Comments for Designbomb http://designbomb.net thoughts on games, reality and the stuff in between Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:44:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Dealing with defeat by Sebastian Bombera http://designbomb.net/2011/12/dealing-with-defeat/#comment-19 Sebastian Bombera Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:44:03 +0000 http://designbomb.net/?p=97#comment-19 I have to admit: I have not heard of Warrior Knights before. But it sounds right up my aisle. The combination of simple victory points with a military aspect (hold the throne) may also be a nice way for players who are trailing point-wise to make a stab at power nonetheless. Thanks for the mention, I'll have a look at the game and its AddOns in the future. I have to admit: I have not heard of Warrior Knights before. But it sounds right up my aisle. The combination of simple victory points with a military aspect (hold the throne) may also be a nice way for players who are trailing point-wise to make a stab at power nonetheless.
Thanks for the mention, I’ll have a look at the game and its AddOns in the future.

]]> Comment on Dealing with defeat by Christian Schaack http://designbomb.net/2011/12/dealing-with-defeat/#comment-14 Christian Schaack Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:54:00 +0000 http://designbomb.net/?p=97#comment-14 Yeah, that's driving the hell out if it, but its true. The most advanced strategy games tend to create the situation above described. If you loose your army, you just can sit and watch the other finish the game for the next...let's see two or more hours? One of my favourite games because it's including back stabbing, bribing, lying and intimidating is Warrior Knights from Fantasy Flight Games. The game is lot's of fun to play but it turns out to tire the players a bit in the endgame when one is making the claim for the crown (victory). Lucky me, I bought the Add-on Crown & Glory and beside a couple of new nicely implemented features it bring a whole new mechanic. But first a little excursion to provide you with some information's. The game sets in an shattered kingdom. The king recently lost his life (probably as cause of your actions?) and unfortunately left no heir to the throne. So all the Dukes decide to be the best bet for country and people, muster their armies and start a raging war on the entire Kingdom. And to ensure all players will have fun while back stabbing outmanoeuvring each other, the church as well as the Knight's Assembly also pull their strings in the game. So far so good. Sounds like a lot of fun? Right. But there is this point in the game when one player is strong enough to claim the Crown ether by military, political or financial means. This could possibly take place an hour or more after you started the game and will kick players one after another. Now the important change with the Add-on. If one claims the Crown, he's further known as the King. He's provided with the Kings Guard which is an immense host in addition to his former host and acquired territory. The basic game would end here but not the Add-on. The King has to hold his throne from this point for a certain couple of rounds (usually 12, I'd think). In this time he's exposed to all the other players. Those bunch of wolves (yes, u guys over there with this secretive behave) will know try to revolt and claim the throne. Holding the crown in the last round provides a player with the (most time) necessary edge of victory points. And like in many other games, the player who had achieved the most victory points win's the game. I know this has nothing to do with the "Army of the Dead" (even when those rules will enhance the rate of backstabbing enormously...have to try them next time^^) it's nevertheless a mechanic to ensure that all players can stay in game and provide some serious influence till the end. For everyone who thinks now that it all comes down to the last round and the luck of being the king I have a little advice: sharpen your sword and your mind, you'll need both. Achieving victory in Warrior Knights is a bit more complex than in this comment depicted. I think its a good example for a mechanic which tries to keep all players in game till the end and provide the endgame with some serious drive. Yeah, that’s driving the hell out if it, but its true. The most advanced strategy games tend to create the situation above described. If you loose your army, you just can sit and watch the other finish the game for the next…let’s see two or more hours?
One of my favourite games because it’s including back stabbing, bribing, lying and intimidating is Warrior Knights from Fantasy Flight Games. The game is lot’s of fun to play but it turns out to tire the players a bit in the endgame when one is making the claim for the crown (victory). Lucky me, I bought the Add-on Crown & Glory and beside a couple of new nicely implemented features it bring a whole new mechanic.

But first a little excursion to provide you with some information’s. The game sets in an shattered kingdom. The king recently lost his life (probably as cause of your actions?) and unfortunately left no heir to the throne. So all the Dukes decide to be the best bet for country and people, muster their armies and start a raging war on the entire Kingdom. And to ensure all players will have fun while back stabbing outmanoeuvring each other, the church as well as the Knight’s Assembly also pull their strings in the game.
So far so good. Sounds like a lot of fun? Right. But there is this point in the game when one player is strong enough to claim the Crown ether by military, political or financial means. This could possibly take place an hour or more after you started the game and will kick players one after another.

Now the important change with the Add-on. If one claims the Crown, he’s further known as the King. He’s provided with the Kings Guard which is an immense host in addition to his former host and acquired territory. The basic game would end here but not the Add-on. The King has to hold his throne from this point for a certain couple of rounds (usually 12, I’d think). In this time he’s exposed to all the other players. Those bunch of wolves (yes, u guys over there with this secretive behave) will know try to revolt and claim the throne. Holding the crown in the last round provides a player with the (most time) necessary edge of victory points. And like in many other games, the player who had achieved the most victory points win’s the game.

I know this has nothing to do with the “Army of the Dead” (even when those rules will enhance the rate of backstabbing enormously…have to try them next time^^) it’s nevertheless a mechanic to ensure that all players can stay in game and provide some serious influence till the end.
For everyone who thinks now that it all comes down to the last round and the luck of being the king I have a little advice: sharpen your sword and your mind, you’ll need both. Achieving victory in Warrior Knights is a bit more complex than in this comment depicted.
I think its a good example for a mechanic which tries to keep all players in game till the end and provide the endgame with some serious drive.

]]> Comment on Fighting graphs by Sebastian Bombera http://designbomb.net/2011/12/fighting-graphs/#comment-10 Sebastian Bombera Sat, 07 Jan 2012 23:11:23 +0000 http://designbomb.net/?p=126#comment-10 Thanks, good comment. The whole point of the descending graph games is, for me, to get players on an even ground and <strong>make their choices meaningful</strong>. That is, do not put them into unbalanced combat, where they have either no chance of winning anyway or just slug through a trivial mop-up. <blockquote>In descending graph games where every player gets a points budget and has to invest most of those points at the beginning and doesn’t have information on what the opponent will spend them on (warhammer…) it’s more easily possible to find yourself in a hopeless situation right after the game starts because you chose the wrong build, the wrong troops to defeat your opponent. </blockquote> Admittedly, the point-balancing system is far from perfect and can be exploited, since it usually does not take into account the context of the battle: Terrain, Synergies with other troops or hard counters. It also requires some strategical skill from players to spot these multipliers. The good news is: If you can see the unbalance directly after setup, you already developed the necessary strategical skill. And can now decide to forfeit immediately, or try your tactical abilities. A meaningful, educated choice either way. :) Thanks, good comment. The whole point of the descending graph games is, for me, to get players on an even ground and make their choices meaningful.
That is, do not put them into unbalanced combat, where they have either no chance of winning anyway or just slug through a trivial mop-up.

In descending graph games where every player gets a points budget and has to invest most of those points at the beginning and doesn’t have information on what the opponent will spend them on (warhammer…) it’s more easily possible to find yourself in a hopeless situation right after the game starts because you chose the wrong build, the wrong troops to defeat your opponent.

Admittedly, the point-balancing system is far from perfect and can be exploited, since it usually does not take into account the context of the battle: Terrain, Synergies with other troops or hard counters. It also requires some strategical skill from players to spot these multipliers. The good news is: If you can see the unbalance directly after setup, you already developed the necessary strategical skill. And can now decide to forfeit immediately, or try your tactical abilities. A meaningful, educated choice either way. :)

]]>