Skip to Content

RTS game in testing stage

9 replies [Last post]
Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013

This week I have put together a greatly collaborated RTS board game (without a board). It is very easy to get the hang of and requires a lot of attention and strategic planning.

You start off with a headquarters, a base, a civilization, whatever you want to call it for now and your job is to build an array of buildings and units through the process of a sort of "deck organization" if you will... What I mean by this is that you will have a deck of about 80 cards that have all the essentials you need in order to create your empire, army, civilization (you get it). On each card will be six different options or "actions" you can chose from to put/use in different areas:money (economy), resources, research points, moves (how many moves your units can take that turn), attack/defense bonuses, and lab points (allows you to do special abilities on the field). The tough thing here is you can only chose one for that turn. For example if you chose money you will put the card in your money pile, if you chose moves you will use it towards allowing you units to move the amount that is on the card.

Moving units is simply moving the unit by its length. No ruler needed just remember or hold its original position and move it in any direction by how long it is. So if you have a builder, which is about half an inch, that you want to move three spaces, move it 1.5 inches or hold its initial position with a finger and move it so that the end of the unit touches that point three times.

Attacking units are either ranged (measured by steps which is about the length if your finger) or not ranged. Ranged means if and enemy unit is within however many steps in your range, you can attack it, otherwise the unit must physical touch the enemy unit to attack. Units have hit points (HP) and attack points (AT). Seeing who wins a battle/conflict is rather simple and bypasses many unnessasary "health" calculations of the units. Instead of keeping track of the health of mobile units, the HP and AT are pretty much just markers. If the attack of this unit equals or exceeds that units' HP, that unit dies, if it doesn't it's considered a "miss" or a representation of the failure for that unit in carry out it's duty.... Now, to see how much attack your unit actual gives out is determined through dice and attack/defense bonuses. The die will have side 1=0 side 2=0 side 3=1 side 4=1 side 5=1 and side 6=2. This will decide how much the attack the unit has will be multiplied by. So if a scout has AT: 1 and you role a 1 that unit gives off one attack point for every unit it touches. So in reality it can only kill units with an HP of 1 (only if an attack/defense bonus is administered can that change)

There are a lot more elements to the game but that is the overall structure I'm dealing with

Comment, critique, criticize! All is welcome
Feedback and ideas are my main concern
Thanks!

GrimFinger
GrimFinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/06/2008
Tbone wrote:This week I have

Tbone wrote:
This week I have put together a greatly collaborated RTS board game (without a board).

In a game of this nature, though, why wouldn't you want a board? Just to be different? How is game play or game experience or fun factor enhanced, without having a board in this particular game?

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
To me... Having a board would

To me... Having a board would almost hinder the game. Plus production cost would be significantly lower and it allows the player to costomize their experience. If they want a longer game, they will play farther apart. If they want a shorter game closer together etc.

silasmolino
Offline
Joined: 02/01/2013
Miniatures game

This sounds like a miniatures game. Are the units all miniatures considering a size is considered into the movement factor? What purpose do the buildings serve? I agree with grimfinger, why not a board? You mention production cost and the customization of an experience but I would venture to say that the omission of a board (which would inevitably have a graphic on it) would decrease a players immersion in the game.

With regards to mechanics, without a board to signify limitations, a player may move a miniature out of harms way indefinitely. The dice mechanic sounds good. It keeps combat calculation simple which I am all for. The movement I have a problem with. What if movement of one unit does not line up exactly with the location of another unit? For example, your melee unit misses an opposing melee unit by half an inch. The melee unit would be SOL because he is not touching the enemy. The enemy decides to move, but his miniature hight is 1 inch, and will end up on top of the other unit (or perhaps add a rule in which movement occurs until movement is not possible).

Let's keep this brainstorm going.

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
Yes the the collision of

Yes the the collision of units and the turn aspec of the game I need a solution to. I understand where you guys are coming from with regards to the board. And I may add one later if need be. To me and RTS type board game shouldn't have the same environment everytime. Maybe there is a way to incorporate both?

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
Here are the list of

Here are the list of buildings
Supply: allow you to pick up an extra card for every supply you have that turn

Depot: gives you storage for cards and allows you to put more cards down as moves

Barracks: allows you to build infantry units and use the cards as attack and defense bonuses

Research Center: allows you to use the cards as research points towards an array of different upgrades

Lab: allows you to use the specials on each card (building more labs will allow you to use stronger specials)

Turret: a ranged defense building

GrimFinger
GrimFinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/06/2008
Tbone wrote:To me and RTS

Tbone wrote:
To me and RTS type board game shouldn't have the same environment everytime. Maybe there is a way to incorporate both?

Just use terrain tiles of some sort, and your map/playing area can be different, each time.

In a computer or video game, the program, itself, can track a multitude of details. In a board game with no board, you are voluntarily giving up a component that can track at least certain information for the player - so that they do not have to do it, themselves.

Sure, you can have a game with units, with no board. Just line them up on a table, the floor, or even outside on the open ground.

If you eliminate the units, also, then you can possibly have the world's first invisible board game. Will people go for it? Maybe. Mood rings and pet rocks were all the rage, at various points in time, after all.

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
Hmm..... I like the terrain

Hmm..... I like the terrain tiles idea. Although, this board would have to be either really big or have pretty small grid lines to be able to have a sufficient amount of space.

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
GrimFinger wrote:Tbone

GrimFinger wrote:

If you eliminate the units, also, then you can possibly have the world's first invisible board game. Will people go for it? Maybe. Mood rings and pet rocks were all the rage, at various points in time, after all.

What do you mean by eliminate the units?

Kroz1776
Offline
Joined: 10/09/2013
:P

Tbone wrote:
GrimFinger wrote:

If you eliminate the units, also, then you can possibly have the world's first invisible board game. Will people go for it? Maybe. Mood rings and pet rocks were all the rage, at various points in time, after all.

What do you mean by eliminate the units?


I believe this was a tongue in cheek comment.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut