Another Arena season, another boring set of factions

[donkeykong66]

Once again the topic at hand is the addition of factions into competitive play and you compared that to chess and duck chess. How does swapping swarmlings for wisp or engineers for dynion turn this into duck chess? The rules are the same. So why do people keep making this comparison?

I know the comparison doesn't quite work, but I do think there's a a significant change by including fan factions in terms of overhead. Swarmlings, Wisps and Mermaids are all blue factions, but all play completely differently. Their gameplan, expansion path, prefered track and bonus tiles, and the like are all different, and learning all this takes time, and takes exponentially longer once we increase the number of factions.
Also, as I have mentioned in a previous post, out of all the additions, fan factions is one I'd be happiest to include in a future season, I just want to hold off until we have official confirmation they are in their final form and not undergoing any more changes.

Ok. Lets talk about f&i factions without landscapes first. I think the first issue at hand is are they too strong? .... There are several factions that can get out multiple dwellings under certain circumstances 1st rd. Mermaids are probably the biggest culprit.

My issue isn't that they're too strong, it's that they're too disruptive. If I'm on a table with one stronger player and two weaker players, it costs me nearly nothing to dig away a crucial connection hex from the strong opponent (even better if it's not their home terrain and it costs me not too much). Getting out that many dwellings isn't the issue for me - if mermaids do it it's very predictable - they need specific starting locations, one of only a few bonus tiles, and if you tell the entire table you're gonna get that many dwellings out, you can with very high accuracy predict which locations (and most of them are their home terrain). If a fire faction announces "I'm going to put down 6 dwellings this round" you have really no idea where they're going.

[ChiefPointThief]

It's fine if you like that and want to play with it, but trying to argue they are simply different versions/ideas of base games factions feels very disingenuous.

If the new clans were all the same as the base clans, then there wouldn't be much point in having them. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

Even the base game Terra Mystica embraces the fact that different clans/abilities can play together in one game. And competitively that's what the auction feature is for.

You're missing the point.

The fan factions expansion has shown how you could have added a lot more factions to the game that work within the base mechanics just fine.

Those of us that don't like FI are telling you that it becomes a different game for us. The base game factions all:
Have a home terrain they want to expand to so they can build on it for free
Use spades to terraform hexes to their color
Must build on a hex to claim it for themselves, otherwise it can be changed by others

FI factions break all these fundamental rules that every other base faction and fan faction follow.

Many enjoy these changes, and that's fine if you do. But while the poster above me more or less argues that more expansions = more better, not everyone has to see it that way. Yes most of the community has embraced the mini expansions, variable turn order, and auction. That doesn't neccessarily mean FI factions should be embraced either--they are a much bigger change to the game, and it should not be shocking that people don't like them.

I'm sure if Merchants ever gets added to BGA plenty will love it and want to play with it as well, but there will be another subset that just does not enjoy it. It should be very easy to conceive that some future expansion could be made to Terra Mystica that would no longer make you enjoy it.

Please note I'm not arguing FI factions are too strong. I'm not arguing they should never be included in arena. I'm simply here defending the very simple idea that some in the community don't like FI factions and why, and why that's a valid thing. What should arena be is a lot harder question, and while I have opinions on that, I don't much care honestly. I still think most TM players would be a lot better off ignoring arena completely and just making simple games with the settings they want. (I also think the community would be better off if Terra Mystica had less options, but that's a battle I've long since lost as we're clearly not going to be removing things, so oh well).

TLDR; Some of you seem to be pretty set on the idea that since an expansion exists, we should adopt it and play with it. That's why the comparison to chess and chess variants keeps coming up by the way--some of us simply are trying to tell you that we don't agree that more stuff = more better, and we've chosen to draw the line at what feels like "Terra Mystica" to us at a certain point. For me, that's FI factions--it now feels like another game, one I'm far less interested in.

Firstly, there are two sub discussions going on here. One for fan factions and one for f&I. I don't think more expansions = better. What I am simply stating is that additions can and have made this community better and it doesn't have to remain static which is what some people proclaim. I do think that the addition of fan factions are a no brainer which you and donkey don't seem to have a problem with so there is that. We just disagree on f&i. There are some players that said they play with them from time to time but wouldn't want it to be the norm. I agree with the players below. It doesn't have to be every season but they shouldn't permanently be banned. I don't see the problem in having a season here or there that includes them.

As far as your fundamentals ice follows the color wheel and so does half of the variable factions. The only one that doesn't is fire. This is not why people dislike fire though. They dislike it because they can "disrupt". The fire factions could be modified to follow the color wheel but the same people would still not like it. I can understand not liking that fire can transform a hex that you can't transform back because they have the ability to dig multiple times early. What I don't understand is why that is so bothersome for ice. They must dig and have nowhere else to build other than the one or 2 hexes they just used all their resources to get. Every faction starts the game w/ 14 (i think) hexes of their home terrain. Ice has to start from the ground up.

What is your opinion on alchemist? To me having coins is a fundamental part of the game. All factions must have coins to do anything in this game except alchemist. I've seen alchemist have massive scoring rounds with no coins.

[ChiefPointThief]

Once again the topic at hand is the addition of factions into competitive play and you compared that to chess and duck chess. How does swapping swarmlings for wisp or engineers for dynion turn this into duck chess? The rules are the same. So why do people keep making this comparison?

Also, as I have mentioned in a previous post, out of all the additions, fan factions is one I'd be happiest to include in a future season, I just want to hold off until we have official confirmation they are in their final form and not undergoing any more changes.

Getting out that many dwellings isn't the issue for me - if mermaids do it it's very predictable - they need specific starting locations, one of only a few bonus tiles, and if you tell the entire table you're gonna get that many dwellings out, you can with very high accuracy predict which locations (and most of them are their home terrain). If a fire faction announces "I'm going to put down 6 dwellings this round" you have really no idea where they're going.

And this is the reason why more factions are a good thing not bad. Predictability isn't good. You've express your opinion about fire but what is your opinion about ice? I don't think you stated it unless I missed it.

[donkeykong66]

Once again the topic at hand is the addition of factions into competitive play and you compared that to chess and duck chess. How does swapping swarmlings for wisp or engineers for dynion turn this into duck chess? The rules are the same. So why do people keep making this comparison?

Also, as I have mentioned in a previous post, out of all the additions, fan factions is one I'd be happiest to include in a future season, I just want to hold off until we have official confirmation they are in their final form and not undergoing any more changes.

Getting out that many dwellings isn't the issue for me - if mermaids do it it's very predictable - they need specific starting locations, one of only a few bonus tiles, and if you tell the entire table you're gonna get that many dwellings out, you can with very high accuracy predict which locations (and most of them are their home terrain). If a fire faction announces "I'm going to put down 6 dwellings this round" you have really no idea where they're going.

And this is the reason why more factions are a good thing not bad. Predictability isn't good. You've express your opinion about fire but what is your opinion about ice? I don't think you stated it unless I missed it.

I think some amount of predictability is good (and even necessary) to master the game. I think we wouldn't have so many deep strategy discussions if (let's say) we were to completely invent a new set of factions every arena season and having those thrown at us. And in fact, I still see strong players taking lines I would've never thought of. The game still leaves many interesting forking decisions and choices to be made. The "good" predictability I touched upon is that when I tell you "mermaids started with 6 dwellings" you have a rough idea of what they done, even if you don't see the board. But if I tell you "dragonlords started with 6 dwellings" you can literally draw up any set of 6 hexes (somewhat close together) and they could've achieved that. In a game that revolves around some kind of area control - with a limited set of hexes (reasonably) available to "normal" factions, that is an issue to me. Even more, many factions truly care about a couple key hexes - both for town space and for network considerations. Knowing which other factions might be able to disrupt that, and which ones you have to fight over hexes with makes the game less swingy. It also leaves you with the option to have a backup plan in case you do get disrupted in the way you expected. My quirk with fire factions is that each and everyone of these hexes is under threat, and I'm not willing to play a 2hr game where a fire faction can just spend their first 2 moves destroying both my entire gameplan by taking away 2 of those hexes.

As for ice factions - I haven't played them too much and I'm somewhat ambivalent. At least they follow the color wheel, and terraform in normal ways (workers / spade actions), and I think the benefit of leaving ice hexes untouched is outweighed by also having to terraform their "home terrain".

[Patrick of the Isles]

That's also why you can change the settings each season. You can switch between base and expansions. Keep everyone happy. Why does it just have to be the base game?

The current arena settings have expansion scoring, which is unacceptable to those of us who enjoy the balance of the base game. We have not had a base game season in a long time.

[ljazz7]

I am looking to relaunch the Madness League which features games played with all factions played async/turn based. For anyone looking to play with those factions while also contribute to the balance of them, please join my bga group as well as the discord here https://discord.gg/ZT7XQQ7rpx

There you can find any information about the games, register, and contribute any thoughts on how to improve things as well.

[coolkid888]

the problem with dragonlords isn't just the unpredictability to me, alone I think thats just fine, its that they can king make better than any other faction early on in the game through their unpredictability. Nobody wants to cue up and a game and have no clue weather the dragonlords are going to screw you up or someone else this time around. Without any detrement to themselves, where if another faction makes an unpredictable move it usually involves a triple dig or a worker dig that hurts them(just hopefully less than you)

[ChiefPointThief]

Also, as I have mentioned in a previous post, out of all the additions, fan factions is one I'd be happiest to include in a future season, I just want to hold off until we have official confirmation they are in their final form and not undergoing any more changes.

Getting out that many dwellings isn't the issue for me - if mermaids do it it's very predictable - they need specific starting locations, one of only a few bonus tiles, and if you tell the entire table you're gonna get that many dwellings out, you can with very high accuracy predict which locations (and most of them are their home terrain). If a fire faction announces "I'm going to put down 6 dwellings this round" you have really no idea where they're going.

And this is the reason why more factions are a good thing not bad. Predictability isn't good. You've express your opinion about fire but what is your opinion about ice? I don't think you stated it unless I missed it.

I think some amount of predictability is good (and even necessary) to master the game. I think we wouldn't have so many deep strategy discussions if (let's say) we were to completely invent a new set of factions every arena season and having those thrown at us. And in fact, I still see strong players taking lines I would've never thought of. The game still leaves many interesting forking decisions and choices to be made. The "good" predictability I touched upon is that when I tell you "mermaids started with 6 dwellings" you have a rough idea of what they done, even if you don't see the board. But if I tell you "dragonlords started with 6 dwellings" you can literally draw up any set of 6 hexes (somewhat close together) and they could've achieved that. In a game that revolves around some kind of area control - with a limited set of hexes (reasonably) available to "normal" factions, that is an issue to me. Even more, many factions truly care about a couple key hexes - both for town space and for network considerations. Knowing which other factions might be able to disrupt that, and which ones you have to fight over hexes with makes the game less swingy. It also leaves you with the option to have a backup plan in case you do get disrupted in the way you expected. My quirk with fire factions is that each and everyone of these hexes is under threat, and I'm not willing to play a 2hr game where a fire faction can just spend their first 2 moves destroying both my entire gameplan by taking away 2 of those hexes.

As for ice factions - I haven't played them too much and I'm somewhat ambivalent. At least they follow the color wheel, and terraform in normal ways (workers / spade actions), and I think the benefit of leaving ice hexes untouched is outweighed by also having to terraform their "home terrain".

the problem with dragonlords isn't just the unpredictability to me, alone I think thats just fine, its that they can king make better than any other faction early on in the game through their unpredictability. Nobody wants to cue up and a game and have no clue weather the dragonlords are going to screw you up or someone else this time around. Without any detrement to themselves, where if another faction makes an unpredictable move it usually involves a triple dig or a worker dig that hurts them(just hopefully less than you)

It appears that most of the reasoning against f&I is for fire (more specifically dragonlords) and not ice. If it helps to bridge the gap just get rid of dragonlords (or fire as a whole) and allow ice. I like the design of acolytes better because they require more strategy (or different strategy depending on how you look at it) but I never see them get picked without landscapes. The two original fire factions are way less attractive without landscapes. So in conjunction with fan factions not having some fire factions probably wouldn't be that big of a loss. The only reasoning I saw against ice was that you cannot terraforn a hex once it is turned into ice. How often is it beneficial to terraform a hex your opponent already changed anyway? I can't remember the last time I saw this in a game. So it is a rare occurrence.

[donkeykong66]

I wouldn't say it's that rare of an occurence. If you have two colors next to each other, sometimes if you take double dig you leave another hex vulnerable. Sometimes this matters with cult digs too. Having color neighbours you have to be very careful about leaving your hexes dug but not built on.

[ChiefPointThief]

I wouldn't say it's that rare of an occurence. If you have two colors next to each other, sometimes if you take double dig you leave another hex vulnerable. Sometimes this matters with cult digs too. Having color neighbours you have to be very careful about leaving your hexes dug but not built on.

Let’s say on average you dig 5 hexes per game. To make it a nice round number let’s take a 20 game sample size (100 digs). How many times in a 20 game span are your opponents taking hexes that you terraformed and left open?