tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post4628423717550612527..comments2024-03-28T05:12:10.477-07:00Comments on Gone Gaming: Elegant Games, Elegant ComponentsColdfoothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11636345146138362966noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-85782600120124583502007-11-29T21:23:00.000-08:002007-11-29T21:23:00.000-08:00And what those Descent dice look like:http://www.b...And what those Descent dice look like:<BR/>http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/266872Jeffrey Henninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15846949270787056220noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-43236531120620458652007-04-28T03:11:00.000-07:002007-04-28T03:11:00.000-07:00One newer game that I think does the information t...One newer game that I think does the information thing extremely well is Pillars of the Earth - we rarely have to go hunting for anything, as there is just enough information on the board and on the cards.Melissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12731608339380263848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-45564681588090797012007-04-27T13:23:00.000-07:002007-04-27T13:23:00.000-07:00Shannon, didn't Richard Borg's designs of Battle C...Shannon, didn't Richard Borg's designs of Battle Cry and Memoir '44 predate the FFG games with their use of custom dice to indicate combat results without the use of charts? They were probably a lot simpler, but I think they used the same concept. I have no idea if that was the first use of custom dice for that. Eagle's Conquest of the Empire also uses custom dice for combat, but that came later than Borg's C&C games.huzonfirsthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12857915477472022870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-5130754808596551142007-04-26T22:08:00.000-07:002007-04-26T22:08:00.000-07:00Good, thought provoking stuff.This piece should be...Good, thought provoking stuff.<BR/><BR/>This piece should be re-posted on BGDF and BGG for greater exposure.Coldfoothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11636345146138362966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-41725762391780940052007-04-26T22:04:00.000-07:002007-04-26T22:04:00.000-07:00Akkkkk -- I shouldn't be doing this tonight. Th...Akkkkk -- I shouldn't be doing this tonight. The number on the Mine card is the die roll to indicate that the Mine produces. The cost of the Mine is established by the auction. --- Like I said, confusion (in this case, just in my mind, I guess).Gerald McDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03032201828179314072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-62404528002549524742007-04-26T22:00:00.000-07:002007-04-26T22:00:00.000-07:00That's another excellent article, Shannon. I agree...That's another excellent article, Shannon. I agree with your assertions.<BR/><BR/>A corollary might be: Poor design of information on components can lead to confusion. The Mine cards in Boomtown are an example. Each card has a number on it and one or more gold coins. We don't play the game too often, but when we do, we always have to remind each other that the gold coins do not represent the cost of the Mine, but rather its production value, while the number is the cost. It is confusing. Perhaps if the gold coins had been pictured in an ore cart coming from the mine and the number placed on a For Sale sign, the confusion would have been avoided. Sometimes graphic designs can be too clever and defeat their primary purpose.Gerald McDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03032201828179314072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-6679320148748175632007-04-26T19:28:00.000-07:002007-04-26T19:28:00.000-07:00Descent is a great game - it certainly adds a lot ...Descent is a great game - it certainly adds a lot that Doom doesn't have. I really do enjoy Descent, but I also love the pared down version that is Doom - although I feel that in Doom players need to play a certain way (keep moving) more so than in Descent - but I like the 'pressure-cooker' feeling this produces.<BR/><BR/>Ys is an example of a very complex game that doesn't feel as complex as it could as a result of some very clever graphics (although the character cards take some getting used to) - the board especially is an excellent example of references that help make the complexities of the game easier to process.<BR/><BR/>Great article Shannon! - thanks!caradochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07713625369443490430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-17208550130422302522007-04-26T19:08:00.000-07:002007-04-26T19:08:00.000-07:00I've played Descent three times now and I've been ...I've played <I>Descent</I> three times now and I've been quite pleased with it, as have the other players who actively requested the third game instead of some roleplaying we had planned.<BR/><BR/>The game is long compared to a board game, but is a perfectly fine length for a RPG. It helps if the players really push the game, and the players who played games #2 and #3 did.Shannon Appelclinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10454937577535623129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-63209808174221806742007-04-26T15:39:00.000-07:002007-04-26T15:39:00.000-07:00Thanks for an interesting and engaging article Sha...Thanks for an interesting and engaging article Shannon! <BR/><BR/>I think component design can make the difference sometimes between a good game and a brilliant game - one where the game takes many, many plays to 'nail down' and one where play feels almost intuitive.<BR/><BR/>I agree with Chris too in regard to Descent, although i found the Doom scenarios to be less ludicrous - especially with the difficulty levels from the FFG site. I think Doom is a fantastic system, especially the 'ammunition' aspect of the dice - you can hit and the marines can still be wincing. The dice don't have the 'critical damage' component that the Descent dice do - but they are still such a simple way of handling so many different game play aspects.<BR/><BR/>Thanks again!<BR/><BR/>Giles.caradochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07713625369443490430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-91760181657478434792007-04-26T11:49:00.000-07:002007-04-26T11:49:00.000-07:00I think what made some AH games more playable was ...I think what made some AH games more playable was commonality rather than really good component design. If you've played PanzerBlitz, you could figure out PanzerLeader and Arab-Israeli Wars by looking at the charts and counters. If you've figured out how to work an odds chart, that could go a long way in many games.<BR/><BR/>That said, some wargame companies do have very good component design. Columbia deserves particular praise here; many of their games are more or less chart-free with graphics that easily and cleanly convey a lot of information.<BR/><BR/>Avalon Hill of course also published a lot more than just wargames. Sometimes they did a good job, sometimes they didn't, but they published a lot of games. Games like Civilization, Dune, Titan, and 1830 are all very good in this respect I think (and all acquisitions where the physical presentation was left more or less unchanged, rather than in-house designs, admittedly). In the 90s, a number of wargames had very good component design, such as Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage and We the People. Hannibal is of course not a trivial game, so it's still got some rules, but the cards and leaders and board make it a lot easier to play than games of comparable raw complexity but weaker graphic (and game) design.<BR/><BR/>I agree that the dice in Doom and Descent are terrific game design elements, brilliant really. It's just so frustrating to me that it seems like they thought to themselves "wow, that's a great idea!" and then stopped worrying about the rest of the game. The scenarios in the original Doom were egregiously poor to the point of ludicrousness. Descent would be a great game if only they could have tightened up the pace. You can play that thing for 4-5 hours (or more) and not get a lot out of it. I also felt like Descent got less mileage out of the custom dice concept because of the prevalence of melee rather than ranged combat, and because the dice and weapons you got access to (without playing forever) seemed to lack the same range as Doom.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12654412977759874403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14856978.post-52703009355783554492007-04-26T11:26:00.000-07:002007-04-26T11:26:00.000-07:00I am not sure I agree with your assertion that war...I am not sure I agree with your assertion that wargames didn't use the components to contain valuable information. One gamer when presented with a new game asked, "Is it Avalon Hill? OK, then I'll just read the board and we can play." They weren't quite that straightforward, but there is a lot of information on AH boards. One couldn't pitch the rules and play, but I think they did a great job of mnemonic charts and turn order right on many of their boards.<BR/><BR/>All in all, though, I agree that the more of that information that is available on the components, the smoother teaching games goes. Icons are powerful tools and I always appreciate when designers include them.qzhdadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00052783136246015481noreply@blogger.com