What if Hockey games added an extra player?

    Have you ever stopped to think of why major sports are created the way they are? Why the rules are the way they are or even why the various positions matter? There must be some reason it is designed in this fashion and some reason the pacing and intensity flows in an even progression.

    Taking this thought a step further, what happens when we change this balance of rules and pacing? Particularly in Hockey, each team has 6 players on the ice at any given time. There is 1 goalie, 2 defensemen, and 3 forwards.

    It's really clear what the point of the goalie is, stopping the puck from getting into the net. It's also really clear what the center forward does, the team needs somebody to score goals and there has to be someone to fight for the puck when the referee drops it. 

But why is everyone else there? What do the other players bring to the game?

    To take a step into game design theory, I'd consider Hockey to be a zero-sum, symmetric game. This means that both sides are completely identical and that one team wins the exact amount that the other team loses, one team scores and they are up by one goal while the other team is down by one goal. These features are important because it creates a competitive environment. With the circumstances being equal, the difference in the teams becomes only strategy and skill, two factors that people love to watch and participate in. A zero-sum game ensures there is a point to the outcome, one winner and one loser.

    Circling back to the previous question, why is everyone else there, it is really a simple answer: the other players are there because there is nothing interesting about two people fighting over a puck. There is no strategy because there are extremely limited options available to the players. There is 10^123 possible moves in chess, there is significantly less in a two player hockey game. 5 players per team brings strategic depth to the game, players have options to pass to each other, rely on teammates to setup interesting plays, and use teamwork to fight for a common goal.

    Now, why not add 1 more player to each team? If adding players = adding strategy and complexity, this should be a great idea!

It's not a good idea.

    It's not a good idea because of two reasons, lack of a clear goal and unnecessary clutter. All of the current players have a defined role within the team. The goalie stops goals, defensemen help the goalie stop pucks and help the offense score goals, the offense scores the goals. There is not enough net for a second goalie, they would just get in the way of each-other. There can't be another defenseman because there are only two corners at the end of the rink.

    Maybe the third defenseman goes in the middle? This overlaps the job of the center, he usually positions himself in the middle of the ice, ready to support a wing (the other two offense players) as they move from the defending zone or into the attacking zone. Similarly, a third offenseman doesn't work for the same reason as the defensive argument. 

    A 6th player brings clutter to the game. There is nowhere for them to go that isn't already covered by existing players. Remember the strategy that was created with adding extra players? There comes a point where adding pieces to a crowded board adds very little value. Imagine if chess had a second row of pawns in front, it suddenly becomes much less interesting because the pawns clog up the board. Pieces behind them suddenly can't move as much as they used to. The same principle applies here, adding more players to the rink only hurts the goal of the game.

    Some might argue that we could just change the rink or change the rules to accomodate more players. But is that really still hockey at the point? Hockey is based on intense speed and a violent clash of skill and strategy in a confined space. If it starts moving away from that point ... you might as well just go play soccer.