Skip to Content
 

Some simple questions for (war)gamers

75 replies [Last post]
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
The Professor wrote:Pelle,

The Professor wrote:
Pelle,

You're absolutely right...I've been out here for 10 years and I've noticed the number of regular folks who post have dwindled to a fraction of what it used to be. Also, there's a reticence by many to attempt military war games.

X3M,

Many, many solid military games have very good Solitaire play. I would try them...not to win, but to experience how that genre uses a variety of mechanics in the game.

Cheers,
Joe


That said, CoH (Company of Heroes) is now on the top of my list.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:Also, there's a

Quote:
Also, there's a reticence by many to attempt military war games.

Well I think the excessive complexity and long playtime is what keep me and probably other gamers away from war game. I would be more considered a light war gamer.

As video game, I can handle more complexity, but even video games can become over excessively complex (ex: Civilization V).

I saw people play a board game that was the recreation of the movie "A bridge too far". The counter size was 1/2" and the map size spanned on 5 tables. They have to move units with pincers It took hours just to get the setup right. And they expected to play the game in a day!?

Else I personally experienced Star Craft the board game, which had convoluted rules but there were no micro movements like found in other war games. Still, the game took 1h30 per player and could leave permanent brain damage after play.

On the other size of the spectrum, I have W1815, which take 20-30 minute to setup and play. Much more accessible and easy to pull out on the table. No need to plan for a game. I also have "Viktory 2" which is another light weight and and colonization game playable in an hour.

So personally, I am looking for games I can easily pull out if a friend comes to visit me. That implies: Short in time and little text abilities.


I don't know if it could help, but since I had an aversion for RTS because it could make me excessively stressed, I once thought: "If I could make an RTS that I would be capable of playing, how would it be".

I came up with the following draft, maybe you could extract something from it:

  • I would split the map in large areas. Units must be inside one of those areas. If enemy units gets in, automated battle occurs between the units in the same area. This avoid situation where the enemy is 1 square too far and just stand there and do nothing. The whole idea is to reduce excessive supervision, imbalance for wrongly placed units, etc.

  • Production would be automated. You would set goals for units you want to have in play: Ex: 3 tanks, 5 infantry. If any of those units dies, the base will auto produce new units until those quantities are met. So the management consist only in determining base upgrades and which unit configuration you want. Again, the goal is to reduce supervision, having to move back and forth between your army and your base.

Maybe you could use those idea for your board game. Production could work like a pool of units in "Viktory 2", your losses come back eventually. You could have maps with large areas and resolve battles à la Axis and Allies. Technologies and upgrades would change the RPS relationship bet your units and the enemy.

It's just some random thoughts. I also wanted to implement an RTS as a board game. It was a parody called Rats Craft, but I never managed to successfully design the game. Balancing special powers is also a problem. If I would do it today, I would use computer simulation to test the game. But that implies having little special text ability since it's hard to program.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Similarities

The way how you described your attempt. It kinda sounded like a wargame that me and my cousin once made for the pc. It would operate kinda like Ogame etc. But the reinforcements would indeed be automated at one point for the meta game. This way, new defences would pop up while the defending player was afk. The attacking player would be attacking a lot, until the factories where slowly dying.
The first few attacks would be to test out the enemy. What they have. The second step would be, what they produce. And the third step would be, wear them down. Or make a tactical bombing run or whatever is needed.

Indeed. If words are to be removed as much as possible from a game. You are left with symbols and numbers.
My hobby game has a lot of words (attributes) and numbers.
I think that if I continue with my public version. I should focus even more on just numbers.

30 minutes. Would my public version take, between 2 players without reinforcements. All the players get are some units with their properties.
But yeah, the hobby game. I already noted some years ago. That it would be too complicated for most players.
a small game in the same set up as described for my public version. Would be 10 times more complex. And as you would have guessed it, would tak 10 times more time to finish. We often played for weeks in one game.
To have a public version. I started cutting.

If RTS make your head hurt. Perhaps you where playing the wrong RTS or against the wrong players. Because some RTS games start out so simple and relaxing. That it actually has a healing effect on my body and mind. But then again, I loved it a lot.

***

That said. Ratscraft sounds cool. I think I once mentioned that in another topic.
Perhaps, the holes you mentioned could serve as well. Where a group of rats are sitting. Another group of rats would attack. And after the battle, some automated reinforcements would already be established.

I sometimes wondered what would happen if I limit my maximum movement and weapon range from 9 to only 3 for my units. Making a board of 18² not a 2² playfield but a 6² playfield. Better yet, the regions don't have to be hexagons. Since I would simply remove anything related to obstructions between regions. No, instead I would make an obstruction only as direct cover for the pieces as much as possible. Just somewhat like CoH does.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Yes, the idea behind Rats

Yes, the idea behind Rats Craft was awesome:

Rats Craft at Larienna Library

I think I stayed too close to the original starcraft. I would have to almost rebuild everything from scratch or only extract a portion of the game. I tried to stay away from complex game design because that would require even more playtesting. Unless I can digitally playtest the mechanics, it not worth even trying.

I am currently working on a stock market, I simulated millions of games so far, and I still have balance issues I must try fixing. Try doing this as a board game.


As for playing RTS, I played solitaire in the slowest mode possible and after 30 minutes, my hands where shaking.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
larienna wrote:Yes, the idea

larienna wrote:
Yes, the idea behind Rats Craft was awesome:

Rats Craft at Larienna Library

I think I stayed too close to the original starcraft. I would have to almost rebuild everything from scratch or only extract a portion of the game. I tried to stay away from complex game design because that would require even more playtesting. Unless I can digitally playtest the mechanics, it not worth even trying.

I think that trying to have some RTS effects is not a good idea if it is an attempt at a wargame. Even I had to cut off a lot of aspects to my game in the first few years. A board game is often regulated for at least 90%.

larienna wrote:
I am currently working on a stock market, I simulated millions of games so far, and I still have balance issues I must try fixing. Try doing this as a board game.
Balance is very important indeed. The sole reason is to have a 50-50 chance for all players to begin with. Now comes the hard part. It has to remain 50-50 for a longer duration of time. Which is also very important for war games imho. Or else, the losing side might give up and the game is over. That is why so many war games out there use that dreaded victory points system.


larienna wrote:
As for playing RTS, I played solitaire in the slowest mode possible and after 30 minutes, my hands where shaking.
Depends on which RTS game you tried. I have a keen knowledge of how difficult certain RTS games are. But there is one out there that is very good for even 12 year old kids. That would be Warcraft 2. Start with the Orc campaign. And you got 3 "tutorial" missions before your first "bigger" mission begins. It is very easy to learn. Then again, if you don't like RTS. Just stay away from them. And stick with turn based. Sometimes I prefer turn based because I can just walk away and think about my next move.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
From memory the RTS I played

From memory the RTS I played are:

Warcraft Warcraft2 Starcraft C&C red alert Dune Overlord II

There are other RTS game I played in my life that are not exactly what people think about when you say RTS. I managed to be much more efficient in those games:

Overlord (NES) Age of booty(XBOX 360)

I recently played Overcooked 2 in multi player, I could manage to do certain tasks and play correctly. But there are some other task I am less efficient.


Quote:
I think that trying to have some RTS effects is not a good idea if it is an attempt at a wargame.

Well, you have to think about what is the essence of an RTS. From my analysis, in a nutshell, an RTS is:

  • Make choices on which structure to build to unlock units or technologies (unit upgrades)
  • Build the right units to defeat your opponent since they have a RPS relationship between units.
  • Harvest resources to build units and structures.

The concepts above could be implemented in a board game. In fact, Star Craft the board game has those 3 features.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Narrow passages

Most RTS games you mentioned have, what I like to call, narrow passage missions. And it is mostly one of the first missions that shows this narrow passage. A lot of players stop after attempting such mission.
After such mission, a couple of easier missions can be played. Giving the experience of going through a funnel. A test, if you will.

The 3 concepts you mentioned are indeed to be found in RTS games AND in war games.
The big factor of an RTS however is the Real Time aspect.
Which is very difficult for board games.

Other than that. We played a perfect copy for years :)

Quote:
Make choices on which structure to build to unlock units or technologies (unit upgrades)
If one is not carefull, this can be a very tedious task for players to keep track of.
We have chosen to keep this simple.
A specific production facility for a specific type of armor. Also differentiating between units and buildings.
Quote:
Build the right units to defeat your opponent since they have a RPS relationship between units.
Not only looking at the opponent. But also the terrain. Campers get long range with sturdy walls and take high ground. Others need to attack, so often a group of fast units are key.
Quote:
Harvest resources to build units and structures.
And this is one of the most difficult things to design. You simply cannot copy RTS games in this regard. Well, not the majority.
A harvester going into the field and gather resources is non done if a player needs to track this. Worker placement is much better already. And even better is that if the resources are to be found in the field. A simple "domination" piece is placed on that resource.

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:A specific production

Quote:
A specific production facility for a specific type of armor. Also differentiating between units and buildings.

I think a key element here is that all path should not be fulfilled trought a game. Players needs to make choices in a path, adjust with certain technologies. But for sure, 1/3 to 2/3 of the units and technologies should never be used in a game. The goal is to adapt the opponent strategy which cannot do everything. It's also to give a replay value the next time the game is played

Quote:
Harvest resources to build units and structures. ... And this is one of the most difficult things to design.

Well there could be many ways to implement or abstract it. Even for my own game, I was considering that collecting, accounting and spending the resource could simply slow the game too much. Yes, worker placement could be a thing. Or the colonization mechanicsm in Eclipse that unlock new resources by putting population on them could be another solution. Maybe you don't accumulate resources from turn to turn, but rather verify you have the necessary resources requirements to unlock units and technologies. Maybe on each turn, you produce 1 of each unit you have unlocked. If you lose resources, you will not be able to build new units.

Quote:
The big factor of an RTS however is the Real Time aspect. Which is very difficult for board games.

You could introduce the time aspect differently. What about timing? In the game Lumis, turns rotate around the table really fast, and the tension raises while players try to rush to assemble a hand before the other players complete their hand. Yet, the game is turn based, but the timing is very important. Getting delayed 1 turn could cost you the game.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
larienna wrote:I think a key

larienna wrote:
I think a key element here is that all path should not be fulfilled trought a game. Players needs to make choices in a path, adjust with certain technologies. But for sure, 1/3 to 2/3 of the units and technologies should never be used in a game. The goal is to adapt the opponent strategy which cannot do everything. It's also to give a replay value the next time the game is played
I agree 100%.
I think that limiting the players resources by income speed can be of great benefit to this key element.

Quote:
Maybe on each turn, you produce 1 of each unit you have unlocked. If you lose resources, you will not be able to build new units.
Slowly limiting your opponents by destroying their supply line. I like this.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Next game.... ehm

I can't find much about Balkan Gambit.
I only found this:
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/27925/balkan-gambit-1943-1945

So I guess I go to the next game.
Chosin Reservoir
Which is a game that actually goes under the name Chosin Few?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKix4v4T6NY
Or.... is it this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CL0GksmfiMo

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Go to Decision Games website and search...

I found this for "Chosin Reservoir":

http://shop.decisiongames.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=1005

And I found this for the "Balkan Gambit":

http://shop.decisiongames.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=VASS47

Here is the main website ... But you can click on SHOP and it will bring you to their website for purchasing their "war" games:

https://decisiongames.com/wpsite/

Here is Decision Games Publisher entry on BGG:

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgamepublisher/102/decision-games-i

This is the entry of Balkan Gambit on BGG:

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/27925/balkan-gambit-1943-1945

This is the entry for the Forgotten War on BGG (with the Chosin Reservoir):

https://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/9263/forgotten-war-korea

That should help you out looking for the correct information!

Cheers.

The Professor
The Professor's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/25/2014
Thanks!

Kristopher,

Thanks for pointing him in the right direction. Every one of the titles is also on BGG.

Cheers,
Joe

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
BGG

That place has a lot.
And I did find the games there, google points out to the place first.

However, I love to see video's about a game too. After watching the CoH (Company of Heroes) video. My brain was overflowing with idea's again.

Speaking of which, I had written a whole new topic about my idea. Where did it go?

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some place for you to look at your History

X3M wrote:
...Speaking of which, I had written a whole new topic about my idea. Where did it go?

Click on this Link/URL to see your History:

https://www.bgdf.com/users/x3m/track

If you are looking for a thread YOU STARTED, look for X3M in the "Author" column. That should help you out a LOT... It's also easy to see the other threads in which you participated by responding to questions, explaining comments and generally supporting the BGDF.com community with your wisdom.

Cheers!

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Then it is...

Gone.
Because it was newer than this one.

For my public version. I was tweaking things.
The following games would be my inspiration and their mechanics combined:

- CoH; infantry can take cover. The pieces are big. Damage is tracked with cubes.
- Advanced Wars; the movement is very simple. Yet has an interesting rule for difficult terrain.
- Warzone2100; combining weapons with vehicles. Might as well include the infantry in the same way. With the difference that infantry can move in and out and survive. While a weapon cannot.
- My "hobby" game; the RPS that I invented. Simplified into 1, 2, 4 and 8 as classes.

The resource managment would be simple. Just 1 resource.
A big question remains. If the costs of vehicles is between 6 and 30(?) Would that be ok?
I think a storage of 99 would be neat for the players. With an income of 10 to 30 per round. But I am not sure yet.

If I where to type the new topic again. I would go into the detail of all the statistics. And after that, think of the resource managment.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut