Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Archetype]

I, like many others on this forum, love to design games. I've had several ideas for games over the years, but I think this particular idea I have is sure to be good!

This game I'm trying to create is a light strategy game where players take territories from each other. Except in this territory claiming game, there is no board. Instead each player has thier own stack of "Territory cards".

Here are some core mechanics:

Territories are taken from other players by people playing cards that have every other player give them
a Territory card.

You can build buildings. These buildings help you in some way. I havent decided how yet.

All buildings have a monetary cost. But its cost isnt what you pay. Instead, all other players get that much money from the bank. This money is used to claim territories from other players.

Thats basically it. The 2 main mechanics harmonize with eachother because as you build buildings and progress through the game, other people can use the money you have supplied them with to attack.

Ive read he interview with Donald X that talks about restrictions, so Ive compiled a list of my own:

Attacks are non politicial. I like that about Donald X games as it prevents kingmaking.

You can not attack money or buildings. This may need to change, but Id rather it didnt.

Ths game needs to be super simple with no complex cards or systems, but still has strategy. The group of friends I have arent big Dominion buffs, but 7 Wonders and other light strategy games appeal to them. I want this game to be simple enough so they can understand it.

No Tableu. Goes along wih simple and concise restriction. Im fine with something like 2 decks and people can choose to draw from either one, but nothing like the tableu Dominion has.

Has to be fun. Ive made a few other games, all with great mechanics. But the problem is, only 1 or 2 are actually fun and asked to be played with. The rest are boring and have the question "is it my turn yet?" asked often.

Fast turns. Theres nothing more that I hate about Territory grabbing games is the long turns each player has. As well as a complex claiming system. I want this game's turns to be quick with very little downtime inbetween turns.

Those are the basics of my game. The problem is, Ive found that there are 2 ways approach it, and I need this community's help in choosing which option is better fit for the game's mechanics and restrictions.

Option 1:

Every player is delt a small deck of Territory cards which are shuffled up and placed in front of them. Each player then draws a hand of cards.

When they build buildings, they are placed in front of the player.

Whenever a player plays a teritory claiming card, each player gives the player of the claiming card the top card of thier Territory deck. Each one of these do something different, and when the player of the claiming card gets the cards, he flips them over and resolves thier effects, whether good or bad. These cards are placed at the bottom of thier deck.

This was my original idea when creating the game. The decks of each player need to be small enough so that the effects of the Territories can be used multiple times. These abbilities would need to be simple and immediate, and not too game changing.

This does elimate the possibility of one time use cards being used as any of these ideas would be used in the Territory cards. You would only have long term cards. Buildings.

And now to option 2!

Option 2:

In this option, all Territories are exactly the same.

Every player is dealt 9 Territory cards which are placed in a 3x3 grid. Every player draws a hand of cards.

Buildings are placed onto these territory cards. So, in theory, you can only have 9 buildings at a time.

When you claim territories from others, they give you first territory cafds from thier deck. If they have none they must give you a territory card on thier grid. Territory cards are immmediatly used to replace any holes in your 3x3 grid, and the remaining are placed in a deck next to your grid.

This idea may sound better on paper, but I really like it. The buildings you place could work depending on where you place them. Ths option is more strategic than the other, so the cards would need to be very simplistic. I dont want the grid to be any bigger than 3x3 as it wouldnt restrict the players as much.

So thats about it. Im really hoping I can get some feedback to which option to go with, and why. Also, if anyone has any idea of when the game should end, and how you win that would be good. I of course want it to some how work wih the teritories, with the buildings getting you there, but I dont know the best way to do it.

Thanks for reading! 

[Ozle]

I dont quite get it.

You shuffle a deck of Building cards? Or are there other cards in your draw deck as well as building cards? Money?

What do buildings do as they are permament?
If they are consistant effects they they will have to be pretty weak.
How do they match up with the territory effects?

How does the interact between money works
I build a cost 5 building, so other players get 5 coins each In the form of a card? Chips? Can they carry them over?


"Attacks are non politicial"
How does this work in three player when you are taking territories from other players? You get one from each?
That will make the piles deplete twice as fast won't it and be a much shorter game.

[popsofctown]

I read some of the OP.

I think your idea is not refined enough for you to begin presenting it to other people.  Ideas that I get to this stage, I often refine on my own, and then realize that there is no correct direction and I must scrap it.

[Archetype]

I dont quite get it.

You shuffle a deck of Building cards? Or are there other cards in your draw deck as well as building cards? Money?

What do buildings do as they are permament?
If they are consistant effects they they will have to be pretty weak.
How do they match up with the territory effects?

How does the interact between money works
I build a cost 5 building, so other players get 5 coins each In the form of a card? Chips? Can they carry them over?


"Attacks are non politicial"
How does this work in three player when you are taking territories from other players? You get one from each?
That will make the piles deplete twice as fast won't it and be a much shorter game.

I guess I wasnt so clear.

Money is just chips with numbers on them to show thier worth. Yes, there is change.

A Deck of buildings is all it is, just buildings. But there are different kinds.

In option 1, there could be a terrain called Forest. And then a building that says: ""whenever a forest is taken from you, take a coin" or something like that.

In option 2, are terrains are the same, so there could  be buildings that do stuff depending on where they are placed.

So the money thing: All buildings are free for you, but help other people. If I build a building with the number 1 on it, all other players take 1 coin. These coins are used to buy peope that can claim land.

Yes, this game does need at least 3 players as when someone plays a territory claiming card, all other players give him how many territory cards the card asks for. So with more people you get more territories, but when you build something, everyone else gets money.

[Archetype]

I read some of the OP.

I think your idea is not refined enough for you to begin presenting it to other people.  Ideas that I get to this stage, I often refine on my own, and then realize that there is no correct direction and I must scrap it.

I have ageneral idea of what I want to do, I just dont know which of the 2 directions I shoud take it.

[Ozle]

I dont quite get it.

You shuffle a deck of Building cards? Or are there other cards in your draw deck as well as building cards? Money?

What do buildings do as they are permament?
If they are consistant effects they they will have to be pretty weak.
How do they match up with the territory effects?

How does the interact between money works
I build a cost 5 building, so other players get 5 coins each In the form of a card? Chips? Can they carry them over?


"Attacks are non politicial"
How does this work in three player when you are taking territories from other players? You get one from each?
That will make the piles deplete twice as fast won't it and be a much shorter game.

I guess I wasnt so clear.

Money is just chips with numbers on them to show thier worth. Yes, there is change.

A Deck of buildings is all it is, just buildings. But there are different kinds.

In option 1, there could be a terrain called Forest. And then a building that says: ""whenever a forest is taken from you, take a coin" or something like that.

In option 2, are terrains are the same, so there could  be buildings that do stuff depending on where they are placed.

So the money thing: All buildings are free for you, but help other people. If I build a building with the number 1 on it, all other players take 1 coin. These coins are used to buy peope that can claim land.

Yes, this game does need at least 3 players as when someone plays a territory claiming card, all other players give him how many territory cards the card asks for. So with more people you get more territories, but when you build something, everyone else gets money.

Ok, I get that bit, another set of questions:

But where do they get the Territory claiming cards from if the deck is all buildings?

Now, I'm presuming that pay a certain amount of money to claim them out of a seperate deck?

Which seems to me to be a flaw:

So imagine a 4 player game, they all build buildings, I just collect money when they build and build nothing. So whatever bonuses they get will have to be 4x better overall than the money they are giving out.
I think you will have major balance issues there.


As to ending the game, thats tricky, gone through several idea's for option 1 and none of them work well. (Gaining points when claiming territory's doesnt work because the order is random and then they go in the other persons deck. X number of buildings defeats the theme)

Hmm, what if you put the buildings and territories claims as cards in the same deck. Then when you drew a T Claim, then you had to meet certain requirements (Like you have to have  Church and X coins, or a Blacksmith and a Saloon) then you could play them and claim them from your opponent. Each player has 9 types of territory in front of him each with similar conditions.

Actually I like this

So you have say 20 building cards and 9 territory claim cards all shuffled together in one deck
There are 9 x number of players territory cards in the middle (3 sets of each one)

You draw 3 cards each turn and say you can play ONE of them (No idea where that restriction came from, but it seems good)

Each building has two costs on it. One if you want to pay with your own money. One cost that if you build it you have to give to the others. (So you either pay 4 coins to build that stable, or give each other player 2 coins)

If you want to claim a territory you must play a Claim card, which relates to a SPECIFIC territory, you have to pay its cost, which will either be straight up money, money + have a building out, or other.

If you claim a territory you can either take it from the middle, or from another player, IF he has no other card in front of it (coming to that bit)
Once you have claimed it goes in a row in front of you, you have to fill up the back 3 slots first, and then you can put the next cards in front of them. Territorys with other T's in front of them CANNOT be stolen by other players (They will have to take it from the middle)
Winner is the first person to have 7 or 8 T's in front of him.

Wow, that turned into a whole design after I started writing that, its strayed a bit from your original, sorry about that.

You would still have to balance the buildings properly of course.
 

[Archetype]

I was thinking that there would be a guide off to the side like:

X Coins = Each other player gives you Y amount of territory cards
X Coins = Each other player gives you Y+1 amount of territory cards
etc

For the building thing with the everyone getting money. My original plan was that you were required to build a building each turn, but I like the idea of the dual cost, pay in money, or everyone else gets that much money. The money everyone else gets could be roughly 1/3 of the buildings actual cost.

I had a random idea about ending the game when talking about the first option:

You can purchase Victory cards. These go to the bottom of your territory deck. But when they are taken from you, they go to the other player's deck. So, you have to estimate when the game will end to know when to start buying Victories, kind of like Dominion. I think that might make the game too luck based as someone could just steal your Victory cards.


I like your idea of having all the buildings and t claiming cards in one deck. But what if thier were two decks and you could choose which one to take from. I also like your prerequisite idea.  For the T claiming card "Missionary" you could either have the Building "Church" and build it for free, or pay some money.

The Territories in front or back seems a bit confusing, and if we are going with the dual cost mechanic, I'd rather I do option 1, with a deck of cards that when revealed do stuff. Please note that the deck

Do you really think that claiming territories from all players will end the game too quickly? A player will build something, give others some cash, steal some territories, then the players that now have cash can steal, or save it for a bigger way to steal stuff. There could be some that are cheap, but are targeted.

Also, do you think the deck of territories is a good idea? Where the top card is revealed and resolved, then returned to the bottom of the player of the Claim's card's deck. It seems like a simple mechanic, but it might look better on paper.

Here's some ideas for Territory cards:

Forest: When you claim this, take a coin from the bank.

River: When you claim this, take an additional territory card from its owner.

Mountain: When you claim this, pay 2 coins to it's owner.

etc

I want there to be both good and bad territories. So when you get a good one, everyone wants to attack you, but when you get a bad one, no one wants to attack you. Which is another reason why I want the claiming to affect everyone.