What do you want in a mini/board game?

[Davor]

I am in a flux. I just can't do anything. Don't have the ambition to paint, I struggle to play a game. It's not just the hobby but a lot of stuff in life. I have taken a break from the hobby but want to get back in. No matter how hard I try, I get into a flux. So a new idea came to me. Why not make my own game? If the person from Hawk Wargaming can make his own game and turn it into Dropzone Commander, why can't I? In most cases this is an attempt in futility and will fail, but I need at least a start and try right? I am hoping this will at leas if anything reinvigorate me getting back into gaming again.

So I am trying to do some research. First thing is, what do you want in a game? I know beautiful minis is a must. I guess that is why I fell out of love for Battletech. The minis and art design doesn't appeal to meal, and is a turn off. Great awesome rules from what I remember. I hated the simplicity of 40K at the time. Now? I love the simplicity of what 40K was. I love the simplicity of X-Wing, Star Trek Attack Wing. 40K can become simple again. I am in the process of making for me and my son a simply version of 40K that is fun. So if I am making a game of a simple 40K version, why not go a step further and make my own game? So just in case this can go somewhere and become something, no matter how small, I want to start it.

So I am asking my family at The Tyranid Hive for help. I am doing my research which seems Games Workshop doesn't do. What do you want in a game? Do you want...

Simplicy?
Complexity?
Just minis?
Cards involved like X-Wing/Attack Wing?
Dice rolling?
Charts? Lots of charts? No charts?
Templates?
A living game or static game? By static I mean like GW where the rules never change but only through edition changes. A living game I mean that the rules are the same from the beginning, but can change during the months and years of play through. Instead of making new codices like GW does, maybe have a card system like Warmahordes, X-wing/Attack Wing does and introduce new cards for abilities and units.

These are some ideas I can think of. I know there is so much more that I can't think of. I am hoping you will share your ideas and see if they give me ideas to keep continuing. I don't know if anyone wants to help.

All I ask for now, what do you want in a game. Let's start there.

*edit* New thought. What scale would you like the minis? 10mm Dropzone Commander style, 28mm 40K style, or some other style? I am only familiar with GW and now DzC. So if there is other styles please let me know about it.
Want a skirmish game, larger or big battles?
What kind of units do you want in the game?

[WestRider]

For me, one of the big ones is clarity and consistency of Rules. BattleTech is my usual example here, because in over 20 years of playing it, I can't think of a single instance where we had a Rules issue that we weren't eventually able to find an answer to in the book.

I prefer fairly streamlined systems that allow for large games (think 2K 40K, not Apoc) in a reasonable amount of time. With a solid core, relatively minor special Rules can really change how different forces work. Look at the way SM Chapter Tactics make a White Scars Army function very differently from a Salamanders or Imperial Fists one, for instance.

Some charts are good, but it's easy to bloat there. I think both 40K and BattleTech eventually took that too far. 40K was fine on that front from 3rd through 5th, but all the various options in 6th took that past the point where I can keep track of it.

Templates are very handy. For something starting small, perhaps best to stick with just round ones, since those are commonly available for a number of systems and from various third parties.

I prefer Models that are at least an inch or so in size. Depending on what they represent, that might not be 25-30mm, tho. BattleTech, again, is a much smaller Scale (6mm, I think), but because the Models are mostly Mechs or Vehicles, it works out to have Models that are easy to paint and move around.

A living game is definitely the way to go in the 21st century, I think. With the tech we've got to push updates out, it makes way more sense to change bits gradually as they become problematic than to wait and make a ton of changes at once.

Dice and Cards are both good randomization systems, and can work well either independently or together. I've got a link to a good article by one of the MtG designers about the use of randomness in game design that I'll add here when I get home, because I don't have it saved on this computer.

[vectron]

Aug 19, 2014 8:32:39 GMT WestRider said:

Dice and Cards are both good randomization systems, and can work well either independently or together. I've got a link to a good article by one of the MtG designers about the use of randomness in game design that I'll add here when I get home, because I don't have it saved on this computer.

Please do. I'd very much like to read that. Wizards is definitely a good example of a games company that has taken balance by the horns whenever it got out of control; some quite clever people work there I gather.

[WestRider]

Here it is.

In addition to discussing how randomness works with balance, he discusses how it can be misperceived, and the kinds of situations in which randomness makes a game more or less fun.

[Davor]

Thank you Westrider for the link. Will read it after I finish my post here.

Thanks guys I appreciate your comments. While I am going to try my vision, it will be no good if it will not sell right? So I have to see what appeals to people and how I can get interested in it.

As WestRiders example, Battletech, I can relate to it because I played a lot of it. Before I loved the complexity of it since it was only 2,3 or 4 minis we would use. Now I love how you can have a 2000 point game in 40K, but it will not work for 40K. So now I am trying to think of how can I make a mech for example make it the game go by quick without looking at charts and marking off armour when hit.

So I am not sure how to do it. An idea I had was something like X-wing, have pre-made dice made up for misses, hits and criticals. Maybe light mechs have one wound, heavy mechs say 2 maybe 3 wounds or just get one wound but have a lot of dice for defence. Lighter mechs get more green dice because of manouverability, heavy mechs get armour dice.

Also what computer programs can I use? I have Excel and Word. Don't know how to use them, but are those good programs to use to make a rule book out of? If so, I will have to learn how to use them. Is there any templates or what not I can use as a background as I type? This way the pages is not an empty white page while I write out the rules. Can I make my own? If so how?

Again, thank you for your help and opinions.

[Davor]

Thanks again Westrider. That was a good read. Too bad Games Workshop didn't read that. Non of the randomness adds fun to the game.

[vectron]

Aug 19, 2014 20:16:07 GMT Davor said:

Also what computer programs can I use? I have Excel and Word. Don't know how to use them, but are those good programs to use to make a rule book out of? If so, I will have to learn how to use them. Is there any templates or what not I can use as a background as I type? This way the pages is not an empty white page while I write out the rules. Can I make my own? If so how?

Word may work, but expect to mess around a lot if you don't know it relatively well. Embedded images tend to live a life of their own. Learn how to make and use document outlines and automatically generated indexes before you start doing any real typing.

If you are really serious about writing, then learn LaTeX. Steep learning curve requires a very large investment of time before you get going, but is extremely powerful. Probably not what you are looking for

Aug 19, 2014 21:05:44 GMT Davor said:

Thanks again Westrider. That was a good read. Too bad Games Workshop didn't read that. Non of the randomness adds fun to the game.

I feel it's mostly the straight single-die rolls that are a downer; those things are just straight lottery. Give us things we can affect, or that uses multiple dice so the results are more predictable.

[WestRider]

I think one of the key takeaways from that article (and it's easier said than done) is that randomness should not actually determine outcomes, unless it's in such large volumes that it reduces the randomness somewhat. Randomness should set up or alter the situation, and then the players' choices about how to react to that should determine the outcomes.

[vectron]

Pretty much spot on.

As an anthithesis to MtG's approach, you have Warmetal: Tyrant. It's an online ccg, where many abilities core are based on 50% chances of things happening.

For example, flyers have a 50% chance to avoid regular attacks, and each unit has just a single attack each turn (but damage varies). Units are queued up against eachother, so essentially you only have to make a single 4+ cover save each turn to remain undamaged. Winning simply because you made two or three 4+ saves in a row isn't uncommon. This is frequently commented loudly on in the common chat.

Edit:
In regards to the actual topic, some preferences of mine:

- Consistent mechanics throughout the game. Contrast the various rolls of AD&D to D&D 3.x that uses D20+skill almost for everything. Alternity's D20 +/- difficulty die was also a good mechanic.
- Similar charts for similar mechanics so there is less to memorize. Preferably based on an algorithm you can do in your head.
- No single, unmodified, die rolls. Eg. Tesseract labyrinth, where it's one shot win or lose.
- Bell curves are your friend, which is why 40K is less suited for skirmishes, and warmachine wouldn't scale up (rolling 2d6 for each attack would be impractical with 30-gant squads).

- Living game, balanced for competitive play. Suitability for competitive play is not an antithesis to "fun"; casual or roleplaying gamers will have fun regardless. Wizard's Magic the Gathering is a good example of a highly competitive game that also plays well as kitchen table game with softer lists.
- Balancing should be done regularly at set intervals by adjusting points or errata. Leave major changes for codex updates (could be done simultaneously to major revisions of game rules).

- Free downloadable rules. Paper books optional - look at how Corvus Belli has done it with Infinity.
- Separate fluff, painting and rules. Why can't we buy just the mini rule book GW? >_<
- Also take a hint from the 40K-in-7-pages pdf that's floating around; keep things tight and easy to reference.

On scale, this depends highly on the theme of the game - if it's mostly infantry, go with larger scale; if it's mostly vehicles, go with smaller scale.

Another thought is to consider adaptability as roleplaying / dungeon crawler game, but this is at direct odds with scaling up for larger battles. The wisest thing is probably to know which kind of game you are (skirmish/rpg/battle/apoc) and do one thing really well.

[gman25639]

Cleat and concise rules. Customizability is a MUST.
Easily understood, yet not overly simplistic.
In other words, everything 40k should be.