I'm a competitive player and I really like Arena (usually turnbased mode). I stop playing normal when I reach the 100 ELO for Arena for most games.
But I really don't like the fact that so many games made for multiple players are crippled down to 2 players. The games are just boring in many cases. Why would you prefer a 2 player variant when you can play 3-5 players?
- Is it more competitive? Varies, in many cases not, its even worse: some games get suddenly super straight forward strategies, YOU CAN LEARN WHAT TO DO. Important decisions depending on game situation are more limited!
- 2 player games are extremly punishing because either you lose or win. Many people are happy ending up 2nd or 3rd place in a good game. 2 player games are always creating 50% last places. (I'm pretty sure this alone scares off a lot of potential arena players). Limit 2 player games to... well real 2 player games
- I can understand the fact that 3-5 player mode needs more players so its more difficult for real time games but honestly I pretty sure the playerbase would be a lot higher when its not just 2 players. And for turnbased mode its even not an argument.
The 2-player variants I played in Arena:
- Hawaii (super straight forward strategy with 2 players)
- K2 (basically no interaction because so much free space)
- Keyflower (I like the game in general but 2 player feels just so boring after 1-2 games)
- Caylus (why does this need to be 2 players... its so much more fun with more)
- Thurn and Taxis (Not much difference, so why 2 players, just for having a more static card pool?)
- Through the Ages (the only game I actually play a lot and like in 2 player variant but I would be still fine with 3 players!)
tldr: Competitive games should make fun and 2 players limits the fun and the player base. More players means less last places and competition is possible with 3-5 players (at least for most games). 2 Player variants are often learnable and is less about making decisions in specific game situations.
But I really don't like the fact that so many games made for multiple players are crippled down to 2 players. The games are just boring in many cases. Why would you prefer a 2 player variant when you can play 3-5 players?
- Is it more competitive? Varies, in many cases not, its even worse: some games get suddenly super straight forward strategies, YOU CAN LEARN WHAT TO DO. Important decisions depending on game situation are more limited!
- 2 player games are extremly punishing because either you lose or win. Many people are happy ending up 2nd or 3rd place in a good game. 2 player games are always creating 50% last places. (I'm pretty sure this alone scares off a lot of potential arena players). Limit 2 player games to... well real 2 player games
- I can understand the fact that 3-5 player mode needs more players so its more difficult for real time games but honestly I pretty sure the playerbase would be a lot higher when its not just 2 players. And for turnbased mode its even not an argument.
The 2-player variants I played in Arena:
- Hawaii (super straight forward strategy with 2 players)
- K2 (basically no interaction because so much free space)
- Keyflower (I like the game in general but 2 player feels just so boring after 1-2 games)
- Caylus (why does this need to be 2 players... its so much more fun with more)
- Thurn and Taxis (Not much difference, so why 2 players, just for having a more static card pool?)
- Through the Ages (the only game I actually play a lot and like in 2 player variant but I would be still fine with 3 players!)
tldr: Competitive games should make fun and 2 players limits the fun and the player base. More players means less last places and competition is possible with 3-5 players (at least for most games). 2 Player variants are often learnable and is less about making decisions in specific game situations.
