Skip to Content

Submission letter.

36 replies [Last post]
Krakit
Offline
Joined: 11/26/2011
Submission letter.

I appreciate that. I'm just very grumpy today.

It could fit on the back of the board (albeit somewhat awkwardly).

I had been planning on making the expansion stand alone and combinable. It'll also come with extra bits (the blocker peices which have other rules).

Carl

Krakit
Offline
Joined: 11/26/2011
Submission letter.

BTW there ARE bugs in the triangle board still to be worked out.

The triangle board has dots at each point of every triangle space. The robots rest on these dots and move along the lines that make up the triangles. That part isn't a problem.

However, the IT bot is supposed to have a movement advantage over the Chase bots.

In the square board, the chase bots move orthogonoly only (unless an upgrade allows for a change), the IT bot moves like a queen orth and diag.

There really isn't such a distinction on the triangle board. I've considered allowing the IT bot to make turns but that seems TOO powerful.

Carl

Krakit
Offline
Joined: 11/26/2011
Submission letter.

Whoops, I just figured it out. Thanks anyway on the Triangle board bit.

I found this website and got what I needed from it:

http://www.chessvariants.org/shape.dir/tc.html#board

Carl

zaiga
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Submission letter.

Hey Carl, I agree with Jeff. We are not trying to change your game, I'm sure it plays fine and that it doesn't need changing. However, I read your submission letter with the same eyes as a publisher would - as someone who knows nothing about you or your game, and some things simply stick out which may or may not give a publisher pause.

I have sent several submission letters to several publishers for different games, so I know what publishers are looking for and what likely reasons for rejection are. After reading your letter there were a few things that stood out, and I told you about that. A publisher might tell you these things as well.

The fact that it is not playable with 3 players is simply a weak point. When reading your letter is stands out as a sore thumb. Sure, I fully understand your explanation, but when you get a rejection from a publisher, you don't get a second chance to try and explain why they are wrong and that they should reconsider their decision. Actually, you *can* do that, and I have done so successfully in the past, but it's not something I recommend. Better to get it right the first time.

In any case, if I were you, I'd try to pitch the game with the 3 player board included. I have never gotten a rejection because a game might be too expensive to produce, but then again my games are usually pretty minimalistic, so perhaps that's not a fair comparison. In fact, I have even got a rejection once because the game didn't have enough special components! With this in mind I think having a cool triangular board might even be a selling point. Just add 1 board to the component list (if it's really impossible to print the board doublesided, something of which I'm still not convinced, but nevermind ;), list the game as for 2 - 4 players, and that will give publishers one possible reason less to reject your submission.

As for comparisons to other games, this is something that will invariably happen, whether it is valid or not. This has happened to me many times, as it's always hard to explain exactly how your game is different from game X. You'd think that publishers should be able to see through thematic similarities with other games, but unfortunately they still reject a good amount of games based on this reason alone. Should you change your theme because of this reason? Maybe, but if you really can't or if the theme fits so perfectly with the mechanics (or vice versa) then perhaps you shouldn't bother. Like I said in my previous post, if your game if thematically a lot like game X, then try and focus your pitch on the stuff that is different from game X. If you get a rejection based on the argument that your game looks too much like game X, then simply take a deep breath and submit to another publisher.

All in all, I wish you a whole lot of good luck!

Krakit
Offline
Joined: 11/26/2011
Submission letter.

I appreciate that and I apoloigzie for snapping.

The three player version of the game is almost like a totally different game and is still in the play testing phase. That is why I was/am holding it back as an expansion rather than just a three player version of the game.

I'm sure that there are other games that play 2 or 4 but not three. I would count St. Pete among them.

Carl

OutsideLime
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Submission letter.

Quote:
In fact, I have even got a rejection once because the game didn't have enough special components!

Hmm... I wonder which game that was...? ;)

~Josh

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut