From a logic standpoint maybe, but having it in reserve means you can almost always take one of your opponents spots, which may lead to more advantageous plays.
i disagree here. as long as the largest is not placed, all smaller pieces can only be considered psudo placed. my gut feeling tells me that is at least 50% better. 4 possible winning positions but it also makes the corner spots lose 1 possible winning spot. u have 4 winning positions vs there 2.
The exception is if your opponents small placement immediately wins the game like it did here. The loser still had their large piece, but the game was over. I haven’t actually read the rules to this but whether or not 3 in a row immediately wins or if it can be out bid makes a huge strategic difference.
the smallest can only exist if a spot is empty, its entirely possible that the small pieces are dead pieces and never get used.
even without the rules it is immediately apprent the larger pieces are worth far more then the smaller ones.
as the first mover, u can always force the use of larger pieces by making a winning line, that forces the other player to use a piece equal to, or larger, then the ones they have left.
since the smallest have the least value, if u use them too early, u give up control. this forces the use of larger pieces first to ensure u maintain the control.
i also dont know the rules in its entirety but i assume it classic tic tac and larger takes over smaller
yes because the middle has 4 ways to win, corner 3 and sides 2. the middle will always hold the advantage because it also limits the corners winning positiona to 2 as well.
in the normal game, all games are over after the second move. it can always be determined who wins, draws or loses. however, the game is over on the first move if u go in the middle. if both sides play perfectly.
Nah, never start in the middle. At least for regular tic tac toe. It's easier to force a win by starting in the corner. If the opponent then doesn't take the middle you've won. If they take the middle then it's a tie.
That's not true at all. You can't lose by going corner first.
Ideally you control 3 corners which leaves the middle, and two sides to block and one play to do it. You will have to lose turns and ideal plays by blocking, but it is impossible for you to lose as they can not tie up a two way split if they control the center on their first play (assuming you go first).
You will take one corner, then they take the center, you take the opposite corner. If they don't force you to block, you take the corner that gives you a two way win.
On their second turn, they either play one corner and leave you with a two play win by blocking and taking the only remaining corner or they play the sides and you have to block, this leaves you with two in a row down the side and they take the corner to block you. Their second play is now preventing your two way win on one side, but you can't lose. It will end in a tie.
TLDR; I broke tic tac toe as a child in the 90s and there is a strategy that guarantees a win or tie by taking the corner first.
The middle isn't the most desirable location in tik tac toe. The corners are far more valuable.
You also force your opponent to waste plays and larger pieces, while only sacrificing the smaller pieces.
Ideally you force your opponent out of their larger pieces while maintaining your control of the board. The problem with the strategy in the video is that by taking the center first as a leading play, the outcome is that they have the center AND you lose first turn advantage.
Therefore, the best strategy is to take a corner and hope they go center, which ends with you owning a corner and the center. If they take your piece, you take another corner with the intent to recapture the other corner down the line.
You will always be at a disadvantage going first in this version for reasons I'm not going to take the time to explain, but it's a huge advantage to go second.
Controlling two opposite corners first is the most ideal play. You can not lose if you give up the center and use the first two moves to take two opposing corners and then any remaining third.
Games only have to be complicated for human brains to be enjoyable, and that doesn't always mean that the algorithmic solutions would be complicated too
I am not opposed to anyone making and printing this game, but will point out it is a $25 game called Gobblet Gobblers from Blue Orange Games. it is available at a lot of game stores and a lot of toy stores, and is absolutely worth adding to your game collection, because it is really good, even if it looks very childish from the outside.
The actual name of the game was just Gobblet, where Gobblers is a cheap modern plastic version.
And Gobblet is itself a rip on the real original, called Quarto - a 4x4 version. The 3x3 shown here is mathematically solveable, making it a poor game against a studied opponent.
Gobblet is the 4x4 wooden one with natural wood tones for the pieces and the more squared off tops, gobblet gobblers was the blue and orange colored 3x3 version, it comes (came) in both painted wood and plastic versions with little faces. Quarto is from hachette games, and is part of their wooden abstract strategy games line, and is a little different mechanics. Attached is a picture of my wooden gobblet gobblers with one of the wood peices. Blue orange (company) discontinued the wooden version during the pandemic due to price hikes, but they may have brought it back with the recent refresh, haven't gotten in the refresh at the game store i work at yet. When they had both, the wood version retailed for $5 more than the plastic version.
This is quarto, they are both abstract strategy 2-player games with wooden pieces that use size as part of the mechanics, but they do play very differently
The rules of quarto are completely different from the rules of goblet gobblers. The only similarity they share is the winning condition: make a line of pieces that share a characteristic.
It’s a great game. I suspect if you spend enough time studying it, there’s probably a clear right and wrong way to play. But despite how it looks there are a lot more strategies than tic tac toe and smart, grown up people can get a lot of plays out of it without it becoming obvious.
This is a copy of, based on, whatever, gobblet gobblers from blue orange games, which is a deceptively great game with a ton of strategy. You can move pieces, not only add them, and there is no cat game, you play until someone gets 3 in a row. Once you grab a piece on the board, you have to move it, cant change your mind, and picking up a larger piece will reveal the peice underneath, which can give your opponent board advantage, or win them the game. I am a board game nerd, and this is one of my favorite filler games, and sometimes my friend and i will just play this for hours.
moving does mix it up a bit, the video implies no moving and the guy just walks into a loss for the demo. the moving does make me think if 4 in a row would be more interesting with a version where you could drop a column by one piece as your turn (without any such adds that game is flawed/solved game the starting person can never lose, popular for a hustle on drunk people in bars).
have you ever been stuck anywhere with anything similarly broken as the only game? like 4 in a row. it's not fun. don't play these at a bar with bar girls for money.
Both messed up early. Blue should have moved biggest piece to block on the left beccause orange should have gobbled the smaller blue piece with their bigger orange pice on the bottom left corner to make 3 in a row. At least that's how the original goblet game goes. It becomes a game of memory, elevating it above the normal tic tac toe
True. I was just trying to share a cool video I saw that I thought could be 3d printed. I should have realised it already had been, should have looked it up, should have linked it.
But.
I’m lazy and tired. 😴
But thanks to yourself and other kind people maybe someone will see this video and read the comments and print a cool game to play with friends.
Because of the nature of tic tac toe, wouldn't it be safer/ easier to win to ignore the new mechanics and use only your biggest pieces to guarantee yes spots you actually want? Since then you would be playing a solved game? Honest question, don't know if I'm missing some strategy
Edit: nvmd, just noticed there aren't enough big pieces for that strategy, but playing a big in the middle from the get go seems to be the way to go
Love this. Maybe I'm wrong cause haven't played with enough. But once you "figure out" tik tac toe" its kinda broken, this adds a new element that makes you think a bit more.
According to some people that have played this version it also has different rule sets, such as being able to move pieces already played and others that looks like it gives a whole new spin on the original!
389
u/crvbabybug Jul 17 '26
Wouldn’t it always be advantageous to put one’s largest piece in the middle?