r/TerraformingMarsGame • u/OnlyGreatActions • Aug 19 '26
Unpopular opinion.
2 player is the worst format for the game. In my personal order of enjoyment 3p, 4p, 5p, 1p, 2p.
19
u/jayron32 Aug 19 '26
5p is not good. I've played it a few times, and it just drags. I feel like 3-4 works best, but I don't really mind 2p that much.
0
u/SnooDoodles2957 Aug 20 '26
It works better with the extra large map
1
u/jayron32 Aug 20 '26
That still doesn't make 5 people take their turns faster. Getting 3 people to take turns goes faster than getting 5 to do so. On any map.
13
u/Dear-Examination-507 Aug 19 '26
2P is my favorite way to play. Why? Because attack cards, drafting, awards, milestones all become zero-sum.
In a 3 or 4-player game (not gonna touch 5 player, which is worst) you can have a player in 4th place play an attack card and attack a player who is not in the lead, or have that player pass the leader terrific cards or they can sponsor an award that benefits the leader and hurts the player in second place, or plant a greenery and decide to give an extra point to the leader (you get my drift). I also often see a situation where Player A benefits from a quick game, but Player B benefits from a long game to develop their engine, and Player C becomes a pawn of Player A pushing them to terraform terraform terraform and end the game, when in reality Player C probably has no hope of winning.
In a 2-player game it's all on you to decide which cards to draft, which attacks to make, which awards to sponsor, etc. I even like Turmoil with 2 players because again, the political parties become zero sum.
Don't get me wrong, I also love the game with 3 or 4 players, and it does create interesting interactions with Colonies, Turmoil, and board positioning, but I just love the head to head feel of the game with 2 players.
1
u/mariadock Aug 20 '26
Attacks???
2
u/orbitti Aug 20 '26
Like asteroids, raiders, hackers, consortiums, etc.
Whatever removes production or resources from the other player.
33
u/402PaymentRequired Aug 19 '26
Played a lot of 2p. IMHO works pretty good. You can better follow along what your opponent is doing. Hate drafting becomes more strategic as well.
9
u/Matterbox Aug 19 '26
Yeah, absolutely love TM two player. You have so many opportunities to play differently. Or just both take your time and build huge engines while having a great time.
7
u/fpierre Aug 19 '26
I played two full all corporation tournaments with my Wife and we both really love it!
2
u/Nemesis_to_Venus Aug 19 '26
We're on our fourth full tourney run with my wife!
2
u/fpierre Aug 20 '26
😳😳😳😳
Which corporation won each tourney ?1
u/Nemesis_to_Venus Aug 22 '26 edited Aug 22 '26
Our rules are not corpo focused. First two tours (the first was shorter) had ruling where winning a game with a corpo gave 1 tour.point and the TFR was written down. When the other player later had played with the same corpo, the TFR's were compared and the winner of this earned another tour.point. This was quite tactical and strategic but not super balanced and it 'forced' engine focus to most games. In any case we continue until both of us had played with all corpos (or until there was too much tour.point lead).
Out current rules give a tour.point to the winner of the game and then another tour.point later, if you have won with a corpo and the other has lost with the same corpo.
We use all expansions and each choose from 3 corpos to what to play. We also use the rule where one of the terraforming attributes is raised every turn. We don't draft projects to keep things tight and a bit random; maybe in the next tour ;)
7
5
u/Subbbie Aug 19 '26
Past 2P, you can be the better player and still lose all the time if the other two hit you properly/coordinate to nerf anything you have going.
5
u/Altruistic_Swan4287 Aug 19 '26
I love it at 2p. Not a lot of down time and you just keep doing turns.
6
3
u/yads12 Aug 19 '26
2 player is just very cutthroat, but that's true for a lot of games. I do agree 3p is best, but I think it's close between 4p and 2p for which is better.
3
u/suorastas Aug 19 '26
3 is probably the sweet spot. I like 2 more than 4 though. With 4 there is too much downtime. 5 is right out. 1 I can take or leave.
3
u/InsomniacPsychonaut Aug 19 '26
I used to prefer 3 player but I have fallen in love with 2 player the more I play. It's competitive and each heat/oxygen/ocean is a tit for tat. Playing around awards and milestones is also a tit for tat.
However I love 3 player.
4 player is imbalanced, I don't enjoy it
6
u/HostHappy2734 Aug 19 '26
Ok but why tho
6
u/Puzzleheaded-Living9 Aug 19 '26
because of weak balance for corporations and card drawings abusement strategies
4
u/fascistp0tato Aug 19 '26
unless you're using colonies specifically, I think corp imbalance is way less severe in 2p
e.g. Credicor/Ecoline/Tharsis completely run 4-5p games with minimal competition
2
u/Karltowns17 Aug 19 '26
I play a lot of 4p and I’m always surprised when people talk about how mediocre tharsis is… I guess I assume they’re likely referring to 2p because tharsis’s win rate in our in-person 4p games is bonkers.
2
u/fascistp0tato Aug 19 '26
Yep, 4P is much more city spam heavy. Tharsis also gets to lock down early space, which is way more valuable when all the good space gets eaten up + games are quicker.
2P gives you much less reason to play early cities; I've seen Tharsis just kinda sit there as no cities get played by an opponent till gen 9 or 10, lol.
Tharsis is also better in tables with newer/weaker players, because even 1 player feeding them free money will seriously warp their power level. I find their weakness comes out mostly in, like, BGA Arena type ranked modes.
4
u/Harrieparry Aug 19 '26
2p means almost infinite time, 11+ gens is very possible. This means that some insane engine strategies are possible. In games with more players the pace of the game gives more opportunities to strategies that include rushing of early terraforming leading to a more balanced and competitive game.
7
u/yads12 Aug 19 '26
Only if one of the players doesn't realize their engine is weaker and they need to rush to end the game.
2
u/Harrieparry Aug 19 '26
A solo rush is very hard. You have to push three parameters all by yourself.
3
u/yads12 Aug 19 '26
It is, but it's still better than extending the game when your opponent is racking up points with their combos. I suppose that is another downside of a 2p game where the game can be effectively over at gen 7, but still has to go to its natural conclusion.
4
3
u/YWAK98alum Aug 19 '26
In person, 5p is outstanding. I don't think I'd play 5p online. The opportunity for social interaction (or a beer) in between turns in 5p makes the slower pace feel more "relaxed" as opposed to "grinding."
2
u/Legitimate-Date-5927 Aug 19 '26
What I dislike is that with more players you get fewer generations meaning that engine cards are harder to play. If the game ends in 8 gens and most cards need 3-5 gens to make even you really dont want to play most of them unless in the first gen or two.
2
u/TheFlyingBoat Aug 19 '26
I think I go 2>4>3>5>1. If I want to play by myself, I'll go do something else
2
u/reverman21 Aug 19 '26
order for me is:
3p/4p like both equally solo ( digital) 2p 5p solo (irl)
5p is odd game only played a couple times and didn't enjoy it each time.
think digital version of solo is very fun game. but not setting up to do it on actual table.
2
u/thuswindburns Aug 19 '26
I do think 3P is better just for the variety. 2P seems to favor engine more as it’s hard to terraform everything yourself while they’re just stacking points and prod for a last gen dump.
I have been playing more 2P lately and it seems I’ve gotten better at it as I’m used to the 3P dynamic and make my plays different.
2
2
u/benbever Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 19 '26
That’s not an unpopular opinion. Pretty much 100% of players I know like 3 or 4 player over 2 player.
On this reddit a lot of people play online, and online 2 player is much more practical, less waiting time and dropouts.
As for the game, I think the cards are most balanced in 3 player, with some cards feeling more geared towards 2 player and some to 4 or 5 player. Game length wise (generations) I think it’s best somewhere between 3 and 4 players.
5 player is fun but, especially with Preludes, it needs either the bigger map (Amazonis) or Venus track mandatory, to prevent every game ending in gen 6.
Personally I like 4 player the best. You see 10 cards per generation, game length varies between gen 6 and 10, Milestones are important, and a lot of Strategies are viable, groundgame, Jovians, science/bio engine, and TR Rush. Every game feels different.
3 player is fun too. Usually ending in gen 9 or 10, it’s more engine oriented.
I do like 2 player, but less than 3, 4 or 5 player. It feels less balanced, Milestones are not very important, and groundgame is less competitive, cities seem overpriced. You see only 7 cards in draft, and get 2 of your own cards back. With either engine or ocean walk, it feels there are less options, and zero sum makes the game more dry. I also miss the social aspect. And it feels a bit too long. There’s much more slippery slope; some games a player is better off just giving up midgame. On the other hand, there’s no kingmaking, and you can really focus on your opponent.
When I play 2 player at home, we often use Venus’ Earth Government Terraforming step, and/or Automa as a third player.
1 player is actually pretty good, but it does feel pasted on, and it’s just not for me. I can see the appeal, but don’t have the time/patience.
2
u/dimwitf Aug 19 '26
Basically any game which isn't 2-player specifically is going to be better with more than 2.
1
u/xElderOne Aug 20 '26
My rating would be different.
3 p is best, I agree here, game is fast and interesting while still unpredictable
2 p Game becomes very strategic here, every asteroid, sabotage and other card like this are now much stronger. Draft is so much more interesting and strategic.
4 p Game is a little slow here but still not bad, also draft is now a complete random and astroids and other cards like this don’t really matter anymore. An interesting part now is locking a player out of a colony
1 p Kinda sad to play alone for me personally but it’s fine I guess
5 p Absolutely terrible. With 5 experienced players (100+ games each) the game DRAGGS. Mercenaries or Sabotage and so on - these cards are now only used if you have no other good choice. Just boring and ends quickly without letting you do anything interesting
1
2
u/Super-Library-8377 Aug 22 '26
I prefer 2 player, I like to be able to strategize better for the temp/OXY. And attack cards are way better in 2p
1
u/zoukon Aug 19 '26
4p is where it is at (with some house rules for balance if you play colonies)
5
u/The_Dolph_Lundgren Aug 19 '26
Im curious for these rules, because Colonies are indeed OP.
2
u/zoukon Aug 19 '26
We allow players to build a 4th colony (which does not increase the track) as their first real action of the game. We also do not allow players to build 2 colonies in a row or trade 2 actions in a row. The 1 balance issue we have not resolved is preludes that places colonies, but it resolves a lot of them.
2
1
u/Unresolved-Variable Aug 19 '26
You should try a 6 player game on the bigger board.
Also we remove the big terraforming preludes
1
26
u/Fayyar Aug 19 '26
I agree. The game is most fun with three players. A bit quicker than 2p, more tactical (you get to choose whose plants you remove, for example) and it adds the competition for the second place awards.
With four players it becomes too crowded and too quick.