Skip to Content
 

Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

24 replies [Last post]
ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008

I've seen some amazing games here in the GDW, so I hope my first attempt at a game will be up to par.

The rules and some game images for Ultra Violets can be found here:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~richm/games/ultra-violets/

Some background on this game: My wife loves african violets, and so to better understand her obsession, I turned her hobby into a card game. I've tried to keep it close to the reality of growing and caring for a collection of plants, so someone can learn about african violets by just playing the game, but I've tried to avoid it becoming a simulation.

A couple of places in particular that I'm looking for feedback are suggestions on reducing the number of components, other themes that might work with these mechanics (I realize growing african violets may not have widespread appeal in the gaming community...), and increasing player interaction without things turning too nasty, but please comment and critique anything. Thanks for any help you can provide, I appreciate your time,

Mark

sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

At first readthrough it sounds pretty good...

I think I missed something though- how do you GET Radioactive counters?

- Seth

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

sedjtroll wrote:

I think I missed something though- how do you GET Radioactive counters?

There's two ways a player can get a radioactive counter, first, by playing a radioactive plant in a Show, and second by having radioactive plants left in their collection at the end of the game. Each time you play a radioactive plant in a Show, even if you've played it before and replaced it into your hand, you collect one counter. And for every radioactive plant in your hand at the end of the game, you also get a counter.

In the example at the end, Mark played two radioactive plants in the Shows, and Laura played one, giving them their counters, while Burr held all of his radioactive plants until the end, getting 4 counters at once.

Hope that helps,

Mark

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

I hope you're planning on getting a booth at your next annual Flower Show... if you have one!

Here in Philadelphia (well, actually, just across the river) I think you'd find a good market at the annual Philadelphia Flower Show.

I have never seen a board game (or any, I think) sold there.

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Sounds pretty spiffy. I don't think the theme is a huge problem. Then again, I have a friend who is pretty big on theme; he doesn't like Bohnanza, loves Munchkin. Bohnanza I think is an obviously better game, but the theme turns him off. Killer Bunnies is another example, theme is good, mechanics are so-so.

You're right that's a lot of components. Playtesting might reduce the number of plants you need, it seems like a lot. Might be true with leaves, too.

Some stuff about the rules:
Trading:

Quote:

When a majority of player are finished trading, the Club President declares "Trading is Closed," and all trading must cease

That needs to be clearer. Does that mean when more than half the people are done trading, the Pres can say, okay that's it? Or can the Prez shut it down whenever he'd like? Or do you mean, when everyone is done, trading ceases. Define majority (2 out of 4?).
Growth:
Plants are bought randomly, right? I'm pretty sure this is true but it's not clearly stated.
Quote:
With (4) unique leaves

Does that mean I can't use 2 of one type of leaf and 1 of another and 1 of yet another? Oops, I see this is answered in the summary part, may want to put it in the main part.
Quote:
If a player's current collection space is full... she can purchase another Shelving Unit

So you can't purchase another unit unless your old ones are full? Might want to spell that out if true.
Quote:
However, they can exchange leaves 2:1 for a random leaf replacement of the from the store. The same exchange rate is used for plants.

So you can exchange two plants for one random plant? Again, if true, you might want to spell it out.
Show:
You don't explain how leaves would be scored, 1 or 2 points? I like the anti tieing mechanism.
Quote:
She now has the option to replace any plants in her collection with those plants displayed in the show

Does the player who's plant is taken get the Pres' plant or is it discarded?
Maladies:
Does 1/4 "round down" mean that you lose a plant if you have 3 or does it mean you don't?

Pests seem like they would be around pretty much all the time. 5 unique leaves seems rather steep and if even one pest survives, they'll be back. Perhaps the pests could have a 1/4 side and a 1/2 side. First round: 1/4 side, second round 1/2, third round: spreads but dies on the starting place (immune plants).

Figure I should submit this before I lose it all. Best of luck.

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Turner wrote:
I hope you're planning on getting a booth at your next annual Flower Show... if you have one!

Here in Philadelphia (well, actually, just across the river) I think you'd find a good market at the annual Philadelphia Flower Show.

I have never seen a board game (or any, I think) sold there.

That's a great idea! There is an annual Africian Violet Show here at the mall in Madison, I'll have to check on how to get a table to maybe demo the game to see if there's interest. Right now I one prototype, waiting until the rules settle down before making any more. Thanks!

Mark

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Grendel wrote:
Sounds pretty spiffy. I don't think the theme is a huge problem. Then again, I have a friend who is pretty big on theme; he doesn't like Bohnanza, loves Munchkin. Bohnanza I think is an obviously better game, but the theme turns him off. Killer Bunnies is another example, theme is good, mechanics are so-so.

Thanks for the theme encouragement, I've been having a hard time trying to transplant the mechanics, ants, pet store management, zombies, nothing really meshed yet, so I'm sticking with the plants for now.

Quote:

You're right that's a lot of components. Playtesting might reduce the number of plants you need, it seems like a lot. Might be true with leaves, too.

The number of plants seems to work out so far, with 4 players, there were about 10 plants left in the Plant deck. I could reduce the leaves to 64, since each player is limited to 16 leaves at most, otherwise I'd need to rework the math for purchasing, which might not be a bad idea...

Quote:

Some stuff about the rules:
Trading:
Quote:

When a majority of player are finished trading, the Club President declares "Trading is Closed," and all trading must cease

That needs to be clearer. Does that mean when more than half the people are done trading, the Pres can say, okay that's it? Or can the Prez shut it down whenever he'd like? Or do you mean, when everyone is done, trading ceases. Define majority (2 out of 4?).

Aha, you've found my most recent changes since the last playtest, good. Trading could take a bit too long, so I was trying to find a way to speed things up. I've changed it back to an open trade in the online rules for now. Maybe have the President cut of trading whenever they're done? This seems to give too much power and could be a runaway leader. Or maybe have trading cycle with the purchasing of plants, as in Settlers, where you can only trade with the person purchasing if you haven't purchased yet. I might try these out and see what happens,

Quote:
Growth:
Plants are bought randomly, right? I'm pretty sure this is true but it's not clearly stated.

Yes, I've gone back and tried to make that clear. You get the top card in the Plant deck, which has been shuffled at the beginning of the game.

Quote:
Quote:
With (4) unique leaves

Does that mean I can't use 2 of one type of leaf and 1 of another and 1 of yet another? Oops, I see this is answered in the summary part, may want to put it in the main part.

It has been changed.

Quote:
Quote:
If a player's current collection space is full... she can purchase another Shelving Unit

So you can't purchase another unit unless your old ones are full? Might want to spell that out if true.

Yep, only when you're out of space are you allowed to get a new shelving unit. Since you can never be full at the beginning of your turn, as you lose one plant each round in the show, you'll always have to buy a plant first, as in the example.

Quote:
Quote:
However, they can exchange leaves 2:1 for a random leaf replacement of the from the store. The same exchange rate is used for plants.

So you can exchange two plants for one random plant? Again, if true, you might want to spell it out.

Changed as well.

Quote:
Show:
You don't explain how leaves would be scored, 1 or 2 points? I like the anti tieing mechanism.

Yes, leaves would score with the points on them. This hasn't happened yet in any games, but I wanted to make sure players would always have something to show.

Quote:
Quote:
She now has the option to replace any plants in her collection with those plants displayed in the show

Does the player who's plant is taken get the Pres' plant or is it discarded?

I've tried to make this clearer. The person who wins the show can look at all the plants played and trade them out with their own collection. Afer this, all the plants in the show are discarded. You will only be able to get your show plant back if you're the president, and even then, at the cost of one plant in your collection. You can never end up with more plants than you started with.

Quote:
Maladies:
Does 1/4 "round down" mean that you lose a plant if you have 3 or does it mean you don't?

Yes, the maladies don't affect players with smaller collections as much. So in the beginning, Mini-heaters are not as valuable as they are at the end of the game when you could have about 7 plants.

Quote:

Pests seem like they would be around pretty much all the time. 5 unique leaves seems rather steep and if even one pest survives, they'll be back. Perhaps the pests could have a 1/4 side and a 1/2 side. First round: 1/4 side, second round 1/2, third round: spreads but dies on the starting place (immune plants).

In playtests, I had the chance for pests at 1/6, and they never showed up, so I upped it to 1/3, but haven't tested that out yet. I like the idea of pest immunity, perhaps you're immune until there's a round with no pests?

Quote:

Figure I should submit this before I lose it all. Best of luck.

Thanks again, I really appreicate the comments and ideas,

Mark

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

One idea for theme that is similar but might have more appeal is a Dog Show instead of a flower show. Using Puppies as currency however... you might want to consider that.

DarkDream
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Good Start

I went ahead and looked at the rules.

To echo the other posters, I do think a theme change is in order. I do think the mechanics hold together, but if you are really interested in marketing a board game I don't think plants is really going to appeal to the general public as much as other themes.

Let me begin by saying that your on-line rules are well done. The pictures are done really well and help clarify the rules.

My initial impression is that the game may too much influenced by luck. It appears to me that a player can easily get in the lead if he or she is lucky enough to get some good plants and types of leaves. Conversely, a set of malady roles (for instance a couple of cold snaps) may decimate a lot of players and put the one player with a mini-heater at a significant advantage for the rest of the game.

It also seems to me that there needs to be tougher decisions going on. It appears that players will develop one clear formula and go through the motions. I think players will always buy a mini-heater and a grow light at the earliest chance. I think players will always put their best plant in the show always.

Here are some suggestions to help provoke some thoughts. Maybe you can have a hidden goal card that if you fufill you get extra points at the end of the game (get X amount of Y plants). It would be neat if you could have growth cards for plants. Almost like with Pokemon cards you have an evolve card. Your plant could grow bigger and be worth more points and produce more leaves. However, it costs leaves to grow it bigger. The deal is you would be taking risks nuturing your plant to place it in the show as it may die due to a malady. It adds a bit of agonizing decision, should I get the points now, or try to grow it bigger and encounter the risk of the plant dying.

With radioactivity added in, why not have some weird mutant plant as one of the possible growth cards. Maybe have a mutant plant that can eat up other players plants or poision others.

Right now the game seems -- too nice! A game is got a lot of conflict going on. I would try to make it so you can try and sabatoge other players. Maybe a player can play an environment card on another player where the card has a pest on it that causes damage. Or even the other player plants pot seeds and the other player gets arrested at the show for growing illegal substances. I think you get the idea.

Anyway, I think you have a solid start and with some choice additions to add tension to the game with an alternation in theme, you could have a good game on your hands.

--DarkDream

Nazhuret
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

i'd have to disagree with most here about the theme.

i say keep it.

why? mostly for the same reasons people say to get rid of it. because it's niche and different. people can't associate with it.

well, i think maybe that's good. perhaps it's just my own current annoyance with what i see as the same old themes rehashed over and over again with the bare minumum of change.... perhaps it's because i have recently started to landscape my backyard and enjoy spending my weekend at the nursery... perhaps it's something else entirely...

anyway, from what i understand you didn't necessarily make this game to be marketed so much as you made it to combine your own and your wife's interests, correct? in that i would say you have succeeded remarkably.

now if you ARE looking to market this game i still think you've got a winner. niche? yes, absolutely. DO put up a booth at the local floral shows ...DO take some down to the local nursurey... i think it would be a hit.

i will take some time to look over the mechanics later.... got to get back to cleaning the house.... :(

Anonymous
Re: Good Start

DarkDream has a lot of good things to say.

DarkDream wrote:

To echo the other posters, I do think a theme change is in order.

I don't think you need a theme change, but I think that if you stick with the flowers, you'd better have really really good mechanics. Be prepared to sacrifice aspects of real life African Violets in exchange for playability.

DarkDream wrote:

Let me begin by saying that your on-line rules are well done. The pictures are done really well and help clarify the rules.

Agreed. But the board picture really screwed up my browser, slowed it down a lot. Probably just my old computer.

Here's a rather big unspecific change that is probably unimplementable. I imagine that flower growing is lots of work and tending that accumulates in a brief but brilliant show. You game is grow, show, grow, show, grow, show (alternative game title perhaps? Grow & Show). The show should feel like a big event. Perhaps something similar to El Grande's three rounds then score, three rounds then score. You can earn a few points during the growing phase but the big payoff comes at the show. Then again, all my knowledge of flower shows comes from your game and a King of the Hill episode.

DarkDream wrote:

Your plant could grow bigger and be worth more points and produce more leaves.

I like that idea. How each plant gains a leaf each round. The number of leaves on a plant is public knowledge, but the type plant itself is kept secret. Some plant types show better and some will give you harvesting bonuses. The plant maxes out at five (?) leaves. At any point you can scrap the plant and harvest all of the leaves (or take one for free?) or you can let it grow. The number of leaves it has is its score, plus a bonus for its type.

How about adding a bidding element? Start a round with a leaf seed, and players bid for it (1 unique! 2! 2 unique! 4! 4 unique!). Adds some interaction. Then you get a random flower type that you keep hidden.

Why does the president get her pick of the flowers, anyways? It seems that would create a runaway leader. Why not make the Pres give away leaves from the show winner while the losers get to keep their leaves?

Quote:

With radioactivity added in, why not have some weird mutant plant as one of the possible growth cards.

Yes! And when you release the Dog Show game, the radioactive plants can eat the toy dogs. Crossover action... sweet.

I'd be careful how much "Screw your neighbor" you add. Player interaction can go both ways, Munchkin (not a favorite of mine, however) mixes both Screw Your Neighbor with Help Your Neighbor quite well, IMO. You have that trading phase... hmmm....

I'd find a different way to do the maladies. Rolling a dice and seeing what happens is my least favorite game mechanic. If I think of a different way to incorperate maladies, I'll let you know. :)

- Sean

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Re: Good Start

DarkDream wrote:
To echo the other posters, I do think a theme change is in order. I do think the mechanics hold together, but if you are really interested in marketing a board game I don't think plants is really going to appeal to the general public as much as other themes.

It is something I worry about.. when I tell gamer friends about the game, they say "What?" But my wife tells her friends about it, they say "Oh, cool!" I guess it depends on what audience I'm shooting for. I would never see this as a gamer's game, but I'd like it to have more depth than a filler. Any suggestions for other themes would be greatly appreciated.
Maybe a competitive mushroom foray, with poisonous or psychadelic mushrooms in the mix?
Quote:

Let me begin by saying that your on-line rules are well done. The pictures are done really well and help clarify the rules.

Thanks, I owe a large portion of my art talent to Adobe Illustrator :).
Quote:

My initial impression is that the game may too much influenced by luck. It appears to me that a player can easily get in the lead if he or she is lucky enough to get some good plants and types of leaves.

Luck is a factor, definately, but I was trying to make sure there were enough ways to victory that most hands will look good depending on what you choose to collect. Sure, Chimera's are great, although radioactive, but so are Violets and Whites, if you can collect enough of them.

One of the ideas I was trying to use was having collections scored as in Poker, with the added dimension of having different hand sizes possible. It is possible to get some good plants at the beginning, but each show you lose one plant in your hand. I want player to have to decide, is it better to go for lots of plants, or keep it small and have more valuable plants?

I can see what you mean about leaves, the Varigated leaves seem a bit too powerful. They are twice as rare, but have a little more than twice the purchase power. I'll have to rethink these proportions, thanks for pointing this out.

Quote:

Conversely, a set of malady roles (for instance a couple of cold snaps) may decimate a lot of players and put the one player with a mini-heater at a significant advantage for the rest of the game.

It also seems to me that there needs to be tougher decisions going on. It appears that players will develop one clear formula and go through the motions. I think players will always buy a mini-heater and a grow light at the earliest chance. I think players will always put their best plant in the show always.

Buying a mini-heater the first round it's always best, since it means you have less plants, and less leaves. I think it's better to see how long you can go without buying one, since they're expensive at the beginning, but cost "less" once you have more leaves to spare. It's risky, but it does work sometimes. Also, I have a tendency to buy the grow-lights too early, before I can really use them, since that round I'll be buying one less plant; it's hard (at least for me) to find the right time to buy them.

I've tried to balance the "best plant" option with a couple penalties. By making the most expensive ones radioactive; if you keep playing that best plant, you'll lose 10 points at the end. When you win the show, it puts you at risk for pests, and it forcing you to play in the show first next round and have others play based on your show plant score. Also, If you don't win, you've just lost that plant. I've found it good to sluff off sometimes, especially when I'm collecting mini-doubles, since I don't want to risk losing the show, loosing my plant, or end up with pests.
Also, the higher plants you play in the show, the closer the game gets to ending. It takes a while to get a good collection of plants that will score major points at the end, so you really want the game to go slower, if only everyone else would play lower cards in the show. :)

Quote:

Here are some suggestions to help provoke some thoughts. Maybe you can have a hidden goal card that if you fufill you get extra points at the end of the game (get X amount of Y plants). It would be neat if you could have growth cards for plants. Almost like with Pokemon cards you have an evolve card. Your plant could grow bigger and be worth more points and produce more leaves. However, it costs leaves to grow it bigger. The deal is you would be taking risks nuturing your plant to place it in the show as it may die due to a malady. It adds a bit of agonizing decision, should I get the points now, or try to grow it bigger and encounter the risk of the plant dying.

I do love hidden goals. They might work well here, and confuse the other players as to what you're trying to collect. I like it, I'll see what I can do with it.
Quote:

With radioactivity added in, why not have some weird mutant plant as one of the possible growth cards. Maybe have a mutant plant that can eat up other players plants or poision others.

Well, the radioactivity is partially based in truth. A company which sells african violets had some seeds sent into space to be exposed to cosmic radiation for a few years, and the plants from those seeds have grown to twice the size, with weird color patterns, etc. But I like the mutant or poison ideas...
Quote:

Right now the game seems -- too nice! A game is got a lot of conflict going on. I would try to make it so you can try and sabatoge other players. Maybe a player can play an environment card on another player where the card has a pest on it that causes damage. Or even the other player plants pot seeds and the other player gets arrested at the show for growing illegal substances. I think you get the idea.

I like the use of antagonistic environment cards. There used to be some more negatives, and I took them out to simplify things, but I agree that it's lost some of the tension and conflict. It's fun to mess with other people's collections. Growing pot, that's great!

What if the maladies were the choice of the president? Roll 1 or 2, they get pests, otherwise they choose between the other 4 options? This could make for some interesting decisions, I don't know.

Quote:

Anyway, I think you have a solid start and with some choice additions to add tension to the game with an alternation in theme, you could have a good game on your hands.

I really appreciate the comments and your time, this is definately making me think and see the game from many different angles. Thanks, DarkDream.

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Nazhuret wrote:

anyway, from what i understand you didn't necessarily make this game to be marketed so much as you made it to combine your own and your wife's interests, correct? in that i would say you have succeeded remarkably.

Wow, thanks! I must admit, I know more about her plant collection than I ever did before, and she's become more interested in strategy euro-games, so it was win-win for us.

Maybe I'm worrying too much about the theme, although I'm glad to have the discussion, it's just what I was looking for. If I were to submit to a publisher, should I have other themes in mind, or is theme-changing something they would take care of, as happened with Balloon Cup or Employee of the Month? Someone posted elsewhere that their train game was returned to them mostly on grounds of theme... I'm starting to get off-topic here, back to the game...

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Re: Good Start

Grendel wrote:
Here's a rather big unspecific change that is probably unimplementable. I imagine that flower growing is lots of work and tending that accumulates in a brief but brilliant show. You game is grow, show, grow, show, grow, show (alternative game title perhaps? Grow & Show). The show should feel like a big event. Perhaps something similar to El Grande's three rounds then score, three rounds then score. You can earn a few points during the growing phase but the big payoff comes at the show. Then again, all my knowledge of flower shows comes from your game and a King of the Hill episode.

This could work, and is definate food for thought; yes, it would be a major reengineering of how to assign intermediate points. I might come back to this later, if shows prove to be too anticlimatic.
Quote:

How about each plant gains a leaf each round. The number of leaves on a plant is public knowledge, but the type plant itself is kept secret. Some plant types show better and some will give you harvesting bonuses. The plant maxes out at five (?) leaves. At any point you can scrap the plant and harvest all of the leaves (or take one for free?) or you can let it grow. The number of leaves it has is its score, plus a bonus for its type.

I'm not really sure I follow how this would work, it looks like this would introduce even more leaves into the mix.

Or do you mean you don't receive leaves for a plant unless it is played in the show? This way, valuable show plants could be worth less in leaves, the inverse for less valuable show plants, and you'd have to choose if you want more leaves this next round, or more points in the show, a nice hard decision...

Quote:

How about adding a bidding element? Start a round with a leaf seed, and players bid for it (1 unique! 2! 2 unique! 4! 4 unique!). Adds some interaction. Then you get a random flower type that you keep hidden.

Why does the president get her pick of the flowers, anyways? It seems that would create a runaway leader. Why not make the Pres give away leaves from the show winner while the losers get to keep their leaves?

This was added to cut down on the luck of the draw, as too many plants you needed were just passing you by in the deck. If you really want a plant someone else has played in the show, it's possible to get it. Another thought was to be able to purchase from the discard pile as well.

Now bidding, I hadn't thought of. hmm... do you mean bidding for plants or for leaves?

Quote:

I'd be careful how much "Screw your neighbor" you add. Player interaction can go both ways, Munchkin (not a favorite of mine, however) mixes both Screw Your Neighbor with Help Your Neighbor quite well, IMO. You have that trading phase... hmmm....

It is a delicate balance, as I'm not one for Screw Your Neighbor games (bad memories of Sorry as a kid...). I'll probably err on the side of Helping in the end, but right now I agree, it's a little too nice.
Quote:

I'd find a different way to do the maladies. Rolling a dice and seeing what happens is my least favorite game mechanic. If I think of a different way to incorperate maladies, I'll let you know. :)

My first idea was to have maladies as random environment cards that could show up unexpectedly in the deck, but people wouldn't purchase environment cards because of that, so I made them mandatory. I am very willing to change the die roll if I can find a better mechanic, perhaps president choice as I mentioned in reply to DarkDream?

Thanks again, these are great comments,

Mark

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Here are my initial thoughts. You've made a very nice presentation! The pictures really helped. You have some very cool mechanics in here, especially regarding the Show. I like the basic game you've got here!

On the topic of the flower theme: some have said keep the theme, while others say find a new one. Personally, I think the game seems to work well with the current theme. So, I say don't change it right now, as it isn't yet clear that theme is a problem. If it eventually does become clear that it's a problem, change it. These mechanics should translate easily into a financial or economic theme.

I put a bunch of thought into the question of how to reduce the number of components. Basically, I think that the Environment Deck can be eliminated. Here are two different ways of doing it, based on fixing a different thing that I didn't really like.

What was the thing I didn't like? It was the Malady Roll. It's not that I mind a forced random negative occurence every single turn (after all, you said these flowers are fickle about their environment). What bothered me was that this is the ONLY place in the whole game where you need a die roll. The die roll felt out of place to me. Okay, so the two ways I propose to fix the Environment deck/component "problem" involve either adding die rolls or removing them entirely.

Solution 1: Change the Environment Deck to be more like the Malady rolls by rolling on a table of outcomes. You pay 2 leaves for some random benefit. You could list out exactly the same bonuses your environment cards currently give. So what if everyone knows what you rolled -- I imagine you'd get some pretty nosey competitors coming to visit your greenhouse from time to time. (Maybe that's when they'd plant the pot in your pots!) Doing this gives you two places in the game where you need a die roll while keeping the function of the Environment deck and eliminating extra cards. (It also reduces your production costs.)

Solution 2A: Take the cards in your Environment Deck and turn them into things you can buy from the Store, just like the Mini-heaters and Grow Lights. You already have the Store mechanic, why not tighten that up? You could raise the leaf cost of the fertilizers and make them permanent bonuses (unless a Malady wipes them out -- call it "Repotting Accident" or some such). This gets the extra components down to a single card per player (for each thing in the Environment deck), and makes the player decide when they want to or can afford to invest in something.

Solution 2B: Well, that didn't remove the isolated Malady die roll, so here then is part two of my suggestion. For this, why not consider a bidding mechanism? Each player makes a secret leaf bid (zero or more) that represents their diligence in tending their plants. All players reveal simultaneously and look up the sum total on a chart. Perhaps something like this:
20+ = Nothing happens to anyone's plants.
16-19 = Plant Exchange
14-15 = Power Surge (lowest bidder with a grow light gets zapped)
12-13 = Repotting Accident (lowest bidder spills their special soil)
10-11 = Cold Snap (gets many people)
6-9 = Mildew (gets all people)
1-5 = Pests (lowest bidder gets infected now, others shortly!)
Of course, you'd have to figure out the right ranges, but the player who bids low should be more severely penalized. This kind of thing also gives you a wider range of effects than rolling a die. It might also generate some of the decision-making someone else was asking about.

On to some other notes.

Does there really need to be 5 different kinds of leaves? Most of which get dealt randomly? I haven't playtested it, but it seems to me this will make it somewhat harder to get the leaf combinations you need for what you want to buy. And why should Grow Lights and Mini-Heaters require unique types of leaves? I don't see a thematic reason why this should be so. It just makes obtaining them harder. You can simplify these parts of the game (and perhaps shift the challenge from random collecting to deciding when and what to buy). It's a thought, anyway.

Why is trading-in (during Growth stage) done at random? If there's a thematic reason, that's fine, just tell me. If I'm going to trade in 3 same kind of leaves, it seems to me that I should get a plant of that kind. Or if I trade leaves 2-for-1, shouldn't I get the kind of leaf I want in return? What happens if I try to trade 2 Round leaves, hoping for a Pointed Leaf, but draw another Round one at random? I've essentially thrown away my game currency!

Now, I have to say that I am fascinated by your Show mechanic in which a player's score goes down if a later player *chooses* to wind up with that score. The order of play REALLY matters. Very cool. I don't think I've ever seen this before. How have your playtesters liked it?

Then combine that with the new Club President getting to swap in and out from the flowers shown. You've got a very interesting setup here. It seems to me that this should generate some very interesting interactions over the course of several turns (what with the President going first next time ...).

Oh, I almost forgot. You should mention somewhere in the rules why you have radioactive plants in the game (for those of us who didn't know anything about the cosmically-exposed seeds). In the final scoring, though, it seems to me that everyone with radiation tokens should get penalties, maybe -2 per token. If someone gets "sick" from having 4 tokens, shouldn't the players with 3 tokens feel something too?

And a typo: under the Mildew Malady, you typed "All players will receive lose 1/4 ..." Remove the word "receive."

I hope these ideas help. At least, they should give you something to think about. Of course, keep in mind your target audience. If you want your game to appeal to us gamers (or players more like me), perhaps reducing the randomness in favor of strategic decisions would help (perhaps). If your target audience is the growers, then perhaps keeping the more randomish elements is in fact appropriate. If you want to hit that crossover market, well, you'll just have to find the right balance. But think about the key points of the game and ask if there might be a different way to implement them that keeps whatever flavor you want while simplifying and/or improving the game play.

Okay, that's enough from me. Thanks for listening. Good luck with this! You've got some really great ideas here! (And an awesome wife who's willing to take part in this!)

Captain Sky

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Here's one other thought on the topic of theme. It's nice to find a game that provides interaction and competition but does not involve killing or attacking or war. You know, something I can play with the kids ...

Captain Sky

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Captain_Sky wrote:
Here are my initial thoughts. You've made a very nice presentation! The pictures really helped. You have some very cool mechanics in here, especially regarding the Show. I like the basic game you've got here!

Thanks, I appreciate your time spent reading the rules and making these detailed comments.
Quote:

Solution 2A: Take the cards in your Environment Deck and turn them into things you can buy from the Store, just like the Mini-heaters and Grow Lights....

More things at the store makes sense, thanks. I especially like the fertilizer being a store product, purchased by 3 unique leaves; I could have them both affected by a single malady later on. I think this would mean getting rid of Double Crown, maybe even Symmetry and making Phosphate worth +2 in the show, but the Sneak Peek would stay, and would have to be used immediately. Then I'm down to only 8 bits of stuff instead of 38 cards, nice!
Quote:

Solution 2B: Well, that didn't remove the isolated Malady die roll, so here then is part two of my suggestion. For this, why not consider a bidding mechanism? Each player makes a secret leaf bid (zero or more) that represents their diligence in tending their plants.

That is an excellent idea, I like it the more I think about it. Each player gets say 5 leaves automatically from the show instead of 3, plus 2 for each plant in their collection, and can bid between 0 - 3 leaves. I think this would have to happen between propogation and trading, probably skipped the first round for simplicity. I'd have to work out the penalty schedule, and how to decide who gets pests if there's a tie, but this could really work. I should play more games that involve bidding, it seems to be a common mechanic these days and I need more exposure to it.
Quote:

Does there really need to be 5 different kinds of leaves? Most of which get dealt randomly? I haven't playtested it, but it seems to me this will make it somewhat harder to get the leaf combinations you need for what you want to buy. And why should Grow Lights and Mini-Heaters require unique types of leaves? I don't see a thematic reason why this should be so. It just makes obtaining them harder. You can simplify these parts of the game (and perhaps shift the challenge from random collecting to deciding when and what to buy). It's a thought, anyway.

In the books and websites I've looked at, there are really about 20 types of distinct leaves, so limiting it to only 5 was a real cutback. It seems to be as easy to randomly get 3 of the same leave type as it is to get 3 different ones, but hard to do both at the same time, which is what I was going for. Also, I hope it inspires more trading. There's not a thematic motive for that mechanic, just trying to introduce a hard decision; I could say the store wants to be able to grow a variety of new plants next season...
Quote:

Why is trading-in (during Growth stage) done at random? If there's a thematic reason, that's fine, just tell me. If I'm going to trade in 3 same kind of leaves, it seems to me that I should get a plant of that kind. Or if I trade leaves 2-for-1, shouldn't I get the kind of leaf I want in return? What happens if I try to trade 2 Round leaves, hoping for a Pointed Leaf, but draw another Round one at random? I've essentially thrown away my game currency!

Yes, this is a problem, and there's no theme reason for it. No one has ever traded leaves 2:1 except me, and it failed miserably, as I just lost leaves. I've been thinking of ways to associate the leaves with the plants, something I hadn't even considered before, because it would mean 4 dimensions per card, but here's an idea:

Each plant card now has a type of leaf on the back, uniformly decided at random, so say the Chimeras would have one of each type of leaf, the Reds two of each type, Violets three of each type, etc. This will make 5 piles of plants, which should be shuffled. When you use 3 Boy leaves of the same type to grow a plant, you pick the top card from the Plant deck with Boy leaves on the back. At propogation, you can pick 5 leaves (given I add the bidding above) however you want, and then you get two leaves per plant, but now you get the particluar leaf on the back of your plant. I'll have to work this out more, but I think it would work, reducing randomness and adding more strategy about what plants to keep, since your highest might also be generating you a needed leaf type. I think this would make the leaves uniform instead of Variegated being rare.

Quote:

Now, I have to say that I am fascinated by your Show mechanic in which a player's score goes down if a later player *chooses* to wind up with that score. The order of play REALLY matters. Very cool. I don't think I've ever seen this before. How have your playtesters liked it?

Then combine that with the new Club President getting to swap in and out from the flowers shown. You've got a very interesting setup here. It seems to me that this should generate some very interesting interactions over the course of several turns (what with the President going first next time ...).

Thanks. It came out of wanting a clear winner in the show without having to break ties after all the cards are played, and it has worked out well. My playtesters like it, it's a little bit of info to keep track of, but not much, since it's over quickly, and it can change what card you were planning on playing. I like how it means you can win without playing a higher card, which is good for keeping the total points less than 40 and extending the game. The club president rotates almost every turn, and the winner is not always the last to play.

Quote:

Oh, I almost forgot. You should mention somewhere in the rules why you have radioactive plants in the game (for those of us who didn't know anything about the cosmically-exposed seeds). In the final scoring, though, it seems to me that everyone with radiation tokens should get penalties, maybe -2 per token. If someone gets "sick" from having 4 tokens, shouldn't the players with 3 tokens feel something too?

I'm inclined to keep the "most radioactive collection" penalty for now, as it can influence whether you play a plant or not in the show based on how many you've played before as well as how many others have played before. I see what you mean thematically... perhaps there could be a -5 if you're second, -3 if you're third?

Oh, and I'll add a link to the cosmic radiation site to the rules, good idea.

Quote:

And a typo: under the Mildew Malady, you typed "All players will receive lose 1/4 ..." Remove the word "receive."

Fixed.
Quote:

Okay, that's enough from me. Thanks for listening. Good luck with this! You've got some really great ideas here! (And an awesome wife who's willing to take part in this!)

Your comments are extremely helpful and make me consider some elements that were subconciously there but seem unnecessary now, and your suggestions look very promising. Thanks!

Mark

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

ensor, I think I got carried away in my post and started coming up with lots of ideas. Guess your game inspired me. :)

I'll focus on the one I didn't communicate very well. Rather than having the back of the plant card simply say plant, put a drawing on it that has space for 5 leaves. The leaves are kept on the plants rather than in "bank". A plant starts with one leaf and adds one each round. That way you're limited by the number of plants you have.

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Grendel wrote:
ensor, I think I got carried away in my post and started coming up with lots of ideas. Guess your game inspired me. :)

I'll focus on the one I didn't communicate very well. Rather than having the back of the plant card simply say plant, put a drawing on it that has space for 5 leaves. The leaves are kept on the plants rather than in "bank". A plant starts with one leaf and adds one each round. That way you're limited by the number of plants you have.

No problem, I understand your idea now, thanks for the clarification. With a change to repeated growth stages before a show as you suggested, this makes perfect sense. Maybe 1 first, then 2, then 4, or something else non-linear, to encourage a little bit of waiting before you harvest the leaves. If I go this route, I'll definately keep this in mind. Thanks, glad the game inspired some thoughts.

Mark

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
New Version of Rules

Ok, based on the great suggestions here, I have a new version of the rules:

http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~richm/ultra-violets/indexV0.7.html

Major changes include associating plants with a leaf type. There are now 5 decks of plants, one for each leaf type, with plants evenly distributed between them. Using 3 Variegated leaves will get you one plant from the Variegated pile, and this plant will produce 2 Variegated leaves next round. Players now have to diversify their leaf production to be able to purchase all the types of plants they would need for a good collection, especially if you want the All Same Variety bonus. Also, you may not want to play your best plant if you really need that type of leaf.

The Evironment deck is gone, replaced by more store products and less overall components (yay!)

Pests can be killed by the Soap, which gives you immunity until all pest are gone; I think will get rid of the cycling pest problem.

Also, the malady die roll was replaced by leaf bidding, which seems to add a little game-theory decision to things. You can influence the final outcome, but there's still some uncertainty until all the leaves are revealed.

I haven't had time to redraw the pictures, hopefully this weekend I can make some new images.

Thanks for all the advice and suggestions! :D

DarkDream
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

I went over the second version of the rules and like it quite a bit better than the first version.

I think getting rid of the environmental cards was a good idea. I don't think it was absolutely needed.

I like the simplification with the leaves and the plants where there are five leaves and five types of plants. One idea is to have a wild card plant that produces leaves except you get to choose the leaves when it grows.

I am not sure I like your peek rule of four leaves. The rule just does not really fit with the overall feel of the game.

Why not make the show even more of an event in winning by only allowing the new Club President to get five leaves. Instead of maybe allowing the President to exchange a plant, the new President gets all the leaves from plants displayed in the show.

I think the bidding for the maladies is a very interesting mechanic that either can be great or too chaotic. I would play test this and maybe experience with changing the malady positions to get the most fun out of the players. I think this is really neat.

To harp back to my previous post, I think the idea of enabling the plants to grow (can replace with a stage 2 card or something) and produce more leaves would still be a good idea. This sets up the agonizing decision of whether I play my plant now and get a sure 2 points or go ahead and risk growing it to get more leaves and hope a malady doesn't occur that kills my plant.

Anyway, good job on coming up with the second set of rules. I think the game is evolving pretty well.

--DarkDream

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Mark,

I like what you're doing with the game. The rules feel noticeably tighter now. Good show! (Pun absolutely intended.)

I'm inclined to agree with DarkDream that the Sneak Peek for 4 leaves doesn't quite fit thematically. In addition, you get to see what the Club President swaps in and out of their collection, so you should get an idea of what they have or are aiming for. In addition, I think you mentioned that the Presidency tends to switch every turn, so an observant player should wind up with a decent idea of what the others are hiding. This makes the Sneak Peek unnecesary. I guess an important question is how often did your playtesters use this option?

I have a question regarding the trumping of another player's score during a Show. The example you gave in your rules has Laura displaying a 6 point plant, and Mark showing a 6 point plant that bumps Laura's score down to 5. In your example, Burr plays a 5 point plant to further reduce Laura's score. What if Burr played a 6 point plant instead? Certainly Mark's score will get trumped and bumped down. What happens to Laura's score? Does it remain at 5? Or does it bump down again in a sort of trickle-down effect?

In an earlier example (under Growth), Laura must have done some pretty impressive trading in order to get 13 leaves since she doesn't appear to have Grow Lights (and therefore could not have started the turn with more than 10 leaves). Under Propagation, it specifically says that players without Grow Lights cannot have more than 10 leaves in hand at a time. Is this limit supposed to be enforced constantly or only at the end of Propagation? If it is a constant check, then the example is wrong and this point should be made more clearly earlier in the rules and especially in the Trading section. If it is only checked once, say at the end of Propagation, then that rule should be clarified there in Propagation.

As for the Malady Bid, playtesting is definitely the next order of business, but I wonder if capping the bid to a 3 leaf max will make it all too predictable? What if everyone bid their max of 3 in order to effectively remove the Maladies entirely? Would the economics of the game support that turn after turn? And would that actually be a bad thing? Of course, since you can only hold 10-16 leaves, it is a pretty heavy hit to bid 3 each turn!

An initial concern upon studying your Malady Bid table was that the other players might consistently gang up on the Club President by bidding 0 while the Pres bids 3. Having looked at the table a little longer, I'm not as convinced that could happen, but I figured I'd mention it. In playtesting, look to see if there is some bidding strategy that the players would learn to use (due to leaf economics) that essentially did the same thing each turn but possibly with a rotating cast of characters.

An example of this might be the realization that I can guarantee that I won't lose 2 leaves to Mildew if I bid at least 1 leaf. So, if everyone believes that, then the group of players winds up bidding high enough (each turn!) that the Mildew and Cold Snap maladies would never happen.
Note also that if I as a player believe this works, then I will never need to buy a Mini-Heater, since I will never ever see a Cold Snap. So the question becomes, does that actually happen in playing the game? If it does, can you restructure the bidding chart to prevent that? Would eliminating the max bid fix it? I don't know. Not having played, I don't really understand the economics and the dynamics well enough.

I hope this helps. (I'm not going overboard with the analysis, am I?)

Captain_Sky

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

DarkDream wrote:
One idea is to have a wild card plant that produces leaves except you get to choose the leaves when it grows.

That could be fun, maybe randomly shuffle one in per deck? I think the Nitrogen Fertilizer has some of this already, since you can choose the leaves you want for these 2 bonus leaves.
Quote:

I am not sure I like your peek rule of four leaves. The rule just does not really fit with the overall feel of the game.

It did feel out of place when I rewrote the rules, and I agree, it's not necessary. Part of what I want to be fun about the game is trying to guess what everyone else is collecting, and this sort of weakens that element. It's been removed. Without it, people should be paying much more attention to who plays what in the show, I hope.
Quote:

Why not make the show even more of an event in winning by only allowing the new Club President to get five leaves. Instead of maybe allowing the President to exchange a plant, the new President gets all the leaves from plants displayed in the show.

Here's my thinking behind the free leaves. I found in playing the game that you need an extra boost to get going in the beginning, so that's why all the players get these extra leaves for being in the show. Also, if you run out of plants and just put a leaf in the show, I'd like there to be some way to recover. You'll be behind, but you won't be out of the game.

I bumped it up to 5 so that players would have leaves left after the Malady bidding, but now I think that gives players too much freedom to choose the leaves they need. I've changed it back to 3, but now players start with 2 plants, which should give them an equivalent boost but with more restricted leaf production. I want it to be a struggle to have more than 6 plants by the end of the game, but not so much that you can't grow at all. If all you can do is restock your collection with one plant after losing a plant to the show, it's not as much fun, and you never really get a choice of what plants to keep around for your collection.

I'll keep thinking about this part, and the effects of swapping out plants on game balance, it is definately something to watch for, thanks.

Quote:

I think the bidding for the maladies is a very interesting mechanic that either can be great or too chaotic. I would play test this and maybe experience with changing the malady positions to get the most fun out of the players. I think this is really neat.

Yes, playtesting will be key, I hope I've set it up so some situations you want to bid all 3, and others you want to bid nothing or something in between, and players should be at different situations to make things even more interesting. I really hope this part works out.
Quote:

To harp back to my previous post, I think the idea of enabling the plants to grow (can replace with a stage 2 card or something) and produce more leaves would still be a good idea. This sets up the agonizing decision of whether I play my plant now and get a sure 2 points or go ahead and risk growing it to get more leaves and hope a malady doesn't occur that kills my plant.

I'm having trouble seeing how this would work, I'm probably misunderstanding what you're suggesting. Plants that you play in the show are discarded and you receive no leaves for them, only for plants left in your collection. Should I have a 2x counter that you place on a plant instead of receiving leaves from it in propogation, so next time, to make it a double-or-nothing gamble? I could see this being worth it after 2 rounds, where you get 8 leaves now instead of 2 each turn for 6 total.... But with the game over after 7-9 rounds, it doesn't leave you with much time, and you really don't get enough leaves to do everything you want as it is.. Although with these new costs and rules, the game might need more than 40 points to get to a good stopping point. So many things to change and adjust... :)
Quote:

Anyway, good job on coming up with the second set of rules. I think the game is evolving pretty well.

Thanks, your comments are definately helpful and thought-provoking, and I appreciate your time.

Mark

ensor
Offline
Joined: 08/23/2008
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Captain_Sky wrote:

I like what you're doing with the game. The rules feel noticeably tighter now. Good show! (Pun absolutely intended.)

Thanks again for your help and bidding suggestions, I knew there were things not working right in the game, but I couldn't put my finger on them until puting it up in the GDW. GDW rocks! :)
Quote:
I'm inclined to agree with DarkDream that the Sneak Peek for 4 leaves doesn't quite fit thematically I guess an important question is how often did your playtesters use this option?

I think ya'll are right, the Sneak Peek is gone. In playtests, this was only really used right before the last round, to see what a player's collected and make some last minute judgements as to how you compare. I think it will be more interesting without it. Some said "I wish I could do this," so I added things in, but looking back, wanting to do things you can't is going to be more interesting, I hope.
Quote:

I have a question regarding the trumping of another player's score during a Show. The example you gave in your rules has Laura displaying a 6 point plant, and Mark showing a 6 point plant that bumps Laura's score down to 5. In your example, Burr plays a 5 point plant to further reduce Laura's score. What if Burr played a 6 point plant instead? Certainly Mark's score will get trumped and bumped down. What happens to Laura's score? Does it remain at 5? Or does it bump down again in a sort of trickle-down effect?

This came up when I was explaining the rules, and we decided against the trickle-down effect. But it was an arbitrary choice, and I'm not sure which one would be better, only affecting the people with the same score, or having bumps cause bumps? The only theme influence I can think of would be that judges save high scores for the end in case they see some really impressive plant, and that's why plants played later will bump earlier plants...
Quote:

In an earlier example (under Growth), Laura must have done some pretty impressive trading ...

Oops, good catch, that's been fixed, thanks. With only three plants, she shouldn't have been able to get 13 leaves... Methinks she's been cheating. ;)
Quote:

As for the Malady Bid, playtesting is definitely the next order of business, but I wonder if capping the bid to a 3 leaf max will make it all too predictable? What if everyone bid their max of 3 in order to effectively remove the Maladies entirely? Would the economics of the game support that turn after turn? And would that actually be a bad thing? Of course, since you can only hold 10-16 leaves, it is a pretty heavy hit to bid 3 each turn!

Yes, losing 3 leaves per turn is a big hit, I think it would mean you can buy one less thing, since store products and plants cost at least 3 leaves. Unless you have the Nitrogen fertilizer to replace them next round, it's going to cost you. Which is why I made the Expiration a fairly high malady; if most people are willing to risk 3 leaves, and one chooses to go for 0 (for the 4 player game), then Fertilizer will go away.

I tried to put the ideal Malady for different situations on opposite sides of the scale. I wanted Pest in the middle, since the should't be able to be directly avoided by the President, and Cold Snap and Power Surge on either side to push different players in different directions. Say you don't have a mini-heater, so you definately want to bid all 3 leaves to make sure the Cold Snap doesn't happen, but if there's more than one person without a mini-heater, maybe you can get away with bidding slightly less. Of course, if no-one bids anything, then everyone loses 2 leaves from Mildew, so it might be worth it to bid a little. On the opposite end is the Power Surge, which affects grow-light people, so they should bid low to help eliminate that option. Players will have to balance protecting their store products, making other players lose their store products, and causing the Club President to get pests. We'll see how it goes!

Quote:

I'm not going overboard with the analysis, am I?

Nope, this is great, you're getting into details that I definately need to focus on to make it as clear and straightforward as possible. Thanks!

Anonymous
Game 28: Ultra Violets by ensor

Quote:
This came up when I was explaining the rules, and we decided against the trickle-down effect. But it was an arbitrary choice, and I'm not sure which one would be better, only affecting the people with the same score, or having bumps cause bumps? The only theme influence I can think of would be that judges save high scores for the end in case they see some really impressive plant, and that's why plants played later will bump earlier plants...

It seems to me that the real effect here is that the score-trump guarantees a unique winner for the Show. If you enforce the trickle-down as well, the effect ensures that everyone's score is distinct. Forget theme for a moment. If you can think of a game reason why this is better than simply guaranteeing a unique winner, then do the trickle-down. I don't know how the game scores in practice, so I'm not a good judge. If you think that you might want to break ties throughout the game, then the trickle-down would help ensure that as each player will earn a different number of points in this step. Also, the trickle-down may serve to punish the Club President rather severely if they invested a fair number of leaves in a good plant, only to have it be devalued by three points at the end of the Show! Of course, maybe this would balance out over the course of the game since it could potentially happen to every Club Pres every turn, or maybe it just doesn't happen all that often. I don't know. I guess it might make players not want to be Club President until the very last turn of the game when they cross 40 points for the win. Would that make players actively try to *not* win the Show? That might get wierd.

... hmm perhaps trickle-down might not be so good for the game after all.

Captain Sky

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut