Variable setup with random numbers and friendly robber in arena is back

[jpfranchet]

Hi,

How on earth, after such a fair and competitive last season, did the decision-makers think reverting to the Variable Number setup was a good idea?

Last season’s rules were a major step forward toward a truly competitive environment, actually, the fairest we’ve seen in a long time. Reintroducing variable numbers feels like a step backward. The next logical improvement should’ve been moving to 4-player games, not undoing progress that made the experience balanced and skill-based.

Can anyone explain how it’s fair to face a setup like this: https://postimg.cc/CBBvJrht
First position – Paired 9s on Ore/Wheat and 13 production points (Ore-Wheat-Sheep)?

That player barely needs a second settlement. The game is effectively 90% decided after the first placement. And since we’re only three players, there’s not even enough counter play to level the field.

Could you please reconsider how Arena rules are being managed? Does this setup make sense to anyone aiming for a fair, competitive experience?

I genuinely want to see the Arena continue to improve, not regress.

[Jontia]

It's not about being fair. It's about being fast.

Variable numbers set-up is faster on average, because it produces lop-sided games like your one.

Gurus are the people who play the most games. They people who played the fastest games.

So they pick the settings that make things go faster.

• Variable Numbers

• Friendly robber

• 3 players

[BusterVA]

I have been in many games where I have first pick and get a spot like the one you note.

I even had one not long ago, but was 8/8/6. 8s were wheat and ore, 6 was sheep.

I lost that game. There were ZERO 8s rolled. Zero. And only a handful of 6's.

Big numbers that game were 3's and 11's, rolled constantly.

I think the biggest problem is how the dice operate. I have seen far too many games where statistically likely numbers are simply not rolled at all - like zero times. I have never seen this happen when playing IRL. Never. Sure, you don't always get 2's or 12's, but odds make sense for that.

I saw 5, yes FIVE, 2's rolled consecutively followed by three 12's once. That simply made zero sense to me statistically. Just bonkers. Possible. Yes, likely .... better odds of winning the lottery I bet.

UPDATE: Just checked the odds. Odds of FIVE 2's being rolled consecutively is just over 1:67M

Odds of winning the Lotto 649 in Canada are 1:13M
Odds of winning the Lotto Max in Canada are 1:33M
Odds of winning PowerBall are 1:292M

Those five 2's should have paid the players in that game $100,000,000!

[zasfp]

I hate it too. I'm simply not going to participate this arena. Friendly robber I personally find annoying but bearable. The random numbers is just stupid. Back to setting up my own games I guess.

[Shivaware]

I saw 5, yes FIVE, 2's rolled consecutively followed by three 12's once. That simply made zero sense to me statistically. Just bonkers. Possible. Yes, likely .... better odds of winning the lottery I bet.

UPDATE: Just checked the odds. Odds of FIVE 2's being rolled consecutively is just over 1:67M

Do you have a link to this game? Was it in a game that you played?

Note, the probability of five consecutive rolls of 2 is 1/36^5 = 1/60466176.

It looks like there have been fewer than 6.2 million games of Catan played at BGA, so that's only about a 10% chance of that happening to anyone here so far.

[Slartibartfst]

its interesting, I use to be a pretty competitive Catan player, but was never interested in playing set numbers. Don't think I have don't it since my first game

[Gulchen]

...

Note, the probability of five consecutive rolls of 2 is 1/36^5 = 1/60466176.

It looks like there have been fewer than 6.2 million games of Catan played at BGA, so that's only about a 10% chance of that happening to anyone here so far.

60 seems like a decent estimate for a typical number of rolls in a Catan game, so the probability per game would be closer to one in a million.

[DVC]

The so-called gurus have got it wrong every time. I’ve complained about this many times, and I have refused to play in Arena for years. Each new season, they make it worse. I agree that last season was a step forward, but it’s now the worst possible combo again.

Apart from the first few weeks the game was live, Arena Catan has ALWAYS been 3-player. This is profoundly stupid. They haven’t changed it once, not even for a bit of variety. Every official tournament I’ve played in for 25+ years has been 4-player. And it’s never been Friendly Robber, which is a variant designed for families and new players. “Easy start” is occasionally used in tournaments, but not normally. Sometimes the number setup is “random”, but it’s usually the “variable” spiral because it’s known to be better balanced. So the BGA gurus are triple-wrong.

When it becomes a serious setup, either with 4p, or by adding Cities & Knights, then I will play in Arena, but not before. You might also attract other serious players who currently seem to enjoy Colonist. Until then, it will remain a random dice fest that no one could be proud to win.

[DVC]

its interesting, I use to be a pretty competitive Catan player, but was never interested in playing set numbers. Don't think I have don't it since my first game

“Variable” is the traditional spiral setup, not set numbers. “Random” is a chaotic version where it’s allowed to have the same numbers adjacent to each other (except 6 and 8). Last season was Variable (good) and now we are back to Random (not good).

[DVC]

It's not about being fair. It's about being fast.

Variable numbers set-up is faster on average, because it produces lop-sided games like your one.

Gurus are the people who play the most games. They people who played the fastest games.

So they pick the settings that make things go faster.

• Variable Numbers

• Friendly robber

• 3 players

I agree, however “Variable” is the traditional spiral setup, which is good - “Random” (what they have now) allows double numbers, which is the bad version.