Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

Blogs

  • Starship Artemis Session

    Last night was my birthday. Having not had a housewarming or anything, we threw a small party, ate cupcakes and showed off the house. 

    And blew up spaceships. That's totally a thing with me. We even managed to blow up enemy spaceships, in spite of our weapons officers (Zog and Baden) attempts to damage anythign which isn't moving. 

    So you pay your $40 to this guy on the net, and you get a site to download the game. The binary is "licensed" for about 6 copies, with no hard licensing or terms other than a basic, just be cool about it kind of attitude. 

    The server runs on one box (which runs the front viewscreen as well) on a 12' projection screen (it was a birthday present, along with Artemis.) Clients run on 2+ other machines. (Same software, different clicky button on the main screen.)

    Each of the clients is assigned one or more of the 6 roles:

    1. Helm

    2. Weapons

    3. Engineering

    4. Science

    5. Comms

    6. Captain

    Helm and weapons are the only ones you NEED, and any client can run multiple stations flipping back and forth between them. Engineering handles energy distribution and damage control. Science is the only one with detailed knowledge about the entire sector, and comms gets requests from friendly ships, and can send out messages and orders to other things. 

    The captain may or may not get a screen, and just gets to look at the viewscreen and shout things. The optional captain's map is an overall sector map. 

    There are a lot of little design touches that force the console to cooperate besides the captain role:

    • The Helm needs help from Science to plot long range courses. 
    • Weapons needs science to set phaser frequencies and get shield and systems status of enemy ships to know where to hit them. 
    • Comms can request and accept surrenders, but also needs to talk to weapons as she is the one who asks stations to build nukes, homing torps or ECM. 
    • Engineering needs to listen to everything going on so they can overcharge and manage cooling for the critical systems. They also have the best knowledge of the Artemis shield status, and the effectiveness of the damage control teams. 
    While the consoles are pretty simple, the details start getting relatively deep. While at the helm, I could REALLY tell when engineering switched power to my maneuver thrusters while I was navigating an asteroid belt. 
    But there are other things we were figuring out. If sensors are damaged, you may lose the front viewscreen or have it flash a bit, and science may not be able to scan easily. Comms can taunt enemies and pull them away from space stations. 
    Mines are proximity devices. Zog tried to go through a minefield, which was the cause of our one death. 
    Your own mines are proximity, and make sure you warp out after setting them. Zog forgot to tell anyone while dropping a mine. 
    Nukes affect everything in the area. Zog took our a space station, and Sandi got to relay tons of messages from our ECM attacks near other space stations. They weren't nice. 
    Missions take about 30-45 minutes, and you can choose from different ships, (We tried one with a missile freighter armed with 8 nukes. Baden got REALLY trigger happy with those, and I would reflexively repeat "No nukes" when in a fight near a station.) and a few mission options. 
    The basic mission is you, a sector, 4 stations, and a lot of incoming ships hell bent on destruction. You are welcome to also run some transport missions to gain extra nukes and things. 
    However, Artemis also support XML-based mission scripts. These includes storylines and support for the Comms officer to play audio file messages on the main sound system as incoming messages. The one we tried included some new game elements, like ships that can warp in reinforements, a ram scoop which can collect energy from cruising through a Nebula with shields down, and a greedy admiral unloading and selling our missiles. 
    Even the base game includes some surprises. There are a number of different ships ripped off from Star Trek. On our second mission, we started hitting this Romulan Warbird. It would show up on some screens and disappear from others, so we ended up with everyone confused and shouting "He's RIGHT THERE!" "There's nothing there" "Wait, he's gone" "Idiots, look at the front viewscreen" "Wait, I see him!"
    The Artemis guy is constantly updating the game itself. And there is a pretty avid community around it, including crazies who are building dedicated bridges. We did it on 6 laptops and a Mini-ATX desktop. 
    There are some other features that are only hinted at. The game supports multiple starships, so you could build a large lan of 30 or so machines and 6 ships flying around, relying on the comms officers to coordinate. The game has an update/ping rate of 250ms, so it really isn't very resource intensive at all. The 3d screens do require a somewhat modern laptop. Zogs 5 year old HP would chug a bit, so we left it as a captain's screen. And we had 3 macbooks running the game in Wine with the only glitch being one machine that needed to run in windowed mode for some reason. 
    And the Helm supports a flightstick. Highly reccommended, as it allowed us to really deal with homing torpedos. 

     

  • Starting a miniatures painting studio-suggestions needed

    Hey guys,

         This is a bit personal but for this new year I have 2 new enterprises I'd like to start and one is a miniatures painting studio. 

         I'd like to hear your opinions if you'd hire other studios before and basically just listen to anything you want to say about a service you acquired or about something you'd like.

          I'm also thinking of painting miniatures for boardgames and selling the games unplayed but with the painted miniatures, picture yourself buying a brand new copy of Fury of Dracula and having all the 5 minis already painted.

          Anyways, I'm awaiting for your comments and suggestions.  I'll put a link once I have finished the set up, probably next week.

          Thanks;

  • Stats, stats, stats

    I've recently been working on an article / blog post that involves a lot of numbers.  Specifically, numbers that we have not shared including our costs for games, our profit margins, our exchange rate riders, etc.

    And I'm just not sure if it's an article I should post.

  • Stephen Player produces superb illustrations for Guards! Guards! A Discworld boardgame

    For the last few months renowned Discworld illustrator Stephen Player has been frantically been working on the images for Guards! Guards! A Discworld boardgame.   He has recently completed them and they are superb.  They are further enhanced as each character image is accompanied by a quote about that character from one of the Discworld books.

    In addition to the Discworld character images Stephen has also drawn four Dragon illustrations set to the backdrop of Ankh-Morpork and is finishing off with illustrating the item cards.

    The artwork to date can be viewed at   www.playergallery.com  (Pratchett, Guards Guards Board Game).

    If you can't wait for the release at Origins, we may even have a demo at the UK Games Expo.

    You can also shortly follow us on Facebook & Twitter.

  • Steve Jackson's Revolution!

    After seeing enough to pique my interest, I picked up Revolution! at the game store just in time to be played.

    With Steve Jackson's games you pretty much know what to expect.   Revolution! is a departure from the usual "completely random happenstance" that makes up the majority of the company's titles.  It's rated for 3 or 4 players and plays in about an hour.  Each player takes the role of a subvesrive leader in an unstable colonial-style environment.  The object is to end the game with the most victory points support meaning you're the faction that ends up in charge after it all goes to hell.

     Gameplay is very simple.  You have a selection of tools to intimidate locals with.  The most powerful is Force, followed by Blackmail, then Gold.  You use these on a board with twelve leaders on them, each of which give different benefits.  Some give support and directly add to your score.  Some give you  extra tools to use in the next round.  Some allow you to influence organizations, represented by one  of the buildings (Harbor, Market, Fortress, Town Hall, Cathedral, Tavern and Plantation).  Round order is as follows:

    1 - Espionage:  Everyone sees what everyone else has to start the round.

    2- Bidding:  Place your tools on the leaders you wish to influence.  Two restrictions on placement are you can't use a tool on someone immune to that tool (i.e. the General doesn't respond to Force, the Inkeeper doesn't respond to Blackmail) and you can only influence a maximum of six leaders per round.  All tokens must be played. 

    3-  Resolution:  After everyone is done,all players move theirscreems aside and show how they bid.  The process is done one leader at a time, left-to-right top-to-bottom.  High bidder gets the effects.  In case of a tie, nobody gets the effects.  All tokens played are discarded back into the supply piles.  All tokens gained are gained.  Influence are placed on the buildings unless that building is full.

    Two special spots are the Spy and Apothecary.  The Spy substitutes one of your tokens for one belonging to your opponent.  The Apothecary allows two swaps of cubes - one of yours changes locations with one belonging to an opponent.  If not for these two spots the game would be worthless because an early leader could never be caught up to.

    4- Sympathy for the SuckersPatronage: After processing the round, any player with less than 5 tokens gets 5 gold from the supply.  This happens mainly because it's damned near impossible to have more than 5  just because of how the game is set up.

    The game continues until every influence square on the board is filled up.  Then you score.  Tokens you gained on the last round are cashed in (Force is worth 5, Blackmail 3 and Gold 1) and the points for the buildings are given to the player with the  most influence cubes in it.  If an area is tied, nobody gets the points.  Most support wins.

    The game played pretty quickly.  I ran away with it primarily be focusing on the middle row, particularly the Priest and Printer, while everyone else fought over the Rogue and Mercenary.  Lots of matching wasted bids.  it can get frustrating if it happens a lot.  The player who finished second made some shrewd plays at the end to take control of the Fortress and Town Hall (the two biggest scoring buildings) and massively leapfrog third and fourth.

     All in all it's not too bad as a quick game.  Might be a bit pricey for some tastes at 40 bucks US.  I don't mind it - it's kind of a neat guessing game.  Using the BGG scale I'd rate it 6 out of 10, or a weak seven.

     Rulebook is here.  It has pictures of the gameboard and bid boards for you to peruse as you see fit.

    Hopefully next week I can have a write-up for BSG: Pegasus and how it feels to be the first player out the airlock.

  • Steve Weeks Won't take my calls


    Also called Origins Report part 2
    phone

    Though by now the whole event  has all blurred together into one big ménage of gaming, sleep deprivation, and cough drops since my voice was little more than a squeak by Friday. I've already messed up fuzzy details. I'll never get them straight so I'll just hit a few  high points- Like meeting Karl aka Ratphink. He emerged from the throng and  proudly announced his presence. We hung out quite a bit though he was committed to demoing at his booth for a large portion of time. He must have been pretty convincing because I saw a few copies of "Those Pesky Humans" circulating in the Cabs room.
    beer
    Another high point was passing out Orange Blossom Ales to various people around Origins. I ended up buying 3 six packs- all they had after tasting the delicious beverage.  Apparently it is forbidden drink alcohol at Origins except in the BrewHaus. How could anything so good be bad? Fortunately I didn't get caught...but Zev did. Or more specifically Zev's buds did. Zev doesn't drink so I was generously  offered to drink his beer.  Somewhere in cyberspace there is a funny picture of him passed out on a table with empty beer bottles strewn about. I. Want. That. Picture.
    summoner wars
    After having the Orcs totally annahilate the elves twice in Summoner Wars, I set off to find Colby Dauch to figure out what the hell I was missing.  Instead of explaining, he challenged me to a game: He as the Fire Elves and I as the Ice Orcs. Things *did not* go well for me. In fact he had me on the ropes almost the whole game.  I managed to recover but he did indeed prove that the two factions were evenly matched. Also wearing the plaid hat was his friend Josh Rios.  I want a name like Josh Rios- thats the kind of badass name you have when you kick doors in and are handy with a six shooter. I may have to assume his identity and take up bounty hunting...

    Later we hung out at the CABS room. I was playing an epic game of Last Night on Earth with Chris aka King in Yellow, his friends Regina, and BHBG (Big Humorous Black Guy), ChisTandimeyer (as Strange Aeon) and Ufe.  I was so busy running my mouth that I ended up having to bow out of of LNOE. Colby and I were talking game design and industry stuff and I was paying less and less attention to the game (SORRY CHRIS! I OWE YOU ONE.)
    '
    However this gave the opportunity to break out Cthulhu dice and inflict er, play them with the rest of the group not invovled with LNOE.  If you've not played, there is not much to the game. Pick an opponent and both of you roll dice. You can steal, loose or (rarely) gain an insanity points. If you're the last one sane, you win!  The game was met with lukewarm responses but Colby was perplexed. He could not fathom why anyone would like the game...

    Jason Maxwell had wandered by why we were finishing Cthulhu Dice. Colby was grilling me why I even considered it a game much less wanted to play it.  Jason persuaded me that our conversation would be much more informative if we added beer + Catwoman.
    (Catwoman was an actress the Brewhouse paid lure old nerds like me and it worked like a moth to a flame.) We adjourned to the Brewhaus and resumed the debate about the qualities of fun and nature of gaming. Colby couldn't fathom why anyone would enjoy a mindless dice game. So we debated it while playing Liars Dice (,a not so mindless dice game.)  I  assert that anything one person finds fun, someone else if going to consider torture and vice versa. That lead to Colby talking about games and finding the right game for the market. My view is that a designer has to publish a game he loves but not love it so much as to be blind to the flaws and that there is an audience for almost any game. However, talk is cheap and I'm not the one putting down the bucks like Colby.  He is driven to find the core audience and strive for great games.

    Colby is an ambitious guy, and has a vision of running a small game company with 5-6 employees who are dedicated at what they do. He exudes a really interesting combination of intensity and naivety. He has no qualms about tackling big projects and has some great ideas. On the other hand, I think his gaming experiences has been primarily with Heroscape and doing contract work with Mattel.  I asserted that there are probably 300 people in the industry that you could meet who design, publish and critique, the bulk of hobby games. With that small a group, individual opinions carry serious weight and games are made or broken.  We then talked about the arc board games have taken over he last 20 years from Games workshop, through the eurogame craze and the AT backlash.

     He then asked me point blank what is the vision for F:AT?  I frankly don't know. I'm old skool Fattie and used to post on the google blog, but was never part of the core group. For me, it is a place to hang out and shoot the shit. We speculated on the agendas of those who are serious contributors,  I told him that Weeks always accused me of peddling 'their' secret agenda.
    anarchy
    I have always been amused by Weeks antics. In truth, the anarchist in me that will always root for those who challenge authority. I had gotten his phone number when he came down to DragonCon. Although we didn't get a chance to hang, I kept the number and would call him from time to time. He never answered but would sometimes email me with a quip or jab.
    So while we were debating the fate of Steve Weeks, I decided to set the record straight.  I called him and put him on Speakerphone. Sure, it was 12:30 at night but I felt he deserved to speak his peace. Unfortunately he must have assumed it was some sort of nefarious setup and decided to not take the call. Undeterred, I called and left him a message apprising him of the situation. Again…no answer. My best guess is that Weeks wanted to be part of the core contributors and help shape the direction of F:AT.  As a loose cannon he was rejected and  lashed out (repeatedly and with excessivley.)  Finally, he decided to take his ball and go home. The conversation finally broke down with Jason Maxwell and I throwing jibes at each other while Janna completed aced everyone in Liars dice. No big surprise there- she's a lawyer.
    I do like a woman who knows how to lie...

    Steve"and that is all the news to print"Avery

     

  • Steve.3 - Getting my life in order - Part 1

    JonJacob was the inspiration for my sharing.  His post about his new son really made me feel comfortable in sharing something personal so I thought this would be a great place to discuss something that's been on my mind for some time:  My life is a freakin' disaster.

    It's not that I don't love my life, I do.  It's just that the logistics of it are completely out of whack.  I need to get myself in order and I need to do it now.  There's a couple things that need to happen and today is the day this goes in full effect.  You know how there's a line that you need to cross to really feel like something's gotta give?  Well, I'm at that line and it's time for a massive change.

    Let's start with the easiest thing to change:  My house.  I love my wife dearly, lets establish that.  What I don't love is her saving of everything and refusal to get rid of anything.  I stumbled on Shellie's post about de-hoarding her house and it really set me off.  We're not nearly that inundated with crap, but we've got a small house and every bit of space is crammed with something of my wife's.  All I've got is my games in one closet and my guitars in the corner of the living room.  The rest is hers.  I've got a detached spare room full of, you guessed it, her stuff.  I'm talking about school books from when she was 8 and shit like that.  True garbage.

      After reading Shellie's post, I put my foot down.  First I cleared all my stuff out that was extraneous.  I had lots of little piles of papers and junk on top of the microwave.  Gone.  I cleaned off all my shelves of clothing and bagged all the stuff that didn't fit so it could be donated.  I bought a toolbox to put all my computer repair accessories in and stored it in a closet with my spare monitor and a tower.  Long story short, I took care of as much of "my" stuff as possible.  I can't stand hypocrites so I wanted to set a good example and not give her crap while I was still guilty.

    We had some disagreements about what was keepable from her stash.  I told her she had a choice:  Either she lets me have final say on what stays or I go through it all with no mercy.  She obviously chose the easier path and once I got her going, she was okay.  It was like breaking a spell of sentimentality.  Once she threw out a couple things, it was like "Oh, this isn't so hard to do."  She's made good progress although there's a metric ass-ton of stuff left to do.

    The second phase is getting control of my finances.  We live so damned irresponsibly that it actually concerns me.  My wife's parent are awesome people and they are well off, financially speaking.  They can live like that because they have the capital.  Unfortunately, my wife sees that and thinks we can do the same thing.  I take a huge amount of blame because I didn't put my foot down and explain to her how things need to work for us.  The good news is that there isn't a huge amount of damage done to our finances, but I could cry at all the money that's been wasted.  I'm definitely to blame as well because I like to buy stuff.  Everyone does.  The trick is to be more judicious in my purchases so this doesn't happen again.

    I sat down the other day and set up an account on a website that links to all my various accounts.  I've got them almost all in one place so I can keep a better pulse on my total wealth portfolio.  My goal is to pay off everything as quickly as possible while creating some savings.  I want to be rid of credit cards altogether so I'd rather save up an emergency fund then rely on credit to bail me out of a tough situation.  The first step to reducing debt is to stop taking on more.  Once we can get off that roller coaster then we can work on taking it down altogether.

    Last but not least is my weight.  Anyone who's met me knows I'm a large mammal with a cherub-like demeanor.  The problem is that my weight and eating habits are severely out of control.  It's a symptom of the same problem that plagues the above-mentioned scenarios.  Either way you slice it, I'm well overweight and very unhealthy.  I'm about 6'3" and weight about 430.  That's completely ludicrous.  I was fat all my life until I lost a ton of weight and got down to 250.  I was in terrific shape.  After that, bad choices were made followed by more bad choices and ballooned back up to where I am.  I've been thin, I know how good it feels.

    This morning was really the breaking point for me.  I stopped at McDeath on my way to work as I do 3 out of 5 days of the week.  I got my usually meal and went to work, chowing down on the way.  I stepped out of the car and walked to the door.  By the time I got there, I was out of breath.  I could feel myself sweating and breathing hard and it was only about 100 ft.  That's just fucking unacceptable, I don't care who you are.  My clothes don't fit well and I look like crap.  More importantly, I feel like crap mentally and physically.  I finally hit that wall.

    As I said before, this is Steve.3.  Steve.0 was an okay guy, young, dumb, and quite robust.  He was truly clueless and learned a lot.  Steve.1 put those lessons into action and lost a lot of weight.  He paid off bills and lived the high life.  Steve.2 was a reversion to Steve.0 and has become someone I'm not particularly fond of.  He really needs to be stopped before he kills me altogether.  

    That's where Steve.3 comes in.  I'm not dieting.  I'm not knee-jerking to finances or house organization.  I'm making full-on lifestyle changes that will affect my entire being.  My life is going to change because it needs to and I want it to.  This really isn't optional.  If we don't fix the finances, something will happen and we'll be screwed.  If I don't fix the house, then we can't stay there and I'll need something bigger further screwing my finances.  Most importantly, if I don't lose weight I'm literally going to die young.  That's not fair to my wife in any way, let alone myself or the rest of my family.

    The line has been crossed.  The camel's back is broken.  My back is against the wall.  It's time for a change.

  • Still in the Holding Pattern

    As I have posted several times on here before, one of my holy grail games is a decent airline game.  I would at least one that I could enjoy as much as some of the crayon rail games where you end up building airline routes and moving passengers.  My gold standard would be a game along the lines of Air Bucks where you start from a DC-3 and work your way up to an expanding empire of modern jets.

    Airline games are few and far between though.  In my collection I have Air Baron which I really enjoy but it doesn't really feel like an airline game.  I also have an old Avalanche Press game called "Airlines" which I don't enjoy.  I've been meaning to give it another go but that has never happened.

    A few months ago, someone mentioned a game called "Jet Set" that would be coming out.  On first blush it looked like Ticket to Ride with planes but it's not quite that.  There are definately some differences there.
    Game Map
    This is the game map.  It is a map of Europe.  It is pretty well laid out.  The numbers on the planes correspond to the value of the routes.  I suspect that correlates to something.

    The game play is as follows.  There are a number of short and long distance routes that are placed on the board.  These can be claimed by anyone.  There seem to be some logic in these routes as routes that involve 1 link are worth 1 point and links that are longer are based on the number of links in the route.  This is important as victory is dependent upon the value of your routes and not the money you have.

    These are examples of the route cards.
    Everyone is also given a pair of what are called "Final Flights".  These are claimed in the same way that the other routes are claimed but they can't be claimed until two vacation cards come up.

    These are the final flight cards.
    A turn consists of flipping over a card if there is less than the minimum number required.  A player has the option of filling the rows out to the maximum if he wants to pay for it.  Then a player can do one of the following actions:
    1.  Claim an airlink by paying the cost of the airlink plus the cost of any planes you want to place on the link.
    2.  Place planes on  existing owned links by paying the cost of the planes plus a fee to the bank.
    3.  Placing planes on one link owned link by paying that player plus the bank.
    4.  Claiming a route card.  This also influences income by a number of chips placed on it.  This insures a diminishing return in income.
    5.  Claim income.
    When two vacation cards come up, that is pretty much the ending of the game because you can claim the final flights at that point.

    What I like about the game:
    1.  It's got planes.
    2.  It's fairly simple and quick.

    What I don't like about the game:
    1.  The final flights aren't all the same in terms of numbers of links and destinations.  I deliberately picked the two cards in my picture as an example.   One is fairly easy to accomplish the other isn't.  This is a huge component of the final victory that it sucks to be the player that gets sucky cards.
    2.  Money is pretty tight throughout the game.   This is definately one of the throttling mechanisms that get thrown in Euros.
    3.  Little interaction.


    The plane pieces are nice but they look more like cartoonish A-4's than a commercial plane.

    Anyways, I guess all in all, I'm still in a holding pattern for an airline game.

  • Sting is coming to visit.

    I just won the "Sting" edition of Dune in a math trade.  Earlier today I heard Sting on NPR.  Coincidence?

  • Storm Over Stalingrad.........

    Is given some love (and a brief overview) on the latest episode of The Messy Game Room podcast. We also run through the do's and don't of starting your own game group. (Keep in mind, none of this is done well, but you should listen anyway).

     http://messygameroom.libsyn.com/

     

     

  • Straight to Hell, Boy- CLAUSTROPHOBIA in Review

    claustrphobia Frank Branham claimed that CLAUSTROPHOBIA "might be better than SPACE HULK" when he introduced it to me. I listened to my gut instinct, which tells me that no man that enjoys the taste and texture of Creamed Pull Candy(sort of a sweetened shortening) should be trusted in such regards. "Poppycock" said I, and dismissed his ludicrous claim out of hand. He was of course wrong and eventually recognizant of his error, but the fact remains that CLAUSTROPHOBIA is a really good dungeon crawl game that sets itself apart from the pack by being extremely easy to get into and play in a reasonable amount of time. It definitely fits into Uba's whole "short games that don't suck" idea, and there are things about that I think make it more appealing than even venerable old DESCENT. The first time I played it, I thought "hey, this is like SORCEROR'S CAVE". And they really just don't make games like that any more. I think it'd also make for a fine kid's game as it introduces important life concepts like smashing demons in the face with a hammer and that Hell is a fun place that you should go in an easy to understand and exciting way. So there's a review at Gameshark.com, of course.

  • Strategic Thinking Is Becoming Rare Among Game Players



    When I was a teenager one of the best aspects of the new Avalon Hill style board wargames such as Stalingrad and Afrika Korps was that they were games of strategy.  They were not family games, they were not games dominated by chance although chance was involved, they were games of skill where a good grasp of strategy made a big difference.

    These games were succeeded as my favorite at age 19 by Diplomacy, a game with no overt chance elements, and a game for more than two players rather than for two, so that playing the player became much more important and playing the system much less.  But it was still a game where strategy was very important, though strategy at a higher level: grand strategy.

    When I began to design games in my mid-teens, before I knew Diplomacy, I designed games of strategy and grand strategy.  All of my published games from “back when” are games of strategy and grand strategy.  They can be described as “chess-like” even when dice and more than two players are involved.  (Though I have to say that I “retired” from playing chess itself when I was 15: it was too much like work, perhaps because there was no chance element and it was too puzzle-like.)

    But that was 30-40 years ago.  Lately I have found that strategic thinking amongst gamers is in short supply, and many prefer a less cerebral form of entertainment that is more like playing cards than playing chess.  Consequently, many of my recent games are “screwage games”, relatively short games that allow the players to competitively mess with their friends and acquaintances in a relaxed context.  This kind of game does not appeal to Eurostyle gamers who are accustomed to an absence of direct competition, but it appeals quite strongly to most college-age gamers.  These are definitely games that you play with and against other players, far from multi-player solitaire or the puzzles disguised as games that are now quite popular in the Eurostyle.

    In game design terms, players of screwage games are happy to compete, and prefer to adapt and improvise rather than to plan [see http://pulsiphergamedesign.blogspot.com/2010/12/game-playing-styles.html].  They prefer fewer plausible choices rather than many choices [see http://gamasutra.com/blogs/LewisPulsipher/20111025/8731/How_Many_Choices_is_Too_Many.php]. They prefer games that they don’t have to study to master.  In terms of “strategic depth” they like relatively shallow games, and by their nature screwage games are not strategically deep.

    Before going any further let’s look for some definitions.

    Google: “strategy  Noun:        A plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.
        The art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle.”

    Wikipedia: “Strategy, a word of military origin, refers to a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. . . Building on the work of many thinkers on the subject, one can define strategy as "a comprehensive way to try to pursue political ends, including the threat or actual use of force, in a dialectic of wills – there have to be at least two sides to a conflict. These sides interact, and thus a Strategy will rarely be successful if it shows no adaptability."

    Notice that planning is central to both definitions. 
    So why is strategic thinking in games less common now than it used to be?  My view is that people are much less likely to plan ahead for any purpose, not just in games, now than they were 35 years ago.  Part of this is the very large number of distractions of modern life.  Furthermore, people have been trained by advertisements and government regulation to believe that someone else will take care of them and that they don’t have to take responsibility for themselves, and that means feel less need to plan.  Furthermore , they’re less likely to have the patience to time their actions most effectively, compared with 35 years ago.  This is the “microwave” age, the age of instant gratification, the age of convenience. 
    Players are also less willing to think when they play a game than they were 35 years ago.  Video games, after all, tend to emphasize movement and action/reaction rather than thought.  Students are taught to minimize logic and precision and rely on their feelings.  “Use the Force Luke” (rather than rely on a targeting computer to destroy the Death Star) is from 1977's Star Wars but applies more and more to modern attitudes as time passes.  The result is that what I’d think were obvious points about strategy are lost on the average board and card game player, even those who play every week.  Most people “don’t have it”. 
    There has been a shift in the kind of thinking that people bring to games as well.  Strategic thinking has been displaced, where people are willing to think about what moves to make as they play a game, with another kind of thinking which video games and Euro-style games encourage and which allows success in those games.  That is puzzle-solving. 
    What’s the difference?  Military strategy is closely related to maneuver, use of forces, and economics.  These are rarely prominent in puzzle-solving.  Military strategy depends heavily on interaction with the opposition, and the best generals often correctly anticipate what the opposition will do and take advantage of that anticipation.  In puzzles there is no opposition, nor can you “read the mind” of a puzzle the way you can read the mind of an opponent. 
    So in the largest sense strategy is about outwitting or out-thinking intelligent opposition, while puzzle solving is a completely different skill.  Strategy involves both logic and intuition (“yomi”, reading the mind of the opponent).  Puzzle-solving is also logic and intuition, but differs in an important respect.  If you use trial and error in strategy, you lose, while in puzzle solving you can fail to solve the puzzle but in most cases that does not mean that you lose, you just try again.  This is why you can resort to trial and error.  In a video game you can just keep playing again and again until you succeed.  In a Eurostyle game you lose, but the elements of competition have been strongly minimized in typical Eurostyle games so that people are much less likely to feel disappointed about losing.  They focus more on what they’re doing in a game than on the possibility of losing.  In a strategy game the possibility of losing looms larger.

    Whatever the reasons, in practice, in game playing we have many more players now who prefer to improvise, or to adapt to circumstances with short-range plans, and fewer players who are willing to plan for the long term, which is a necessary element of strategy.  Yes, we know the old maxim that a plan does not survive beyond first contact with the enemy, but that is less true in a game than in reality, and even in reality we know that the planning itself can include contingencies to deal with what happens when we first contact enemy.



    When I was 24 Diplomacy was succeeded as my favorite game by Dungeons & Dragons, about as different from Diplomacy as two games can be.  Much of the reason was that I no longer was keen to play against other people and D&D is a cooperative game, though there is still intelligent opposition as conducted by the referee.  For the rest I had always been a fan of fantasy, and the role-playing aspects of being a goodguy, a hero (not a thug like the typical D&D player), attracted me.  D&D is very versatile insofar as it can be played as a strategic game or it can be played as a game where players have to adapt or improvise, or it can even be played as a semi-random game (what I used to call “lever pulling/button pushing D&D”). 
    Moreover, it can be played as a wargame or it can be played as storytelling, and I played it is a wargame.  To me D&D is a microcosm of life because it shows that sometimes no matter what you do things are going to come out against you, but it also shows that you can minimize the number of times that you need to depend on luck to get you through.  Despite it being a game where lots of dice are rolled you can play it so that you rarely have to get a particular role to succeed.  (I’m talking about first edition D&D.  Fourth edition D&D is not much like first edition.  Much of the decision-making and strategic depth has been removed and it’s really hard to fatally screw up, rather like World of Warcraft and most other video games.)

    D&D is still my favorite commercial game to play, but my favorite “game” is the game of designing games. And I don’t design role-playing games.  Perhaps because, as one boardgamer said, they are too “loosey goosey”, too imprecise, for my taste in design.

    Someday I’ll get my long spiel about what constitutes strategy and depth in a game up to speed.
    END

    [This blog is posted, now, in as many as five places, reaching a quite different readership at each place.  The blog has existed since 2004 but I "spread out" only in 2011.

    The "home" is at:
    http://pulsiphergamedesign.blogspot.com/

    On Boardgamegeek (and the other geek sites) it is at:
    http://boardgamegeek.com/blog/435/pulsipher-game-design

    On boardgame designers forum it is at:
    http://www.bgdf.com/blog/1509

    Some, but not all, of the posts are also on my "expert" blog on Gamasutra, the site for video game professionals:
    http://gamasutra.com/blogs/LewisPulsipher/774/

    And recently I've added "Fortress: AT" ("Ameritrash") to the list:
    http://fortressat.com/index.php/blogs/myblog-admin/

    The sometimes-lively discussions at BGG and Gamasutra, where most of the readers are,  are usually very different from one another.  I suspect fortress:at will also be quite different from the others.]

  • Strategic Titles

            For the last few months I've been sitting on an article, largely because my understanding of the subject matter changes every two weeks.  My son aged 12 has been attending a Strategy Gaming "club" that meets on alternate Saturdays for six to eight hours per session.  Lunch is eaten on the fly, coaching occurs throughout the session and after-action reports occur at the end of the day.  Conquest of the Empire, Axis & Allies, Joan of Arc, mostly long DoaM games where conflict and long-term goals are featured parts of the play, more due to their opportunity for "bigness" than any particular thematic preference.

     Age of Mythology

            The guy running these games is no slouch, and to date he's been eating the cost of three copies for each game and often has special laminated boards to increase the playing area for the less steady hands of the elementary school kids.  Each session features a single game played across three age groups, elementary, middle school, and high school.  The level of immersion he's coaxing out of these kids is pretty impressive, and he has an established curric that coincides with the lesson plans of the teachers in the local schools.  He himself is in the education field and his approach document for Strategic Gaming is very impressive.

            The larger games have served him well but he's looking to broaden horizons now with less belligerent, shorter titles to change the mix and fill gaps when a table finishes early and still has an hour or two to play.  In particular he's looking for games that breed critical thinking and an ability to identify and execute a long-term strategy as opposed to reacting to conditions in the moment.  We're talking games where teachable moments come into the play.  Given this is more in F:At's baileywick than BGG's I've opted to pose the question here:  what are the shorter titles that still have decision-then-luck mechanics involved and keep cooperation and competition in the mix?  He's looking to make another purchase and has some candidates (to the tune of $400+ dollars -- we parents will be picking up the bill for this one for obvious reasons) but the titles are yet to be confirmed.

                            S.

     

     

  • Struggle for the Galactic Empire: First play

    I recently received this game from my Secret Santa (Yep. I still engage in this "silly" BGG event) and it was an excellent choice, as I was really interested in this game and not very sure of its availability where I live...

  • Stuff my dad says about boardgames

    A recent email exchange with my father, who is 68 years old and blasts the tv so loudly that my mom is threatening to move in with us.

    _______________________________________________________________

    Dear Dad,

    Go get a freaking hearing aid and quit punishing mom.  Also, it will allow you to talk with your family, which may or may not be something you want to do.

    Love,

    Mark

    -----------------------------

    Jeff  to me

    8:20 PM (23 hours ago)

    Dear Mark,

    Quit playing boring board games away from home with geeks and stay home and save your marriage.

    Love,

    Dad

    -----------------------------

    Mark to Jeff

    8:41 PM (23 hours ago)

    What? I can't hear you.

    -----------------------------

    Jeff to me

    8:48 PM (23 hours ago)

    I can't read your email because I am playing Monopoly.

     

  • Stupid Geek Boys

    The Spawn related the following story to me today.  

    This morning she noticed a boy on the school bus reading a comic book. 

    "Whatcha' reading," she asked? 

    "Manga," he replied. 

    "I like X-men and Wonder Woman," she told him. 

    "Those are comics. This is a graphic novel." 

    The boy then explained to her how superior Manga and graphic novels were to American [sneer] comic books. Also that his life's ambition was to attend PAX, the biggest video game convention in the world.

    "I've been to a board game convention," she told him, "Is it like that?"

    He then explained to her why video games are superior to board games, and why PAX is superior to her dumb [sneer] board game convention.

    "My mom's going to PAX," she told him, "She said I can come if I wanted"

    Boy's jaw drops.

    "She also said I could invite a friend."

    She then flounced off to another seat.

     After relating this to me, she asked me why the boy was so mean to her.

    I told her not worry about it. He was destined to spend his life on internet forums complaining that girls don't share his interests. Also, points to her for turning the screw.

    "Whatever," she replied, "Wonder Woman is not dumb. Wolverine could totally take those skinny Mango dudes. And boys are just flippin' stupid." 

     

     

     

  • Stupid Piece of Shit!

    Sony Releases New Stupid Piece Of Shit That Doesn't Fucking Work

  • Summer Gaming Challenge -- Bolide

     

    It took more than a bit of time to come up with what my Summer Gaming Challenge title would be.  There were several on the list that seemed to be in the neighborhood of good choices, but most were games that got plenty of traffic or had gotten recent playtime by me, both of which weren’t in the spirit of this Summer’s challenge.  Then I recalled that Bolide had sat for years on my shelf.  I recalled a reread of the rules last year (or maybe two years ago now) that had surprised me in their scope, and it certainly isn’t a game you see talked about here or anywhere else to any great amount.

     

     

    And certainly not to any great accuracy either, for this may be the single most misrepresented game I’ve ever played.  Bring up its name and invariably someone will pipe in with “there’s a web site where you can play Bolide, it’s a vector racing game.”  I even had the displeasure of having JC Lawrence explain in one of my threads that “given an hour, I can determine the optimal path around any track, at which point the game becomes trivial.”  Well isn’t that special.  The only problem is that, well, he’s wrong.  Mr. Lawrence’s optimal path is going to be rudely interrupted when someone shoves him off of the space he’s claimed on it.  I don’t mean take it before he gets there, I mean take his car, move it aside, and take his spot.  Bolide’s rules explain exactly how to do that, and it’s very much an important part of the game.  This isn't a game with cut-and-dried movement rules.

    For those of you unaware how vector racing works I’ll give you a quick synopsis.  Fundamentally it’s a way to model how cars work in the real world.  Changing your speed or direction takes a bit of time to accomplish.  In Bolide your movement this turn affects your movement next turn.  You are able to change your speed or direction next turn from what you did this turn, just not very much.  This is executed by use of a little pawn that precedes your car.  It mirrors your movement this turn, and it defines where you’re allowed to move next turn.

     

    The example above shows the car moving down one spot and three to the right.  Your pawn does the same thing from the new position of your car, moving down one spot and three to the right.  On your next turn you’re allowed to pick any spot that’s within two of the pawn in any direction, two above, two below, two to the left, two to the right.  The result is that you can move to exactly where the pawn is to maintain the exact same speed and direction, or you can adjust your move to make your car pass the pawn by as much as two (accelerating), move short of the pawn (decelerating) or move to one side or the other to change your direction, Generally it’s a combination of these.  At the end of the turn your pawn moves to match your car’s movement again, so it recaptures your current speed and direction again, and forces you to deal with whatever that may bring on your next turn.  In short, it works the way real cars do – it takes time to change speed or direction and you need to be looking down the road to adjust, especially if the track takes a hard turn in the near future.  If you’re not careful you can find yourself forced to move seven spaces in a turn that only offers four.

    This is the Bolide that the world thinks they know, and the games you play on the Internet implement Vector Movement very nicely.  I’ll be honest, it’s tough to get the hang of, and this is a brain-burning game.  Anyone with a couple of beers in them is going to find themselves in the grass in short order.  But Bolide only uses Vector Movement as its base.  What you won’t find on the Internet is the rest of the rules that Bolide implements, particularly Sharp Braking, Slip Streaming, Boosting and “Engagement” which is a lovely euphemism for barging in and taking someone’s currently held position.  You may get to a position first, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to keep it.  The last two of these four movement options involve a roll of the dice, and the results can be more than a bit of a crap shoot, resulting in success, failure, damage to either or both vehicles, or the dropping of the yellow flag that could wipe out the carefully crafted lead you’ve been working on for the last half lap.  Add to all this the ability to customize your car away from what the other players are using and you have more than a bit of unpredictability built into your pre-calculated optimal path.  So in spite of a cold, calculating reputation, Bolide can be quite a ride, whether you want it to be or not.

    So game 1 after going years without playing involved a complete reread of the rules last night and then a solo session today to make sure that I had a handle on everything prior to bringing it out with other players.  In the past we’ve played with Hard Braking and Slip Streaming, but not using Boosting or Engagement, nor using the chart that allows you to attempt Hard Braking after your tires are completely shot.  I wanted to run the whole Megillah in all its glory so that I could both explain the game in detail to start, and offer coaching as the game progressed so that rules would be explained in situ.  Two laps of three cars would run me about 90 minutes even with the customized cars and all the rules, especially if the cars stretched out their positions on the track a bit.

     

    Well, that stretch part didn’t happen.  The cars I was running managed to stick to each other like glue, constantly vying for the same space.  The example above is a prime example.  The Red and Green cars had tangled earlier trying to jump off to a quick start with Green trying to steal position away from Red.  The cars tapped and spun, leaving both of them a little behind as Blue avoided the scrum and jumped out to a lead.  Blue customized for Hard Braking, taking soft tires that would let him jam hard in the turns three times before the pit, with a reinforced undercarriage giving him a fourth.  The turn above is quite tight, and Blue’s natural strategy was to go into it wide open, utilizing Hard Braking to ignore his pawn position, dump virtually all speed and simply turn a hard left.  That’s what Hard Braking is – ignore your pawn, drop immediately to speed 2 and make any turn that is less than 90 degrees.  It allows you to enter a corner at Ludicrous Speed and leave rubber on the track to avoid hitting the wall (or the river in this particular case.)  Green, in spite of its Engine Boost tuning and fast tires decided to do the same, using one of its only two Hard Brakes on the tightest turn in the entire track, but there’s a problem, at least from a Vector Movement perspective.  The rules only allow a Hard Brake turn of less than 90 degrees, and if green proceeded straight (to the position just above Blue) he can’t turn due south, a very favorable option given the track bending back on itself.  Blue would maintain the lead position, meaning Green would waste its Hard Braking maneuver to no particularly good use, especially with Red coming screaming in behind him.  So, he did what any self-respecting win-at-all-cost F1 driver would do – he pressed his point in the turn, attempting to dislodge Blue from its damn-near perfect position.  A successful move would take the lead, force Blue to move to the left of his current position which would suck with Red coming into the mix soon, and Green would have a nice slice of clear air to take into the upcoming short straightaway.  A roll of the 12-sider (result of 3) and a quick review of the Kick-His-Ass-Off-My-Space Table –

     

    . . . shows that Green’s customizations built for speed got taken out of play because he bashed in his side wing against Blue’s car.  Blue escaped undamaged and got to keep the position, Green had to settle for falling in behind him, and awful position because he still hadn’t cleared the inside post of the turn.

    In this particular case Green had half a dozen choices, including a very aggressive one that could have given him the magical spot in the turn that every car on the track wants to be in.  Blue got it first, but wouldn’t necessarily get to keep it.  Had Green played more conservatively he could have followed Blue through the turn and looked for an opportunity to pass farther down the road.  But that didn’t feel right to me personally for the car on the track most crafted for pressing the throttle.  A different roll of the die would have produced a very different result.  Blue with his more conservative setup likely would have followed a safer line, preserving his car to avoid a pit stop at the end of the first lap of a two lap race.  Avoiding that pit would be a tactical coup, especially in light of a damaged Green and only one other competitor who’s more aggressive design choices would likely invite a pit stop as well.

    The odd thing about Bolide is that it manages to be a tight thinking game as well as a press-your-luck-stick-your-buddy kind of game at the same time.  I don’t think most people that have heard of it realize that, instead thinking that they know the game without ever having tried it.  As in most racing games there’s a bit of luck required to finish in the winner’s circle, but what I found myself thinking about with each move was whether it was “time” yet.  Do you make the jump from the slip stream and overboost your engine now, with a tight corner looming just beyond it?  Or do you play it safe and stay in the pocket waiting for a better opportunity next turn?  This is largely what racing is for the drivers, keeping it tight turn after turn until someone slips just enough to let you exchange positions.  Bolide is at times mentally grueling, but so is real racing.  A very enjoyable session.

    S.

     

  • Summer Gaming Challenge -- Bolide Going the Distance

     

    I had put word out to my friends that I wanted to get at least one session of Bolide in this summer, a full game using the full rules.  Having the game be the Summer Challenge gave me extra barging rights, and this past Tuesday proved the perfect moment as the one guy in our group that hasn't cared for it much in the past was away.  I was lucky enough to have it with me in spite of driving the beater this week.  We played one of Love Letter's cousins (that was lackluster), then Bolide, then most of a game of Thunder Alley.  Without a doubt, Bolide presented the best buzz for the money.

    This was on the English track with four cars and we wrung out all the rules.  Each player customized their cars and I chose the full-fuel hard tires ("tyres" as written in the English translation of the Italian original) version that gave me three hard braking maneuvers, but I chose the transmission customization since, with full fuel and slow tires, I would need to be reaching for the booster on any number of occasions.  My three buddies grabbed more aggressive configurations with one car going with the balls-to-the-wall setup of soft tires, half fuel and booster setup.  All cars on the road would be faster than me, but I would be able to bullshit in three turns and, with a full load of fuel I wouldn't likely need to Pit when they would be forced to.  The challenge for lap one was to stay in view of the leader, then get by him in the Pit and hope to hold out against his better speed in lap two.

    First half of the race, some rules still settling in.Coming out of the first serious turn in lap one is shown at left, and it shows our second plays after a very rare pace car moment in Bolide.  Cars line up one behind the other, and my slow start let me pick up a few boxes worth of distance on the front-runner.  (I'm the red car in the back.)  Note the white pawn on the track -- a place holder for whatever car is in the process of moving so that the player can more freely throw things around a bit.  If you screw up you know where you started.

    There's a timer included in the box but we never used it, largely because you can be working out your move in advance as others play.  On the rare occasion that someone steps into your way or takes your spot you have the option tucking in right behind them and using the draft rule to more or less reach the same position on your next turn, or trying to kick them out of your chosen spot with the "engagement" rules, something we made plenty of use of.  I'd guess we were on that chart about fifteen times in two laps.  In the corners a particular spot can be much more critical and the English track has one line of points on the tightest corner that are critical to your success.  Players contended for positions both times around but I was unlucky enough to be trailing the first time, leading the second, so wasn't in the scrum.

    Near the end of the first lap.My red car is the slowest car on the track but holding second place through good work in the turns, and certainly maintaining my goal for turn one -- in view of first place.  It's hard to appreciate from a static photo but a look at the velocity markers indicates that green is going faster than me and has no pressure to slow down -- he's into the Pit for sure and will get fresh tires for use in extra hard braking maneuvers in lap two.  He has to pit.  He isn't far enough ahead and he knows it, and what became apparent to us was that the long, diagonal straightaway (right hand side of the photo) on this particular course does not favor the fast cars -- a limitation on your longest axis is not a limitation on your combined axes, and 5x5 is about as fast as you can go on that patch of track regardless of your car's top speed.  It's still plenty fast, but 7x7 or 8x8 isn't something that can practically play itself out.  So my car's slower top speed of 5 wasn't terribly punishing.  It pays to analyze the track to be played before customizing your car, and I had gotten lucky by grabbing about the best setup possible for this one.  More care will be taken to review the lay of the land the next time we play.

    At this point in the race we were punching out our turns in seconds.  In the curves we were still having an occasional delay as people tried to work out how to handle hard braking and how to wiggle around the inside edge of the turn.  But after the first lap we all had it down.  As one player would finish the next was reaching for their car, and a steady cadence of "five spaces over, two down; five spaces over, two down" as first the car and then the marker moved was rhythm of the play.  Only on rare occasions was someone counting to the turn, we had enough experience to shoot from the hip and hit our marks.

    What becomes apparent as you get a game under your belt is how much the vector mechanic mirrors real life.  Bend wide out before the turn, aim for the inside edge, finish wide to keep your speed up.  In a real car your tires are converting the kinetic energy in one direction into kinetic energy in another, and of course that's not what's happening in the game.  The game is much more contrived but it's still intuitive, and it results in the same mechanical concepts as you'll find in real driving.  I'd be curious to see bumps to the rules that imitate drifting in a rear-wheel drive car or nose jamming with a brake tap in a front-wheel, but I don't know how you'd do that or if it would be worth it.  Food for thought.

    As it turns out I really hit my stride in lap two, being much more efficient in the turns and managing to stay ahead of the faster cars behind me.  They were closing, and on a track with two long straights they likely would have caught me.  But as it was I crossed with two turns to spare, this on a track with a tight turn just before the finish line.  Good racing, I thanked those present for indulging my request and got positive reviews from all in the room.  My one friend is not a big fan of the game, but I may keep it in the back of the car for nights he doesn't show.  It will make the trip to WBC this year as well and I'll see if I can con some folks into releasing their inner gearhead.

    S.

     

     

     

  • Summoner Wars Impressions

    Had  a chance recently to play a review copy of Summoner Wars, and I came away fairly impressed with it.