Tablut: A Case Study

    The study will discuss the process in which a game with many flaws can be fixed by changing the right rules based on feedback.
    The game represents the battle between two sides. One that defends and the other one that attacks. The defending pieces are situated in the middle of the boards while the pieces that attack are positioned on the edges.
    The object of the game is to take the piece from the center of the board(the king) and place it on one of the edge squares.
    Pieces move horizontally or vertically, one at a time. When a piece is surrounded from two sides is conquered and goes outside the board. Pieces can't jump other pieces and the center square can be occupied only by the king although pieces can pass through the king's square.
  
    The game flaws:
    I've read an article by Wayne Schmittberger in which he says that the game biggest issue is that the defending team has a big advantage over the attacker: the king can easily reach the edges of the board. In his writing he also states that several similar adaptation of the games tried to fix the problem but is very hard to get it perfectly balanced when the game is asymmetric.  
   
    Schmittberger thinks that an easy fix for the game is to apply to principles: "bidding" and "the pie" rule.
    The bidding rule allows the player to bid on a number of moves before the king escapes. Whoever escapes in fewer moves gets to play the defending team, next. This rule can be implemented in many other games where one player has move advantages over the other.
    The pie rule is similar to splitting a pie into half. One person cuts and the other chooses. Same for here: one player chooses the bid and the moves and the other starts moving either the attacking or the defending side.
  
    This solutions seem to make the game fairly playable and way more balanced than before.
    This rules are a general solution to this problem and can easily be applied.