Skip to Content
 

Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

20 replies [Last post]
Anonymous

First of all, let me thank everyone for taking their time to participate in the GDW.

This is the first game where I started with a theme (hitchhiking) and created a mechanic that represented the theme. I was too successful - the first and second versions of the game felt like the players were wandering aimlessly with no purpose.

After learning from the first two play test sessions, I started again - from scratch. There are a few similarities. For example, both games contain hitchhikers and ships. But with this version I simplified scoring and added a lot more opportunities to score. The game transformed from a race game to a set collecting game.

Without further ado, here are the rules and board

http://www.hagerfamily.com/games/intergalactic-hitchhikers/rules.pdf
http://www.hagerfamily.com/games/intergalactic-hitchhikers/board-small.pdf

There is a scoring track that does not appear in this digital version. It was added after printing the board and scores 0-99.

I am looking for feedback in general. However, if you want to think about particular questions here are a few things that I hope to discover:

    1. Does it sound fun?

2. Are the rules clear? Is there any section that needs clarity?

3a. Two examples of "Play When Arriving in Solar System" Challenge cards are "Visit a Solar System in the Orion Sector" and "Visit Sargas, Muhlifain, Menkar or Tejat". Do these sound like reasonable secret goals? Are they clear?

3b. Some examples of play "During Final Scoring Challenge Cards" are "Write at least 2 Blogs in the Cepheus Sector"; "Write the fewest Blogs in either the Orion, Cepheus or Gemini Sector", "Write a Blog for either Cepheus Iota, Depheus Delta or Alfirk" , "Have the most ships with a movement point cost of 2". Do these sound like reasonable secret goals? Are they clear?

Thanks
Jonathan

[/]
Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Can you give more of a description (or show more examples) of the Ship Tiles. From the 1 pictured example, it looks like it's destination is "Castor" and costs 2 movements points ... I'm not sure what the 3-by-2 grid in the lower-left is showing -- origin?

I assume that some ships take you to new solar systems within the same sector and some take you to completely new sectors ... is it possible for 2 players to be in the same solar system at the same time?

On the game board -- are the solar systems the labelled stars (the upper-left sector shows: Castor, Pollux, Wasat, Mebsuta, Tejat, Gemini Lambda, and Almesisan)? Or are they each of the sections within the sector grid (again, the upper-left sector shows labelled stars in just 5 of the 6 sections)?

-Bryk

jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Jonathan,

Thanks for sharing your game with us. It looks like it would be fun to play, and does a nice job of evoking the theme.

The game is pretty simple and you’ve explained it pretty well. The game feels pretty similar to Web of Power, with the twist that not only are you trying to control regions, but also trying to visit many systems. However, Web does a couple of things well that I think your game will run into problems with. The main concern I have is the tiles dictating where you’re allowed to move. In Web, you have cards that tell you where you can place, but to analogize with your game, they give the sector you can place in, but not the exact solar system. Furthermore, each card has 2 regions you can place in, AND, you can trade in any two like cards as a wild. So there’s some luck of the draw, for sure, but it’s mitigated quite a bit. In your game, it seems that your moves are completely scripted based on what tile is showing in the sector you’re located in. Am I missing something? Is there any choice in where you can move?

Even if there is, the tiles still seem too restrictive. Maybe there’s something big I’m not seeing, but it seems that you really need some way to allow players to pay more for a “free move”; maybe they use all 6 movement points to move anywhere on the board, or they can use the tiles to use those 6 movement points (even for 3 moves -- if you’re going to use an Action Point system, let players use all that you’ve alloted).

My only other main comment is that the map board is not very user-friendly. It’s hard to tell what constitutes a sector, or which draw areas go with which sectors. Part of the problem, I guess, is that most people probably don’t know the names of stars or what constellation they belong in, but it just seems that there would be a ton of analysis time taken up as people tried to figure out, if you have a choice of tiles that say “Rigel”, “Castor”, and “Vega”, where exactly all those destinations are at.

I do think the choices between “blogging” (one of the 2004 buzz words I find odious, but never mind...), taking instant points, or taking a challenge card, is interesting, though I’m sure you’ll have some work to do balancing all the payouts. But it’s a simple way of doing things that gives nice tension between trying to be in a lot of different places but also to have a majority in each place.

Good luck with the game!

-Jeff

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

"Ooops".
White, black and yellow cubes stated in introduction.
Black, white and green cubes used during set-up.
Green, black and yellow cubes used during the game...

It sounds fairly straight-forward, although I share Jeff's concerns over the map-board (a cute concept but remarkably difficult to follow; it probably does need colour-coding for the various sectors) and the limitations imposed by the tiles.

I do like the progression of the game: as it develops there are less options as the cubes are removed. I can see why the Challenge Cards are there, but it feels as though players need a couple to begin with, just to give them an initial strategy - otherwise I think the early turns would just be "go to sector, pick up card".

I assume the "travelling to more than 2 systems" line is supposed to mean that players may not take more than two tiles in a turn - in which case, it should say that!

One suggestion: there should be penalties for "failed" Challenges. This would make navigation hazardous if a player has to go to a sector where only the Challenge cube is left. Of course, this requires the action of taking a cube to be mandatory rather than optional.

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Brykovian wrote:
Can you give more of a description (or show more examples) of the Ship Tiles. From the 1 pictured example, it looks like it's destination is "Castor" and costs 2 movements points ... I'm not sure what the 3-by-2 grid in the lower-left is showing -- origin?

The ship tiles are very similar. The destination is shown in the upper left, the destination sector is shown in the lower left and the cost is shown in the lower right. The back of the tile (not shown) indicates the origin sector. There are three ships to each destination.

I'll add a section to the rules that highlights what each area of the tile represents. I was also thinking about making them different colors based on the destination sector too.

Brykovian wrote:
I assume that some ships take you to new solar systems within the same sector and some take you to completely new sectors

There are no ships that originate and end in the same sector. I have a cost grid that shows where all the tiles are. Would that be useful to understanding the game? It should not be necessary to play the game as the tiles represent possible movement.

The movement cost for the ships is 2, 3, or 4. The total cost for the three ships to a single destination adds up to 8. How much it cost depends on the distance between the origin sector and destination solar system on the game board. For example, the tile to the Castor solar system from the Cepheus sector cost 2, the tile to the Castor solar system from Orion sector cost 3.

Brykovian wrote:
... is it possible for 2 players to be in the same solar system at the same time?

Yes. Two players may be on the same solar system or in the same sector at the same time. Currently, the only interaction is that the first player to arrive chooses what action they take and the other player may only do one of the other actions.

I'll add a section to the rules to clarify this since many gamers might expect some type of conflict or bonus when encountering other players. This might not be a bad idea; I'll have to think about it. I like how the game is focused on set collecting with a few auxiliary goals. But encounter other players might be a good auxiliary goal.

Brykovian wrote:
On the game board -- are the solar systems the labelled stars (the upper-left sector shows: Castor, Pollux, Wasat, Mebsuta, Tejat, Gemini Lambda, and Almesisan)? Or are they each of the sections within the sector grid (again, the upper-left sector shows labelled stars in just 5 of the 6 sections)?

The solar systems are the labeled star. For example, the upper-left sector shows Castor, Pollux, Wasat, Mebsuta, Tejat, Gemini Lambda, and Almesisan.

There are 6 sectors in the game. They are (in left-to-right and top-to-bottom order) Gemini, Cepheus, Orion, Scropius, Centaurus, and Cetus. I will label the sectors on the game board so it is obvious what they are. That should eliminate the need to either play with the designer or know astronomy.

A player's current sector determines where they can go while what a player can do is deteremined by what actions remain on his or her destination solar system.

Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Thanks, Jonathon ... that clears things up a bit.

I would have to echo Jeff's comment that you might want to interjet a bit more decision-making on the players' parts. Perhaps instead of only having 1 ship tile flipped over at a time in a sector (unless I'm reading that wrong), always have 3 face-up ... when someone jumps a ship, a new one is flipped up from the deck.

Also, instead of simply drawing a challenge card and *having* to reacte to it (and possibly take a penalty, like Scurra suggested) ... you could have them draw 2 and keep whichever one they'd like.

Also, in agreement with Jeff, I'd use some other term than "Blog" ... perhaps "write an article" or "journal" or something else generic and not so trendy.

I like a lot of things you have going here -- the theme, the action cubes limiting what players can do (and giving the only source of interaction, that I can tell), the game-end conditions.

I think it just needs a few more tweaks to open up the way players' decisions can impact the game -- and even each other.

-Bryk

DSfan
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Jonathan,

Thanks for sharing your game with us. From the looks of it, it is not to complex, and it sound's fun to play.

After being finally being able to post a replay (tough day) it looks like you've sum'ed up a lot of my questions.

Also, in argreement with Bryk, I think a few tweaks here and there will really expand the games depth, and enjoyment level.

Again, nice game, and thanks for sharing it.

-Justin

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

jwarrend wrote:
Thanks for sharing your game with us.

Thanks for looking at the game.

jwarrend wrote:
In your game, it seems that your moves are completely scripted based on what tile is showing in the sector you’re located in. Am I missing something? Is there any choice in where you can move?

When a player is in a sector there are three destination ships that are available to the player. The player must choose where to go from the available three ships. Towards the end of the game there may only be one or two tiles visible in each sector as the stacks disappear from the sector.

Apparently this isn't clear from the setup. "Shuffle the ship tiles for each sector and place 7 in each draw area"

jwarrend wrote:
It seems that you really need some way to allow players to pay more for a “free move”; maybe they use all 6 movement points to move anywhere on the board, or they can use the tiles to use those 6 movement points (even for 3 moves -- if you’re going to use an Action Point system, let players use all that you’ve alloted).

I think a "free move" is kind of against the idea of hitchhiking. However, if there was a penalty for it (directly in points) that might work. The issue is that the game currently ends neatly, since the number of actions equals the number of ships.

The reason for only being able to use 2 ship per turn was to prevent analysis paralysis. Being able to move to 2 solar systems means the player must ask What of 3 solar systems should I visit? What of 3 actions should I take when I am there? In my new sector what of 3 solar system should I visit? What of 3 actions should I take when I am there? This can be looked at as 4 different decisions or a fully expanded decision tree with 81 different choices.

If I increase it to allow 3 ships, the number of valid moves increases up to 729! Many of the decisions might get pruned since there are only 126 available actions in the game.

jwarrend wrote:
My only other main comment is that the map board is not very user-friendly. It’s hard to tell what constitutes a sector, or which draw areas go with which sectors.

Agreed. I am not very graphical. I will add color to the tiles to indicate their destination sector (that's what's important). I'll use the same color to outline the sectors. Also the tiles already have a small symbol indicating the destination sector. I will enlarge this too so it can be seen from across the table.

Jonathan

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Scurra wrote:
"Ooops".
White, black and yellow cubes stated in introduction.
Black, white and green cubes used during set-up.
Green, black and yellow cubes used during the game...

I was going to use white cubes but found yellow cubes for cheap. It should be green, black and yellow.

Scurra wrote:

I assume the "travelling to more than 2 systems" line is supposed to mean that players may not take more than two tiles in a turn - in which case, it should say that!

It means, "At most a player may visit two solar systems per a turn." I'll just say it that way.

Scurra wrote:

One suggestion: there should be penalties for "failed" Challenges. This would make navigation hazardous if a player has to go to a sector where only the Challenge cube is left. Of course, this requires the action of taking a cube to be mandatory rather than optional.

Good observation about the taking a cube being optional. It should have been mandatory. I updated the rule to be "Upon arriving in a solar system the player must do one of the following actions"

I have been debating if a player should be penalized for failed challenges. My issue with penalizing the player is that the challenges are drawn at random. However, by penalizing a player it would prevent a single player from being a "Challenge" Hog. I think this might need some play-testing to see how scoring works. For now I'll add a token 1 point penalty and see if I get any comments during my next play test session.

Thanks for your feedback.

Jonathan

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Brykovian wrote:
I would have to echo Jeff's comment that you might want to interjet a bit more decision-making on the players' parts. Perhaps instead of only having 1 ship tile flipped over at a time in a sector (unless I'm reading that wrong), always have 3 face-up ... when someone jumps a ship, a new one is flipped up from the deck.

You will always have three face-up when making a choice in a sector except near the end of the game. I am trying to figure out how to make this clear in the rules or on the game board.

Brykovian wrote:

Also, instead of simply drawing a challenge card and *having* to reacte to it (and possibly take a penalty, like Scurra suggested) ... you could have them draw 2 and keep whichever one they'd like.

I'll consider this. The penalty and drawing multiple cards sound like the mechanic in Ticket-to-Ride. This means I would also have to introduce a rule that the players reshuffle the Challenge Cards when the deck is empty. Also, I would need to increase the number of Challenge Cards. Of course, I could increase it to 50 or 54 without much of an affect on manufacturing cost.

How does this sound? A player may choose to takes 1 Challenge Card + 1 Point or 2 Challenges Cards and then discards 1 Challenge Card. At the end of the game, a player looses 1 point for each failed Challenge Card. A player must decide how many cards he or she is taking before looking at the first card. [My thoughts: A player is either getting a fair challenge or is net 0 points.]

Brykovian wrote:
Also, in agreement with Jeff, I'd use some other term than "Blog" ... perhaps "write an article" or "journal" or something else generic and not so trendy.

What about Take a Souvenir or Befriend the Ship's Captain. The ship is kind of a souvenir. I am not really tied to the idea of Blogging, journally or writing an article. Are there any other suggestions on what this third action should represent?

Again, Thanks for helping shape this game

Jonathan

Brykovian
Brykovian's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

jhager wrote:
What about Take a Souvenir or Befriend the Ship's Captain. The ship is kind of a souvenir. I am not really tied to the idea of Blogging, journally or writing an article. Are there any other suggestions on what this third action should represent?

I like the "take a souvenir" idea ... a lot of travelling folks that I know love to grab a tacky little momento of places they've been (a shotglass from Las Vegas, a miniature hula dancer from Hawaii, etc.). It could be a quick way to show off your travels.

-Bryk

Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Hi Jonathan

Thanks for sharing the game. I hade a really interesting time reading it.

Question 2: Are the rules clear.
When I started to read the rules it did not take long before I realized I did not understand the game at all. After the clarifications in the thread, there was no problem to understand them (the rules need to be updated with this information).

Question 1: Does it sound fun.
The game have a interesting theme (and I would probably get a copy for the theme), for a prototype the components look great, the rules are understandable (after update) but the answer to the question has to be no (a little bit hard but I think that you need to do a lot of rework to make it a good game).
There are three main reasons why I probably don’t like the game:
- Setup
- Interaction
- Simulation

Setup: This is a game that has a game time of 60 minutes to complete and have a setup of minimum 5 minute. There are too many components to set up before you can start. To play the game two times on an evening is out of the question.
- There are 126 tokens that have to be sorted into 6 piles and then they should be divided into 3 piles each with 7 tokens in each pile.
- There are 126 cubes in three colors that shall be divided into 42 piles with one of each color in each pile.

I can think of several ways to solve this problem:
- Do the other way around with cubes. When you have been on a solar system, then mark your action with a cube on that system.
- The ships does not need to be distributes into the final places. Just have 6 piles with 21 tokens (and place three from this pile into the sector).
- Another way is that combine the cubes with the space ships (you can add more victory combinations as have visiting all solar systems in a sector (and you don’t have to have any cubes)).

Interaction: I got the feeling that you have made a solo game for 3-6 players. There are not so many things you can do to interact with other players.

Simulation: There are very little I can do to change to outcome of the game. I got the feeling the choices are so limited, it will be a simulation of who get the best markers.

Interaction and simulation are actually the same problem. I can think of several ways to do things differently. This is one way:
Just let the ship cards/marker only be a destination indicator and a goal color (the cubes). The cards/markers can not be placed on there home sector and there can not be more then 2 more on one place then it is on the lowest number.
Setup: Each player set up a ship in a sector. Deal 3 cards/markers to each player. In order around the table, each player draw a card and place a card in each sector until 18 cards has been placed. Then can the game starts.
The turn: Each turn a player can/shall do the following:
- (optional) Exchange a card from the hand to any ship on the board or place a ship from the hand to the board (the player will have one card less).
- Move from the current sector to another sector (and the player can continue moving until he has moved 6 positions or can not move to a sector he has not been in this turn. The player can keep the cards.
- Draw the same number of cards from the deck and place them on the board.

(This is maybe a hard judgment on the game and the others seem to like it. You should probably listen to them).

// Johan

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Looks like a nice little game (by the way, on a side note, I'm back! Sorry I keep coming off and on the site, I've been way to busy with Christmas and school studies and just about anything else you could think of), and you managed to keep it simple, which is a plus, but also a minus in some ways.

After a quick skim of the rules, some questions:

1. Is there a limit to how many club challenges a player can take? Is there a penalty for not completing them?

2. How many players? I know it's a stupid question, but I swear I didn't see this anywhere.

-Aaron

Hamumu
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

I think the secret goals sound fine, but if I'm understanding the setup correctly, I'm gonna agree on overdrive with the comments that there is too much setup and too many fiddly bits. Are there really 3 cubes set on each DOT on the map? It seems like there's just got to be a better way somehow... Setting up triple digits of anything is pretty excessive, and all the more so when there are 2 triple digit setups. And your game sounds like a really light game otherwise (well, not super light, but not the kind of game people typically spend hours setting up).

One thing I don't get - how do you move between sectors? I guess some of the ships have non-local destinations?

I like the overall notion of 3 possible ways to play each space, and each can only be done once (especially combined with secret goals). I also like the idea that it's hitchhiking, so you have a set number of ships to hop on and no control otherwise. I worry that the 6 sectors, 42 spaces total, means a lack of contention between players, but maybe you've playtested it.

I would change the "Take Instant Fame" action name... it only makes sense in game terms- what is "taking instant fame" in the real world? Maybe call it a "Photo Op" or something.

Simple improvement to the map (as someone else said, it could be more informative): just make the dots in each sector a unique color, and maybe the ship tiles then match the color for their sector.

Instead of the scorekeeping of actually 'taking instant fame', I'd say just keep the green cubes in front of you, and add them up at the end of the game. Minor issue, but that + keeping completed challenge cards in a pile means no scorekeeping is needed during play, you just tally it up at the end (don't even need that score track!).

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Johan wrote:
Hi Jonathan
There are three main reasons why I probably don’t like the game:
- Setup
- Interaction
- Simulation
...
(This is maybe a hard judgment on the game and the others seem to like it. You should probably listen to them).

Johan,

Thanks for your feedback. The judgment is harsh but also fair. I agree with your assessment of Interaction and Simulation, but disagree about Setup.

I disagree with your statements regarding Setup because it takes less than 5 minutes to setup. I use several plastic bags to store the pieces presorted by type. Also, the games setup is very similar to Elfenland's, which requires a block to be placed for each player on ever city, but the games setup takes less than 5 minutes and the game is about the same duration. That said, I have a solution for the other problems below that further simplifies setup.

Regarding Interaction and Simulation I have to agree that it seems like it will be a solo game between 3 to 6 players. The only way to interact is to attempt to block players from blogging in a particular solar system. Which a player may or may not be able to do based on the luck of the draw.

I am thinking about making the following changes. Do you think this would allow for sufficient Interaction?

Setup Choose a starting player. The starting player takes a starting player token. Randomize ALL the Tiles and place 18 tiles face-up on the board. There should be 1 tile in each tile area.

The Turn No changes here. Except that no tiles are added to the board.

Setup for the next Round Starting with the starting player and going counter-clockwise each player draws one tile and places it on the board in an empty tile area. Continue until all the tile areas are filled.

The starting player rotates one player clockwise before starting the next turn.

The game ends when 1) There is not enough tiles to refill the empty tile areas. or 2) At the end of the turn when every planet has been "blogged".

I think, the players will always be able to influence what is available to other players. The new starting player can only take what other players place in his current and possible destination sectors, while other players are influenced by what the new starting player does.

Jonathan

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

snipy3 wrote:

1. Is there a limit to how many club challenges a player can take? Is there a penalty for not completing them?

There is no limit or penalty in the current revision of the rules. I am adding a small penalty in the next revision of the rules.

snipy3 wrote:

2. How many players? I know it's a stupid question, but I swear I didn't see this anywhere.

The first line after the title has the answer. 3 to 6 is what I am currently targeting. I will try play testing with 2 to see if it is interesting, but for now it is 3 to 6.

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Hamumu wrote:

Instead of the scorekeeping of actually 'taking instant fame', I'd say just keep the green cubes in front of you, and add them up at the end of the game. Minor issue, but that + keeping completed challenge cards in a pile means no scorekeeping is needed during play, you just tally it up at the end (don't even need that score track!).

That would almost work. There are also challenge cards that are played when arriving in a Solar System. For example, you get 5 points when visiting X, Y, or Z. There is no token that tracks this. I suppose that the card could remain face up in front of the player until the end of the game.

Personally, I like the tension of scoring between the players that take points now vs. taking points later.

Anonymous
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

First things first. While reading the rules I noticed you refer to the action cubs in the contents as being black white and yellow, while in the setup as black white and green. This should be fixed.

A clarification about what on the game board counts as a solar system, and what counts as a sector.

as for if the game looks like it will be fun. I am unsure. I usually like games solely upon their gameplay. There are some themes that I like more than others, and space in general is one of them. The game board sort of turns me off to the whole game, as it just doens't entice me. The 6 different sections I can see in the .pdf document don't come together at points that make sense and it kinda hurts my eyes or my feelings or something.

Overall if it played well, and as a player I could really screw over my opponents I think it would be enjoyable. A game where it is in the rules to screw each other over is good. because then people won't complain about getting killed

Deviant
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Interesting game. I like the notion of interstellar hitchhiking (perhaps because I read all the Hitchhiker's Guide books) but the blogging part seems tacked-on disconnected from that theme. "Take a souvenir" is better, although why this would make you famous is equally perplexing. Maybe this whole game needs a theme update - say, interstellar rock stars touring the galaxy, attracting fame when they arrive unexpectedly at a new location (instant fame), hiring publicists to promote them locally (blogging), and doing concerts and special events in distant locales (challenges). It's a 180-degree flip from hitchhiking, but more logically consistent IMHO.

Other concerns:

Non Sequitors

Star systems: As far as I can tell, star systems and solar systems are the same thing, so use one term to describe them. "Star system" has the nicest ring to it, but could be misleading. A star system in astronomy could be one or several stars - for example, the Centauri star system consists of Alpha and Proxima Centauri. How about just calling them stars?

Intergalactic?: I'm not sure, but are the stars actually in different galaxies? If not, your title is a misnomer.

Confusing

Movement: The two-system limit is a fiddly rule. It's better if the limit is hardwired into the game, so players don't even have to think about it. What if movement had two values (1 and 2), and only movement to a far corner of the board cost 2? Which, incidentally, is your movement limit.

Blogging rule: When you take instant fame, the ship is discarded. When you blog, the ship goes in front of you. Why? Is this for scorekeeping purposes? I thought the cubes served that function already.

Instant fame: not listed in final scoring. I assume it plays a role in your final score, so why not?

Scoring token: I assume there is a scoreboard for the token, but I see no mention of it anywhere, nor any explanation on how to use such a scoreboard. Or does the token itself denote score in some arcane fashion I can barely comprehend?

Draw areas: I see now that the draw areas are the light-colored squares, but until this was explained in the forum I had no idea. A picture of the board, with everything set up and labeled, should be obligatory for all rulebooks for all board games.

Unnecessary Complexity

Setup: five minutes for setup may not sound like much, but how many players are helping? You say the pieces are presorted at the start of the game in several plastic bags. Someone has to do the re-sorting at the end of the game, and that takes yet more time. If something can be done more quickly one way (for instance, adding rather than subtracting cubes), do it that way.

Secret goals: Some of the secret goals are good, like blogging the most in sector x. But others, like "go to x star system" don't make much sense as secret goals. Secret goals should be secret because if someone else knew about them they could thwart you. If the other players have no way of knowing what the goal is, let alone stopping you if they did know, there's no reason for that goal to be secret.

Broken?

Thankfully, I have only one entry for this category.

The rules state that the game ends when a player "arrives in a sector with no outbound ships" Could a player consciously end the game early by travelling to a system with no outbound ships? If so, I think you are right to make the ships universal to all sectors, as this guarantees that the game will end when the tiles are exhausted.

----
Huh, I sure went overboard with this post. Really, I think your game has potential and I wish you the best. The attempt at humor is welcome, as are the pictures in your ruleset. It's just that the rules are too confusing for what appears to be such a simple game.

Hamumu
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

Wow, I just want to note that what Deviant said was the single most brilliantly simple suggestion in this whole thread: have players ADD cubes to the (initially empty) star systems when they do one of the 3 actions there. This completely eradicates the cube setup phase, which is quite significant, and still maintains the exact same information. Nice one!

Johan
Johan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/05/2008
Game #56: Intergalactic Hitchhikers by Jonathan Hager

jhager wrote:

I disagree with your statements regarding Setup because it takes less than 5 minutes to setup. I use several plastic bags to store the pieces presorted by type. Also, the games setup is very similar to Elfenland's, which requires a block to be placed for each player on ever city, but the games setup takes less than 5 minutes and the game is about the same duration. That said, I have a solution for the other problems below that further simplifies setup.

Yes, this is correct that you can minimize the setup by prepering. I also use zip bags to be able to make quick setups, but we are not the normal gamers. If you don’t plan to send some useful storage to separate the different things in the game, then 250 objects are a lot to setup for an 1 hour game

jhager wrote:

I am thinking about making the following changes. Do you think this would allow for sufficient Interaction?

Setup Choose a starting player. The starting player takes a starting player token. Randomize ALL the Tiles and place 18 tiles face-up on the board. There should be 1 tile in each tile area.

The Turn No changes here. Except that no tiles are added to the board.

Setup for the next Round Starting with the starting player and going counter-clockwise each player draws one tile and places it on the board in an empty tile area. Continue until all the tile areas are filled.

The starting player rotates one player clockwise before starting the next turn.

The game ends when 1) There is not enough tiles to refill the empty tile areas. or 2) At the end of the turn when every planet has been "blogged".

Yes I think that you will add sufficient interaction between the players, but you will also add another 50% – 100% of game time.

// Johan

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut