רצינו לנצח, אך היה תיקו.

רצינו is the past tense form of לרצות (to want).

• root: ר-צ-ה
• person/number: first person plural
• so רצינו = we wanted

Hebrew verbs usually include the subject inside the verb form, so this one word already tells you we wanted.

Because Hebrew often does not need an explicit subject pronoun when the verb already shows who is doing the action.

So:

• רצינו already means we wanted
• adding אנחנו would be possible, but usually only for emphasis or contrast

For example:

• רצינו לנצח = we wanted to win
• אנחנו רצינו לנצח = we wanted to win (with extra emphasis)

Here לנצח means to win.

The ל־ is the normal marker often used with the infinitive in Hebrew, similar to English to in to win.

So:

• רצינו = we wanted
• לנצח = to win

Together:

• רצינו לנצח = we wanted to win

This is a very common pattern in Hebrew:

• רציתי לאכול = I wanted to eat
• הם התחילו לדבר = they started to speak

Yes. The spelling can be the same, but the meaning is different and the context makes it clear.

• לְנַצֵּחַ = to win
• לָנֶצַח = forever

In normal unpointed Hebrew, both may appear as לנצח.
In this sentence, after רצינו, it has to be the infinitive to win, not forever.

אך means but / however.

It is correct here, but it sounds a bit more formal, literary, or elevated than אבל, which is more common in everyday speech.

So these are both possible:

• רצינו לנצח, אך היה תיקו.
• רצינו לנצח, אבל היה תיקו.

The second one is probably more common in casual spoken Hebrew.

Because היה agrees with תיקו, which is treated as singular masculine.

Even though the first part talks about we, the second clause is not saying we were something. It is saying that there was a draw / it was a draw.

So:

• היה = was / there was
• תיקו = a draw, a tie

Since תיקו is singular, Hebrew uses היה, not היו.

תיקו is a noun meaning draw or tie, especially in sports or games.

Examples:

• המשחק נגמר בתיקו = the game ended in a draw
• היה תיקו = it was a draw / there was a draw

It is a very common word in sports contexts.

Because Hebrew has no indefinite article.

English says:

• a draw

Hebrew simply says:

• תיקו

Hebrew does have a definite article, ה־, for the, but no separate word for a/an.

So:

• תיקו = a draw / draw
• התיקו = the draw

It can be understood either way in English, depending on how naturally you want to translate it.

Hebrew often uses היה + noun in a way that can correspond to:

• there was ...
• it was ...

So היה תיקו can be understood as:

• there was a draw
• it was a draw
• the result was a draw

All of these fit the Hebrew structure here.

Yes, it is natural and correct.
But in everyday speech, many speakers would more likely say one of these:

• רצינו לנצח, אבל היה תיקו.
• רצינו לנצח, אבל נגמר בתיקו.
• רצינו לנצח, אבל יצא תיקו.

Your original sentence is perfectly good; it just has a slightly more formal feel because of אך.