Recently, I have been thinking about how communities form in MMOs. In truth, these are quite possibly the most important part of an MMO. Without a community, an MMO is simply a single player game where you can watch other players play the same game. With a community, you can take on far larger objective and even make friends online. The problem with communities is the game developers have no direct control over them. They can provide tools to foster their creation, but it is next to impossible to pre-create communities for a game.
I have been playing Bungie's recent title Destiny. There is a lot one can do without a community, but the highest level content requires that you find a group. The problem is Bungie greatly restricts in game communications. There are no public chat or voice channels. The closest thing would be using the Bungie forum. This seems far too much like posting an add on Craigslist. You have to get lucky in having the comparable people view your advert and you will still have to sort through a lot of crap first. There are also third party sites, like Destiny LFG, which look promising. Though it really depends on the power of their search and matching algorithms. So we will have to see.
The other method available is to send lots of messages to people in game hanging around certain spots. This is a very high variance activity. A group found me to help with the Raid on normal, and that went well. Though then a member of that group invited me to do the Raid again later and it was massive mess of cursing from a player who thought he knew more than he did. So I am not super optimistic about this tactic for finding a long term community.
My only other experience with MMO communities is EVE Online. And I started EVE after it had been running for nearly 10 years. This meant that there were many large, established communities to pick from. And all had nice websites and private voice comms. While a good part of the difference can be attributed to the difference between an established MMO and a new MMO, I think some of it comes down to the medium. It is much easier to run other programs in the background on a computer than a console. This means it is easier for communities to develop new tools to help their growth. On consoles this is much harder due to restrictions the console manufactures place on apps. This means that players have to rely more on support from both the console manufacturers and the game developers to give us tools for forming communities. In this sense, I am pessimistic for console MMO communities because no one knows the tools that we as players need better than the players. Not to mention we outnumber the developers by a huge factor meaning we have more time to develop the custom tools for our particular community instead of the one size fits all versions from the developers. I hope I am mistaken, and probably will be due to how creative players as a group are.
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Monday, September 8, 2014
Alternative Methods
One topic that I have been musing about a lot recently but doesn't seem to get much discussion is that of Alts. An Alt, or alternative character, is a second or third or twentieth in game avatar, usually requiring multiple accounts. These are most common in MMOs as there are a few things that push players towards them. But it doesn't seem like developers always take into account the impact of Alt nor if they are healthy for the game.
Players start Alts for many reasons. Usually there is some limit on character abilities. Hence players need multiple characters to have full flexibility of activities in game. In games like World of Warcraft this takes the form of actual character classes which restrict your character so they are distinct from other classes. in other games like EVE it is simply more efficient to train many specialized characters than on generalist. This is mostly a function of the fact that to have multiple characters training in any game you have to pay for multiple accounts.
From the developer perspective, Having players train alts makes things easier on them. If pa player is training more than one character, they are clearly invested in the game and will probably stay for a longer period of time. In addition, the developer is making multiple subscription fees from one person instead of needing to find new subscribers. So for developers alts are useful in capturing more revenue from invested players.
Unfortunately Alts have at least 2 major downsides. First they decrease the impact of reputation. It is very easy to have an Alt for doing unscrupulous acts. Then once the penalties have built up, simply switch to another character and ignore the consequences. In games like EVE which emphasize that actions have consequences, Alts really damage this philosophy. The other downside is they decrease social interaction. There is no need to coordinate with other players if you have enough alts to run a production empire. Or why group up if you can play multiple characters at once and do group content by yourself? This seems counter to games called Massively Multiplayer Online.
One recent example of a game company thinking about alts and doing them well, in my opinion, is Bungie with Destiny. Each account gets 3 character slots, which is conveniently the number of classes in the game. So you only ever need one account to have access to all play options. In addition, individual characters do not have unique names like WOW. Instead the account has one name that is displayed no matter which character is used. This mitigates the reputation problem as the reputation is for the account instead of the character.
The other interesting feature of Bungie's implementation of Alts is they share storage space. So instead of having to do some convoluted process to get gear from your Warlock to your Titan, all you have to do is deposit the gear in the vault. Then any character on your account has access to it. So all your characters always have access to all of your best gear, so you can quickly swap to the one you want to play and go. Granted Destiny is no where near as complex as EVE, but it shows that when developers think about Alts and how players interact with them, you get a much better gaming experience.
Players start Alts for many reasons. Usually there is some limit on character abilities. Hence players need multiple characters to have full flexibility of activities in game. In games like World of Warcraft this takes the form of actual character classes which restrict your character so they are distinct from other classes. in other games like EVE it is simply more efficient to train many specialized characters than on generalist. This is mostly a function of the fact that to have multiple characters training in any game you have to pay for multiple accounts.
From the developer perspective, Having players train alts makes things easier on them. If pa player is training more than one character, they are clearly invested in the game and will probably stay for a longer period of time. In addition, the developer is making multiple subscription fees from one person instead of needing to find new subscribers. So for developers alts are useful in capturing more revenue from invested players.
Unfortunately Alts have at least 2 major downsides. First they decrease the impact of reputation. It is very easy to have an Alt for doing unscrupulous acts. Then once the penalties have built up, simply switch to another character and ignore the consequences. In games like EVE which emphasize that actions have consequences, Alts really damage this philosophy. The other downside is they decrease social interaction. There is no need to coordinate with other players if you have enough alts to run a production empire. Or why group up if you can play multiple characters at once and do group content by yourself? This seems counter to games called Massively Multiplayer Online.
One recent example of a game company thinking about alts and doing them well, in my opinion, is Bungie with Destiny. Each account gets 3 character slots, which is conveniently the number of classes in the game. So you only ever need one account to have access to all play options. In addition, individual characters do not have unique names like WOW. Instead the account has one name that is displayed no matter which character is used. This mitigates the reputation problem as the reputation is for the account instead of the character.
The other interesting feature of Bungie's implementation of Alts is they share storage space. So instead of having to do some convoluted process to get gear from your Warlock to your Titan, all you have to do is deposit the gear in the vault. Then any character on your account has access to it. So all your characters always have access to all of your best gear, so you can quickly swap to the one you want to play and go. Granted Destiny is no where near as complex as EVE, but it shows that when developers think about Alts and how players interact with them, you get a much better gaming experience.
Friday, May 9, 2014
Dissertation Files: Team Dossier
Two weeks ago I started a game of Dissertation Nemesis. My team is a little on the small side with only four members. None the less, I think it has been a very positive and valuable experience for everyone involved. So without further ado, the team:
Right now the team meets once a week for an hour. There we talk about how our week went and any other dissertation related topics. Sometimes we go into detail on someone's project. Others we just talk about our concerns, frustrations and fears relating to graduate school. This is very therapeutic as everyone has the exact same issues and needs a chance to voice them. Overall, I think everyone is very satisfied with the meetings.
At the end of each meeting, we pass out assignments for who we will check on during the week. Then everyone has one person they must ping daily to ask about how things are going and what they are up to. After the first week, we decided to require at least a paragraph response. This forces people to own what they are doing and provides more commitment. We didn't officially theme this process, but I like to think of it as field reports to my supervising officer.
As the game continues and evolves, I'll keep people posted.
Bonus Pairing: Winry vs. Edward (Fullmetal Alchemist) "Sometimes you just want to hit it with a wrench"
- Fox Mulder vs. The Smoking Man (The X Files) "The Truth is out there," or at least Mulder must believe it is. The objective always seems so close. But as soon as you nail it down, all you are left with are more questions. This is a struggle with the unknown and often ill-defined nature of research. The Smoking Man and his Syndicate represent all the knowledge that you know must be out there, but always seem to fail to find. Other graduate student can be viewed as other CIA agents with one's committee as the board of directors. They are helpful but often understand less than you do.
- Sherlock Holmes vs. Professor James Moriarty This is the quintessential duel of wits. The problem is the villain sets the stage and is always ahead of the hero. The trick is seeing and anticipating the other's moves, getting better and better as one learns the patterns.
- Gambit vs. Rogue (X-Men) Gambit clearly likes Rogue and the attraction seems mutual. Unfortunately, any time he tries to pursue it past friendship, Rogue sucks the life out of him, literally.
- Shahryār vs. Scheherazade (1001 Arabian Nights) The exact opposite dynamic as Gambit and Rogue, Shahryar wants to kill Scheherazade. But her enchanting stories enchant him night after night, leaving he alive for one more day.
Right now the team meets once a week for an hour. There we talk about how our week went and any other dissertation related topics. Sometimes we go into detail on someone's project. Others we just talk about our concerns, frustrations and fears relating to graduate school. This is very therapeutic as everyone has the exact same issues and needs a chance to voice them. Overall, I think everyone is very satisfied with the meetings.
At the end of each meeting, we pass out assignments for who we will check on during the week. Then everyone has one person they must ping daily to ask about how things are going and what they are up to. After the first week, we decided to require at least a paragraph response. This forces people to own what they are doing and provides more commitment. We didn't officially theme this process, but I like to think of it as field reports to my supervising officer.
As the game continues and evolves, I'll keep people posted.
Bonus Pairing: Winry vs. Edward (Fullmetal Alchemist) "Sometimes you just want to hit it with a wrench"
Monday, April 28, 2014
Skinner's gone rogue
FTL: Faster Than Light recently released a free expansion. So I booted up my copy to jump through the stars on a mission to deliver a message critical to a civil war. Many hours later, I was surprised to find myself still playing. This had me thinking about why FTL has such addictive game play. FTL is a Roguelike, a genre started by the text game Rogue. There are three key features of a Roguelike. First, everything is random. The levels, enemies, and items you get are all randomly generated. Other than you starting gear, there is no guarantee of finding any particular item or location in a play through. In FTL, there are a fixed number of stages and the power of the enemies ramps up through them, but within those minor constraints it is all random. Second, Roguelikes have perma-death. If you die, you have to start over from the beginning with a completely new random world. There is no way to revert to a saved state. Finally, Roguelikes are hard and tend to boarder on punishingly so. If you are winning more than 50% of the time, the game is too easy. Sounds like a fun game, no?
Despite how awful Roguelikes sound, they are a popular genre. Some of the popularity has to do with the creativity and adaptability these games require. But that is not what I wanted to talk about. Instead, I want to talk about the psychology of conditioning and how it relates to games, in particular operant conditioning. Loosely defined, this is providing positive or negative feedback to encourage or discourage certain behaviors. An example is Sheldon giving Penny a chocolate every time she does something he approves of when she and Lennard start dating the first time.
On the surface, this clearly relates to games. Every time you defeat an enemy or finish a quest, you are rewarded. Though often the rewards are random in games. This is where things get a bit weird. It turns out that only sometimes rewarding for a behavior reinforces the behavior better than always rewarding for it. Random rewards are one reason that gambling is so addictive.
Putting this together, we see that the difficulty and randomness of Roguelikes utilizes this random reinforcement mechanism. Instead of knowing where a certain enemy is that gives a great item, players sometimes stumble upon interesting enemies that might give a nice item. And this could happen in the next location you visit! Instead of always having the sweet taste of victory, you have to fight for it. But this makes the cases when it happens that much sweeter. Granted it is possible to have the good outcomes happen to infrequently, see the first release of Diablo III. But FTL and other successful Roguelikes condition you to want to come back for more, even though they repeatedly beat you to a pulp.
Despite how awful Roguelikes sound, they are a popular genre. Some of the popularity has to do with the creativity and adaptability these games require. But that is not what I wanted to talk about. Instead, I want to talk about the psychology of conditioning and how it relates to games, in particular operant conditioning. Loosely defined, this is providing positive or negative feedback to encourage or discourage certain behaviors. An example is Sheldon giving Penny a chocolate every time she does something he approves of when she and Lennard start dating the first time.
On the surface, this clearly relates to games. Every time you defeat an enemy or finish a quest, you are rewarded. Though often the rewards are random in games. This is where things get a bit weird. It turns out that only sometimes rewarding for a behavior reinforces the behavior better than always rewarding for it. Random rewards are one reason that gambling is so addictive.
Putting this together, we see that the difficulty and randomness of Roguelikes utilizes this random reinforcement mechanism. Instead of knowing where a certain enemy is that gives a great item, players sometimes stumble upon interesting enemies that might give a nice item. And this could happen in the next location you visit! Instead of always having the sweet taste of victory, you have to fight for it. But this makes the cases when it happens that much sweeter. Granted it is possible to have the good outcomes happen to infrequently, see the first release of Diablo III. But FTL and other successful Roguelikes condition you to want to come back for more, even though they repeatedly beat you to a pulp.
Monday, April 14, 2014
Dissertation Nemesis
Right now I am struggling through my PHD thesis. Calling it my nemesis would not be an understatement. Even though I am in the home stretch, motivation to finish it has been hard to come by. I recently read Reality is Broken and starting toying with an Alternate Reality Game to find the element of fun and make this job a game. This was inspired by the part of the book talking about SuperBetter, an alternate reality game to help with injury recovery. While SuperBetter could conceivable be used to motivate thesis work, I think some variations are needed. In particular, every PHD student is working on a thesis and could use a support group. Hence, the dissertation version is more of a team game than SuperBetter.
In this game, you and your fellow dissertaters are part of some team working together for some purpose, like protecting the world. But each team member has their personal adversary, their Nemesis, that they alone can defeat. The team can and should support each other in this endeavor, but no kill stealing. Two obvious ways to theme your team would be the Justice League or the Avengers. They are working together to save humanity, but each has their own personal enemy. Thor has Loki, Captain America has HYDRA, the Incredible Hulk has his anger issues and
The first step is to assemble your team. This means recruiting like Nick Furry. Your team can come from any discipline. It doesn't have to be just people in your program or sub-sub-sub-specialty of your program. In fact, it is helpful to have other perspectives and not have to worry that you are directly competing with those on your team. Recruitment is probably the hardest step. Programs tend to be very insular, especially near the end. Just remember that everyone is in the same boat as you and wants people to commiserate and support them through this. Don't get discouraged. It took Nick Furry 6 movies before he could get the entire Avengers team together.
Once you have assembled your team, everyone needs to pick their in game identity and Nemesis. Your group doesn't need to have as tight themeing as the Justice League or Avengers. Mixing DC and Marvel is perfectly fine. Or a mash-up like the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen does for classic literature or Fables for faerie tales.
Picking your nemesis is as important as who you are. This dichotomy represents the major focus of your energies. While some characters, like Sherlock Holmes and Moriarty, are easy to pair, others are much harder. Batman has so many great opponents in his rouges' gallery that you can really fine tune you Nemesis to how your thesis feels to you. Maybe it is the Riddler if your thesis is an enigma to solve. Or perhaps the Joker because your dissertation is just wonton destruction and chaos. Or Ra's al Ghul if you keep having to rewrite the same portion of your thesis over and over again. I would just recommend against Captain Ahab chasing the white whale as that doesn't end well.
Once you have your team and nemesis, you need a base of operations. The Avengers have the S.H.E.I.L.D. helicarrier and the Justice League their satellite. This is your teams safe area. It is a place you can go and talk shop without reservations. It could be a lounge in your department, some meeting room on campus or even your groups' favorite coffee house. Any place you can all gather and talk about the dissertation writing process comfortably will do. In addition, also schedule a weekly meeting there. During this meeting your team should discuss how they are faring against their nemesis. Is the battle going well? Do they need some help? What are people worried about that is coming up? This way the team can support each other and help those that are struggling.
Contact with your team should not be limited to just the weekly meetings. Members of your group should be in contact daily. This does not mean talking to everyone every day. If you know someone predicted a hard week or had a hard previous week, check in to see how they are doing. Conversely if you are struggling, don't be afraid to reach out, that is what your team is for. This can be as simple as and e-mail, Facebook Post or text. Or if someone needs something bigger people can meet up for lunch or coffee to help formulate strategies.
Outside of the normal meetings and check-ins, having group writing sessions is extremely valuable. Having everyone gather to write for a few hours is a great commitment device. In this scenario, all your nemesis have banded together to create a super team to challenge your own. Only a concerted, joint effort can push them back. This is a great way to start the game or re-set people's writing if their schedules have gotten screwed up.
Finally, you need goals and achievements. Goals are things that you have set out to do and achievements are things that other people bestow upon you. Both are important to the process. Goals enable you to focus your efforts. Achievements show you hidden strengths and provide positive reinforcement.
Clearly, your ultimate goal is
Achievements aren't things you can work for but can give others. They should be recognitions of a job well done or acknowledgments of a strength the person is overlooking. Obvious achievements would be congratulations for finishing a chapter or surviving giving a presentation on your work. Smaller ones could be about regaining momentum after a speed bump or making a really cool graphic for your thesis. Even things like recognition for a very cool turn of phrase in the text or handling a tough adviser meeting are achievement worthy.
Everyone should make an effort to hand out achievements to other people and publicize them. Group meetings are a good place for them as everyone is there. But even during a daily check in they can be awarded if you think the person has done something achievement worthy which they might have overlooked. So if you see Batman working for 8 hours straight, especially if he has never done this before, telling the group that he is a Diligent Detective would be in order.
Doing a dissertation is a unique experience, which can be very isolating. The alternate reality game outlined above is an attempt to create a framework where dissertaters can socialize around their work. Its goal is to provide a support network of like minded individuals so you can push each other over the hump and finish your thesis. I am not sure it is complete in its current form, but should provide a good starting point. Hopefully, I'll assemble a team and be able to post updates to the rules as we play.
Thursday, April 10, 2014
PnP Wiz-War - Part 4: Finishing touches
In addition to the base game, I also printed out the community expansion. This adds many more cards to play with and lots more tokens to cut out. As of now I have not integrated any of the community expansion cards into my deck. Most of them are on the complex end and many of the basic support cards are missing to make a usable expansion. In particular, number cards (27.5% of the normal deck) and Pick Lock (3%) are not included in the file. I used Ilya's source files to add the community expansion symbol to some number cards and pick lock cards, which will let me tweak the deck. I will probably just select my favorite cards from the community expansion and balance them with numbers, Pick Locks and some other simple cards from the original game after some plays.
For the tokens I followed my previous method. First I pasted one set of each token to a big sheet of matte board.
Once affixed, I sprayed with my ink fixative and allowed it to dry overnight. Then I scored the tokens and cut the outline of each strip and attached the back label, except for the creatures. These I fully cut out because I wanted the creature names to be on the same edge on both sides. With the original game, I could rotate 1/2 the labels before printing in the source files. Unfortunately, I don't have the source files for the full community expansion, which meant I had to do it the old fashioned way. Once the backs were attached, I sprayed them with my ink fixative. Then sliced them apart.
This completed all the game components. In addition to the pieces, one also needs the rules. At the time of this post, there isn't a super good version of the rules to print and use. The core rules can be found on at Wiz-War.com along with a good card FAQ. Sadly the formatting on that site sucks. The first few pages of Kwanchai's Wiz War Redesign have the rules from the website formatted nicely. Unfortunately, there have been a few player made updates to clarify the rules. In particular, the distinction between Line of Sight and Line of Movement, which is present on Ilya's redesign, but not in the core rules. So in addition to the core rules, I strongly recommend having Ilya's Quick Reference on hand. It doesn't have the complete rules, but enough to get you started and fill in some of the clarifications to the core rules. I had mine laminated.
I also found some great storage options for my copy. At my local hobby store, there was a square box which was perfect dimensions to hold all the boards & warps. I also purchased one of the small plastic dividers for all the different tokens. For the cards, I used one of my Magic: the Gathering boxing I had lying around. This is the complete set.
One last thing, you will need a 4 sided die to play the game. Every reference in Wiz-War to a die is to a 4 sided die. This can be found at any gaming store.
For the tokens I followed my previous method. First I pasted one set of each token to a big sheet of matte board.
 |
| So Many Tokens... |
 |
| Community Expansion Tokens |
 |
| Quick Reference & Rules |
 |
| Completed Set! |
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
King of the Hill
During International TableTop Day I had a chance to try out Illuminati at one of my good friend's recommendation. The game has some very cool and thematic mechanics. Plus the satire and crazy conspiracies you can create make it a very flavorful game. Unfortunately, the end game is a bit to reminiscent of another of Steve Jackson's games, Munchkin. Until the end, the game is rarely adversarial. As soon as one player is about to win, all the others dog pile him or her to prevent it. This happens to the next two or three people who try to win. The winner is decided then by being the first player to be in position when all the other players' have exhausted their resources. This creates a very frustrating and confrontational end game to otherwise light games.
I think this is a separate phenomenon than King Making, or a losing player making the deciding choice between two contenders for first. Games like Settlers of Catan have King Making. Often there will be a just two players with a good shot a winning. Then actions of the third or fourth player will ultimately determine who wins, either through trades or placement of the robber. These players can simply impede progress or aid in another player's progress, it is impossible for the King Makers to actually tear you down and remove points. In Munchkin, it is very likely that the efforts of the players will result in losing a level or completely wipe out the gear one acquired. Further, the efforts of all the players will be coordinated as most will stand a decent chance of winning if they tear down enough other players.
The best analogy that I have come up with is playing King of the Hill. The objective is simply to be the only one standing at the highest point of some hill or other terrain feature. The game is rough as people will physically push and throw each other down. You can even have multiple people team up to pull one person off the hill. Contrast this with King Making, which is more like a duke peddling influence to frustrate his least favored candidate.
The problem with King of the Hill environments in games is not the underlying analogy game. King of the Hill is a fine game and something like Smash Up implements it well. The problem is having this rough and tumble situation evolve at the end of a game. In Smash Up, you are told that it is a free for all to capture bases. But Munchkin wants to be a game about killing monsters in funny ways. It is purely an emergent result of player behavior that the game ends with King of the Hill. Essentially all the play until level 8 or 9 is set up for the final King of the Hill match. This is not explained by the rules nor generally expected by the players, which is where the game fall flat. That King of the Hill is not an intentional part of the design and isn't integrated into the flavor of the game breaks player expectations. Any game that does something counter to player expectations runs the risk of being frustrating. Especially if the violation of expectations happens in a very rough and tumble way.
I think this is a separate phenomenon than King Making, or a losing player making the deciding choice between two contenders for first. Games like Settlers of Catan have King Making. Often there will be a just two players with a good shot a winning. Then actions of the third or fourth player will ultimately determine who wins, either through trades or placement of the robber. These players can simply impede progress or aid in another player's progress, it is impossible for the King Makers to actually tear you down and remove points. In Munchkin, it is very likely that the efforts of the players will result in losing a level or completely wipe out the gear one acquired. Further, the efforts of all the players will be coordinated as most will stand a decent chance of winning if they tear down enough other players.
The best analogy that I have come up with is playing King of the Hill. The objective is simply to be the only one standing at the highest point of some hill or other terrain feature. The game is rough as people will physically push and throw each other down. You can even have multiple people team up to pull one person off the hill. Contrast this with King Making, which is more like a duke peddling influence to frustrate his least favored candidate.
The problem with King of the Hill environments in games is not the underlying analogy game. King of the Hill is a fine game and something like Smash Up implements it well. The problem is having this rough and tumble situation evolve at the end of a game. In Smash Up, you are told that it is a free for all to capture bases. But Munchkin wants to be a game about killing monsters in funny ways. It is purely an emergent result of player behavior that the game ends with King of the Hill. Essentially all the play until level 8 or 9 is set up for the final King of the Hill match. This is not explained by the rules nor generally expected by the players, which is where the game fall flat. That King of the Hill is not an intentional part of the design and isn't integrated into the flavor of the game breaks player expectations. Any game that does something counter to player expectations runs the risk of being frustrating. Especially if the violation of expectations happens in a very rough and tumble way.
Monday, April 7, 2014
PnP Wiz-War - Part 3: Cards
Last time I finished with all the pieces for the Base game and the two official expansions. This left me able to do take really nice staged pictures. Like this one:
Unfortunately, I can't actually play the game without the cards.
Instead of doing standard print and play using Ilya's files, I ordered custom cards through an online service. I knew that I wanted nice cards that would stand up to lots of use. And didn't trust myself to get the cuts correct on standard card stock.
After doing some research, I settled on PrinterStudio.com. They do custom cards of many sizes. I went with standard Poker Cards. It is just over $20 for 234 cards with the premium linen finish. (The linen finish is like $1 extra, so I went with it.) If you print all the cards (Base game, 1st Expansion, 2nd Expansion, Community Expansion) you will need 2 sets of 234 and one set of 54. This leaves you with 20 extra slots for anything else you can dream up. I added 2 custom cards, 8 pick locks and 10 black cards. You can skip the community expansion and fit everything in a set of 234 and one of 54. This is about $30.
To use the website you must first have a separate image for every single card. They should be formatted as 822x1122 pixels for this service. The easiest way to do this is use Ilya's source files and a free trial of Corel Draw. You can then select the card and export as a .jpg. After exporting simply expand the canvas to the correct size and add a canvas color to match the border (xFFFF00 is what I used) in your favorite editing program. This works for all but the community expansion. Ilya's is not complete. If you contact Black Canyon on BoardGameGeek.com, he can send you the community expansion properly formatted. Or you can just send me a message and I can send you everything bundled up.
Once you have the files, it is simply a matter of uploading them to the site in batches of 30. Then autofilling once they are all uploaded. The one wrinkle is the site doesn't really like files with the same art so you have to manually copy all cards that have duplicates manually. It is just drag and drop, but still a bit tedious with all the number cards.
The site often runs deals on shipping or simply larger orders, so be sure to search around for codes to reduce the final price.
PrinterStudio gave me an estimated delivery of about 7-10 days. The cards arrived at the early part of that window. They were in good condition so lets check them out.
Overall I am very satisfied with the cards. They are clearly of good quality and all the colors are nice and crisp. My only complaint is there is some inconsistency across the card packs. I ordered 3 sets, 2 of 234 and one of 54. One of the sets of 234 has a slight yellow-green hue and is cut a little more off center than the other two sets.
Honestly the difference in hue is not the big. If you are not a perfectionist, like me, you should have no issue mixing the cards. Even if you can tell the difference when studying them, given lower lighting and focus on the game it shouldn't be noticeable.
If PrinterStudio had given me consistent hue and cutting I would give them a 5 out of 5. But I can only go with a 4 out of 5 for them. And only for PnP. If you are doing a game to sell, I advise a test run first.
Now that I have over 550 Wiz-War cards, who wants to play with me?
 |
| 5 Player Board in Action |
Instead of doing standard print and play using Ilya's files, I ordered custom cards through an online service. I knew that I wanted nice cards that would stand up to lots of use. And didn't trust myself to get the cuts correct on standard card stock.
After doing some research, I settled on PrinterStudio.com. They do custom cards of many sizes. I went with standard Poker Cards. It is just over $20 for 234 cards with the premium linen finish. (The linen finish is like $1 extra, so I went with it.) If you print all the cards (Base game, 1st Expansion, 2nd Expansion, Community Expansion) you will need 2 sets of 234 and one set of 54. This leaves you with 20 extra slots for anything else you can dream up. I added 2 custom cards, 8 pick locks and 10 black cards. You can skip the community expansion and fit everything in a set of 234 and one of 54. This is about $30.
To use the website you must first have a separate image for every single card. They should be formatted as 822x1122 pixels for this service. The easiest way to do this is use Ilya's source files and a free trial of Corel Draw. You can then select the card and export as a .jpg. After exporting simply expand the canvas to the correct size and add a canvas color to match the border (xFFFF00 is what I used) in your favorite editing program. This works for all but the community expansion. Ilya's is not complete. If you contact Black Canyon on BoardGameGeek.com, he can send you the community expansion properly formatted. Or you can just send me a message and I can send you everything bundled up.
Once you have the files, it is simply a matter of uploading them to the site in batches of 30. Then autofilling once they are all uploaded. The one wrinkle is the site doesn't really like files with the same art so you have to manually copy all cards that have duplicates manually. It is just drag and drop, but still a bit tedious with all the number cards.
The site often runs deals on shipping or simply larger orders, so be sure to search around for codes to reduce the final price.
PrinterStudio gave me an estimated delivery of about 7-10 days. The cards arrived at the early part of that window. They were in good condition so lets check them out.
 |
| Why is Buddy an Attack?!?!?! |
 |
| Can you tell which one is miscolored? |
If PrinterStudio had given me consistent hue and cutting I would give them a 5 out of 5. But I can only go with a 4 out of 5 for them. And only for PnP. If you are doing a game to sell, I advise a test run first.
Now that I have over 550 Wiz-War cards, who wants to play with me?
Saturday, April 5, 2014
PnP Wiz-War - Part 2: Tokens
Last time I finished the boards and other foam core pieces. This left me able to build magical dungeons to play in like this:
Unfortunately, I have no pieces to move around the game board. So that is the next step in the construction.I have to build the absolutely massive number of tokens present in Wiz-War.
For the tokens I was looking for about 2mm thick cardboard. They needed to be stiff and actually have some size to them so they are easy to pick up. What I ended up with is 1mm matte board. You know the stuff that is used to edge paintings. It is definitely a nice rigid material for tokens. The downside is 1mm is a bit thin to pick up. Also matte board is HARD to cut. I went out and bought the special Zirconium coated Exacto blades to speed up the process and tear the label paper less. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade if you are using matte board. Other options are illustration board (matte board with a different coating) or chip board. Sadly I couldn't find those in the hobby shops I visited.
I think that I screwed up my first batch. And being the smart cookie that I am used the treasures as the first batch. Essentially I pasted them close to the edge. Then cut out the outline. This left me with no registry marks for accurate cutting. Overall the pieces look OK, but are a bit irregular. Which is not good for things that are used all the time.
With the next batch I tried something different. Instead of cutting out all the pieces I pasted of one side of the labels to the matte board.
Then I scored between all the tokens. This allowed me to use the registry marks for more regular tokens. It is important not to cut all the way through yet. Then I cut out the outline of each row of tokens. This let me affix the back side label to the row and provided good guiding marks. Once the back side was on, I flipped the labels and used the scores to separate the tokens. This worked MUCH better and resulted in very regular tokens.
For the large block of walls I didn't do them double sided. So I just cut the inside lines first. Then did the outer edge so everything pops out in one nice bunch.
Unfortunately, I am not done with tokens. There are still the community expansion tokens. Plus I think I will re-do the treasures because the are a key game piece.
 |
| 5 Player Board Setup |
For the tokens I was looking for about 2mm thick cardboard. They needed to be stiff and actually have some size to them so they are easy to pick up. What I ended up with is 1mm matte board. You know the stuff that is used to edge paintings. It is definitely a nice rigid material for tokens. The downside is 1mm is a bit thin to pick up. Also matte board is HARD to cut. I went out and bought the special Zirconium coated Exacto blades to speed up the process and tear the label paper less. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade if you are using matte board. Other options are illustration board (matte board with a different coating) or chip board. Sadly I couldn't find those in the hobby shops I visited.
I think that I screwed up my first batch. And being the smart cookie that I am used the treasures as the first batch. Essentially I pasted them close to the edge. Then cut out the outline. This left me with no registry marks for accurate cutting. Overall the pieces look OK, but are a bit irregular. Which is not good for things that are used all the time.
 |
| Treasures and walls |
 |
| The rest of the tokens for the Base game & 2 released expansions. |
For the large block of walls I didn't do them double sided. So I just cut the inside lines first. Then did the outer edge so everything pops out in one nice bunch.
 |
| Sticks & Stones will break your bones |
 |
| Creatures & Environmental Effects |
 |
| Wizards, Treasures & Home Bases |
Friday, April 4, 2014
PnP Wiz-War - Part 1: Foam Core
One thing I have been meaning to do for awhile is make a Print and Play (PnP) version of Wiz-War. The most recent, and nicest looking, re-design of 5th edition I have found is Ilya's which is posted at BoardGameGeek.com. 5th seems to be the most popular version to PnP as it was the last iteration by Jolly Games. 6th and 7th are simply 5th with minor graphical updates. I have never done PnP before, and am not that good at crafts so making my own copy of a board game is going to be a challenge.
The first step was printing out all the boards, token, and other game pieces (excluding cards & rules) on full sheet labels. (Base game, 1st Expansion page 1, 2nd Expansion page 1, Community Expansion Part 1 pages 1-3, Auto-warps, Wizard HP) This allows you to just stick them to your backing without worrying about glue. It is really the simplest way to go about making pieces. The one catch with this game is the pages are formatted A4 which is slightly bigger than letter. Most stores only sell full sheet labels in letter size. My advice when printing is to choose the Actual Size option and just look at every page in the print preview to ensure nothing is being cut off.
A big recommendation I have seen when researching this topic is to use an ink affixative to preserve the printed images. Also it seems that ink jet printer's color can be faded by the sun, so needs UV protection. I used Krylon UV-Resistant Clear Coating Matte for this project. As of now I am still experimenting with it so not sure how necessary this step is, but will go over what I have done, will do and have learned.
I sprayed a few coats on the sheets before mounting them on my chosen backing. Then used another few coats once mounted and cut. This makes the pieces look nice, but they are grainy to the touch. Plus I found a fine white powder from handling them, which is a bit annoying. I think that I used too much on my first pieces and didn't give it enough time to dry before handling. I would spray VERY thin coats, you shouldn't see any wetness, and leave them to dry for a good few hours. Plus I would only do 3 coats or so. One before mounting and 2 after mounting.
For this project I choose 3/16" Black Foam Core for the mounting material on my boards, auto-warps and HP trackers. A large sheet of this will provide you with exactly enough space to mount these things. Before mounting I cut most of the white space off. This way the pieces didn't take as much room and I could save the tokens for another material.
Being the perfectionist that I am, I used a decoupage tool to ensure no air bubbles and a flat mount. It is probably overkill, but an option for those who must have it perfect.
Once mounted I used an exacto knife and metal ruler to cut through the foam core, using the nice registry lines Ilya included. This take about 4-5 passes per line to ensure a smooth cut. For the player boards and Wizard HP trackers the results are quite nice.
I am less impressed with the small warp markers and auto-warp markers. The foam core is hard to cut in a circle and doesn't like to be cut starting from an edge. Which makes it hard to cut small pieces and anything else fancy.
I also STRONGLY recommend that you have a vacuum on hand. Foam core is pretty messy and leaves lots of particles lying around, especially with the smaller pieces.
One last cool thing that I found is a storage case which holds all 8 boards and the auto-warp pieces perfectly.
As I complete more pieces of the game, I'll continue this series. Next up will be the massive number of tokens for this game.
The first step was printing out all the boards, token, and other game pieces (excluding cards & rules) on full sheet labels. (Base game, 1st Expansion page 1, 2nd Expansion page 1, Community Expansion Part 1 pages 1-3, Auto-warps, Wizard HP) This allows you to just stick them to your backing without worrying about glue. It is really the simplest way to go about making pieces. The one catch with this game is the pages are formatted A4 which is slightly bigger than letter. Most stores only sell full sheet labels in letter size. My advice when printing is to choose the Actual Size option and just look at every page in the print preview to ensure nothing is being cut off.
A big recommendation I have seen when researching this topic is to use an ink affixative to preserve the printed images. Also it seems that ink jet printer's color can be faded by the sun, so needs UV protection. I used Krylon UV-Resistant Clear Coating Matte for this project. As of now I am still experimenting with it so not sure how necessary this step is, but will go over what I have done, will do and have learned.
I sprayed a few coats on the sheets before mounting them on my chosen backing. Then used another few coats once mounted and cut. This makes the pieces look nice, but they are grainy to the touch. Plus I found a fine white powder from handling them, which is a bit annoying. I think that I used too much on my first pieces and didn't give it enough time to dry before handling. I would spray VERY thin coats, you shouldn't see any wetness, and leave them to dry for a good few hours. Plus I would only do 3 coats or so. One before mounting and 2 after mounting.
For this project I choose 3/16" Black Foam Core for the mounting material on my boards, auto-warps and HP trackers. A large sheet of this will provide you with exactly enough space to mount these things. Before mounting I cut most of the white space off. This way the pieces didn't take as much room and I could save the tokens for another material.
Being the perfectionist that I am, I used a decoupage tool to ensure no air bubbles and a flat mount. It is probably overkill, but an option for those who must have it perfect.
Once mounted I used an exacto knife and metal ruler to cut through the foam core, using the nice registry lines Ilya included. This take about 4-5 passes per line to ensure a smooth cut. For the player boards and Wizard HP trackers the results are quite nice.
I also STRONGLY recommend that you have a vacuum on hand. Foam core is pretty messy and leaves lots of particles lying around, especially with the smaller pieces.
One last cool thing that I found is a storage case which holds all 8 boards and the auto-warp pieces perfectly.
As I complete more pieces of the game, I'll continue this series. Next up will be the massive number of tokens for this game.
Monday, March 17, 2014
Medium determines design: Magic & Hearthstone
I recently started playing Hearthstone, Blizzard's new free to play CCG. It is extremely similar to Magic: the Gathering. The designers of Hearthstone admit to being heavily influenced by Magic. What stuck out to me were the differences and how closely these design decisions were influenced by the medium. Unlike Magic Online, which is just a port of Magic from paper to digital, Hearthstone makes use of many features which are easy to implement in the digital world, but extremely hard in the physical.
The primary example of this is how creatures/minions are affected by damage. In Magic all damage is erased at the end of the turn. This simplifies the record keeping and means that counters can be used for other things without over taxing the player's mental resources. Hearthstone takes the opposite approach with damage on minions, it persists over turns. Because the game is digital, this is extremely easy to implement. A simple number that counts down is sufficient. Plus, the game can actually change the number on the card itself, which is impossible in a paper game. This means all the relevant information is compactly displayed. The truth is that neither of these decisions are "wrong" for designing a game, but the limitations of a medium push design in a particular direction.
Another interesting deviation that is completely due to the digital nature of Hearthstone, is the persistence and creation of cards which are not in one's deck. A common mechanic in card games is to have Token Creatures, essentially creatures not represented by actual cards. Usually used to summon multiple creatures with one spell. In Magic, there is no assumption that one has cards to represent these. People usually use whatever they have on hand, like pennies, as the physical version of token creatures. This means that Magic cannot have the token creatures returned to your hand, deck or sit in a graveyard. So token creatures simply cease to exist once they leave play.
Contrast this with Hearthstone, where they can become physical cards if such a minion is returned to your hand! The returned token has a mana cost and can be played just like a normal minion. The truely amazing thing is these token minions often only exist as cards when returned in this manner. The game creates cards out of nothing to maintain the consistency of effect, which physical games literally cannot do without much greater expense.
This creation of cards shows up in many places in Hearthstone. Such as the Bananas you get in the tutorial missions. Though there is one case that actually violates one of the cardinal rules of Magic design. You can never have an opponent's card in your hand, deck, or library. This is another practical matter as it ensures that people always have their full deck at the end of a match. Plus, most use card cases which tend not to match across players. Hearthstone has no such issue as the decks are just reset after every match. The Priest even has a few cards which copy the opponent's cards from the deck or hand. In addition it is possible to bounce your creature into your opponent's hand if they have it on their side of the field due to some mind control effect.
I really like that Hearthstone is embracing the medium is it built in. It forces the game to be qualitatively different from the physical card game predecessors. What really excites me is seeing how they continue to leverage the differences in the mediums to create unique cards and effects in future expansions.
The primary example of this is how creatures/minions are affected by damage. In Magic all damage is erased at the end of the turn. This simplifies the record keeping and means that counters can be used for other things without over taxing the player's mental resources. Hearthstone takes the opposite approach with damage on minions, it persists over turns. Because the game is digital, this is extremely easy to implement. A simple number that counts down is sufficient. Plus, the game can actually change the number on the card itself, which is impossible in a paper game. This means all the relevant information is compactly displayed. The truth is that neither of these decisions are "wrong" for designing a game, but the limitations of a medium push design in a particular direction.
Another interesting deviation that is completely due to the digital nature of Hearthstone, is the persistence and creation of cards which are not in one's deck. A common mechanic in card games is to have Token Creatures, essentially creatures not represented by actual cards. Usually used to summon multiple creatures with one spell. In Magic, there is no assumption that one has cards to represent these. People usually use whatever they have on hand, like pennies, as the physical version of token creatures. This means that Magic cannot have the token creatures returned to your hand, deck or sit in a graveyard. So token creatures simply cease to exist once they leave play.
Contrast this with Hearthstone, where they can become physical cards if such a minion is returned to your hand! The returned token has a mana cost and can be played just like a normal minion. The truely amazing thing is these token minions often only exist as cards when returned in this manner. The game creates cards out of nothing to maintain the consistency of effect, which physical games literally cannot do without much greater expense.
This creation of cards shows up in many places in Hearthstone. Such as the Bananas you get in the tutorial missions. Though there is one case that actually violates one of the cardinal rules of Magic design. You can never have an opponent's card in your hand, deck, or library. This is another practical matter as it ensures that people always have their full deck at the end of a match. Plus, most use card cases which tend not to match across players. Hearthstone has no such issue as the decks are just reset after every match. The Priest even has a few cards which copy the opponent's cards from the deck or hand. In addition it is possible to bounce your creature into your opponent's hand if they have it on their side of the field due to some mind control effect.
I really like that Hearthstone is embracing the medium is it built in. It forces the game to be qualitatively different from the physical card game predecessors. What really excites me is seeing how they continue to leverage the differences in the mediums to create unique cards and effects in future expansions.
Monday, February 17, 2014
Deck Distribution and Optimal Play in Wiz War
I have been thinking more about why the 8th edition of Wiz-War feels so different from the 5th. Some of it is clearly because they took out some of the more devastating spells, like Buddy or Swap Home Bases, and toned down some mechanics, like the new stun mechanic instead of just losing a turn. So there are far fewer of the higher end spells. But Fantasy Flight also cut out the lower end. Not by just removing traps, but also combining the 2s and 3s with other minor spells. This flattening of the power level has a dramatic effect on optimal play.
In the 5th edition, there were a lot of cards that tended to just clog up your hand, 2s I am looking at you. But discarding to draw was a actual risky decision. While there was a chance of getting an actually amazing spell, there was also a chance of getting something far worse. It was often the correct play to keep mediocre or situational cards and try to maneuver into position. This encouraged creativity and truly memorable plays.
8th edition Wiz-War has no traps and essentially every card has the same basic power level. So burning it for a minor advantage is optimal because you know you will get another card about as useful from your draw. This leads to plays like using the Werewolf transformation just for the extra point of movement and dismissing the spell on the turn it is cast so another can be used at the destination. This sort of play would never have happened under the 5th edition where the transformations were powerful in their unique abilities.
Part of the issue is the combining the 2s and 3s with spells. Usually these numbers were essentially trash as were the spells they were placed on. But you still couldn't burn through them too fast by discarding or boosting your speed because getting stuck with no numbers to boost spells was crippling. Now players have more flexibility because if they burn a 2 or 3 now, odds are there is another coming attached to a spell that might be useful. The added flexibility of the cards actually reduces the space of rationalizable choices because there is no real resource trade off. So it is almost always correct to burn the cards for a marginal advantage to inch ahead of the other players.
This combining of the 2s and 3s with other cards is probably a contributing factor for requiring that maintained spells cost against your hand size in the 8th edition. Essentially people have too many possible cards in their hand. The combining the 2s and 3s with minor spells probably doubled hand sizes. Now we not only have 1 card where we might have had 2, there is also less fear of cycling through cards so we see more during the game. Without mechanisms to fill hand slots the shear number of options people have would get out of hand. Which would lead to both decision paralysis and the game becoming even more about shear efficiency. Not to mention less board clutter as people have fewer creations out at a time.
Honestly the most potent cards are now some of the stones. Especially those that give a minor buff to cards or movement every turn. These allow the player which posses them to do that one extra thing every turn. Which builds up to a huge lead over the course of a game. In a recent 2 player game, the turning point was when I used strength to rip a speed stone from the other player. This minor shift in power resulted in very divergent paths on what we were able to do and me winning simply because I could cover more ground.
Overall I am disappointed by how balanced the cards are in the new 8th edition of Wiz-War. This balance makes the game one of pure efficiency instead of the traditional chaotic good time. In addition, the extra options on the cards through the combination energy actually reduces the space of correct play. I think that fewer options and more variable card power would result in a more interesting game due to requiring the players to be more creati
In the 5th edition, there were a lot of cards that tended to just clog up your hand, 2s I am looking at you. But discarding to draw was a actual risky decision. While there was a chance of getting an actually amazing spell, there was also a chance of getting something far worse. It was often the correct play to keep mediocre or situational cards and try to maneuver into position. This encouraged creativity and truly memorable plays.
8th edition Wiz-War has no traps and essentially every card has the same basic power level. So burning it for a minor advantage is optimal because you know you will get another card about as useful from your draw. This leads to plays like using the Werewolf transformation just for the extra point of movement and dismissing the spell on the turn it is cast so another can be used at the destination. This sort of play would never have happened under the 5th edition where the transformations were powerful in their unique abilities.
Part of the issue is the combining the 2s and 3s with spells. Usually these numbers were essentially trash as were the spells they were placed on. But you still couldn't burn through them too fast by discarding or boosting your speed because getting stuck with no numbers to boost spells was crippling. Now players have more flexibility because if they burn a 2 or 3 now, odds are there is another coming attached to a spell that might be useful. The added flexibility of the cards actually reduces the space of rationalizable choices because there is no real resource trade off. So it is almost always correct to burn the cards for a marginal advantage to inch ahead of the other players.
This combining of the 2s and 3s with other cards is probably a contributing factor for requiring that maintained spells cost against your hand size in the 8th edition. Essentially people have too many possible cards in their hand. The combining the 2s and 3s with minor spells probably doubled hand sizes. Now we not only have 1 card where we might have had 2, there is also less fear of cycling through cards so we see more during the game. Without mechanisms to fill hand slots the shear number of options people have would get out of hand. Which would lead to both decision paralysis and the game becoming even more about shear efficiency. Not to mention less board clutter as people have fewer creations out at a time.
Honestly the most potent cards are now some of the stones. Especially those that give a minor buff to cards or movement every turn. These allow the player which posses them to do that one extra thing every turn. Which builds up to a huge lead over the course of a game. In a recent 2 player game, the turning point was when I used strength to rip a speed stone from the other player. This minor shift in power resulted in very divergent paths on what we were able to do and me winning simply because I could cover more ground.
Overall I am disappointed by how balanced the cards are in the new 8th edition of Wiz-War. This balance makes the game one of pure efficiency instead of the traditional chaotic good time. In addition, the extra options on the cards through the combination energy actually reduces the space of correct play. I think that fewer options and more variable card power would result in a more interesting game due to requiring the players to be more creati
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Review: Wiz-War 8th Edition
I finally got a chance to play the 8th edition of Wiz-War. Some of my friends had a homemade copy of the 5th edition which was a blast to play. It was a very light game. The purpose was to kickback, relax and hopefully have some awesome stories to tell. The minimalistic design of the older version really emphasized this as the cards had no art and the tokens simply had the name of what they were. All the visuals were inside your imagination. I was really excited to play the new 8th edition because of how great the previous version is.
Overall my reactions are mixed to the game. It is still a fun game to play, but it doesn't capture the spirit of the 5th edition that I was hoping for. Granted, I only played the 8th edition with 2 players and this game really shines with 3+. But I think that I got a good taste of the modern mechanics to make a decent judgement.
What I liked was there was still an emphasis on being creative with spells. Things that manipulate the board were especially fun like Rotate Sector or Destroy Wall. The creation elements were a bit lack luster by comparison because of the new maintaining spells rule. But this can be easily corrected using a variant or two at the end of the rules.
The flavor of the game also stays very true to the original. All the new, fancy art and high quality pieces really bring you into a fantasy world. Nothing really seems out of place for a wizard battle royal. The card art has a lot of anime influences. But this is not a bad thing as it reminds you not to take the game too seriously.
My main complaint is this game is not swingy enough. While most modern games aim for balance by having nothing really overpowered, the strength of the 5th edition was balance achieved by extremely overpowered cards. Essentially all the cards that were not utility cards in the 5th edition were extremely powerful. It wasn't hard to torch someone within an inch of death. But the balance came in they would be able to return the favor in the not to distant future. In the 8th edition, all the advantages and cool plays build on marginal advantages over a number of turns. Doing something to absolutely wreck another player is much harder now. Overall the cards are at a more uniform power level and the counters are more prevalent than in the 5th edition.
I think this leads to a less memorable play experience. It is still very enjoyable to build up small advantages until the win is inevitable. Especially trying to do it under the nose of other players who have the same goal. I love Magic: the Gathering for this type of play, but am not really looking for it when I break out Wiz-War. I would prefer more swing and randomness. This generates much better stories. No one remembers the time that you kept a card advantage over your opponent and just won because you had more actions. But everyone remembers the time you were fried almost well done, but managed to teleport to safety and then fry the offending player with lightning to return the favor a few turns later.
There is still a lot of strategy and creativity in the latter type of play, just far less planning due to the chaos that multiple players can unleash. It feels good to not have to feed the Spike in me all the time. Sometimes Timmy wants his time with the massive attacks and flashy tricks. And the 5th edition of Wiz-War was just such a game. While I like the new 8th edition, there is just too much room for Spike to come out. Hopefully, this is less of a case when playing with more than 2 players. But I think that with the flattening of the spells' power Spike still has ample room to come out an play.
EDIT: There is a fan art version of the 5th edition with both official expansions and a community expansion which looks really nice on Board Game Geek. I recommend that those interested in making there own copy use that over the scans linked previously.
Overall my reactions are mixed to the game. It is still a fun game to play, but it doesn't capture the spirit of the 5th edition that I was hoping for. Granted, I only played the 8th edition with 2 players and this game really shines with 3+. But I think that I got a good taste of the modern mechanics to make a decent judgement.
What I liked was there was still an emphasis on being creative with spells. Things that manipulate the board were especially fun like Rotate Sector or Destroy Wall. The creation elements were a bit lack luster by comparison because of the new maintaining spells rule. But this can be easily corrected using a variant or two at the end of the rules.
The flavor of the game also stays very true to the original. All the new, fancy art and high quality pieces really bring you into a fantasy world. Nothing really seems out of place for a wizard battle royal. The card art has a lot of anime influences. But this is not a bad thing as it reminds you not to take the game too seriously.
My main complaint is this game is not swingy enough. While most modern games aim for balance by having nothing really overpowered, the strength of the 5th edition was balance achieved by extremely overpowered cards. Essentially all the cards that were not utility cards in the 5th edition were extremely powerful. It wasn't hard to torch someone within an inch of death. But the balance came in they would be able to return the favor in the not to distant future. In the 8th edition, all the advantages and cool plays build on marginal advantages over a number of turns. Doing something to absolutely wreck another player is much harder now. Overall the cards are at a more uniform power level and the counters are more prevalent than in the 5th edition.
I think this leads to a less memorable play experience. It is still very enjoyable to build up small advantages until the win is inevitable. Especially trying to do it under the nose of other players who have the same goal. I love Magic: the Gathering for this type of play, but am not really looking for it when I break out Wiz-War. I would prefer more swing and randomness. This generates much better stories. No one remembers the time that you kept a card advantage over your opponent and just won because you had more actions. But everyone remembers the time you were fried almost well done, but managed to teleport to safety and then fry the offending player with lightning to return the favor a few turns later.
There is still a lot of strategy and creativity in the latter type of play, just far less planning due to the chaos that multiple players can unleash. It feels good to not have to feed the Spike in me all the time. Sometimes Timmy wants his time with the massive attacks and flashy tricks. And the 5th edition of Wiz-War was just such a game. While I like the new 8th edition, there is just too much room for Spike to come out. Hopefully, this is less of a case when playing with more than 2 players. But I think that with the flattening of the spells' power Spike still has ample room to come out an play.
EDIT: There is a fan art version of the 5th edition with both official expansions and a community expansion which looks really nice on Board Game Geek. I recommend that those interested in making there own copy use that over the scans linked previously.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Money in Catan
One of the people that I play Settlers of Catan posed the question on whether one could introduce gold as money, not any of the gold variants in the expansions, into the game so that people actually use it to trade with. This would remove one common friction to trade, namely there won't have to be a double coincidence of wants. In addition, it would serve as a good economics lesson on how money works, despite being inherently valueless. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible to graft money onto Settlers in a way that makes prices endogenous. The structure of Settlers makes trade non-essential and any additional frictions would completely shut down trade.
Before going into detail on the issues, I would like to formalize how gold would be added to Settlers. Gold's purpose is solely to be a medium of exchange. This means that there will be nothing to buy from the game for gold, only the other players. So any gold that enters the hands of the players will never leave. As we want the players to use gold instead of relying on barter, all trades must have just gold on one side of them. To remove the loophole of players swapping gold back and forth to simulate barter, we will further restrict trades to only be the active player. Things like can more gold be generated or how much gold each player starts with can be left up in the air and isn't really important for discussing what goes wrong.
I think that most people who have played Settlers notice that the end game tends to turn into a game of solitaire. Once you have your production upgraded enough through cities and settlements, there is usually no need to trade with other people. How ever you have built will generate the necessary points to win. Even early game, trade is not essential with things like sufficient diversification in starting resources and 4:1 with the bank. This means that if trade becomes more difficult it will vanish from the game.
How difficult trade is really depends on who you are playing with. Some groups trade a lot, others never do anything that is not 2:1 or better. In the former case, trade might still exist with gold due to the high level of reciprocity already present in the group. Though there is the added layer of trust needed that people will trade back for gold on your turn, which makes trade less likely by making it more risky. Those who are already stingy traders will completely shutdown because gold is literally a worthless resource and they will not trust that anyone will trade back for gold.
In addition to the trust issues, gold is extremely undesirable in the late game. It doesn't help you to win and no one is trading, so there is no need of a resource to facilitate trade. In this way gold becomes a hot potato and anyone left with more gold than he started with is the sucker for giving up actually useful resources. I would expect that this would cause gold to hyper-inflate as the game progresses. If there is a way to generate gold, one might see trade later in the game as enough exists to pay the exorbitant prices. But in games with no gold production, trade will cease when prices exceed the available gold.
Given that adding gold to Settlers would not achieve endogenous prices, is there any game out there that we could graft gold onto to get them? While my knowledge of games isn't perfect, I would highly doubt such a game exists. Mostly because this endogenous price requirement seems like it would have to be a core game mechanic to function, not something grafted on by hobbyists. Though I do think that it is possible to create a game with money and endogenous prices. It would have to encourage or require specialization so that trade is necessary and benefits both parties. But not a cooperative game like Arkham Horror where any prices are simply mechanisms to get the appropriate items to each player. I think something like a vertical production chain or a medieval king's council could have the desired features.
Before going into detail on the issues, I would like to formalize how gold would be added to Settlers. Gold's purpose is solely to be a medium of exchange. This means that there will be nothing to buy from the game for gold, only the other players. So any gold that enters the hands of the players will never leave. As we want the players to use gold instead of relying on barter, all trades must have just gold on one side of them. To remove the loophole of players swapping gold back and forth to simulate barter, we will further restrict trades to only be the active player. Things like can more gold be generated or how much gold each player starts with can be left up in the air and isn't really important for discussing what goes wrong.
I think that most people who have played Settlers notice that the end game tends to turn into a game of solitaire. Once you have your production upgraded enough through cities and settlements, there is usually no need to trade with other people. How ever you have built will generate the necessary points to win. Even early game, trade is not essential with things like sufficient diversification in starting resources and 4:1 with the bank. This means that if trade becomes more difficult it will vanish from the game.
How difficult trade is really depends on who you are playing with. Some groups trade a lot, others never do anything that is not 2:1 or better. In the former case, trade might still exist with gold due to the high level of reciprocity already present in the group. Though there is the added layer of trust needed that people will trade back for gold on your turn, which makes trade less likely by making it more risky. Those who are already stingy traders will completely shutdown because gold is literally a worthless resource and they will not trust that anyone will trade back for gold.
In addition to the trust issues, gold is extremely undesirable in the late game. It doesn't help you to win and no one is trading, so there is no need of a resource to facilitate trade. In this way gold becomes a hot potato and anyone left with more gold than he started with is the sucker for giving up actually useful resources. I would expect that this would cause gold to hyper-inflate as the game progresses. If there is a way to generate gold, one might see trade later in the game as enough exists to pay the exorbitant prices. But in games with no gold production, trade will cease when prices exceed the available gold.
Given that adding gold to Settlers would not achieve endogenous prices, is there any game out there that we could graft gold onto to get them? While my knowledge of games isn't perfect, I would highly doubt such a game exists. Mostly because this endogenous price requirement seems like it would have to be a core game mechanic to function, not something grafted on by hobbyists. Though I do think that it is possible to create a game with money and endogenous prices. It would have to encourage or require specialization so that trade is necessary and benefits both parties. But not a cooperative game like Arkham Horror where any prices are simply mechanisms to get the appropriate items to each player. I think something like a vertical production chain or a medieval king's council could have the desired features.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)