I know two rounds of a game are not enough to really understand it, but coming from a background of tightly balanced board games, a lot of the rules in the American Mahjong game I played tonight seemed like poor game design.
The biggest problem seemed to be the card...that is a ridiculous amount of scoring combinations, all so hard to get that it seemed like you kind of had to pick the one you were closest to pretty early in the game and then just hope to draw more and get enough jokers and joker stealing tiles to win...the second half of both games I was pretty locked in to one combination and was mostly just waiting for my turn to come around and hoping to draw one of the couple tiles I needed...which is not my idea of a great time.
I understand that I still need to watch the other players and not discard the tiles they need, but that's not all that interesting (or fun). Of course with so many combinations, even there I'm not sure how I was really supposed to track the specifics beyond "well, I guess they want odds."
If I understand correctly, in a lot of other variants a winning Mahjong is just 4 triples and a pair (along with some rules for straights)? This seems better, though I suspect it might come down to just waiting around to topdeck your missing pieces (but at least you can reveal triples with opponents' discards). Maybe a straight rummy variant game just isn't my thing, but being able to pivot to other combinations (which didn't seem a realistic option in our games) would have helped a lot...are there variants that improve on this?
Also I know everyone had fun with their pushers and mats and stuff, but, what is with all the breakfast lunch and dinner/then take two from the first and third stack, etc, roll the dice and start from the middle of the wall stuff. Do groups ever all just draw 14 tiles or whatever from the middle and start playing?