3 ms·

I love board games. And I used to play Monopoly too as a kid, then stopped. In retrospect I know why: it has a self-enforcing feedback loop that leads to the r

I love board games. And I used to play Monopoly too as a kid, then stopped. In retrospect I know why: it has a self-enforcing feedback loop that leads to the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. Thus the outcome of the game is often determined very early, but the game still drags on for long, being not much fun for most players. The same feedback loop can be found in "The Settlers of Catan", though less (the poor don't get poorer, it's just that the rich grow ever faster). I liked it too, but it's not fun for too long. An example where it's done differently is Dominion, where resources for development and resources for winning are distinct, but mixed into the same heap. During your turn you take a fixed number of cards from that heap, so if you have many winning resources, your progress actually slows down. And of course there are also lots of games where the current position doesn't really affect your chances to progress. In the long run I like those (and the ones with negative feedback loops) better than the ones with positive feedback loops.

mprovo1 16y ago
We've had this debate about "catchup mechanisms" or negative feedback loops with my boardgames friends countless times. I personally tend to prefer games with a minimal amount of luck rather than a strong negative feedback loop. I dislike settlers of catan as much as as dislike monopoly. As long as luck is under control, I have no problem losing -- because I can understand where I made my mistakes and be better next time :)
- zipdog 16y ago
  In Settlers the catch-up mechanism is meant to be provided by the other players stopping trade with the leader. In the two-player version this is somewhat explicit (there's a trading cost to be winning)
follower 16y ago
> An example where it's done differently is Dominion Dominion is great--I got introduced to it recently, found it online (http://www.brettspielwelt.de/ http://www.brettspielwelt.de/) and now purchased my first base & expansion set. :) Highly recommend checking it out if you haven't seen it already.

mprovo1 16y ago

We've had this debate about "catchup mechanisms" or negative feedback loops with my boardgames friends countless times. I personally tend to prefer games with a minimal amount of luck rather than a strong negative feedback loop. I dislike settlers of catan as much as as dislike monopoly. As long as luck is under control, I have no problem losing -- because I can understand where I made my mistakes and be better next time :)

zipdog 16y ago
In Settlers the catch-up mechanism is meant to be provided by the other players stopping trade with the leader. In the two-player version this is somewhat explicit (there's a trading cost to be winning)

follower 16y ago

> An example where it's done differently is Dominion Dominion is great--I got introduced to it recently, found it online (http://www.brettspielwelt.de/ http://www.brettspielwelt.de/) and now purchased my first base & expansion set. :) Highly recommend checking it out if you haven't seen it already.