Board Game Arena

One question I’m curious about: does anyone know how score differentials worked out here on BGA (or elsewhere) between players of similar Elo/skill levels?
I have no idea whether at some point in the past Arena games featured a non-draft setting. My suspicion is that equally rated players would see huge point differentials in non-draft games more often than in draft – but that’s a suspicion.

@FrankJones – I had a bit of a chuckle reading your evaluation of the game designer’s own skill level as a player of the game. The analogy that springs to mind is that of a designer of a race car who will never be able to extract as much performance from the car he designed as a top racing driver. That doesn’t mean the designer’s views on design and recommended settings are ill-informed, whether they are about the game designed by a game designer or about the race car by a car designer.
The TfM rulebook describes drafting as a variant for when “more interaction is desired”. The rulebook text makes clear that drafting also means you draft essentially for your opponent too (“affect which cards your opponent gets access to”), offers better prospects for finding cards that you want (“increases your ability to pursue a certain strategy”) and that drafting gives access to otherwise hidden information (“predict which parameter will rise first”). The Fryx brothers may not have grasped all the minutiae of the game dynamics, but this sets out the broad sweep of what drafting means. Looks like a strong and relevant understanding from my perspective. In short: drafting is available, fully endorsed as an option, and it’s what “we” on BGA play most of the time.

The one thing I find surprising is the original post:

I do not understand why most of the games I see is without draft, this includes Strong and Expert players also.

All Arena games and most tournaments feature a draft. Non-draft is the exception from what I can see. Perhaps in Play settings, if you start joining games there, you’ll find people who deliberately set up a non-draft game to have some variety from what’s on offer in Arena and tourneys. The set of reasons people give above about why they prefer non-draft looks interesting and well-thought-out. I prefer drafting. And I don’t even have real “reasons” for that anymore. I notice I just stay away from the format these days, and if I stumble into a non-draft game by mistake, I dislike the experience, and that tells me enough: I’ll stick to drafting.

FrankJones wrote: ↑27 August 2026, 03:11 Well, at the risk of speaking sacrilegiously,
I don't think the designer (Jacob) understood the game all that well.
He would absolutely get clobbered by any competent player.
So, the argument "This isn't what Jacob intended" doesn't hold much value to me.
I have yet to play a game designer who could beat me at his/her own game.

Designers make games and top players break games; these are different skills. Elite players presumably prefer drafting because it helps them win; their understanding of the card set lets them make optimal choices that less-experienced players may get wrong. But why should the overall community want to help the most experienced players win? The top players, by definition, are already most likely to win and so they should be handicapped rather than assisted.

Some luck of the draw is such a handicap. (See Fischer Random Chess for a similar idea in that game). As I understand it, the main designer likes the idea that players have to make the most of what they are dealt. Maybe they see this as being more fun for everyone, not just the elite. The greatest good for the greatest number.

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35

FrankJones wrote: ↑27 August 2026, 03:11 Well, at the risk of speaking sacrilegiously,
I don't think the designer (Jacob) understood the game all that well.
He would absolutely get clobbered by any competent player.
So, the argument "This isn't what Jacob intended" doesn't hold much value to me.
I have yet to play a game designer who could beat me at his/her own game.

Designers make games and top players break games; these are different skills. Elite players presumably prefer drafting because it helps them win; their understanding of the card set lets them make optimal choices that less-experienced players may get wrong. But why should the overall community want to help the most experienced players win? The top players, by definition, are already most likely to win and so they should be handicapped rather than assisted.

Some luck of the draw is such a handicap. (See Fischer Random Chess for a similar idea in that game). As I understand it, the main designer likes the idea that players have to make the most of what they are dealt. Maybe they see this as being more fun for everyone, not just the elite. The greatest good for the greatest number.

So yeah you are mediocre and want everyone to be dragged down to your level and babysit you, I got you, but no.

FYI, fisher random is not a handicap, you need a greater understanding of the game to compete within the time limit, it's designed for the GMs/top players.

Peach 2d wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 12:03

@FrankJones – I had a bit of a chuckle reading your evaluation of the game designer’s own skill level as a player of the game. The analogy that springs to mind is that of a designer of a race car who will never be able to extract as much performance from the car he designed as a top racing driver. That doesn’t mean the designer’s views on design and recommended settings are ill-informed, whether they are about the game designed by a game designer or about the race car by a car designer.
The TfM rulebook describes drafting as a variant for when “more interaction is desired”. The rulebook text makes clear that drafting also means you draft essentially for your opponent too (“affect which cards your opponent gets access to”), offers better prospects for finding cards that you want (“increases your ability to pursue a certain strategy”) and that drafting gives access to otherwise hidden information (“predict which parameter will rise first”). The Fryx brothers may not have grasped all the minutiae of the game dynamics, but this sets out the broad sweep of what drafting means. Looks like a strong and relevant understanding from my perspective. In short: drafting is available, fully endorsed as an option, and it’s what “we” on BGA play most of the time.

Speaking generally and noy just with regard to Terraforming Mars:
If a game designer lists something as a "variant", but it ends up being by far the more preferred way to play, especially in most or all competitive settings, then I could conclude that the designer misread the target audience. In my opinion, there were two such misses in the design of Terraforming Mars.

Consider two other games that have drafting as a built-in mechanic: 7 Wonders and Blood Rage. Personally, I think these games would be terrible without drafting. Deal everyone 6 or 7 cards and whoever gets the better cards wins! Good thing the designers of those games did not write the rules that way with drafting as a "variant", because that would just be silly.

So, yes, I do consider it a design flaw that Terraforming Mars was written this way. And I consider it a flaw that the "standard" game (without corporate era) rather quickly became a version very few people played, and the corporate era "variant" quickly became the "standard" game.

I can acknowledge the greatness of Terraforming Mars while still calling out what I personally believe to be two major errors.

Peach 2d wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 12:03 The one thing I find surprising is the original post:

I do not understand why most of the games I see is without draft, this includes Strong and Expert players also.

All Arena games and most tournaments feature a draft. Non-draft is the exception from what I can see. Perhaps in Play settings, if you start joining games there, you’ll find people who deliberately set up a non-draft game to have some variety from what’s on offer in Arena and tourneys. The set of reasons people give above about why they prefer non-draft looks interesting and well-thought-out. I prefer drafting. And I don’t even have real “reasons” for that anymore. I notice I just stay away from the format these days, and if I stumble into a non-draft game by mistake, I dislike the experience, and that tells me enough: I’ll stick to drafting.

Full agreement here.

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35
Designers make games and top players break games; these are different skills.

That was sort of my point. If people are seeking high-level play or high-level game analysis, the game designer might not be the ideal person to look for.

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35 Elite players presumably prefer drafting because it helps them win;

Or maybe they prefer playing that way because it's viewed as a more strategic way to play, reducing the luck factor and increasing the skill factor.

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35 But why should the overall community want to help the most experienced players win? The top players, by definition, are already most likely to win and so they should be handicapped rather than assisted.

So, now this is no longer about what is more enjoyable or makes for better game design, but rather, handicapping stronger players? Weaker players have various ways to learn and improve if they wish to do so.

I'll ask the same question I've asked previously: Why do I only seem to hear about this in Terraforming Mars? Do people complain in 7 wonders or Blood Rage that the drafting mechanic is helping the better players win when it should be eliminated so as to handicap them?

If the rulebook for Terraforming Mars had been similar to 7 Wonders and Blood Rage, with drafting as a built-in mechanic, and no mention of doing it differently, would we even be having these discussions?

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35 Some luck of the draw is such a handicap. (See Fischer Random Chess for a similar idea in that game). As I understand it, the main designer likes the idea that players have to make the most of what they are dealt. Maybe they see this as being more fun for everyone, not just the elite. The greatest good for the greatest number.

Fun fact: When playing with drafting, once the research phase is finished and the action phase begins, each player still needs to make the most of the cards they hold. It's not as though drafting removes that aspect of the game.

Peach 2d wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 12:03 The one thing I find surprising is the original post:

I do not understand why most of the games I see is without draft, this includes Strong and Expert players also.

All Arena games and most tournaments feature a draft. Non-draft is the exception from what I can see. Perhaps in Play settings, if you start joining games there, you’ll find people who deliberately set up a non-draft game to have some variety from what’s on offer in Arena and tourneys. The set of reasons people give above about why they prefer non-draft looks interesting and well-thought-out. I prefer drafting. And I don’t even have real “reasons” for that anymore. I notice I just stay away from the format these days, and if I stumble into a non-draft game by mistake, I dislike the experience, and that tells me enough: I’ll stick to drafting.

I prefer playing games with colony expansion but that option is not in the Arena so I usually use the play mode. Let's say 50% of games are arena and 50% of games are in play mode, then of course more games are with draft option. But as for play mode alone, non-draft is what I always observe with games and with a lot of strong players too (lesser so with Expert, but I guess most expert players play Arena mode anyways). I definitely prefer drafting but sometimes my TFM urge is so big that I don't care for drafting. (don't wanna pay for premium )

Andrew Davidson wrote: ↑28 August 2026, 17:35

FrankJones wrote: ↑27 August 2026, 03:11 Well, at the risk of speaking sacrilegiously,
I don't think the designer (Jacob) understood the game all that well.
He would absolutely get clobbered by any competent player.
So, the argument "This isn't what Jacob intended" doesn't hold much value to me.
I have yet to play a game designer who could beat me at his/her own game.

Designers make games and top players break games; these are different skills. Elite players presumably prefer drafting because it helps them win; their understanding of the card set lets them make optimal choices that less-experienced players may get wrong. But why should the overall community want to help the most experienced players win? The top players, by definition, are already most likely to win and so they should be handicapped rather than assisted.

Some luck of the draw is such a handicap. (See Fischer Random Chess for a similar idea in that game). As I understand it, the main designer likes the idea that players have to make the most of what they are dealt. Maybe they see this as being more fun for everyone, not just the elite. The greatest good for the greatest number.

^ This is an example of my point (strong players play without draft) in original post.

I play chess myself and your understanding of Fischer Random Chess (chess960) is completely wrong. Your argument is like saying "I'm losing the game not because I play all the bad moves but it is because the starting position is random!" If you are truly comparing it to chess, then the "handicap" you are saying is something like "I'm 300 elo so if I'm playing a 500 elo player he should have his queen taken away at the start of the game."