$10.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

JAB: Realtime Boxing» Forums » Variants

Subject: More than 2 players? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I played the for the first time yesterday, so I'm not suggesting a variant; however, it seems to me that you could have two sets of the game and play it 3 or 4 player with everyone just throwing down on multiple player's piles. Has anyone tried this?

A very interesting game. For something so light, it's got me still thinking about it the next day.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fede Miguez
Argentina
Capital Federal
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
uh, this game is totally not what I consider light! It's super heavy, specially the right punches!

PS: no, I don't think it works as multiplayer. But hell, it's 30 seconds a turn, just do it WWE style and switch players between rounds
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aswin Agastya
Indonesia
Bekasi
Jawa Barat
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Umm, 4 boxers in a ring?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
I played the for the first time yesterday, so I'm not suggesting a variant; however, it seems to me that you could have two sets of the game and play it 3 or 4 player with everyone just throwing down on multiple player's piles. Has anyone tried this?

A very interesting game. For something so light, it's got me still thinking about it the next day.

It's not really as light as it might appear on the surface, as it does require good strategy, and it taxes your brain harder per second than any other game out there. In this case attention is the constrained resource. You can't do everything, so you have to narrow your focus, and that creates counter opportunities for an opponent.

Back to your question, though. We have tried an interesting 4-player variant where each player plays one hand of the boxer and two players play as a team. Now you have extra attention to devote and players can specialize in watching for opportunities. The drawback is communication: the left hand knows not what the right hand is doing. And any communication signals to the other boxer what your plans are.
3 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
I played the for the first time yesterday, so I'm not suggesting a variant; however, it seems to me that you could have two sets of the game and play it 3 or 4 player with everyone just throwing down on multiple player's piles. Has anyone tried this?

A very interesting game. For something so light, it's got me still thinking about it the next day.

It's not really as light as it might appear on the surface, as it does require good strategy


I certainly see some strategy, but I think it's fairly obvious after one or two plays which is why I think from a brain-burning standpoint, it's a light game (i.e., I rate it a "2" (which is technically medium-light by BGG standards))

out4blood wrote:
and it taxes your brain harder per second than any other game out there.


I completely agree. I actually had my heart racing after each round, something that I don't think any game has done since I stopped playing tournament chess.


out4blood wrote:
In this case attention is the constrained resource. You can't do everything, so you have to narrow your focus, and that creates counter opportunities for an opponent.


That is great! gg for you. I had never thought of making a player's attention a contraining resource. You're absolutely right and that's a great way to explain the game.


out4blood wrote:
Back to your question, though. We have tried an interesting 4-player variant where each player plays one hand of the boxer and two players play as a team. Now you have extra attention to devote and players can specialize in watching for opportunities. The drawback is communication: the left hand knows not what the right hand is doing. And any communication signals to the other boxer what your plans are.


Thanks for this. I may have to try it. I would expect something like this would also work 3-player . I suspect the increased ability to focus by the 2-player side would be offset by the solo player's perfect information of his plans.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
out4blood wrote:
Back to your question, though. We have tried an interesting 4-player variant where each player plays one hand of the boxer and two players play as a team. Now you have extra attention to devote and players can specialize in watching for opportunities. The drawback is communication: the left hand knows not what the right hand is doing. And any communication signals to the other boxer what your plans are.

Thanks for this. I may have to try it. I would expect something like this would also work 3-player . I suspect the increased ability to focus by the 2-player side would be offset by the solo player's perfect information of his plans.

Possibly, until the 2-player teams develop some specialization and communication (like one player focus on blocking and counters, while the other focuses on combos and damage). One mention, make sure the 2-player teams only play with one hand each (the other hand should probably be under the table).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
out4blood wrote:
Butterfly0038 wrote:
I played the for the first time yesterday, so I'm not suggesting a variant; however, it seems to me that you could have two sets of the game and play it 3 or 4 player with everyone just throwing down on multiple player's piles. Has anyone tried this?

A very interesting game. For something so light, it's got me still thinking about it the next day.

It's not really as light as it might appear on the surface, as it does require good strategy

I certainly see some strategy, but I think it's fairly obvious after one or two plays which is why I think from a brain-burning standpoint, it's a light game (i.e., I rate it a "2" (which is technically medium-light by BGG standards))

What aspect do you consider obvious? I find that optimal strategy is partly based on opponent attention focus, which may change from game to game, or even within a game, and with good opponents will be difficult to discern.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jimmy Okolica
United States
Washington Township
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
[q="out4blood"What aspect do you consider obvious? I find that optimal strategy is partly based on opponent attention focus, which may change from game to game, or even within a game, and with good opponents will be difficult to discern.[/q]

Just some initial strategy thoughts (after only one play):

1. Play 1s as blocks and 2s as attacks
2. Play haymakers as blocks unless you've got an immediate stagger opportunity
3. Try to play punch attacks to two stacks instead of all three
4. Note counter punch color; then block, attack with those colors
5 Keep an eye out for combos but don't waste too much of your attention on it.


Not sure if any of this makes sense or not; if not, let me know why

However, I think you nailed it when you said that a player's attention is the constrained resource. Even if everything I said above is true, it doesn't mean you can track the counter punch/combo opportunities and of course, since your opponent isn't letting you act in a vacuum, you can only do so much of what you want.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
flag msg tools
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
mbmbmbmbmb
Butterfly0038 wrote:
Just some initial strategy thoughts (after only one play):

1. Play 1s as blocks and 2s as attacks
2. Play haymakers as blocks unless you've got an immediate stagger opportunity
3. Try to play punch attacks to two stacks instead of all three
4. Note counter punch color; then block, attack with those colors
5 Keep an eye out for combos but don't waste too much of your attention on it.

Not sure if any of this makes sense or not; if not, let me know why

That's a point scoring strategy, which is fine... if your opponent doesn't knock you out first, which he probably will if you don't manage to focus on damage dealers.

But I think there are a couple of inherent problems with your scoring: If you only play to 2 piles your opponent can place blocks on a single pile and cover the the other one, which leaves you few points at the end; and secondly, combos are the best source of points, and you're mostly ignoring them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fede Miguez
Argentina
Capital Federal
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I just want to reiterate what out4blood is saying and that a pre-conceived strategy does not work here. It depends on what the opponent is forcing you to do, or on how much you can force the opponent to behave in a certain way.

IMO the best strategy in this game is to play just a tiny bit faster than your opponent while keeping the same level of attention/focus. That puts them off their comfort zone and they start making mistakes, while you don't burn out yourself too fast (so no need for DING DING DING). Easier said than done, of course.

A good base strategy to get this game really crunching you is to play cards fast until you reach a Haymaker in one hand. Then only play cards from the other hand until you have the matching colour, then you go for a quick Haymaker playing both cards in quick succession (including considering the ruling that you can only use one hand at a time to place cards on the opponent side).
When you start doing this, your opponent should catch on (after a first turn KO) and start doing the same to you. THEN block becomes crucial. And while you are looking at your opponent moves to block Haymakers, it just takes little extra effort to look for Counter Punches. But this stance gets wrecked if your opponent just stops trying to press Haymakers and goes for combos. But doing combos is troublesome if the opponent just goes mad rushing cards into DING DING DING. So now you have to see what he is doing, how he is reacting to what you do, and trying to do it a bit faster than him to have him make mistakes (and not you). And how fast can you be without losing sight on what you are doing and what your opponent is doing? Playing too fast without paying enough attention might be your doom.

Really, the resource you have to administer here is time/attention, until that is not a scarce resource this game doesn't shine as much as it can. Each time one of my friends beat me at this game, I like it more because I end up learning some new trick. Like changing from one strategy (Haymakers) to another (Combos) from round to round putting you off balance and never knowing what to expect.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.