Skip to Content
 

Good mechanics for 2-player games?

8 replies [Last post]
Mon, 09/22/2008 - 02:09
Willi B
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008

I have a game that I'm pretty satisfied with that is strictly 2-player. I think it needs new wrinkles to make it better and was wondering what people thought were mechanics that worked well in 2-player games.

I mean, it's pretty obvious to me that drafting/bidding certainly has more dynamism with 3 or more people, so it isn't good in my opinion... you could add dummy hands or AI, but it rarely is as good as more people.

What works well? What doesn't? Why?

Top
Thu, 09/25/2008 - 03:23
#1
Willi B
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Nobody Got Nuttiin?

Nobody Got Nuttiin?

Top
Thu, 09/25/2008 - 12:28
#2
KrinkleChip
KrinkleChip's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2008
Depends on the game, really...

What is the game? Could you give us a description along with the mechanics you are currently using?

Phil

Top
Fri, 09/26/2008 - 02:00
#3
Willi B
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Thanks for CHIPPING in!!!!!

Thanks for CHIPPING in!!!!!

It is a 2 player Murder Mystery game with 1 player playing the detective and the other the culprit. It is card based and works on a measured time element.... the detective must solve the crime by a set amount (measured in playing elements) or he loses the game. Currently the players are in VERY HARD TO BALANCE roles that are at once symmetric and asymmetric. What I mean to say is that they share properties and are "balanced" but have differing. obvious goals... and thus strategic styles.

Top
Fri, 09/26/2008 - 15:37
#4
SiddGames
SiddGames's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/02/2008
Action Points

AP work well with 2p I think, whether it's one AP per action (e.g, take 3 actions on your turn) or a menu of actions with various costs. It becomes pretty tactical with 2p because you each know exactly HOW MUCH the other guy can get done on his turn but not WHAT he will do, so there are frequently tough choices, especially the tension between advancing your position vs. undermining/attacking/blocking the other guy.

Top
Mon, 09/29/2008 - 02:06
#5
Willi B
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Thanks Sidd! AP's was

Thanks Sidd!

AP's was primarily where I was at with this project when it was in its CCG state.... then when I moved it to a table top card game I tried to simplify it and tried a couple of things that were not practical.

I really didn't think there was a marketplace for CCG level board games until I saw Race for the Galaxy and its success. I may move back to some AP's but I really want to keep some of the greater simplification I've achieved.

Thanks for reminding me that AP's can still work.

Anyone else got suggestions?

Top
Mon, 09/29/2008 - 16:05
#6
Rick-Holzgrafe
Rick-Holzgrafe's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/22/2008
Willi B wrote:I mean, it's

Willi B wrote:
I mean, it's pretty obvious to me that drafting/bidding certainly has more dynamism with 3 or more people, so it isn't good in my opinion...

That's not necessarily true. Ticket to Ride and Through the Ages are two games that come to mind: they both have card drafting (TtA has a form of action points as well) and both are fine two-player games. Even auctions can be done in two-player games; they become a face-to-face duel and can be quite intense. You can see this happen in any multi-player game when all but two players have dropped out and the two who remain are still bidding against each other.

For auctions to work well, you need to be auctioning items (or opportunities) whose value to each player is not obvious. If the value is calculable, then there's little interest in the auction: the item will be bid up until it is clearly no longer worth the price to one player, at which point the other player wins it for that price. Make the value real but uncertain for both players, and the auction gets more interesting. Hidden information helps with this.

Top
Mon, 09/29/2008 - 23:25
#7
KrinkleChip
KrinkleChip's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/30/2008
Some scattershot ideas...

Could you post what mechanics you are currently using? In the interim, here are some scattershot ideas...

-The detective has to search for various clues around the crime scene. The culprit starts the game with 'X' evidence cards. At the start of the game he must split it into two piles facedown and the detective player must choose one, with the culprit keeping the rest. With some evidence better than other evidence, how does the culprit split it up?

-There could be 'X' suspect cards, as in Mr. Jack. Instead of narrowing down the suspects by Line of Sight, the detective eliminates suspects by building evidence. Actions of both players raise/lower evidence as a side cost of the action.

Regards,
Phil

Top
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 05:38
#8
Willi B
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Thanks Rick for the reminder

Thanks Rick for the reminder of good examples of 2 player auctions/drafts that still work. I have 2 games that suffer from systems that don't work - mainly because there are too many of them! So I think that's another indication that abandoning old ideas may not be the right tack... but fresh perspective can stimulate new thoughts.

The game has a structure that I have to work around making it all the harder to balance. A few people here have seen bits and pieces of the game and I am sure they would agree that sacrificing those parts would cause the game to lose its strongest selling point. The trouble is making a game equal in the quality play department.

The game is most similar to Netrunner. There are 2 routes to victory for the detective player - revealing the main clues or interrogating the correct suspect before X times through the deck. The culprit player wins by causing the detective to fail in his goals.

Consider the main clues as cards at the bottom of their own stacks. Each card on top of the main clue must be overcome by the detective to retrieve these clues. Retrieving 3 of the 4 is required for detective victory. Also a detective can win by having the correct suspect in the interrogation room at the end of the game.

Culprits can add more cards to the stacks and even lock them during play. They can set traps for the detective and cause the detective harm. Additionally they can remove suspects in the interrogation room.

Mechanics

Currently all cards are two-sided dual usage (the same ability does not hold the same value for both players). Players draft cards each round of play (way too often). All the cards have some ability on them and perhaps there needs to be fewer cards in the pool. Both players are now draing from the same stack, but the only way to get new cards is from the draft and the initial draws.

A representative detective is chosen by the detective player before the game and the differing detectives have differing abilities. The more powerful the detective, the less time to solve the crime.

A culprit is chosen beforehand and the appropriate clues are put in their appropriate stacks. While there is no suspect card to represent the suspect, the differing clue card functions can set the tone for the strategic style employed by the culprit.

Everything, outside of the rules governing detective interaction with the stacks, how the stacks work, and the way the suspect "interrogations" are handled are pretty much on the cards. I always liked that goal in CCG's and am trying to keep it that way.

Whew.... thanks again for the input and I hope this generates more input.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut