Game #17: Nova by SVan

Ok, I'm not sure I've fully digested everything yet, but here are some preliminary reactions.

I like the core concept of an exploding star that players are "fleeing" from. To me, this makes me feel that players should be hopping from planet to planet, squeezing what they can out of the inner planets but always running the risk that the nova will catch up to them. It seems like this could create a tense atmosphere and could be a lot of fun to play.

The player elimination aspect, I predict, will be poo-pooed a lot in this discussion, but I think it actually works for this game. The idea should be that if you decide to lag behind to get resources, you run the risk of getting caught by the wave and eliminated. In a 30-45 minute game, it is fine. And I agree, this one probably should go about 30-45 minutes.

But...it won't. Not even close. This one, I'm almost sure, will take 2 hours or more for 6 people to play (and I wouldn't be all that surprised to hear of a 4 hour playtest for this one). Maybe I'm way off, but I just don't see 30 minutes as being within the realm of the possible. Have you tested it yet?

My impression is that there is just too much going on, too much to do. I personally feel like you could build a nice, robust, clean game just around building colonies (which get you resources and/or VP) and building fast ships (so you can high-tail it when the nova comes). I haven't seen the "upgrades" or "colony parts" cards, but I don't think they are even needed, necessarily; in a sense, I suspect they'll be a distraction from the relatively elegant game you have hiding beneath the surface.

Also, 6 resource types is a lot, and I don't see nearly enough differentiation between them to justify the complexity. You might consider streamlining to maybe 3 resources. One type is best for "movement"-style actions, one is best for "colony-building" style actions, and one is equally good for either type (but not as good as the more specialized resources).

Your start player bid algorithm is probably too complicated as a method for picking the start player; it basically amounts to two different blind bids, which have the net effect of deciding one outcome. If you're going to keep the "maximum bid" approach, change it so it's more "ebay"-esque, where initial bids are incremented until people hit their maxima. But even then, it's probably not worth the complexity. Is going first very important? Why or why not? If not, just roll a die; if yes, allow bidding, but just dice off ties (which you'll still have, even in your 2-step process, which actually is a 3 step process). Save your clever bid algorithm for a game that needs this element more...

I can sympathize with your lack of art skills, since I have the same problem, but I feel in this case, it's not exactly clear how the game board relates to the game. What are the "waves" in relation to the board? Your board shows six rows of 6 planets. What are these? Are there 6 planets undergoing 6 waves, or are there 18 planets? Having a space game with things arranged "linearly" rather than "orbitally" is confusing.

Finally, I don't know if the complexity associated with the planets is necessary. I don't think the "move a worker around to collect resources" actions will be all that interesting or important. I think just making each planet have one kind of resource, and you can set up a colony there to mine that resource, or not, is enough of a choice. Maybe there's an alternative option of setting up a "trade base" that lets you get extra commodities of that type or something.

Anyway, in summary, the game has a lot of potential, but is going to be much longer than you think. My suggestions are made with an eye towards identifying the main source of tension in the game, which I believe must come from the dilemma of trying to "escape" the oncoming supernova. As written, it sounds a little too much like a very standard "resource production" game. I strongly suggest that you simplify the resource aspect and focus the game more around actions that create the sense of "fleeing from impending doom", which I think comes through most clearly in deciding how far is "far enough" away to build a base.

Good luck with the game! It's too bad you're coming up with it now, it would have done ok in the contest last year, and would have been way more on-theme than most of the entries we've heard about thus far!

-Jeff

Not even finished reading it yet, but have some comments.

Ok, I assume that the black tokens in the initial bid are discarded after that bid? I don't think it says that anywhere. I kind of get the idea of that, in that you are first to leave your planet so have fewer resources than others. However it does seem like a drawn out way to decide the start player.

I assume the 'galaxy plan' is the big square of 36 planets? And a Solor System is a set of these planets, but which set a Row of all 6 colors or a column of all one color?

There is a cut off sentance at the end of the movement section, "..solar system, place your..." If you can only move 3 spaces if you combine tokens, this means that only the lowest two colors are useful to combine, because any other color moves you more.

Finished reading..

Yeah, I can see Jeff's point. Why have 6 different resources? I see that 'trading up' to the higher colors allow for more movement, but that seems odd for steller distances.

Thematically it also seems wierd to have a 'wave' go through a solar system and only destroy one planet. It also means that if a wave die fades pretty early that entire column is safe, which again seems wierd. Also without seeing (or having a good description) of a wave die (also note they are referred to as Nova Die and Wave die in different places), it is really hard to imagine how the wave moves. Also if a wave peters out, you don't get any more boards beyond the last one, because the early ones don't empty.

Again I agree with Jeff, the colony cards don't seem to make sense. I assume each one has a cost in tokens and a flag number(maybe?). It would seem better just to set a fixed cost per flag number and do away with the cards.

Speaking of cards, I could find no mention on how they are drawn.

The VP conditions need some more explaining. Colony Flags of surviving colonies score one point per flag as long as the colony is finished. This I get. The first colony scores double (if it survives?). You would need some way of marking this. Save Ship from Wave - nowhere does it describe giving Energy to another ship (except maybe subtly in a trade), but then how do you determine saving? I do like this condition, as it helps against the elimination factor. Save a Worker - Can you 'save' your own workers by running back and forth between solar systems.

My thoughts.. I like the theme and the idea of running from the wave. "Do the Wave" However, I would also say to reduce the number of resources and simplify some, as I as well can't see this taking only 45 minutes. The decisions at the moment are too complicated for such a short time goal.
What is the point of having the solar systems linked in pairs? It seems that if you made them seperate you could actually make a group of 'squarish' tiles that each had a solarsystem on it (normal circular format). Then you could have solar systems with different numbers of planets and resources. So you make your solar systems themselves the randomizer, as opposed to the planets in the current version. Each planet could then represent one or two resources that you coudl gain by being on it.
From what I gather the workers are essentially your 'gathering' actions. It costs one worker to gather one resource token (plus the token exchange). If you have to leave too early you lose actions for later solarsystems, ditto if you dedicate them as colonists.

I will have more on this as I think on it more. I really like the theme and think it has alot of potential. But as Jeff said as well, in it's current form it feels too complicated. Thanks for putting it out for GDW, it is quite interesting.

Andy

However I don't think 6 resources are all that much. The colors are actually the reason I created this game, it was the first mechanic i made for it. Everyone pretty much knows the primary colors, and also know what colors are made from mixing them. I don't think that will be too tough of a thing for players to handle.

It depends on what you mean by "tough to handle". The point isn't so much that they won't be able to keep track of the colors, as whether there is really enough differentiation between the resources to having 6 different kinds. Can you get the same quality of decisions with only 3, or 4 resources? You obviously are closer to the game than I can, and could say better, but consider "similar" games, and how many suits they have -- Settlers: 5 resources. Lord of the Rings: 5 suits. Attika: 4 Suits. Puerto Rico: 5 commodities I just worry whether players can meaningfully pursue 6 different resources, and at any rate, your "resource types", based on what I know only from the rules, seem more like different values -- they are "Monopoly money" rather than distinct resource types (although maybe the colony aspects bring out the differences more). If there's no difference between the colors than simply the value (ie, movement allowance), then you might not need all 6.

This makes sense. How about something whereby the resource a planet produces is indicated by a face-down token that when you colonize/mine/whatever a planet, you flip it face up. But, the number of planets producing the "valuable" resources decreases as you go further out. So, in the "inner shell", maybe almost all of the planets produce "green", whereas in the "outer shell", fewer do. So, if you want to be more sure of getting "green", you colonize the inner planets, but you're doing so at much greater risk of being overtaken by the wave (and you're also going to need a fast ship to sample the different planets, just in case you don't draw green).

That's great, but what I want you to see even more is where the game is going right. I think you have an idea with a lot of potential, and I think, rather than try to heal its ills, you need to just refocus on the things that are very successful. Build the game more centrally around the "escaping from the nove" theme, and have all of the resource systems contribute to that aspect of the game -- that we're trying to have enough resources to get away from the nova and still be able to re-start our civilization. I think there's a very solid game in there, and it just needs to be brought out by removing some of the clutter and reenvisioning the systems with an eye towards evoking that theme more strongly.

Good luck!

-Jeff

Yes, naturally, and I suppose that it bears repeating that "suggestions" in the workshop really are just "suggestions", and ought to be phrased as such. Obviously, the game is yours to do what you want with it!

In this case, I feel like you just have too many elements that you have tried to incorporate, and I think a streamline will do the game some good. But of course, that should be with an eye towards what you see as the interesting nucleus of decisions that you want to build the game around. Good luck!

-Jeff

I've been thinking, a dangerous pastime I know.

What if the planets only produced Red Blue and Yellow. And to actually do anything you need Green, Orange, and Purple. So you still have your primary color thing, but maybe reduced the complexity. Or I dunno, maybe that makes it worse.

On the Card front, what if you combined the cards. So that if you have a card for like 'Electrostic Generator', it could be used as either a part for a colony or as an upgrade. So then you have to decide whether to go for VP's for for speed. It also means that no card is totally useless.

On your Wave Dice, neat idea, but the statistics are a bit off. If half the die is 1's, and 1's is the trigger for the reroll, and two 1's in succession the wave dies (I hope I'm reading this right), then the probability is 1 in 4 (25%) EACH turn that a wave section will die. So on average you will expect each wave to last four turns. This will certainly affect playing time, and probably fun if you only have to run for four turns on average.
You have a 1 in 3 chance it will move 2 squares, the wave cannot move 1 square, a 1 in 3 chance of it moveing 3, and a 1 in 12 chance of it moving 4. I think if you add all of this correctly you get an average movement of 2 squares per roll. So basically on average the wave will move 8 squares before it dies. This isn't as exciting as it could be.

As for the idea of solar systems on the tiles, imagine the following. Take a look at your current planet diagram. Imagine if the Sun (or Suns) were in the center of a tile. Then in random orbits about it are circles with colors. Gas Planets give something, Rock planets give something else.. and so on. Thus you get a selfcontained solar system that can have differing numbers of planets.

Actually if you have these neat little tiles, you could put an exploding star on the flip side. So when the wave hits it you flip the whole thing. It might give some thematic-ness to the impending doom sort of thing.

One thing for your start auction... if it was made much simpler it still could be thematically cool. Something like whoever bids the fewest chips leaves the last, so has more little chips, but it first in the chain of planets. A player that bids a lotof chips leaves really early and could start further from the wave, but with fewer chips. Maybe something then like the wave starts after a delay based on the number of chips bid on average. So that if everyone bids a lot of chips the wave is delayed (basically the game starts earlier), but noone has very many chips. Which might mean that the wave will catch them before they can move.

Looking back at the statistics, I almost think the wave is not powerful enoguh. It's an EXPLODING STAR, not a popped balloon. It should be big and nasty and with sharp pointy teeth (look at the bones...). Maybe even a nice cardboard cutout as it roars along.

More thinking will produce more posts. Still thinking this is a spiffy game.

Andy

I still think Race from the Wave is a neat idea, you should file that away for another ('prequel'?) game. I know it is sort of chrome, but if the wave becomes a Ravaging Horde of Space-whatevers, you still have your tension/push; the idea of more random planet destruction makes a little more sense; and you can save the Wave for the other game. As always take it or leave it.

I like the new ideas. Question though. I assume Mines only super-fast ship stuff to you in the same system. Secondly, can you spend an action or two to recover a mine instead of waiting for it to get destroyed?

A question from the main rule set... I don't quite understand the requirment of leaving a worker (now colonist) at a colony site. Who has to do this and when? If you only have a few colonists, you can only have a few colonies (but does this mean you can only START several colonies, or only be involved in several). And if you play the odds and lose a colonist to the wave/horde of destruction, then you are out a proportionately large portion of your ability to gain points. Just trying to get clarification. As I read it, having only three colonist means that any one person can only gain points for at most 3 colonies.

This seems to go against your cooperation aim. My suggestion is as follows, if the first person to plant the colony places the colonist, and people score points for the flags, but double if you also own the colonist. So once you risk your colonist, others will be interested in helping finish the colony. On the chance it survives they get points, they have only risked resources that are renewable as opposed to their finite colonists, and to prevent you from filling all 4 flags for lots of points when doubled. Again just musing.

Andy

One other critique that isn't restricted strictly to your rulebook, but is a more general topic. I find that in reading your rules, and in reading a lot of rulebooks, I'm given a paragraph of backstory, a list of components, a statement of how you win, and then, whoooosh, I'm setting up the game already!

I try to provide, in my rulebooks, the "high level" thematic intro, like your backstory, but then a paragraph or two about how the game actually plays. What are players going to be doing? What kinds of actions will they be taking? I don't actually explain any specific rules, just try to introduce the basic elements of the game ("oh, so these cubes represent 'peasants'") and how they are going to be interacting with them ("oh, so I'm going to be moving peasants around and using them to produce 'money'").

I'm no rulebook writing whiz, and I'm wondering what the opinion of the others is on how much of an intro to provide. I feel like adding an extra paragraph or two can help make the connection between the theme and the actual details of the game play, rather than a stark jump from one to the other. And, it's helpful to have this kind of a holistic picture of the game from the beginning, rather than having to piece it together from the rules.

Anyway, it's not strictly related to your game play, but I do think it would help a lot to add a brief description of what the game is all about. And, don't ever say "the object of the game is to collect the most Victory Points." without at least saying a little bit about how VPs are collected in the first place. Otherwise, you might as well say "the object of the game is to be the winner."

Sorry to go a little OT, but it was something your rulebook got me thinking about...

-Jeff

I like the changes. A lot. Particularly the speed tracker mechanic. If I understand it right, this forces players to plan carefully before they load up on speed tokens. The first three levels of speed (red, yellow, blue) can be bought cheaply (one token=1 speed) while the remaining three colors must be combined so that they cost 2 tokens each. In other words, each level of speed above 3 will be especially expensive, giving the fastest players a small penalty.

At least, I think that's what's supposed to happen in theory. More likely, once players have the mixed (secondary) colors on their tracker, they will sacrifice and replace the primary colors only, indefinitely. Isn't this a problem? So in order to keep my starship moving at warp 6 (couldn't resist the Star Trek reference) every turn, I only need to spend one point (one token) per turn. So long as I have at least one primary token, I can keep this up forever. What this does is it devalues the secondary systems, since secondary-color systems are especially expensive and no more useful. What if the token you sacrificed each turn had to be the one furthest to the right, and all the secondary tokens were on the right? This would solve the problem I think. Effectively, all movement up to warp 3 costs 1 each, while warp 4-6 costs 2 each, technically. In fact, it is not QUITE so simple. The resources furthest to the right would be progressively more precious, since it is a given that these will be lost first and so must be replaced more often to maintain full speed. So, if you have loads of green tokens, but need orange to maintain warp 6, and you're out, what to do? Either accept a slower speed, or trade with players for the orange. Expect to pay more than one green for each orange!

Anyway, this game is among the most promising designs I've seen on the board lately. I shall be interested to see how it develops.

Interesting changes.. I am ever curious on the wave. YOu are now giving it a starting strength and letting it disappate as it chews through solar systems. However if the wave has a fixed starting strength and a fixed speed of disappation (1 level per pair of solar systems if I read it right), then won't the players know exactly how far the wave will reach, just not have fast it will get there. I dunno, maybe this isn't a bad thing for what youhave in mind.

I just see atleast my strategy would be to hang out a system or so ahead of the wave, pick up as many resources as I can, and then sprint off beyond the fixed end of the wave and use those resources to build colonies. Maybe this is exactly what you have in mind. I just don't see any reason to tempt the wave, and all reason to just outrun it.

I still don't quite understand the need for pairing up the systems. It seems like having them singly would make more sense. Oo oo, maybe every time the wave eats a system, a die is rolled. On 1 the strength is reduced, on anything else it just mows on through undeterred. Then you don't exactly know when the wave will end.

As for the resource to move thing I have two thoughts. One you just chuck what you can into the engine and it all goes away next turn. Throw Coal in get energy out. You throw in too much coal (err unused tokens), oh well think it through better next time. This does hinge on some way of storing tokens from round to round. Has the mention of Cargo Space come up yet? How many tokens can I lug about.

My second thought is along the lines of what Deviant said. Maybe your little speed tracker is a setup of three engine pods. Each can take a normal(R,Y,B) and a second level (O, G, P) token. Each turn you burn off a second level if it is there, otherwise a first level.

The hybrid of the two is something like 'fill up the tanks and burn what you need'. So Fill all 6, and remove a number of tokens equal to your movement starting with the second-level ones first. So if you know you are only going to be moving about just a little, a rank of Y,R,B is fine. Saving your special ones when you need a burst of speed, knowing you will lose them right away.

I do wonder however how much of a role speed will play here. Since moving your ship ends your turn, and pretty much everything in-system is one movement, the only need for speed is to 'skip' systems quickly. Again just see how this goes in your tests and what you prefer.

I don't think 5 mines sounds like a lot at all. Imagine that each first tier token costs one to produce. (either you land or your mine it). Each second level token actually costs 3 (1 each for the pre-reqs and one for the transmutation into the second level token). So imagine if I have a system with a Y, a B, and a G. It takes me one turn to gather the Y and the B, either with two mines or a mine and my ship. The next turn I spend the Y and B and get a G. So I've spent two turns and three mines (or two and a ship) to produce one G token. Assuming I can produce stuff simultaneously ( I can actually get a B and a Y on the same turn in that method), I also end up with a B and a Y. Again just watch the balance of stuff as you play it. I really think it will work, but you a lot of interrelated numbers and costs and speeds and stuff, that may take some time to balance out to produce the elusive FUN.

I'm glad to see you get excited about your game with the GDW. I guess it worked it's purpose then right?
Andy

I think that is the basic risk with randomness, in that some of the possibilities aren't desirable. I do however think that that is better than the predictable. If you ar worried about the randomness, have the wave throw several dice. This should force the averages more without removing the unpredictability.

I didn't exactly mean having a ship with some sort of limit, I mean more 'Can I even store them?' I just didn't see anything saying one way or the other.

ANdy