A problem with this game is that player order is very important, especially during scoring rounds but also generally speaking as being a few moves ahead throughout the game is an advantage.
I would love to see statistics about how people fare depending on the starting position for each player count...
Many games have an advantage to the first player(s) but mitigate it either by some starting bonus/malus or by playing last being an advantage in the very last turn of the game.
That's not the case in Tikal in a 3 or 4 player game, the last player will also be last to play in the final scoring which is a disadvantage
(There are 8 columns of 5 hexagons on the map but 4 hexagons are pre-printed. So there are 36 normal turns in this game and 4 scoring rounds)
You can of course balance this with advanced mode but advanced mode is slow, extremely so in a 3-4 player game in turn-based mode.
Other games that have bidding to determine the first player are all much more light on the bidding.
So here are some ideas...
But before I continue, yes, I know that no rule variant can be implemented without an agreement with the publisher/author...
--------------------------------------------------
1) The only thing that can be done without an agreement is a better UI for the advanced mode.
This is a bit tricky to make good because the game's bidding system is complex but it could work like this:
Likewise, an Auto-pass of level B means that when it is your turn to bid, the game will automatically pass if the current winning bid is B or more.
This means that you are not *forced* to bid in advance and you can keep a some wiggle room but you can make some decisions in advance.
This, however, is of limited help as it relies on the players and because the amount we are willing to bid often depends on who is likely to win the bid which we usually cannot assess in advance.
Still, if you know that you'll bid at least 2 no matter what and no more than 5 no matter what, it just might speed up things a bit...
--
2) Advantage of being first can be mitigated by reducing the number of actions for the first players on the first round.
For instance, in a 4 players game, for the 1st round, 1st player could get 6 actions, 2nd player gets 7, 3rd player gets 9 and 4th player gets the full 10.
--
3) Final scoring round could be in reverse order.
--
4) After 18 turns in a 2 or 3 player game or 16 turns in a 4 player game, shift play order by 1 position (2-3p game) or 2 (4p game) (or reverse game order).
--
5) Turn order for all the 4 scoring rounds could be fixed and independent of who plays the volcano.
I don't know what would be the most balanced but maybe the 1st player would go first for the 1st scoring etc...
And in a 3 player game, it could go 1, 2, 3, 2.
Note that playing a volcano would then become a disadvantage as they are somewhat less interesting to place than other tiles.
--
6) We could have some form of stream-lined bidding.
There are *lots* of ways to do this so here are a few. Note that some of the options below are mutually exclusive.
6a) Bid for positions before the start of the game (no tiles revealed) then play as usual in the basic mode
6b) Bid for positions at the start of each scoring round. "Normal" order is restored once the scoring round is over. (Plays essentially like basic mode except that turn order for scoring rounds is different)
6c) Single round simultaneous bidding: instead of players bidding one by one until every player but one has passed, everyone (that is allowed to participate in the bidding) bid secretly and the bids are then revealed. Whoever has bid the most, wins the bid and pays the victory points.
This can be used to speed up advanced mode or in conjunction with one 6a or 6b.
6d) Integrated bidding for all positions.
Having to bid for 1st position then for 2nd position etc is especially gruesome in a 4 player game.
We could do this instead:
It can also be combined with 6c as long as you determine in advance (at random or in some other fair manner) who wins the ex-aequos.
I would love to see statistics about how people fare depending on the starting position for each player count...
Many games have an advantage to the first player(s) but mitigate it either by some starting bonus/malus or by playing last being an advantage in the very last turn of the game.
That's not the case in Tikal in a 3 or 4 player game, the last player will also be last to play in the final scoring which is a disadvantage
(There are 8 columns of 5 hexagons on the map but 4 hexagons are pre-printed. So there are 36 normal turns in this game and 4 scoring rounds)
You can of course balance this with advanced mode but advanced mode is slow, extremely so in a 3-4 player game in turn-based mode.
Other games that have bidding to determine the first player are all much more light on the bidding.
So here are some ideas...
But before I continue, yes, I know that no rule variant can be implemented without an agreement with the publisher/author...
--------------------------------------------------
1) The only thing that can be done without an agreement is a better UI for the advanced mode.
This is a bit tricky to make good because the game's bidding system is complex but it could work like this:
- If a bidding is ongoing, player can define, even if it's not their turn to bid, an auto-bid level for the current auction and and separate auto-pass level for the current auction
- At any moment, player can also define an auto-bid level for the *next* auction and and auto-pass level for the *next* auction
- When a new auction starts, options for *next* auction are copied into the *current* auction options and default values are set for the *next* auction options (0 for auto-bid and some big value like 20 for auto-pass)
Likewise, an Auto-pass of level B means that when it is your turn to bid, the game will automatically pass if the current winning bid is B or more.
This means that you are not *forced* to bid in advance and you can keep a some wiggle room but you can make some decisions in advance.
This, however, is of limited help as it relies on the players and because the amount we are willing to bid often depends on who is likely to win the bid which we usually cannot assess in advance.
Still, if you know that you'll bid at least 2 no matter what and no more than 5 no matter what, it just might speed up things a bit...
--
2) Advantage of being first can be mitigated by reducing the number of actions for the first players on the first round.
For instance, in a 4 players game, for the 1st round, 1st player could get 6 actions, 2nd player gets 7, 3rd player gets 9 and 4th player gets the full 10.
--
3) Final scoring round could be in reverse order.
--
4) After 18 turns in a 2 or 3 player game or 16 turns in a 4 player game, shift play order by 1 position (2-3p game) or 2 (4p game) (or reverse game order).
--
5) Turn order for all the 4 scoring rounds could be fixed and independent of who plays the volcano.
I don't know what would be the most balanced but maybe the 1st player would go first for the 1st scoring etc...
And in a 3 player game, it could go 1, 2, 3, 2.
Note that playing a volcano would then become a disadvantage as they are somewhat less interesting to place than other tiles.
--
6) We could have some form of stream-lined bidding.
There are *lots* of ways to do this so here are a few. Note that some of the options below are mutually exclusive.
6a) Bid for positions before the start of the game (no tiles revealed) then play as usual in the basic mode
6b) Bid for positions at the start of each scoring round. "Normal" order is restored once the scoring round is over. (Plays essentially like basic mode except that turn order for scoring rounds is different)
6c) Single round simultaneous bidding: instead of players bidding one by one until every player but one has passed, everyone (that is allowed to participate in the bidding) bid secretly and the bids are then revealed. Whoever has bid the most, wins the bid and pays the victory points.
This can be used to speed up advanced mode or in conjunction with one 6a or 6b.
6d) Integrated bidding for all positions.
Having to bid for 1st position then for 2nd position etc is especially gruesome in a 4 player game.
We could do this instead:
- who ever bids the most pays his bid and play first
- In a 3-4p game, the second highest bidder pays half his bid (rounded up) and plays second
- In a 4p game, the 3rd highest bidder plays a third of his bid (rounded up) and plays third
- smallest bidder pays 0 and plays last
- In case of ex-aequo, last to pass is considered to have bid more.
It can also be combined with 6c as long as you determine in advance (at random or in some other fair manner) who wins the ex-aequos.