Tips for 3-way games

[hermit]

Hey folks, sorry if there have already been threads about this, I did a search but couldn't find any--what are basics strategies for 3-player games, either ones that only start with 3 players or that start with more but get narrowed down to only 3? Also depends of course on escalating vs flat rate cards. I'm in a flat rate 3-player right now that's been going on almost 30 rounds lol, we're hunkered down in our respective areas with some back and forth but we've balanced each other pretty well (one player did take the advantage for a few rounds, but eventually the other player and I were able to contain them again). Is it just a matter of waiting until say player A accidentally pushes player B just a little too much, enabling player C to then make an irreversible rise over both of them? Right now (I'm player B) I've been trying to keep player A slightly stronger, so that the responsibility of balancing him falls to player C a bit more each round before A goes again, instead of player C being slightly stronger in which case player A would just let the burden of the balance fall to me each round, allowing me to build up a bit more each round. Is that as clever as I think it is or nah?

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Three player games are a balancing act, for sure. You have the right idea. In the end, you have to either be able to take out a player without weakening yourself so much that the other player wins, or get the other two to weaken themselves in that respect. It can be difficult. Sounds like you may be in a 'marathon' game there...

 

[Grotho]

I'm in a couple of 3 way games and they are taking forever even with being mercenery and there being an incentive to take out a player.

 

[Virtuoso]

Pick on the player who comes after you. Heavily enforce all your mutual borders. It'll compel him to attack the other player to get his card.

 

[Cardinalsrule]

Pick on the player who comes after you. Heavily enforce all your mutual borders. It'll compel him to attack the other player to get his card.

That can work for a short time, but if you consistently attack one player only in a 3-player game, you're going to find yourself deeply unpopular.

 

[brianstheman]

No Diplomacy in three player games is a policy I have in place for games I play in, to avoid a 2v1 situation.

If two players have an agreement not to attack one another, then that leaves the third player prone.

To avoid such situations, as soon as the fourth player is eliminated or goes AWOL, I post in chat something akin to: "3p game now, no diplomacy please (else=2v1)".

It is up to the players in the game to let others know that this practice is expected.

Venerable players like NDRM has "No diplos in 3p" right on his frontline page in his bio. Some people extrapolate this theory to games with 3 teams - I lean in favor of no diplo in those, but if the other teams want it, I'm not as adamantly opposed. There are ways to leverage those diplomatic lines to one's advantage in such settings.

Below is the best post title ever on the subject:
Strategies for Awkward Threeways