Math question

Are these numbers coming from dice, or cards, or statistic look ups?

It's hard to say with that example, the numbers you listed in your second post the second was faster than the first because the first three pairs of numbers all added up to five, where I had to count all the two's in the first number (which is hard on a computer screen), then add 6 to that value. It took me 7 seconds to add 2,2,2,2,2,3,3; and 2 to add 1,4,1,4,2,3,1.

In your first post, the first number was faster than the second number, because it likewise had no discernable pattern - the second number was grouped in sets of numbers that were easy to combine (3 2's is 6, + 3 is 9, repeated is 18 +2). It took me 9 seconds to add 1,4,3,3,2,2,4,1,2,2 and 2 to add 2,2,2,3,2,2,2,3,2.

In both cases I believe this to be a result of the pattern of the numbers more-so than the numbers themselves.

The fastest way to add a string of numbers is to be able to infer the addition of numbers in a quickly intuitive way.

If I understand your system correctly, your commitment to combat can have anywhere from 3 values, to 15 values. A way to add a pattern to the numbers would be to simply color each of the numbers, 1-4, a different color so the player could easily break them into a simple format for addition. With a quick glance I could see (3) green 4's [12], (3) red 3's [9 - 21], (3) purple 2's (6 - 27], and (6) yellow 1's [6 - 33]. Which is a lot easier to add up than 4,1,3,2,1,1,4,2,2,3,3,1,1,4,1

If you want to resolve combat faster it will have to be more than changing values. There are probably abstraction and simplification that can be done, but I need to know how the combat system works to be able to make suggestions. With little info, we can give little solutions.

A quick idea, you can make sure that all battles are resolved at the same time. So that for example when player A and B are duelling, Player C and D can also duel instead of waiting.

It's not a perfect solution but it will at least cut some downtime.

Ahh explained your way (each 2 is 1 unit, then add another 1 for each 3) *would* allow me to add the numbers faster - as long as that method is explained.

If you expanded that, and showed that up in your combat (I'd be wary to change anything if people are really liking the way it works) - you could express the values in a different way, but still keep the interactivity.

If we base everything off of a "2", then 1 can be expressed as -1, and 3 can be expressed as +1, and 4 can be expressed as (2) 2's

Then you can make sets of a 1 and a 3 (they cancel each other out to 2) and you'll be left with either a small number of +x or -x, to a set of numbers that is the number of elements X 2

This could theoretically be done without numbers. If a 2 is expressed as a white box, a 3 is expressed as a black box, a 1 is expressed as a red box, and a 4 is expressed as 2 white boxes, then you'd make sets of red and black boxes, and multiply the total number of boxes by 2, then add 1 for each un-matched black box, and subtract 1 for each unmatched red box.

The "boxes" could also be different shapes for people who are color blind. And you would be fine putting the numbers in the shapes as well for additional enforcement.

This might not work for you - its just a thought - based on a possible mis-interpretation of your system.

Is it necessary to have each card have up to 3 numbers? If each card only had one number you could color code the cards of different values like its been suggested and when they are revealed cards of the same value from both players would cancel each other out. So they would only have to count the cards that are different. This would especially work well if one value of the cards is more common than others (2s more than 4s).

For example (2,2,2,2,3,4) vs (2,2,2,4,4). Three of the "2s" and one "4" cancel out so the first player only adds 2+3 and player two has 4.

Not sure if this will help.

What about this... I have seen your post over on bgg as well where you were showing the actual combat mechanisim and having people test out a couple of rounds.

So how about this. Leave the numbers on the ship cards, and use stones (glass beads) to count up the points. These can then be lined up on the attack/defence board to indicate your choices for the round.

The players would not actually need to completely total up the number of points they have all together. Just count out 2-4 stone for each segment as indicated on the ship. When a segment is destroyed, they just need to remove that number of stones from their collection.

Additionally... Each card could indicte the total power of the ship (The total of it's component values) cutting the counting time in half or even thirds to get their initial values.

If you are running this as combat scenarios (each battle plays out a scenario which defines all of the ships that will be involved on each side) then the scenario could include total fleet values for each side as well.

First, why are there multiple numbers on these ship cards?

Second, could you put a total value number on each card to reduce the number or calculations needed? If it is meant to represent different types of weapons / damage / armor then aggregate those categories on each card instead of (or in addition to) showing emplacements.

Third, I think someone else already mentioned it but I love the idea of keeping Player F involved by introducing a mechanic for effecting battles you are not directly involved in or you could go the cosmic Encounters route and allow allies / reinforcements from players not directly involved.

Hope that helps,
Levi Mote
www.bonsaigames.net