The Spectrum of Board Game Competition
Most board games involve competition—you're trying to score more points than opponents. But there's a vast difference between the gentle competition of Ticket to Ride (quietly building routes whilst others do the same) and the cutthroat economics of Brass: Birmingham (where building in the wrong location at the wrong time can cascade into defeat).
I've spent eight years playing competitive board games with groups ranging from casual families to tournament players. The most common misconception: assuming all competition feels the same. It doesn't. Economic competition feels different from territorial conquest, which feels different from racing, which feels different from social deduction.
This guide examines twelve games representing different competitive structures, analyzes what makes competition engaging versus frustrating, and explores the psychology of competitive gaming.
Types of Board Game Competition
Economic Competition
Players compete through markets, resource management, and financial optimization. Victory comes from building more efficient economic engines or outmaneuvering opponents in market dynamics.
Characteristics:
- Indirect conflict (affecting opponents through market actions)
- Long-term strategic planning
- Mathematical optimization
- Less personal antagonism
Example games: Power Grid, Brass: Birmingham, Acquire
Territorial Competition
Players compete for physical control of board spaces. Victory through area control, expansion, or territorial dominance.
Characteristics:
- Direct conflict (occupying space opponents want)
- Spatial reasoning
- Expansion and defense balancing
- More visible confrontation
Example games: Small World, Scythe, Risk
Racing Competition
Players compete to achieve goals first. Victory through efficiency and optimization against shared objectives.
Characteristics:
- Parallel progress (less direct interaction)
- Optimization focus
- Time pressure
- Less antagonistic
Example games: Splendor, Wingspan, Quacks of Quedlinburg
Social Deduction Competition
Players compete through deception, information management, and social reading.
Characteristics:
- Intense social interaction
- Deception and bluffing
- Information asymmetry
- High social engagement
Example games: The Resistance, Secret Hitler, Blood on the Clocktower
Combination Competition
Games blending multiple competitive types.
Example: Twilight Struggle (territorial + card management + event competition)
Twelve Competitive Games Reviewed
Economic Competition Games
1. Brass: Birmingham (Ages 14+)
Competition type: Economic warfare through industrial development
Why it's brilliantly competitive: Every decision affects opponents' options. Building a brewery creates resources others can use—but only if they connect to your location. Building where opponents want to build blocks their expansion.
The two-era structure creates rising tension. Early game is about positioning. Late game is about executing strategies while opponents actively interfere.
Competitive intensity: 9/10 (high strategic conflict, moderate emotional intensity)
Player interaction: Constant. Your actions directly enable or hinder opponents.
Spite potential: 7/10. You can absolutely build to block opponents, but it's rarely optimal to play purely destructively.
Best for: Groups who enjoy economic strategy and don't take blocking personally.
Not for: Players who dislike having their plans disrupted.
Price: £60-75 | Players: 2-4 | Duration: 120 min
2. Power Grid (Ages 13+)
Competition type: Auction-based resource competition
Why it's brilliantly competitive: The auction system creates direct competition—you're bidding against opponents for power plants. The resource market creates indirect competition—when you buy coal, coal becomes expensive for everyone.
The catch-up mechanism (leader goes last in auctions and resource buying) keeps competition tight. Leading is disadvantageous short-term, creating fascinating strategic tension.
Competitive intensity: 7/10 (strategic conflict without personal antagonism)
Player interaction: Moderate to high. Auction timing and resource purchasing affect everyone.
Spite potential: 6/10. You can overpay for resources to inflate prices or overbid in auctions to drain opponents' cash, but these tactics often hurt you too.
Best for: Economic strategy enthusiasts who enjoy auctions.
Not for: Players prone to analysis paralysis (can slow dramatically).
Price: £35-45 | Players: 2-6 | Duration: 120 min
3. Acquire (Ages 12+)
Competition type: Stock market and corporate acquisition
Why it's competitive: Creating hotel chains that absorb others generates shareholder profits. You're competing to found chains, acquire stock before others, and trigger mergers at opportune times.
The competition is sophisticated—sometimes helping an opponent's chain grow benefits you if you hold stock. Sometimes sabotaging mergers is optimal. The complexity creates engaging strategic conflict.
Competitive intensity: 6/10 (strategic without aggression)
Player interaction: Moderate. Stock ownership and merger timing create interconnected strategies.
Spite potential: 5/10. Limited direct blocking, mostly about optimal timing.
Best for: Business strategy and stock market enthusiasts.
Not for: Players wanting intense direct conflict.
Price: £30-40 | Players: 2-6 | Duration: 90 min
Territorial Competition Games
4. Small World (Ages 8+)
Competition type: Territorial conquest with declining civilizations
Why it's competitive: Conquest is direct and personal. You attack opponents' territories, defeat their armies, and claim their land. But the brilliant mechanic: civilizations decline. You abandon your current race to start fresh with a new one.
This creates engaging strategic decisions about when to commit to conquest versus when to decline and rebuild.
Competitive intensity: 8/10 (direct conflict tempered by game structure)
Player interaction: Constant. Every turn involves attacking someone.
Spite potential: 9/10. You can absolutely target one player, though it rarely wins games.
Best for: Players comfortable with direct conflict who appreciate fantasy theme.
Not for: Players who take territorial loss personally.
Price: £45-55 | Players: 2-5 | Duration: 60-80 min
5. Scythe (Ages 14+)
Competition type: Territorial control with economic engine building
Why it's competitive (sort of): Scythe has beautiful production and alternate-history 1920s mech theme. The competition is mostly engine-building efficiency racing with occasional territorial conflict.
Honestly, it's less competitive than it appears. Most games involve minimal direct conflict. Players build economic engines in parallel, occasionally bumping into each other.
Competitive intensity: 5/10 (looks more competitive than it plays)
Player interaction: Low to moderate. Mostly parallel engine building.
Spite potential: 3/10. Combat is costly enough that spite attacks hurt you more than them.
Best for: Players who want competitive aesthetics without intense conflict.
Not for: Players wanting cutthroat territorial warfare.
Price: £65-80 | Players: 1-5 | Duration: 120 min
6. Kemet (Ages 13+)
Competition type: Tactical combat for temple control
Why it's competitive: Unlike Scythe, Kemet delivers on combat promise. Players control Egyptian tribes fighting for temple control and divine powers. Combat is frequent, tactical, and decisive.
The power tile system creates asymmetric capabilities—some players become teleportation specialists, others summon monsters. This variety keeps combat fresh.
Competitive intensity: 9/10 (constant tactical combat)
Player interaction: Extreme. Combat every few turns.
Spite potential: 8/10. Targeting one player is viable (and sometimes optimal).
Best for: Players wanting tactical combat without dice randomness.
Not for: Players preferring indirect conflict.
Price: £50-60 | Players: 2-5 | Duration: 90 min
Racing Competition Games
7. Splendor (Ages 10+)
Competition type: Economic development race
Why it's competitive: Players race to 15 points through buying development cards. The competition is mostly parallel—you're building your engine whilst opponents build theirs.
Limited interaction through card reservation (blocking opponents from cards they want) and noble attraction (multiple players competing for same nobles).
Competitive intensity: 4/10 (gentle racing competition)
Player interaction: Low. Mostly optimizing your own engine.
Spite potential: 2/10. Card reservation allows minor blocking, but it's costly.
Best for: Players wanting light strategy without confrontation.
Not for: Players seeking intense competition.
Price: £28-35 | Players: 2-4 | Duration: 30 min
8. Wingspan (Ages 10+)
Competition type: Engine-building bird collection race
Why it's competitive: Similar to Splendor—mostly parallel engine building with limited interaction. Competition comes from racing to complete objectives and collecting limited bird cards.
The bonus cards create individual goals, reducing direct competition. It's competitive in scoring but not in gameplay feel.
Competitive intensity: 3/10 (very gentle competition)
Player interaction: Minimal. Primarily solitaire optimization with score comparison.
Spite potential: 1/10. Almost impossible to play spitefully.
Best for: Players wanting strategic gameplay without conflict.
Not for: Players seeking cutthroat competition.
Price: £45-55 | Players: 1-5 | Duration: 70 min
9. Heat: Pedal to the Metal (Ages 10+)
Competition type: Formula 1 racing
Why it's competitive: Racing naturally creates competition. You're trying to cross the finish line first while managing heat (engine stress). The slipstreaming mechanic (drafting behind opponents) creates interactive racing.
Feels competitive without being mean—blocking opponents is part of racing strategy, not personal antagonism.
Competitive intensity: 7/10 (racing excitement without malice)
Player interaction: Moderate to high. Positioning affects everyone.
Spite potential: 4/10. You can block, but it's racing strategy, not personal attacks.
Best for: Racing enthusiasts wanting board game competition.
Not for: Players wanting deep strategic planning (more tactical/reactive).
Price: £40-48 | Players: 1-6 | Duration: 45-60 min
Social Deduction Competition
10. The Resistance: Avalon (Ages 13+)
Competition type: Social deduction and hidden role deception
Why it's intensely competitive: Hidden role games create fierce competition through social dynamics. Loyal servants of Arthur try to identify Mordred's minions. Minions try to sabotage missions whilst maintaining cover.
The competition is psychological—reading people, detecting lies, building trust, and betraying it. Incredibly engaging but emotionally intense.
Competitive intensity: 10/10 (extremely intense social competition)
Player interaction: Total. Every player constantly engaged.
Spite potential: 10/10. Personal targeting is core gameplay.
Best for: Groups comfortable with deception and social reading.
Not for: Players who dislike lying or being deceived.
Price: £15-20 | Players: 5-10 | Duration: 30 min
11. Secret Hitler (Ages 17+)
Competition type: Social deduction with political theme
Why it's competitive: Similar to Avalon but with policy enactment and chancellor/president mechanics. The fascist players (including Secret Hitler) try to enact fascist policies or elect Hitler as chancellor. Liberals try to prevent this.
The political theme creates additional intensity. More mechanically complex than Avalon with the policy deck, but same social deduction core.
Competitive intensity: 10/10 (intense social conflict)
Player interaction: Total and constant.
Spite potential: 10/10. Accusation and suspicion are core mechanics.
Best for: Groups wanting political simulation with deception.
Not for: Players uncomfortable with political themes or deception.
Price: £25-35 | Players: 5-10 | Duration: 45 min
Hybrid Competition
12. Twilight Struggle (Ages 14+)
Competition type: Cold War geopolitical competition (territorial + event + card management)
Why it's brilliantly competitive: Two-player Cold War simulation blending territorial influence, event management, and card play. The USA and USSR compete globally through political manipulation, coups, and space race.
The card-driven system creates agonizing decisions—sometimes you must play opponent's beneficial events because the card's action is necessary. This creates fascinating strategic complexity.
Competitive intensity: 10/10 (intense head-to-head strategic warfare)
Player interaction: Total. Every action affects opponent.
Spite potential: 8/10. Can target opponent's strong regions, but usually suboptimal.
Best for: Dedicated two-player groups wanting deep strategic competition.
Not for: Casual players or those wanting quick games.
Price: £45-55 | Players: 2 only | Duration: 180+ min
The Psychology of Competitive Board Gaming
Why Some Players Avoid Competitive Games
Fear of loss: Losing feels bad. Competitive games make winning/losing explicit.
Social discomfort: Direct competition can feel aggressive or confrontational.
Skill anxiety: Worry about looking incompetent.
Relationship concerns: Fear that competition damages friendships.
Why Some Players Seek Competitive Games
Achievement satisfaction: Winning through skill provides genuine accomplishment.
Strategic engagement: Competition creates stakes making decisions meaningful.
Social bonding: Shared competitive experiences create connections (within appropriate contexts).
Skill development: Competition drives improvement.
Managing Competitive Tension
Set expectations: Discuss competitive intensity preferences before playing.
Match games to group: Don't play Kemet with conflict-averse players.
Separate player from strategy: Attack strategies, not people.
Celebrate good plays: Acknowledge brilliant opponent moves.
Rotate roles: In games like Secret Hitler, everyone experiences all roles over time.
Competitive Intensity by Game
| Game | Economic | Territorial | Racing | Social | Overall Intensity | |------|----------|-------------|---------|---------|------------------| | Brass: Birmingham | High | - | - | - | 9/10 | | Power Grid | High | - | - | - | 7/10 | | Acquire | Medium | - | - | - | 6/10 | | Small World | - | High | - | - | 8/10 | | Scythe | Low | Low | Medium | - | 5/10 | | Kemet | - | High | - | - | 9/10 | | Splendor | Low | - | High | - | 4/10 | | Wingspan | Low | - | Medium | - | 3/10 | | Heat | - | Medium | High | - | 7/10 | | Avalon | - | - | - | Extreme | 10/10 | | Secret Hitler | - | - | - | Extreme | 10/10 | | Twilight Struggle | Medium | High | - | - | 10/10 |
Choosing Based on Competitive Preference
Want Intense Competition:
- Twilight Struggle (2-player strategic warfare)
- The Resistance: Avalon (social deduction intensity)
- Kemet (tactical combat)
- Brass: Birmingham (economic warfare)
Want Moderate Competition:
- Power Grid (auction competition)
- Small World (territorial with declining races mechanic)
- Heat (racing competition)
- Acquire (stock market positioning)
Want Gentle Competition:
- Wingspan (parallel engine building)
- Splendor (racing development)
- Scythe (aesthetic competition)
Frequently Asked Questions
How do you prevent competitive games from damaging friendships?
Choose appropriate competitive intensity for your group. Discuss boundaries beforehand. Separate strategy from personal attacks. Remember it's a game—shake hands afterward.
Are competitive games suitable for families with children?
Depends on children's temperaments and ages. Small World (age 8+) works for families comfortable with direct conflict. Wingspan provides competition without confrontation. Avoid intense social deduction games for young children.
What if someone in our group always wins?
Several options: play games with catch-up mechanisms (Power Grid), rotate to games favoring different skills, handicap stronger players, or focus on improvement rather than winning.
Do competitive games teach bad social habits?
Not if managed appropriately. Competitive games teach strategic thinking, graceful losing, and achievement satisfaction. Problems arise from poor sportsmanship, not competition itself.
How competitive is too competitive?
When fun disappears. If players dread playing or relationships suffer, the competition is too intense. Find games matching your group's comfort level.
The Value of Competitive Gaming
Competitive board games provide something valuable: genuine achievement through skill. Wingspan is lovely, but winning doesn't feel earned—everyone's optimizing individually. Brass: Birmingham or Twilight Struggle victories feel genuinely accomplished because you outplayed thinking opponents.
This matters psychologically. Humans need achievement experiences. Competitive games provide safe contexts for this—stakes high enough to matter, low enough to be ultimately trivial.
Choose competitive games matching your group's intensity tolerance. Embrace competition appropriate to your preferences. Whether gentle racing (Splendor) or cutthroat economic warfare (Brass), competitive gaming offers engagement that cooperative games can't match.
The key is honesty about what you enjoy. If you love intense competition, play Twilight Struggle and Kemet. If you want gentle scoring competition, play Wingspan. Both are valid. Just don't force intense competition on players who'll hate it, or gentle competition on players who'll be bored.
Know your group. Choose accordingly. Compete with enthusiasm but kindness. That's the formula for excellent competitive gaming experiences.
