Page 2 of 4

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 30th, 2018, 9:34 am
by knightkrawler
Pancho wrote:I'm currently working on something slightly different; players take the role of a present day superpower and have to become the dominant force but at the same time not completely destroy the planet. I've had a lot of fun trying to model all the chaos of the modern world, complete with financial crashes, natural disasters, conflict zones, shock elections & referendums, terrorism & false flag operations, globalists trying to remove elected leaders and so on. About to embark on the play-testing phase soon.


That sounds really interesting. Be sure to present results here and don't leave for boardgamegeek!

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 30th, 2018, 11:15 am
by Pancho
knightkrawler wrote:
Pancho wrote:I'm currently working on something slightly different; players take the role of a present day superpower and have to become the dominant force but at the same time not completely destroy the planet. I've had a lot of fun trying to model all the chaos of the modern world, complete with financial crashes, natural disasters, conflict zones, shock elections & referendums, terrorism & false flag operations, globalists trying to remove elected leaders and so on. About to embark on the play-testing phase soon.


That sounds really interesting. Be sure to present results here and don't leave for boardgamegeek!

LOL I'm a member of the geek too, but I spend far more time here than I do there.
I'll let you know when I have something substantial. I have the rules written and the map-board pencilled out, I just need to make it look colourful, create the tokens I need, get some play-testers together, and then see if all my crazy ideas work out as a coherent, tight, interesting game!

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 30th, 2018, 4:24 pm
by The Admiral
Anderas wrote:Darklight


What's that like?

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 3:44 am
by Anderas
Nice! It's like Warhammer Quest.

Wrong model scale. Well. I sold those.
You build a random dungeon, in which you encounter random monsters, and where random events take place, and where random dungeon dressing is placed.
It has a limited playtime because the dungeon deck is finally used up, so in the end somewhere you will find the Boss Room. Those Boss Rooms have some scripted elements in the quest notes that turn out to play rather nicely.

Those "random dungeon dressings" and the random dungeon rooms are VERY Heroquest like, including tokens for Heroquest furniture (you can imagine what i use instead)

You have any number of healings you can imagine, however, each single monster encounter is also a serious threat to your group. So dicing all those monsters to death can take some 2, 2.5 hours. So that's a big difference to Heroquest, where you rather have no healings at all, and a limited number of monster to throw dice at.

The only disadvantage is that it is super-hard on beginner heroes. Where most of the dungeon scales with both, number of heroes and experience of heroes, the boss monsters don't scale with the number of heroes. As a consequence, you have a considerably better chance with 4 heroes than with anything less. An example is the Orc Shaman (sorry... scorn shaman) that self-heals each turn and has an armor which absorbs 95% of the damage. If you have no opportunity to poison that guy, you have a problem. So far i needed to flee only once in six games, other people report that (or total party kill) to happen much more often. Other people probably play with less heroes. :-)

For me that game is completely positive. I paid 70€ for everything and received 84€ for the models. Now would I pay the current retail price? I don't know. I don't think so. However I wish Mauro Pane all the best so that he gets some money out of the project in the end.

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 5:44 am
by mitchiemasha
Pancho wrote:I'm currently working on something slightly different; players take the role of a present day superpower and have to become the dominant force but at the same time not completely destroy the planet. I've had a lot of fun trying to model all the chaos of the modern world, complete with financial crashes, natural disasters, conflict zones, shock elections & referendums, terrorism & false flag operations, globalists trying to remove elected leaders and so on. About to embark on the play-testing phase soon.

This sounds interesting, I like the idea how it's balanced against not destroying the world. This wold also be good at fixing the issues in many games where a leader early on is the obvious winner. Be too powerful, to wreckless and you'll actually end up losing.

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 6:28 am
by The Admiral
Anderas wrote:Nice! It's like Warhammer Quest.


Thanks. Is there any Hero advancement, or is each quest started from scratch?

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 6:34 am
by Anderas
Yes there is advancement. But you try to delay because the monsters ramp up, too.

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 7:10 am
by Pancho
Anderas, Darklight sounds like a good game. I'll check it out.

Now I'm going to ask a really evil question. Is it as good as Heroquest?

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 7:37 am
by Anderas
Different.
If you like bashing monsters...

I love storylines. Random has by definition no good storyline.

I would say it is better than a badly written quest but a lot less good than a good written quest.

Re: Other Board Games??

PostPosted: May 31st, 2018, 7:38 am
by Pancho
mitchiemasha wrote:
Pancho wrote:I'm currently working on something slightly different; players take the role of a present day superpower and have to become the dominant force but at the same time not completely destroy the planet. I've had a lot of fun trying to model all the chaos of the modern world, complete with financial crashes, natural disasters, conflict zones, shock elections & referendums, terrorism & false flag operations, globalists trying to remove elected leaders and so on. About to embark on the play-testing phase soon.

This sounds interesting, I like the idea how it's balanced against not destroying the world. This wold also be good at fixing the issues in many games where a leader early on is the obvious winner. Be too powerful, to wreckless and you'll actually end up losing.

I hate it when the early running dominant player then has a cake-walk to an easy victory. What "should" happen in this genre of games is that if a player starts getting too strong the other players put aside their differences and join together to stop him. I had a recent game where I played as House Arryn and took Kings Landing early and annoyed a few people. Meanwhile house Stark become really strong in the north and it became obvious that he was going to win if not stopped. Instead of stopping Stark the other players became fixated on Kings Landing and me, meaning that I had to face Stark alone, with all the other Houses attacking me too and rolling over for the Stark player.

Hopefully this won't happen in Instability (rough working title for my game). It's going to really difficult to win the game by military might alone. They will need a strong economy but also respect environmental limits. Not only that but they'll be fighting other players for control of global media, as well as available natural resources. They'll have to keep their own population happy yet also respect international agreements that will potentially constrain their ambitions. Each player should have a chance of dominating in each sphere, making outright victory a nail-biting affair right up until the end.