Playtesters wanted for Project: Kaiju on TTS

Orlok, Sag, these are the changes we're looking to try out after watching you guys play and getting your feedback.

-Defense being handled AS YOU ARE ATTACKED instead of before the end of your turn, and when attacked you can spend 1-3 AP PER ATTACK. So no overall max on defense.

-The event deck just handles military units, no additional effects. The cards will say that the military either escalates to the next level or any with LOS wilk shoot at the monster with the most health. No upkeep, just a threat you really need to keep your eyes on.

The Defense Dice thing -- a couple of ways to go on that. Are you allocating dice left over from your turn, and then you replenish at the beginning of your next turn, or are you already replenished and are allocating dice from your next turn's supply? I was never very sorely pressed for actions, so I don't know how much of a difference the two options would make. If I had been allowed more than two attacks then managing the action points would be much more critical, and the question above would be more interesting. I didn't move around as much as you indicate other players have though.

I like your change to the event deck, and it makes much more sense thematically. Presumably the "escalation" means an upgrade to the new units that come onto the board?

That's correct.

The defense thing...I really think that doing it in response (so during another player's turn in response to being attacked, before you refresh) is key to making it more intuitive because it makes more sense narratively. Plus, the first player on the first turn doesn't have to worry about defense before they get their second turn. The second player does. That's not a surprise you want to leave for folks to discover not is it something you want to print in the rulebook. You'd basically being saying, "We realize this is less than ideal."

I think that option is fine. It reverses the measured response -- how much do I need to reserve to protect myself? Presumably they need to decide before the attack is rolled.

In other playtests were people running out of action points? They didn't seem terribly sparse for me. The reason I ask is that you currently limit each critter to two attacks per turn, so how many actions to reserve for defense isn't terribly difficult to decide if you have three left over all the time. If you can spend more somehow, the scarcity comes into play and giving up potential defense to get another shot in becomes an interesting decision.

Depends on the player.

I tend to run dangerously low on action points, especially with Gigantra. I leave no attacks against the other monster up to the chance of the normal attacks. So I smashing buildings constantly and trying my best to move out of LOS.

But yes, making defense an interesting decision has been a tough but to crack since day one. I'm hoping this change, being able to make multiple defense rolls and paying for each, combined with the fact that you might want to leave APs for the military to soak up if you're winning will make that choice stronger.

See you tonight on the channel at 8

Got to play this game last night, and spoiler alert, it's a ton of fun! A really good balance of action and strategy, with monsters that feel very different from each other, yet balanced.

I played Not-Ghidora vs. Not-Kong, and even though I was reduced to only one of my three heads, I managed to fell the great Ape with a mighty breath weapon. For his part, he was bounding around the city on top of buildings, attempting to body slam me, which he did, many times.

If you get a chance to try it out on TTS, I don't think you'll regret it. Unless you hate dice.

Josh and Al - have you written up a rule book? If so, I'd love to read it.

hotseatgames wrote: Josh and Al - have you written up a rule book? If so, I'd love to read it.

It's next on the To Do list. We'll let you know when it's ready

This was another fun match to watch. We're very, very happy with how everything works and fits together now. The last run of changes felt just right.

Also, I had a thought last night. Obviously this is based on a single game and might be total nonsense. Feel free to completely disregard.

One thing that occurred to me was that each game is not overly likely to see too many powers come out. I think my power deck had 8 cards, and I only brought out 3. This does keep things very different from game to game, but I was thinking about Cosmic Frog and how it encourages lots of power changes over the course of a game. What if:

The row of 3 powers is essentially a river. Each new round, if there is an open spot in your river, you place a FACEDOWN power from your hand in the leftmost spot. Cards shift to the right. This does not cost energy, but the card can't be used. You pay energy = to the cost of the card to READY it, as normal, but you could also make the cost one less at each track spot if desired to a minimum of 1. At the end of a round, any USED powers will shift to the right. READY powers would shift to the left if necessary to make room. If a USED power shifts off of the track, it's gone. You can pay energy to READY the card before it goes off the track if you want to keep it.

This would apply a time pressure to powers since, once used, they are subject to elimination. It also brings more powers into each game. It also opens up an option for game effects to force a shift in the track, etc.

Very interesting!

I've noticed that the average number of cards left in the deck at the end of the game is 2-3. I feel like that's a good place to be at, not seeing all of the powers each game but getting a good variety of them. However, that right there is the kind of thing that I look at and say that that's a system for a new monster all together.

Ironically enough, I kind of want to take that "river" idea and use it for the pollution themed monster I've had kicking around since day 1.

I also REALLY want to try that giving health to another monster team game thing. We're currently thinking limiting the number of attacks on a monster is a gamey-yet-necessary way to handle it, but I *love* the idea of putting yourself at risk to help a partner while at the same time (unless you're Guardian X-1) giving yourself a better recharge rate. Might be interesting to say that you can drop below a recharge bracket, but you can't be raised back into one.

Also, after this is published and wildly successful, in between the slew of expansion material I hope you convert this to a Mech game, since it's perfect for it.

hotseatgames wrote: Also, after this is published and wildly successful, in between the slew of expansion material I hope you convert this to a Mech game, since it's perfect for it.

I have one in my back pocket. It's a little bit different, it's in space and involves control points on olanetd instead of buildings, and the three different types of points that power your moves circle around in your reactor core Mancala style.

Oh, and another thing I love about the shared health team game idea...

Anytime we've talked team game, I've always not loved that there's no actual teamwork involved. Unless we were to come up with monster specific team moves, which I do not have the fucking energy to do, it would be a thing where it would work with 4 players, but you'd prefer to be playing with 2. That idea introduces a concrete reason to want to play it with 4. I'm dying to try it out.

Team moves, eh? Simaximus absolutely needs to be able to throw his teammate like a building.

Maybe someday. It took long enough coming up with the 32 powers (which used to be 48!) took long enough.