Friday, 21 December 2012

Production

So right now - I'm talking to people about production.

The trouble being until I get everything lined up - no actual orders can be made.  Until I've got a way of getting.....

a printed box, a deck of cards, some hexes, a pile of components, and a mound of specific stone head bits there is no point getting any one of these things..... I mean really what am I going to do if I end up with 9000 meeples in 5 colours if Giant Stone Head is never actually made.....

The rule book and other player aids - the are just a printing job which I'm sure I've got the contacts for.  But it's a big challenge.  And once I've found a way of sourcing it - I've got to make the appropriate files to the correct standards which involves learning a world of new skills to do with desk top publishing......

All within a tight budget so I don't lose money on every copy I sell - even before additional expenses like getting tables at cons.....

Sunday, 16 December 2012

I suspect I need witty titles

So another play test with the Monday night gamers – people who last played 3 or so version a go.  And yes I’m definitely pushing for play tests much more at the moment – simply because I set a deadline to start production work at the start of January in order to have it for Bristol comic con so I need to have a version I could produce sharpish.  In fact that might well be the last play test of the 2012.....
They were all very impressed by the little stone heads – there so cute!  What I’m going to do for the full production version is now an issue…….  Explaining the game seemed really hard for some reason.
Good positive feedback – they seemed to enjoy the game – and seemed to think it had improved over last time.    
So the new dual use cards are excellent – people now have a range of options available while still just being able to throw cards down for violence if they feel the need.  The balance is still with the attacker but the defender manage to throw down some large reversals due to the wider range of defensive cards.   The chances of a “bad bad day” being in the hands of somebody able to play it are much higher now – which makes attacking a heart that little bit more dangerous.  And the “totally taboo” cancelation card is certainly a good addition….. 
The new rongaronga seemed popular – the ones giving you points for attacking the player to your left or to your right were good.  The new “shaman says what?” cards which give points for taking certain combinations of territory did not seem to be quite right.  Of the three combinations the coastal one was done 3 times – the middle one was done 1 and the straight line one was never done (although I did try)…….
The problems seem to fit into a set of similar problems from previous games……
-          Those behind – stay behind
-          Turn Order – when is good to go?
-          Last turn does not matter that much.
I think I see a solution for all three of those issues – but I’m trying to avoid changing too much too quickly – specifically I don’t want to change the cards until I’ve seen them in use a little more.  So while I think we need more movement cards and more steal a vp from the leader cards I need to see that a little more first.
What does not seem to be a problem….
-          Sitting on your arse.  I ran a defensive game – large numbers of men on the first turn – grabbed a lot of space and built up slowly and won.  But only just – and only after making a grand grab for the middle which could have gone very wrong. 
So plans for the next version…..
1)      Remove the resource value for holding the quarry.  Still have it break ties but no value.
2)      Change the end of game points to being for Hexes, and for resources.  Stoneheads post game become worthless – which is thematically better anyway.
3)      Increase the difference between the top and bottom ranks for the end of game points
4)      Change turn order so that lowest VPS choose when they want to go
The last is the only one that worries me – the other 3 seem sensible – it’s an old idea I have used before – but it slows things down.  It’s another choice point but it feels like a bit of a road bump rather than a significant choice.  However with the new game when you go seems important and yet not obvious (where as it was obvious before) – and first place is getting the first choice of stone heads and extra VPS……..
In terms of production I’ve asked my friend with the most contact into the games industry to see if he can find me….
a)      Contact details for a games bit wholesaler willing to handle a small order – I’ll need about 95 pieces per a box (ignoring worshiped and unworshiped stone heads for which I have an idea) so about 10,000 in total for a 100 copies which is a tiny order.
b)      See if he can find me a printer who can do print runs of a 100 decks of cards.
Even if that works - that still leaves……
Hexes, stone heads,  unworshiped stone heads, boxes, rules, and art to source…….
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm just had an idea.  What if each player had their own deck of cards?  Would be less random  each player would have the same mix of cards to use – just in a different order.  But at first glance looks much more expensive to make – but I know that in printing a 1,000 copies is the place where the price per a unit drops massively (5 player – 5 decks a box means 200 copies of the game which is more than I was thinking of doing.  Except that the different backs might well mean it counts as different decks so the price would go up.
Last night as one of the play testers played around with stone heads – I was struck how you could have a game of stone heads that just involved covering resources with stone heads until the island fall apart without all the violence.  And a good game it would be to.  But through all the version of the game – when I’ve felt like every idea was under considering – I’ve stuck with the violence because the original dream had involved this sort of violence based conflict around the stone heads. So I've let certain preconceptions stay with me throughout the design process without realising they were there.  Nothing wrong with fixed notions - but it would be better to acknowledge them I think....

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

Another Play Test....

This one was with people who had played one of the earlier version.  To my mind it all seemed to be fine.  The new hexes were good - less crowded.  The lower amounts of resources mean the maths was easier and at 4 turns things felt they wrapped up a little better.

However two odd thing.....

One person decided he had lost and so did random things.  Generally taking down another player - and allowing the other three to just fight it out amongst themselves.  Really not sure what I could do to prevent that since he was not in fact in a bad position - he just assumed he was and acted that way.

The second was that the game was played by somebody who had played one of the earlier version.  A very long time ago.  He seemed unimpressed - and claimed he enjoyed the previous version but was not sure why.  I think I understand the problem - this person likes veracity and dislike abstractions.  So previous version which involved collecting stone and wood were better because they felt truer.  Where as this version the mechanic of "the most resources gets first pick" did not feel true to him.

But I am very happy I've moved way from other versions - and accepted that abstraciton.  He asked me what I wanted the game to be and I said "fun, quick, war game where lines shift and changes rapidly as people look for opportunities."  And if I keep that goal in mind when I develop it should help a lot.

This time round we've a new action deck - and it's a big overhaul.  Now most cards have two functions - there main play ability and some sort of discard for violence benefit.  25% of the deck has now discard, 25% has defence, and 50% has attack.  That's not to say that the main effect is not sometimes violence related but it's also movement or points related.  Hopefully this will get round the problem of hands of violence or hands of useful stuff.  Now you'll get both and have to pick......

The movement cards hidden pathways and fishing boat have been clarified - they do the same thing just hopefully more obvious.
The rongaronga has been changed.  Now there is a steal a VP card if your opponent has more VPs - and also if they sit to your left/right.  I'm hoping the later will add some randomness to the game.....
 There is now a "counter card"
As well as a flanking card to move a warrior into a battle once it has started - stealing a card if he gets there and a plus 3 defence that requires you to lose a man (the logic being even if you win you've lost a warrior).
We've also got goal cards which are based on holding certain patterns of terrain such as 5 coastal spaces or 5 in a straight line. Might need more variaty in those - but want to see they go.  They were going to be a new deck but adding them in seems to work.

I really want to check this with 4 players - with 5 players a round seems to take a while....  Also might need somebody who is utterly defensive and see what happens.....

Also not sure about turn order - I might have to give players a choice in reverse VP order.

 

Monday, 26 November 2012

Bits

So this was my 40th Birthday Party - and amongst the lake of pork and collection of other random but cool presents I got given a box for Giant Stone Head.  And in that box were these......

A big bag of my very own giant stone heads - 3D printed.

Thank you very much - and also damn you - now the final version has to have bits at least this awesome.........

So obviously I had to play with them as soon as possible - so a little fragile we had a play test. 

The good.....
........drawing a card when attacked really worked.  Not to fiddly and meant it was impossible to work out exactly what was happening.
........the reduced build deck worked well.  It's certainly more controlled and seems to present more genuine choices making controlling resources more valuable.

The Bad....
.......once again somebody got out ahead and stayed there.
.......some of the cards really confused people.  The movement cards and the ronga ronga cards.
........getting the balance of the cards is trick - to many ronga ronga cards and you've a worhtless hand.  To few and you've got limited options.  Same with movement cards as well. 
.........it's still running a little long.
...........the feeling was that the Giant Stone Heads are generating to much in the way of VP's.
.............the end condition was good and stopped it dragging on with an awkward last turn.
................I'm not sure where in the turn order to go is good anymore.

So there is a raft of changes I want to do - and I'm not sure which to do for this version. 

I want to......

..... reduce the points for building a GSH - so the fighting and the violence has more impact.  Keep GSH at the end of a turn unless you've flipped them for a VP.  So taking a GSH and keeping a GSH are similar in terms of points - but taking one is easier as you don't need a card to get the point.  So offenses is rewarded but defence is possible.  And your able to try and build up a bundle of points to score.

......remove the pool mechanic as it seems not to be doing that much and just give people a lowish population cap.
..... change the cards so that everything can be dropped for either an attack point or a defence point while also having another function.  So people have more flexibility.  This might well mean the build decks values need to be reviewed because cards might be just better then men then and at the moment taking "good cards" gets you 2 cards more then "ok cards" where as "good men" is just 1 more man then "ok men".

I'm not sorting out the turn order problem at the moment.  I don't have a clever idea.....

Which all of which is a lot to sort out in one go.  But as always the problem is - if I know I'm going to change it why put people through a play test with a version I think is flawed?

Started talking to people about production.  I see a number of significiant problem areas.
1) Making hexes.  Here I have an idea - I might need a conversation with a friend with a laser cutter to make wooden hexes.
2) Getting bits.  here I need a wholesale contact - assuming a wholesaler bits dealer will deal with an order as small as mine will be (at most 2,400 pieces).
3) Box.  No idea about this one.
4) Printing - rules and player aids and score board.
5) Cards.  This is the one I'm really stuck on.  Card runs are expensive unless you do lots and lots



Friday, 16 November 2012

On the interrelatedness of all things.....

Or at least when designing games.

So after a pretty good play test I wanted to make a pretty small list of changes.

One of which was updating the resource cards to make a more limited but more distinct range of options for players. And I think I have the values for that.

But I also wanted to change game end - specifically with respect to making the game a little shorter. Easy enough - got a good suggestion about that last play test.  But changing the resource cards changes the rate at which giant stone heads go on the board - thus changing the rate the game ends.

Worse - I know I want to change the hexes (blance and quality of resources) at some point which once again changes the game end.

I have three options.

1) change the cards.
2) change the cards and the game end rule.
3) change the cards and game end rule and the hexes.

One bit of advice was 'don't change two things at once' otherwise you don't know which change is responsible for the alteration in behaviour. And yet play tests are rare things for me - and each time I play test with a rule I suspect I'm going to change of feels like a waste.

I'm going to go with number 2 - it seems a reasonable compromise - and I'll need some information before changing the hexes.

I need to sort out the quarry - which in turn means a change to some action cards that relate to it. So my 'minor' update looks like it will impact on resources, hexes, action cards, and game end........


Wednesday, 14 November 2012

Mussings

So two things I really approve of in game design are…..
The micro turn – take a single action – onto the next person – and back round to you it comes sharpish.  Much better then the ponderous mega turns where one person does everything and it’s impossible to plan as the world will be a very very different place when it comes to your turn.

The second is the existence of “roll then do” – games like “roll through the ages” where you roll our dice and then see what you can do with that as opposed to “decide then pass/fail”.

So it’s a little odd that Giant Stone Head fails to have the micro turn – although the turns are not supper long – and the rough notes of These Dark Satanic Mills seem to have heading towards the “decide then pass/fail” dice mechanic…….
 

Sunday, 11 November 2012

Play Test and Games

This weekend I headed over to Midcon where I got to play some of my essen purchases (libertallia - solid and fun; luna - which hurt my brain the 1st time but I got into my stride for the 2nd game).  I also found my first "wish I had brought game" in the shape of tzolk'in which has the coolest dial based mechanic in it.

But what I want to talk about is ugg-tect a much dafter game - in which you play as a team of neandorthols trying to build a monument in which only one of you can see a card - in which you communicate via a prescribed list of gestures, noises and bashing people with an inflatable club.  A genuine classic of stupidity - and a really clever idea.  Placing limitations on players and making a game out of what would otherwise be a frustating situation - as the ugg-tect keeps saying the same thing and you all look confused and go "ug?".....

We also snuck in a play test of GSH - five players all of who had played a number of versions over the years.  Including one person who played the last playtest - and seemed impressed about how much a fairly simple change made.....

So the defensive obsession went away - since stone heads are now just a source of VP's for other people - which caused a more more fluid game of violence.  It's - as always - not quite right.

The build cards need work - specifically there needs to be less of them and each one more clearly defined.  This has been something I've been thinking about for ages - but it's time has arrived.
It's still far to possible to get worn down and beaten up - but the addition of a card each time your attacked should short that out.

It's also been suggested that the end point is hexes out of trees - and I've decided I like that.

Also RongaRonga cards appear a little on the weak side - for all that there steal a point mechanism is clearly vital......

Now what needs to be added is some sort of defensive thing people care about - somebody suggested that the quarry allows you to score for holding a unfinished stone head at the end of the turn which could be interesting.  Also the idea that ronga ronga reward you for holding certain things - rather then just killing lots of people.  These I need to think about but the first two changes are definitely going in.