Skip to Content
 

"Triumphant arc"

5 replies [Last post]
Fri, 04/07/2006 - 08:02
Ota
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969

Hallo,
I try to design board game about ancient Rome. Each player is one of mighty senator and target of game is become to consul (the highest position in Rome republic). Senators can build buildings, manage celebrations, use contacts with „dark side“ of Rome and so on. During the time, some events come (starvation, fire, disease etc.).
I would like to add to the game concept of „triumphant arc“. Current solution is following:
One of event is „War on borders“. Each player can try to candidate to become leader of Roman army. Players secretly choose amount of money and after that all participants reveal this amount. Player, who sacrifice the biggest amount, is a leader. For next two round he can’t do any action in city, because he is on the road to dangerous area. After two rounds he throws two dices. If result is bigger than 5 (probability of success is 72.2%) he won the battle. He come back to the city as a hero, republic builds him „triumphant arc“ and his position in city is much more better than before a battle. If result is 5 or lesser, he was defeated, he come back as a outsider and his reputation is little bit smaller than before a battle. Each player can win only once per game.

Rest of game is not so dependent on „dice destiny“, so I feel something like unbalance between „War on borders“ and rest of game.Victory in battle can have quite big influence on few next rounds in a game. On the other side, I would like to give to players possibility to have their own „triumphant arc“ in the city and wars aree not absolutely deterministic events.

Maybe, that solution would be change needed result to 5 (probability of success is 83.3%) or to 4 (91.7%), so the biggest fight will be in the city during selection of leader.

I know, that I should describe my game better if I want more reasonable opinions, but it is not so easy. The game is quite complex and I don’t want to write many sentences to explain all fine nuances. I will welcome every view, because I am too much “inside” and each idea (it can be absolutely crazy) can help me to see it from another position.

Thanks for patience with my english.

Ota

Top
Fri, 04/07/2006 - 08:33
#1
jwarrend
Offline
Joined: 08/03/2008
"Triumphant arc"

Ota,

Welcome to the group! The first thing you should do is look up the game "Republic of Rome" on the BoardGameGeek, as it has many elements that are very similar to what you are looking for. It's pretty long and is out-of-print, so it probably shouldn't deter you from moving ahead, but comparisons will definitely be made.

I'm not sure I understand what you're looking for with a "triumphant arc". Do you mean "arch"? As in, if you do well in battle, they build you a monument? It seems like you could incorporate this as the basic way players gain victory points, ie, anything you do well, you get a monument built in your honor, and the goal of the game is to be the most highly-regarded senator.

Definitely, the more you tell us about the game, the more helpful we can be. Good luck.

-Jeff

Top
Sat, 04/08/2006 - 17:41
#2
Jpwoo
Jpwoo's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2009
"Triumphant arc"

Quote:
Each player can win only once per game.

Why only once per game?

Are there multiple copies of the "Border War" event card in the game, or just the one?

Perhaps certain buildings or legislation the senators pass modify the die roll. For example if your senator helped to build the armory you might get a bonus when you roll to put down the barbarians.

Quote:
Rest of game is not so dependent on „dice destiny“, so I feel something like unbalance between „War on borders“ and rest of game.

Sometimes it is nice to have an option in a game that has some gambling involved, even if the rest of the game is more chesslike. It gives someone who is behind a chance at getting a boost.

Top
Sun, 04/09/2006 - 16:53
#3
Venga2
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
"Triumphant arc"

I am nor sure if thisis particularly usefull in your game, but as I imagine a battle for the consulate in roman it involves lots of dirty tactics, backstabbing, hidden agreements etc. So why, as consul, go to battle yourself? Perhaps you can play a general card, or pay some ammount of money to have the battle won for you, and you can stay in the city, still getting all the glory, and the arch of course.

I like the idea of your buildings influencing the outcome of the battle. Again, maybe a very rich senator can finance a bigger army to make sure that rome will win the battle. Maybe other sentors can secretely give money to the enemies to make you lose. Then again maybe this will all get very complicated, but I really like such "hidden" tactics.

Top
Sun, 04/09/2006 - 17:29
#4
Ota
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
"Triumphant arc"

Thanks for all reactions,
yes, the name for building should be "Triumphant arch" (in English language), it was my mistake.

I decided to set up needed dice value for victory on 5 (probability of victory is 83.33 % in this case). So it is not so big risk to go to battle. Of course, it will increase interestingness of possibility to become leader of army, but it neverminds.

Quote:
It gives someone who is behind a chance at getting a boost.

Exactly, this choice is very good for players, who don´t see any other possible way to incerase their position.

Quote:
For example if your senator helped to build the armory you might get a bonus when you roll to put down the barbarians.

Senator, who helped to build barracks, has some advantages during elevation of army leader.

Quote:
The first thing you should do is look up the game "Republic of Rome" on the BoardGameGeek, as it has many elements that are very similar to what you are looking for.

I have already read rules of this game. It looks interesting, but much more complex than my game. I hope, that my game will be easy to understand and not so long.

Quote:
Again, maybe a very rich senator can finance a bigger army to make sure that rome will win the battle.

I thought about possibility, that senator would be able to increase his chance for victory by money (let´s say bonus +1 for some money). It is in the rules now, but I am not sure, if I will let it there in final version.
I found out, that it is very easy to add a lot of rules, but it is not so easy to remove some of them (because I have to recognize, where is a limit between complexity and amusement).

Ok, thanks for patience with my English. It seems, that my problem is solved for this time. I will try to test it and I will see.

Top
Fri, 04/14/2006 - 12:41
#5
snak_attack
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
"Triumphant arc"

Rather that requiring the player to build specific buildings (which are useless if the card doesn't come up or if the player doesn't get the card), why not allow the player to hire troops either on the way or right before the battle (buy troops). The more you buy the better your chances of victory. That gives the player much better control over his fate (while never being able to get a sure thing of course).

This gives me a related idea. Say that the winning bid goes directly towards buying troops, but the lowest bid wins. The thematic tie perhaps being that the senate will subsidise the army and doesn't want to pay too much.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut