Tuesday, 30 March 2021
children games: Little Bird Big Hunger, To Market, Act Fast
Friday, 26 March 2021
boardgaming in photos: Space Hulk 4th Edition
Now I had only three marines left. The captain and the flamethrower marine were in front and they were now near the control room. The flamethrower marine had now lit up two sections, killing all genestealers within those sections and also preventing those beyond those sections from moving forward. The flamethrower marine had been using the flamethrower to kill many approaching genestealers. By now he only had one shot left, and that had to be reserved for destroying the control room. The corridor to the control room on the left was occupied by two genestealers, and the captain was now standing between them and the flamethrower marine.
The third marine was facing backwards shooting at the approaching genestealers. Unfortunately he wasn't able to shoot all of them down. These genestealers didn't bother attacking him. They were aiming for the flamethrower marine. So they slid off into the side corridor after surviving the gunfire.
Friday, 19 March 2021
Cities
Cities by Martyn F was published in 2008. I have heard of it before but have never tried it. I recently borrowed it from Allen to give it a go. After trying it, it gave me a feeling that I had played a game from a very different era. 2008 wasn't that long ago. It's just that we don't get many games of this style in recent years.
Cities is a tile-laying game, like Carcassonne. However everyone builds his own city, and not a shared city. Also the edges of tiles do not need to match up. The scoring rules incentivise you to lay your tile in specific manners, but there are no hard rules limiting your placement. The only restriction is your city is a 4x4 grid and you cannot place tiles beyond this 4x4 limit.
Everyone has an identical set of 24 tiles, and each tile is numbered. You also have 7 tourist pawns. When a game starts, pick a leader, who will randomly remove 8 of his tiles from the game. He then shuffles his tiles and stacks them face-down. He draws three of them, and reads aloud their numbers to everyone else. The other players then find those same tiles from their own sets. Everyone now starts his own city by placing his three tiles, with only the corners touching, like in the photo above. No peeking at others.
Every round, the leader draws a tile, then reads the number out to everyone else, so that everyone will be adding the exact same tile to his city. Although everyone uses the same tiles, there are may ways to place tiles, and players will usually end up with very different cities.
Friday, 12 March 2021
Yamslam
Yamslam is a simple game with wide appeal. It is easy to teach and engaging to play. It works well with non-gamers and you can bring it out at (non-boardgame) parties and gatherings. You can even use it to teach maths - high school probability. Despite being a light game, there are many design elements in Yamslam that I admire. A complex game doesn't mean it is a good game. Sometimes seasoned gamers equate complexity with quality. Conciseness and compelling experiences are more important than complexity for the sake of itself.
Friday, 5 March 2021
the victory points mechanism
When I try to summarise a game within a few sentences, often I find myself saying, "... and whoever has the most points wins the game." So many games use this victory points concept that we don't really think about it anymore. When we sit down to play a new game, we just ask, "so what do I do to score points?" Sometimes it is difficult for me to get excited about a new game, when I see it as yet another game where you try to score the most points.
The victory points mechanism is a convenient one. In complex games where the designer wants to reward you for various different good actions, giving you victory points is a simple solution. Otherwise it might be impossible to unify the many different actions or aspects of a complex game. Your success is measured in one consistent currency. Bad actions get no points, or even cause points to be deducted. Good actions earn points. It is a little like how society generally defines success by wealth. Money is victory points. Straight-forward, quantifiable, unambiguous. I'm not making any political, sociological or philosophical statement. I certainly do not believe our goal in life is to chase money. It's just that money is easier to measure than happiness. Maybe.
Wingspan
Many of my favourite games use victory points. Through the Ages, Race for the Galaxy, Food Chain Magnate, Carcassonne. Many popular games use it - Terraforming Mars, Wingspan, Terra Mystica, 7 Wonders. Victory points is not a problem per se. I just wish there were more games which use other ways to determine victory. There are many such games. Many war games determine victory based on area control, e.g. capturing the opponent capital in Axis & Allies. In Chess you win by cornering the opponent king. In Mahjong, there are many different game-winning combinations you can aim for. There are race games where you try to cross the finish line first. In head-to-head battle games you try to reduce your opponent's health to zero. It's arguable that this is just another way to present victory points. Your victory points is how far you have reduced your opponent's health.
Cooperative games tend to use victory points less, and are objective-based
instead. In Pandemic you need to cure four diseases. In
Samurai Spirit you need to protect the village. You don't need to
compare whether one player is doing better than another, so you don't need
victory points to measure the success level of any player.
Samurai Spirit
Games which use victory points apply different granularity. I find that those with fine granularity feel more distant from their theme. Building a monument gives you 20VP. Leftover money is 1VP per $3. First player to pass in a round gets 3VP. The VP starts to feel more and more like just a number you manipulate. In a game with coarse granularity, you think about the VP less and more about the action you need to perform. In The Settlers of Catan you only need 10VP to win. The contest for that 2VP for longest road feels more real than just one out of ten ways to score points in other point salad games. To take it to an extreme, in Chess you need to score 1VP to win, and trapping your opponent king is the only way to score 1VP.
The Settlers of Catan
The number of different ways to score points affects how real the victory points feel. In Russian Railroads there are many ways to score points, even for not being start player of a round. Victory points become just an abstract measure of success. Many different accomplishments in the game give you victory points. It is almost like whatever you do, you'll be praised. You just try to get praised more efficiently than others. If a game only has a handful of ways or just one way to score points, the corresponding actions will feel more real. In Power Grid, your victory points is the number of cities you can power. There is much you need to do to power cities - buy resources, buy power plants, build your network. You think in terms of powering cities instead of scoring victory points.
Power Grid
I am tinkering with game design now, and one thing I try to do is to not use victory points. I want people to slay dragons, and not increase the dragon kill count by 1. Victory points is a useful tool. It's just that sometimes it takes away some immersion. We already have so many victory point games. Let's explore more different and fun ideas.