by mst3k4L
Grudunza wrote:
mst3k4L wrote:
Grudunza wrote:
The balance between 2-3-4 players is definitely off with the base game. 2p is the easiest, which is why the 2 Special Events per player rule was added with On the Brink.
In all seriousness, did you talk to the designer about this?
I can see a lack of attention to end game conditions causing 4 player games to be harder than 2 player games, but that is it. It is easier to run out of cards with more players, but I think it is easier to die from cubes/outbreaks with 2 players. People usually pay attention to cubes and outbreaks, but people rarely notice the amount of cards remaining until about a round left.
You'd have to wade through the earlier Pandemic forum threads, but it was pretty well established among those who played the game a lot that the base game seemed easier to win with fewer players than more (I played the base game about 100 times and definitely had that impression). The idea is that fewer players have the ability to coordinate special abilities in a more focused and repeated way, and perform cures a little more readily. With 4p, there will be fewer turns in the game for each player, thus fewer opportunities to use their ability, cure, trade cards, etc. Having different abilities available is good, but seems offset by the fewer times you can use them.
I can't recall if Matt Leacock or Tom Lehmann ever acknowledged this on the record, but the new rule in On the Brink for adding 2 Special Events per player was considered by many to be a balancing mechanism to counter the perceived disparity between player numbers in the base game.
Here's a geeklist where someone had recorded the results of 137 games: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/30006/analyzing-roles-...
2 players: 43-26 (62%)
3 players: 13-11 (54%)
4 players: 18-23 (44%)
Interesting. I played the base game 50+ times and never noticed. I also don't recall this being discussed in the threads, but it's been a while since I read them.
The problem with those stats is that 50% of the games he played are 2-player, so you could certainly make an argument that he had more experience in 2 player games which resulted in more wins. This obviously wouldn't completely equalize the stats, but it would help some.
I quickly browsed the list, and found this interesting comment:
Overall, it was used about 7% less often than random chance would dictate. In the two-player games in particular, it was used in only 28% of contests, when you'd expect it to appear 40% of the time (2 out of 5 roles).
From my experience, Dispatcher is the weakest role for 2-players (even weaker than Researcher) because he has less players to interact with. Using him significantly less in 2 player games is going to skew the results some in favor of 2 player games.
Additionally:
Well, we don't have enough information. Sure,it's well over 100 games logged, but that's a drop in the bucket with all the variables this game offers.