Variant: Is an Auction a Lazy Game Mechanic?
Image via beinggeeks.com
There are a ton of games that use auctions in order to distribute resources. Prominent examples include Power Grid and Princes of Florence. A more recently released game, Fleet, uses an auction to distribute licenses. With Fleet and Princes of Florence, some of the items up for auction are just flat out better. The players have to realize this and bid up the price to a level where the additional value of the better item is cut off by the greater expense. That way it all evens out.
I wonder if this isn’t lazy. The best games are well-balanced. There might be a wealth of alternate strategies or areas of focus, but there is no one “best” option. In fact, if there is a best option – especially if it is obvious – then that can lead to the downfall of a game. I detest games where I feel like I’m basically an AI because the decisions are easy and immediate. I want to play the game, I don’t want to just facilitate the game playing itself.
Typically, it is the designer’s job to balance the game in a way that is engaging. But auctions can circumvent that. If there is a “best” option, the only way to make it not the “best” is to make it so expensive that it is less attractive. In essence, that puts the onus of balancing the game on the players rather than the designer. Players have to recognize what is worth more and less and respond accordingly. While an experienced group can usually do this well, new players will easily be swamped. And if groupthink creeps in, the game can lose all semblance of fun.
Power Grid and Fleet use this, though they aren’t so bad. The Power Stations or Licenses are fairly obvious as to which is worth more and the players can respond. Of course, it may not be immediately obvious how much better they are. But the worst is Princes of Florence. The Jester is simply the best item that can be acquired 90% of the time. What’s worse, the Jester provides two points to a Work’s value. On first blush, especially for a new player, that may not seem like a big deal. But veterans know better.
Those Jesters also help you get the Best Work bonus – which can be critical to success. If you look at the expected profit a round one or two Jester can bring, it is worth nearly a third of your starting money. New players just don’t expect that. If Jesters aren’t bid up to be properly in line with the expected value of other objects, then the player with the most Jesters wins. In other words, the Jester is so game breaking that other players have to balance the game.
Now, I enjoy all three of the games noted here. But, speaking entirely as a non-designer, I wonder if there isn’t a better way to balance a game than simply making highly unbalanced items up for auction and leaving it to the players to even things out.
Auctions are significantly better when items are valuable in some circumstances and not others, forcing you to balance bidding for what you particularly need with trying to bid up items that others need without getting stuck with it your self. It’s a lot more exciting that way.
Phoenicia; now that’s a perfect example of your issue. Players are expected to always bid things up but no one realizes this on a first play and it’s hard to value items even into a 3rd play. So, yes, I think expecting players to be combative over certain items when it may not be clear for several games is not the best way to go about it.
Fleet requires multiple plays to recognize values based on timing, but no license is more “powerful” than others. I like the variety this provides.
I’d say that if the game has an auction as its MAIN mechanic, then bidding isn’t necessarily “lazy.” But if the game provides obviously OP abilities or cards and then expects players to even out the difference, that’s just Harsh and not going to be a popular bidding game.
I agree with Wolfie. (What am I saying?!)
Yeah, I think there are definitely times when auctions are used well. Amun-Re and Ra both are excellent. But sometimes I feel like the auction is just used as a means of transferring the onus of balancing the game from the designer to the players. Phoenicia sounds like a great example of that.
LOVE the amon-re auction. I think auctions are a way to provide some inherent balance to acquiring items. When used well ofcourse.
I agree on Amun-Re. That game is chock full of auctions and it seems to be a way of sussing out varying strategies. And there isn’t one particular land in Amun-Re that is flat out better and everyone must bid up. So the game doesn’t depend on players to create balance.
That’s not true of Princes of Florence and the Jesters.