Board Game Arena

I actually do enjoy this game, I love simple rolling games. I certainly haven't played it for hours and hours but in the games I have played I feel like the game basically depends on whether or not one player cannot kill a monster in their first turn. Maybe first few turns, but I feel like its largely just that first.

Both players kill a monster on the first turn? Likely tie, unless one player gets very unlucky and cannot keep killing monsters with the cards in hand.

One player cannot kill a monster? One player gains a lead that basically cannot be grabbed back. Not only does the other player have +1 cards for the rest of the game, but you have worse odds of killing a monster than you did last turn, making it very possible to still not kill a monster.

This makes it feel like the game is only really felt in the first few turns, and then it's just however many turns between either player with the gap between scores fairly unlikely to change. Solo has the score mechanic of trying to keep cards in hand, which makes it a fun risk/reward. In multiplayer, since the sole focus is to always kill a monster and there's no loss for using cards...I just feel like the game fundamentally comes down to the first 10% of it's playtime. Which isn't great.

The tie-breaker is to give the win to the player with the most cards in hand, similar to the solo scoring, so when both players come out of that first stage level, there's plenty still to fight for.

I believe a points system should be implemented that scores based on the value of the cards won. For example, a pair should be worth significantly less than three of a kind or higher poker hands. If such a points system were in place, it would create a catch-up mechanism, making the decision of which card to win on your turn more complex than simply removing the easiest card to hinder your opponent.

I have played this game solo in RL and enjoyed it as a quick, not too difficult game. I agree that the first couple of turns are crucial for getting some modifiers and then you rarely miss. Also the multiplayer does not do it for me for the above mentioned reasons. Once you fall behind it is near impossible to catch up, also the card count does not match the # of players, so that players can have a different number of turns. I would also vote for a point system.

Cards should be worth different amounts. Why not make a card worth the number of dice on the card or something similar. Would make the game way more interesting and enjoyable.

Not every game needs to be tuned to a particular set of gaming preferences.

This is a really nice solo game with a slightly janky multiplayer mode. It makes a good change from all the janky solo versions of much better multiplayer games. And the multiplayer game is still fun, in many of the ways that the solo game is.

I think it's a great core mechanic that many different multiplayer (or solo) games could be built around. Go ahead and make some! I like the one we have too.

Yea some alternative modes with different scoring would be great

I think points should be given for how many die are needed to obtain card.

If a card is used and placed in the discard deck, it should only be worth 1 point.

Yeah, I was wondering about multiplayer mode.
Why would I spend more than one card to kill a monster? And even one card, if I'm not the player who lead?
If I kill a monster, I win 1 point, if I spent 2 cards to kill it, then it means 1 - 2 = -1 points..