[ARENA Season 0] Switch between 4p and 3p versions

[sourisdudesert]

7 Wonders format will be:

• 4 players during even seasons (0, 2, 4, 6...).
• 3 players during odd seasons (1, 3, 5, ...).

(this follow a lot of discussions made here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14361)

[Pistolero]

Great decision!

[CB Droege]

Can we have some seasons with even higher players? 7Wonders is most interesting at 6 or 7.

[nmego]

Can we have some seasons with even higher players? 7Wonders is most interesting at 6 or 7.

but it is not AS competitive.

And this mode is competitive only, if you want interesting and "fun" look in simple mode, i'm pretty sure many players would go there to play 7p/6p

[CB Droege]

Okay, yes, but I would also like to compete with others to see who is the best at 7-player 7 Wonders.It's probably not the same people who are best at 3-player or 4-player 7 Wonders, and if we are changing up the settings from season to season anyway, why not?

[Gunslinger99]

I wonder how you will ponder the victories at 3P.

If all players have the same level:
+1 for winner,
+0 for second,
-1 for 3rd
?

[ppsantos]

I agree with higher player counts, especially at 7 players, instead of alternating between 3 and 4 player counts, which are basically the same (low player counts, almost everybody is your neighbor, you see the hands again as they come back to you).

As for competition, 7 players is the hardest to play and win (as you are competing against 6 other players). A lot of experienced players quickly dismiss 7 players as more luck, but I think the sheer number of information you have to keep track of lends the 7player game to such misleading generalization.

[RealLife_]

As for competition, 7 players is the hardest to play and win (as you are competing against 6 other players). A lot of experienced players quickly dismiss 7 players as more luck, but I think the sheer number of information you have to keep track of lends the 7player game to such misleading generalization.

What information? You're completely in the dark for the first 3-4 hands each round, only after that you could in theory make some calculated risks based on all the cards you passed + all the cards players have on the table vs. the whole deck, but even then you still have wildly inaccurate information because all the cards you need could be stacked in the same hand.

The more unknown information any given game has, the more luck is involved, it's not that hard of a concept. It's why chess is one of the most competitive games in the world.

[ppsantos]

What information? ... based on all the cards you passed + all the cards players have on the table vs. the whole deck,

You've answered your question: all the cards you've passed+all the card on the table. For a 3-player game, you only need to keep track of your opening hand and the 2nd hand cards to know what the 3rd hand would be. For a 7 player game, you've got to track the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th hands, to get an idea what might be your 6th hand, and what you might not see (the 7th hand). That's more information (arguably too much for most to track, hence, sweep it under the rug and just call it 'luck').

The more unknown information any given game has, the more luck is involved, it's not that hard of a concept.

That might be true, but for these kinds of arena games, people play not just 1 game, but hundreds of games, where 'luck' would even out. Besides, what I don't hear getting mentioned often about small player count games (3p or 4p) is that not all boards are in play. Your board is randomly determined, (3 out of 7 boards). So there's the luck factor there too. Whereas for 7 players, you know all boards would be in play (no luck in that regard).

I just thought that a 7 player game would provide a nice alternative to the 4 player game 7 Wonders arena.

[RealLife_]

You've answered your question: all the cards you've passed+all the card on the table. For a 3-player game, you only need to keep track of your opening hand and the 2nd hand cards to know what the 3rd hand would be. For a 7 player game, you've got to track the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th hands, to get an idea what might be your 6th hand, and what you might not see (the 7th hand). That's more information (arguably too much for most to track, hence, sweep it under the rug and just call it 'luck').

I dunno how you can possibly defend this lol, the amount of information has nothing to do with this at all. You're literally agreeing you are in the dark in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th hand and only get a little bit of wildly inaccurate information in the final 2 hands. Just because something is "harder" doesn't make it more strategic. Nobody is sweeping this game mode under the rug because it's hard to track, but because it's absolutely pointless since the potential strategic edge you get is way too small vs. the luck factor involved of getting the right cards.

That might be true, but for these kinds of arena games, people play not just 1 game, but hundreds of games, where 'luck' would even out.

You need WAY more than hundreds of games to even out the luck factor in 7 player games.

Besides, what I don't hear getting mentioned often about small player count games (3p or 4p) is that not all boards are in play. Your board is randomly determined, (3 out of 7 boards). So there's the luck factor there too. Whereas for 7 players, you know all boards would be in play (no luck in that regard).

Wait what?