Board Game Arena

Hi,
In 7 players game, there should always be 3 sabs. If there are only 2, in 99% of the games, they will lose.

Thanks!

Nope. the balance depends a lot on the cards that each side have. Anyway, I don't think it is board game arena's role to change a game. It has been designed that way by the author for a reason !

The chance of having two saboteurs is very low .

I would suggest the game authors to add a small variant, when you have 7 players and more.

For instance, the rule for 7 players would then be :

4 diggers & 3 saboteurs
or
5 diggers & 2 saboteurs
or
4 diggers & 2 saboteurs & 1 selfish

The same idea would also apply for more players.


Following this idea : random selfish would add some suspense and suspiciousness.
If admins can read this and eventually add a new variant, this would be great !

Regards,
Y.

GingoO wrote:Nope. the balance depends a lot on the cards that each side have.

The unbalance you should say.
At least you can't balance the game at the random card level, but it should be at the repartition. There is no point playing a no-match, it's more a pain to wait other players "playing". Discard all ? Hey I'm not that kind of players, I prefer balanced games.

Oso wrote:The chance of having two saboteurs is very low .

Not really, unless I'm cursed, because simply you can be sab 3 times in a game.
But when it happens its LOSS for the sab, and it's a pain when it happens 2 times in a game.

the real secret to fixing this is to add sab2 to the mix!

Also the 7 player game seems to be having 2 sabs a lot more now seems at least 2 of the 3 rounds have 2 sabs they should adjust it to maybe 20% of the time 2 sabs...horribly unbalanced for 2 sabs.

Its just useless to get 2vs 5 games

johnxxx wrote:Hi,
In 7 players game, there should always be 3 sabs. If there are only 2, in 99% of the games, they will lose.

Thanks!

I respectfully disagree. First, the existence of 2-sab rounds are necessary to make 3-sab rounds more interesting (by increasing uncertainty and making life easier for undercover sabs who are the spice of the game). And second, due to the Saboteur scoring rules, 2-sab rounds can be viewed not so much as "failed rounds" with uneven balance between 2 teams, but rather as digger versus digger competitions which follow their own logic (although many of the players, me included, prefer not to see it like this, at least most of the time). All in all, 2-sab rounds add some depth and strategical variety to the game and are important part of it.

I'm so tired of rounds when i'm one sab in a 2 vs 5. I'm playing to have fun and these rounds are the complete opposite of fun. The only way to hope to win the round for the sabs is to expect a digger who plays such a weirdo to be broken by his teammates, to rebalance the round.
Please create a variant for forcing 3 vs 4 in 7 players games, let the hosts choose between standard rule or this new rule.