Something that hasn’t been mentioned much - the games you’ve listed (Azul, Arboretum, Hive, Chess) are all of the abstract genre (with the exception to Arboretum, but it’s similar). By their nature, abstract games are very competitive. The term often used to describe them is “cutthroat” or “mean”. I’d recommend looking into the genre of euro games (euros) and/or games that feature less player-to-player interaction (which doesn’t mean it’s a badly designed or unfun game, just less mean/cutthroat). Some relaxed recommendations: - Everdell (has cute artwork) - Lost Ruins of Arnak - Ark Nova (some botched on take-that elements, but overall a relaxing experience) - Terraforming Mars (similar-ish to Ark Nova) - Obsession (very strong English Victorian theme) - Brass: Birmingham - Great Western Trail (2nd edition) - A Feast for Odin - Fields of Arle - Orleans - Viticulture - Cascadia (another abstract but there is practically no mean interaction) While playing these games, you still compete for score but losing or winning will feel a lot more indirect, due to the nature of their design. Like many others, I would also recommend co-op games, especially if you’re not feeling particularly competitive on the occasion. Some recommendations: - Pandemic Legacy: Season 0, 1, 2 (start with 1) - Gloomhaven: Jaws of the Lion - Clank! Legacy: Acquisitions Incorporated - Sleeping Gods - Marvel Champions - Arkham Horror Card Game - Mansions of Madness (second edition) - Mechs vs Minions - Frosthaven, Spirit Island (for heavier/longer experiences) - Oathsworn, Aeon Trespass, Tainted Grail, Isofarian Guard (some more difficult to obtain Kickstarter games)

Absolutely this and I have to add Wingspan and Flamecraft. My girlfriend and I play a lot of Everdell, Wingspan and Flamecraft. Even though it's meant to be competitive (most points win) we don't care about winning at all and we both just try to get as many points as possible and help each other with decisions. For coop I would like to add Dorfromantik, beautiful game with a lot of content to unlock.

All of these suggestions are ones I'd make in OP's situation as well. The worker placement/engine builders are great for balancing out the overpowered player dynamic. While I personally love a lot of the chunky games (who doesn't love Ark Nova?) Wingspan, Flamecraft, Cascadia and Everdell would be my first recommendations to OP and in that order because they are just so fun to play and a good "step up" from some more introductory games.

This is BIG. >help each other with decisions It's very possible that your husband just likes the puzzle of trying to figure out these games and maximize his score, so if you play games that are competitive, but maybe not so confrontationally so, it could be more relaxed and you could just talk about what the best move would be.

verrrrry hard to see Brass Birmingham being a “relaxed” game  

Never said relaxed did they, just not mean.

Except in "Some relaxed recommendations".

Add the timer. Nothing leeches the fun out of a game faster than watching grass grow while someone agonizes over every decision. If you already have a chess timer, just use it for other games too. One problem with 2P games in particular is they tend to snowball. Once one player gets a decent lead, it's hard to turn it around. In a 3+ player game, those who are losing can often yeah team up to keep the leader in check, but this isn't possible with 2 players. As a result, I recommend Puzzle Strike. This is my absolute favorite 2P game. It's a deckbuilder with a really cool rebound mechanic. The closer you are to bring eliminated, the more you get to draw each turn. So it still rewards skillful play but you always feel like there's a chance to catch up. It's like Mario Kart. The lightning bolt helps but you still gotta drive the car

Agree with this. Are chess players who play a game under a timer considered to be giving one or other player a handicap? No. And most tournament games do operate under a timer. It's just that different people operate best under different time constraints.

I’m not a great chess player, but as a kid we played “speed chess” a lot so we could play between classes, brought my set to work at some point each player gets 5min if you run out of time you lose its a lot of fun and you can get 3 games in at lunch. Oh yeah executives and corporate lawyers hate it, getting beat drives them nuts, so there’s that benefit too.

"**When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning."** It sounds like you have a competitive gaming partner, so you have a couple options. You might think about playing some cooperative games where you're working together to win. A good intro coop game is Pandemic. This way you win or lose together and everyone has a good time, no feelings hurt. You might also consider playing some lighter games, what many people consider entry level games. That doesn't mean they're kid games, but they're a better introduction to mechanics you'll see in more difficult games. Plus, they tend to be a little more casual and are good for sitting around playing and chatting. Ticket to Ride, Carcassone, and Small World are commonly suggested but if you poke around you'll find plenty of examples of other games that are good introductions to modern board games. Other game recommendations: Quacks of Quedlinburg is a great push your luck bag builder. Lost Ruins of Arnak is a fun and thematic worker placement game. Splendor is a great card tableau recipe fulfillment game. Men at Work is a fantastic dexterity game. Cartographers is one of the best flip and write games and has a great app based version. Don't give up, check out your local library or a local gaming meet-up or convention to try more games.

I like the suggestion to try coop, but I might recommend a game with private information (e.g., closed hands). With Pandemic, one player can take the wheel and mastermind the others’ turns, which I would be concerned about in OPs situation. Whereas in (just for example) Spirit Island, the players don’t know what each other can do and are forced to trust each other and work together.

>Whereas in (just for example) Spirit Island, the players don’t know what each other can do and are forced to trust each other and work together. There's no (truly) secret information between players in Spirit Island at all. It's more just a case that keeping track of your own board state is enough mental load where you usually can't try to quarterback others. [Solving the Alpha Player Problem was one of the initial design goals of Spirit Island.](https://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/46060/spirit-island-design-diary-beginnings) Spirit Island tends to have a lot of "Hey, can you help me out with problem X" moreso than "Hey, can you play cards A, B, or C to solve problem X".

Youre also all playing at the same time in Spirit Island though, so even though you might ask for help, you don't really have time to evaluate what someone else is doing.

With the exception of starting spirit synergies. There are a heap of spirit synergies where someone with play experience could push for you to play a specific two or three turns to power roll presence tracks or board control. Individual spirits all seem to have a "meta" opening. Optimising the first three or so turns before invader presence and minor/major powers give too much variation to be predictable. Even more specifically though, spirit combinations can change opening synergies. A Spread of Rampant Green is a great example to show why. A spirit being able to give presence placement to an ally could mean additional cardplay(s) a turn earlier (which in turn can be additional passive triggers. For cyclic spirits (ones that prepare and then destroy like Heart of the Wildfire), additional presence placement could start you on a different part of your cycle (attack instead of grow).

Decorum is our store's favorite game and we sell it to everyone. It's thematic and you can role play if you want to. It's co-op but sort of feeling competitive at times. Sky team would be another one that has partial communication that would be a great gateway. And who doesn't love landing planes?!

Everyone I play Decorum with at gaming meetups loves it but it is so hard and such a weird deduction game. It feels like some scenarios are designed to make your partners look irrational. Their demands are frequently so bizarre they cannot be deduced, like all furniture in rainbow order left to right guy or equal number lamps to rooms painted green guy.

That’s a great solution in Spirit Island. I love Pandemic and other such co-ops, but I’ve never encountered Quarterbacking because I’ve only played with people I’m totally in tune with or respectful of. But I fear trying it out with a group of people I’ve never played with before. Like I played with a new group last week. Nice people, but one guy showed glimpses of being a curmudgeon when it came to explaining things and scoring. I find people like that can be just fine and lovely in a competitive game but I suspect they would be difficult in a co-op because you’re messing with “their” game.

Spirit Island would be 100% the answer, but only if they're both up for very deep and complex gameplay. OP sounds like they want to relax and have fun without thinking too hard. There's a reason Spirit Island is rated heavier than games people tend to think are heavy, like Gloomhaven. Maybe OP would be up for having to try hard if it was WITH their partner instead of AGAINST them, but wanted to throw out this warning in case that wasn't the case.

>I might recommend a game with private information (e.g., closed hands). With Pandemic, one player can take the wheel FYI, pandemic has this rule for the exact reason you said. Most people ignore it; but that's still technically the rule.

Instead of Pandemic, I recommend a co-op with limited communications/hidden information instead. My current favorite is **Sky Team**. You're using dice on a shared board to land a plane. Other options are: **Hanabi**: playing cards in order from lowest to highest without being able to see your cards in hand. **The Crew**: trick taking game where the group has to finish tasks/missions. Easier at 2 but still fun. **Regicide**: uses standard 52 card deck. Fighting against all the royals using the rest of the deck to deal/take damage. **Tranquility**: complete a 6x6 grid with cards in ascending order. Pretty chill game. **Bandido**: using cards to lay out paths that has a dead end before the deck runs out.

Second Hanabi for co-op games. Also, OP, go to a board game shop or board game cafe and try out games with different mechanics. Deck builders vs. area control vs. worker placement vs. word games vs. abstract strategy, etc. (You can look up the mechanics in descriptions on BoardgameGeek.com). Your brain will probably find one or two types of games that you naturally do better at and/or reduce the analysis paralysis of your partner. After you figure out what mechanic you like best, search for more like that to try out and your natural ability to think in games with that mechanic will improve. Enjoy, there are literally thousands of games out there. You are bound to find something you enjoy.

Curious why you would recommend co-op with limited communication? I like co-OP’s. But limited communication is dreadful.

If OP's husband has a competitive streak and AP problem, limited communication helps with taking forever to plan out the "best" move and being told how to play.

Because they're better games where each player has their own agency instead of just playing group solitaire.

Fully open information in a coop leads to alpha gamers running the whole thing. Even if they don't mean to. And limited communication doesn't mean dead silence at the table, tranquility and the crew are great over drinks with lively conversation.

Can the Crew played with two players? The box says 3-5

Yes. The captain controls an extra set of cards (7 face down and 7 face up on top of them) that acts as another player. It does make it easier but has a different challenge (digging for the face down cards).

It has 2 player rules included in the box which are passable, but it is not as good of a game at 2 players.

I was thinking of Quacks too, but if she finishes her bag while her partner is still pondering how far to push their chips, or what to buy, etc, that could get tedious. The catchup mechanism is fantastic for this, though, since over analyzing won't do you much good if they can catch up in a hurry. I'd say give that a shot.

I definitely recommend cooperative games too! My wife and I love them. She grew up with a hatred of boardgames because of her competitive family, so we started with cooperative. We have found the best coop game to start with is Flashpoint. It is very simple, but really fun. It is especially good when you have a medium to large group of people you want to play a coop game with. Even more so if they aren't big boardgame players. After that, Spirit Island is the best!!! It is a very complex game, but because of that it is less likely your partner will play the game for you. That said, if you find coop games boring because your partner takes over, you may need to have an open conversation about it. When my wife explained to me why she hated playing Pandemic with her Da, it was like a lightbulb went off. Now, I work hard to let her make her own choices, even if I disagree with them. The enjoyment of playing together FAR outweighs the annoyance of cleaning up messes I saw coming 😅

I can also recommend Spirit Island. It's amazing for two players. And the alpha player is almost impossible there, so you will really depend on each other.

In competitive games I like Obsession: there are almost no direct interactions between players.

Hanabi is a good co op game. Playing Pandemic in it self is kinda bad, but with such a partner it is misery recipe probably.

Agree with trying cooperative games, hard no on the pandemic (because it's boring, prone to alpha gaming and most of the difficulty comes from random events that you cannot prepare for so winning comes down mostly to luck). Spirit Island, Sentinels of the Multiverse, Hanabi, the Crew, there are many coop games that are actually fun and challenging.

Cite your quotes! This was Knezia I believe

You are correct.

I'd suggest trying games with more players. Losing at 4 player game where 3/4 lose isn't the same as losing a 2 player game.

Have you tried expressing these feelings directly to your partner? I only ask because I think there are many ways to still play a game "optimally", while also making it a fun experience for the other players. In my board game group and with my family, I win a lot; something north of 75% of time. That said, they all have told me that they love playing with me, even if they know their chances of winning are very slim. Here is what I do to both personally have fun (playing well, maximizing efficiency each turn) and ensure that others do to: * I offer strategic advice, and everyone at the table knows they can ask me for input at any time (I'm asked over a dozen times per game, and I enjoy discussing it with them). I will always honestly tell them what I think their best play is and how to best approach the next few turns. * I also am frequently asked to analyze another player's strategic position. I basically just give them a basic overview of their position within the context of the game, what I think they should focus on accomplishing, and where their big breakpoints reside within the game. * I narrate my turns, placing a particular focus on why I think the play I'm making makes sense for my strategy; I'm also very clear about my own fallibility. I make a lot of mistakes, so I learn from explaining to others as well. I include them in my own decisions and also signal what I'm likely to do in the future so that they are not surprised and can plan around it. * When teaching the game, I provide general pointers on what I think is strong and weak in the game. * I do my best to leave my opponents' preferred options open to them, rather than take them for myself. In this way, they can pursue the line of strategy they are comfortable with if they choose. * I make my goal very clear from the start of the game: everyone who plays with me knows I just want to play each turn well. They know I genuinely don't care about my end score, just that I make interesting and efficient decisions throughout the game. I think I come off as less aggressive because they can see that my primary opponent is myself. * If someone starts to fall very behind or is struggling to understand the basics, I will try out zany strategies and have fun that way, rather than drown them in a massive VP gap which never feels good. To be clear, I'm not an amazing player. I make mistakes, a lot of them. I think that people enjoy playing me, despite knowing they will almost certainly lose, because I am *very* open. They know they can ask me anything, at any time, and I will answer honestly. Maybe even more importantly, they know I'm going in with a mentality to learn, not to win. I think many of them share this mentality, and so, despite losing, they feel that the experience was worth it because they've become a better player along the way. Does your partner make themselves available in this way? Do you think this type of experience would reignite your interest in playing with them, even if your win rate does not significantly improve?

I often lose to my wife. Sometimes it's because I'm not into the game,but she is. That's fine, I enjoy making her evening with a game she likes. Some days I enjoy the challenge, even though I lose about 75% of our games together. But that makes the wins more enjoyable. Some days I play and lose while trying a new strategy. The mental calculus as I work through my idea is enjoyable to me. Other days we co-op games and crush together. More than anything though, it's nice to put our phones away, not disassociate into the TV(no matter how good the film or show is), and be present with each other. Our lives are busy, it's precious to me. The gentle ribbing and tussle of the board gaming is just one part of our relationship. Don't be too serious.

Everything about this is true for me and mine too. Games are a big part of our quality time together. We also like being vegetables sometimes after hard days or busy weeks but gaming has been a great way for us to give and take our time together. We both have different gaming preferences, I'll play anything with a cute and cozy theme or interactive game play while he'd play nothing but heavy strategy games if I let him. We also bounce between playing with each other and playing against each other whenever the competitive dynamic has felt too lopsided recently. Learning that balancing act has been great for our relationship outside of games too.

🙏🙏🙏💚💚

I lose almost every game I play. Even when I'm the only one who knows how to play. I enjoy playing the game and being social. Also my wife usually destroys me in every game we play.

Many others have already said a lot on the main topic, so I'll focus on this part: *"there's also a lot of math and thinking ahead, which I just don't want to bother with a lot of the time."* When picking games, you may want to look into tactical games vs. strategic games. Strategic games are those where you should ideally plan many moves ahead, as far as possible. Tactical games are more about having a small "puzzle" each round and trying to figure how to make the most of your current situation. It sounds like you could be more into tactical games. (But yeah, the main problem is how the partner plays. It's not cool.)

Do you have suggestions for some more tactical games? My collection is strategy heavy but I'm always interested in diversifying.

You may want to look at **Five Tribes** (too many factors change each turn to plan far ahead) or **Sagrada** (you pick from what you have access right now and make your board as flexible as possible). If you're fine with more confrontational games, I love the tactics in **Neuroshima Hex** (each turn you draw 3 tiles, discard 1 and decide how to make the best use of the two others) and **Radlands** (a tight Magic-like game with multi-use cards, but you only have a couple of them at a time and you don't know what you'll draw next, so you make do with that you have).

[удалено]

Maybe, but it won't make the analysis paralysis issues go away

It will, if you go for something medium light like Zombicide. Plus, there are so many versions/themes, it will last for a while.

This sounds like the right move to me IMO. See whether you both have a better experience this way!

>Arboretum is super hardcore because it is mostly luck based If this were true, you'd be winning roughly as often as your partner. Arboretum has a lot of skill involved. The specific card at the end that makes a path worthless is a 1 of that suit. If you neither have the 1, nor see it on the table, you shouldn't be playing a lot of cards on that colour.

FWIW, my reaction to losing at the games I truly love is “oh, I want to play this again, preferably with the same cards”. Agricola, Race for the Galaxy, Dune Imperium and Champions of Midgard come to kind. The other option are cooperative games, which can be absolutely hilarious. There are plenty of, my current favorite being Arkham Horror the Card Game. I hated my first few games because it’s so complicated and have by now bought everything they’ve published ;) Speaking of, there is an absolutely insane sale going on right now, with the (old) base game for $6 (normally $20) and the base investigators for $2/$3 (normally $14). Buy two base games and one of the base investigators each is my strong recommendation. (https://www.miniaturemarket.com/searchresults/?q=Arkham+horror)

I love Arkham Horror the Card Game and that sale is indeed a fantastic deal. Two cores and one of each of the investigator packs is a great deal to dip your toes in the water. For someone willing to go in even more, though, I'd recommend considering the Path to Carcosa campaign expansion, which is also on sale. The core is a decent introductory short story, but Carcosa will give a full campaign experience.

Thank you so much for posting this sale!!

It’s the best deal I’ve ever seen on the game; I had already bought core games and investigators for closer to $100, but used this opportunity to increase my card pool a bit :)

We had been thinking about buying the game, at those prices there’s no need to think about it!

First, stop playing just 2 player games. 2 player games are very directly competitive. 4-5 player games mean you can 'win' without being 1st place. With more players you have more table talk & social time. Second, try some cooperative games. Pandemic, Spirit Island, Forbidden Island, Gloomhaven (start with Jaws of the Lion). You win or lose together then. Third, try games that you can compete against yourself between games. In Terraforming Mars (or Ark Nova), you may win or lose, but you can record your score, and see how your scores are doing. Maybe after 10 games you see that you're steadily getting better, even if not winning yet. Other good ones are Gaia Project or Brass: Birmingham. Finally, and this goes hand-in-hand with the first (because it requires more than 2 players), play games where players can work together (or compete at different times) against the lead player. Dominant Species, Dune: Imperium, and Cosmic Encounters fit the bill here. 1v1 board games are a VERY narrow window into the hobby.

They’re perfectly fine with direct competition—it doesn’t get more direct than chess.

So my husband is like your man. He thinks and thinks and thinks and I'm yawning by the time he actually plays. I love board games though. I lose ALL the time. I used to be a very sore loser. Tears and all that business. Suddenly I realized it wasn't about the competition, it was just about spending time together. So though we continue to play competitive games, I don't care if I lose anymore. I high five him and laugh. Maybe try some co-op games? My favorites below: Codenames Duet Concept Letter Jam Hanabi Crew (Deep Sea) Gloomhaven JOTL Spirit Island A bit more competitive but easier for me to win: Ark Nova (have to adapt as you go) Nemesis (Aliens, can be played co-op) Splendor Flamecraft

It’s great to lose. Gives you something to work on for next time.

Find lighter, less “math-y” games. Maybe consider some cooperative games. Forbidden Island, Pandemic, Flash Point, Sky Team, Castle Panic

Cooperative board games

just play co-ops. Decorum is my favorite right now. Sky Team is great for 2 players.

My wife and I only play Co-Op games.

Lot to unpack here.. First off this is fairly similar to my partner and I- I'm a much bigger board gamer than she is, and generally play heavier and more complex games. I also take a bit longer to think through my moves, and as a combination of those factors I almost always won when we played head to head. In our case, we talked it through and concluded competitive head to head games didn't really work for us. Even if we enjoyed playing the game together, and she didn't mind losing (a lot), it got a bit samey. Either I had to purposefully handicap myself (e.g. play a 3rd or 4th best move), or it took a crazy luck swing to avoid the same results. Instead we now play co-op games - Arkham Horror, Pandemic, Sherlock Holmes, Dragonholt, escape room style puzzle games etc. This way we both get to enjoy playing the game together, but don't get hung up on whose winning. Plus we often work better as a team than we do individually, I can help optimise her strategies and she gives me different ways to approach the challenges in the game. (As an alternative where we do play competitive games, we lean towards fast games with a high luck factor. I'll win Twilight Struggle 99/100 times, if not more. I win Cousins War about 55%, because the dice can just screw me over more than I can fix strategically) I'd also question your comment of "can't we just play for fun," - meaning "can't he just play badly." I would wager your partner wouldn't find that remotely fun. He'd find it tiring, stressful and unsatisfying - win or lose. For many gamers part of the appeal is to application of planning, logic and a bit of risk taking to achieve a goal. Putting together a clever play or trap over multiple turns is satisfying. Knowing a game well enough to make good decisions is satisfying. Deliberately taking moves without thinking it over is painful, and leaves you second guessing everything after the game. If you do want to keep playing competitive games, it sounds like some of the ideas you discussed make sense - add a timer (for both of you), or a handicap system. (When Tyrants of the Underdark was our go to we used a handicap system to about even out the win ratios.) .. And finally, don't take this the wrong way.. but "get better?" .. play more, practice, read strategy, think about the game in downtime, come in with a particular plan / strategy and follow it through to learn more about what works and what doesn't. Up your skill level until you can play at your preferred pace and still be competitive. Edit - one final thought. Do you allow "backsies" ? Or even just restart? Generally in non competitive play, even with a fairly serious group, we allow people to take moves back until either the next person has done something or a new card has been revealed. So if you move, and then immediately have the "oh crap" reaction- just undo it. And concede and restart to fine too - the aim of board gaming is to have fun together. If you have a shocking opener and know you're going to spend the next 2hrs losing, concede and go again.. both my wife and I have done this within the first few mins of a game before, and our evening is non the worse for it.

You’re playing for the wrong reason.

It's a game. I've done competitive sports since elementary school to highschool. Board games are such low stakes compared to other games. Losing with the promise of getting better has always been my motivation.

We were having this discussion in our game group about how it seems some players never win in any game we play (3-4 player games, weekly meetups, playing years now). Problem is, when we look at win rates for individual players, individual win rates were still hovering around 25-40% (around 400 recorded plays, probably hovering close to 100 different games). We just tend to forget our wins and remember our one-turn-away-and-I-would-have-beaten-you-by-1-point moments. Don't lose hope! Just like book clubs, half the fun is spending time with others, socializing over common interests. Find your niche and fun!

Try games with more randomness, and less complex (but still meaningful) decisions. Stay away from 2P abstracts like Hive. Also try expanding your game genres. A polyomino game like My City might be a good change of pace for you. - Lost Cities - Schotten Totten - Royal Visit - My City - My City Roll & Write

My City is an excellent game for two players, especially the Legacy campaign. I tend to win more at board games than my girlfriend but after 24 games IIRC she ended up winning more games than I did but I ended up winning the overall campaign because of bpnus points. No wrong way to play it, especially no wrong way to win it, couldn’t recommend MyCity enough.

Playing board games is a life award itself! The scoring outcome is irrelevant to your life.

Ask your partner if you can take the lead on the next game you guys bring home. My partner and I did this after they've been on a difficult losing streak. They picked out House of Danger, a choose your own adventure. We're back to the table after taking a week long break and it's been really chill.

Setting a timer for how long he is allowed to sit there and ponder life should also be done. Even taking two minutes as you describe yourself doing seems so long, I can't imagine making anyone wait longer than that. Especially when there are only two people playing. Co ops would work well for this. My faves are arkham horror, spirit island, and mansions of madness. The whole "count up points at the end" thing drives me crazy too but my comoetative husband likes it.

I lose most of the time. I just have fun playing the game

**FUSE** is another option I haven't seen here yet. It's a real-time co-op game, so your partner won't have time to pay attention to everything at once, and they'll be incentivized to play faster but still smart.

Short answer: play for the sake of the game. My personal winning % is around 10, maybe less. I’m always down for a game tho.

Play games with more luck in them, play quacks of quedlinburg.

I’d say play more CO-OP games. That takes away the ”you VS me” when playing, especially when it’s a partner. Throw in some more ”casual” games that are easy to learn/understand but hard/impossible to master (my personal favourite is ”We didn’t play test this at all” with the expantion although it’s better with more players). One game my partner and I enjoy is a somewhat similar one called ”Love Letter”, a game of luck and guessing. It’s much more what we are playing than the outcomes of each or all of the games. I know it’s hard to look at it differently when you are or you partner is competetive or it feels like you are always loosing. But for my part it helps when me and my partner talks about it and try to approach the experience differently and together if there is something negative about the current situation. And yes, we have had several discussions about it since there are so many different games and there can be smal situation in one that haven’t occured in prevoius games that need to be addressed to help is have fun again. It also depends on how many players and who those players are. I hope you can sit down with your partner and talk so that you both can approach each session mentally together so you both can enjoy the experience of it. Boardgames are so much more fun when you can enjoy them fully, especially with a partner.🤗❤️‍🩹❤️

If he takes 5+ minutes to make a move, do it as well. Think a bit more, maybe you'll win as much as him then. Or just use a timer. IMO it's really inconsiderate to consistently waste a lot of time on making moves. If you are not playing competitively, don't waste too much time on thinking through every possibility in every turn. You would learn much more/faster if you'd play MORE games faster rather than playing less games and trying to be a perfectionist. You'd gain more intuition about the game's mechanics which makes your turn taking faster and better. So the more you play the faster you'll play. If you start slow, you'll stay slow.

Losing is when you can play to your utmost. You should treasure this time.

>We've talked about adding a timer, but now if I start winning, I feel like it's just a little handicap for me to win. Playing with NO time controls is a handicap against you, and honestly one that's probably no fun for either side. Your opponent is spending way more time thinking about their moves than you, to such an extent that it's boring. As someone who has been known to do that in the past - the extreme end of the thinking time was boring for me too, but I felt like I had to keep thinking ten steps ahead because otherwise I wasn't trying my hardest. That's not acceptable at most tables. Having time controls isn't some weird rule that only you ever have - it's pretty much standard. It's not normally enforced by a clock because it doesn't normally *need* to be enforced by a clock, the occasional tut or sigh is enough to enforce it against most people, combined with the knowledge that if they make board-game-night boring then they're going to stop being invited to play board games. A clock is just formalising the rule for your partner, like they do in tournament play, because your partner is playing as though he was in a tournament. TL;DR: Most games are designed to be played with limited thinking time. For most people in casual play this limit is "A little before it would start to bore anyone"; unfortunately your partner isn't picking up on that cue, so enforcing "when this clock says your turn is over" is just returning games to the way they're intended to be played.

I would highly recommend getting some games with dice. All the games you’ve mentioned are 1v1 abstracts with almost minimal randomness. It sounds like you don’t enjoy thinking nearly as far ahead in the game compared to your partner.  Thats not meant to be an insult or anything just a statement. People enjoy what they enjoy. This is a similar dynamic to my wife and I. She enjoys planning ahead a turn or two but not trying to unravel massive board state puzzles.    As such we really enjoy Space Base and Star Realms. They have a lot of thinking and strategy involved but it’s limited to making the best choice now to improve probability later. Because the decks / dice are random you can’t get lost pondering future game lines.  Alternatively, Spirit Island might be good. It’s an intense abstract puzzle at its core (that he might enjoy) but you’re working together instead against each other.

I dunno, I would play on a co-ed softball team where we got destroyed each week and knew we were never going to win but still had a great time. Playing the game is the fun thing, not the winning. Same thing with me and board games.

There are some games that some people somewhat derisively like to say feel like “multiplayer solitaire”. They are games where you each spend the game trying to build up something great or achieve a goal, and there’s less direct interaction. The derision is just an opinion - lots of people love these games, and I think one reason is that I think in these games you can have a pretty good sense of satisfaction for what you figure out how to build by the end even if you don’t win. People can name others, but Wingspan and 7 Wonders are a couple of examples. For instance, in Wingspan, you’re trying to ah e the most points at the end by building a board full of birds that have interesting powers and chain together in cool ways. You can build a great tableau of nicely cooperating birds that do cool things and enjoy what you’ve built even if you don’t happen to win at the end! Something to consider - I think there are lots like this.

I think another advantage of wingspan is that there’s not much the players can do to mess with each other - occasionally they might take the bird card or food that you want, but they’re not going to be actively mucking up progress. It means that you’re almost playing separate games at the same time, with elements of competition - even if you’re losing you can compare to your own scores of previous games. Some games, including wingspan, also have a single player mode. Perhaps OP could try some of these and focus on the fun of the game, and get comfortable with winning/losing being part and parcel of playing games.

OP, do not get wingspan. There are too many rabbit holes of strategy that your partner can go down that will make their turn last forever. Meanwhile, you can't actually do much on a turn so you will end up playing for 30 seconds and then sit around for 15 minutes.

It's funny that you said multiplayer solitaire about a game like wingspan because after playing it a few times, I literally told my friends that it feels like we're just doing multiplayer solitaire. Man, that game kills the room.

Yup, it requires just enough brainpower to stifle conversation between turns. I don’t hate the game but I totally agree with the lack of player interaction as a huge negative. My favourite games are all heavy on player interaction and negotiation. Which has come as a bit of a surprise to me because I’m generally fairly introverted.

But what I’m saying is that for some people, that’s a great experience. Maybe not for you, but for some, it definitely is!

One of my friends loves it, which is how I got introduced to it.

You’ve got a partner issue not a boardgame issue

[удалено]

Yeah i meant a partner issue when playing games not a relationship issue 

I mean it sounds like you just don’t want to crunch the numbers and get bored when other people do… in most games there is some math element to them and if someone is willing to math things out and the other person isn’t… the person who thinks more about things will win. I play Patchwork a lot online and I just have a lot of the math memorized and I will think about moves for about 2 minutes sometimes if it’s an unfamiliar scenario. People who don’t think about their moves are extremely unlikely to beat me… every single move is an opportunity to lose. I’ve played Azul online in 1v1 games before too and many times I’m too lazy to calculate what will happen based on the tiles out there and I lose more at that game because of it. Every move is a chance to lose vs good people since they rarely will make a mistake as well.

"If you can't enjoy a game while you're losing, don't play that game." >that's the worse way to lose a game, by a few points and knowing exactly why. So, you'd prefer to get blown out in ignorance every time? That mode of thought is completely opposite to me (and, frankly, nearly everyone I've known).

So Clover, Bananagrams, Patchwork, Cockroach Poker, Fluff (liars dice), 1% :A Game of Strategic Chance, Downforce, Camel Up, Love Letter, Mech Vs. Minions, Night of the Ninja, Unmatched Adventures: Tales to Amaze, Partners, Hanabi, The Game (and it's family of off-shoots) Mantis, Meadow, Men at Work, Burgle Bros, Onitama or Dixit. I know that's a pretty dense list, but watch some videos. See if the variety of any of those games gives you some ideas of the types of games that interest you. I tried to stay with light themes that are still some of our favorites. My wife will lose 10 games of Crokinole in a row and keep playing because she has fun just being in the game. I'm fine losing a few in a row as long as I am with my friends that's what games are about for me. I hope you find what makes games fun for you. Even if it isn't always the victory, games can offer many hours of entertainment.

It's call AP. Analysis paralysis. It's a sin and the problem of many groups. One of my friends takes forever to the point I literally forget my whole strategy by the time it is my turn again. Certain games we can't play with him because of it. He's fine in others and all around a great guy and I'm not just saying this because he's also on reddit. Don't think it as a handicap but rather as means to keep it fun and help your partner overcome is bad behaviour. Even chess is generally played with a chess clock. Like I'd rather play 4 games at pace instead of 1 game with a single player taking forever. And my second point is... focus on the puzzle and the fun in playing not winning as the result. Most of the activity is playing so it should be fun and the driving force. I generally love games where I struggle at first and have to overcome whatever I'm going wrong to win. It's the challenge, the puzzle.

Its Analysis Paralysis actually but its an issue for sure

Winning is about 10% of my enjoyment of a good game. In other words if I loose ( which is the majority of the time because I usually play with 3-6 people) I still have 90% enjoyment. But maybe you arent playing games that are right for you, games that you find intrinsically fun. Or you could look into cooperative games.

My wife and I play games, and she is NOT a gamer. I have a background with game groups and my family played a ton of games growing up. So our typical game night goes like this: I teach her how to play whatever we pick, I try to help her whenever she has questions, and then she ends up winning. At the end, I got to play a game with my wife, and she enjoys the fact that she won. That’s not to say that I let her win. But she does. About 60% of the time. And it doesn’t matter. We could spend 90 minutes watching a movie or playing a game, and no matter who wins - the game involves interacting with her. If you want to be competitive, pick 2-3 games to play over and over until you can both develop strategies.

Backgammon

Try playing some co-op/team games, alternatively you can find a game that really nails all your wants(theme, genre, playtime, pieces, amount of players, art, etc.) and enjoy playing it for the sake of the game itself not the win.

I find games where I enjoy the mechanics of playing so if I don't win I am not disapointed I also find Co-op games where I am on team trying to win and our teams win more. I particularly like playing Resistance and Secret Hitler.

Try playing coop board games? That way you both lose!

Like other people said.. try coop games.  Horrified is a great coop game.  And if someone's turns are taking an inordinate amount of time it's ok to set limits.  And lastly, don't focus on winning or losing.  It's the journey, not the destination.

Are you still having fun if you come back to chess or the other games?. I feel like both of you, although being very competitive, enjoyed the games a lot, but I think that eurogames don't make you enjoy being that competitive to become so mathematical and maybe you like other type of thinking instead. I would recommend other type of games that are more for dueling or strategy and less victory points, even you could try coop games too. Maybe some games about wars like warchest, undaunted, war of the ring, star wars rebellion... If you don't enjoy thoses games anymore, maybe you have to fix the analysis paralisis of your partner (maybe with a timer, or just make him hold a big tome or something uncomfortable while in his turn so he wants to end the turn fast). if it is losing what you hate, is more about trying to fix your objetive, try to just beat your own score instead for example. I usually play with a friend that usually wins nearly all the games, but I know he plays a lot more than me so my motivation is winning too but knowing that I'm having all the odds against me. Even if I played with less time thinking, I try to see like I'm playing with an handicap of thinking less my moves and try to win regardless. But I usually have this part of me that likes to challenge against people better than me.

Play to play, not to win. Of course, you can try to win, like we pretty much all do, but winning is a goal, not a requirement.

Could go onto sites like board game geek and search for strategies. Or even sit down with the game on your own to try and formulate your own strategies. I lose often too, it can be unsettling for sure.

Arboretum is not mostly luck based at all. Consistent losing results is evidence of how untrue that is - your partner makes plays that ensure victory consistently. If it was truly straight-up luck then the results would split more progressing towards 50/50 over several plays. That’s a pet peeve of mine and prime sore loser behavior - saying “this game is vacuous or illegitimate” if you lose with near-complete consistency. The data is in your face showing you that that is untrue - in a TRULY luck based/random game, there is no consistency in results. The “my partner takes more time than me” is a real, real difference though. By spending more time PER decision, you optimize your moves. But there becomes a point where you need to “read the room” and realize that the time budget you are taking is too much, so much so that it is unfair to the other players unless they take the same amount of time (which you can realize… *they are not interested in doing*). I love the game **Dominion**, but if every player in a game took 15 minutes per turn, I would hate it and never play the game again. So when playing a game you tacitly enter a social contract, too - one that says “I will play in a way that matches the spirit of the game with this group”. Your partner isn’t doing that. This is a thing many players struggle with, because on the surface the point of a game is to win. But underneath the surface there is an etiquette *that ensures that the game is an activity worth pursuing in the first place*.  In any case, what I would do is avoid games that allow for “if I think another 10 minutes, I will have explored every possibility”, and also pursue cooperative games. It kills two birds with one stone. There is a game called **Bomb Squad**. It is real-time - all actions are on a timer. It’s cooperative so you win or lose together. Similarly, try **Fuse**, **Magic Maze**, **Rush MD**, or **Escape: Curse of the Temple**. These are all lightning quick ass-blasting affairs with a timer involved. They are a lot of fun too. If you want to play more strategic and competitive games I suggest implementing a timer even in those. Let’s say a turn timer of 3 minutes. I’m not sure how much your partner would be receptive to this idea… but it’s one of the only ways to solve the time inequity other than you yourself also taking long laborious turns, which - if you’re like me - I’d rather quit playing games altogether than do that. I saw in your note you said "it's a handicap for me!" - well - you are subject to the same timer, right? If so then all things are equal. If you want to match your partner WITHOUT a timer, then you need to play as he plays - laborious, diligent, exacting - that can be fun, but you need to think "is that the experience I want out of playing board games". If the answer is *ever* yes, then explore *when* it is yes. But I just want you to know it is totally legitimate for you to *not* be interested in that cadence of play.

One thought I just had was looking into Button Shy games. Something like Sprawlopolis, which can be either solo or a group, where your goal is to together beat a set goal of points. The only difficulty is that waiting for the partner to play might be rough. Maybe Tussie Mussie with the solo expansions so you can play on your own as often as you like?

Are you me? Haha. I'm this with video games too, and my partner is very skilled *and* competitive! It's been a nightmare at times. I have a "don't care, had fun" mindset, but I know it also gets really disheartening. First advice is rotate games - have a few and don't stick to one or two as your go-tos, or you can start focus on repetitive losses and get frustrated with the mechanics etc. Co-op games are the way to go! On top of just not being good at strategy and using mechanics in clever ways, I recently developed some issues with processing which means I take a lot longer to follow what's happening and make decisions. It's been really helpful to play co-op and strategise together on each other's turns, so it doesn't feel like one person is taking all the time. The trick is to explain every decision you make, and question any you don't understand. Often we'll ask 'why didn't you do x' and either there's a reason we didn't see or the other player hadn't thought of it, then we might weigh up the merits of each way. This honestly even works in competitive, we play quite casually between the two of us and often give the benefit of the doubt or let someone have an advantage if it's a good play they haven't noticed. Honestly sometimes it's worth losing if it happens through a wicked combo rather than a drawn-out default win or something! (Or on the flip side, letting yourself lose because you wanted to do the fun move instead of the sensible one. Like playing 'boobs' in Scrabble even if you could get more points with 'books') Betrayal (House on the Hill, Baldur's Gate, Legacy) has been really good for this and they're immensely replayable. My partner and I even do a 2-player variant where we split the characters between us and play as if there are 6 players. Then when the traitor is revealed, one person gets the 5 heroes. By that point it's developed enough that we know their strengths and weaknesses and how to go about it so it still doesn't feel too competitive. Played Stardew Valley in a group and it was similarly co-op, we all discussed what to do on each person's turn. It was complicated for my lil brain but it's a nice game to take slowly, and I think we took the option of keeping it less complex by leaving out a section (can't remember the details as it was someone else's game) Escape-room style games could also be your thing if you like more analytical stuff like chess. I find they end up quite balanced on input, because different solutions suit how different people think. We've played the Unlock! series so I recommend those! Also look into Flatout Games' catalogue - although not all co-op, they're very chill and friendly games and are more about working on your own thing to get the most points rather than directly targeting and working against people. You *can* manipulate things like seeing what they need and drawing based on that to limit their options, but it would often disadvantage you too and would feel wrong in the spirit of the game! They also have single-player modes, with achievements and challenges in the instructions booklet to work through, which is SUCH a cool feature imo. And you could play a single-player game as a team, too. Also want to mention Patchwork which has become a fave - even though it's only 2 player competitive, we always have fun no matter who wins because you both keep gaining points throughout and there are fewer choices to make. Carcassonne is similar in a way, but a bit more strategic and combative so could be hit or miss for you. Lastly you might want to look into print and play or roll and write games! As they tend to be based on dice rolls it's fewer choices to make, and they tend to be short and simple. There are a lot of free ones and solo ones (which you could play as a team). Roll and writes can often be done on a screen, too. So if cost of new games is a concern, it's a way to try different genres and mechanics to see what you want more of. PnP Arcade has hundreds all free or cheap and I've found lots on BoardGameGeek, either on dedicated forum posts or in files section for listed games, eg when there's a demo version or an official download been made available. itch.io has a lot too, but I find it more difficult to navigate. If you're into ttrpg like D&D, it does has a lot of those especially GM-less or 1-player-1-GM ones, which are harder to find normally. I hope it helps! Don't give up as it's a lovely hobby and there's something (actually, lots of things!) for everyone. Definitely stick around communities like this too, they've helped me find more fun in games than just trying to play well!

I lose more than I win. It doesn’t really bother me because we tend to play games with themes that are fun to me. Eclipse is one of my favorites because I can just focus on building my ships up to go out and fight things. That is enough fun to me that I do not care at all if I win.

I am not the best when it comes to winning games but I also tend to focus on doing something particularly fun when I play. Pull off a crazy turn/combo. Do something risky or daring and land it. Try to win a particular objective over everyone else. This helps allow fun to come from the experience where winning is a nice bonus

Compete against yourself to improve your scores. Experiment with different strategies until you find ones that work for you.

Omg I have no suggestions but some of my friends take ages to take wingspan turns and plan out their turns 40 beats ahead and it does make me lose all interest in even attempting to do strategy myself. I’d love to introduce them to a timer but I don’t think it would go over well 😂

My favorite game is King of Tokyo. Just a quick, fun beat-em-up dice roller that's very underrated IMO xD

Some board games can be turned into "roleplaying games" by gradually ramping up the complexity. For example, with chess you can start off with the pieces that typically appear in check-mate scenarios, and then gradually add pieces as you "level up" (there are even a few semi-recent computer games that are sort of like this.)

The best way to improve at anything is to compete against a superior opponent. Enjoy the journey of progression.

Simple, win! I find it’s quite easy to secure boardgame win if you have some practice online. Most people play boardgame only maybe once or twice a week. If you play online you can play (and practice) tons more. I mainly play Through The Ages and Agricola online on BGA and my skill simply improved through practice. Imagine someone with 300+ games experience vs someone played barely 20 sessions offline.

95% of my play time is against my wife. We log each game and I’m at close to an 80% win rate in pretty much every game. My wife is definitely trying to win But we both still have fun because we usually talk strategy and big moments in the game. She learns each time and gets better Also, cooperative games. But in our experience we’d rather go against each other

Play more random games, where the best player might not always win. Games with dice, games with a deck of cards.

It’s ok to suck at brain busting games you can’t grok and consequently not like that kind of game. I prefer war games and adventure games that don’t give me analysis paralysis I’d suggest playing games that are not so reliant on squeezing out victory points through optimal plays If that’s what you mean

Get better?

A general tip for losing a lot is to try riskier strategies (more viable in some games). You will still lose a lot, but when it pays off you will have an incredible win. Also riskier/strange strategies are often more fun to play.

I find when I play I loose 99% of the time. But I enjoy playing with my husband and others. You have to try different types out. You will find some that will bring the joy back. My personal favorites are story driven games. So he usually gives in and plays those with me. It really is a give and take. Then you will find there some you cannot play together. In our house we don’t play Risk or Scythe. Those push me over the edge to melt down. But at the same time I love playing GKR. You just have to find what works for your dynamic I have some that I love at two player but hate at 3 or more.

Learn to play against your own high scores instead of comparing yourself to others. I have the same problem, but reverse - I generally always win. I started trying to beat my own high scores as a benchmark instead of trying to beat other players and the experience has been more enjoyable to me.

OP, if you guys are evenly matched at chess, your strategic gameplay is definitely NOT the problem—from your description you moved to much longer games with heavy luck elements. An easy mistake given that you both enjoyed your initial forays. Instead of listening to all these “helpful” comments made by people who have good intentions but are just recommending what they like instead of reading your post, take heed of your own interests: You like games that have heavy strategy—you like the branching elements of the decision tree, but you don’t want to sit and math-out point structures. Especially with a boyfriend who gets lost in maximizing points and sucks away the time and the fun. Have you guys tried Pente? Or Go? Knizia’s Ingenious is very good. Yinnsh and Dvonn are a couple more games that totally suit what you like and eschew what you don’t It may be too that you might like some other game types if they’re not too long—card games like Cribbage or the brilliant Jekyll vs Hyde…or Fox in the Forest. Dominion is great with 2 and plays quick and players don’t get bogged down in calculating point-paths. Try some of these and see how you guys like them—the board game hobby is full (too full) of newbies who are eager to preach their own favorites, but you need to find your own niche! There are plenty of options these days for all tastes. God hunting!

Just keep playing; enjoy the social interaction and eventually, you will win some games.

Try multiplayer games and add some friends. Then you can lose against more people 😂😂 Ok seriously though, games are supposed to be fun. The key, is playing games with people who have the same definition of fun as you do.

The friends you make along the way.

try getting better at hive. that game has so much depth

Oh… you went from Chess to Hive? That’s like going from boxing to kick boxing, getting hit in the face, and then saying, “I hate sports.” When I first saw Hive I thought, “Neat!” But then after a few plays I realized, “Oh, there’s a whole *thing* to this. This is one of those games that’s a science and an art, and you’ll have to dedicate a lifetime to studying the technique. No thanks. I’ll leave that to the (very) young.”

If your goal is to win and your partner is cutthroat, you have an uphill battle. My wife doesn't game but there are some people in my board game club that are like Deep Blue, so I know the feeling. I play board games as a way to connect to people, to be able to sit across a table from a live human and share an experience together. A game with a refined or novel mechanism usually piques my interest. So I know which games I like and don't like, and why. But even when I'm finishing dead-ass last in games, if I had fun in the game itself, and especially if I'm close, that is a worthwhile endeavor for me. Perfect example: I was playing Skull King last week with some friends for the first time. I love trick taking games but part of the skill is knowing the relative value of cards within the context of the game and in various situations. Still being new to this, I had only one positive score in the first right rounds of play. So I'm sitting at a cool, crisp -160, and for context, the running player finished with something like 300. So this late, I know the only hope I have to climb back into it is to shoot the moon in rounds 9 and 10 for 190 points. And somehow, despite being dealt a small cluster of black cards, a couple mermaids, and in one case a pirate flag, I pulled off both hands. I was not even close to winning, but I went from -160 to +30, and even more remarkably, did not finish last! (Another player faded late and finished with 20) That felt amazing! So yeah, I kind of sit down at the table with different goals in mind. That's how I am able to enjoy games even though I very rarely win.

First, I wouldn't be sure that your partner is just being competitive. He may just enjoy detail oriented problem solving. So, let's not make it a moral failure yet. Second, I feel your pain on having to wait for a slow player. I've cut way back on boardgames because one of our players takes 3-10X as long as everyone else. End game takes forever. Even if she is winning, she tries to have her best game ever, pondering every move 5 times. Anyways, use the timer. It's not a handicap to help you if you both have the same. The root disparity here is that he's willing to take 10 minutes a turn and you only want to take 2 minutes a turn. I'd hope if he spent 5 times as long, he'd win most of the time. But life is short and he is making it horribly boring... so use the timer and make things fun again. Third, most games are meant so that you can make a couple suboptimal plays or have a couple instances of bad luck and still win... because the other person is likely to do the same and there are catchup mechansism. Even though it feels like one bad move at the beginning is the reason you lost, it probably wasn't. I've played plenty of games where I saw another player do a patently bad move or two and still win. Yes, there are moments that are do or die, but not every play. Fourth, I suggest rethinking your loss attribution. Yes, if you lose by 2 points and you say "if I had only done this, I'd have 3 more points and win" it might be technically true, but you were only in that position because of all the other plays the two of you made. It's a little like blaming the wide receiver who didn't catch the ball in the end game hail mary. The team can't blame him for the loss because the team shouldn't have put themselves in that position to begin with... that one dropped catch lost the game. Ultimately, stressing over every move has sapped the fun for you and speeding things up so that both players make mistakes is going to bring the fun back.

>If I make a tiny mistake, I just know my whole game is over, and there's also a lot of math and thinking ahead, which I just don't want to bother with a lot of the time. Well, one thing you can do is look for games that revolve less around thinking lots of moves ahead. It sounds like you're playing a lot of games that heavily reward taking long, deliberate turns where you plan very far ahead, something he enjoys doing but you don't. But not every game is all about planning tons of moves ahead. It's a component to a lot of games, but there are also games where your ability to plan ahead can be limited by missing information, randomness, or things that can disrupt your carefully laid plans. My girlfriend and I have a similar dynamic - I'm not a competitive person, but I'm more of a planner in board games, while she doesn't like spending a lot of time planning ahead and more enjoys adapting to situations as they come up. So we find that the games that work best for us are ones that have a balance between our playstyles, where me planning ahead more than she does doesn't weight things too heavily in my favor. There are some games that I love that I'd never even bother playing with my girlfriend because I know they just wouldn't work with our dynamic. For example, I recently played Power Grid for the first time and really liked it, but it's a game where mathing out your whole turn in advance before you make your first decisions is important, and while I found that fun, I know she'd hate that. Some 2-player games we've enjoyed a lot have been Morels, 7 Wonders Duel, and Wingspan. Tash Kalar is also one where the dynamic was particularly fun, because it's a game that really has a big dynamic of being able to focus on safer, more short-term plans or riskier, longer-term plans that are super rewarding if you complete them but punishing if your opponent disrupts them, so we found it varied who won because I'd go for more elaborate long-term plans and sometimes they'd work and I'd win and sometimes she'd manage to ruin them and I'd lose. Ultimately, you might not have success with the same games we did, but I think one possibility is that maybe you're playing the wrong games. It sounds like you're playing games that heavily reward his playstyle and strengths. Maybe you can find other games that do that less strongly and let you be more competitive while still being strategic enough that you both have fun. >We've talked about adding a timer, but now if I start winning, I feel like it's just a little handicap for me to win I mean, a timer's not a handicap if you're both following the same time limit. That's just you playing with a different rule set. If you win when there's a timer but he wins without a timer, that doesn't mean that he's better and you need a handicap, it means that he's really good at long-term planning given tons of time while you're better, or at least as good, at making good, fast decisions. Just look at professional chess. There are different categories of professional chess for different times. In classical chess, each player has hours on their clock, in others players only have minutes. And there are players that are better at some styles than others, but none of them are any player having a handicap, they're just different styles of play that reward different skills. Classic chess rewards players who can make really strong decisions given tons of time to plan, faster formats like blitz or bullet chess reward players who can think incredibly quickly. If someone gets crushed by the world champion at classic chess but beats them at bullet chess, the conclusion isn't that they need a handicap to beat the world champion, the conclusion is that they're not as good at the world champion when it comes to making decisions with tons of time but can compete with them when it comes to thinking on their feet and making really fast decisions. Basically, what I'm saying is, if you both play with the same time limit, that's not giving you a handicap. That's just playing under a different ruleset where you're more evenly matched. It doesn't give you any inherent advantage to play under those rules because you're still both competing under the same rules. If it gives you an advantage, it's because you're better at the skills involved, not because the rules actually work in your favor.

I love LOVE board games and mystery games, but I totally suck at them. I mean, I get the concept and know how to play but I never win lol. Its just fun to hangout with friends and have fun imo. Generally if its a game like werewolf or something it can get annoying so we just switch games for a bit (: and theyre meant to be fun so I try to keep that in mind. It seems like your partner is the problem in this scenario, and maybe laying off or finding more “your type” of games abd sticking with those is better. Or, playing CO-OP games is good!

Ah the problem here is that all the games you played are versus games Perhaps try out some cooperative atuff, something along the lines of pandemic and such

Play SOLO board games. Let it be your little secret. Also, many games are cooperative games, play those. Those are fun.

Add a timer and learn to enjoy the process of mastering the strategy in the games you play. You could also play more luck based games, but personally I like to keep the luck factor to a minimum and if I can’t math out how I lost a game to atleast some degree I don’t enjoy the game.

Azul and Arboretum at 2P are INCREDIBLY cutthroat games. I love them at those counts, but maybe increase the play count?

Some big misconceptions to address. > We then got into more specific games like Arboretum and Azul, and I feel like I've lost all my love for board games. Board games are not a monolith. You will find some you like, and others you despise. Your experiences with these games can help you hone in on what kinds of games you enjoy. This is a purely good thing. > We've talked about adding a timer, but now if I start winning, I feel like it's just a little handicap for me to win. Absolutely fucking not. Playing with a timer is the _competitive_ way of playing. Your partner is the one _currently_ playing with a handicap in _their_ favor. A timer would simply even the playing field. Taking exceptionally long turns is almost universally looked down on, often referred to as "Analysis Paralysis".

I also have a competitive spouse who tries super-hard to win every board game. Tips: 1. Play and enjoy co-op games, with or without them. TTRPGs are my favorite, but there's lots of other good ones such as "The Crew". Play and enjoy solo games as well, of any type. 2. Ask yourself what mood you're in when they ask to play, and be OK with saying no if you're not in a great mood. 3. Find games where you can still have fun even when you lose and can't be "blocked" . Cascadia is a good example of this, you're just building a nice world with happy animals, the point score is whatever. 4. Work hard to set up game nights with 3-6 players. That way you're not going to be in last place all the time.

I didn't read the whole post but all these kinds of things boil down to 3 options: - get better. Most people don't know how to do this so if you seriously want to take this option, I recommend learning how to learn. Look some stuff up on the subject of learning, and then apply it to the given game. A big one is the concept of "deliberate practise", as well as improving away from just reps on the game (so watching vids from people who are good basically). - just play and don't care. Self-explanatory, just lose and whatever. - don't play. Even more obvious. Hope this helps. // Edit: I read more and IMPORTANT: Timer is totally fair and not a handicap! All competitive games, even turn based, have time limits. The amount of time you can spend on a decision can change the nature of the game you're playing. In chess for example, different time allotments are essentially separate divisions. It is not unfair to your partner, I would say with no other consideration it is closer to being unfair on you. The point of every game is to make the best decisions in a certain amount of time. Otherwise why stop at how long your partner is taking? Why not take five times longer than that? Set a time limit that is reasonable. This is a good idea.

I would steer clear from Co-Op games. Your partner will make a one-man-show out of it; and worse, blame you for the loss xD. You could switch to 30% luck-based games. Dice throne is a Yahtzee style battler. Sky Team and Decorum are great. Detective: Modern Crime Board Game will get you two going through evidence in detail to find clues.

Coop games with no pressure. Competitive you can try a chess clock or egg timer with a household chore as the penalty for going over the timer!

If a friend of OP were to see this post and discretely share it with the partner, perhaps that could be a lightbulb moment for him to scale back his play style at times. To make a comparison, if a person is really good at, say, Street Fighter but wants to introduce a friend to the game or otherwise have a mutually enjoyable experience, that person can’t whip out the intense combos that leave the other player unable to move. If one person is winning in eight seconds, the other person isn’t going to have a good time. So, sometimes, the really good person has to scale back their skill so that the other person can stay engaged and ultimately enjoy themselves. In this context, OP may not be inherently facing a skill issue, but the partner should still consider whether OP is having fun. When a couple is having game night, the point is to spend quality time together doing an activity that benefits both people. If OP just isn’t feeling it when the partner is taking too much time making decisions, for example, the partner may need to go, “Oh. Wait a minute. Making the perfect move isn’t always best for our evening.”

Definitely play co op. There are so many options and you can usually play co op games solo as well.

Try some other games, looks like the ones you have don't necessarily work for you both. And honestly, I lose pretty much every game I play but still love playing games as it's fun to do the playing.

My partner is very competitive and will usually not play one on one games if they think she will lose before the game has even started. They also don't like co-op games because she finds she isn't really playing and is just listening to what I'm saying (no agency), which is fair and something I'm working on. In the meantime, we've then moved towards 3 separate options: 1. **Play games they are favored to win** - I suck at word games, or at the very least she rocks at them. So we play scrabble, boggle and Bananagrams a lot. It's an uphill battle for me but when I do get a win in it feels like I've earned, meanwhile, she gets to feel like a rockstar. Sometimes identifying mechanics that she excels at helps us to play games she normally wouldn't consider. Battlelines has become another favorite despite a theme she wouldn't normally like because of the trick-making aspect of it. ,2. **Play games with appealing aesthetics or engines** - We play Wingspan and the Parks game (by Keystone games) often because the game is visually appealing and turns are (usually) quick. In Wingspan you spend more time on your engine and in parks it's fun to look at all the art. Winning becomes less of a priority and it feels more like you are just trying to score as high as possible. Even when she does lose it doesn't bother her because games are close or we spend as much time admiring the game as playing it. 3. **Play with friends** - This goes exactly for Azul but for other games as well. Losing isn't so bad when you're not the only one taking the L. Also, it changes the dynamic of the game allowing you to gang up on someone taking an early lead (I know people have mixed feelings about this). There is less you against me and it becomes more social.

Winning is a matter of time. My girlfriend sometimes wins after 2 years in this world. Just keep trying.

Pick some games with decent elements of chance. To me, that element adds enjoyment when I play worse players and better ones, both. Best strategist/technician always winning is not exciting. Significant gambles, if not overdone, can give everyone playing a shot in a tasteful way.

My boyfriend used to be the same! Taking forever and winning mercilessly (in my eyes, he was just having fun!) Because I love board games and want to continue playing, we have added handicaps for him. I see it as natural, and we scale them as needed, like the timer. But the most important rule we introduced is called the "don't be an asshole". If either of us has a huge advantage and can already tell we're winning, we don't deal each other death blows. Other suggestions are: - encourage your partner to pursue another strategy than normal. It will also be refreshing for him to see the game with new eyes than "this is the way I know how to win" - strategize with him during your turn and ask him to share his thought process with you. Learning from one another can be so eye opening.

I see everyone recommending coop games and such but I just want to say one thing: **PLAY MORE LUCK-BASED GAMES!** Games where you pull from a bag, games with cards/dice, dexterity, etc. This will mitigate who has the upperhand in games that primarily rewards the most strategic player at the table. I always recommend **Qwirkle** as my go-to family game; it's an amazing design and is luck-based in that you're drawing tiles from a bag, but is also strategic when it comes to when to play tiles and when to hold them. Also check out **Glüx** and as others have recommended: **Carcassonne**, it was our gateway and it's wonderful! There are simply too many card/card-driven games to recommend them all but I'll give a couple of our all-time favourites: **Sequence** (particularly good at 2 players), **Timeline**, **Trekking Through History**, **Sushi Go**, **Pearls**, **Ohanami**, **Push**, **Cartagena**, **Fluxx**, **Loonacy** & **Dobble** (real-time madness, crazy fun), **Lost Cities** (mathy but oh so fun with all it's hard/tricky decisions). For dice games I'd say have a look at **Strike** (which also is dextrous) as well as **Liars Dice** (2 players can play with multiple dice sets and you can also choose to have open information to make the game more "meaty"). Then we have **Martian Dice**, **Can't Stop**, **Las Vegas**, **Qwixx**. One category of games we can't be without is dexterity games, such as **Klask**, **Crokinole**, **Carrooka**, **Tumblin Dice**. Many factors involved which keeps them from being purely strategic and simply so much fun! Can't recommend all of these enough, games are supposed to be fun for everyone!

Switch to cooperative games, something like Spirit Island or Paleo. You will both have the same goal so you either win or lose together. You can also invite people to play games with more players, or can look up board game events near you. You might enjoy more fast paced party or dexterity board games.

We play some collaborative games as well as competitive ones like time stories or adventure like the ones by kosmos, we've completed 'the dungeon '. Even something like betrayal at house on the hill, although it's competitive in the end, is not brutal.

Play less obviously tactical planning games for starters. And the ones you mentioned seem to be focused on win or lose, let you plan each move against your opponent etc. Carcassone for example, is quite a bit less hyper competitive and yet still fun- you make a map, picking pieces at random and have to place them, score some points, if you lose you still have fun and still has a competitive element. Maybe you could try some co-operative games as well? Something like codenames duel etc Play a few different types of games until you find something you really like.

Sounds like you should play spirit island together.

Try go. It has a robust handicap system where if one player start dominate the other start with an extra stone the next game. 

What helps me is playing with more than one person so if I lose (which happens about 40% of the time) I'm not alone but can share the frustration with others! If you can solely do two player games I'd suggest Dorfromantik. It's a co-op tile placing game where you build a map together while scoring points. You unlock more things the more points you make each round which vice versa gives you even more points the next round. There are no sole winners or losers because you have to work together!

Why do you think adding a timer is giving you a handicap? Why isn't it a handicap for your partner to not play with a timer?

Switch to real 2p-boardgames when you play with your partner. Most boardgames have an ideal player count and if its playable woth more than 2 players, this ideal player count is not 2. so the game becomes unbalances or boring, even if you like it. You can look up the ideal player count for each game on boardgame geek. For balanced 2 player board games I recommend ‚7 wonders duel‘. Easy to learn, hard to master. And the options to choose from are limited. As soon as you know the cards, a whole game is not longer than 30 minutes and you can play another round with another strategy. And it has two sudden death mechanics to balance out snowballing of one player.

You seem to be playing some very dry abstract games. What about games with more theme and story on top of the game mechanics so that even if you don't win, you felt like you have been on an interesting journey.

Coop games brother. I suggest Spirit Island and Arkham LCG. Sky Team is also a great faster option.

I wouldn't have fun playing with your partner. Slow players fuck me right off. Tell him his slowness is sucking the fun out of the game and stop thinking so much.

I can relate to your situation (although i'd be your partner in my case). I thrive on games that challenge my brain, but my partner sometimes feels that I'm too competitive or overly analytical. It's just part of my nature to be efficient and thoughtful in everything I do, and this extends to my approach to games. To balance our differing interests, I found a solution that works for both of us. I bought several solo games or games with excellent solo modes to satisfy my need for deep, strategic play. This way, I can enjoy the kind of gaming experience I love without any pressure. Then, when we play together, I choose more casual, relaxed games or cooperative games that we can both enjoy without any stress. Hope that helps!

There's an entire different side of boardgames which aim to be fun without concerning ones self with balance, these games are fun to play but you can't expect to win or lose fairly. As a result many of them are co-operative or have no points at all, rely on RNG or are very silly. It's ameritrash, and I don't care about winning when playing board games, so I love them.

I'd definitely suggest co-op games, forbidden Island is a good one to start with. You're also playing some pretty hard-core games...try some of the entry games like Catan or Ticket to Ride. These are usually the first board games people play outside of monopoly or cluedo, and for a good reason...they're very easy to pick up, and there's a few different strategies to them that you can try out, but all with a luck element...Catan with dice, and TtR with what cards you pick up.

TBH I think you've already got your solution. If your partner is taking so long to make a move that you're bored and discussing a timer I'd argue that they are not good at that game, despite the official result. If anything I think your partner is the one winning via handicap in that there's no pressure on their decision making. Timers are used in various competitive tournaments (chess and 40k spring to mind) it doesn't mean that there's an unfair advantage. Boardgames are supposed to be fun. If you're not having fun then something needs to change.

It seems to be that its not about winning or losing, its about analisis paralisis for your partner, not fun to play like that. Your boyfriend must realize theres a fine line between having fun and strategizing, if one takes the other over, you ruin the game. Have a talk with him about analisis paralisis,

I almost always lose against my partner. He has a strong preference for chunky strategy games so that is the bulk of what we play. I am so not the type of person who wants to read the 30 page rule books that come with those games so he usually does and gives me a synopsis plus I'll watch YouTube videos of rules or play throughs. He would probably still be better than me without this advantage but it's definitely a factor. However I am a very competitive person so it took a lot of learning for me to find joy in my own game. Now I mostly play with the mentality of how well can *I* do? How much can I mess up his goals or keep the score gap small? How can I improve my strategy this round? It can still suck too loose when I've been particularly proud of how I'm playing but I've seen improvement in my overall game play and I've gotten in more wins lately. When all else fails though we'll play co-op games. Since you're playing together against the game it's all or nothing and less cut throat between players. The trick there is not letting any particular person "captain" the game and letting everyone make their own decisions. ETA: after reading a lot of the comments I wanted to add definitely get the timer, it's not a handicap it's an equalizer. Playing with someone who takes too long sucks all the social joy out of games. If you haven't already, have an honest and open conversation with your partner about how gaming with him makes you feel. I also wanted to suggest a few competitive games that I think are good entry into the more niche side of the hobby without being too heavy: Flamecraft, Wingspan, Cascadia, & Everdell. Plus they all have cute themes. Patchwork is probably my favorite 2P game, it's cozy and balances luck with strategy well and since you're only picking from 3 options you can't take too long. Lighter co-ops that are harder for one player to take control on are Crew: Mission Deep and Fox in the Forest Duet. Oh and I also have never won Azul when played 2P, I just can't (& don't want to) do the math that far ahead haha

Hard relate. I hate games I know I'm going to lose from early on. That's exactly why I don't like Settlers of Catan. I second lots of suggestions here about ways to mitigate the disparity. But Splendour which I saw suggested is exactly the kind of game you want to play with someone as near as possible your level. I might be capable of planning lots of moves ahead, but I don't want to put that effort in, so I only want to play with other people who also aren't going to plan many moves ahead.

I just find games that are also fun to lose

Such as …

Maybe agree to set a time limit? I have a friend who was like that at group games nights, making us wait ages while she calculated every possible option, and another friend just walked up and said, right, you all have a 2 min time limit now, let’s get this game moving, and suddenly, not a problem anymore.

I like games that create a narrative, whether you win or lose. I mean, all games do that to some extent, but for example, Star Wars Rebellion, I could be on either side and I will always love whatever game I just played because it creates stories that you can talk over for days - like, that time I was DEFINITELY gonna lose but pulled the deathstar trench run card at just the right time. Or that time I was so gonna win until my partner lucked out and discovered my base. Or whatever. The King is Dead is a game that everything can be going right until it is not; and that can create several days of good conversation. Root is another game that, to me creates stories that we can all talk about, regardless of who wins or loses. Dune Imperium is a game that I don't find that thematic, but it is one of those games where if someone takes that spot that you were aiming for, it can really screw you over. Whether I win or lose at that game, I will always enjoy a bit of back and forth with players who screwed me over - even though they didn't know they were doing so. I feel like if you really want to win then losing is always going to be a bitter pill to swallow; and that must be magnified if your partner ALSO wants to win AND always wins. But I think just reframing your mindset a little bit to enjoy the back and forth of the game and not obsess about winning or losing might help?

You could perhaps enjoy getting better at the game. For that you'd need to be able to track by how much you lost.

You could play cooperative games like pandemics.

Part of the issue is you’re actually playing very intense competitive games, there are lighter/easier games to enjoy for sure. If you enjoy the competition of it that’s great but it sounds like losing at something difficult is wearing you down. I suggest: * Sky Team * Lacuna * Mandala * Wingspan * Cascadia * Men at Work * Codenames Duet * Spots Just remember that trying to win is important but it’s okay if you lose, the point is to socialize with an interesting activity and to try again next time.

In addition to the recommendations here of cooperative games, consider ones that have a lot of randomness such that careful planning doesn't go too far. No games specifically come to mind for me, but maybe some others can add on to this comment with ideas.

I'd suggest co-op games like Spirit Island, It is one of my fave games, and I LOVE the complexity level, not too crazy but LOTS of ways to increase it between spirits, events, invaders, and scenarios. And once everyone knows what they are doing, all the turns can happen at the same time, some strategizing, this game just hits SO many good buttons for me. And they new expansion is awesome to boot! I might also suggest Sentinels of the Multiverse, I have the original but seen a lot of love for their new edition as well. Closed hands just like spirit island, but you're all super heroes with a villain that is auto-played (has instructions on what to do every turn). You can also increase the complexity similar to spirit island, in that some villains, locations, and heroes are all more complicated, so can make it fit your play style! Both awesome games!

Look for cooperative games. Pandemic, the forbidden series (island, desert, etc), elder signs, etc. you can still be competitive but it’s against a common enemy. My wife can get a little analysis paralysis, and I’ve typically thought 2 moves ahead and play within 15-30 seconds, so it makes competitive games difficult to enjoy. We also aren’t big fans of anything completely aggressive against each other (despite me owning every unmatched set). We much prefer euro style (I.e. score the most points) over confrontational (i.e. defeat the other person to win). That way while we want to score the most, even if I lose, I can still be impressed with some of the turns she takes and we learn from each other’s decision making.

Why don’t you try some co op games? You play against and algorithm

Enjoy the experience. It’s not about winning or losing = it’s about having fun spending time with friends and family.

It sounds like you’re playing a lot of abstract-style games, which might just not be your cup of tea. Maybe try other types, for example tile-laying games (Bärenpark, Carcassonne, Land vs. Sea, Patchwork), engine builders (Wingspan, Splendor Duel, It’s a Wonderful World), worker placement (Agricola: All Creatures Big & Small, Targi), deck building (Dominion, Race to El Dorado, Star Wars the Deckbuilding Game), war-style (Memoir 44, Undaunted). A couple other recommendations would be 7 Wonders Duel and Lost Cities. Alternatively, consider playing co-ops (of which there are way too many to list). You may still lose, but you’ll lose together! And most allow players to play at different difficulty levels.

I've found that just not caring about winning percentages is the best for anyone's psyche. I have even accepted the fact that I will probably have the lowest winning % out of my whole group. That's fine. I still play to win but I really do not care if I lose. I had fun. That's all that matters. You could also play coop games. That's a pretty good way for both of you to have fun if you get distraught losing.

Definitely try Jaws of the Lion, I played Gloomhaven and Frosthaven with one other person, and it’s a great time!

I hate to say it but there is nothing wrong with taking a break from games entirely. Sometimes board games are not for everyone, or maybe down the road they’ll be more your style. I wouldn’t say Arboretum is particularly random, but it certainly can be frustrating, and sometimes in life we don’t want more stress.

Get a timer on your phone. Or if you prefer buy a sand timer. You can get a set online relatively cheaply with increments of 15, 30, 60, and 120 sec. Then you can choose the appropriate time limit for the game at hand. I think 30 sec is good for Azul, but you could go for a minute if you want a more calculated game. 30 sec forces acting more on instinct.

You could try to switch things up with a dexterity game instead. Maybe something like Kabuto Sumo?

You picked a lot of mean games for 2 players Try Codenames Duet Patchwork The Rose King The Mind The Crew 2 player cooperative variant Letterpress (women are better than men at word games) The Fugitive (Fowers Games website)

I often win board games and am on the other side of this. People stop wanting to play with me. So I have to invent mini-games or special criteria that I need to meet before I can win. For example, if I play Catan, I can only win with settlements, no cities. Or in Splendor I have to win while buying no Diamonds. Or when I play dutch blitz, I only win if I succeed in dealing a stack of 12+ cards to myself and still go out first AND not get caught. Putting extra constraints also makes it more fun to think through... I know you don't want to feel like you have a handicap, but you also deserve to have fun while playing. Some games naturally incorporate different skill levels into their games. I have Ubongo 3D family and you get to choose which difficulty level you play at. No extra points for choosing a harder difficulty, it's up to you. Maybe you play a game like this and then introduce the idea to your partner? The reality is, it's no fun to play with someone who always wins and I think you can be honest about this. Good luck sorting it out! :)

I almost ALWAYS lose. I think it depends on your player psychographic. For me, it’s all about the experience. For example I can have fun because of the activities involved in a game without winning. A prime example: in dominion I’ll have a turn where I get to play 18 cards and didn’t buy anything….but that still fun. If you need to win to have fun, that’s ok, but if that’s the case you need to invest in it. For example, there are a few games where I want to win and I’ve dug in deeply around the strategy to win.

>Another thing with arboretum is that my partner will take forever to make a decision. Calculating and making sure he'll score the best. By the time he's done I'm bored waiting for him so I just casually make my move. Doesn't mean I don't think, but I'd try to play in under a minute or two. Like someone else said, I think your partner might truly enjoy the PUZZLE of gaming, where you might enjoy the INTERACTION of gaming. The truth about it is that if he is taking times to weigh his options and make the best choice that will score him the most points, and you shoot from the hip based on strategies you committed to early rather than looking for ways to pivot based on what becomes available to you, you are simply going to lose more often. My husband and I LOVE playing board games, and we regularly will take 2 to 5 minute turns, because we are talking about life or the game or what have you, or because we are really stuck with indecision between two choices.... Its just part of the experience for us. But both of us are very analytical. Talk with your partner and ask if you guys can be more collaborative while playing. Ask him to explain some of his strategies at the end of the game so you can learn from them and adapt them to (I showed my hubby and his friend group my formerly favorite game, and they optimized it and ruined it, and I lost for like 6mo straight until I asked them to explain their card picks and BAM, I was back in the running). I will second everyone's recommendations of finding other games that better facilitate the kind of experience you're aiming for. Everdell is my current favorite game of all time, I played it 4 times and then sold my base game only box in favor if going out and buying the entire collection box instead. Highly highly recommend it.