Board Game Arena

Any suggestions for how to contend with someone who isn't really playing the game - they're just pinning and countering every move?

I mean, don't get me wrong - I know it's technically a valid/sound strategy. It's just kind of tedious and obnoxious IMO. I'd rather go up against someone who's willing to risk a bit for the sake of their strategy and an interesting game. As opposed to someone who's just going for the chokehold until there's nothing left.

What do you mean by "really playing the game"? Pinning and counter-pinning have always been a huge part of good strategy in Hive. Piece mobility is a key strategic factor, both increasing your own and limiting your opponent's.

I have two suggestions for how you might contend with such opponents:

1. Don't. Limit your opponent selection to players with lower Elo scores. Those players may play more casually and/or not have learned good strategy and tactics (including piece mobility and pinning) yet.

2. Learn to pin and counter-pin better than they do. That will take experience, playing lots of games, and learning from your losses, but you could also watch some strategy videos on youtube and/or read Ingersoll's or Schultz's book (or both) on Hive strategy. You may find, as so many Hive players have, that the game is even more interesting when you play it carefully and strategically.

I had a feeling I was going to get this kind of reply...

Maybe I should clarify - I'm not playing recklessly or non-strategically (or looking for opponents who play that way). I'm saying there's a subtle difference between someone who's pinning and counter-pinning and someone who's only strategy seems to be "hunker down" and "lock it up." As in - there's a perfectly legitimate move that will win them tempo or allow them to add strength to the board (i.e., seizing initiative and actually "playing the game") and instead they just pin and block, pin and block, pin and block. Until there are no plays left.

And again, I get that it's a valid strategy. Just seems overly conservative, tedious, and lacking creativity to me. I enjoy playing opponents who are working all of the core gameplay elements (tempo, strength, and mobility). I don't love playing opponents who seem to only have one trick - feels like playing a bot.

Because ultimately I agree - the game is way more interesting when you play it carefully and strategically. But it's even more fun when you're both trying to outsmart each other.

I favour an outer-hive/mobility/ant-game play style myself, the kind you dislike. I know that it is not possible to lock an opponent down with pins and blocks without having the tempo and force to execute those pins and blocks. If you are consistently finding yourself locked down, then your opponents are outplaying you in these aspects of strategy as well.

I stand by my two recommendations. Well, let's eliminate the first since you've indicated it does not appeal. But I still recommend learning the pinning and counter-pinning strategy and play-style better. This is what I did when I had hard losses to chaotic inner hive play, or to skilled early-game beetle blitzes. I experimented with those strategies myself.

This helped me not only learn them better in order to defend against them, but also to add them to my own repertoire of strategic options. I believe this approach makes one a stronger player. Learn to play all aspects of the game well--the game as it is, not as you might prefer it to be. The reality is that if you let opponents lock you down to having no move, then they will do that, and by doing so they will be "really playing"--not only trying to outsmart, but succeeding.

As I have often said, "Surrounding your opponent's Queen is not the strategy in Hive, that's just how you win!"

More seriously, post a link to one of the games in question and I am sure that someone will review it and comment on it.
You might even make it on my YouTube channel.

PsyDinSB wrote: ↑02 September 2024, 16:36 But it's even more fun when you're both trying to outsmart each other.

Are you winning these games? Drawing these games? Or losing these games?

If you are winning, you should have no complaints. Someone is playing sub-optimally and you are taking advantage.

If you are drawing, then I understand why it would be a little annoying but that doesn't mean there isn't room for you to recognize that your opponent is playing for a draw and not letting it happen, thereby outsmarting them.

If you are losing, it sounds like your opponent is playing to outsmart you and succeeding. Why is it your opponent that needs to change?

ringersoll wrote: ↑04 September 2024, 22:15 As I have often said, "Surrounding your opponent's Queen is not the strategy in Hive, that's just how you win!"

More seriously, post a link to one of the games in question and I am sure that someone will review it and comment on it.
You might even make it on my YouTube channel.

Woah, Randy is here! Great job on your YouTube channel. I’ve enjoyed many of your analysis videos.

It's been long stablished that controlling and limiting your opponent's pieces is the main concern in Hive, otherwise White always win because they got the uphand when it comes to Tempo. If Black doesn't try to limit White, Black always loses, and if White doesn't try to overcome Black's complications by creating some of their own, limiting one or two of the Black pieces, White will lose the Tempo advantage and ultimately lose the game.

Hive is a game that revolves around control/limitation and tempo.

It doesn't have a board, so it doesn't have the same strategies/mechanics as in chess, such as:

• Limiting opponent's pieces mobility to certain squares (usually by pawn moves)
  Attacking a specific "side of the board"
  No discovered checks or attacks
  No forks
  No double check
  No pawn promotion
  No skewer
  No whatever other mechanic inherent to chess apart from:

Turn-based game, checkmate, pins, and constriction, that's it.

Even the pin concept is different in Hive than it is in Chess. Pinning a piece in chess refers to attacking a certain piece in a way it cannot move otherwise it would open a direct attack to one own's king. In Hive, pinning a piece merely means attaching one of your own pieces to the enemies so they can't move as not to break the "one-hive" rule. (the hive can never be parted) If you are the one making the pin, then you got the freedom to decided when you want to move that piece away, your opponent on the other hand, doesn't.

I myself have complained about playing against stronger players on this Website (given the fact that the amount of players here is not that many, you will most likely than not face stronger opponents who are addicted to the game, I'm almost becoming one), because I don't feel like I learn much when playing against someone who is too much better than me. I feel like I learn the best when I play someone who is slightly better than I am or slightly worse or even about the same level.

But all in all, I never complained about what strategy they used to win. I know that if I lost it is simply because my opponent is better than I am, there is no secret in that.

It's funny how it is usually newer and weaker players who always complain about how a certain game should be played (it doesn't matter if it's Hive, checkers or even tic tac toe)

If you feel limited in what you can do creativity-wise in your games, it is simply because your opponet is outplaying you.

I take it that this game is not as cool as it seems as the fool proof player will always win if they start white.. is that really so?

oottam47 wrote: ↑09 November 2025, 20:14 I take it that this game is not as cool as it seems as the fool proof player will always win if they start white.. is that really so?

Hive probably has a slight first-player advantage. Probably someone can provide some statistics for us. I don't think it matters what would happen between two "fool proof" players.

I also don't think a slight first-player advantage is a problem. It's true of many, many games, especially two-player, abstract, perfect information games like Hive. Chess, for example, also has a first-player advantage (and it's probably bigger than Hive's), and that hasn't stopped its being a popular and worthwhile strategy game for centuries.