tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.comments2023-12-03T23:16:56.786-07:00CumbersomeSeth Jaffeehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comBlogger1012125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-56985458847681409332023-12-03T15:34:12.241-07:002023-12-03T15:34:12.241-07:00Innovation is a game where I am constantly distrac...Innovation is a game where I am constantly distracted by all the Compliance Cognition options. I see a great move, but I need 3-4 turns to setup the right situation. My opponent takes a single turn which worsens my ability to exact my plan, and now I see another option. At any given time, there might be 2-5 logistical plans to carry out, and every turn, some vanish and new ones appear.ektedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-59128407080806729692023-12-03T14:40:05.880-07:002023-12-03T14:40:05.880-07:00I think you understand what I was saying perfectly...I think you understand what I was saying perfectly :)<br /><br />I don't know how popular that type of game (SH but not LH) is nowadays, but like I said, I think people don't view them as "heavy."<br /><br />I think when people say a game is "heavy," they're probably usually referring to *logistical* weight Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-58256947845730375492023-12-03T14:35:01.725-07:002023-12-03T14:35:01.725-07:00If I understood correctly, you are saying that str...If I understood correctly, you are saying that strategically heavy games put their emphasis on what the player wants to do. In order for that to be a meaningful decision, the breadth of options has to be very large, as in Go or Chess, because if the player can only get a card or place a token (as in No Thanks!), there is very little to think about.<br /><br />Maybe Tikal could be one of those games, because choosing what to do among all the possible moves is what's difficult. Carrying out your play then is really simple.<br /><br />I think that those games are not as popular today because they tend to produce a lot of analysis paralysis.Ludiciosohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13119601967137493081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-64554362164596470202023-12-03T12:12:12.001-07:002023-12-03T12:12:12.001-07:00Wouldn't Go be a good example of a strategical...Wouldn't Go be a good example of a strategically heavy game that's not logistically heavy?<br /><br />I think games like that are not viewed as "heavy" much of the time Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-45366947585104193192023-12-03T08:49:45.931-07:002023-12-03T08:49:45.931-07:00I'd say that Lisboa is both logistically and s...I'd say that Lisboa is both logistically and strategically heavy. Do you have any example of games that are only strategically heavy?Ludiciosohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13119601967137493081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-60717781952906548422023-12-02T06:49:56.497-07:002023-12-02T06:49:56.497-07:00I think this is a great analysis. I am a puzzle so...I think this is a great analysis. I am a puzzle solver by nature, so I have no problems with compliance cognition because that is what puzzles are about -they define a set of rules, albeit often deliberately left for the solver to deduce, and then invite you to see how those rules are being enforced in a logical fashion. (As a result, bad puzzles tend to be ones where the setter sidesteps their own rules; sometimes this works but more often the solver just gets cross with the setter.)<br /><br />And I can absolutely see how other people with a different mindset might get bored with that process. I tend to think that the trick is to try and deflect people before they discover that this is what is going to happen. (A good example of this may be when I was discussing <i>Key Market</i> with Richard Breese back in 2010, and we decided to do a Geeklist that specifically outlined how much logistical and compliance effort was going to be required in order to try and, well, warn people off before they got frustrated!)Scurrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15182486408258989295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-1416363043618061242023-12-01T15:17:58.756-07:002023-12-01T15:17:58.756-07:00@Codratus - I recently posted an update to The Lis...@Codratus - I recently posted an update to The List: https://sedjtroll.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-list-oct-2023.html<br /><br />In which I THOUGHT I had moved those two to "Finished but unpublished" (but apparently I didn't)... it appears that Renegade has backburnered them because Crusaders isn't selling as well as they'd hoped. :/Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-64235638640478914842023-12-01T14:30:09.214-07:002023-12-01T14:30:09.214-07:00Any update on the Crimson & Amber Knight expan...Any update on the Crimson & Amber Knight expansions to Crudaders? Really looking forward to that!Codratusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-16208359147117248382023-11-21T15:17:26.776-07:002023-11-21T15:17:26.776-07:00I'm sure I'll be posting about EmDo: Coali...I'm sure I'll be posting about EmDo: Coalition soon... just as soon as I can get myself over the hurdle of mocking up a prototype!Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-53533311578639717912023-11-21T14:51:29.329-07:002023-11-21T14:51:29.329-07:00Co-op does sound cool. Seems like it wouldn't ...Co-op does sound cool. Seems like it wouldn't take much to add to the existing game for co-op. Now a whole new deck of cards would take a lot of extra printing, but some extra rules might be easy enough to work with. I do look forward to seeing how that goes.<br /><br />And a campaign mode over legacy/destroy stuff mode does sound intriguing. Of course, getting people to keep playing gets harder these days.Peter Schotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08234754312915202260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-19121613777547247902023-11-21T14:35:46.636-07:002023-11-21T14:35:46.636-07:00To be honest, the impetus for this blog post was r...To be honest, the impetus for this blog post was really the co-op mode, which I'm actually excited about because I can imagine it working. I hope to get something together soon (maybe in time to test it on Thursday night!)Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-58450792415861344302023-11-21T14:28:42.886-07:002023-11-21T14:28:42.886-07:00@Peter: To be completely clear, the "EmDo Leg...@Peter: To be completely clear, the "EmDo Legacy" tournament format is not "Legacy" in the style of Risk Legacy, or Pandemic Legacy... that would be a Campaign mode, but you wouldn't be stickering things or permanently altering components<br /><br />Chaos Theory hasn't changed in years, I think it was about ready to go, and was "in line" to be published before TMG faded away (as was Eminent Domain Origins -- that one even had art all done!)<br /><br />I'm hopeful that EmDo will do well enough for Rio Grande to justify their publishing offshoots, like EDO and Chaos TheorySeth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-33280984545379687932023-11-21T13:38:32.657-07:002023-11-21T13:38:32.657-07:00I could see co-op or solo being interesting. I'...I could see co-op or solo being interesting. I'm not really a Legacy fan so that has less interest to me. Still would like to see more about that Chaos Theory version. I read the blog posts in the past about it, but I know things changed for TMG along the way.<br /><br />Sadly, I have to agree that I wouldn't likely buy Eminent Domain again without something being different. I like the games, but new artwork alone isn't enough to get me to buy a game again.<br /><br />I look forward to seeing where this goes.Peter Schotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08234754312915202260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-68433459792828958402023-08-08T04:16:42.958-07:002023-08-08T04:16:42.958-07:00Glad to see Eminent Domain likely getting a reprin...Glad to see Eminent Domain likely getting a reprint. We broke it out again recently and it played pretty well. I know I've followed the "Chaos Theory" posts in the past and still intrigued by that idea. But I'll also admit I really like dice games so that is intriguing.<br /><br />Peter Schotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08234754312915202260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-72835787499222104672023-01-23T01:43:51.124-07:002023-01-23T01:43:51.124-07:00Sounds interesting, I'd definitely be interest...Sounds interesting, I'd definitely be interested in playtesting the idea. Thematically, I'm having trouble thinking of a reason for the mechanic but I'm sure there's one there somewhere...Ki Mansellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-87274458374649381172022-12-14T23:57:38.461-07:002022-12-14T23:57:38.461-07:00Replying a couple of years later...
I ended up go...Replying a couple of years later...<br /><br />I ended up going with a card row of 5 plunder cards, each with a small effect that adds a couple pirates to the board, or captures a couple opposing pirates, and a gem for set collection (for each gem, score the number you have, squared... so 1/4/9/16/25 for each gem type)<br /><br />The cost to take one of these plunder cards is 2 plunder icons, plus 1 more for each card before it in line, so 2/3/4/5/6 for the 1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th/6th card in the row<br /><br />This has proven to work very well, and I think it's much better than all the attempts to make the original Plunder workSeth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-36557468548315772432022-09-02T10:06:13.324-07:002022-09-02T10:06:13.324-07:00@Matt B - you're right, I'm sure this mode...@Matt B - you're right, I'm sure this model is not perfect... I'll note one thing though: you said "dense but fair sort of puzzle would be the most challenging and, by extension, the most fun" <br /> <br />I am not claiming that Challenge is the ONLY source of fun in a game! I'm just saying that the difference between a game being "challenging" and being just "difficult" is whether it's fun (and/or rewarding) to overcome that difficulty <br /> <br />That says nothing about any fun to be had in the game otherwise<br /><br />You bring up another good point -- frustration. When "out of your depth" so to speak (when you haven't gained the competency required by the depth of the game), then perhaps that depth/fairness ratio - though favorable - represents frustration rather than challenge. One might argue that the learning process of gaining that competency is fun and rewarding thoughSeth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-37023176836062316442022-08-30T13:12:15.788-07:002022-08-30T13:12:15.788-07:00I like the idea of a sudden jump up in scale a lot...I like the idea of a sudden jump up in scale a lot. My idea I had after reading this post:<br /><br />Start on a small board with everyone building physical things on the board, people get put down, when a meeple gathers food it has a physical location etc. When someone builds their first "city" then the game moves to the next age.<br /><br />In the next age we sub in a different small board (same size as the first). everyone starts in the same corner representing the old board, the person who built the city starts with a city there. Whatever people/food etc. everyone had now becomes their "resources" for this age (if they had 5 meeples out, then they start the age with 5 population), again they are building to some big resource and the age will change once someone completes it.<br /><br />In the next age another board is swapped in and cities, factories etc. become resources, and a different unit is being built on the board.<br /><br />In the final age it is a race to see who can build the great final technology.<br /><br />Each age would have similarities, but the resources would act differently/have different nuances between the ages so that each board feels different.Gabrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14801479391224404734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-69314401806145642092022-08-25T14:03:18.493-07:002022-08-25T14:03:18.493-07:00@Steve Erwin: Those are all great things to watch ...@Steve Erwin: Those are all great things to watch out for and adopt in your designs!Seth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-2158283191330837212022-08-25T08:57:18.764-07:002022-08-25T08:57:18.764-07:00@Ekted: Long time no see! Thanks for commenting
I...@Ekted: Long time no see! Thanks for commenting<br /><br />I'm not sure if your comment is saying that going after low hanging fruit in development is good or bad -- I guess it's a waste of time because it's like climbing a tree when what you really want is to get to the moon?<br /><br />Maybe this depends on the perspective -- a designer starting a game from scratch has a lot farther to go than a developer coming in after a game is "fully designed" so to speakSeth Jaffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12449603052617321357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-29242100268119399232022-08-25T08:26:54.289-07:002022-08-25T08:26:54.289-07:00When I hear the "low-hanging fruit" argu...When I hear the "low-hanging fruit" argument, I am reminded of the story about two groups of scientists planning a mission to the moon. After a week, the two groups are evaluated. The first group has barely started working on the physics, math, and rocket design. The second group is much closer to the moon, having climbed a tree.<br /><br />The moral is that getting 1% closer to your goal might feel like a short-term win, but might be a complete waste of time.ektedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02200891099572736360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-18687142755970725802022-08-23T18:46:46.081-07:002022-08-23T18:46:46.081-07:00I'm still working on my first two game designs...I'm still working on my first two game designs, but have a background in web design, graphic design, and usability, so most of my thinking comes from those fields. <br /><br />I'd LOVE for you to go into more detail on the things that seem obvious to you. I've learned a lot from reading through your thought processes in this blog.<br /><br />Some of the things I'm constantly on the look out for in my games include:<br /><br />- Exceptions to the rule. It better be worth it, but it very likely isn't. Change the rule to be more encompassing, or just remove the exception.<br /><br />- Don't make me have to remember things. I don't want to forget an important rule, but I also don't want to have to continually open the rulebook.<br /><br />- Unnecessary complexity. When combining two things into a single concept actually simplifies quite a bit and lowers the mental load of the entire thing.<br /><br />- Call things what they are. Theme is helpful, until it isn't. Example: Don't be clever. Just call it the discard pile.<br /><br />- Whenever possible, put the action closer to the effect. I find this to be more intuitive for new players. Example: Place an action disc on the Gather space of your player board and gather wood from a forest on the map where you have a worker. Or instead... put your worker on a forest to gather wood.Steve Erwinhttps://yourturndad.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-53790862612830825862022-07-09T21:25:40.350-07:002022-07-09T21:25:40.350-07:00There are some publishers (button shy, for instanc...There are some publishers (button shy, for instance) that wouldn't be unhappy with an 18 card game pitchtheTrueMikeBrownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10455716356678012472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-44535168546806779532022-06-30T17:58:29.082-07:002022-06-30T17:58:29.082-07:00This model would seem to indicate that an extremel...This model would seem to indicate that an <i>extremely</i> dense but fair sort of puzzle would be the most challenging and, by extension, the most fun sort of game. It seems to me though that, even if a game is fair, if it's simply too hard because of its depth, it's not going to be fun. Beyond this, the model doesn't really account for how solvable a game is. It could be very deep, and yet still solvable. <br /><br />Because of these, while I appreciate the distinction here between challenge and difficulty, the model seems to be oversimplified to me when we're ultimately trying to learn what's fun in the game. Thoughts?Matt Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00833567926271812997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19884352.post-21034400529679192122022-06-30T06:40:09.896-07:002022-06-30T06:40:09.896-07:00Great considerations and presentation, thank you!Great considerations and presentation, thank you!mickteroohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11653404438212254183noreply@blogger.com