhat playable games.

A game implementation where the optimal strategy is stalling is not fun for anyone, clogs up the search results, and makes it harder for new players who join BGA and are looking for an actually fun game.

If a new player joins BGA and their first experience is this game and stalling, it seems fairly likely they would leave the site.

If the publisher rejects all changes that would make the game at the very least, somewhat playable, it should be REMOVED from the site, and at the very lead, not advertised in the headlines.

Deleting the game is a bit overrreaction in my opinion. I love about the BGA that I can try out a game I consider buying. Even if I play a game at BGA once and I don't have fun at all, I think it's great that I had the possibility to find out myself.

For the Digit Code, it's not that easy, because the current implementation is different than the physical game's rules for two-players. BUT, what makes the current BGA implementation unfun for two-players is an issue in the physical game for 3 players and more (for a 3+ players in physical game, it's the same: everyone guesses the same code, and one player is a sort of Game Master, giving answears to questions). So, if I was looking for a game to buy, having in mind a game to play in a small, but larger than 2 group of friends, having an option to play this on BGA would still give me the information that it's not a good game to buy.

I really, really hope that the publisher will one day reconsider the decision to not let the BGA implement the fun version, because, as for now, it seems more of a anti-advertising than advertising their games.

And even if not, I think keeping this game on the site for people who want to try out themselves, and for people who want to play it solo (I think it's actually fun as a solo game, maybe not my favourite, but if I'm in the mood for something sudoku-like, I might choose the solo Digit Code) is a good idea. There doesn't seem to be any considerable cost (the developer has already made an effort to make this game, and I think really well - the UI is very intuitive and easy to use, I don't know about the licencing cost, but it doesn't seem to be high if any at all, as it's not a Premium game), and the benefits are non-zero.

About any new player getting discouraged from the site - I don't think playing one unfun game would be enough to drive anyone away from a site. I can't imagine anyone who doesn't know at least a few board games from IRL and doesn't have the vauge idea that some are just objectively better than others, or at least that some will be more or less fun to them, due to personal taste. I don't think the Digit Code just existing on the site would be enough to drive anyone away.

What might drive someone away is that the bad games are advertised. And I wholeheartedly agree that this game in current form is not worth the main site to highlight it. But it's only there due to the current calendar thing. It will disappear from there in an hour (I hope), so there's not much to worry. Let's just hope that BGA will make better decisions on what to highlight in the future.

[Brontolo3]

The implementation in BGA for two players game is awful. I'm not interested if the creators of the game agree with this stupid way of implement the game. Also choosing the numbers that the opponent has to guess is a part of the game. And in any case at least should be an option to play with the real game rules. This is a pity!!!

[Mike_K]

+1

The first half of the game is a fun puzzle but by the end it's just a game of chicken, deduction goes out the window and the winner can be decided arbitrarily.
There are several suggestions in this thread and I think all of them would be improvements.

[Nuummite]

You can also decide to leave the game together, without punishment. Currently no active game, so I don't know what it is called.
Of course you are dependent on your opponent agreeing with it, if not you still have to play. But if they agree, you don't waste time for nothing and you avoid the chance of losing point, just because you weren't the first one to guess right

[anneschuessler]

This is why I mostly play solo mode and try to get the answer in the fewest guesses possible. I hate stalling, so I mostly lose by giving away the final piece of information when playing against someone I love the game, but I hate that you either have to stall or guess to actually be able to win.