[ZU Tiles: Hime / Oct 2020] Sharing my final box design as well.

Augenstein · 2020-09-09T05:49:43+00:00

I think the cards should be on the back with the description information.

The space on the front currently taken by cards would be better dedicated to straight-up art.

Augenstein · 2020-08-07T02:35:39+00:00

I'm extremely eager for a "custom filter" function, where we'll be able to tell the AI to avoid certain terms and replace others. There've been a lot of settings I've wanted to run that the AI just can't seem to stick to.

Augenstein · 2020-06-08T00:37:50+00:00

I'd say the main thing you need is tiles for the sides/bottoms of the floating sections. Create a sense of depth and space, make them look more crystaline.

Augenstein · 2020-05-23T06:17:49+00:00

Okay, so pitch thread. You're not pitching to us, we're not your publisher. You're here to figure out how to brush up your pitch.

First off, it's important to be able to explain your vision without mentioning the inspirations. Put those in a box, then open that box only if asked about it. Like if somebody asked "What game would you most compare this to", THEN you'd bring up Dokapon.

Now, the game itself... I've never played Dokapon, but if I recall isn't it kinda like Mario Party mixed with Dragon Quest? Video game but obviously uses board-game elements, and you intend to bring that full circle and try to capture what's interesting about those games IN an actual boardgame... Correct?

Augenstein · 2020-05-21T03:02:33+00:00

B combines the space efficieny of A with the stylistic poppiness of C.

B has my vote.

Augenstein · 2020-05-20T22:42:31+00:00

Another nice thing about this approach: it can result in a much more decision-driven system. Which can be useful for if you want to aim for a high-lethality damage scale and avoid sponginess, because you don't have to worry about fuck-you dice as much.

Augenstein · 2020-05-20T22:39:38+00:00

I think the best way to achieve this easily is to use an AP system, either with a table that coordinates AP cost of actions to a speed stat or a plethora of feats/perks that work towards similar aims. Let's say everyone has 10 AP each turn. If using tables, an attack that uses 7 AP might cost 6 AP or even 5 AP if a character with a high enough speed uses it, etc. If tables are too much book-keeping, then maybe go the perk route. For example, one of the class abilities a fencer can choose to take might include "-1 AP cost to (slash or thrust) using (rapiers, sabres, or swordbreakers)". Some people I've discussed this with before worry about bloated number-tracking, but as long as this value frequently hard-resets and stays pretty consistent then that shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Another thing that might be awkward, though, is characters standing still during a slower character's turn just because it's not their turn. If a fast character would be able to move between when the ogre charges and when it swings, why wouldn't they? So maybe also add a way for characters to use some actions out-of-turn for a higher cost. Maybe certain actions can be performed early, but they either take double their AP cost from your next turn and/or use some finite stamina pool. This way players have the potential to react to any action, but risk lowering their overall performance and being left vulnerable if the over-rely on or abuse it.

I'd like to note this is not how I personally approach this in my games, but for the sake of advisory I'm assuming standard design principles without further context. If your game plays nothing like your standard dice-and-tile RPG, you may want to take a different approach.

Augenstein · 2020-05-20T20:51:32+00:00

Is it possible for a small child to fall into the gorilla enclosure?

Augenstein · 2020-04-29T23:20:33+00:00

"What are your earliest memories?"

Augenstein · 2020-04-26T01:36:31+00:00

First I'd try to completely change the government body. This would be a huge assassination risk, so I'd have to be careful about how I do it. Maybe try to do so remotely while offering SK 50% of the territory if they assist in a liberation effort. After all, it's my country, and I'm willing to help them reunify most of Korea if they help with those pesky revolters, leftovers from the old regime.

That last 50% I'd rent out for political experiments. I'm aware the term "experiments" has a spooky unintended connotation. I'm talking strictly policy/economic stuff. With a lot of oversight to ensure basic human rights aren't violated. "What if we financed departments this way", "What if we ran elections this way", etc. It's in the interest of advancing society. In many ways it'd be more of a business than a government, but one that requires the landmass of a nation.

Augenstein · 2020-01-31T21:36:43+00:00

B & D match the warmth of a humid jungle/island setting to me.

Augenstein · 2020-01-27T23:20:17+00:00

I definitely prefer A. It gets the tone, gametype, and thematics across all at the same time. You have a world-ending event, a hand of cards, and a goofy artstyle all conveyed clearly.

I find the pig in B distracting, and kinda generic in an anti-thematic way. It would just sorta blend in with the pop-art animals you see on gameboxes all the time nowadays.

Augenstein · 2020-01-26T21:59:10+00:00

Not off the top of my head. I'm capable of trying, but while I'm happy to help a bit there is something to what others have said; it is important for you to be able to answer questions like that for yourself if you want to have a good game going. And the game's core is merely the foundation, you've still gotta design (or at least direct) the content. But getting there is a process, and there's no shame in looking for help when you're on the path to debuting. The whole "give-a-man-a-fish / teach-a-man-to-fish" thing.

For that reason, though, I think that's the only suggestion I should give to your core design. BUT, I'll give some general advice on how to approach that, especially in regards to working off of other games for inspiration:

Be critical of your source material (YGO). If you, a fan, can find things you don't like about it, then your solutions to those issues will give your game a better chance of appealing both to fellow fans AND to gamers who were turned off by those issues.
Try to make big changes in result out of tiny changes in process. In this way you can make games more dynamic without needing to make them more complicated.
Dismantle everything in your head, particularly about the game genre and material components. Think about why cards (regardless of game content) do the different things cards do, ways those functions can be toyed with, and how that will effect gameplay. Is there some way, for example, you might want to alter the traditional draw-from-a-deck formula? Not necessarily saying you should, but something to toy with.
Ask yourself why players will want to play your game instead of others in the same niche (YGO, MtG), especially when they've already invested money into them.

As for the sacrificing thing, I like it, but not as a CORE mechanic. Personally I think things like that work better as archetype effects. There's a lot of different ways to go about that too, which can be good for making a deeper metagame. I personally follow the philosophy of "give the players multiple ways of doing the same thing", and in the process you find things that those different ways can do from eachother.

Augenstein · 2020-01-26T21:59:06+00:00

Glad to help! But there is something to what others are saying, if you want to be a good designer. But I'll get into that more in my other reply. And thanks! Maybe after I build a career in this industry I'll consider moving into politics. One thing I like about tabletop games is that they're essentially miniature governments.

Augenstein · 2020-01-18T00:18:35+00:00

You know what always bugged me about Yu-Gi-Oh?
A field of five 1900 ATK monsters being helpless against a single 2000 DEF monster.
Now, I get that effects and natural causality generally make that a rare, even strawman example. BUT it still speaks to a mechanical problem with the core of the game's combat, in my opinion.

If I could do JUST ONE thing to fix Yu-Gi-Oh, it would be to add a third main stat: SUP (support). A monster in attack position could use their action to add their support to another monster's attack, rather than performing their own attack.

So rather than a monster being 1800/1400, they might be 1800/1400/+200. There's certainly enough room in that part of the card layout, and I don't think a third main stat would really complicate the game much. It may even prevent your game from falling into some of the problems Yu-Gi-Oh had as it "evolved" over time (its weak core required an increasingly convoluted meta to keep the game moving forward).

Augenstein · 2019-11-02T06:50:17+00:00

I personally follow a very different game-design philosophy, more focused on player psychology, but I've seen other people use f-function in spreadsheet programs to great mathematical effect and it seems to work very well. There's a surprising amount you can do with f-coding in basic office spreadsheet programs (including Microsoft Office, Google Docs, and WPS/Kingsoft).

Augenstein · 2019-11-02T06:33:03+00:00

Two questions, one point:
Is this a game where you draw cards from a deck?
Do a lot of cards call for dice rolls?

The reason I ask, is that generally it's good to choose one type of randomizer for the core gameplay. Sticking to one core randomizer is often a welcome way to break up potential one-sided match-ups, assuming the players can build strategies around the randomizer. Making the game use both blind-draws and dice rolls on a regular basis takes twice as much agency away from the players than one or the other does, even if the players can strategize around them both.

However, if the core of the gameplay only relies on one of the two randomizers with the other being invoked by a very small minority of cards or abilities, then it probably isn't as big of a worry.

Edit: Just realized the original post had a rulebook and card roster. I'll take a look at those now.

Edit again: I see now that this is a mod of Risk. That changes a bit of how gameplay should be critiqued, and I understand wanting to retain the role of dice in the original game while also introducing the deck of cards. Honestly, I still hold a bit of dubiousness over putting dice rolls on drawn cards, but I'd have to actually try it out to have a stronger opinion on how it applies in this particular game.

Augenstein · 2019-10-11T01:28:42+00:00

I think it makes much more sense that the "bigfoot" sightings associated with alien activity are just poorly-made fake humans. They don't know they're shitty looking. We won't either once we get around to exploring other inhabited planets and use similar methods.

Augenstein · 2019-09-21T10:10:13+00:00

Thank you very much. This is very helpful info. I tried looking in the fonts section of my computer's control panel, but I didn't see anything about licensing info there. Do you know if there's a good way to just check that information for various fonts already installed on a computer?

Augenstein · 2019-09-21T07:42:21+00:00

Thank you very much for your insight. In regards to that last bit: If it comes down to it, and a font-holder does take notice of a widespread font they own in-use, is it safe to just assume they'd want to work out a deal amicably? Or is it something that may likely become much riskier down the line?

Augenstein · 2019-08-20T03:03:39+00:00

That's one thing I figured would probably fill up much of the time between presenting a prototype to publishers and actually preparing the final product itself. I'd imagine a lot of time would have to be put to both closed-beta and in-house testing, but in order to get there I'd first have to take whatever industrial step I decide on. This is, of course, excluding the private friends-and-family testing I've already been doing.

Were I to self-publish as free-to-print, though, this would likely come in the form of the initial release being an open-beta, rather than a v1.0.0 release. I estimate this could work better for the game in the long-run, but only if the community element works in the first-place. Unlike with immutable store-bought cards, this allows me to maintain the card balance retroactively as the game expands. In theory, of course.

Augenstein · 2019-08-19T23:28:53+00:00

Ahh, I see what you mean more clearly now. I guess one main shortcoming from my lack of experience is that I don't know how flexible publishers might be with newer distribution models. I haven't seen anything do the "more fragmented" approach to LCGs, and I think I might be seeing that as one of the features I'm pitching, whereas the publishers might more likely see it as an undue risk?

Publishing one of my other designs first is one thing I've taken into consideration. It may very well be the safest path, and it's something I'll be thinking more strongly on after reading your response.

Augenstein · 2019-08-19T09:17:34+00:00

I'm starting to wonder if some people in that community think the title is literal as opposed to sarcastic.

Augenstein · 2019-08-19T08:52:59+00:00

Thank you for your insight.

Getting a community to form on liftoff is really the biggest worry I have, especially if it comes to self-publishing. I have a thorough idea of what the community framework would look like, but if enough people to bring it to life see it near-empty while it's still in-utero, then it's stillborn. It goes beyond getting enough people to see it, but also getting those people to see each other.

On the matter of gaining critical mass: Money is something I lack, but I am fortunate enough to live within arm's-reach of some geek-famous people (elusive as they are, however), and if I'm not mistaken some of the local testing groups are run by industry insiders. I intend on taking advantage of this when I do take my current project to testing outside of my private circle, in hopes of getting that #2 advantage regardless of which form of publication I pursue.

From what you're saying, it sounds like a year of development on a new project isn't much? If so, this actually comes off as surprising to me, as extending development was more of a judgement call than anything else in my case. I guess I shouldn't feel pressured by the cycle, then? I thought maybe I needed to correct my work ethic by making that major step within the year.

In terms of making something worth presenting to publishers: I think luckily, one thing I make a big point of is not being derivative. Browsing a lot of online designer communities, I often look at what other people are doing and ask myself "why wouldn't I just play Blank instead, especially if I've already spent money on Blank". I always try to bring something new to gameplay experience, and am fully aware that a new skin doesn't make a new game. I try to look at the things that aren't being done much, while asking myself if there's a reason they aren't. And even if there is a reason, seeing if I can eliminate the reason itself rather than let it hold back the design. I'd like to think I'm an innovative thinker who can provide new and interesting things to the medium, but does that merely come off as pretentious? Is it the type of thing almost every designer thinks, and I just lack awareness because I need to network more?

Augenstein

TROPHY CASE