I see a lot of high level players taut the supremacy of 2p games in Terraforming Mars, mostly citing kingmaking as the reason. I think this is misguided.
Most multiplayer board games have some sort of kingmaking potential embedded in them. Terraforming Mars has slightly more of that with the implementation of Awards, for sure, but any high level player that played at a decent table can attest to: kingmaking (and princemaking) mostly happens when the skill level is vastly different from player to player. I have played many 3p Terraforming Mars games with good players where kingmaking was never an issue - people also tend to be less salty when they actually have a good understanding of the game.
The problem is the BGA arena setting. You have no good way to filter to get a decent table. Even 200ish players can get to Elite given enough games, so making your settings restricted to just Elite players while helps, is not a guarantee. Also there is a problem of actually getting games. Simply put: I do not want to wait for ages to get a table, that isn't guaranteed to be a competitive table anyway. My current setting for waiting time is Elite for green, Plat for green/brown (not sure what color to call the second setting), Gold for brown. This setting does get me a high level table from time to time - which I enjoy the most. But sometimes it nets me lower skill players, where most of the time I win simply by being better at the game. You might rightly call this impatience, but just looking at other people's arena history, I know that many people can relate to this.
Ark Nova, which is the most popular game on the site, and 2p in its arena, is a clear example of how reduced player count isn't gonna fix the issue. Most top level players have to grind on low rated players game after game without much challenge, gaining a miniscule amount of points (see discussion in here). Terraforming Mars would be the same: having to grind on random lower skill players with the occasional challenge.
I am not arguing that the next arena season should not be 2p. I am fine with that. I do prefer 3p games, as I think the game is best balanced around that player count, but 2p is fun as well. But I do have an issue with 2p supremacists claiming how that format is superior. It is not. 2p games are just easier to organize between good players. As an avid tabletop roleplaying game (TTRPG) player I can attest that scheduling is the bane of most group play.
The competitive scene is not at BGA arena. It is at tournaments hosted by third parties. TfM tourneys organized e.g. on Discord, similar to how Emu Cup is done for Ark Nova. If you want BGA's arena to be actually competitive, you have to change BGA's arena system itself - changing the player count isn't going to fix it. Either fix the arena system or just accept that it isn't the most competitive scene out there, and enjoy it for what it is. And while I do find a lot of issues with it, I do enjoy it.
Most multiplayer board games have some sort of kingmaking potential embedded in them. Terraforming Mars has slightly more of that with the implementation of Awards, for sure, but any high level player that played at a decent table can attest to: kingmaking (and princemaking) mostly happens when the skill level is vastly different from player to player. I have played many 3p Terraforming Mars games with good players where kingmaking was never an issue - people also tend to be less salty when they actually have a good understanding of the game.
The problem is the BGA arena setting. You have no good way to filter to get a decent table. Even 200ish players can get to Elite given enough games, so making your settings restricted to just Elite players while helps, is not a guarantee. Also there is a problem of actually getting games. Simply put: I do not want to wait for ages to get a table, that isn't guaranteed to be a competitive table anyway. My current setting for waiting time is Elite for green, Plat for green/brown (not sure what color to call the second setting), Gold for brown. This setting does get me a high level table from time to time - which I enjoy the most. But sometimes it nets me lower skill players, where most of the time I win simply by being better at the game. You might rightly call this impatience, but just looking at other people's arena history, I know that many people can relate to this.
Ark Nova, which is the most popular game on the site, and 2p in its arena, is a clear example of how reduced player count isn't gonna fix the issue. Most top level players have to grind on low rated players game after game without much challenge, gaining a miniscule amount of points (see discussion in here). Terraforming Mars would be the same: having to grind on random lower skill players with the occasional challenge.
I am not arguing that the next arena season should not be 2p. I am fine with that. I do prefer 3p games, as I think the game is best balanced around that player count, but 2p is fun as well. But I do have an issue with 2p supremacists claiming how that format is superior. It is not. 2p games are just easier to organize between good players. As an avid tabletop roleplaying game (TTRPG) player I can attest that scheduling is the bane of most group play.
The competitive scene is not at BGA arena. It is at tournaments hosted by third parties. TfM tourneys organized e.g. on Discord, similar to how Emu Cup is done for Ark Nova. If you want BGA's arena to be actually competitive, you have to change BGA's arena system itself - changing the player count isn't going to fix it. Either fix the arena system or just accept that it isn't the most competitive scene out there, and enjoy it for what it is. And while I do find a lot of issues with it, I do enjoy it.
