Whoa, that's definitely way too long, I don't think I'd enjoy it much if it went anywhere near 2 hours. I've definitely had games go over an hour and even then it feels longer than it should. If you can get it played with a group of 4 and have it done in 30-45 minutes I think you'll have a MUCH better time with it.

Thanks Todd, and same to you!

Thanks! You're absolutely right, and Azul and War3 are both great examples. The more players there are in most games, the more each player has to look out for their best interests more than trying to impede one or two opponents.

Thanks, Joshua! Glad to hear you enjoyed it. It's suuuuuch a good game with 3 or 4 players.

As I mentioned in the video, if you're looking for great 2-player card games, I'd highly recommend Battle Line (or Schotten Totten which is very similar) or Lost Cities. Another great one for 2 players is Air, Land, and Sea. I think these are all in a similar price range and have a similar play time. Hope you find something you enjoy!

Yes, Biblios! Amazing game that has a similar end-game reveal. I also prefer Biblios with 4 players but either way they're both great games.

There's absolutely more luck in a 4-player game, no question. But personally, I like that more than the card counting, mathematical leaning 2-player game. Even the times I've finished dead last with 0 points, I've had so much fun playing Arboretum, especially the reveal of cards at the end.

Right on, I hope you enjoy it with 4 (or even 3). It certainly has a different feel to it at the higher counts.

I'm not sure if that's better because then the deck is missing cards, so some tree species would inherently be better/worse. I feel that's too far from the original design, and the designer clearly intended to have numbers 1-8 in the deck for any colours that are in play.

No problem! Even though I like it most with 4, it's still an amazing game with 3 players. But with 2 players I only think it's okay.

Thanks, Paul! I really enjoyed putting this one together. I know some people have said it fell flat for them as a 2-player game, so I hope more people try it out with 3 or 4 which is where I think it truly shines.

I guess there can maybe be a bit of that, but not entirely in this game. You're not supposed to reveal what's in your hand to other players, and I've never played with anyone who's trying to count everyone's points in each other's tableaus throughout the game, so I haven't experience any games of Arboretum where people are "attacking the leader" or anything like that. From my experience the end-game scoring reveal is usually a surprise to everyone.

@@AllYouCanBoard You've been fortunate :) Either my playgroup is quite advanced or I have such a huge target on my forehead. In any case, in our experience it's more or less 80% certain who's doing what by the last two turns. And another thing - in case it's opaque, people can - and do - gang up against whichever board looks the most developed. In the end, it might be the group dynamic in any old abstract 4-player game and it's not the game's mechanics per se that are to blame in this particular case, so it ends up being a generic drawback. So that being said, does the benefit of a 2p game that by definition does not have king making outweigh the 4p experience? I can't tell. I love it with both player counts.

@@DinoGramatikov If everyone knows who's doing what by the last 2 turns, that could mean people have revealed too much about what's in their hands. It's important to keep some of your cards from the start in hand until the very end so that some of your cards are unknown to everyone. If everyone is drawing from face-up discard piles then people can keep track of what other people have. Otherwise how would you know who has which cards and who can stop players from scoring? Also - the player who has the strongest-looking tableau might be the player who scores the fewest points if they don't have the card majorities in their hand to earn the right to score for those tree types. I don't necessarily disagree with you, it just sounds like my group's 4-player games have been very different from yours, and that's really interesting to me as I had never considered the kingmaking potential of this game. I don't often play with the exact same group of 4 though, so maybe I'll start to see similarities in your comments once I get to that point with the same group. As of now, it always feels like everyone is looking forward to that end-game reveal and there are usually surprises. As always, thanks for sharing your thoughts, Dino!

@@AllYouCanBoard All good arguments! Our group does indeed rely a lot on discarded cards..

I've never thought of it as a family game, especially not for 4 players, it can be very mean and confrontational by players holding onto specific cards to deny their opponents points. I've had many games where someone ends with 0 points, which I don't think is ideal for a family game.

@@AllYouCanBoard Chess for four players? (Arboretum scoring and certain number of rounds)

Generally I would agree that most games are better with 4 players than 2, but I have to disagree with the rest of your comment. I don't think playing with 2 players is ridiculous - games like Carcassonne (plays up to 5), Race for the Galaxy (plays up to 4), Santorini (plays up to 4) are actually much better with 2 players. I think it really depends on the game. Also - not everyone is in a position to play with a bigger group. There are a variety of reasons why someone might only have access to one other player to play games with - maybe they don't know anyone else who enjoys games, or maybe they just have one roommate and they live far away from a major city with other gamers, or whatever the case may be. But I absolutely agree with your last point - nobody should ever force someone else to play a game. If your friend or partner isn't actively interested in playing a game they should never feel forced to do that just to make one person happy. Thanks for watching!

Great point! I actually played Citadels recently with 5 players and it took around 2 and a half hours. The entire time I was thinking, "I wonder how much quicker this would be with 2 or 3 players..."

Do you mean if the game ends before all players have had an equal number of turns? Worst case scenario some players might have one fewer tree in play, because you have to place one tree each turn. I've never found it to be an issue in my plays but maybe we just haven't noticed.

@@AllYouCanBoard thats exactly the situation. Still really like the game, just like finishing out the round. Players can always draw from the discard piles when the draw deck is emptied