Just played a round of and I've realised something. have a fundamental limitation: they heavily rely on the players' skills to work. Some players may overbid and effectively take themselves out of the game, others might gauge a value wrong and throw an easy win to the player after them. Are there any games that somehow overcame this problem? πŸ€”

Β· Β· 6 Β· 0 Β· 9

@benosteen l see it as a particular limitation of (most) auction games as they can simply be not fun / frustrating if players aren't quite evenly matched, much more than in other genres.

I love For Sale, but I don't think it's very different in that respect. πŸ€” I'll need to play Ra again, from what I remember it might indeed create a different feel. πŸ˜‡

@markus can you explain what you mean by a game that doesn't rely on players' skills to work? Like something that relies on chance? Or something that is rubberbanded so you're not really punished for poor moves? I feel like RA has a sort of bidding system that is a bit self correcting & not too punishing.

@TimClare What I mean is that auction games are particularly prone to one or two players playing rather erratically and effectively making the game pointless for the whole table.

Definitely need to play Ra again, it's been a long time... πŸ˜‰

@markus would you say that bidding is particularly prone to that, or just games that involve skill? Like any war or area control game, or really almost anything but the most solitaire of euros? If players have agency & they don't use it wisely, isn't the result the same in any multiplayer game?

@TimClare There are indeed two characteristics of auction games at play here: they're usually high in both skills required and player interaction. Which is a fun combination in the right circumstances, but can make a game fall apart in the wrong ones.

I do think there are other genres that can be great fun even when skill levels are more unmatched, but I'll need more time to come up with a good example πŸ˜‚

@markus Depends on what you accept as "bidding". Both Furnace and Nidavellir use bidding but with clearly defined amounts (bidding tokens with a fixed value).
And no matter what you bid, you will always receive some reward in both cases.

@markus I think Modern Art is a special case, because due to its theme it invites people to shift their goal towards something other than the most efficient/profitable move.

Is this what happened in your game?

@Georgios No, I don't think it was particularly theme related, though I do see how that could happen. In this case it was rather one or two players not really buying into the game and the calculations it requires πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

@markus Ah, I think I know what you mean. But wouldn't that be an issue with any game, where players - for whatever reason - don't engage the mechanisms they way they are expected to?

@markus auction games in general are rough for new players because it's hard to understand the value of the thing you're bidding on the first few plays. That's said Q.E. has a clever take on this with their "bid any amount you want" where winning bids in the first round set the tone for the rest of the game.

Keyflower is also somewhat unique as your effectively bidding with action points, and can reuse your lost bids

Also For Sale, since its such a small and well defined value space

@markus I think Ra, by Knizia, handles this quite well, with the limited number of bids and the way it handles costs.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Tabletop Social

We are an inclusive Mastodon community for everything tabletop (and more).