Skip to Content
 

WIP: WAR, crossing borders

10 replies [Last post]
Tue, 12/15/2015 - 00:27
Joska Paszli
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2012
TOKEN_HEX_ORCS_WOLFRIDERS_LP2_0.png

Hello dear reader,

For many years i am busy developing a high fantasy wargame. Since the hiring of a skilled artist I decided to make more effort in this. Right now i am on the eve of much playtesting with my son who have come also at an age where he can outsmart me :)

Check the website i started here and enjoy the artwork....

http://joskapaszli.wix.com/thewargame

A lot of work still has to be done. More units will be added, need a exciting lore, finishing rulebooks, armybooks and such. And i also consider doing a kickstarter project in late 2016.

I also like to meet people who have good ideas. And probably want to participate in proofreading the rulebook, lore or whatever.

Please feel free to add comments on everything u find could be improved.

Thanx in advance.... Joska

Top
Tue, 12/15/2015 - 10:01
#1
ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
Joska Paszli wrote:The game

Joska Paszli wrote:

The game is played on a hexbased map and it is created to be more fastpacing than tabletop games, the rules are emphasised on depth and uses the most common wargame rules for commanding your units, combat, shooting, routing and so on."

So, how is it more fast paced than the 'tabletop games' if the rules are emphasizing depth (so are probably more complex) and "using most common wargame rules to command units"? Where does the quick pacing come from?

Have you played, for example, Battlelore?
What is unique in your design? Why would I pick it over an already established game?

Nice 2d artwork though.

Top
Tue, 12/15/2015 - 17:15
#2
Joska Paszli
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2012
Good questions

Good questions

It uses hexes which allows more pace.... it shows the most relevant stats on the token itself which allows pace too... I am always aware to skip complex additions if they dont benefit the depth of the game enough...

I played battlelore, i have bot boxes, also the battle of westeros. Also battlelore on the tablet. The game really disappoint me, esp the 2nd edition.

What i dislike about games like battlelore and also battlecry is this:

- i always felt tactical restricted by the commandcards where you could only move at a certain flank and even just a few units. It never felt like i was commanding an army. For me this is not how medieval-alike movement should work.I like to move the whole battleline up towards the enemy where i must think about the most relevant moves to do, what to prioritize.
The size of the hexes is a bit too big, this also restricts tactical movement.

In my game the commandcards allow flexibility across the board. Just take care of your commanders and your battleline and you will do fine. If your battleline get too scattered than you would have problems to get the most effect out of your army and probably loose.

- units dont have a flank or rear in these games, i miss the use of simple tactics of overpowering a flank to create a hole in the enemies battleline to get behind the enemy and make use of rear bonuses and break him.

Hexes are perfect to create a simple rear and a flank, I uses this in my game. You get rewarded to break the enemy line and get behind the enemy.

- i miss a zone of control around units, why can i use my whole movement allowance to move between 2 enemy units and get to its rear (where i dont get a rearbonus)? This is also the case in a pc game like elves legacy.
In "reality" if a unit moves between 2 enemy units these 2 units will bend towards the enemy and intercept it.

In my game you cant simple pass enemyunits through their combatzone.

Overall the fun-time invested ratio is so low in battlelore/battlecry. I wanted to adress this.

Did you play bloodbowl? It has tacklezones, fumbles all benefit to the game. I love the thrill of a "going for it", the epic feeling of a successful action according to plan. Or even the total failures are epic.The number of puzzles you have to solve in bloodbowl is so much higher than in battlelore or battlecry. This is what i address in my game.

2 hours of many puzzling moments with some epicness into it where your plan before the game and the execution during the game really matters....

Do you recognize my feeling about too much simplicity and restriction in battlecry and battlelore?

Top
Tue, 12/15/2015 - 19:54
#3
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
To be real honest...

I find these types of "battle" (wargames) to be less interesting (to me).

Since I have seen "Golem Arcana", nothing quite lives up to their system. It's like THEY are the TOP of the scale, and everyone else using archaic systems.

Ok granted some MOBA games use nice "minis" - that's not a bonus anymore - it's sort of the standard. Because card-based pieces to represent units is so "1980s"... It's like if we were are sent back to that decade, maybe card-based pieces would be really innovative.

Now if you had "minis" for the game - you might be more in-line with games of 2015. But the cost can be very prohibitive. "Loka" demonstrates what minis can be used for Fantasy Chess. And there are four (4) races which have six (6) types of pieces for each side.

I saw a prototype of a Magic: The Gathering board game - and they too were using card-based pieces... And I kept thinking "Golem Arcana"...

Our third expansion of "Tradewars - Homeworld" will also have a tactical board and use "minis". But this is another "enhancement" to the base game. It takes the game to a whole other level. This is innovative because we are using a tactical board to play a virtually based card game.

Wargames usually take longer to play that board games - so "minis" in the context of this expansion make for an interesting/enhanced gaming experience.

Top
Wed, 12/16/2015 - 00:40
#4
Joska Paszli
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2012
Cardboard minis do look 1980s

Cardboard minis do look 1980s but the advantage are there too like storage, costs and convenience. The stats can be printed on them which increases pace too.

I agree that a combination would be very nice to add 10-15mm minis on the token, a bit like Demonworld did in the late 1990's. But modern players dont have the time to spent hours painting them... at least i wont at my age.. :)

If the gamesystem is worked out 100% and perfected i could imagine a transistion to a tabletgame would be nice too.

Top
Wed, 12/16/2015 - 00:47
#5
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Try

Joska Paszli wrote:
If the gamesystem is worked out 100% and perfected i could imagine a transition to a tabletgame would be nice too.

That's the thing: so "Golem Arcana" has an awesome Imaging System. It would be awesome if other games could BENEFIT from that system too. Okay so maybe they won't make an API for their technology - but maybe YOU as a designer can approach them and say: "Look I have this wargame that I have completed 100% and think it would make for an AWESOME Tablet game also..."

I mean they must be looking for other games for their technology. No?

It pays to TRY - if you don't try, you'll never know for certain.

Top
Wed, 12/16/2015 - 05:16
#6
ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
Joska Paszli wrote:Do you

Joska Paszli wrote:

Do you recognize my feeling about too much simplicity and restriction in battlecry and battlelore?

Well, these games are simplified ('restricted') to appeal to a different target audience.

The more special rules you have (Like flanking. Btw, I absolutely hate how flanking works in battles of westeros) the more often you'll have to consult with the rulebook while you're playing.

The main difference between something like Warhammer and a boxed game is that the former will be played again and again, with the first games being just 'learning the rules' kind of thing. So lots of specail rules like flanking, zone of control etc etc is ok.

While with a boardgame, you will probably play it a couple of times and forget about it, if the rules will feel to complicate to grasp as you go. So the good idea is to ensure that your players don't have to consult with the rulebook constantly.
For the same reason, the shorter game time you have - the better.

I really don't think that a 'middleground' is a good idea. Either make it super-streamlined, possibly sacrificing some of the depth, and market it to boardgamers, or make a serious wargame (which would be extremely hard to do, considering how niche it is and how many existing wargames there are).

I couldn't find the rules download. So can't comment specifically on the mechanics of your game. I did like the grouped movement though.

Also, the 'armybooks' are a bad idea. The very mention of the armybook suggests a certain level of complexity which you hardly want in a boardgame.

I would disagree with questccg regarding models being a must. Models will triple the production cost of your game, require substantial prior investment and increase your financial risk if you do go through a KS.

What you do need though is a demonstration (preferably in video format) that will show that your game is indeed fast paced and unique to create interest.

Personally, I wouldn't go for the hexagon unit markers though. It's not practical when you have to change the facing of the unit which is in formation, for example.

Also, consider making a prototype of your game and taking photos of it. Currently, while you have some decent 2d artwork, the 3d renders of the board and setup look dated. I would suggest you replace them.

Top
Thu, 12/17/2015 - 22:19
#7
Joska Paszli
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2012
I played warhammer in the mi

I played warhammer in the mi 1990's and i really missed the tactical puzzles. U set up 2 armies and in a few moves they clash. You buy 20 miniatures for a single unit but in the combatphase, after 1-2 rounds of dicesrolling they get routed and thats it....a warhammer game last 4-7 turns.. for me i prefer more movement, more puzzles on what to do and so on....

The rulebook is close to finished but it requires more playtesting as there are numerous options how to handle things like routing or spellcasting... give me some time :)

I made a 3D sketchup area where i will add all units. This environment i will use to create the examples of the rulebook for explanation of the rules.

I will later on make a catchy video to explain the rules.

"Personally, I wouldn't go for the hexagon unit markers though. It's not practical when you have to change the facing of the unit which is in formation, for example."

What suggestion do you have here? I choose the hexagon as it allows perfectly to creates aces flank and rear of a unit....
The counters are 3 mm high so can pretty easily picked up from the board.

Top
Fri, 12/18/2015 - 06:13
#8
ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
My first advice would be to

My main advice would be to post whatever you have here _before_ it's finished. It will save you some time probably. (and don't worry about someone 'stealing' your game - all of us have much more game concepts on our minds than we can handle).

As for markers - use squares. They can be placed on the very same hexagons, will look more like a unit and will be easier to move around.

Problem with tactical puzzles is that it's appealing to a smaller demographics, I think. Warhammer is mostly about rolling buckets of dice. Which is fun for many people. Maneuvering until you can get that perfect position is, in general, less exciting, than smashing your enemy.

Make sure you tool your game to the right target audience. Long intricate maneuvers of cardboard counters is a territory of hex and counter historical wargames, i'm afraid.

P.S: personally, I would prefer less dice and more thinking and maneuvering, but I'm not sure if that's the most popular opinion in reality.

P.P.S: i've played WH too, back in the days. Dropped it some time ago - it takes waaay too much time to play a game. And the game itself isn't that good either.

Top
Fri, 12/18/2015 - 06:43
#9
adversitygames
adversitygames's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
Joska Paszli wrote:Since the

Joska Paszli wrote:
Since the hiring of a skilled artist I decided to make more effort in this. Right now i am on the eve of much playtesting with my son who have come also at an age where he can outsmart me :)

I suggest you find someone with more knowledge about games to play it against.

Also there's no reason to wait until you get artwork before you test a game. If anything you should make sure you have a game worth playing (by testing it) before sinking money on artwork.

Top
Sat, 12/19/2015 - 21:40
#10
Joska Paszli
Offline
Joined: 05/25/2012
thanks for the advice, it was

thanks for the advice, it was tested before and also with other gamers. I dont know if you have kids but i noticed now my own has grown up that they are excellent to test with. They learn fast, and show fast new approaches in tactics.They are also very demanding in the fun they get in return for spending time. They have 100s of alternatives to to do when young.

It is just that now the artwork is there I have the push to get to a final situation. For years i used artwork from the internet and that witholded me to get more public.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut