Hullo, everyone. We'll have a look at an often overlooked mechanic today, the tie-breaker.
The tie breaker is often relegated to 'most money', or 'first to do X', which, while functional, can be... mundane. If not set properly, it may also favor one strategy over another; which may lead to stale play. We want excitement, adventure and tension, right?
-'One more round'. Everyone who is tied plays one more round. If only the tied players playing is infeasible, then have everyone play one more round. ...I actually like that second option better. It would create serious tension for the leaders to attempt to end the game while everyone who wasn't part of the tie desperately scrabbles to get ahead.
-'Final Battle'. This is more for games with a battle system. The tied players have one final struggle over who reigns supreme and who is buying sodas for the next week. You could even put it in the rules that way...
-Group vote. Have the other players choose who won. This could cause some animosity between people, but it makes players think twice about being a backstabbing little bastage if they start taking the lead. In this instance, you could end up in a tie twice over. In that instance, it probably would be a tie... or they could...
-Rock-Paper-Scissor. Have the tied parties play rock paper scissor. This would only really work for lighter fare; a six hour gulag through stat tables and strategic maneuver in an attempt to come out on top should NOT be determined this way. But it would be funny if ASL did have this as an obscure rule.
-No ties possible. This fixes the problem entirely. There are a few ways to do this...
--First to the space. In games with variable turn order, the first to the score space wins.
--Only one score marker per space. The trailing player simply skips over the leader. This could cause other issues of people hanging back in their actions, though...
--Have a 'leader board'. The game starts with the order of players' positions. Actions would manipulate position and cause you to rise. That would make for an agressive game...
That's all for now. Keep on designing, yo!
Phil
Comments
No tie breakers
Or you could simply determine that there are no tie breakers. I usually find this the more preferable choice.
http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/2008/07/24/game-design/negotiated-dissection/
No Ties
Unless there is a solid reason, avoid tie breakers. Personally I would attempt to refine the game so scoring to a tie is rare before adding in a tie breaker rule.
Whoops, wrong link
Correct link:
http://kanga.nu/~claw/blog/2008/05/08/game-design/tie-a-yellow-ribbon-ar...
Better not to have too many draws
I suppose it depends on the game, but designing a game where it is rare or impossible to draw is ideal. If both players are completely balanced, it isn't too bad for them to come out even. If it happens too often, there may be something wrong with the game. I would hate to play a game for hours where my opponent and I are completely equal, but someone wins because they were lucky enough to win in RPS.
-SBR
Abstract Strategy Games