boardgames.about.com has a game design contest where the goal is to design a two-player abstract game in which no player "owns" a piece.
http://boardgames.about.com/cs/sharedpieces/a/shared_rules.htm
- Rene Wiersma
Shared Pieces Contest
Mon, 10/13/2003 - 14:30
Mon, 10/13/2003 - 15:18
#1
Shared Pieces Contest
I've been working on a checkers variant where each player starts with 8 instead of 12 pieces, and then there's a 3rd army of 8 pieces in the middle of the board that either player can control and treat as their own or treat as the enemy and capture.
It has a lot of flaws that need to be worked out though, the most obvious is you get into situations where player A moves a neutral piece into an advantageous spot, and then player B moves it back, so you can get into an infinite loop with neither player willing to back down. At least that can be fixed by not allowing player B to move the piece player A just moved; it just makes it more fiddly.
It also has a problem where at the start armies are only 1 row apart, so whoever goes first instantly threatens the second player with a neutral piece, so right from the start the second player is on the defensive.
Anyway, it doesn't qualify for the contest because each player has their own army too. Besides, with all those pop-ups, who uses about.com anymore? :)
Jason
Tue, 10/14/2003 - 07:48
#2
Shared Pieces Contest
Even if it won't fit the criteria Abstract Games Magazine who is co-sponsoring the contest would be the place to submit you game for review.
Tue, 10/14/2003 - 08:30
#5
Shared Pieces Contest
I have come up with an abstract monstrosity that i plan to submit. It is currently in the rules review stage. I don't think it has much a chance to win. It might be worthy of getting listed on about.com or in AGM. It's a 2 or 3 player that requires a checkers set and one six sided die. The only random factor is who goes first.
P.S. It is not a checkers variant
Tue, 10/14/2003 - 09:31
#6
Shared Pieces Contest
zaiga wrote:
Especially the fact that I cannot make my own components is something that hampers my creativity, but on the other hand I just see that as a challenge.
Ahh, don't let not being able to make your own components slow you down. If nothing else, consider just how you can use components you have available. For one of my designs, I used playing cards...and its not a typical playing card kind of game. For another design, I used those colored glass pieces, but my primary concern and work came from designing my board, which is a basic 10 X 10 grid with "special" areas and diagonals.
For a third project, I cut out my cards I needed from poster board so I could at least have some working prototype cards to get a handle on the design. My point is, you might notice that I don't let my creativity and design plans become hindered by lack of readily made custom components. There is some truth to the saying, "If there's a will, there's a way." I'll wander around hobby shops just to see what I can use to shape things out of for components or whatever. Let alone, if you've ever seen the pewter miniatures for table-top battle games or RPGs, they also make great playing pieces for other games. They'd actually make Monoply more interesting! :)
Anyways...I'm just trying to inspire you. Did it work? :)
zaiga wrote:
I wonder though, would a game such as Clans qualify as a game with shared pieces? You do not technically *own* those huts and everyone can move them. I think it would qualify.
I don't know about Clans or Through the Desert, but if you'd like to check out some good examples which were mentioned in the contest article, look up the games Zertz, Trax, Martian Chess, and Phutball to name just a few. Like I mentioned elsewhere, Zertz looks cool to me. I think I'll be ordering that one. :)
Have fun!
-Vexx
Tue, 10/14/2003 - 10:34
#8
Shared Pieces Contest
Oracle wrote:
I've been working on a checkers variant where each player starts with 8 instead of 12 pieces, and then there's a 3rd army of 8 pieces in the middle of the board that either player can control and treat as their own or treat as the enemy and capture.
It also has a problem where at the start armies are only 1 row apart, so whoever goes first instantly threatens the second player with a neutral piece, so right from the start the second player is on the defensive.
Your game sounds promising. You've probably thought of it already, but just in case; concerning your starting armies problem. Are you oppposed to adding a row of squares to each end of the board to spread the armies apart some?
zaiga wrote:
So, time to start brainstorming again :)
:) Well, good luck and you know where to look to beat...I mean get some ideas out of someone. :)
Having Fun!
-Vexx
Tue, 10/14/2003 - 14:12
#9
Shared Pieces Contest
Vexx_Paradox wrote:
Your game sounds promising. You've probably thought of it already, but just in case; concerning your starting armies problem. Are you oppposed to adding a row of squares to each end of the board to spread the armies apart some?
I was planning on using a normal sized checker board. It would be 8 red pieces, 1 blank row, 8 neutral pieces, 1 blank row, and 8 black pieces. That's where the problem of the second player being instantly threatened comes from, so your suggestion could be a solution.
As far as making a packaged game, adding 2 rows to the board is a good idea because then it can't just be played on a normal chess board :).
Sun, 11/02/2003 - 18:29
#10
Shared Pieces Contest
I have a game that’s really perfect for the contest. Hopefulley you can read about it when it comes in at number one....:lol: well maybe in my dreams, but anyway
"but my primary concern and work came from designing my board, which is a basic 10 X 10 grid with "special" areas and diagonals."
just make a printable jpg in word and It should be ok I think.
I looked over the artical about the contest myself as well as check out the Abrstract Game Magazine (or e-zine). It wasn't until recently I learned that one of the my projects was catagorized as an abstract strategic game. Go figure. :) Anyways, now that I know what qualifies as an abstract game, I've been thinking about it more clearly after looking up new examples; some mentioned in the contest artical suhc as the game Zertz.
I looked up Zertz and explored its rules a bit and wish I had known the game existed until now. Its my kind of game.
Now, as far as the contest goes, I've been inspired! :) I don't yet know how my idea will compare to what's out there and what's coming (at least for the contest) but if feels good to work on a new project like this. I think I can have it whipped up nice and creamy before the deadline. :)
Anyone planning on submitting a project to the contest?
Have fun all!
-Vexx