The concept of GUARDing in Big 2.5

[archalmighty]

Advertisement

The concept of guarding, where a player has to deal his bigger cards against the next player who only has one card left, per se is stupid. Why should I guard someone just because he had one card left when I have mostly scraps (small value cards) with a few face cards but obviously has little probability of winning?

Why wouldn't I want to try ending the game as quickly as possible with the hope of winning consecutive rounds instead of salvaging 1-2 extra points so another guy could win instead of the next player after my turn who had 1 card left? Having to guard someone puts the extra burden on me and diminishes my already low chance of winning?

A round of 2 minutes could potentially earn me 80 points rather than wait another 30 seconds to squeeze 1-2 points. With an average win rate of 25% and 2 minutes/round in a fast game, 30 seconds translates to 4-5 points.

Conclusion, the inverted pyramid scheme of guarding doesn't bring any advantage for the person guarding and the pioneer of the concept itself is a retard.

[SCORPIO31]

agree agree agree agree agree