Board Game Arena

Hello, I watched the game from the link, in which the player says their opponent was "cutting off [their] final area of track in all directions".

Despite the other player's attempt at blocking, he could have gotten to where he wanted to anyway, and was not cut off from every direction.

I still agree that it was a kind of unfair move. The game is built like that, unfortunately. Taking a minute to think about the situation would've helped him see it was not over... and see that he could have had it either way.

Sorry if this isn't more helpful. Just wanted to say that sometimes losing in an "unfair" way doesn't mean there's a real problem.

I sincerely sympathize with those who, due to their stubbornness, cannot perceive blocking as another tool to achieve their goal.

I love a game with blocking players. It makes me have to think harder. It feels less about chance and makes it more interesting. I feel frustrated when I'm blocked, but wouldn't say its unfair. If you were playing another game, say chess, this would be called strategy not unfairness. I wouldn't call it unfair if someone took my queen in chess, I'd accept my own carelessness. Why are people so tense about good strategy in this game?

modest-woodpecker wrote: ↑28 February 2025, 18:01 Why are people so tense about good strategy in this game?

Because they don't actually like the game . They like a variant which isn't implemented because it's not official (and which isn't properly defined and therefore probably impossible to implement).

modest-woodpecker wrote: ↑28 February 2025, 18:01 I love a game with blocking players. It makes me have to think harder. It feels less about chance and makes it more interesting. I feel frustrated when I'm blocked, but wouldn't say its unfair. If you were playing another game, say chess, this would be called strategy not unfairness. I wouldn't call it unfair if someone took my queen in chess, I'd accept my own carelessness. Why are people so tense about good strategy in this game?

Comparing it to chess is pointless because they don't want to play chess.

Some people just want "chill" experiences when gaming. Feel good about scoring points.

Strode wrote: ↑01 March 2025, 05:50

modest-woodpecker wrote: ↑28 February 2025, 18:01 I love a game with blocking players. It makes me have to think harder. It feels less about chance and makes it more interesting. I feel frustrated when I'm blocked, but wouldn't say its unfair. If you were playing another game, say chess, this would be called strategy not unfairness. I wouldn't call it unfair if someone took my queen in chess, I'd accept my own carelessness. Why are people so tense about good strategy in this game?

Comparing it to chess is pointless because they don't want to play chess.

Some people just want "chill" experiences when gaming. Feel good about scoring points.

They basically enjoy the idea of playing something with the pieces that come in the game box. But not quite the game that was designed. Which is fine, they can do whatever they want with their personal copy. But expecting everyone else to do it is pretty strange.

buu441 wrote: ↑01 March 2025, 06:10

Strode wrote: ↑01 March 2025, 05:50

modest-woodpecker wrote: ↑28 February 2025, 18:01 I love a game with blocking players. It makes me have to think harder. It feels less about chance and makes it more interesting. I feel frustrated when I'm blocked, but wouldn't say its unfair. If you were playing another game, say chess, this would be called strategy not unfairness. I wouldn't call it unfair if someone took my queen in chess, I'd accept my own carelessness. Why are people so tense about good strategy in this game?

Comparing it to chess is pointless because they don't want to play chess.

Some people just want "chill" experiences when gaming. Feel good about scoring points.

They basically enjoy the idea of playing something with the pieces that come in the game box. But not quite the game that was designed. Which is fine, they can do whatever they want with their personal copy. But expecting everyone else to do it is pretty strange.

I don't disagree. TtR pre-dates the low interaction trend in board gaming. Usually those games have large decks of cards and stuff to make up for the lack of interaction (i.e., you play against the system). TtR doesn't even have that.

Relying on people to act with "sportsmanship" instead of the rules in an anonymous online game environment is asking a lot…

However, it's interesting to think about what an actual "no block" rule would look like. Any thoughts? Penalties for claiming routes not connected to their own tickets? When should a block not be counted as a block?

What are your best no block house rules?

jsveningsson wrote: ↑02 April 2025, 08:42 However, it's interesting to think about what an actual "no block" rule would look like. Any thoughts?

There is no thinking behind this, only emotions. Try to find anywhere in any of these threads (be it TTR, or Carcassonne, or Azul) where someone has actually typed out the exact wording of the rule they would like to be inserted if they had their way. If they did this, at least we'd have a starting point for discussing whether such a rule would actually be workable.

One test of whether it's workable is if it's something you could actually program to be followed without subjective human input that also does not contradict other rules. The failure of anyone to propose such wording demonstrates how ill-conceived the notion is.

jsveningsson wrote: ↑02 April 2025, 08:42 However, it's interesting to think about what an actual "no block" rule would look like.

As a house rule, I'd suggest playing with open tickets, and you must always leave a possibility for others to complete their tickets (i.e., must not block the last possible route). Unless it's the only way to complete *your* ticket. That would still allow blocking, maybe even self-blocking (force an opponent to take a longer route, because the shorter one would block you completely).