Best with two or more players?

[Goodbye Horses]

I've been playing with a friend and against one AI for now, I was wondering if the game is more enjoyable with more people (or AI) than two

[Socram]

The game certainly is faster with 2, but the choices (e.g. while drafting or having "attack" targets) get more interesting with more players.
BGG votes claim that 3 players is the sweet spot, I'd say that 4 is fine as well. 5 drags the game out too much.

[JU5T]

I play 2 player most of the time and really enjoy it. 3 player changes things where tile placement becomes more crucial and strategic. I don't really like anything over 3 (prefer 2) because of the extra time and chaos on the board.

I've played most of my games table top so no 24hr turns or anything but my partner and I like to use the digital if it's been a long day and don't feel like doing math. XD

[Mehhh]

I find 4 or 5 players who are all experienced tend to end the game faster, not slower. There can be a few slow turns where someone has to make a tough decision with limited information, and of course you're waiting for 3-4 people in between your turns rather than 1-2, but overall, more players ends the game in fewer generations, which cuts down on the amount of planning you need to do.

With 2-3 players, you can build some really crazy engines, due to having so many cards. Games may last 12-14 generations, as opposed to 5-10 in a 4-5 player game. Those engines are really fun! ...at the expense of taking a few hours to build. That's been my experience.

[Azuvector]

The game plays differently depending on the number of players. I would consider 3-4 players optimal for a long game that's still interesting, and more players changes how interactions of various things work and incentivize a faster game as well.
This assumes people who know how to play, not necessarily being good or bad, just prompt about their turns and doing things that make sense rather than are random and ineffectual.
I usually find 1-2 players kind of dull and drawn out in comparison.

[spinn72]

I love 2 or 3 players. Engine building is the fun of the game for me.

[Si1Foo]

2 player's can basically focus on there own area's without any interference for the most part 3 player's there will be some over lap maybe but minimal depending on starting cards
4 player's there will be one player most likely who doesn't get any competition for a certain area and snowballs because of it
5 player's there will be competition for everything and can leave a player or two super far behind.
6 player's takes too long in real life on here i don't think you can but you shouldn't anyway

[Khashishi]

3 or 4 is good. 2 players is not, because the optimal strategy in 2 players is to not terraform, and just concentrate on engine building. The game just drags.

[chaney]

2 player is like a stadium bicycle race. Both players slow play to build an engine until one realizes they are behind and then the sprint is on. It can be pretty fun IMHO.

[Khashishi]

3 or 4 players is best. 2 players is bad because the winning strategy is to NOT terraform, and if both players do that then the game drags.

[chaney]

Originally posted by Khashishi:

3 or 4 players is best. 2 players is bad because the winning strategy is to NOT terraform, and if both players do that then the game drags.

Your "drags" is my "gets interesting." I love the action and reaction - quite a game.

[AronFJenks]

I play almost exclusively 2 player. I find some of the game mechanics in 3p (or more) to be annoying or less interesting than in 2p. I'll play 3p in person if two other friends want to play, but I would not [even bother playing 4p, I would just get out splendor or 7 wonders or blood rage. The few times I played 4 player I hated it.