5 ms·
>Settler's is great, but a lot of people will complain it leaves too much to chance. I've noticed this quite a bit in the board game community, which I think i
by dminor 17y ago
>Settler's is great, but a lot of people will complain it leaves too much to chance.
I've noticed this quite a bit in the board game community, which I think is unfortunate. Chess is a great game, but Poker is too.
The element of chance not only makes the game more entertaining against a better player, but also disguises the winning strategies so that the game requires deeper thinking to master.
- jacobolus 17y agoPoker isn’t really a game of chance, in even remotely the same way that Settlers is. Settlers doesn’t really require much deep thinking to master, or allow particularly hidden strategies.
- dminor 17y agoOn the contrary, both games have hidden information and an unknowable optimal strategy. Poker is more challenging because more is hidden, but there are similar underpinnings.
- jacobolus 17y agoOkay, but that’s true for any game that isn’t completely deterministic, for instance, Yahtzee or Guess Who. Poker and settlers are worlds apart in any reasonable comparison though: one is a light-hearted family game in which any player has a reasonable chance of success, and the rules are set up to keep games relatively close feeling, and the other is a ruthless betting game, in which superior players quickly and consistently trounce less experienced opponents (and take all their money), with chance generally only entering substantially in games between players of similar skill.