Andrew T
United States
Maryland
-
I tried playing with my brother, but he tired of it quickly. I'm trying to figure out if his complaints had merit or if we just didn't give it enough of a chance. I was hoping some fans would be able to answer our concerns.
For one thing, he felt burdened to count cards, which has play consequences as well as being annoying. We felt that you could get a pretty good idea whether you would win or lose an engagement based only on visible cards, in which case the game becomes very conservative. Both sides would only close to attack distance when they are pretty sure they could win, and the only decisive strikes coming when an unlikely situation occurs (for instance, an attack with two 3s in the early game is countered because the defender just happened to have all 3 remaining threes).
So where is the motivation to play more aggressively? A previous post mentioned that players on their own end should play close to the opponent to try and push him back. Obviously if you have the right cards to overpower him at that distance, that's great. But assuming that's not the case, isn't it far risker to close within 5 than it is to simply stay out of range until you have better cards?
Essentially we found that a player who had the cards to make an attack would do so, and otherwise players would remain out of reach. It became purely a matter of luck who would get the right cards to set up an attack, which wasn't very satisfying.
You could argue that bluffing plays a part, but the difference between this and something like poker is that with relatively many cards viewable, the bluffing doesn't add that much since it's much easier to predict the cards in someone's hand (relatedly, poker doesn't force you to keep track of "spent" cards in order to make the best guesses about the opponent's hand).
I would love to hear from any fans who could address these criticisms! Mostly to get ammo to use on my brother so we can get more of a feel for the game.
-
Pedro Silva
Portugal
Porto
-
Well... No game is suited to all people. Maybe En Garde isn't for your brother.
Regarding the counting of cards, a good card player usually is able to count cards and needs to in order to perform well at most card games. Poker might not fit into this but then again, the skill involved in poker is of a different sort and, in my opinion, much less meaningful than the luck factor. I know it's a disputed issue but that's how I feel about it.
If this counting aspect is such a bother then you should definitely stay away from this game and most other card games for that matter.
You can play aggressively in En Garde, you can also play defensively. I keep a couple of running games and enter tournaments on yourturnmyturn.com and I've seen many people play aggressively and win and others play defensively and win too. I've played 54 games at this moment with a 48% win rate.
In this site you don't need to count the cards as the cards that have been played are open. So it becomes a matter of judging whether you have a good chance to push the opponent or whether you should try and lure him into distance to try a killing strike.
If you play aggressively you are usually trying to get to a point in which you'll win by being further down the play field than the opponent, that would be the incentive to play that way, that winning condition. This style does not require so much counting. You have to risk and keep pushing the opponent as much as possible.
A defensive player will usually try to manipulate the number of cards remaining in the deck to attempt a lethal move near the depletion of the deck or to get in a position to be the one playing the last card and staying in distance with more direct attacks possible, another winning condition. This style requires much more calculation of what has already been played, what is yet to be drawn and what might be in the opponent's hand.
I'd risk saying that those two conditions are more frequent than unblocked direct attacks garnering hits.
In any case, you should only get in the 5 spaces distance when you either are attacking indirectly or you are trying to deceive the opponent (for example when you have three equal cards and hope he'll attack with two convinced he'll score so you'll parry and kill). Attacking is not the same as exposing yourself.
I completely disagree that the opening hands are enough to have a prediction on who will win. You may win with high cards or with low. It really is a matter of adapting and choosing the best option.
In any case, these aspects may be irrelevant to your brother. If he does not enjoy the game or has yet to see that there are at least three possible ways to try and win it's better to just find some other game to play. Life's too short to waste playing games you don't like.
Have fun...
-
-
What do you mean by counting cards? Do you mean keeping track of how many cards are in the deck, which have been played, and which remain?
I don't count cards like that, and I still enjoy it. En Garde is not a game full of deep strategies, but it does present some tactical options.
For example, do you hold on to a pair in hopes of getting a third card of the same in order to have an unblockable attack? Do you move and attack in order to drive your opponent back, or do you edge forward to get within striking range, presenting your opponent only the option to parry and not to retreat?
If your brother doesn't like it, then he doesn't like it. I have a personal rule that I will try any game at least twice before refusing to play it again. En Garde is so short, that it wouldn't hurt to give it another try. I certainly don't feel counting cards is a requisite to enjoy the game.
-
|
|
