Skip to Content
 

Blind test of 8/7 Central.

2 replies [Last post]
Sun, 07/03/2005 - 11:23
Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008

Hello

Yesterday (July 2) we had a smaller game/test session (OK we played for 14 hours but we was just 4 players). During this session we tested 8/7 Central writtend by Seth Jaffee (sedjtroll). 8/7 Central has been up several times at this forum in this forum. You can find information here from the GDW. There are also two follow up GDW threads about the game in this and this topic.

8/7 Central is a game where you trying to set up the best TV broadcasting week. You compete with the other players to get the best ratings (or something like this, you score points in 4 different categories each evening and most points in the end wins). We played a game for 4 weeks and there was 5 days in a week (Monday-Friday). The game took around 1.5 hours to play. Finally (before I start with the review), I was the big looser in this game. I was the only player that after the first week did not have any program hit and in the end I only had 4 programs that had hit once.

The game worked. We had a lot of problems with the game and especially about the rules. We found out in the middle of the game that we had made some game mistakes (in the advertising rules), we had to come up with some rules about the cards and how to use them and we had a rely hard time to understand the rules, but still the game worked smoothly. The basic game idea is Ok and works.

The rules
The rules are the most tragic part of this game. We had (me and another player) read the rules twice. Then we did a talk threw of the rules and after that he read the rules once more. Still we had a lot of problems with the rules when we played the game.
The rules are badly written and it needs to be rewritten from scratch. I would say that the current rules could not be saved.

The prototype
The prototype worked fine, but it was boring. Add real TV shows to the cards would make the game alive (also for a prototype). It did not feel right to reefer to the programs as Program 25 instead of Dr Who or Buffy.

Start of game
We stared the game, placed 4 cards on the table and started to bid on them. After the second bidding round we had played for around 10 minutes. This took to long time. We stopped the game and decided to change the game start.
Instead of playing 6 round with 4 cards in each, we played 1 round with 24 cards. All programs where placed on the table and the first player choose one program to start with. He made his bid and the next player could now bid over or pass (if you pass you wound not be able to get the program). Continue with the next one until someone got the program. Then the next program was auctioned and the next until all programs had an owner. This change worked well and it took around 5 minutes to complete.

Program time
We all had the feeling that the ½ hour programs where better then the 1 hour programs. The programs need to be modified (A drama 8 and a Comedy 8 on the same night was a game winner).

When could you play the cards?
We did not know if we could play the cards on other players programs (we decided that we could do that for except advertisings. The rules has to be clarified on that.

// Johan

P.s The next game up is the High Council of Evensford by Bill Allen (Geminiweb).

Top
Tue, 08/30/2005 - 06:10
#1
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Re: Blind test of 8/7 Central.

Johan wrote:
we tested 8/7 Central writtend by Seth Jaffee (sedjtroll). 8/7 Central has been up several times at this forum in this forum. You can find information here from the GDW. There are also two follow up GDW threads about the game in this and this topic.

8/7 Central is a game where you trying to set up the best TV broadcasting week. You compete with the other players to get the best ratings (or something like this, you score points in 4 different categories each evening and most points in the end wins).
I'm sorry I didn't reply to this thread sooner, I guess I missed it. I was on vacation the weekend it went up.

Anyway, I'm glad you took the time to try out 8/7c, and to post your thoughts on it!

Quote:
The game took around 1.5 hours to play.

That's a little longer than I'd like - 60 minutes would probably be more ideal. But with 4 players it doesn't suprise me that it took that long. I've never tried the game with 4 players before because I never had enough cards (!). The files I sent to Johan had more cards, enough for a 4 player game.

Quote:
Finally (before I start with the review), I was the big looser in this game. I was the only player that after the first week did not have any program hit and in the end I only had 4 programs that had hit once.

Wow... that is VERY surprising, as each day 2 sets of 2d6 are rolled, and each show has at LEAST a 1-in-6 chance of hitting... so phenomenal die rolling aside, a program that's in play at the beginning of the game will have at least 8 rolls of 2d6 to see if it 'hits' (gets viewed). This is not counting modifiers that increase the show's chances (which is what the game is about).

I suppose 8/7c could suffer a similar criticism that Settlers of Catan gets - that the die rolls can cause too much luck in the game.

Quote:
The game worked.

That's good to hear!

Quote:
We had a lot of problems with the game and especially about the rules.

That's not so good to hear :/

Quote:
We found out in the middle of the game that we had made some game mistakes (in the advertising rules), we had to come up with some rules about the cards and how to use them and we had a realy hard time to understand the rules

I believe you when you say the rulebook needs revising, but frankly I'm surprised at your comment that they are so bad you couldn't understand them. I would like to start over with them, but honestly, looking at them now I don't see them being very much different then they are.

Can you tell me what parts are confusing to you? For those reading along, I'll link to the rules so you can take a look. All comments appreciated!

Quote:
The prototype
The prototype worked fine, but it was boring. Add real TV shows to the cards would make the game alive (also for a prototype). It did not feel right to refer to the programs as Program 25 instead of Dr Who or Buffy.

I totally agree, and I've been procrastinating on this point. I'd like to go through and give each program a name and some flavor. I wasn't sure if I wanted to use actual names of shows, or parodies, or what... so I didn't put anything. For a prototype I thought that would be OK since the game works fine without names - but of course flavor would make it better!

When I've played we just refer to shows as "My Niche 3 show" rather than "Program #3". To tell you the truth, it's not really come up as an issue. I suppose when we play we all know that eventually the shows will have names and pictures.

Quote:
Start of game
We stared the game, placed 4 cards on the table and started to bid on them. After the second bidding round we had played for around 10 minutes. This took to long time.

The 'Starting Lineup' does take a little while, but when we've played maybe the entire setup takes 10 minutes - not just 2 rounds of bidding. I wonder why your bidding took so long.

Quote:
We stopped the game and decided to change the game start.
Instead of playing 6 round with 4 cards in each, we played 1 round with 24 cards. All programs where placed on the table and the first player choose one program to start with. He made his bid and the next player could now bid over or pass (if you pass you wound not be able to get the program). Continue with the next one until someone got the program. Then the next program was auctioned and the next until all programs had an owner. This change worked well and it took around 5 minutes to complete.

This is an interesting way to do it as well, and it might speed things up. We decided we wanted some kind of bidding rather than dealing out initial programs because we thought it added some strategy - for a quick start the starting lineup could simply be dealt out (indeed maybe that would be better all around). The reason we didn't want to turn up all 24 cards at once is that we thought people would overanalyse... But it seemed to work for you guys, so maybe I'll give it a shot.

Quote:
Program time
We all had the feeling that the ½ hour programs where better then the 1 hour programs.

1/2 hour programs can have 1 ad and generally have 1 or 2 Genres. 1-hr programs can hold 2 ads, and have more Genres. They also have higher hit probability. I didn't want a 1 hr program being BETTER than 2 1/2 hour programs, but I didn't want them to be WORSE either... I wanted the to be different. I think I'm pretty happy with how powerful the 1-hr programs are relative to the 1/2 hr programs. I think it's a matter of preference which is really better.

Quote:
The programs need to be modified (A drama 8 and a Comedy 8 on the same night was a game winner).

This phrase leads me to believe you have misunderstood a good portion of the game.

There are 4 Genres, and for each Genre there's a Vicory Point available each day. So if you have two 1/2 our programs, a Comedy 8 and a Drama 8, on one day - you might win the points for Comedy and Drama, but you will definitely not win News or Niche. Also, someone else could stack up a Comedy 3 and a Comedy 4 against you and boost them up with cards such that they overtake your Comedy 8 for the Comedy point on that day.

In other words, in no way is the situation you mentioned a game winner. You might also note that the Comedy 8 programs are less likely to hit than any other program.

Did you note that when a programs number comes up (when it 'hits') that program gets a ratings counter, which asdds to each of it's Genres?

Quote:
When could you play the cards?
We did not know if we could play the cards on other players programs (we decided that we could do that for except advertisings. The rules has to be clarified on that.

You got it right, the modifiers can be played on ANY program.. yours or another players. Most of them could be used either way, as a positive modifier for your own program, or a negative one on an opponent's program.

I think you're right... it doesn't specifically say in the rules which programs you can play a Modifier to. Ads are only playable on your own programs.

Thanks again for testing the game. It obviously needs some work, especially in the rules area. I'm glad you were able to get it to the table, and I'm sorry the rules were hard to follow.

- Seth

Top
Tue, 08/30/2005 - 09:54
#2
Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Blind test of 8/7 Central.

I will try to reply, the best I can (it was some month ago that we tested the game).

Quote:
Quote:
The game took around 1.5 hours to play.

That's a little longer than I'd like - 60 minutes would probably be more ideal. But with 4 players it doesn't suprise me that it took that long. I've never tried the game with 4 players before because I never had enough cards (!). The files I sent to Johan had more cards, enough for a 4 player game.

The number of players can be the difference in both game play and effects. More players will give problem with the possibility to win a day.

Quote:
Quote:
Finally (before I start with the review), I was the big looser in this game. I was the only player that after the first week did not have any program hit and in the end I only had 4 programs that had hit once.

Wow... that is VERY surprising, as each day 2 sets of 2d6 are rolled, and each show has at LEAST a 1-in-6 chance of hitting... so phenomenal die rolling aside, a program that's in play at the beginning of the game will have at least 8 rolls of 2d6 to see if it 'hits' (gets viewed). This is not counting modifiers that increase the show's chances (which is what the game is about).

Yes I know but the dice was against me on those rolls.

Quote:
Quote:
We found out in the middle of the game that we had made some game mistakes (in the advertising rules), we had to come up with some rules about the cards and how to use them and we had a realy hard time to understand the rules

I believe you when you say the rulebook needs revising, but frankly I'm surprised at your comment that they are so bad you couldn't understand them. I would like to start over with them, but honestly, looking at them now I don't see them being very much different then they are.

I don’t think that the rules are not badly written, they are badly organized.

Quote:
Quote:
Program time
We all had the feeling that the ½ hour programs where better then the 1 hour programs.

1/2 hour programs can have 1 ad and generally have 1 or 2 Genres. 1-hr programs can hold 2 ads, and have more Genres. They also have higher hit probability. I didn't want a 1 hr program being BETTER than 2 1/2 hour programs, but I didn't want them to be WORSE either... I wanted the to be different. I think I'm pretty happy with how powerful the 1-hr programs are relative to the 1/2 hr programs. I think it's a matter of preference which is really better.

Quote:
The programs need to be modified (A drama 8 and a Comedy 8 on the same night was a game winner).

This phrase leads me to believe you have misunderstood a good portion of the game.
This can be the effect of a 4 player game.

Quote:
Did you note that when a programs number comes up (when it 'hits') that program gets a ratings counter, which asdds to each of it's Genres?

Yes we did, and this had a huge impact when you calculated who was the days winner.

// Johan

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut