Tuesday, March 19, 2024

YANGI: Mono-match game

Dobble, Spot-It, and "Mono-match" technology 

Lately I've been giving some thought to and old idea: mono-match decks/games (like Dobble/Spot-It), and specifically how one could be made that's *not* a speed recognition/reflex thing. 

In case that sounds like gibberish, Dobble (AKA Spot-It) is a game where you have 55 cards, with 8 little pictures on each one, out of a total of like 57 different pictures. The distribution is such that any two cards will match one-and-only-one picture ("mono-match"). In the game, you flip up 2 cards and race to spot the matching picture. It's pretty fun. 

But the coolest thing about that game might be the mono-match-ness of the deck. There's a good video online explaining various ways to create such a deck which guarantees exactly 1 match between any two cards: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTDKqW_GLkw

I've long been interested in the idea of using this Dobble technology (the mono-match deck) to drive a more euro-style game. So in an attempt to leverage "Dobble technology" in a game that's *not* just speed recognition like Dobble/Spot-it, I have come up with this proof-of-concept 2-player, 7-card mono-match game in which you deal 1 card to each player and the other 5 to slots on the board labeled MUSTER, MOVE, FIGHT, BUILD, SCORE. On your turn, you'd choose one of the actions to resolve in the region where your card and the card in the slot match, then swap your card for the card in the slot. You'd take turns doing that until some game end condition is met, and the player with the most points wins. 

The actions I came up with are pretty bare-bones:

MUSTER: Add meeples to the board

MOVE: Move meeples around the board

FIGHT: Force opponent's pieces to adjacent regions (maybe also get some VP?)

BUILD: Place a building token from your player board in the region, increasing the scoring value of the region, and upgrading one of your other actions

SCORE: Award points for majorities in certain regions


I made a quick mock-up of this on Tabletop Simulator, and last weekend we were able to give it a shot. I observed while Rick and Daniel played a 1st draft of the game, and that test might be among the most liberal I've ever been with rules changes on the fly! 

After their game, we had a much better idea how things felt. Here's an updated rules summary:

2-player, 7-card mono-match game v0.2

* Deal 1 card to each player and the other 5 to slots on the board labeled MUSTER, MOVE, FIGHT, BUILD, SCORE

* On your turn, choose one of them to resolve in the region where your card and the card in the slot match, then swap your card for the card in the slot

* Alternate turns until some game end condition is met (Race to a VP threshold? Play until a player's meeples are exhausted?)


MUSTER: Add 1 meeple to the active region


MOVE: Use 2 movement points. With one movement point you may move 1 meeple between the active region and an adjacent region


FIGHT: For every 2 of your meeples in the active region, you may force 1 opponent's meeple from the active region to an adjacent region (maybe also get 1 VP?)


BUILD: Place a building token from your player board into the active region, increasing the scoring value of the region, and upgrading one of your other actions. In order to build a building of level X, you must have at least X meeples in the region: 

   Muster building: For every 2 Muster buildings, muster 1 additional meeple when you MUSTER

   Move building: For every Move building, use 1 additional movement point when you MOVE

   Fight building: For every Fight building, you may force out 1 additional meeple when you FIGHT

   Build building: For every Build building, reduce the build requirement by 1 meeple

   Score building: For each Score building, score 1 additional VP per area that you score


SCORE: For each region shown on the card in the Score slot, award vp to the player with the most meeples there (ties do not count). Score the active region (matching the player's card) double.

   Each region is worth 1vp, +1vp per building in it (so everyone knows which 3 regions will score the next time anyone does a SCORE action, but your card indicates which region scores x2)

This game plays like a 2 player abstract or something, it reminds me of Onitama or something. Come to think of it, I wonder if this will turn out to just be "bad Onitama" -- I will have to keep that in mind, and try to avoid it! 

I noticed a bit of the Strategy Triangle evident in the game... "Red" moves like scoring and fighting, "Blue" moves like mustering and moving, and Green moves like building. So maybe that's something worth keeping in mind as well.


As first tests go, this game was promising enough that I expect I'll keep working on it. I don't know if I'll ever make the jump to multiplayer though... I think I'd need to go up to 13 cards with 4 symbols/regions on each (13 total regions), and that sounds a bit cumbersome to me. 

Monday, March 04, 2024

EmDo: Coalition update

 Since my last post, I've played EmDo: Coalition 4 more times, and I've been iterating on a few things. My main goal lately has been to reduce game length, because while it feels pretty good now, it still takes longer than I think it's worth.

Reducing Duration

My friend Steve had a lot of salient suggestions for reducing the games' duration. My first stab at it was to simply reduce the amount of stuff you need to do in order to finish the project. I lopped off a planet slot from each section of the sphere, and I reduced the initial resource slots from 3 per section to 2 per section. In addition to this, I made them resource-specific, because otherwise I think it's too obvious to go for [+1 Action/turn] first every time.

That worked a little, but not enough. My next attempt was to increase the frequency that you get benefits from the sphere. I divorced the technology slots from the resource slots, and where you get your pick of two role icons when you commit a particular pair of planets to the sphere, now you get the other one for committing the level 2 technology in that section. The abilities no longer require the tech, just the 2 specific resources. It occurred to me that to get the resources, you have to first flip planets, then produce, then trade... it takes a while, and it' not even engine-build-y (normally), so this seems like enough work to earn [+1 Hand Size] or [+1 Action per turn].

That's all I've done so far, the only trick I have left up my sleeve might be to use scenarios or something to jump start the players a little bit. But I'm pretty lazy, and that might be tough to design, so I'm kinda hoping I won't be need to do that *fingers crossed*

Endgame Tension

Something that's been a problem all along is that as you fill up the sphere slots with planets (for example), then Survey and Colonize become largely worthless. Similarly, as you fill up the tech slots, Research isn't really needed anymore. Near the end game you get to a point where there are a couple specific things that need to happen, and for several players, there's nothing relevant left to do. This is always disappointing; the game action needs to stay relevant the entire game!

I have two ideas to address that issue, and I'm torn as to which I think might be better for this kind of game:

Option 1. If you win, total everyone's personal Empire scores and refer to a chart to see how you did

Option 2. In order to win, require a minimum number of total Empire points (add everyone's personal Empire score for this)

One thing I like about option 1 is that players who struggle to finish the sphere in time could feel good about just accomplishing the task, and they don't have to worry about how "well" they did, while players who can consistently finish the sphere could still have a higher score to shoot for. Another thing is that you don't need to see the points as you play, which means you don't have to track people's level 2 tech buys so you know they have 2 "invisible" points.

A couple things I like about option 2 are that requiring the condition may keep players involved who prefer a pass/fail sort of game end, but are competent enough to easily complete the sphere. This can also be used as a difficulty tuning knob: for an easier game, use a smaller total score requirement; for a harder game, use a larger score requirement. In addition, this format could allow (or possibly even encourage) plays such as "you are set up to ship a lot, why don't you do that and rake in some points, while we concentrate on completing the planets and techs for the sphere". I don't know why, but that feels cooperative-y to me. On the down side, I feel like I'd want the Empire scores to be state-complete (you could walk up mid-game and count them), and having a level 2 tech in your deck complicates that... so I'd either live it not being state complete, or I'd not count the techs, which seems weird to me.

I really don't know which way to go here. But either way, I think this score reckoning will help keep the game action relevant, even as the sphere fills up. I'm open to other suggestions as well, feel free to leave them in the comments below!

Tension from Aliens

I think the alien tension is kind of OK, I don't intend to change it further - at least for now. I'll probably revisit once I get the duration down and the endgame tension fixed (see above).

Coalition Actions

In an effort to clean up the Coalition tiles, I removed "Action: RFG an alien Spy card from hand" and simply made that an action on the Spy cards themselves. So as an action, you can play a Spy from hand to get rid of it. That's the same thing, but it makes space on the Coalition tile for something more interesting - though I'm not sure what that should be.

I had made some other tweaks as well... with Basic Coalition, you can spend an action to EITHER Bolster OR Repair a card in the sphere. It then goes on to explain what BOLSTER and REPAIR mean, which is reasonable, but maybe another ability would be better (the rules could go into the rulebook). I do like a good player reference...

I tried a version where the tile let you spend an action to commit a card to the sphere. At that time you could commit for free when you obtain the card, or as an action later, as a way to allow players to use their cards for a while and then push them into the sphere. But we didn't waste actions on that, we just did it for free upon obtaining... so the latest rule is that once per turn you may commit one card to the sphere for free (does not cost an action). I think this works better, so it can probably come off the tiles as an action.  

With Improved Coalition, you can both Repair and Bolster in one action, and you can send a ship to defend a stack. I'm pretty happy with the usefulness of Improved Coalition but I'm worried that the Basic side isn't enough -- any thoughts on that would be appreciated!