Board Game Arena

Meeplelowda wrote: ↑11 July 2026, 22:26 You just admit to not paying attention, state that there are things that you didn't see

And don’t forget, they don’t engage in “spiteful” blocking. I’m sure their opponents do, though. Which all by itself goes a long way towards explaining why it seems like the opponents get better cards than he does.

Tell you what, Daddistracted: your claim is awfully vague and handwavy. Make a specific testable claim and we can dig into it. Like the original OP of this thread claimed he rarely got deer and when he did it was far too late in the game. Make a claim. Better yet, make a prediction and then keep track of whether it comes true or not.

I mostly play 2 games: Azul and Forest Shuffle.

I get why people think the game is rigged against them in Forest Shuffle, I'm currently at 547 ELO and I know I'm only ever a bit of bad luck from a bad run that drops me below 500 and makes me shout at the screen. Sometimes I can't find a deer at all, yet my opponent has seven of them, or I just get an endless succession of trees. It's annoying, it's bad luck I suppose, but it happens and if it happens all the time, well, you're playing the game badly. On the flip side I've definitely had games recently, even without many deer (heaven forbid!), that have been so easy to play because I keep drawing nice cards.

Working out how to work different strategies, adapt on the fly and get the most out of card-combos are all things you have to work on to be a decent player.

With Azul it's a lot easier to deal with losses as I can generally pinpoint exactly what the blunder was that I made. There are occasions where the draw really is against you, but the best player on the site has a 94% win ratio which kind of suggests that you can negate a lot of the bad luck with excellent play.

The thing that I like about this "Game is rigged" argument is that programming a game this way would be complex, therefore more expensive, to design. It would be liable to require more maintenance (tinkering with), therefore more expensive to run, and for what purpose? Any business that increases it's overheads in order to mess with customers probably wont get through a year before going bust.

TheBattlesnake wrote: ↑15 July 2026, 14:37 The thing that I like about this "Game is rigged" argument is that programming a game this way would be complex, therefore more expensive, to design. It would be liable to require more maintenance (tinkering with), therefore more expensive to run, and for what purpose? Any business that increases it's overheads in order to mess with customers probably wont get through a year before going bust.

This is obviouly an excellent point. Every developer on the site would have to be in on it as well. No one want to maintain code that is more complex than necessary.