Yeah, my first post on these forums. I have been reading some of the articles here, and this really looks like a great place to "hang out". I'm glad that I found it. I have always been interested in game design, but have never actually finished a game. I always hit a snag in the design, or the game changese so much that it becomes a new game, or I move onto something else. But I still have my dreams of creating a game that eventaully gets published. Recently I have become interested in more "abstract" games, but I'm really a FRPGer and wargamer at heart, and most of my games usually go down that road.
Anyway, I have been kicking around a game design idea for some years now, but was never sure how to fix a mechanical problem. This problem was so massive (to me atleast) that it cause me to shelve the idea, as excited as I was about it. I'll turn the problem over to the forum in the hopes that new sets of eyes will give me a fresh perspective, or at least a new avenue to explore.
The game idea was basically one of exploration, expansion, and conquest. Played on a board of hexagons, players built settlements, collected resources, and raised armies to fight each other. I imagine that this probably sounds alot like Settler of Catan, and my only defence is that I have never actually played that game. The focus was mainly on the battles and conquest (since I am a wargamer at heart), as that seemed the most exciting part to me. Here is where I hit a mechanical pitfall. I wanted the players units to be completely secret from each other, both in composition and in movement. That seems easy enough, right? You could use face down markers, or a hidden map system, or any number of other things. Like in Stratego, Battleship, or Scotland Yard.
BUT!
I felt that players should be able to produce "spy" units that could detect and reveal the make up of an opponents units. After all, reall battles are fought on gathered intelligence, and armies have always used spies to track the enemy. Once again, the problem seems simple. "Oh, by the way I have a spy unit here, so I get to see the contents of that marker." But in "real life" the enemy rarely knows that it is being spied on. So, how can I fix the "spy" units so that they reveal enemy details, without giving away their own position? Is it even possible? I could always say that the "spy" units expend thenselves after one use, making it irrelavent if your opponents know where it is, but I don't really like that solution.
And just in case you were wondering, the setting/theme for the game was space. Players represent genocidical alien races in a battle to control the galaxy and eliminate the other races. Kind of like Risk, but with resources collected from your settlements, and (obviously) the whole hidden movement thingy. The "spies" were going to be sensor stations/ships/probes that you could build (either stationary or mobile) to track enemy movement. So you can see why I'd perfer to NOT have them be "one use" units. Oh, and even though I said I liked abstract games, this is one of my earlier designs, and the rules/mechanics are heavily influenced by the space opera/sci-fi setting.
Thanks for looking, even more thanks of you take to time to post a response (no matter what it is), and I really didn't mean for my first post to be so long. I tend to be "wordy" as you all will probably find out.
Yeah, cheating. I've thought alot about that problem too. Thought about, but not come up with any real solution for. How does the player prove that they COULD spy on an enemy unit without revealing the spy? They can't really. This really may prove to be an insurmountable mechanics problem for a "board" game. A video game could probably handle this with no problem, but a traditional game? I'm starting to doubt it. The OSSD (One Shot Sensor Drones) may be the only viable solution, and to me, it's a solution that really detracts from the feel of the game. Saying that you picked up on an enemy Sensor Drone transmission, and now know it's location seems like a rules "cop-out", especially if you didn't have any Sensor Drones in the area to pick up that transmission.
Although I have (just now actually) come up with some more thoughts on the problem.
If everyone knows that the spy units are one use only, or at least have to reveal their position when spying, everyone is at the same disadvantage. This would make mobile spy units that much more valuable then stationary ones. Use your Sensor Drone to listen in on the enemy, and then get it the hell out of there ASAP before someone can come and destroy it. A smart (or lucky) player could use a single spy unit a number of times, always keeping it one step ahead of the enemy. Or you could set a trap with it. Keep some powerful fighting units close to your spy unit, then when the enemy comes to smash it, you smash them instead. A whole new level of "cat and mouse" has just emerged. You can't afford to leave that spy unit hanging around your operations, but you also can't risk blundering into a trap, or a sending your units off to follow a diversion while their army sneaks up on your empire.
Players would also have to balance the risk/reward factor. In this case the acquiring of information vs. the loss of secrecy. Do you reveal your spy unit in the hopes of discovering some important enemy information, or do you wait. And what if the information that YOU are basing your decision on proves to be false. I'm starting to think that having to reveal spy units isn't such a bad thing after all.
And last, the setting could dictate the rules for this problem. Since we are talking about the vast distances of space here, transmissions would take time to be sent and recieved. Players could "activate" their spy units on one turn (recording it's position in a special "logbook") and then move it away in their next turn. The "sensor wave" would travel independantly until it hit something, and by then the drone could be "lightyears" away. Of course that introduces the problem of a "logbook" and the time it would take for the message to bounce back to the sender.
Thanks for your response, General. Sometimes you need someone elses feeback to jump start your own creative process. If anyone else has any ideas/thoughts/problems or what ever, I'd love to hear them.