Board Game Arena

The problem with Alhambra is that if you don't get a lot of double actions in the first half, you can
easily be behind more than 20 points after the second scoring. It would help if there was an option
to play only with a final scoring. Since Boardgameareana will only allow official variations typically,
there would need to be some persuading the publisher.

Since that changes the whole dynamic of the game I doubt the publisher will agree.

The game has 3 scoring phases for a reason- because that's how the publisher designed and tested it
Would be a completely different, and not as good game, with only 1 scoring phase

I noted now 14 games where someone was ahead by 30 points after the second scoring and the game was
basically over

I'd be curious about this: Is it due to better play that someone got ahead so far during the first two scorings, or can that happen due to sheer luck?

Removing first 2 scoring rounds means everybody hold on money until they can perfect pay EVERYTHING (until end game). There is not much decision making in such games anymore.

The 2 in between scores let you actually build wall/buildings in between and you consider overpaying, meaning: decisions. Which is good!

Getting a lot of double actions in the first half is a lot of luck. If someone takes tiles without double actions early,
they typically lose. Top players hold on money until they can perfect pay nearly EVERYTHING until end game now. By not having 3 scoring rounds, the double actions everyone gets would average out to be more equal.

asd123321 wrote: ↑05 March 2024, 03:07 Getting a lot of double actions in the first half is a lot of luck. If someone takes tiles without double actions early,
they typically lose. Top players hold on money until they can perfect pay nearly EVERYTHING until end game now. By not having 3 scoring rounds, the double actions everyone gets would average out to be more equal.

It's not luck it's planning. Paying the exact amount for tiles to get a second action is a key aspect of the game. Not doing so means you are limiting the number of actions you carry out in a game. So yes doing it too many times may well lose you the game. It's all part of the decision making aspect to the game - overpay now or grab money and hope your opponent doesn't take it before you can pay exact. There are times when overpaying makes sense (overdue a scoring round and it would give you the most, the last one of that set and it gives you an advantage, your opponent has picked up a card allowing them to pay exactly for it next time and put them ahead of you), and knowing when to do it can be game changing.

Top players do NOT hold onto money until they can pay for everything (just had a look at the last couple of games of the top ranked) indeed doing so would penalise them in the first two scoring rounds.