Skip to Content
 

Game with different sections

10 replies [Last post]
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 11:56
SVan
Offline
Joined: 10/02/2008

It's been a while since I've posted anything in the design forum, but I wanted to see some feedback on a game idea before I work on it more.

Basically the game will be divided up into 3 sections, almost like seperate games. I'm shooting for 90 to 120 minutes total, so it will be a longer game. The 3 sections will share similar mechanics, and the same resource (money) for the entire game, but there will be a distinct difference in play for each of the 3 sections. In fact, I hope to make it possible to start either during the 2nd or 3rd section if players want to, or even just play a single section.

My questions are these: How would you feel reading the rules or playing a game like this? Would the 3 seperate sections distract you from the overall game?

Thank you in advance for any comments,

Steve

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 12:15
#1
Chad_Ellis
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
I think the key question is...

...WHY do you have three sections? If it adds to the game play in a significant way, it could be great. If it feels arbitrary -- gee, the designer wanted a multi-stage game -- then it would detract.

Can you flesh out for us what the idea is behind having multiple stages?

Hugs,
Chad

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 12:20
#2
Anonymous
Game with different sections

I would have to agree that a game with multiple stages could be a great game so long as the theme and the multi-stage idea fit well together.

I like the idea, though it would be essentially learning three different games to play one game. It would be interesting to have a single game that could act as a large 3-part game or smaller single or double part games. Very cool in theory.

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 12:55
#3
SVan
Offline
Joined: 10/02/2008
Game with different sections

Thanks guys for the quick comments. Let me take them in order.

Chad_Ellis wrote:
...WHY do you have three sections? If it adds to the game play in a significant way, it could be great. If it feels arbitrary -- gee, the designer wanted a multi-stage game -- then it would detract.

Well I have always wanted to do a multi stage game, but in this case, I didn't plan it this way. I've been wanting to do a heavier game than I usually do, so I was thinking of themes and the theme pretty much allowed it to be a multi stage game.

Quote:
Can you flesh out for us what the idea is behind having multiple stages?

The theme of the game is the Rise and Fall of Rome (which happens to be the name as well.) Basically the first part is the rise, where players build the empire, the second part is the glorifying of the empire, and the third part is the fall. The first part will probably take as long as the other parts combined, as the end of the game will be variable, depending upon if the players help to make Rome fall or hinder it's fall.

SiskNY wrote:
I would have to agree that a game with multiple stages could be a great game so long as the theme and the multi-stage idea fit well together.

I like the idea, though it would be essentially learning three different games to play one game. It would be interesting to have a single game that could act as a large 3-part game or smaller single or double part games. Very cool in theory.

I believe that it can be done, but I know it's not going to be an easy or short task. I want it to flow very well, which means not adding too much to the 2nd and 3rd parts to make it feel way too different.

One thing I do know, is that I don't want this to be a military game. I definately want it to be a heavy euro game with lots of strategy.

Thanks again,

Steve

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 13:03
#4
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
Game with different sections

Steve,

You should check out the old Avalon Hill game "Republic of Rome", it has this 3-part structure. Each is its own sub-game, but the three can be played together as one long campaign game as well. It's much longer than what you're talking about, so I'm sure it's quite different, but you might check it out for inspiration. The one nice feature of that game is that the mechanics are the same for all 3 eras; the only difference are the Event cards that come out, yet these really provide a different flavor for each era (I think).

Good luck.
-Jeff

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 13:14
#5
SVan
Offline
Joined: 10/02/2008
Game with different sections

Jeff,

I was looking at BGG just to make sure there wasn't a game like this already done, but I didn't look at it good enough. Thanks for the heads up. I'll check it out now.

-Steve

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 13:31
#6
SVan
Offline
Joined: 10/02/2008
Game with different sections

Wow! Ok, well I like the idea behind Republic of Rome, but way too long and way too complicated for me to ever play. But I will probably read the rules just to see if there's anything interesting to help my game.

I'm definately going in a different direction compared to that game. Where that game has a goal for the players to make sure Rome doesn't fall, my game will end when Rome falls, which will be a definate. It'll probably be a VP thing, although getting old, it's the only way I can think to do it correctly.

And just like most of my historical games I have created, it'll have history in it, but it won't be historically correct. It might as well be a fictional historic game, kinda like Civilization.

-Steve

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 14:03
#7
sedjtroll
sedjtroll's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Game with different sections

I'd like to add to the sentiment that the multi-part game is a pretty nifty idea.

Ideally, one could create a series of short but decent games seperately (hopefully pretty cheap to produce) such that upon buying them all a longer, deeper game could be played by playing the series in sequence, with game information carrying over.

I don't see this working well unless it's something like 2 45 minute games which combine for a 1.5 hour playing experience. The 2 games should be similar and complimentary in theme of course, and the starting setup of game 2 should be set by the 'endgame' of game 1, with the option of simply starting each player out equally and having a standalone game.

I'd start with that. If that works out, you could think about a three or more part game. But if the sub-games are to be meaningful and good games on their own then putting three of them together might not work- either they'll be too short or the whole campaign will be too long.

- Seth

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 14:05
#8
Anonymous
Game with different sections

I like the idea of a three-phased game. Recently I have been playing a lot of Power Grid, which happens to have three different phases. Each phase has very similar mechanics, but differ slightly in what resources are available, the process of bringing new power planets to market and how many power planets can power a city. The mechanics are similar enough that after playing phase I, you just have two or three difference to learn. The only issue is that every time we play we have to reference the rules to remember all the little nuances. Best of all if you want to set the goal as the end of Phase I it is still balanced and can be played in less than 45 minutes.

Top
Tue, 10/26/2004 - 19:11
#9
Trickydicky
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Game with different sections

I think this is a very good idea. Plus I like the theme.

Would players acquire VP fluidly through any of the 3 phases or would they be scored at the end of each phase?

To do what Seth suggested it would probably have to be fluid. It would be very interesting if you somehow tied the VP acquired in phase 2 and 3 to that of phase 1 and 2 respectively.

Good thoughts. Hope it works well.
If you need any hands on help, I live in Ogden. PM me and we can exchange info.

Top
Wed, 10/27/2004 - 00:13
#10
SVan
Offline
Joined: 10/02/2008
Game with different sections

This game idea is very new. I just came up with it yesterday, so everything is in the air.

However, I plan on scoring at the end of each phase or part or stage, whatever I call it. However, what you do in the beginning will effect the middle and late stages, and the middle stage can effect the late stage as well. I plan to have different strategies to be available, and I will try to make it where you do not have to completely successful in each phase to win the game. If you want to specialize, you can succeed or if you want to balance, you can succeed as well. I definately am against the St. Petersburg way of only winning one way.

The only fluid thing during the game will be the money. You can collect that all the way during the game, but it'll be worthless at the end (Roman money can't be worth much without a Roman Empire.)

-Steve

Note: I am sending a PM now. Thanks for the offer.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut