Board Game Arena

I think it is great to have a season with just a base game, but why are New Worlds disabled? They improve the experience so much.

Agreed, just seems like nonsense to me. The game will have more RNG and you can't choose an opening strategy as easily and can be forced into crappy starts with no outs. Choosing starting world feels like one of the more interesting and fun moments to me. This guru thing is just failing in all kinds of games I play. Who are these people who don't like choosing a starting world???

I expect part of the reasoning is that there is a desire to try and do something different with every Arena season. For various reasons some people prefer particular expansions and settings (for me it's Brink of War with New Worlds and Takeovers on), and some people prefer the vanilla base game. As per the current RFTG second edition rules, the New Worlds are optional, so they are not a required part of the base game. That said, I personally prefer playing with the New Worlds in the mix.

My question would be this is there anyone who prefers to play vanilla without New Worlds in a competitive mode?

I cant speak for everyone, but i think the current Arena Season was just an accident due to lack of organization. I am a Guru myself, but i never was asked if i wanted to be one, I simply received a notification and i didnt know what being a game guru was and i wasnt particularly interested. I just play games here actively but i almsot never watch discussions or forums, thus i almost always miss the voting for the arena season, and here there was no exception.

Apparently there was a votation to pick the next arena season and my guess is that nobody, or just a very reduced amount of people, voted. Having a decent number of people voted, the result would be different, because no matter the activity or the level, only a big minority prefeer to play without starting worlds. For me, allowing the player to choose a second world removes a lot of rng from the game, and it lets your strategy be much more cohesive with your starting hand.

Did the proposition exclusively suggest excluding New Worlds option?
I agree this being a result from lack of organization. New Worlds is a must-have option for competitive RtfG games.

Can we get this changed? I think this is a small change and would be really appreciated by majority of the players.

Agreed with above

Wonderful Plays wrote: ↑07 October 2021, 23:10My question would be this is there anyone who prefers to play vanilla without New Worlds in a competitive mode?

I'm not playing the game, so don't put much value on my opinion but random start can force you to try to do good things with a bad start, which is not rewarded otherwise.

But from what I read here, I suppose the rng part is way too annoying compared to that small argument.

Romain672 wrote: ↑09 October 2021, 13:40

Wonderful Plays wrote: ↑07 October 2021, 23:10My question would be this is there anyone who prefers to play vanilla without New Worlds in a competitive mode?

I'm not playing the game, so don't put much value on my opinion but random start can force you to try to do good things with a bad start, which is not rewarded otherwise.

But from what I read here, I suppose the rng part is way too annoying compared to that small argument.

I can see that, but I think it can be fun for a few games. RFTG is something that you spam a lot of games on, so controlling RNG contributes to much more enjoyment.