Zee Garcia / Tom Vasel / Sam Healey 10: Five Tribes / David & Goliath / For Sale 09: Saint Malo / Pandemic / No Thanks! 08: Augustus / Ticket To Ride / Wasabi 07: Hey! Thats My Fish! / Airlines Europe / Augustus 06: Race for the Galaxy / Libertalia / Fire & Axe: A Viking Saga 05: Lanterns / Reef Encounter / Smash Up 04: 7 Wonders / Tigris & Euphrates / Stone Age 03: Rolling America / El Grande / Kingsburg 02: Dimension / Seasons / Quantum 01: Karuba / Small World / Small World
Bruno Cathala is on record saying he made Five Tribes to be played with 2 players. Its suppose to be a 2 player game. The company made him make it for more people so it reached a wider audience.
Really surprised 7 Wonders wasn't on everyone's list. Yeah the 2 player mode is blah, but it's a game you can bust out with 3/4/5/6/7 players and get a solid experience. I think that's much more impressive than a game that scales well 2-4 players.
I'll stick up for Z with 7 Wonders being on the list. Scaling seamlessly from 3-7 is a great achievement, so the fact that the two player variant is only "pretty good" by comparison is a testament to being able to pull that game out pretty much no matter how many or few people are at the table. And at the end of the day that's what scalability is all about - being able to use a game no matter how many people want to play.
I also wouldn't put Ticket to Ride on this list but for the opposite reason of Zee. I think that at 2 players there isn't enough conflict and the game is just about getting lucky with the train cards. To each their own though.
+Sean Weeks I also agree except that I think in general Smash Up played by the book is too.. loose. There's never really any competition. because there's too many bases. If you play with (N-1) bases instead of (N) bases I find it works much better. It doesn't speed up the turns but it does take care of the "too much information" thing Zee brought up.
I disaggre with Zee about Libertalia. it's a really tight game with two but in my opinion heavily strategic. Also the 2 player variant for 7wonders is amazing. it's like an advanced mode of the game
I couldn't agree more with Zee on Smash Up. I've only played it a couple times and it was with 4 and I totally couldn't keep track of the bases and powers. I would put a guy on a base and then someone else is like "oh remember how this guy does X" so I wasted my turn. I haven't played Smash Up since and had no desire to. I wonder if I tried it with 2 first if that would have changed. When Zee talks about 7 Wonders calling, the point is, all the way from 3 to 7 it works just fine. It's basically a list of 'is this a good game if we add another or remove a player'.
I bought Smash Up and felt exactly the same. I shelved it for almost a year and then pulled it down to play 1v1 with a friend. After that I bought expansion after expansion and adore the game with 2-4 and even 5 players with a variant we've tried.
This is an interesting conversation. Some people might take scaling "well" to mean that it plays the same. I would take it to mean that it is still fun and doesn't have flaws or need excessive extra rules at different player counts. So how "mean" a game plays, or how many people can interfere with me seems more a result of more players than of poor scaling - at least to me. Basically if it's still fun, even if the game dynamics change significantly - it qualifies. I mean adding more players to anything will change how any game plays.
Hilarious how Zee gets crap for zeven wonders with 2 players and Tom gets away with El Grande (which also says 2 on the box, which they shouldn't have)
Surprised that Tsuro didn't make the list. 2-8 players with similar length at all player counts. Player elimination may be a minor issue, but the game is short enough that I don't feel it's a big deal.
Keyflower takes too long at 5-6 imo - also I am surprised by Quantum. I have played with many of the most experienced Quantum players in the world on BGA and none of them care from 2 player Quantum. It loses the 4x feel and the games self balancing, social nature. The game can be decided within minutes but take much longer to play out or end quickly without anything interesting happening. I personally only like it at 4 as it can be two players farming the one weak player who just sits there all game, but to each their own.
The player Kingsburg rule is before players place their dice, a neutral npc roll is made placing 3 dice on 1 advisor, then 2 die are rolled for the the npc. *If the total is the same as the 1st roll of 3 dice, then you split those 2 dice & put them on advisors matching each die's #. (If there's still a tie, then one die is discarded). I've never played w/ this rule, but may give it a try.
I agree that El Grande scales really good 3 to 5 players but the box says 2 to 5. Also in 3 player game you don't score for the third place (which increases the tension of the game).
Very surprised that Cyclades did not make anyone's list. Between the different maps for number of players to the scaled method for bidding on the gods, this game scales perfectly in all regards.
Five Tribes was the first game that came to mind for me. Me and the girlfriend play it two player all the time and it's a very different game at 2 vs 3-4 but all three are fantastic.
The name evolution of Augustus was opposite of what's mentioned here: the original was called "Augustus" but the second edition English copies carry the "Rise of Augustus" moniker.
Zee is right on Race for the Galaxy and Tom is wrong. This game scales really well! Yes, the 2-player game (which is a variant btw) is different from 3 and 4, but it's still a great game and I'd happily play it at any player count. After naming Libertalia too... Come on, it totally sucks at 2 and it's not even that good with 3 players...
It seems like many Euros scale very well with different players such as Concordia, Robinson Crusoe, Legends of Andor, Elysium, San Juan etc. I feel like Ameritrash-style games suffer more with player scaling. I just wish they would put the right number on the box.
Zombicide can be played from 1 to 6 players, even up to 12 if you have Rue Morgue. It is a cooperative game among players who are survivors against zombies coming out based on the amount of survivors, so it will always be balanced.
I like the scalability of Level 7: Omega Protocol. The way you spend adrenaline as action points, which then goes tot he overlord player to spend to activate the abilities on his dashboard really lends itself to scaling well.
I've been playing 2-player Pandemic Legacy and agree it still works. The only downside is that many of the roles never really get played (until they die, that is).
I think Takenoko scales pretty well. Also had no problems with Caverna with all player counts. Same with Castles of Mad King Ludwig, Dungeonquest, Lords of Vegas, Machi Koro, and Queen's Architect. Just to name a few off the top of my head.
Cyclades and Kemet both immediately came to mind for scaling, as well as Sentinels of the Multiverse (as long as we're not talking the team villains variant). As for games I have that don't scale well, I'd like to complain about King of Tokyo- it's absolutely abysmal as a 2-player game, and I'd strongly avoid 3-players as well.
The Resistance works great at 5-10 and that's quite a range. I'm surprised the lists aren't filled with cooperative games and 1 vs many. Those games seem to play identically at most player counts. If the list was instead "plays a large variety of player counts", games like Formula De would fit a lot better. That game is different, but enjoyable when you have around 4-10 players. 2 and 3 are OK. Still, 4-10 is quite a range in player count. It was fun to watch since people had such a difficult time coming up with games.
+pandaeskimo Regarding cooperative games, sometimes cooperative games have either balance problems or problems with downtime between turns at high and/or low player counts. For example Eldritch Horror, one of my favorite games, is well balanced at four but significantly harder to beat at 2-3 and with more than 5 players the downtime and game length become much greater. Sentinels of the Multiverse likewise is great with four but the difficulty spikes up with three and with five becomes a bit too long.
Slaughterball is a great game for 2-4.. never played a game where ganging up on one player was an effective strategy. You mainly need to focus on getting points since it’s a high scoring game and spending a turn just trying to mess with someone in particular could haunt you.
Should have a shared characters game on there like zombicide, 2 players you take control of 3 characters, 6 you take 1....so from the start of your turn to the next, you have the same round time regardless. Very user friendly and scales to infinity and beyond.
Surprised that Tom didn't mention viticulture. He's said in the past that he enjoys it with all player counts. I actually play it with 2 most often because that's the easiest number to get to the table for me but I also really like it all the way up to 6.
I'm with Tom on Libertalia. With 2 players I feel more focused on the secondary number for the character selection. This is a different kind of interesting.
I agree with Zee, Ticket to Ride is frustrating because players often block in a high number of player game but what bugs me is that the block plays are just on the way to doing your path. Hey that's my fish is just much more strategic.
I won't play this game at the higher numbers. The map changes so much between your turns that you can't make any plans and it all comes down to chance.
This video/list was interesting. I knew it was coming so I had been thinking about it. And before watching, I put together a list. Although I didn't order it. I will order it as I write this. The idea of which games scale best vs which games I like and scale well was a tough choice. I decided to go with games that scale best. But these guys did throw in games that vary at different player counts but they like all player counts. This is true for me with Alien Frontiers. I like all player counts but not equally, and it is my 11th favorite game. So here is my top 10 games that scale well, based on how I feel they scale well: 1. Dungeons and Dragons Adventure System Board Games: I lump these as 1 entry on my top 100 at #16. I thought Tom would have this on his list somewhere, as it is even seen on his shelf in this video. Maybe his short list? I own 3 of the 4 games, but have only played one, and that is Wrath of Ashardalon. I also own 2 of the Dungeon Command games as expansions for these, and several individual monsters from the other Dungeon Command sets. The reason this game scales so awesomely well, as each player draws 1 monster. So its exactly the same no matter what player count. I have even played higher than the stated player count (5) by adding more characters from the other 2 games. But despite this, the game played in less than 2 hours. Easily the shortest fantasy based game I own (dungeon crawl or Adventure game that is). 2. Colt Express: Scales great because the length of the train is decided by the player count. Although I have not played the 2 player variant, which I guess would fall in the same "busted" as Zee's 7 Wonders (I loved that bit btw...). While interaction is increased with more players, and can be fun and interesting. I have found varying player counts seem to be just as fun. 3. Tikal: Maybe its a cheat, but I absolutely love playing Mini-Tikal an Unofficial 2 player variant. But it doesn't require anything outside the box. But the rules are not in the box and are on BGG. 3 & 4 player are great, and I do wish to try a 3 player variant, but haven't tried it yet. 4. Heroes Incorporated: I love every player count equally, but haven't played the game at all player counts often. But it seems to scale great and enjoy the game no matter the count. 5. Wiz-War: I have only played the game twice, and this is a lot of guessing, but each player comes into the game with his own maze. So I am fairly certain the game will scale perfectly. 6. Trias: I absolutely love Trias, it is my 8th favorite game, and have played many 2 player games, and it took several months to get a 4 player game. But when I did, it played just as fun as 2, and I had played a 3 player game as well. I have not played 5, but expect it will do well! 7. Run, Fight, or Die!: Now I haven't played this recently but played it a lot when I 1st got it. And all player counts seemed fun. Sorta like the games Zee had, this is almost a solo game, where you have your own board and do your own thing. I have bought and played the 5/6 player expansion and loved it. In fact, I think I played a 5 player game before buying it! Fun game! 8. Ark of the Covenant/any Carcassonne variant: I haven't played these much, but to me it seemed they were very player count friendly. I will even throw Isle of Skye in here, but perhaps more players makes the bidding slightly better. 9. For Sale: I agree with Sam on this one! 10. Star Wars: Rebellion: many may disagree with me, but I enjoyed the 4 player team play in the game as equally as playing 2 players. 3 players works just as good. I will comment on some of some mentioned in the video: No Thanks: (Sam): I thought about it, and my perspective may have changed after watching the video. This goes hand in hand with my intro. I like all player counts, but some better than others and the game play changes, not as much of a chance to have a big straight with more people. Ticket to Ride: I disagree with Tom, and agree with Zee. I prefer less confrontation in this game. Small World: This didn't even enter my mind, but mostly because I am not a fan. I prefer the computer version to the physical version. Tom's review of Small World was one of the 1st videos I ever watched. And I bought the game, looking for a "fantasy" game and was disappointed. Even though it isn't the typical fantasy game and like many other types, I just didn't enjoy the game. So I sold it. Jamaica (Sam's short list): I am a Jamaica fan, it is my 34th favorite game, but I do not like the 2 player variant, and think the game shines with 4 plus players. Interaction is necessary for the game to be fun. Mission: Red Planet (Sam's short list): This also was on my short list, but haven't played enough player counts to be satisfied with listing it. I have heard grumblings from some people that high player count is very brutal.
Ha! I've often wondered how Tom organizes his games. I would look at the groups of games, searching, hoping to find some kind of pattern. Judging by how long it took him to find 7 Wonders, I'm not sure there is one.
Tom is absolutely right about 7 Wonders! If I'm in a 6 or 7 player game going for a military strategy and I get a hand with 3 military cards, too bad There is no way I will ever get more than one of those. Same goes for science strategy, or some other strategy. In a 3 player game I can try to guess what the other players will take and what might make its way back to me, allowing me to mitigate some of the luck of whatever happens to be in my starting hand. I won't play this game with 6 or 7, and I don't like playing with 5 if I can help it.
I take issue with the lack of difference between "plays well at all numbers" and "scales well." many games can play well, although differently at different player counts, but a game that "scales well," needs to play very similar at each number of players. Both plays well and scales well games were on this list.
Yessir, Zee. Drafting scales well in sense of fun, but it's definitely different, strategically, with 3 players than 7. Take MTG drafts: if you don't take that rare when you open your pack, it's probably not gonna make it back around. And that's when each player brings a pack to each round of drafting.
Great list!! The best choices for me were: El grande, Pandemic, David&Goliath, For Sale, No Thanks, Stone Age and Augustus. I would add Castle of Burgundy, Takenoko and CV. Also I like Puerto Rico, Village and Tobago with any numbers of players as well!
Games I find scale well in no particular order: Caverna Blood Rage 7 Wonders Ticket to Ride Dominion (I know some people try to play this with 5 or 6 but that goes against the intention of the designers/developers) Viticulture Food Chain Magnate I'm sure there are others I enjoy, but I can't think of them at this very moment.
Speaking about two players variants i really like Tokaido's one (brilliant) and i think it scales fine for other counts also. Disagree on Seasons though, it is just too random with 3+. You can't plan for resources. Also, i thought the optional drafting is for all players counts, not just 4.
I agree with Zee on the do your own thing with a lot of people. That's what I love about Bananagrams. We're all playing at the same time so nobody has to wait.
Rattus, eight minute empire, blood rage, resistance, dominion, tiny epic kingdoms. Usually I have more cross overs with your lists, now I can think of many games that were not on any of your lists.
Agree with Tom about Ticket to Ride (and Ticket to Ride Europe, for that matter). It's very good at all player counts. I prefer 3 & 5, but 2 & 4 are fun, too. I really like Medieval Merchant at all player counts as well. Each count plays differently, but they're all fun.
Nice list. Was listening through this episode and wondered "Why haven't they picked small world?!" and then... #1! How about 6 player small world? I think it gets quite crowded, but it's still great fun
I'd only add a caveat in Zee's Rise of Augustus: don't play more than 4 players if they are minimally AP or just new to designer games. This game should be 40 min, for 6 players, but we took 2 hours! Specially in those situations where various people hit Ave Caesar at the same time... oh dear god. "His it me?" "Wait let me re-check every single card that I own and then compare with what's in the market!" "His it me?" "I'm just waiting!" "His it me?" "What does this do again?" "His it me?"
Steampunk Rally is a recent one that scales well 2-8, once people have learned the game. (Learning game at high player count can be a little clunky, but that's usually the case).
the surprise absent game for me.. Bohnanza. I love that game all the way down to two players. It's a very different game with two but I like it. I think it fell into burnout amnesia. I know the TD guys have played it out for themselves but it's still a great game and still fun with 2- 7 players.
citadels scales remarkably well up to about 4 and possibly 5, it seems to me. what surprised me more than anything was that 2 player citadels was so fun. like amazingly so! my preferred mode ever since my best friend and I discovered how it works.
made this before the citadels dis ;( heard it's whack at rly high player counts but that's why you gotta mod it and throw in a bunch of the extra characters! plus I think it scales awesome at lower counts, 2-4, and it's actually a diff game sort of each time.
+RockCh4lk - Also...People are terrible at tracking the coins in a 5-Player game and it can lead to someone just getting decimated unfairly. I've been on the receiving end and scoring 50 points less than the closest opponent sucks.
Agreed--especially that first turn, ugh. Everyone figuring out all the race/power combinations and then setting up their starting position takes forever. If you're playing with vets it's not a huge deal but otherwise it's a bear.
I think the first time I played Small World with 5 players it was so slow I never played it again. There is almost nothing you can do on your turn to plan or interact with other players. Before that I was so psyched for that game. It's a shame because conceptually, I love it and with reasonable people, I think the 3 player game would be fun.
I agree on Augustus. But how do you get people to play? I've had trouble getting people (other than my kids) interested. I try pulling it out during filler game times and it gets a negative reaction around the bingo mechanic.
+Luke Hector (Broken Meeple) And even with two, it's not very good due to imbalance of the factions sometimes. Third player messing up the game makes it better IMO, and I'd personally only play it with three. Out of all games in my collection, this one scales the worst.
+Luke Hector (Broken Meeple) completely agree. This is one of those games where 3 players is about 45 minutes...and somehow 4 players translates into an hour and a half.
For 7 wonders 2 player variant, do the better Among the Stars 2 player, where the hands are twice as big, and as well as taking a card, you discard one. (often looking at the other player's tableau while you do so)
Battle sheep > Hey that's my fish Smash up scales amazingly all the way, and is very neat with 2, I agree with Sam Escape: the curse of the temple ... it's the epitome of scaling, since you all play simultaneously!!!! even better than pandemic for scaling Forbidden island/forbidden desert scale great, was surprised not to see those Lots i expected and did not see
Libertalia is really good with just two players. Nexus Ops and Runewars are fantastic 2-to-4 player games. I wouldn't have chosen coops like Pandemic, Arkham or Ghost Stories, since the important thing about those games is the amount of characters, NOT the amount of players, IMO. I can solo them easily.
Ticket to Ride with 4-5 is fine by me. Played this way many times. It's tight, it's ok. Race for the Galaxy is fine with 4 (actually i would prefer it with 4 rather than just with 2). 7 Wonders is great at scaling considering play time (except for the 2 players variant, which i don't play, but i would really like to have 7 Wonders Duel). Small World - i get what Zee is saying and i agree. With only one opponent you don't have a choice (no, having an option not to attack the only opponent is not a choice..).
35:52 In a 6-7 player game 7 wonders cards are duplicated and you most likely will see all of them at one point. If you're very unlucky there might be all copies in one hand, and if you're last player to pick you won't every see them. But thats playing against the statistics of the game.
Lanterns - aren't the number of each colour limited and that limitation never changes dependending on number of players? Makes the game more difficult with more players (well easier to block out handing out cards). I'd say Kingdom Death: Monster scales well regardless of how many actual players are present since all positions will always be filled. Falling: The Goblin Edition scales well (4 to 8 players). More players means the game ends sooner but it all still takes the same amount of time and players pick the pace of the cards dealt. Players also resolve the rules. Boss Monster. 2-4 players more if you decided to increase the deck. Heroes to be defended against varies according to number of players, and every player size offers a challenge. Evolution 2-6 players (North Star Games) Almost scales well. Carnivores see more use when there's more players. Besides that, it works well regardless of player count.
Keyflower, Escape: curse of the temple. So pretty huge scaleable titles missing, keyflower being one of the biggest. IMO. Euphoria plays really well with 6 as well. Augustus.
Couple from my personal collection that i find work well (in no specific order) smallworld, deception murder in hong kong, roll player, one night werewolf (while i like more players it still works well with 3) carcassonne, forbidden island, and epic spell wars.
I love Quantum, but I don't think it plays well at 2 players. The end game gets really drawn out as you both try to get your last quantum cube and each turn is just you stopping the other player from getting in next then setting your self up, then they do the same to you. Last time I played 2 player half the game was this back and forward for the last point.
I disagree with Zee on Hey, thats my fish! I think it plays only very good with 3. 4 and 2 have problems. 2 Is too thinky i believe and lends to AP, while 4 is too swingy as you can't accurately predict all the moves of your opponents. 3 Players is just perfect in both aspects imo. I agree with Zee on Smashup. It takes too long. while i like the concept REALLY much, i will limit the bases to condense the information. 2 players, 3 or 2 bases, 3 players, 3 bases, 4 players 3 bases. otherwise it's AP city
This would have been much more helpful if it measured by the range of players a game works well with. A game that scales well from 2-4 (Kingsburg) is not as a good as a game that scales 3-7 (7 Wonders) because 7 Wonders can handle a larger amount of players... hence the idea that scales better... I feel like matching what it says on the box is a totally different list.
No Shadows? No ONUW? No Incan Gold? No Two Rooms and a Boom? No SpyFall or Codenames? No Dixit? Many of the games mentioned were very standard 2-4 or 2-5 anyway.
I've got to disagree with Zee on Hey! That's My Fish! The game feels way more strategic at 2-players. The more players you add, and the more moves between your turn really stops you from running a strategy a decent strategy. The more players, the more random it becomes.
For Sale scales well but plays poorly with three at times because of the advantage of getting the second best house most of the time. If one player spends all their money early the person on their left is very likely to win.
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
Zee Garcia / Tom Vasel / Sam Healey
10: Five Tribes / David & Goliath / For Sale
09: Saint Malo / Pandemic / No Thanks!
08: Augustus / Ticket To Ride / Wasabi
07: Hey! Thats My Fish! / Airlines Europe / Augustus
06: Race for the Galaxy / Libertalia / Fire & Axe: A Viking Saga
05: Lanterns / Reef Encounter / Smash Up
04: 7 Wonders / Tigris & Euphrates / Stone Age
03: Rolling America / El Grande / Kingsburg
02: Dimension / Seasons / Quantum
01: Karuba / Small World / Small World
Bruno Cathala is on record saying he made Five Tribes to be played with 2 players. Its suppose to be a 2 player game. The company made him make it for more people so it reached a wider audience.
Really surprised 7 Wonders wasn't on everyone's list. Yeah the 2 player mode is blah, but it's a game you can bust out with 3/4/5/6/7 players and get a solid experience. I think that's much more impressive than a game that scales well 2-4 players.
I'll stick up for Z with 7 Wonders being on the list. Scaling seamlessly from 3-7 is a great achievement, so the fact that the two player variant is only "pretty good" by comparison is a testament to being able to pull that game out pretty much no matter how many or few people are at the table. And at the end of the day that's what scalability is all about - being able to use a game no matter how many people want to play.
The original box of 7 Wonders stated 3-7, they changed it later on.
+Luiz Costa cool!
+Luiz Costa that should put it at #1 for my list then.
I also wouldn't put Ticket to Ride on this list but for the opposite reason of Zee. I think that at 2 players there isn't enough conflict and the game is just about getting lucky with the train cards. To each their own though.
Super high energy level between the guys in this one - love it!
watching you guys just makes my day!
Thank you for all you do!
With Zee on this one. Smash Up takes forever outside of three players.
+Sean Weeks I'm in the opposite, I rarely play less than four. I've done it just fine with five and six.
+Sean Weeks I also agree except that I think in general Smash Up played by the book is too.. loose. There's never really any competition. because there's too many bases. If you play with (N-1) bases instead of (N) bases I find it works much better. It doesn't speed up the turns but it does take care of the "too much information" thing Zee brought up.
This was a feisty top 10. I like it.
+Twenty-Sided Turtle Yes! You said it! 27:30 is soooooooo feisty! Smash up really turned the fire up!
They have certainly woken up a bit since the Hidden Role one. 😄
I disaggre with Zee about Libertalia. it's a really tight game with two but in my opinion heavily strategic. Also the 2 player variant for 7wonders is amazing. it's like an advanced mode of the game
7 wonders scales well because card drafting is simultaneous, and because additional cards are added to the draft for larger games.
I couldn't agree more with Zee on Smash Up. I've only played it a couple times and it was with 4 and I totally couldn't keep track of the bases and powers. I would put a guy on a base and then someone else is like "oh remember how this guy does X" so I wasted my turn. I haven't played Smash Up since and had no desire to. I wonder if I tried it with 2 first if that would have changed.
When Zee talks about 7 Wonders calling, the point is, all the way from 3 to 7 it works just fine.
It's basically a list of 'is this a good game if we add another or remove a player'.
I bought Smash Up and felt exactly the same. I shelved it for almost a year and then pulled it down to play 1v1 with a friend. After that I bought expansion after expansion and adore the game with 2-4 and even 5 players with a variant we've tried.
This is an interesting conversation. Some people might take scaling "well" to mean that it plays the same. I would take it to mean that it is still fun and doesn't have flaws or need excessive extra rules at different player counts. So how "mean" a game plays, or how many people can interfere with me seems more a result of more players than of poor scaling - at least to me. Basically if it's still fun, even if the game dynamics change significantly - it qualifies. I mean adding more players to anything will change how any game plays.
Tom! no love for Kemet? The changing map makes 2 through 5 work very well. Is your issue the 2 player version? I have had fun with 2.
Hilarious how Zee gets crap for zeven wonders with 2 players and Tom gets away with El Grande (which also says 2 on the box, which they shouldn't have)
Surprised that Tsuro didn't make the list. 2-8 players with similar length at all player counts. Player elimination may be a minor issue, but the game is short enough that I don't feel it's a big deal.
Keyflower and Walnut Grove should have been on here. Glad to see Quantum on the list as it is a rather underrated game.
Keyflower takes too long at 5-6 imo - also I am surprised by Quantum. I have played with many of the most experienced Quantum players in the world on BGA and none of them care from 2 player Quantum. It loses the 4x feel and the games self balancing, social nature. The game can be decided within minutes but take much longer to play out or end quickly without anything interesting happening. I personally only like it at 4 as it can be two players farming the one weak player who just sits there all game, but to each their own.
The player Kingsburg rule is before players place their dice, a neutral npc roll is made placing 3 dice on 1 advisor, then 2 die are rolled for the the npc. *If the total is the same as the 1st roll of 3 dice, then you split those 2 dice & put them on advisors matching each die's #. (If there's still a tie, then one die is discarded).
I've never played w/ this rule, but may give it a try.
I agree that El Grande scales really good 3 to 5 players but the box says 2 to 5. Also in 3 player game you don't score for the third place (which increases the tension of the game).
Very surprised that Cyclades did not make anyone's list. Between the different maps for number of players to the scaled method for bidding on the gods, this game scales perfectly in all regards.
Samurai! Easy setup and great tension at 2, 3 and 4 players.
Samurai in in my top 10. A masterpiece of game design.
Some Euro’s that scale well- San Juan, Blue Moon City, Thurn
and Taxis, Vikings, Age of Empires, Carcassonne, Ingenious, Karuba, Stone Age
I love the two-player 7 Wonders variant.
Five Tribes was the first game that came to mind for me. Me and the girlfriend play it two player all the time and it's a very different game at 2 vs 3-4 but all three are fantastic.
The name evolution of Augustus was opposite of what's mentioned here: the original was called "Augustus" but the second edition English copies carry the "Rise of Augustus" moniker.
What about Takenoko? IMHO it plays really and equally well from 2 to 4.
Zee is right on Race for the Galaxy and Tom is wrong. This game scales really well! Yes, the 2-player game (which is a variant btw) is different from 3 and 4, but it's still a great game and I'd happily play it at any player count. After naming Libertalia too... Come on, it totally sucks at 2 and it's not even that good with 3 players...
Nexus Ops scales perfectly. Different maps for 2, 3 and 4
Tom prefers ticket to Ride at 2?! The maps too big for 2, you can have no interaction/ competition etc. I prefer it with more
Stone Age is definitely accurate - thousands of people play this on BGA at 2-4 players very evenly. 2/players may even have a slight edge.
It seems like many Euros scale very well with different players such as Concordia, Robinson Crusoe, Legends of Andor, Elysium, San Juan etc. I feel like Ameritrash-style games suffer more with player scaling. I just wish they would put the right number on the box.
+Ramonosuke I wonder if publishers could be persuaded to put two ranges on the box - 'can be played with' and 'plays best with'?
Zombicide can be played from 1 to 6 players, even up to 12 if you have Rue Morgue. It is a cooperative game among players who are survivors against zombies coming out based on the amount of survivors, so it will always be balanced.
I like the scalability of Level 7: Omega Protocol. The way you spend adrenaline as action points, which then goes tot he overlord player to spend to activate the abilities on his dashboard really lends itself to scaling well.
Between Two Cities scales really well - 3-7 on the box.
I've been playing 2-player Pandemic Legacy and agree it still works. The only downside is that many of the roles never really get played (until they die, that is).
I think Takenoko scales pretty well. Also had no problems with Caverna with all player counts. Same with Castles of Mad King Ludwig, Dungeonquest, Lords of Vegas, Machi Koro, and Queen's Architect. Just to name a few off the top of my head.
+Gaming With Geo doesn't caverna with 7 take ages ?
Not really. Assuming you're playing it with people that are well acquainted with the game.
Cyclades and Kemet both immediately came to mind for scaling, as well as Sentinels of the Multiverse (as long as we're not talking the team villains variant).
As for games I have that don't scale well, I'd like to complain about King of Tokyo- it's absolutely abysmal as a 2-player game, and I'd strongly avoid 3-players as well.
The Resistance works great at 5-10 and that's quite a range. I'm surprised the lists aren't filled with cooperative games and 1 vs many. Those games seem to play identically at most player counts.
If the list was instead "plays a large variety of player counts", games like Formula De would fit a lot better. That game is different, but enjoyable when you have around 4-10 players. 2 and 3 are OK. Still, 4-10 is quite a range in player count.
It was fun to watch since people had such a difficult time coming up with games.
+pandaeskimo Regarding cooperative games, sometimes cooperative games have either balance problems or problems with downtime between turns at high and/or low player counts. For example Eldritch Horror, one of my favorite games, is well balanced at four but significantly harder to beat at 2-3 and with more than 5 players the downtime and game length become much greater. Sentinels of the Multiverse likewise is great with four but the difficulty spikes up with three and with five becomes a bit too long.
Pandemic doesn't work very good at 5 and 6 IMO, two spies just isn't enough. It's MUCH better at 7-10 for me.
Alfredo I didn't know Pandemic plays at 5 or 6? I think you meant to say Resistance.
I bought Keyflower because everyone one r/boardgames was raving about how well it scales (2-5). They were absolutely right. Fantastic game.
Nice to see a bunch of games you guys don't normally talk about.
+Peter R One of the prime reasons i watch these channels is to learn new games (create a shoping list for Essen :D ). And top-ten-lists FTW !
Slaughterball is a great game for 2-4.. never played a game where ganging up on one player was an effective strategy. You mainly need to focus on getting points since it’s a high scoring game and spending a turn just trying to mess with someone in particular could haunt you.
Should have a shared characters game on there like zombicide, 2 players you take control of 3 characters, 6 you take 1....so from the start of your turn to the next, you have the same round time regardless. Very user friendly and scales to infinity and beyond.
I thought Viticulture would make it on this list. Scales well from 1 to 6.
+Jonas Siewert Agreed, this is the first one I thought of too!
+Kenneth Kuhn Same here especially knowing how much Tom likes it. It scales really well for a worker placement game.
+Bigft64 it jumped off the shelf when I was considering numbers. The Gallerist scales really well 1-4 as well.
Surprised that Tom didn't mention viticulture. He's said in the past that he enjoys it with all player counts. I actually play it with 2 most often because that's the easiest number to get to the table for me but I also really like it all the way up to 6.
I'm with Tom on Libertalia. With 2 players I feel more focused on the secondary number for the character selection. This is a different kind of interesting.
I agree with Zee, Ticket to Ride is frustrating because players often block in a high number of player game but what bugs me is that the block plays are just on the way to doing your path. Hey that's my fish is just much more strategic.
Why no Carcassonne on the list. It plays really well at 2 players, Sam's comment. And with many players you have to co-op with each other.
+Scott Hix / I think it drags with 5 players.
carcassone is amazing with 2, or 3 or 4 and i agree it scales phenominally
Awwww I would have thrown Carcassonne on there for my first
The base game scales quite well. Using the right expansions makes it scale phenomenally.
I won't play this game at the higher numbers. The map changes so much between your turns that you can't make any plans and it all comes down to chance.
I like the chuckle they shared about Citadels.... it just crawls when you get too many people.
This video/list was interesting. I knew it was coming so I had been thinking about it. And before watching, I put together a list. Although I didn't order it. I will order it as I write this.
The idea of which games scale best vs which games I like and scale well was a tough choice. I decided to go with games that scale best. But these guys did throw in games that vary at different player counts but they like all player counts. This is true for me with Alien Frontiers. I like all player counts but not equally, and it is my 11th favorite game.
So here is my top 10 games that scale well, based on how I feel they scale well:
1. Dungeons and Dragons Adventure System Board Games: I lump these as 1 entry on my top 100 at #16. I thought Tom would have this on his list somewhere, as it is even seen on his shelf in this video. Maybe his short list? I own 3 of the 4 games, but have only played one, and that is Wrath of Ashardalon. I also own 2 of the Dungeon Command games as expansions for these, and several individual monsters from the other Dungeon Command sets.
The reason this game scales so awesomely well, as each player draws 1 monster. So its exactly the same no matter what player count. I have even played higher than the stated player count (5) by adding more characters from the other 2 games. But despite this, the game played in less than 2 hours. Easily the shortest fantasy based game I own (dungeon crawl or Adventure game that is).
2. Colt Express: Scales great because the length of the train is decided by the player count. Although I have not played the 2 player variant, which I guess would fall in the same "busted" as Zee's 7 Wonders (I loved that bit btw...). While interaction is increased with more players, and can be fun and interesting. I have found varying player counts seem to be just as fun.
3. Tikal: Maybe its a cheat, but I absolutely love playing Mini-Tikal an Unofficial 2 player variant. But it doesn't require anything outside the box. But the rules are not in the box and are on BGG. 3 & 4 player are great, and I do wish to try a 3 player variant, but haven't tried it yet.
4. Heroes Incorporated: I love every player count equally, but haven't played the game at all player counts often. But it seems to scale great and enjoy the game no matter the count.
5. Wiz-War: I have only played the game twice, and this is a lot of guessing, but each player comes into the game with his own maze. So I am fairly certain the game will scale perfectly.
6. Trias: I absolutely love Trias, it is my 8th favorite game, and have played many 2 player games, and it took several months to get a 4 player game. But when I did, it played just as fun as 2, and I had played a 3 player game as well. I have not played 5, but expect it will do well!
7. Run, Fight, or Die!: Now I haven't played this recently but played it a lot when I 1st got it. And all player counts seemed fun. Sorta like the games Zee had, this is almost a solo game, where you have your own board and do your own thing. I have bought and played the 5/6 player expansion and loved it. In fact, I think I played a 5 player game before buying it! Fun game!
8. Ark of the Covenant/any Carcassonne variant: I haven't played these much, but to me it seemed they were very player count friendly. I will even throw Isle of Skye in here, but perhaps more players makes the bidding slightly better.
9. For Sale: I agree with Sam on this one!
10. Star Wars: Rebellion: many may disagree with me, but I enjoyed the 4 player team play in the game as equally as playing 2 players. 3 players works just as good.
I will comment on some of some mentioned in the video:
No Thanks: (Sam): I thought about it, and my perspective may have changed after watching the video. This goes hand in hand with my intro. I like all player counts, but some better than others and the game play changes, not as much of a chance to have a big straight with more people.
Ticket to Ride: I disagree with Tom, and agree with Zee. I prefer less confrontation in this game.
Small World: This didn't even enter my mind, but mostly because I am not a fan. I prefer the computer version to the physical version. Tom's review of Small World was one of the 1st videos I ever watched. And I bought the game, looking for a "fantasy" game and was disappointed. Even though it isn't the typical fantasy game and like many other types, I just didn't enjoy the game. So I sold it.
Jamaica (Sam's short list): I am a Jamaica fan, it is my 34th favorite game, but I do not like the 2 player variant, and think the game shines with 4 plus players. Interaction is necessary for the game to be fun.
Mission: Red Planet (Sam's short list): This also was on my short list, but haven't played enough player counts to be satisfied with listing it. I have heard grumblings from some people that high player count is very brutal.
Ha! I've often wondered how Tom organizes his games. I would look at the groups of games, searching, hoping to find some kind of pattern. Judging by how long it took him to find 7 Wonders, I'm not sure there is one.
Tom is absolutely right about 7 Wonders!
If I'm in a 6 or 7 player game going for a military strategy and I get a hand with 3 military cards, too bad There is no way I will ever get more than one of those. Same goes for science strategy, or some other strategy. In a 3 player game I can try to guess what the other players will take and what might make its way back to me, allowing me to mitigate some of the luck of whatever happens to be in my starting hand.
I won't play this game with 6 or 7, and I don't like playing with 5 if I can help it.
I would've expected shadows over camelot. not only does it play well at all player counts, it even scales well if players enter/leave the game.
I take issue with the lack of difference between "plays well at all numbers" and "scales well." many games can play well, although differently at different player counts, but a game that "scales well," needs to play very similar at each number of players. Both plays well and scales well games were on this list.
Yessir, Zee. Drafting scales well in sense of fun, but it's definitely different, strategically, with 3 players than 7. Take MTG drafts: if you don't take that rare when you open your pack, it's probably not gonna make it back around. And that's when each player brings a pack to each round of drafting.
Great list!! The best choices for me were: El grande, Pandemic, David&Goliath, For Sale, No Thanks, Stone Age and Augustus. I would add Castle of Burgundy, Takenoko and CV. Also I like Puerto Rico, Village and Tobago with any numbers of players as well!
Games I find scale well in no particular order:
Caverna
Blood Rage
7 Wonders
Ticket to Ride
Dominion (I know some people try to play this with 5 or 6 but that goes against the intention of the designers/developers)
Viticulture
Food Chain Magnate
I'm sure there are others I enjoy, but I can't think of them at this very moment.
Speaking about two players variants i really like Tokaido's one (brilliant) and i think it scales fine for other counts also. Disagree on Seasons though, it is just too random with 3+. You can't plan for resources. Also, i thought the optional drafting is for all players counts, not just 4.
I agree with Zee on the do your own thing with a lot of people. That's what I love about Bananagrams. We're all playing at the same time so nobody has to wait.
Rattus, eight minute empire, blood rage, resistance, dominion, tiny epic kingdoms. Usually I have more cross overs with your lists, now I can think of many games that were not on any of your lists.
Interesting what you guys were saying about Ticket to Ride. I think it works fine with all player counts, but 5 is by far my favourite.
It doesn't have solo, and the 2-player mode is a little funky, but I've always thought Cyclades always scaled pretty well.
Can't figure out why no one mentioned Coup. Unlike Zee's list, Coup has extreme player interaction. Yet it's just as much fun with 2 as with 6.
Agree with Tom about Ticket to Ride (and Ticket to Ride Europe, for that matter). It's very good at all player counts. I prefer 3 & 5, but 2 & 4 are fun, too.
I really like Medieval Merchant at all player counts as well. Each count plays differently, but they're all fun.
Nice list. Was listening through this episode and wondered "Why haven't they picked small world?!" and then... #1!
How about 6 player small world? I think it gets quite crowded, but it's still great fun
I'd only add a caveat in Zee's Rise of Augustus: don't play more than 4 players if they are minimally AP or just new to designer games. This game should be 40 min, for 6 players, but we took 2 hours! Specially in those situations where various people hit Ave Caesar at the same time... oh dear god. "His it me?" "Wait let me re-check every single card that I own and then compare with what's in the market!" "His it me?" "I'm just waiting!" "His it me?" "What does this do again?" "His it me?"
between 2 cities should have been one as well. seems to work well with 2-7 players
Steampunk Rally is a recent one that scales well 2-8, once people have learned the game. (Learning game at high player count can be a little clunky, but that's usually the case).
Totally agree with Zee on Smash Up. it's way too much at four. 2 player is pretty ho hum. 3 player is the sweet spot.
+EntropyGuardian Spot on!
the surprise absent game for me.. Bohnanza. I love that game all the way down to two players. It's a very different game with two but I like it. I think it fell into burnout amnesia.
I know the TD guys have played it out for themselves but it's still a great game and still fun with 2- 7 players.
El Grande is 2-5 players, not 3-5... and it sucks at 2 players.
+Steve Chamberland I think the only area control game that plays well with two players is Go :)
What about Twilight Struggle?
I was going to call shenanigans if small world was not on the list. Fantastic game for all player counts.
citadels scales remarkably well up to about 4 and possibly 5, it seems to me. what surprised me more than anything was that 2 player citadels was so fun. like amazingly so! my preferred mode ever since my best friend and I discovered how it works.
made this before the citadels dis ;( heard it's whack at rly high player counts but that's why you gotta mod it and throw in a bunch of the extra characters! plus I think it scales awesome at lower counts, 2-4, and it's actually a diff game sort of each time.
I thought Small World was going to be Tom's No.1. First one I thought of too.
Surprised no social deduction games made the list; they do tend to fail at lower counts but still have a larger spread despite that.
With an AP group Small World is terribly long... People taking 5 minute + turns at my house, no joke... makes it unplayable with 5
+RockCh4lk - Also...People are terrible at tracking the coins in a 5-Player game and it can lead to someone just getting decimated unfairly. I've been on the receiving end and scoring 50 points less than the closest opponent sucks.
+RockCh4lk 5 minutes or more to take a turn in Small World? I would have jumped off a bridge by now.
+chuckm1961 hahaha! that's why I have NOT brought that one out again
Agreed--especially that first turn, ugh. Everyone figuring out all the race/power combinations and then setting up their starting position takes forever. If you're playing with vets it's not a huge deal but otherwise it's a bear.
I think the first time I played Small World with 5 players it was so slow I never played it again. There is almost nothing you can do on your turn to plan or interact with other players. Before that I was so psyched for that game. It's a shame because conceptually, I love it and with reasonable people, I think the 3 player game would be fun.
I agree on Augustus. But how do you get people to play? I've had trouble getting people (other than my kids) interested. I try pulling it out during filler game times and it gets a negative reaction around the bingo mechanic.
On the topic of scale ability, how does TI3 scale? I've only played it at 6, but I'm interested in trying it at both 3 and 8
Arrrrgggghhhhh! Smash Up? No way that does not scale well at all. I'm ok with 2 , best at 3, but 4 oh god no the downtime is insane!
+Luke Hector (Broken Meeple) And even with two, it's not very good due to imbalance of the factions sometimes. Third player messing up the game makes it better IMO, and I'd personally only play it with three.
Out of all games in my collection, this one scales the worst.
+Luke Hector (Broken Meeple) completely agree. This is one of those games where 3 players is about 45 minutes...and somehow 4 players translates into an hour and a half.
I just played Smash up for the first time and we had 4 players. It took about 45 minutes, and I had a blast. Love the game. I'm with Sam.
But the other issue is how Zee put it, there is simply too much text on the board with 4 players.
For 7 wonders 2 player variant, do the better Among the Stars 2 player, where the hands are twice as big, and as well as taking a card, you discard one. (often looking at the other player's tableau while you do so)
+kdhlkjhdlk That sounds interesting, since I use a similar thing for Smash up too and I really don't like the 7 wonders 2-player
I very much agree with Smash Up, I've even taken it up to 5 players and it plays fine with that many.
Battle sheep > Hey that's my fish
Smash up scales amazingly all the way, and is very neat with 2, I agree with Sam
Escape: the curse of the temple ... it's the epitome of scaling, since you all play simultaneously!!!! even better than pandemic for scaling
Forbidden island/forbidden desert scale great, was surprised not to see those
Lots i expected and did not see
Blood Rage 2 to 5 players, change the number of cards based on the amount of players, but always works well.
Libertalia is really good with just two players. Nexus Ops and Runewars are fantastic 2-to-4 player games.
I wouldn't have chosen coops like Pandemic, Arkham or Ghost Stories, since the important thing about those games is the amount of characters, NOT the amount of players, IMO. I can solo them easily.
Deception: Murder in Hong Kong scales well
Ticket to Ride with 4-5 is fine by me. Played this way many times. It's tight, it's ok. Race for the Galaxy is fine with 4 (actually i would prefer it with 4 rather than just with 2). 7 Wonders is great at scaling considering play time (except for the 2 players variant, which i don't play, but i would really like to have 7 Wonders Duel). Small World - i get what Zee is saying and i agree. With only one opponent you don't have a choice (no, having an option not to attack the only opponent is not a choice..).
35:52 In a 6-7 player game 7 wonders cards are duplicated and you most likely will see all of them at one point. If you're very unlucky there might be all copies in one hand, and if you're last player to pick you won't every see them. But thats playing against the statistics of the game.
Lanterns - aren't the number of each colour limited and that limitation never changes dependending on number of players? Makes the game more difficult with more players (well easier to block out handing out cards).
I'd say Kingdom Death: Monster scales well regardless of how many actual players are present since all positions will always be filled.
Falling: The Goblin Edition scales well (4 to 8 players). More players means the game ends sooner but it all still takes the same amount of time and players pick the pace of the cards dealt. Players also resolve the rules.
Boss Monster. 2-4 players more if you decided to increase the deck. Heroes to be defended against varies according to number of players, and every player size offers a challenge.
Evolution 2-6 players (North Star Games) Almost scales well. Carnivores see more use when there's more players. Besides that, it works well regardless of player count.
Keyflower, Escape: curse of the temple. So pretty huge scaleable titles missing, keyflower being one of the biggest. IMO. Euphoria plays really well with 6 as well. Augustus.
What about Takenoko?
I think Takenoko works excellent with every player option.
Couple from my personal collection that i find work well (in no specific order) smallworld, deception murder in hong kong, roll player, one night werewolf (while i like more players it still works well with 3) carcassonne, forbidden island, and epic spell wars.
I don't mind the two player version of 7 Wonders. :}
If you don't like ghost players, then you're gonna have a bad time.
Time to update this list y'all! :)
I love Quantum, but I don't think it plays well at 2 players. The end game gets really drawn out as you both try to get your last quantum cube and each turn is just you stopping the other player from getting in next then setting your self up, then they do the same to you. Last time I played 2 player half the game was this back and forward for the last point.
I disagree with Zee on Hey, thats my fish!
I think it plays only very good with 3. 4 and 2 have problems. 2 Is too thinky i believe and lends to AP, while 4 is too swingy as you can't accurately predict all the moves of your opponents. 3 Players is just perfect in both aspects imo.
I agree with Zee on Smashup. It takes too long. while i like the concept REALLY much, i will limit the bases to condense the information. 2 players, 3 or 2 bases, 3 players, 3 bases, 4 players 3 bases. otherwise it's AP city
This would have been much more helpful if it measured by the range of players a game works well with. A game that scales well from 2-4 (Kingsburg) is not as a good as a game that scales 3-7 (7 Wonders) because 7 Wonders can handle a larger amount of players... hence the idea that scales better... I feel like matching what it says on the box is a totally different list.
No Shadows? No ONUW? No Incan Gold? No Two Rooms and a Boom? No SpyFall or Codenames? No Dixit? Many of the games mentioned were very standard 2-4 or 2-5 anyway.
I've got to disagree with Zee on Hey! That's My Fish! The game feels way more strategic at 2-players. The more players you add, and the more moves between your turn really stops you from running a strategy a decent strategy. The more players, the more random it becomes.
I'd like to see a Top Ten of games that play really well with only two players, but can be played with more.
For Sale scales well but plays poorly with three at times because of the advantage of getting the second best house most of the time. If one player spends all their money early the person on their left is very likely to win.