Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/bugs
Post Reply
thg0724
Posts: 87
Joined: 25 December 2022, 15:25

Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Post by thg0724 »

I play almost exclusively three-player TTR, so am speaking primarily of that game. Feel free to add in thoughts about the topic for other numbers of players.

I have found myself keeping three tickets more and more often. I don't want to waste a turn later in the game drawing destinations, usually better to complete what you've got and then build more long routes to rack up points and end the game as quickly as possible. When I do not keep three routes it is usually because there is one that is on the east coast that would take some short routes to connect. A Boston-Miami sort of ticket. Short routes are bad! Especially when those short tickets are not easy to connect to the longer routes in the west. If I have only shortish routes that are not convenient to connect, then I will sometimes toss one back and draw a second set of tickets rather early in hopes of getting a coordinating ticket, especially a long one.

Anecdotal evidence suggests to me that higher rated players (~400+ ELO) tend to not get involved in ticket drawing games, they are mostly trying to end games quickly. So, I think I am on the right path!

I understand each game is different, not one approach is right all the time. But, does this sound about right for three players?
User avatar
DrakeStorm
Posts: 11
Joined: 24 January 2012, 02:12

Re: Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Post by DrakeStorm »

3P games are pretty tough to play since you can only use single routes. 5P is pretty crowded also.

I don't play a lot of 3P, but I would think keeping 3 tickets is dangerous, and unless they match up really well, you could easily get blocked out of a ticket. Of course if you are playing with non-blockers, then keeping more tickets would be better. Almost all Top players will avoid 3P games so you probably have a better chance of playing against non-blockers.

In 2P, you almost always only should draw more tickets in the last couple of turns if you are losing, but in 3P I could see drawing tickets in the middle of the game after you have secured some of your routes (as well as see where other players are going), and can tell what you might be able to complete.

In 3P, you really can't block if you start with bad tickets because you wouldn't know which player to block (as opposed to 2P games). So the only way to pull out a win would probably be to draw more tickets unless you can end the game fast enough, but that isn't always possible because in a 3P game there aren't as many big routes to take (i.e. 3 people competing for them rather than 2).
ExaltedAngel
Posts: 145
Joined: 16 January 2021, 22:15

Re: Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Post by ExaltedAngel »

I'm not a top player (my Elo ranges from 450 to 650 depending on how often I forget to be in arena queue and get punished for that), but I think I can answer properly to your question even tho this is just my opinion and some top player may eventually refute it.

I premise that I tend to avoid playing 3p TTR on 2-5p maps. Since here we only have USA for now, I have very few 3p games.
This is because in 3p games variance hits harder due to the combination of double routes being disabled and luck factor in how the objectives are distributed on map. Often one random player gets an advantage just because the other two are contesting the same routes each-other having similar objectives. In 2p games this is not a problem, and in 4p games the double routes help mitigate the issue. I have no clue about 5p, but it sounds just like chaos.
Anyway, what I'm gonna say I think applies to 3p games too, actually it might be even more relevant in those than how it is in low-rating 2p games, due to higher risk of being blocked/hindered by chance.
thg0724 wrote: 26 February 2023, 23:56 Anecdotal evidence suggests to me that higher rated players (~400+ ELO) tend to not get involved in ticket drawing games, they are mostly trying to end games quickly. So, I think I am on the right path!
This is true, but needs a bit of refinment: I think you had all the thinking process right then stumbled on a (kinda) wrong deduction.
Drawing tickets is generally bad, true. Short routes are bad, ending the game fast is good.

So keeping 3 objectives is better than 2? NO!
(I want to emphasize that here I'm talking in general, a sort of TTR heuristic that helps you understand the general idea to follow, then each situation is unique)

Keeping 3 tickets is good when you basically get the 3rd (almost) for free by completing the best set of 2. In most other cases, keeping a third objective is an unneeded risk. The bias that makes you feel like you need it is either "I need more objective points" or "once I finish my objectives I'm left with many cars, so I need more objectives" and they are both kinda wrong. Points are made mainly from long segments. This makes prolonging your route to places you don't need to go just to claim long segments for points and longest route the best way to deal with cars in surplus. Just by doing so while having a fairly easy pair of objectives you will have 90+% winrate against anyone below 300 Elo (I'm talking about 2p, 3p might be slightly different but the concept is the same).
The main focus when choosing objectives is that you want to be sure you are able to complete your route nmw and close the game as fast as you can.

Remember: higher rated opponents will try to block you if you go for greedy objectives. This is mostly true in 2p, but in 3p people often even block you just by playing their own game and this is why I think everything I said applies all the same if not more.


EDIT: I wrote my answer before reading DrakeStorm's (he is a real top player) and gotta admit that I missed the fact that it might be harder to end games fast in 3p due to lack of big routes, so drawing objectives mid-game actually makes sense in the right situation, but I still think all the rest still applies.
thg0724
Posts: 87
Joined: 25 December 2022, 15:25

Re: Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Post by thg0724 »

ExaltedAngel wrote: 27 February 2023, 07:48Keeping 3 tickets is good when you basically get the 3rd (almost) for free by completing the best set of 2. In most other cases, keeping a third objective is an unneeded risk. The bias that makes you feel like you need it is either "I need more objective points" or "once I finish my objectives I'm left with many cars, so I need more objectives" and they are both kinda wrong. Points are made mainly from long segments. This makes prolonging your route to places you don't need to go just to claim long segments for points and longest route the best way to deal with cars in surplus.
We're mostly on the same page. In three player there are fewer 6-routes per person so it's often not as easy to simply complete those to finish out the game. Something like Calgary-Salt Lake City that I might consider a throw-away may turn in to a useful addition, especially if I might be trying to grow my train (which almost always happens in the west rather than the east). New York-Atlanta would surely get tossed back unless it overlapped with LA-New York or New York-Dallas, I would never consider keeping it with SF-Atlanta.

Average number of route points probably declines as the number of players increases. Certain is less in 4-player than in 3-player. I'm not as confident in the difference between 2-player and 3-player.
ExaltedAngel wrote: 27 February 2023, 07:48Remember: higher rated opponents will try to block you if you go for greedy objectives. This is mostly true in 2p, but in 3p people often even block you just by playing their own game and this is why I think everything I said applies all the same if not more.
I started playing some 2-player today and my instinct was to simply keep the most suitable two tickets unless the third fit very well.
ExaltedAngel wrote: 27 February 2023, 07:48EDIT: I wrote my answer before reading DrakeStorm's (he is a real top player) and gotta admit that I missed the fact that it might be harder to end games fast in 3p due to lack of big routes, so drawing objectives mid-game actually makes sense in the right situation, but I still think all the rest still applies.
Or, maybe keep a not-so-perfect third from the start and don't waste a turn drawing tickets later!?

Thanks for musing with me, I appreciate the discussion.
ExaltedAngel
Posts: 145
Joined: 16 January 2021, 22:15

Re: Kept Tickets (Mostly 3-Player)

Post by ExaltedAngel »

thg0724 wrote: 27 February 2023, 18:19 I started playing some 2-player today and my instinct was to simply keep the most suitable two tickets unless the third fit very well.
Yeah that's generally correct
thg0724 wrote: 27 February 2023, 18:19 Or, maybe keep a not-so-perfect third from the start and don't waste a turn drawing tickets later!?
Keep in mind that's not only a matter of how the third objective fits in your route, but also how easy it is to complete considered the other players involved. This means that while drawing mid-game costs you a turn, having a better understanding of the board situation has a lot of value when choosing, which is basically what DrakeStorm was saying in the third paragraph of his message.
Post Reply

Return to “Ticket to Ride”