I'm always trying new ways of looking at typical game mechanics and twisting them into something new and thematic.
I'm putting this out there for two reasons 1) To get me to work on this project. and 2) To show people there are more ways to represent a resource system than just a typical Magic-esque escalating resource system.
I've always been a fan of mecha battle and Robotech stands as my top anime of all time. To me, that show represented a time in my life when I really started to explore who I was as an artist and figure out what I liked and disliked. Of all the scenes in the show, there's one that sticks out in my mind...a short scene where 2 rivals duke it out on a 3d mecha fighting arcade game.
As I grew as a game designer, I've dreamed of trying to recreate this type of battle in some kind of analog game. I've looked all over and I've seen some games that give that fast-dueling mecha action, but nothing exactly what I'm thinking of (Virtual ON really got it close) and I wanted to see it in an analog game.
...so I'm designing one myself.
There's a couple of main ideas I'm working with:
The "disk wars" system. There's something intriguing about this mechanic, but it doesn't seem as exploited as I would expect. Warhammer Diskwars is the last game that incorporated it and after a couple of expansions, it seemed to die out. As something different to the table (and a bit more thematic), I'd be using hexagonal disks instead of circular disks. Before movement, a player can twist the character however they wanted, but when they moved, they have to move straight according to the flat sides (or slightly veer off while moving). To me, it gives a hex-like battlefield while allowing a mech to go in any direction...like sideways. This also means the board can be anything you want, so I'll have to do a lot of testing.
A modified resource system. Back in the day, I spent my days building mechs for the BattleTech RPG. Even though I never really had anyone to play with, I still built mechs in case I somehow did play (and I did...one time). Instead of having to spend resources to power abilities, it will be the opposite; weapons and abilities will incur "heat"...some weapons will incur more heat than others. Every turn, your mecha will "cooldown" 1 unit of heat. If you go over your heat sink limit, your mech will shut down until it's cool enough to operate again. If you reach a certain heat threshold, your mech will explode. While not a real "change" in resources, it's certainly more thematic. Of course there are other ways to cooldown your mech...
Transformation. One of the things I love about what Robotech and Transformers did was that the actual transformation of the vehicles was a tool for combat. While in Robotech there was typically three modes of transformation, It would be easier to incorporate transformation as two modes: robot and vehicle, as two sides of a card. Therefore, flipping a card will indicate a transformation. Transformation won't change things like HP or weapons load, but it will change things like Agility, Speed, Accuracy, and...wait for it...heat dissipation. This will force a player to constantly transform in order to cool their engines and use their high heat generating weapons when they need to.
So I believe I've got the elements of a good, thematic game that has a lot of potential. While it appears simple, I think it needs more simplification and a lot of testing. I've been toying with a missile system, but I'll talk about that when I nail it down.
Feedback would be appreciated, but not required. Thanks for reading!
Comments
I love both of those: Robotech and Transformers!!!
Brings me back to my childhood... I was lucky enough to get as a GIFT "Optimus Prime". I remember thinking to myself: "He's so small in reality!" LOL
But that was an awesome gift and I remember it!
About Robotech, that was a Saturday morning cartoon that I only got to watch a couple times... Don't remember if it was because it was too early or just because the American Stations only broadcasted a limited amount of episodes.
That idea of flipping the card to "cool-down" is interesting.
I wish "Kids Would React To" "Robotech"...! Would be cool to share that with this younger generation. Especially after watching how much MOST (not all) kids love Pokemon (the music, the anime, the card game, the creatures, etc.)
Anyhow your new venture sounds very worthy of your attention.
Wish you all the best with it!
Update: If you really want to "mix-it-up" rather than having a transformation from "Robot" -> "Vehicle", I would go the Robotech route and go from "Vehicle" -> "Hybrid Assault Mode". Robots, while cool - I don't think they ADD to YOUR "genre"... A "Hybrid"-mode would probably MORE CREATIVE and make you ponder how to transform from one to the other... Of course feel free to use "Robot" - I just personally would like some kind of freakish assault mode - which causes more damage but incurs more "heat" (as you put it...)
But that's just my personal preference.
I feel using "Robots" makes it TOO "Robotech"/"Transformers". A Hybrid - would be more "original". Plus I think it would be more FUN to create all of the *unique* Hybrid "machines". :P
The other games that were interesting are "Mechwarrior". That's also another "genre" of "robots". Although there was no "transformation", there was HEAT and you could configure your "Mechs" with all kinds of weapons like Lasers, Particle Cannons, Autocannons, etc...
But I think the "Robotech"-Hybrid "machine" is the most NOVEL of the concept. It's also the LESS EXPLORED route... If going the least seen way - I'd go that way...
"Mechcommander" was a RTS game that had you trying to defeat miniature mechs in a 2D angular view... Was also a pretty interesting "Robot" incarnation.
Update 2: If you look at some of the "KNOCK-OFF" Transformers - you'll probably find more "machine"-hybrids than the transformers. There was a whole other set of toys - on the cheaper range - that could allow you to take a vehicle "into something else". Now because those machines did not resemble anything we actually knew (think robots), they were not as popular... But I remember have a 2 Foot Robot that could transform like into 5 or 6 shapes, all which were some freakish "machine-like" modes... It was cool too. Just had one of those...
I've been doing some designing...
The terms I've come up with are
The "S.W.I.T.C.H." system (instead of "transform") which stands for Specialized Warfare Incorporating Transformation in Combat Habitat.
And the missile system will be called "C.R.A.Y.O.N." which stand for Compact Rocket Adjustable Yaw Orientation and Navigation. It will use a targeting system similar to X-Wing, but custom to my mechanic.
Hybrid sounds a little more feasible, though things are really loose at this point; I'll definitely keep it in mind. I kinda liken my post to a sculptor just slapping clay together just trying to get the shape down, but no real details are emerging.
Flipping the card won't really be to cooldown as much as it's another mode they can attack with...it won't be as accurate but will have the added bonus of cooling down the mech faster. So yeah, it will kinda force players to switch constantly between both modes to balance their heat.
But we'll see.
The more you post, the more I
The more you post, the more I like you.
Have you seen this? http://mobileframezero.com/mfz/
Mecha made from Legos. There's one that looks like my all-time-favorite Battletech mech, the locust.
Also, scans of art from the Japanese Battletech books if you want to see a Rifleman that looks even more like a Destroid than a Robotech Destroid: http://www.gearsonline.net/series/battletech/
I love crayon, because I imagine the missile heads looking like the tip of a Crayola. Also, how about A.C.R.O.N.Y.M. for something like Aerial Craft Reconnaissance Operations Nonlinear Yield Munitions.
Soulfinger wrote:The more you
Have you seen this? http://mobileframezero.com/mfz/
Mecha made from Legos. There's one that looks like my all-time-favorite Battletech mech, the locust.
Also, scans of art from the Japanese Battletech books if you want to see a Rifleman that looks even more like a Destroid than a Robotech Destroid: http://www.gearsonline.net/series/battletech/
I love crayon, because I imagine the missile heads looking like the tip of a Crayola. Also, how about A.C.R.O.N.Y.M. for something like Aerial Craft Reconnaissance Operations Nonlinear Yield Munitions.
Haha, that's funny!
The original thought was that when you fired your missiles, you'd start with a range stick similar to the stick used in X-Wing, except that it's divided into 3 piece instead of one long piece. Each "stick" would look like a crayon...flat on the front with tapered sides and completely flat on the end...hence "crayon". When missiles are off, each stick represents a turn, but because the stick is tapered at the front, you could essentially veer the missile towards the opponent, if they decided to dodge, which would mimic "heat seeking".
But after some arts and crafts experiments today, I found that a convex front and a concave end would work better (kinda like the movement markers in Star Wars Armada without the "click"), but still limited (the stick could only go so far to the left or right). Then missiles could appear like they are "lazy" like they are in Robotech.
But going back to LEGOs. I'm definitely looking into those things. My wife is pregnant with our first child and this would be the right time for me to start looking into LEGOs...especially mecha LEGOs!
The Gearsonline site you linked has some really cool scans. I'll definitely use it for my prototypes and may even give me inspiration for functions. Thanks!
I wonder if there is someone
I wonder if there is someone here who isn't a giant robot fan :)
Anyway. I like the idea of flipping to the other side both indicating state AND used for movement.
I imagine the side you were at the start of the round indicates the current transformation mode, right?
I would force straight line, using facing for the fighter-jet mode.
I.e. you can only 'fly' straight or 30 degrees left/right and you must 'fly' to either your full movement, or full movement -1 (so that you could change the mode).
While the 'robot' mode could move in any direction and change facing freely, yet having much much slower movement.
I would use the hex grid though.
Unless you're using miniatures, having free terrain brings you little real benefit, while a board would allow loads of information (like terrain rule modifiers) be embedded on the board itself to speed-up play.
It also helps providing similar experience to the players. As terrain setup influences your usual wargaming match A LOT.
Not sure about the heat thing. Sounds like a lot of maintenance each turn.
I would use something like this instead:
You can have X actions per turn normally.
You can use X+Y action, but get an overheated token.
If you are overheated, you roll a die if you fire your weapons. If you fail - you explode.
You have to spend one round without firing weapons/changing form to discard an overheated token.
How heavy do you see this game? I.e. memoir'44 heavy or warhammer 40K heavy?
Not heavy at all, ElKobold.
The fact I'm not using miniatures and using a disk wars system (with a hex token instead of a circle disk) is what's making my game unique. Essentially you can play anywhere where there's table space, which makes this easier to set up and play with the same strategy options as a miniatures game. The trouble with a hex grid is that you can't do true sideways movement (or forward depending on how the grid is set up). By giving the option to turn the disk before movement, you can give the feel of a hex board without the restriction a hex board gives.
The state of the mech is a card (that flips and has the adjusted stats for its state) and the mech itself is a hex token (that flips for movement); they are two separate things.
Then there's ANOTHER card for the mech base stats (HP, flavor text, etc), its heat sink indicator, its armament, and the pic.
So the mech is represented by three things: The hex disk (indicating position and movement), the state card (flipping to either robot or vehicle and shows adjusted stats on each side), and the stat card, which is more like a control panel showing static stats like heat indicator, HP, etc.
Heat is simple. It's just a meter on the stat card. You use a weapon or do something, the heat rises. When you are moving in vehicle mode or when you wait, the heat falls. It's the same as a resource system., but it makes more sense because you aren't acquiring any kind of resources to fuel anything in a mech battle.
Again, I'm still piecing things together...figuring out a solid turn order and gameplay (I've played with command cards, a deck, dice, many things) is the biggest priority.
I'm trying to stay away from dice, but if I end up going with dice, I may do a d10 instead of a standard d6.
radioactivemouse wrote:The
Board may bring A LOT of flavor though. Two Mechs battling around a ruined city is one thing and around a stack of books - is another.
Miniature games usually use tonns of terrain. Flipping tokens around those would not be very convenient I think.
But hey, that's easy to test. Maybe I`m wrong.
The trouble with a hex grid is that you can't do true sideways movement (or forward depending on how the grid is set up). By giving the option to turn the disk before movement, you can give the feel of a hex board without the restriction a hex board gives.
True. However, restrictions aren't always bad. Restrictions limit your options, making the choice more streamlined. It also saves you from all the same issues that measuring games have. "hey, you've moved your mech, while flipping it".
The state of the mech is a card (that flips and has the adjusted stats for its state) and the mech itself is a hex token (that flips for movement); they are two separate things.
But... why? Wouldn't it be cooler to have a two-sided token? One side - a mech, the other - a plane? Do you really need them to be separate?
Then there's ANOTHER card for the mech base stats (HP, flavor text, etc), its heat sink indicator, its armament, and the pic.
Why can't it be on the same card? Thing is, with lots of additional cards you're making it less viable to be able to control multiple mechs by a single player. Which could be an option otherwise.
Heat is simple. It's just a meter on the stat card. You use a weapon or do something, the heat rises. When you are moving in vehicle mode or when you wait, the heat falls. It's the same as a resource system., but it makes more sense because you aren't acquiring any kind of resources to fuel anything in a mech battle.
You know what I absolutely hate in otherwise great game "Through the Ages"? Moving those culture/science sliders each turn. Sooooo annoying.
I'm trying to stay away from dice, but if I end up going with dice, I may do a d10 instead of a standard d6.
It doesn't matter which dice to use. Or if using dice or any of the alternatives like expendable coolant boosts. Just an example how to avoid using a track.
My suggestions come from personal tastes. I`m not saying you have to implement any of them, or that the ones you have in mind won't work. Just sharing what I would do differently.
Lots of points.
My suggestions come from personal tastes. I`m not saying you have to implement any of them, or that the ones you have in mind won't work. Just sharing what I would do differently.
I understand you want to try and help me, but there are very specific reasons.
Board may bring A LOT of flavor though. Two Mechs battling around a ruined city is one thing and around a stack of books - is another.
Miniature games usually use tonns of terrain. Flipping tokens around those would not be very convenient I think.
But hey, that's easy to test. Maybe I`m wrong.
I'm not sure if you know what the disk wars system is. The disk represents the figure and, when moving, is flipped end over end to indicate movement. It wouldn't make sense for a robot to be on one side and a vehicle on the other because you're using the token flip AS the movement. Again, look at Warhammer Diskwars. There has to be a separate card for transformation.
True. However, restrictions aren't always bad. Restrictions limit your options, making the choice more streamlined. It also saves you from all the same issues that measuring games have. "hey, you've moved your mech, while flipping it".
But... why? Wouldn't it be cooler to have a two-sided token? One side - a mech, the other - a plane? Do you really need them to be separate?
Why can't it be on the same card? Thing is, with lots of additional cards you're making it less viable to be able to control multiple mechs by a single player. Which could be an option otherwise.
Originally, I had wanted everything in one token...movement, stats, state, etc. But it's not practical. It's not complicated to have 1 token for movement/board position, 1 card for mech state, and 1 card for stats. Believe me, there are far more complicated setups out there.
NO MINIATURES. I believe this is the biggest trend today. It's like if I tried to make a fantasy dungeon crawler game...tons of people are doing it. I make games to bring something completely new to the table, not be like everyone else. Plus, if I make miniatures then the whole disk wars system has to be scrapped...then my game will fell like every other miniature game, which is not what I'm aiming for. I'd be competing with games like Blood Rage, Kingdom Death Monster, KrosMaster, and very other Kickstarter game that has miniatures.
My suggestions come from personal tastes. I`m not saying you have to implement any of them, or that the ones you have in mind won't work. Just sharing what I would do differently.
Food for thought: If games like Blood Rage and X-Wing dominate the casual miniatures market today, what does that mean for everyone else that's trying to make a miniatures game? They are now fighting for the tiny space in a pond where Blood Rage and X-Wing are the biggest fish. If you make a game that's clearly different, then people will notice.
My thinking is to bring the feel of miniatures in an even more compact execution. Games like X-Wing require you to have a lengthy setup. Granted it's faster than Warhammer, but it's still long for a lot of people. The reality is that not everyone will want to spend $$$ on terrain or extra miniatures for a game. If I offered the same experience with buildings and debris as flat cardboard tokens, then it's a lot easier on the wallet.
Think about it. Only a scant few people are playing Warhammer and Warhammer 40k on a regular basis. The setup is high, the play is long, but the immersion is high. Unfortunately, it's also a lot of time and money. Far more people are playing X-Wing. It's more streamlined, the miniatures are already painted, and a lot cheaper.
Yes, I'll lose immersion, but even abstract games get played a lot :)
You know what I absolutely hate in otherwise great game "Through the Ages"? Moving those culture/science sliders each turn. Sooooo annoying.
Through the Ages has many sliders, mine has 2: HP and Heat. It's not any more complicated than HP and Mana.
You bring up some really good points, but like I said, there's specific reasons why I did what I did. Of course it all has to test itself in its execution, so we'll see.
radioactivemouse wrote: I'm
I'm not sure if you know what the disk wars system is. The disk represents the figure and, when moving, is flipped end over end to indicate movement. It wouldn't make sense for a robot to be on one side and a vehicle on the other because you're using the token flip AS the movement. Again, look at Warhammer Diskwars. There has to be a separate card for transformation.
I know how it works :)
See my first comment. The side in which your token stops movement/starts next turn - is it's 'current' state.
If you want to remain in the same form - do even amount of flips. If you want to swap - do odd amount of flips.
There's no problem whatsoever for it to be two-sided. This way, change of form becomes part of movement. Which adds to strategic depth, as well as reduces amount of components needed.
Originally, I had wanted everything in one token...movement, stats, state, etc. But it's not practical. It's not complicated to have 1 token for movement/board position, 1 card for mech state, and 1 card for stats. Believe me, there are far more complicated setups out there.
What if you have 6 mechs to control? ;)
NO MINIATURES. I believe this is the biggest trend today. It's like if I tried to make a fantasy dungeon crawler game...tons of people are doing it. I make games to bring something completely new to the table, not be like everyone else. Plus, if I make miniatures then the whole disk wars system has to be scrapped...then my game will fell like every other miniature game, which is not what I'm aiming for. I'd be competing with games like Blood Rage, Kingdom Death Monster, KrosMaster, and very other Kickstarter game that has miniatures.
I`m not suggesting miniatures. In fact what I suggest is to dig deeper in the flipping mechanics. There's nothing unique in flipping itself - as you've mentioned yourself, diskwars already exist.
Food for thought: If games like Blood Rage and X-Wing dominate the casual miniatures market today, what does that mean for everyone else that's trying to make a miniatures game? They are now fighting for the tiny space in a pond where Blood Rage and X-Wing are the biggest fish. If you make a game that's clearly different, then people will notice.
Miniature is not a mechanic. It's just a glorified meeple. Miniature game is not a genre.
My thinking is to bring the feel of miniatures in an even more compact execution. Games like X-Wing require you to have a lengthy setup. Granted it's faster than Warhammer, but it's still long for a lot of people. The reality is that not everyone will want to spend $$$ on terrain or extra miniatures for a game. If I offered the same experience with buildings and debris as flat cardboard tokens, then it's a lot easier on the wallet.
What i suggest is randomizable hex grid board.
Think about it. Only a scant few people are playing Warhammer and Warhammer 40k on a regular basis. The setup is high, the play is long, but the immersion is high. Unfortunately, it's also a lot of time and money. Far more people are playing X-Wing. It's more streamlined, the miniatures are already painted, and a lot cheaper.
I`m not suggesting you to do a miniature wargame. :) If that's what you've understood from my message, then I`m sorry, apparently I wasn't clear enough.
Yes, I'll lose immersion, but even abstract games get played a lot :)
But what do you _win_ from abstracting a battlefield?
Through the Ages has many sliders, mine has 2: HP and Heat. It's not any more complicated than HP and Mana.
Assuming you have just one mech - then yes. If not, multiply the amount of sliders by the amount of mechs you control.
One of the major advantages of not going for minis is cheap components. You can have dozens of mechs to control. Scale it as much as you like, without thinking about the production cost that much.
Why limit yourself to just one?
You bring up some really good points, but like I said, there's specific reasons why I did what I did. Of course it all has to test itself in its execution, so we'll see.
I understand that this is just a concept.
Would be curious to see what you come up with in the end.
Good luck!
radioactivemouse wrote:Each
This sounds like a description of the measuring sticks that Games Workshop used to (maybe still do) include with their games. They were shaped like an 18" bisected triangular crayon. It would be fun to have a measuring stick with an integrated scatter diagram built-in, like a little spatula. You measure then roll to determine which point on the arc at the tip to measure from, and repeat.
Congratulations! I love toy shopping for my kids. Don't forget about Lego Duplo, which are for young kids. It's also possible to find used sets of the briefly manufactured Quatro line at a reasonable price, which are twice as big as Duplo and were marketed for 1-3 yrs. I can tell you though that it works out best just to get the Legos when your kid is old enough to pick out his/her sets. The aesthetics and licensing change so frequently these days that the sets my son inherited from me look downright primitive, and my son is most excited by the Doctor Who and Minecraft sets (stuff I never would have anticipated existing when he was born).
Sadly, although it received ample support, Lego opted not to produce a Lego Golden Girls set: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/98263
Tabletop-wise, I highly recommend the Hape line of bamboo tabletop games, like Super Moose and Stormy Seas.