A friend & I have been playing The Colonists about once a month. We've gotten to where we can bang out an era 3/4 game in about 3hrs. I think we're maybe 10-15 games deep and have gotten past the "ok, what's my intra-turn optimization" to where we try and plan out 6-9 moves as goals.

Well, we've hit a ceiling though of ~290vp over 6ish games now (today was 280 vs 282). At this point, it's a fundamental rejiggering of how we approach the game vs just tightening up existing play.

It's a wide open sandbox though as best I can see. Ora & Labora is another that sort of feels like that, but there differentiation is determined by an opponent's building acquisition rather than conscious player planning choice as it is in The Colonists. Point stands though, I think both can fit the definition.

What examples of unguided games that don't guide players to optimal pathways?

(Note, this doesn't mean it's commercially successful, or a good design in general, just unguided)

@gpage This seems to explicitly assume constructive games, essentially engine-builders and similar, but really anything constructive/accumulative/aggregative and challenged sustained average VP production rates with an intimation of rich-get-richer.

Random thoughts around those edges: Carcassonne, Fresh Fish, Lokomotive Werks, TwixT, Sticheln, Quo Vadis?, Xe Queo! -- each for a sharply distinct and different reason.

@gpage There's also an intimation of VP accrual for the feedback. Games with a threshold or last-one or like end qualifiers have a tougher time setting that feedback.

Diplomacy is interesting here..?

@jcl sighs wistfully... Is there anything that game can't do...

(Seriously though, I appreciate the response, something to chew on tomorrow. The Container remark in particular helped illustrate another way to dodge the giant beacon).