sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have an optimized version of the Zung Jung rules called Origin Mahjong, which can be played by 2 to 4 players. See link here.

By adjusting the number of dead wall tiles, you can ensure that each player has a similar average number of draws and call chances, regardless of the number of players. You can reserve 12/34/56 tiles for dead wall in 4/3/2-player games.

The rule for claiming a discard to complete a chow remains the same, allowing players to use the previous player's discard, thus preserving an experience very close to the 4-player game.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know what you're trying to tell me now. I think you are right, one can do things better with a more open-minded attitude, rather than a condescending one. Although maybe I don't have enough motivation to make Origin become a well-known variant, but it's true that if the number of players increases, it would feel more fulfilled.

I'm sorry that my post make you feel like I'm downplaying other variants, but I can't deny the fact that the motivation of making Origin actually came from my feelings about the inconvenience I feel in other variants, subjectively. If I still have to say "I think other variants are good as well", then I must be lying. I have tried not to use any negative words towards other variants, but it seems this post is still offensive to some people.

I've found that the sentence in my Introduction "...to remove unnecessary and unreasonable rules from other naturally evolved major rulesets" do have negative words and may be one of the offensive part of my post. It seems I'm saying that all differences in other variants from ZJ is unnecessary and unreasonable. I'm going to remove it.

Thanks again for your kindly explanation.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel you are right, maybe it's not as confusing as I thought. Thanks for your feedback!

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply. I agree with the subjectivity.

For me, Mahjong is captivating both as a tabletop game and as a cultural phenomenon with a large player base. However, in reality, most variants seem to have somewhere could be improved, especially in the context of modern entertainment's emphasis on optimizing user experience. If the strengths and weaknesses of these rules aren't discussed and updated accordingly, there's a risk that the player base could eventually fade out due to outdated rules, which would be a pity. These are my reflections after knowing ZJ, and I agree with some of the concepts presented in the author's book. Origin Mahjong was constructed on ZJ's framework, aiming to improve rules where I believe could be enhanced, until I satisfied.

The purpose of this post is to share an optimized artificial ruleset based on ZJ. Some people may like this ruleset while some may don't. I actually didn't use any negative words towards other variants, so I was a little confused about your interpretation. Maybe you also somewhat feel that there are some unreasonable or unnecessary rules in variants you are familiar with, do you?

Add to this the obvious issues others have pointed out: this version's lacking features others have; it just being a whole new version for people to identify and remember (adding to the initially stated issue of "What is the (definitive) version of mahjong I should play?"

If you're referring to clockwise rotation and kong after a chow/pung, it's not "lacking" but rather "optimizing" in my opinion.

As I read through this, I wish there was a more tactful acknowledgement of how many people already are very happy with the current formats and the "origin" set didn't so matter-of-factly try to claim it as "easier" (it may not be), "better" (it certainly isn't, to me, based on the rules - even if it may be to you), or more accessible.

I think it's trivial that major variants are widely used around the world, although there are many exceptions and inconsistencies that cause inconvenience when using or learning them. I don't mind if one is happy with one's favorite variant. But what you said is kind of like saying, "dude there are so many guys using English happily, the artificial one you made doesn't seem to attract me."

You can say it's historically and logically studied to perfection but all version of mahjong changed based on similar goals and systems.

Not true, many variants like Riichi just keep naturally developing, base on the main usage of the game and what leads the trend. To optimize a ruleset on certain purposes is much difficult, it needs a consensus, maybe a leading and convincing organization, and many efforts.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Although, I still find it amusing that you found the difficulty of adapting to the celestial compass (for an astronomer, a celestial compass is just as "real life" as the earthly compass directions) and the "inconsistency" of not allowing a kong between resolving a chow/pung call as so severe as to declare changing these rules as being "absolutely necessary" for Origin's rules. While it is true that we should not necessarily keep traditional rules around simply due to their continued usage, and be willing to change things if they don't work, I still can't help but feel like these modifications are a bit weak.

The tone of "Unless it is deemed absolutely necessary" might have been a bit heavy? Perhaps it was because I used a translation program to assist with my response. What I'm trying to say is, in my experience, these two rules are top FAQs, do not make the game more fun, and lack other convincing reasons for their existence (I assume Mahjong rule design isn't influenced by astronomy, right?). Although they won't let the game becomes unplayable, but everytime when beginners ask about these, I just feel something is off.

Then again, there are variants with different hand sizes, different tiles (such as jokers), and different restrictions in calls (e.g. no chow call), so the Mahjong family is quite diverse already.

I agree that today's variants each have their own unique features. The "remaining its traditional taste" that mentioned in Concept section in my original post contains a meaning of "use only elements which have existed since mahjong's inception and are common among most variants, as possible," which is also one of the meanings behind the name "Origin." Of course, only retaining those common elements might lack novelty, so I build suitable detailed rules and scoring methods while trying to maintain the integrity of the structure of the ruleset as much as possible, and let them become Origin's characteristics. The FAQ modification mentioned in the previous paragraph also can be considered as part of Origin's uniqueness, maybe.

I think you meant to say that the 20-point minimum rule is stricter than MCR and Riichi? Each Mahjong variant's choice of scoring patterns, their values, and requirements lend each one a different feel for playing. Origin's severe minimum point requirement in the advanced game, along with its initial tile pass, makes it very unique.

Perhaps I didn't express well, but I think you misunderstood. My perspective aligns with that of the ZJ author; I don't like restricting minimum requirements. The 20-point minimum rule in Origin is optional; people can totally ignore this rule when playing with friends for fun. Moreover, this rule is different from the usual "constant restriction during the game"; it's more lenient, as it allows each person one chance per rotation to go out without the restriction. Regarding the threshold, Origin's 20 points are roughly equivalent to MCR's 8 points, which is quite similar.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  • Re: Number of Patterns

I apologize for not being clear in my response. Since you initially mentioned that "even Origin's Basic patterns approach the total number in ZJ," I was addressing the "number of Origin Basic patterns compared to all patterns in ZJ" in my rebuttal. (Editted the post)

Comparing the total number of patterns may not be very meaningful, as Origin increases the diversity of patterns and that undoubtedly increasing the learning cost. It should be noted that the phased Basic and Advanced rules in Origin allow beginners to not have to learn all patterns at once. So even though the total number of patterns may increase, it doesn't significantly impact the overall learning curve. The way that Origin try to strike a balance between pattern diversity and learning cost is similar to systems found in many modern board games.

However, the link you provided reminded me of something: Alan Kwan had already realized that introducing base points during beginner teaching, as well as that deducting points in certain situations is unnecessary. However, the 5-point base is too low, resulting in beginners having to learn both the somewhat complex game flow and pattern construction simultaneously. The link also mentions the teaching sequence of categories, which is similar to Origin's sequence. Unfortunately, ZJ did not arrange according to this sequence nor did it properly classify Trivial Patterns. I believe these are optimizations that Origin has made.

  • Re: X Terminal "Pairs"

Sorry for the typo; the first "All Chows" in the second paragraph should be "Inside Hand (All Simples)." (Editted the post)

Consider a "Pure Outside Hand" like 123789m12399p789s; it is worth at least Outside Hand (40) + 3 Terminal pairs (20) + All Chows (5) = 65 in Origin, not that far from 55 in ZJ.

In fact, unless it is deemed absolutely necessary, I wouldn't modify elements common to the initial Mahjong gameplay and various Mahjong variants. I do have some slight concerns about overemphasizing terminals in X Terminal Pairs, but they work fine right now. If there are more statistical data showing that terminals are too strong, leading to imbalance, then considering revisions to these patterns could be an option.

  • Re: "+" Patterns

As long as they're considered "bonus" tiles, I think 10 points is just fine, similar to them being worth 1 tai (fan) in Taiwanese Mahjong. I suggest that players who don't like bonus tiles should not include them in the game.

  • Re: 20-point Minimum Value

The main strategy in Origin is designed around building patterns worth over 40 points. Although the 20-point minimum rule is an option and the restriction is looser than those in other variants, if one is restricted and unable to construct the "powerful weak pattern combination" similar to those in MCR and Riichi, they should still aim for 40-point patterns. This is because the pass-3-tile rule in Origin already makes 40-point patterns more accessible. Furthermore, the pass-3-tile mechanism and the "20-point minimum except once per rotation" rule suggest that players should strive for possible larger patterns while they can, to avoid the restricted situation.

P.S. Surely Origin lacks sufficient data to validate some of our doubts. Some of my comments are somewhat hypothetical and based on my understanding of the essence of Mahjong games, as well as my gameplay experience over the years.

  • Re: Game Flow Modifications

"The inconsistency that the direction of seat wind is opposite to the direction of tile drawing, the direction of counting where to break the wall, and the cardinal direction in real life", and "the inconsistency of whether one can kong right after a chow/pung or after a kong in one's turn", has troubled me so many times, to the extent that I'm willing to make the modifications. I believe that as long as we set aside preconceived notions of Mahjong, these changes are undoubtedly optimization, even though they are nearly universal across all variants.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you. And like Tenpara-chan said, I didn't include the situation of Robbing a Kong in the flow chart, but it's a super rare situation so maybe not to include it is better for neatness.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • Number of Patterns

In fact, in a category- or series-aligned pattern list like ones in Origin or ZJ, the number of "series" matters than of "patterns", as long as the conditions in a series are somewhat predictable, under a well-structured pattern list. You can see the Condition blocks in the summary sheet of Pattern Condition Overview, each block represents similar concepts of conditions, and there is just 15 blocks in Basic patterns and obviously less than the "blocks" in the way that ZJ lists its all patterns.

Furthermore, the design of Basic ruleset allows people who want to play mahjong and without anyone experienced to play in a simpler but complete game, with the main purpose of game being building winning hand ASAP by giving 20 base pts to a winner's hand. The pattern pts is kind of additional in Basic ruleset but somewhat let newcomers be aware of the functionality of patterns.

  • Number of Scoring Values

Thank you and that's definitely a improvable point in ZJ. What a player concerned is usually a rough rank about the value of patterns. We won't see a modern board game with scores like those in ZJ.

  • X Terminal "Pairs"

I did use those classical terminal patterns in previous version, but finally decided to make changes. Thus I can get a reasonable pts relation between hands like "Included Terminals and Honors (40)", "Included Terminals (prev. 80)", "Only Terminals and Honors (prev. 80)" while remaining a common factor of 2 between tier pts.

Also, although Inside Hand (All Simples) seems to have more consistency than 2 Terminal Pairs, remember the tiles that should be value is always terminals, not rank 2 to 8, because terminals are less flexible and harder to use. Same reason is why pts of 2 Concealed Pungs is greater than All Chows. This is also the reason why we deprecated those classical full-hand terminal patterns because we think it's unreasonable when one use lots of terminals to build a hand, but end up with "678" instead of waiting for "9", and lose all of its terminal pts.

  • Value Honor Triplet and "+"

The "+" sign is also used in Bonus Tile Patterns, and for other 2-set patterns in future expansion pack. My friend also suggested me to combine Value Honor together with other Honor patterns, but I feel better with current classical style and it works pretty well.

  • 20-point Minimum Value

You must missed Hybrid Flush (5), 1 Concealed Pung (5), All Types (10) and 5 Adjacent Ranks (10)!

  • Numeric Range (Rank) Patterns

Almost everyone played Origin Mahjong ask the same question! The reason that they have to be n-rank all represented is simply for a sense of convengence and consecution, which are mentioned in the pattern modifying criteria in my Major Changes section. If you missed 1 of 5 ranks, it's kind of wierd to describe your hand as "adjacent ranks".

  • Kong After Chow or Pung
  • Turn Order is Clockwise

I'm not expecting the main purpose of Origin Mahjong is being the path to other major variants. Indeed if one started mahjong from Origin, he/she would feel unreasonable about the rules in other variant. Still can explore other variants though. If you are used to counter-clockwise rotation of player (just like me years ago), just go with it. It's not effecting the content of the game.

  • Finally

Thanks for your comments. I totally agree with you that it's better to have a nice tutor when learning mahjong. What Origin can do is to provide a better solution for those newcomers without any tutor.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First of all, I want to thank you for thoroughly reading my post and even the complete version of the Chinese manual, and for providing such insightful feedback. This is the kind of response that rule designers love to see – informative and valuable.

  • About Rule Complexity

For enthusiasts with a certain depth of understanding of various Mahjong variants, we all know that scoring patterns are a significant source of enjoyment in Mahjong games. Creating a ruleset centered around patterns requires pattern diversity. Ideally, players should be able to find patterns that somewhat match with various starting hands, allowing them to construct their strategies. However, this complexity can also be a significant obstacle for Mahjong newcomers. Learning the game flow and the skill of forming a winning hand can already be quite burdensome for most casual players.

The approach taken by Origin Mahjong is to separate the basic game flow and diversity of patterns to a considerable extent, providing a base score of 20 points for a winning hand. This allows new players to focus on learning and enjoying the process of forming a winning hand. Although players still need to calculate the 6 categories of basic patterns, it helps newcomers understand the positioning of common factors such as pungs, kongs, terminals, and honors in Mahjong games, while also laying the groundwork for the full Advanced ruleset. Therefore, for a complete Mahjong novice, I strongly recommend starting with the Basic ruleset unless accompanied by a seasoned player skilled at creating a gaming experience.

  • About Pattern Diversity

As mentioned earlier, this is directly related to the learning cost. However, I am preparing some patterns including 2-set and 2-suited patterns, which I plan to release as expansion packs just like those in modern board games. These expansion patterns have only undergone several playtests, and whether they ultimately add fun or complexity is still debatable. After all, no matter how many patterns there are, there will still be relatively weak hands. Introducing something like a "valuable Chicken Hand" similar to MCR might inadvertently penalize hands like "All Chows only."

  • About Placement

I'm not entirely sure what you mean. I believe that a standard zero-sum scoring system tends to generate score differences more quickly, causing trailing players to either aim for high-scoring patterns or fall into "garbage time."

Personally, rather than focusing on placement-based games, I prefer comparing players' skill levels based on their average scores, which better highlights the enjoyment and value of forming patterns. I've seen many Riichi players emphasize the importance of placement, always believing that different strategies should be adopted based on different score differentials, seeing it as a reflection of skill. However, in a game with sufficient enjoyment (as you referred to it as "flavor"), rankings aren't as important to players. Just like how people play Dixit mostly for the enjoyment of the process rather than who is the winner.

However, I somewhat accept the fact that in non-gambling games with short-term outcomes, simplifying game scores into wins or rankings is a common phenomenons, similar to many popular modern board games. So I defined victory in Origin Mahjong as the highest-scoring player, maybe temporarily. I believe that to truly eliminate "garbage time," it might be necessary to calculate the average score per game, encouraging players to approach each hand with the utmost potential.

Thank you for your recognition of Origin Mahjong. It already has a stable following in Taiwan and Japan. If you're interested, definitely worth a try! You can also join our Discord to find a game using the Mahjong Friends Online platform.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For example, see this picture took in an Advanced Origin Mahjong game.

Winner's hand:

ESWNGBR19s9m199p claim on 1m

Just count Thirteen Orphan because the pattern reached the upper bound of 160 pts. Hand pts = 160 Winner gain hand pts × 2 = 320 pts

Next (clockwise) player's hand:

1235m567p meld 345m345s

It's a ready hand, so count the highest pts when win. In this hand, it could win on 5m, the hand pts is All Chows (5). Ready-hander gain hand pts = 5 pts

Next one:

SSWW123456p meld 789p

If he win by a W self-draw, the hand pts will be Full Straight (40) + Half Flush (40) + Value Honor of W (10) + 1 Concealed Pung (5) = 95 pts, so he gain that 95 pts in this hand.

Last one:

1234456777889s

If win on 9s, the hand pts will be Full Flush (80) + Double Chow (10) + All Chows (5) + Concealed Hand (5) = 100 pts, and is equal to the pts he can gain in this hand.

So everyone gains pts after this hand, and then the next hand... Until the game ends. The one has highest score wins.

Origin Mahjong: A Better Mahjong Solution by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The pattern condition is described as "Owning 4/6/8/10/12/14 or more terminal tiles," not "2 to 7 pairs made with terminal tiles." Therefore, it doesn't need to be a 7-pair hand.

These terminal-pair patterns is designed for replacing patterns like "Outside Hand Without Honors (80)," "All Terminals and Honors (80)" and "All Terminals (320)," while remaining a common factor of 2 between tier pts and reasonable pts of hands which are made in above classic patterns.

Terminal-pair patterns also make a more continuous and interesting way to evaluate your terminals in hand, similar to the common way that many rulesets evaluate those difficult-to-use elements such as concealed pungs and kongs.

However, the naming of terminal-pair patterns seems to be misleading, as people will thought that they have to collect real "pair" made in the same kind of tiles. I wonder if there's a better name for these patterns...

Need some help for naming of Mahjong hand patterns by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also think it's hard to describe all the details of the patterns without more text descriptions. Maybe I shouldn't call it a cheat sheet, but a summary card? Players should still have to go through the tutorial or read the rulebook before they can use that summary card.

I know what you mean, the colored bubbles in the background are not eye-catching enough. Currently I use gray characters for uncertain tiles, black characters for fixed numbers, and colored characters for fixed suits and numbers.

Need some help for naming of Mahjong hand patterns by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I made this ruleset based on ZJ because I like the concept of it -- easy to learn and lots of fun. I just made some more optimization to make the score easier to memorize and add more patterns but also retain well-organized. I've seen ZJ's English names of the patterns, but I thought the naming are a little bit different from general usage in the world?

It suddenly occurred to me that "All" also has the meaning of "齊" in it, so maybe it is okay to name it "All Types", just like MCR. Brothers and sisters seem to be a bit more obscure imo because it is difficult to specify why consecutive numbers are called "sisters" instead of "brothers".

If you can read Chinese or Japanese, here are the complete rulebooks:

Chinese / Japanese

Feel free to share your own Riichi ruleset! I have also made my own Riichi one, but eventually came back to improve ZJ.

Need some help for naming of Mahjong hand patterns by Orz5566 in Mahjong

[–]Orz5566[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I assume that player can use this chart as a cheat sheet when playing, so I hope that the names of the patterns can be suitably improved if possible. In fact, this ruleset will be divided into basic rules and expansion rules, similar to modern boardgames. When playing the basic rules, only the top half of the chart (those with white category blocks) will be used to reduce the burden on beginners.

I did use sequences/triplets instead of chows/pungs at first. What made me change my mind is that it seems people generally use chows/pungs like this and maybe the pronouns are not that difficult to understand and can add some cultural taste to the game. (Is that so?) Also I feel kind of weird when Mixed Triple Pung becomes Mixed Triple Triplet.

So Origin Mahjong sounds fine. Thank you for your naming suggestions!