Guess I should introduce myself, I am G.A. Heris. Creative Director, among other things, on the Sanitarium Studios team. My job is to help shape the story and art of the Broken Wars continuity, as well as other IPs in development at Sanitarium Studios.
And I am not the person who has been primarily posting up to this point, I will try and tag my stuff with GAHeris for blog posts so that you know it is 'I' writing.
I am not sure how often I will make use of this blog, or what purpose all those posts will be. I am going to attempt to make commentary on rules sets and how they are both shaping and shaped by the creative direction of the stories for the Broken Wars. Also make commentary or respond to questions about creative choices in the stories being written for these IPs. In that vein I welcome questions, comments, and to be frank out right insults. Anything that will help shape these worlds.
I am currently lead director of the Arglwyddi Stêm rules and development cycle. Which is still in conception phase. But looks to be heading towards card game first and follow up games later.
Perhaps I should offer some brief commentary so this isn't just a 'who cares' post about one of the team members.
διασπορά αρραβώνες : We have been working on this project for years, between my other numerous projects and ideas lays this one. Our attempts and desire to create an alternate world, a universe that might have been and the universe that follows. And after all this time I look back at it and go... "that's it? That is all we've done?" Usually this is followed up with a brief sigh, and then a "we've made a lot of progress from where we started." I go from depressed to depressed. But, I am still proud of everything that has come together from this story and look forward to start really posting about the story as it exists, maybe get some of the concept art out as well. We may have gone a bit backwards, rules first, then story, but we are getting there.
Arglwyddi Stêm : A result of a stupid question, "hey, wouldn't it be neat to apply our Broken Wars rules to a steampunkish setting!" Yeah, stupid comment on my part, but still has potential. This project is much more sideline then the first. But I still see potential for it in a world that loves the steam punk, the idea of what we could have done with a more fantastical application of steam technology. The universe is an another world. While I was tempted to follow the classic line of an alternate history Earth I felt that it limited too much of the potential stories and ideas. Not to mention 'meetings', I want my Napoleon counterpart to fight against my Patton counterpart, or against by von Richthofen counterpart. Not as easy to do in an alternate history.
Myths and Legends: *spoilers* Don't want to give them, this is still in early, early development.
Well, hope the introduction and brief thoughts give you some insight into one of the slightly crazed minds at Sanitarium Studios. Good gaming and good luck,
G.A.Heris
2015-08-28
2015-08-27
2105 Books
So here is where we are standing on books:
The army list is currently a 35 page pdf. Although it will be about twice that length in the end.
The experimental rules, all of those optional rules and blank pages. Currently 20 pages, with over 6 blank pages for you to write your own stuff in. We don't want to give you too much space y'know.
Although there was the quick start rulebook, do I really need it when the rules themselves are currently narrowed down to 38 pages? Okay, I may still try to put something together that has none of the space for artwork, refined down to pretty much straight text, and maybe one of the sections (unaligned) from the army list book thrown into it. This one we will provide for you for free. Or you can access our torrent link that leads you to a poor quality scanned copy of our rulebook... if you are really cheap and don't want to actually support us even when we work to provide the quick rules for free. Pay for our artwork mostly.
Still, remember to Donate.
- 2105 Rule Book
- 2105 Army List
- 2105 Experimental Rules
The army list is currently a 35 page pdf. Although it will be about twice that length in the end.
The experimental rules, all of those optional rules and blank pages. Currently 20 pages, with over 6 blank pages for you to write your own stuff in. We don't want to give you too much space y'know.
Although there was the quick start rulebook, do I really need it when the rules themselves are currently narrowed down to 38 pages? Okay, I may still try to put something together that has none of the space for artwork, refined down to pretty much straight text, and maybe one of the sections (unaligned) from the army list book thrown into it. This one we will provide for you for free. Or you can access our torrent link that leads you to a poor quality scanned copy of our rulebook... if you are really cheap and don't want to actually support us even when we work to provide the quick rules for free. Pay for our artwork mostly.
Still, remember to Donate.
2015-08-23
Heraldry
Designing the banners for the different factions is lots of fun. There are the concepts which inspire each flag. With the starting two factions, the American Confederacy and Star Kingdoms, the flags were partially just put together as what worked. Two of the planned future factions took a little more thought to put together. The pirates flag was actually something put together years ago for the most part; and the Unaligned flag was put together, well, within the last few hours.
So we can go down the list.
I wanted to get the Pirates and Unaligned having something so I could throw that into the Army List book as chapter headers... that way there is some kind of artwork.
Today I modified the aquila decorations, upgraded them you could say.
Today, aside from making up one of these flags, I was mostly putting them together at a higher resolution. Or the same resolution that the cards are built on. Higher quality images, pixel by pixel was fine years ago but it really no longer satisfies me properly.
So we can go down the list.
Unaligned
The inspiration is pretty much just the NAM, Non-Aligned Movement heraldry. A dove carrying a branch. Pretty simple. Though the Dove is Argent instead, the branch is Or. And I threw in a Or wreath around it, all on the UN light azure field.Pirates
I am not actually going to say what their faction name is... yet. But the banner is various circle patterns around the central three characters for their acronym. This was something I worked on considering years ago with a friend when thinking about pirate factions.I wanted to get the Pirates and Unaligned having something so I could throw that into the Army List book as chapter headers... that way there is some kind of artwork.
Star Kingdoms
This one is pretty funny. Start with a dark azure field. Put or aquilas on the upper corners, just for decoration mostly. In the center is a slight modification of a Swiss shield, argent with an or border. On the shield is what I adopted as their symbol that is a five pointed star, with each point being a different color to represent the five kingdoms. This faction, in general, has actually been the funnest faction to put together.Today I modified the aquila decorations, upgraded them you could say.
American Confederacy
This was jumbled together with whatever I could think of. The symbol alone is a gold icon based off of an idea I formed after seeing a shadow on my ceiling. I then put this on a modified Swiss shield, still different design then the Star Kingdoms. Then for the field I used a Argent saltire dividing two dark azure sections and two sanguine sections; what a friend of mine collectively refers to as Democratic Blue and Republican Red. This flag is admittedly my favorite flag just because of the two field colors with the saltire.Today, aside from making up one of these flags, I was mostly putting them together at a higher resolution. Or the same resolution that the cards are built on. Higher quality images, pixel by pixel was fine years ago but it really no longer satisfies me properly.
2015-08-15
Manifesto
1. Rules are written on paper—not etched on stone.
2. Rules are suggested guidelines—not required edicts.
3. If the rules don’t say you can’t do something—you can.
4. There are no official answers—only official opinions.
5. When dice conflict with the story—story always wins.
6. Rule abuse isn’t a problem with the game—it’s a problem with the players.
7. A game that is not fun is no longer a game—it’s a chore.
8. This book contains the answers to all things.
9. When the above does not apply… look again, or make it up.
Today's Work
Currently at 25 pages. Hmm, not quite where I want to be. Although, to be fair, I was not counting certain pages in my estimate. Cover page, front page, table of contents, chapter covers, blank pages thrown in solely for the purpose of letting the chapter covers line up properly.
In comparison of what I was counting as pages to be counted: 17 pages.
Pretty good, especially considering the core section of 14 pages I narrowed down to 4 pages. And if it isn't all holding hands.. then so be it. I want people who want to have fun, not be stingant about the rules.
I will try working on it next week when I am off of work, but might not get around to it for a couple weeks.
In comparison of what I was counting as pages to be counted: 17 pages.
Pretty good, especially considering the core section of 14 pages I narrowed down to 4 pages. And if it isn't all holding hands.. then so be it. I want people who want to have fun, not be stingant about the rules.
I will try working on it next week when I am off of work, but might not get around to it for a couple weeks.
2015-08-14
Cards
Been working on refining how the rules for the card game are written, as well as the board game variant. When I design the game, I see it as being simplistic. Yet when the game is played, it gets bogged down with the intricacies. So I work on forming a way to keep the game interesting, while making it play faster.
Also, as it is more then just the card game, I have to work on developing the board game with it. So I came up with something. I have the rules for the Card Game, which do you fine, and you could play it that way, although it would probably take longer. Then I have the variants:
Territory Game, which is using extra cards for playing the field. This has always been part of the Card Game, and was the part that you replace in the Board Game. So making this a variant... it is one of the ways you play the cards.
Board Game, using the hex tiles. Has to have added rules with moving between tiles and keeping track of where units are. It also makes the difference, you don't make your own Territory Deck, you play with what comes with the box. Or we release booster packs of hex tiles.
Strategy Game... well... the idea is out there, but I am not writing anything down yet until I actually feel like we are getting closer to needing that. Meaning after we have released everything else. That way we have future things to release so we can get our loyal fans to just give us money to take our stuff...
On that note, and since we love the idea of getting money. Please Donate.
Also, as it is more then just the card game, I have to work on developing the board game with it. So I came up with something. I have the rules for the Card Game, which do you fine, and you could play it that way, although it would probably take longer. Then I have the variants:
Territory Game, which is using extra cards for playing the field. This has always been part of the Card Game, and was the part that you replace in the Board Game. So making this a variant... it is one of the ways you play the cards.
Board Game, using the hex tiles. Has to have added rules with moving between tiles and keeping track of where units are. It also makes the difference, you don't make your own Territory Deck, you play with what comes with the box. Or we release booster packs of hex tiles.
Strategy Game... well... the idea is out there, but I am not writing anything down yet until I actually feel like we are getting closer to needing that. Meaning after we have released everything else. That way we have future things to release so we can get our loyal fans to just give us money to take our stuff...
On that note, and since we love the idea of getting money. Please Donate.
Books
The main problem I am running into with coming up with the rulebooks for the Tactical Game: Graphics Design. If I never worried about the graphics design then I could have published the rules long ago. But, it needs to look nice, isn't that half the sale?
The other thing about the books, the sizing. Most rule books have this standard size, pretty much A4 pages. So what do I want? Naturally something different. A5 paper, smaller, more like having field manuals then carrying rule books; gets less in the way when playing the game.
If you need it when playing. I mean, let's try to refine the rules enough so we can play it all without looking at the rules. I probably can't make it that simple while still trying to keep the complex nature of tactics, so maybe not quite that refined. But with what it is standing at now, I am planning on refining it a bit.
When I wrote the rules before I figured it needed to be complex. But with the idea now that I can do what I wanted to do all along, just write a sentence and call it good, and not give a moment carrying about how people are going to use, abuse, or do whatever weirdness they want to.
The purpose of these games is to have fun, not to be a chore. We give the playground to work inside of, the rules of physics in the playground, but otherwise the rules are yours to make. Now, be in agreement with your opponents or else you will be immature little children bickering and fighting; but if you play it all straight to have fun, then you can just play it.
The other thing about the books, the sizing. Most rule books have this standard size, pretty much A4 pages. So what do I want? Naturally something different. A5 paper, smaller, more like having field manuals then carrying rule books; gets less in the way when playing the game.
If you need it when playing. I mean, let's try to refine the rules enough so we can play it all without looking at the rules. I probably can't make it that simple while still trying to keep the complex nature of tactics, so maybe not quite that refined. But with what it is standing at now, I am planning on refining it a bit.
When I wrote the rules before I figured it needed to be complex. But with the idea now that I can do what I wanted to do all along, just write a sentence and call it good, and not give a moment carrying about how people are going to use, abuse, or do whatever weirdness they want to.
The purpose of these games is to have fun, not to be a chore. We give the playground to work inside of, the rules of physics in the playground, but otherwise the rules are yours to make. Now, be in agreement with your opponents or else you will be immature little children bickering and fighting; but if you play it all straight to have fun, then you can just play it.
2015-08-13
Current Circulation
I forgot about the Twitter account to post brief ideas as they come along, should probably start actually using that though @sntrmstudios
Anyways, I have had some ideas lately, but between travel and my other work, I haven't had the time to write them in any posts.
The Tactical game. When designing the rules, I always compared with other rule books, which use what I call filler. Endless amounts of pages about... stuff. Three pages here just talking about what a wargame is, another page about rolling dice, another page on using other tools, twenty pages on how to move a model. Maybe not that bad, but it always felt like I was unable to write in the similar style. Which ruined my rulebook.
When I first wrote the initial rules for the Tactical Game, it was seven pages. Now it is about 50 pages; still with no artwork or real graphic design. Admittedly most of the current content is getting cut from the initial release, although I have the rules for vehicle written, initially I will forgo that option. I know, I know, taking all the fun away of doing a tank army... for now.
I seemed to keep getting input that the seven pages was too... loose. Rule Nazis especially take advantage of that and go with whatever they want to accomplish, instead of just playing the game to have fun. Or it isn't refined enough to make proper sense. As I identified a few days ago, it is like the Bill of Rights versus the other Seventeen Amendments: The Bill of Rights covers the principle of each point in a sentence or a paragraph, whereas the other seventeen amendments need about three pages to briefly cover an idea of what they want while still leaving some major inconsistency or "imbalance".
Which does lead to the problem of fifty pages. Most of what is in the fifty pages is crap. And a lot of the rest is confusing and potentially inconsistent or imbalanced. Which, spoiler, everything is imbalanced.
Lately I was looking at the latest releases in some games and finally the companies are coming around to my originally preferred method: Why say a sentence when a word will do. So let's go back to the seven pages. Okay, I probably will never get it back down to the seven pages, because to tell you the truth, there is a lot more detail to the rules now then when it was just seven pages. But I can probably narrow each column to a paragraph, so we will call it one hundred paragraphs, say four paragraphs to a column, let's go with a nice round number like 15. Once I get some people great at graphics design then we can bump that up to 20, adding nice shapes and ascetic features in between the words; get some artwork people to throw stuff in and bump it up to 30-40, final release of 50ish pages, publish it for 15$.
Sounds like a plan?
Anyways, I have had some ideas lately, but between travel and my other work, I haven't had the time to write them in any posts.
The Tactical game. When designing the rules, I always compared with other rule books, which use what I call filler. Endless amounts of pages about... stuff. Three pages here just talking about what a wargame is, another page about rolling dice, another page on using other tools, twenty pages on how to move a model. Maybe not that bad, but it always felt like I was unable to write in the similar style. Which ruined my rulebook.
When I first wrote the initial rules for the Tactical Game, it was seven pages. Now it is about 50 pages; still with no artwork or real graphic design. Admittedly most of the current content is getting cut from the initial release, although I have the rules for vehicle written, initially I will forgo that option. I know, I know, taking all the fun away of doing a tank army... for now.
I seemed to keep getting input that the seven pages was too... loose. Rule Nazis especially take advantage of that and go with whatever they want to accomplish, instead of just playing the game to have fun. Or it isn't refined enough to make proper sense. As I identified a few days ago, it is like the Bill of Rights versus the other Seventeen Amendments: The Bill of Rights covers the principle of each point in a sentence or a paragraph, whereas the other seventeen amendments need about three pages to briefly cover an idea of what they want while still leaving some major inconsistency or "imbalance".
Which does lead to the problem of fifty pages. Most of what is in the fifty pages is crap. And a lot of the rest is confusing and potentially inconsistent or imbalanced. Which, spoiler, everything is imbalanced.
Lately I was looking at the latest releases in some games and finally the companies are coming around to my originally preferred method: Why say a sentence when a word will do. So let's go back to the seven pages. Okay, I probably will never get it back down to the seven pages, because to tell you the truth, there is a lot more detail to the rules now then when it was just seven pages. But I can probably narrow each column to a paragraph, so we will call it one hundred paragraphs, say four paragraphs to a column, let's go with a nice round number like 15. Once I get some people great at graphics design then we can bump that up to 20, adding nice shapes and ascetic features in between the words; get some artwork people to throw stuff in and bump it up to 30-40, final release of 50ish pages, publish it for 15$.
Sounds like a plan?
2015-08-09
Social Media
I have had this connected to the Google+ page the entire time, actually had the Google+ page setup about a month before starting this blog. I had my priorities in order.
Figured to really promote and get this company and our games out there then I should join into the entire social media project. Eh... I don't get along with society, should probably hire a PR person.
So we have a new Facebook page, just lookup Sanitarium Studios LLC and look for our broken planet icon.
We also have a Twitter that you can follow us on @SntrmStudios
Lastly, as always, remember to Donate.
Figured to really promote and get this company and our games out there then I should join into the entire social media project. Eh... I don't get along with society, should probably hire a PR person.
So we have a new Facebook page, just lookup Sanitarium Studios LLC and look for our broken planet icon.
We also have a Twitter that you can follow us on @SntrmStudios
Lastly, as always, remember to Donate.
2015-08-08
Rules for Territory Cards Updated
Territory Game Variant
New page for using Territory Cards with the Card Game.
Don't forget to Donate!
New page for using Territory Cards with the Card Game.
Don't forget to Donate!
2015-08-07
Card Game Update
Card Game Link
Update on text for card game rules. Implementing some of the new features, still have to test play for bugs and finish doing touch-up work on the edges. One step closer.
What edition should I call this? 0.6.0
Just four more editions away from 1.0, first release.
Update on text for card game rules. Implementing some of the new features, still have to test play for bugs and finish doing touch-up work on the edges. One step closer.
What edition should I call this? 0.6.0
Just four more editions away from 1.0, first release.
2015-08-03
Space Opera
This is something that we have been off and on working on for about as long as we have had the universe idea. BUT, we can never agree on it. I mean we just constantly argue about how to balance between what makes sense and what is accurate and keeping it simple but keeping it realistic.
A common misconception about space is that... "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the drug store, but that's just peanuts to space." - Douglas Adams
You watch so many Space Operas... always running into another ship or some nearby planet. Which is entirely unlikely because of how ginormously huge that space is. The distances are so huge that unless you have someway to bend physics and break the speed of light, then it will take forever to send messages across space, and assuming you can only come to a fraction of the speed of light, take you forever to get anywhere.
On top of this, the entire concept of ships in combat just sitting still and slugging it out wouldn't really make sense. Although some give the concept of old naval ships doing that, they really didn't. You know what I am talking about? The era of Caribbean pirates, the thing is it was all about maneuvering the ships around, constantly moving and passing each other to try to hit the enemy without letting the enemy hit you.
Take into account the other factor that... space doesn't have friction. Without friction, or some interfering object... an object in motion... stays in motion. So ships don't just drift to a halt, they keep going. And going. And going.
Now factoring this together. It can be complex, or simplistic, or people get confused about it, or annoyed that they have to do math...
One of the possibilities is a simple matter of acceleration. This piece has an acceleration of 2". So this turn it can move 2", next turn it can either increase the momentum by 2", thus to 0, or increase to 4". And so on. Then you put some simplistic factor for turning, say every round while moving, halfway through it's movement you can turn it by 60 degrees. 60 degrees because we plan on using hex bases and that is pretty easy to do then.
Easy, right? At least I thought so.
But some people get annoyed by the idea of acceleration, and having to keep track of momentum, and moving... always...
Here is a negotiation then. A ship has a minimum and a maximum movement. One ship, for instance, has a min-max of 7"-11". Their momentum is about 9" and they can either increase of decrease that by 2". But it is streamlined so you don't keep track of an ever changing number, you just now how much you have to move and how much you can move. Some ships, that can achieve higher acceleration, have a min-max of, say, 5"-13". But in general, all ships have a momentum of 9" with the movement on either side of that.
This system requires ships to be moving always, so you never have it where people just park their ships and hammer each other... this is not Star Wars, or Star Trek, or Battlestar, or Mass Effect, or Stargate, or I could keep going on and on. This is more like David Weber, especially more like Jack Campbell, and significantly more like wet navy.
Although it does have a significant difference from wet navy... your movement is in one direction, but you can face your ship in any direction. So wherever the enemy is, you can rotate your ship so the weapons point that direction when you are passing by.
It has a lot of work to go still, and we wouldn't be planning on releasing this in the 2105.
Saying that however, it does have potential with the Tactical. BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED!
If you disable a ship's engines then you can come up alongside of the ship and board it. Okay, there could be potential things about why that can't happen, or arguments about the difficulty about that, but let's keep it simple stupid. You disable a ship; you then get your ship turned around to come up alongside of this ship, and a disabled ship will still be moving in it's direction until it goes off the board. Once you get your ship next to it then you do a board action, you remove both pieces. At the end of the game, you roll for any boarding actions, either you succeed and get the ship, or you fail and they board you and take your ship; what it means is mostly victory points.
On the other hand, you board the ship... so afterwards you setup a Tactical Game and play out the boarding action, or part of the Boarding action; or you setup a Strategy Game to play out the entire boarding action across some capital ship. If you have the time that is.
Remember to tell others about us, get more people involved in our universe, and please feel free to Donate
A common misconception about space is that... "Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the drug store, but that's just peanuts to space." - Douglas Adams
You watch so many Space Operas... always running into another ship or some nearby planet. Which is entirely unlikely because of how ginormously huge that space is. The distances are so huge that unless you have someway to bend physics and break the speed of light, then it will take forever to send messages across space, and assuming you can only come to a fraction of the speed of light, take you forever to get anywhere.
On top of this, the entire concept of ships in combat just sitting still and slugging it out wouldn't really make sense. Although some give the concept of old naval ships doing that, they really didn't. You know what I am talking about? The era of Caribbean pirates, the thing is it was all about maneuvering the ships around, constantly moving and passing each other to try to hit the enemy without letting the enemy hit you.
Take into account the other factor that... space doesn't have friction. Without friction, or some interfering object... an object in motion... stays in motion. So ships don't just drift to a halt, they keep going. And going. And going.
Now factoring this together. It can be complex, or simplistic, or people get confused about it, or annoyed that they have to do math...
One of the possibilities is a simple matter of acceleration. This piece has an acceleration of 2". So this turn it can move 2", next turn it can either increase the momentum by 2", thus to 0, or increase to 4". And so on. Then you put some simplistic factor for turning, say every round while moving, halfway through it's movement you can turn it by 60 degrees. 60 degrees because we plan on using hex bases and that is pretty easy to do then.
Easy, right? At least I thought so.
But some people get annoyed by the idea of acceleration, and having to keep track of momentum, and moving... always...
Here is a negotiation then. A ship has a minimum and a maximum movement. One ship, for instance, has a min-max of 7"-11". Their momentum is about 9" and they can either increase of decrease that by 2". But it is streamlined so you don't keep track of an ever changing number, you just now how much you have to move and how much you can move. Some ships, that can achieve higher acceleration, have a min-max of, say, 5"-13". But in general, all ships have a momentum of 9" with the movement on either side of that.
This system requires ships to be moving always, so you never have it where people just park their ships and hammer each other... this is not Star Wars, or Star Trek, or Battlestar, or Mass Effect, or Stargate, or I could keep going on and on. This is more like David Weber, especially more like Jack Campbell, and significantly more like wet navy.
Although it does have a significant difference from wet navy... your movement is in one direction, but you can face your ship in any direction. So wherever the enemy is, you can rotate your ship so the weapons point that direction when you are passing by.
It has a lot of work to go still, and we wouldn't be planning on releasing this in the 2105.
Saying that however, it does have potential with the Tactical. BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED!
If you disable a ship's engines then you can come up alongside of the ship and board it. Okay, there could be potential things about why that can't happen, or arguments about the difficulty about that, but let's keep it simple stupid. You disable a ship; you then get your ship turned around to come up alongside of this ship, and a disabled ship will still be moving in it's direction until it goes off the board. Once you get your ship next to it then you do a board action, you remove both pieces. At the end of the game, you roll for any boarding actions, either you succeed and get the ship, or you fail and they board you and take your ship; what it means is mostly victory points.
On the other hand, you board the ship... so afterwards you setup a Tactical Game and play out the boarding action, or part of the Boarding action; or you setup a Strategy Game to play out the entire boarding action across some capital ship. If you have the time that is.
Remember to tell others about us, get more people involved in our universe, and please feel free to Donate
2015-08-02
Strategy Game Mk.II
So, this game is not intended for release until a little ways further into the game, because it would not fit story wise... persay. However, the rules were accidentally invented today.
The big surprise of what we have discovered though... it is just like the Board Game. E.G. it is a variant for the Card Game.
I have thought a lot, or maybe some, on the difficulties of how to make a game where you can roll out for playing a game where a one inch base is equal to a whole team; or you can go down and please with each individual member of said team. Just... the scale of rolling for an entire team of casualties, and how to calculate loses, et cetera.
The simplistic method to avoid it was just to play it as something like Risk. I have my units, you have your units, we roll it out... win or lose. Or, I call Field Time and we set it out at some kind of value, like each base is equivalent to approximately 250 points.
But, Risk is not good enough for me. It is too... simplistic. Wouldn't it just be easier to play it simplistic? But everything is the same, one dice, highest number wins, loser takes off one army. Why do we never use the different types of Risk pieces? Infantry gets +1 on attack and defense, Calvary gets +2 on attack, Artillery gets +2 on defense. Well I might as well be talking about Axis and Allies now.
So we have more detail to what you are playing on the field. But I still need more detail then just here is an Infantry and here is a Calvary and here is a Artillery. First off because I have tanks as well, and aerial vehicles. Second off, because not all infantry are created equal. Our games, even if they have such heavy pull towards Strategy, is still Tactics and Number Crunching.
So, use the cards. This infantry is a 1/1, and this Infantry is a 2/2, and this Tank is a 4/4. But still use the dice, and add the attack to the dice roll. We then of course took this idea and incorporated it into the card game. Or I spent about five minutes going... ooh... ahh... that would be cool... but I can't... but it may be ingenious... but everyone would hate mixing dice and cards... but it would be more chance on victory... and it help with card strength imbalance, as well as the entire concept that a level one character could somehow get lucky and end up slaying a level 20 dragon. Right? Right?!
I want to start this paragraph with so, but... What is awesome about this whole concept. Play the card game. You want it to have more spin, then play the Board Game. You want it to have more on hands feel... play the Strategy Game. Is the Strategy Game not enough for you? Incorporate the Tactical Game into it.
This then leads to our next developmental step:
See: Space Opera
The big surprise of what we have discovered though... it is just like the Board Game. E.G. it is a variant for the Card Game.
I have thought a lot, or maybe some, on the difficulties of how to make a game where you can roll out for playing a game where a one inch base is equal to a whole team; or you can go down and please with each individual member of said team. Just... the scale of rolling for an entire team of casualties, and how to calculate loses, et cetera.
The simplistic method to avoid it was just to play it as something like Risk. I have my units, you have your units, we roll it out... win or lose. Or, I call Field Time and we set it out at some kind of value, like each base is equivalent to approximately 250 points.
But, Risk is not good enough for me. It is too... simplistic. Wouldn't it just be easier to play it simplistic? But everything is the same, one dice, highest number wins, loser takes off one army. Why do we never use the different types of Risk pieces? Infantry gets +1 on attack and defense, Calvary gets +2 on attack, Artillery gets +2 on defense. Well I might as well be talking about Axis and Allies now.
So we have more detail to what you are playing on the field. But I still need more detail then just here is an Infantry and here is a Calvary and here is a Artillery. First off because I have tanks as well, and aerial vehicles. Second off, because not all infantry are created equal. Our games, even if they have such heavy pull towards Strategy, is still Tactics and Number Crunching.
So, use the cards. This infantry is a 1/1, and this Infantry is a 2/2, and this Tank is a 4/4. But still use the dice, and add the attack to the dice roll. We then of course took this idea and incorporated it into the card game. Or I spent about five minutes going... ooh... ahh... that would be cool... but I can't... but it may be ingenious... but everyone would hate mixing dice and cards... but it would be more chance on victory... and it help with card strength imbalance, as well as the entire concept that a level one character could somehow get lucky and end up slaying a level 20 dragon. Right? Right?!
I want to start this paragraph with so, but... What is awesome about this whole concept. Play the card game. You want it to have more spin, then play the Board Game. You want it to have more on hands feel... play the Strategy Game. Is the Strategy Game not enough for you? Incorporate the Tactical Game into it.
This then leads to our next developmental step:
See: Space Opera
Board Game
The Board Game has always been envisioned as a variant for the Card Game. It is like the Tactical versus the Strategic, meant to be played separate or together. The Card Game and Board Game were both meant to be played together, or separate. Although the Board Game then became just a variant of the Card Game.
In the Card Game, we make use of Territory Cards. In the Board Game the field is made up of those Territory Cards. It lends itself to the simplicity required by the cards versus a complexity allowed by a board. With Cards, you represent the field with more cards, but you just play the cards wherever you can fit them. With the board, you have an actual map. So with the cards you can effectively go from Point A to Point B-Z; whereas on the board you go from Point A to point B or C, then from point B to point D, E, or F, and from point C to point G or H.
Being just a variant to just a part of the Card Game, it is actually very simplistic. But you also have to know the Card Game to make use of the Board Game.
The one potential problem with this Board Game is that it is tied to the Card Game. With most Board Games, you buy the box and what you get is what you get, and what you get is everything you need. With this Board Game, you get everything you need, or you can add other stuff into it. Then when you add the Cards into it, it is constantly shifting based on every release of Cards. And possibly we have to release little "expansion kits" for the Board Game when we develop more Territory Cards in the Card Game.
I cannot say that much will ever be posted about the Board Game persay, because it is so dependent on the Card Game firstoff. But stick around and find out more.
And please, do not forget to donate
In the Card Game, we make use of Territory Cards. In the Board Game the field is made up of those Territory Cards. It lends itself to the simplicity required by the cards versus a complexity allowed by a board. With Cards, you represent the field with more cards, but you just play the cards wherever you can fit them. With the board, you have an actual map. So with the cards you can effectively go from Point A to Point B-Z; whereas on the board you go from Point A to point B or C, then from point B to point D, E, or F, and from point C to point G or H.
Being just a variant to just a part of the Card Game, it is actually very simplistic. But you also have to know the Card Game to make use of the Board Game.
The one potential problem with this Board Game is that it is tied to the Card Game. With most Board Games, you buy the box and what you get is what you get, and what you get is everything you need. With this Board Game, you get everything you need, or you can add other stuff into it. Then when you add the Cards into it, it is constantly shifting based on every release of Cards. And possibly we have to release little "expansion kits" for the Board Game when we develop more Territory Cards in the Card Game.
I cannot say that much will ever be posted about the Board Game persay, because it is so dependent on the Card Game firstoff. But stick around and find out more.
And please, do not forget to donate
Card Game
The Card Game has gone through a lot of development, and a lot of changes in the core mechanics. The problem with it is just that it isn't attempting to be just a card game, but attempting to be a card game that represents a Real Time Strategy game, or Turn Based Strategy game.
One of the big features that the game mechanic was geared around is the concept of needing to capture territory cards. The idea is fairly complex, because then you have to keep track of whose Territory card it is (literally who owns that card) versus who is currently controlling that card... and you may have six cards to keep track of, or thirty.
See: Board Game
I mention that even though I have not actually written anything for the Board Game yet; however the Board Game is basically a variant gameplay for the Card Game, alternative to territory cards.
It felt like the Territory Card idea was slightly unbalanced enough that I had tried dropping the idea. Except what ended up dropping the Territory card in favor of made the game just as complex, and I had to change a majority of the cards.
Then this idea came along. Still have the Territory Cards, just drop the necessity to capture them. To take advantage of the Territory Card you just need a unit card on it at the beginning of your turn, if you don't have a unit card on it then you don't get the benefits. Much more simple and it still makes use of the original idea of Territory Cards.
Then this other bonus idea came along. Which is still on the possibility to implement as a cool idea, but also maybe not implement it so we don't add another step. Using dice with the cards. Instead of just having two cards in a combat, one attacking and one defending, and the card that is strongest wins. Now, our game has always made heavy use of equipment cards so you are not just stuck with the base line stats of the cards. Additionally, Tactical Cards, quick use cards, that can make the ready change to how a combat is played out. But in additional to this, roll a d5 and add it to the attack.
Now, the possibilities on it could be potentially annoying, an added complexity that takes away from the simplicity that a card game is supposed to be built around. On the other hand, it adds more factor of chance; okay, a 3/3 card is still more likely to kill the 1/1, but maybe the 1/1 rolls good and the 3/3 rolls bad and things do not happen as planned. Alea Iacta Est.
See: Strategy Game Mk.II
Another future article that is also related to these dice rolls. The idea was actually originally suggested on the Strategy Game, then it kinda crossed backwards compatibility into the Card Game. Everything plays together?
One of the big features that the game mechanic was geared around is the concept of needing to capture territory cards. The idea is fairly complex, because then you have to keep track of whose Territory card it is (literally who owns that card) versus who is currently controlling that card... and you may have six cards to keep track of, or thirty.
See: Board Game
I mention that even though I have not actually written anything for the Board Game yet; however the Board Game is basically a variant gameplay for the Card Game, alternative to territory cards.
It felt like the Territory Card idea was slightly unbalanced enough that I had tried dropping the idea. Except what ended up dropping the Territory card in favor of made the game just as complex, and I had to change a majority of the cards.
Then this idea came along. Still have the Territory Cards, just drop the necessity to capture them. To take advantage of the Territory Card you just need a unit card on it at the beginning of your turn, if you don't have a unit card on it then you don't get the benefits. Much more simple and it still makes use of the original idea of Territory Cards.
Then this other bonus idea came along. Which is still on the possibility to implement as a cool idea, but also maybe not implement it so we don't add another step. Using dice with the cards. Instead of just having two cards in a combat, one attacking and one defending, and the card that is strongest wins. Now, our game has always made heavy use of equipment cards so you are not just stuck with the base line stats of the cards. Additionally, Tactical Cards, quick use cards, that can make the ready change to how a combat is played out. But in additional to this, roll a d5 and add it to the attack.
Now, the possibilities on it could be potentially annoying, an added complexity that takes away from the simplicity that a card game is supposed to be built around. On the other hand, it adds more factor of chance; okay, a 3/3 card is still more likely to kill the 1/1, but maybe the 1/1 rolls good and the 3/3 rolls bad and things do not happen as planned. Alea Iacta Est.
See: Strategy Game Mk.II
Another future article that is also related to these dice rolls. The idea was actually originally suggested on the Strategy Game, then it kinda crossed backwards compatibility into the Card Game. Everything plays together?
2105 Tactical Release
So our first "edition" is released as 2105, and our three chief books are:
One of our running jokes is about the purchase options for these books:
You have the link for buying a printed copy plus downloadable pdf
You have the link for buying a pdf
You have the link for cheap people who don't want to pay/support us that goes to the torrent link for the poor quality scan, some of the pages are backwards on it, maybe one or two out of order, a coffee stain on one of the pages... because I understand that piracy happens, so I would rather make a joke about it instead of getting uptight about it. So think twice before deciding if you just want to take a shortcut to supporting us.
P.S. So our first "edition" is released as 2105, and ourthree four chief books are
P.P.S. So our first "edition" is released as 2105, and ourfour five chief books are
- 2105 Rules - The full rule set for how to play with everything we are releasing up to this point. Meaning not all of the rules we have designed, because we are not releasing everything on day one, that will be in 2107.
- 2105 Army List - Otherwise a faction book, just not a separate book for each faction. This will have the rules for all the units we are first releasing rules for, as well as faction specific rules.
- 2105 History - The book all about any fluff we want to give away at that point in time. Probably general knowledge about past, because even though we have all that worked out... you will just have to wait your turn.
- 2015 Misc - (Edit: Our four books in the first release) This one may vary. I am thinking optional rules should go in here. And by optional rules I mean the experimental rules that I thought sounded really cool but I decided to drop because of being too complex, or just adding too much extra features. But if you want to test them out then go for it; or, on the blank pages, if you want to suggest your own house rules and submit them then maybe we will release them in the next optional rules book, or incorporate them into the main rules. Also in this book would possibly go concept art, notes on development... most of the makings for a collector's edition book.
- 2015 Quick Start - (Edit: Our five books in the first release) I have always personally wanted to give the option for the rules to be freely accessed. Problem with that is that I won't be getting paid if I give everything away for free. Speaking of that, I am going to be setting up a please donate link soon. So the alternative is giving you the quick start pdf that has even more watered down rules and unit entries, probably no artwork as well.
One of our running jokes is about the purchase options for these books:
You have the link for buying a printed copy plus downloadable pdf
You have the link for buying a pdf
You have the link for cheap people who don't want to pay/support us that goes to the torrent link for the poor quality scan, some of the pages are backwards on it, maybe one or two out of order, a coffee stain on one of the pages... because I understand that piracy happens, so I would rather make a joke about it instead of getting uptight about it. So think twice before deciding if you just want to take a shortcut to supporting us.
P.S. So our first "edition" is released as 2105, and our
P.P.S. So our first "edition" is released as 2105, and our
Universe Concepts
When we created the entire universe, we knew about what we wanted things to look like at the point that we are starting the game.
Then we talked about how we actually have the backstory leading to where things are.
Then we had to discuss that it is based on an alternate history, that way the game can take place in one hundred years from now but using technology that we probably won't have for the next three hundred years. I am just saying, we haven't started colonizing Mars yet.
Then we had to spend countless hours arguing back and forth about what should transpire to lead to where we are. There are of course many disagreements about "well, that wouldn't actually work." It doesn't have to work, it just has to sound good on paper. Thus when bureaucracy got involved with our game development.
Of course I cannot post what we actually have on our drawing board, because I do not want to ruin anything for future story development. And by future story development I mean stuff that we have planned out twenty years in advance. Our universe does not just expand into the future as the story continues on, but we also expand into the past with going back to things that did happen.
Now, one feature which we are going to use is dropping "editions". Instead of having first edition, releasing all sorts of stuff for first edition, and then suddenly jumping over to second edition and slowly working on catching other stuff up. Instead what we will have is years.
Of course the difficulty of this is that, with having multiple game types, the year releases need to fit across all the genres. So our first release, which, spoiler, 2105, will have the coverage on Tactical Wargame, Strategy Wargame, Card Game/Board Game, maybe iOS/Android/WX app, even Roleplaying if I have decided to work on that before our initial release. And anything we don't have up to this point would then get covered in some subsequent release, 2107 for instance.
Probably won't be releasing the Strategy Game until at least 2110 though, it really wouldn't fit in story wise before then... just saying.
So if this interests you then please join our community, and please donate (coming soon).
Then we talked about how we actually have the backstory leading to where things are.
Then we had to discuss that it is based on an alternate history, that way the game can take place in one hundred years from now but using technology that we probably won't have for the next three hundred years. I am just saying, we haven't started colonizing Mars yet.
Then we had to spend countless hours arguing back and forth about what should transpire to lead to where we are. There are of course many disagreements about "well, that wouldn't actually work." It doesn't have to work, it just has to sound good on paper. Thus when bureaucracy got involved with our game development.
Of course I cannot post what we actually have on our drawing board, because I do not want to ruin anything for future story development. And by future story development I mean stuff that we have planned out twenty years in advance. Our universe does not just expand into the future as the story continues on, but we also expand into the past with going back to things that did happen.
Now, one feature which we are going to use is dropping "editions". Instead of having first edition, releasing all sorts of stuff for first edition, and then suddenly jumping over to second edition and slowly working on catching other stuff up. Instead what we will have is years.
Of course the difficulty of this is that, with having multiple game types, the year releases need to fit across all the genres. So our first release, which, spoiler, 2105, will have the coverage on Tactical Wargame, Strategy Wargame, Card Game/Board Game, maybe iOS/Android/WX app, even Roleplaying if I have decided to work on that before our initial release. And anything we don't have up to this point would then get covered in some subsequent release, 2107 for instance.
Probably won't be releasing the Strategy Game until at least 2110 though, it really wouldn't fit in story wise before then... just saying.
So if this interests you then please join our community, and please donate (coming soon).
2015-07-30
Tactical Scale
So initially when we were working out the rules for the tactical scale game, we didn't have any idea on scale wise except to say we would be using models from other games as proxies. Not so far as to say using chess pieces to proxy infantry and soda cans to proxy vehicles. Without wanting to invest into designing and building our own line of plastic models, yet; and without spending the time to make cardstock proxy models. Why not use already purchased models that are infantry in some game.
Then as the rules were being designed, I started nominally referring to everything as a 1:60 scale. Because it was easy for everyone else to think in terms of 1 inch is equal to 5 feet, especially when everyone there was so used to thinking in terms of five foot squares. Although the rule and model scale would be more nominally 1:72, have you ever actually seen a Dungeons and Dragons game played with six foot squares? Obviously when we get around to begin development of the Roleplaying game then we should do everything in three foot squares.
Anymore the scale is just simply referred to as the Tactical Scale, less numbers that way, and that way anyone who doesn't read this blog or was familiar with the early years of development will just have to keep guessing what the scale is.
Hint: One set will possibly be released as something really huge like 1:48, that way we can have models with holes in their feet that click onto the bases, and their hands will just be c shaped so you can click appropriately sized round pieces into their "grip".
Then as the rules were being designed, I started nominally referring to everything as a 1:60 scale. Because it was easy for everyone else to think in terms of 1 inch is equal to 5 feet, especially when everyone there was so used to thinking in terms of five foot squares. Although the rule and model scale would be more nominally 1:72, have you ever actually seen a Dungeons and Dragons game played with six foot squares? Obviously when we get around to begin development of the Roleplaying game then we should do everything in three foot squares.
Anymore the scale is just simply referred to as the Tactical Scale, less numbers that way, and that way anyone who doesn't read this blog or was familiar with the early years of development will just have to keep guessing what the scale is.
Hint: One set will possibly be released as something really huge like 1:48, that way we can have models with holes in their feet that click onto the bases, and their hands will just be c shaped so you can click appropriately sized round pieces into their "grip".
Strategy Scale
When I was designing the Tactical Scale game I always had personal problems about the lack of space. When playing on a 8'x6' standard wargame table, then at a 1:72 scale you are only dealing with a 576'x432' field. Which is, depending on which city you are in, a block or smaller then a block. Pretty much a firefight, at least if you have that all taking place in open ground. Although if you design the entire table to be levels of a ship then you could have a lot more going on with it.
So I wanted something where you are dealing with more then just a squad or short platoon, but perhaps fielding an entire company or even up to a battalion.
My scale comparison was that approximately a team of 2-7 infantry, as defined by the Tactical game, could fit onto one of our bases. The difference between the scales would be moving a unit of 2-7 bases that is 2-7 infantry, whereas in the other game you are moving a unit of 2-7 bases that is 2-7 teams, effectively a platoon.
There is the factor of calculating how to really do that difference, rolling for an entire team, and calculating team loses, versus individual models. In that tactical, you have a casualty, you remove one model, you have less weapons. In the strategy... it is less simplistic, or I am just looking at it too closely.
The one non-negotiable factor about the Strategy Scale, almost what I consider more important then the actual rules, is a playability between the tactical and the strategic. You have the entire strategy game being played, you are moving your platoons around, you have artillery pieces hitting locations. Then you have two platoons get into a firefight. So you setup another table with the Tactical game going on, effectively playing out the firefight between those two platoons, all while the strategy game is being played. And let's say another firefight starts, you setup that game and play it at the same time. Then you hit locations with artillery in the strategy game, works as off-field artillery in the tactical game. Or if you send more squads into the firefight then it is reinforcements coming into play.
For this concept you would of course need more then just two players, but you would want lieutenants that would deal with the firefights while the captain is concentrating on the overall battle. Sounds like a good idea, or so I personally think.
So I wanted something where you are dealing with more then just a squad or short platoon, but perhaps fielding an entire company or even up to a battalion.
My scale comparison was that approximately a team of 2-7 infantry, as defined by the Tactical game, could fit onto one of our bases. The difference between the scales would be moving a unit of 2-7 bases that is 2-7 infantry, whereas in the other game you are moving a unit of 2-7 bases that is 2-7 teams, effectively a platoon.
There is the factor of calculating how to really do that difference, rolling for an entire team, and calculating team loses, versus individual models. In that tactical, you have a casualty, you remove one model, you have less weapons. In the strategy... it is less simplistic, or I am just looking at it too closely.
The one non-negotiable factor about the Strategy Scale, almost what I consider more important then the actual rules, is a playability between the tactical and the strategic. You have the entire strategy game being played, you are moving your platoons around, you have artillery pieces hitting locations. Then you have two platoons get into a firefight. So you setup another table with the Tactical game going on, effectively playing out the firefight between those two platoons, all while the strategy game is being played. And let's say another firefight starts, you setup that game and play it at the same time. Then you hit locations with artillery in the strategy game, works as off-field artillery in the tactical game. Or if you send more squads into the firefight then it is reinforcements coming into play.
For this concept you would of course need more then just two players, but you would want lieutenants that would deal with the firefights while the captain is concentrating on the overall battle. Sounds like a good idea, or so I personally think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)