We’re All Friends In Space

August 10th, 2009 Zen

The TUCS LAN just past was choc full of inane sleep deprived rambling, shouting, board games and bricks being thrown through windows. The latter was not us, eff why eye.

We played a good many games of the Battlestar Galactica board game. I played in two, but hid in my jumper and slept through the third. While the game isn’t exactly fair, and mostly consists of the human team desperately trying to hold on to their bar of soap in a prison shower, while keeping their backs to the wall and eying everyone else in the room - wondering who might jostle them and make them drop it.

I have briefly mentioned this game before in a previous post, but to recap it’s a semi-cooperative game where there is guaranteed to be one or two people who aren’t really on your side. These people will work to destroy the fleet while you’re not looking. There are a few things about the mechanics of this game that I find intriguing.

Player-Enforced Social Rule: The game features a skill check system in which the humans stave off disaster, but which player play cards into secretly; Some cards help, some hinder. In this way, an unrevealed Cylon can disrupt the fleet without giving themselves away. In comes the player-enforced secrecy rule. Nobody at the table is allowed to state with certainty anything they know, except when such a statement could be a fabrication. For example, anyone can say that they can “help out on this skill check a bit” but nobody may say “I can play 5 piloting to help out”. However, if a player gets the ability to look at another player’s Loyalty card(s) - which indicate his human or Cylon status - he can say whatever he wants, be that “he’s a Cylon” or “he’s cool, guys”. I’m constantly surprised how well this player-enforced system works, given that player-reliant rules are usually flimsy and most games rely on a player’s lack of knowledge to determine limitation of information.

Bluffing: One thing I love about the game is it brings the fun of social interaction to its potential limit. A Cylon player has many different bluffing strategies up his sleeve, and humans need to work out the true intentions behind everyone’s actions. Some of the Cylon bluffing strategies I’ve seen used to great effect (there are many others):

• Be “honest”. Stating the logical reason to the table why you could be a Cylon is a good way to decrease suspicion, usually. “Well the Cylon obviously played politics cards against us, so it could either be player x, player y or me.”
• In contrast to the above, try to acquire cards outside of your skill set. If you’re a politician, get some tactics or engineering cards to play against the humans. This has the added benefit of shifting suspicion on the other players. “Well I don’t even draw tactics cards, but you do.”
• Gain their trust. While this is easy to do by simply blowing up some Cylons or helping everyone in some crucial skill check, I’ve seen it best used in an unlikely situation. A Cylon player who investigated another player and found him to be a Cylon declared it - leading to the capture of a Cylon. But this earned him enough trust to stay out of suspicion for the rest of the game while he ruined the human team. “Yep, he’s a Cylon guys.”
• Endure the blame. If you’ve been accused of being a Cylon and locked away when you are one, you can wait it out instead of going guns blazing. The person who pulled this trick sat in the brig until I wasn’t sure why I accused him in the first place, and we let him out. “Bloody hell, I’m not a Cylon!“

Grudges: Most games suffer when grudges get involved. The constant tit for tat in any other board game just detracts from the experience. However, in the Battlestar Galactica board game, grudges for a part of a justifiable accusation. If that other guy threw you in the brig because he thought you were a Cylon, you can exact your revenge by accusing him of being one (which makes sense, because if you aren’t one then he could have been deliberately disrupting the fleet). The constant banter when pointing out inconsistencies and past actions is what makes the paranoia in the game so great.

One Player Can Ruin It For Everyone: While it’s true that every player has his own style of play, there is rarely any advantage in keeping vital Cylon location information to yourself. Occasionally a player will withhold information about the Loyalty cards he just spied on. Even for Cylons, there is no reason to hold on to this - you can lie, or tell the truth ala the above bluffing strategy. While I usually despise game rules that limit the play style to one avenue (handing the information out), the game mechanic more than makes up for it. In other similar ways, the game can be “ruined” by one player not rooting for his team, or being a mehhfort Cylon.

President Admiral Winton Adama

Posted in Board Games, Game Concepts | 2 Comments »

Addiction, Arrows, Space Battles

July 2nd, 2009 Zen

A brief update is about to happen. Brace yourselves.

I recently returned from a trip around the South Pacific, which I thought was quite cool until my holiday was trumped by the rest of Secret Lab. As many of you would agree, 23 nights on a boat with a crappy satellite Internet connection and a laptop with only Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe and The Matrix was a bit too much for me. I hugged my computer when I got back, and I’m not ashamed to admit that.

A few of you would know that I started playing World of Warcraft (again) just prior to my trip. This is still continuing, as it is one of a select few games that my fiance also enjoys. Addicted. In addition, I’m playing Team Fortress 2 again but this time with Spy as my favoured class. Some of the Spy unlockables have drastically improved my performance - so much so that I’m now doubling my previous kill/death ratio. I have been alternating Spy with Sniper, also using the new unlockables. I hit 11 kills, 3 dominations in one life using the bow - which is pretty impressive. Pinning people to walls with arrows is fun. There was a LAN at University only a day after I returned, during which I kicked off my Spy career - but was otherwise devoid of multiplayer games. We did manage to edge in a 6-player game of Twilight Imperium, in which I won (aren’t I great?), which took from 11pm ’til 5am.

Since I’ve returned, I’ve been watching the third season of Burn Notice (now up to episode 4) and Better off Ted (I don’t know what it’s up to, but I’ve watched 2). Dungeons and Dragons (4th Edition, you oldschool elitists) is going to run again soon, but this time with Aleena (my fiance) as the DM. I think I’ve been scaring her with my brutal pre-planned stun and flank tactics. I really enjoy 4th Edition - It really appeals to my tactical mind.

Getting a little slack with the blog lately. I blame you. All of you. If you’d send some damn comments my way I might post more. Clicking “mark all as spam” is just wrong. Wrong!

Posted in Board Games, News, PC Gaming, Pen and Paper | 2 Comments »

Bringing Home The Bacon: Victory In Strategy Games

May 25th, 2009 Zen

While on the topic of Twilight Imperium, a game much played by my friends recently, I got to thinking about victory.

I have to thank Mr Ford though, as through failing to achieve many objectives towards the game’s victory, it made me wonder why. In Twilight Imperium, at least, most of the objectives you have to complete in order to gain victory points are economic or technological - a facet of the game that doesn’t appeal to anyone. Some people just like to blow stuff up. In the interests of science, and because I like making lists, he’s a few motives for play and endgame objectives I can think of. Try to work out which one you like best.

• Conquest: Wipe out the other players. Very popular in computer games and best used in games that don’t last that long. It is a tug-of-war type game, in that players will push back and forth until one wins. Because players can be eliminated, its best not to use this in a game like Twilight Imperium unless you’re prepared to have players pack up, walk out the door and go home many hours before the game ends. One important aspect of the conquest objective is balancing your resources between warfare and development, using developed territory or technology to fuel your war machine. Players who fail to balance this could be left with a destroyed fleet and no income. This option is more commonly used in Real-Time Strategy games on computer and rarely in board games.

• Attrition: An alternative to conquest, wherein players just try to deal damage or take territory to gain victory. It doesn’t involve the complete elimination of any player, though it’s certainly not discounted as an option. This is the type of victory used in games like Defcon, and in the alternative objective deck provided with the Twilight Imperium expansion.

• Economic: Victory usually occurs after a player has amassed enough stuff. It is, in essence, a race to a victory point, with which one player can suddenly and unexpectedly emerge the victor. This can put emphasis on budget, management of purchases and the occasional aggressive action to get the job done. This is the type of objective I prefer, as I don’t like being forced into conflict if I can avoid it. The economic victory requires the player to leverage diplomacy in their favour, which can be hard against a heavy-handed conquest player. This is the option used in the base Twilight Imperium game and in games like Settlers of Catan.

• Build Up: Victory is achieved through establishing a certain level of infrastructure or technological advance, and appeals to the type of gamer who likes the economical victory. Similar to the economical victory, it is a race gametype. Unlike economical though, it requires the player to invest in something other than warfare, while still maintaining a formidable defense force - in case things go south. It requires a little more tactics than economical, as the money or gains are not immediately available for use in warfare whenever you need it. Therefore, players who like to build upwards are going to have a lot more invested in static defenses such as minefields, forts or cannons. This is partly used by Twilight Imperium in the base game.

• Precision Strike: Victory is gained by acquiring one particular location or thing, and is favoured by players who prefer underhanded tactics and negotiation. This type of strategy is frequently only available in games with alliances, or variations of them. This objective is definitely for people who like action, as it doesn’t require much investment in infrastructure or forces, but rather careful foreplanning, an opportunity - and luck. However, lack of power usually leads to fatal backlash from the person you backstabbed, and is frequently the downfall of the precision player. Additional planning can lead this sort of player to defend against a backlash, causing further damage to the intended target. The precision player needs to use threats more than any other negotiation, which doesn’t win you friends.

Posted in Board Games, Card Games, Console Gaming, Game Concepts, PC Gaming, Player Satisfaction | 1 Comment »

Twilight Imperium: Pax Magnifica, Adicere Gloriosum!

May 25th, 2009 Zen

Addiction is glorious. It would seem that a group of strange associates from the Maclab have become infatuated with my newest board game. It got me thinking yesterday: what is it about this game that attracts the nerdy?

The game’s mechanics are elegant, but slow. A single game takes upwards of 6 hours, which is enough to turn most new players off. The action on the game board happens at a snail’s pace. The abilities afforded to each race keep the game in balance, but often can stunt the most awesome moments - when in the hands of certain players.

Yet, somehow, the game remains entertaining for the entire 6+ hours of gameplay, and will linger in your brain for months afterwards. I have made a small list of important points that make this game so great.

• It’s set in space. With spaceships.
• Each player has 116 little plastic ships to muck around with.
• The board is modular, allowing for a different tactical play style each game.
• Each player will have one thing they are the best at: Warfare, Economics, Politics, Technology, Diplomacy and so on.
• Player interactions are fluid - trade agreements break, objectives may cause war and a joint strike might be required.
• Player skill with negotiation matters. One might employ reason, threats, lies and bribery to achieve objectives.

I’m sure I could go on, but I’ll keep this post concise. If you’re a fan of space and explosions, I’d definitely pick up a copy of Twilight Imperium. I know several more people who are thinking about it. I think this will become a regular game within the Maclab.

Posted in Board Games | No Comments »

Suspicion, Distrust and Teamwork

April 20th, 2009 Zen

I tend to favour games with flimsy alliances and deadly tactical consequences. To explain, I like games that allow you backstab, and be vulnerable to the same. When I half-bake an idea for a board or card game in my head, I deliberately keep teamwork in mind.

Permanent alliances, or teams set out from the start, harbour a sense of security. You know who your friends are, you know where the enemy is - you build your tactics on numbers and probability alone. However, when you play a game in which you form alliances that can be broken, or you just don’t know who the enemy is, a human element of suspicion and distrust develops - which extends the game beyond simply knowing the rules and the best tactics. Note that these rules apply to certain fantastic electronic video computer games, in which Spy Checking can be a waste of time and ammunition.

In a card game idea that has been ongoing for some time now, I have toyed with the idea of players’ reliance on each other, even though there can be only one victor. It is my hope that players will begin the game with complete teamwork in mind, in order to complete their common objective, but as they get closer to the end, will begin playing against each other or, at the very least, leaving each other to die.

So, if you ever aspire to making a computer game or two, throw in some suspicion and distrust with your teamwork.

Posted in Board Games, Card Games, Game Concepts, PC Gaming | No Comments »