Let's Talk! - Game Design - On Game Balance with Joe McCullough
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- We're back with the next episode of Let's Talk! - Game Design. This time Joseph McCullough (Frostgrave, Rangers of Shadowdeep, Oathmark, Operation: Last Train) and I take on the topic of game balance and the challenges of getting it right, or even knowing what RIGHT means.
GMG Let's Talk on SPOTIFY: open.spotify.c...
GMG Let's Talk on SOUNDCLOUD: / guerrilla-miniature-games
RSS Feed for any App you want to listen on: / sounds.rss
GMG Measuring Gauges and Tokens available HERE: deathraydesigns...
GMG T-Shirts and Hoodies HERE: shop.spreadshi...
GMG is publicly supported. Become a backer on Patreon to ensure new content and that the CoOp can continue: / guerrillaminiaturegames
Want to challenge Ash to a game? Email him at GuerrillaMiniatureGames@gmail.com or message him through his Facebook Page!
Follow Ash on Facebook: / outofthebasementintoth...
All Jingles and Music by Kevin McLeod: incompetech.com
I too have an interest in balance
I talk about you so much in this episode it’s like you were there. 😘
*Thanos has entered the chat*
@@torymiddlebrooks 🤣
@@GuerrillaMiniatureGames It's not talking behind someone's back if you put it on CZcams!
@@GuerrillaMiniatureGames I was surprised to hear of the height! 6'5" - he hides it well on camera
Excellent discussion. Ash, please stop thinking you talk too much. You have a ton of great ideas and it never gets redundant or boring. Bravo to everyone involved with these talks!
Another great talk. That comparison of what +1 means in a d6 vs d20 system reflects the history of D&D in the mid-70s, when it shifted from using Chainmail’s D6 melee table to its own D20 table, and +1 magic swords went from awesome to ho hum.
That part in the discussion regarding the sword that can be either 1 or 2 handed. That was an 'of course' moment for me as I realised that was the scene in the Hobbit. The one when they find the weapons in the cave.
Theoden was going to throw his away as he thought it useless at first and Bilbo got a letter opener!
I think Kings of War 3rd edition is an example of a well balanced game. You can win with any army. You can have fun with any army. You can also mix up army compositions drawing from two different forces and have the chance to paint and play with models you might not otherwise try, that's just my two cents. Keep it up, Ash, I always enjoy Let's Talk.
Thank you so much for doing this video, and the last one too. I'm working on a miniatures game myself, and these videos have been really inspirational.
I’ve been struggling with balance as well. One of my goals was to make a game where the winner is determined more by skill and luck than by who brought the better party (which really means by who won the rock-paper-scissors game of character choice). I had this tough realization that the more interesting I make the powers, the stronger the rock-paper-scissors dynamics of character choice will be.
So a question rather than a compliment this time. Pertaining to narrative, any thoughts on ways to keep the players creating their own stories, past any provided scenarios and expansions? In that old school sense (I'm in your gents age bracket), of getting players to then take the reigns and have endless possible fun with the toolbox you've given them. Coming back to the hobby after a long time away, it seems to me that lots of younger or newer folks, want or expect a boxed experience, and once that provided experience is completed, they move on to the new hotness. So perhaps, thoughts on game world exploration, long term character growth (in the RPG-lite sense/skills, inventory, exp), ways for the world to grow with the player's experience, while playing your game, etc..
Very happy you’re producing these again. I know you’ld rather have them face to face but I am really enjoying these. Please keep up the great work!
Please always write an optional to bother to read designers commentary section in rule sets. It changes the game/rules from some corporate computer output to a world that a human cares about and loves.
It allows you to add context and properly explain things like cover can always be found on a batlefield so you have incorporated into toughness or opposite and why there are 5 types of cover. Another evxample is explaining that game is to show marvel type superheroes clashing or to play John Doe from your neighbourhood rising to the occassion despite his lowly abilities.
This is a great idea.
These discussions about game design are my favorite ! 🤗
Édit : would love to listen to Owen point of view
Thank you for this fascinating discussion. Really helps me crystallize some vague thoughts, and given me a deeper understanding of this hobby's recent history and how my own approach to wargaming has changed over the years.
Games with well balanced rules, such as X-wing for example, also make excellent platforms for scenario play. It ensures that two forces when pitted against each other will result in something other than a one-sided game. Whether casual or competitive, even if you are enjoying the game in completely different ways, you always want the game to last for a significant amount of time with both sides being invested, and ideally result in some climactic finale. So having a balanced system is great in both cases, as a tool.
These are so AWESOME! Thank you for doing these! Working on a solo game to keep myself busy and these insights into the creative process are perfectly timely!
I'm glad these are back, throughly enjoyable :)
I'm thinking of maybe House Ruling that Thugs are free, but are prone to stealing small bits of treasure; so you lose 1D10 Gold for each Thug or Thief in your Warband.
The massive swinginess of the Frostgrave/Ghost Archipelago is what draws me to them. It is an element that drives the low-fantasy atmosphere, in which everyone is vulnerable. I'm really looking forward to the release of Stargrave, to use it for playing Inquisitor 28 games. Until then, I'll stick with Operation: Last Train. :D
Some of my favourite bits of the Frostgrave books are the little sidebars giving an idea of how weird and scary the city is.
In my experience the size of the table top community makes a more perfectly balanced game less likely to find an audience. When you have a pool as small as 10-20 players which is what many local game shops (at least here in the states) will be dealing with your skill levels will be more varying. The better players won't be able to find as many challenging opponents and the less skilled opponents will find themselves losing regularly against those more skilled players, both situations make for unsatisfying experiences over time and will drive players away. When you introduce more randomness you create more opportunity for the less skilled players to win which effectively makes the experience more balanced if not the game itself.
When everything is built off the same stats, balance becomes much easier. When armywide rules, weapons, points, and stats widely vary is when balance becomes far more of an issue. Having every faction have the same units and guns to choose from really helps make balance easier. 40k is really set up to fail on balance.
Ash, that was awesome hearing both your thoughts on the subject. Never thought about the separation of mechanical vs emotional, and of course it turned on the light as to why I enjoy some games vs others and the skew it has on games
Question for the team - when designing a game, what do you look for that separates your game from others? is it a setting, is it a mechanic. Do people add a mechanic just for the sake of standing out and yet this leads to the game becoming difficult to play etc.
Cheers mate
A wrinkle that isn't often seen in fantasy or sci-fi games but is fairly common in (some) historical are deliberately unbalanced scenarios. For example, one side gets 2x the points of the opponent, but must attack a well-defended position. Or the defender only has to hold out a certain number of turns. So sometimes the scenario is "balanced" by an advantage that they figure is worth a certain point amount (like the fortified positions) and sometimes its "balanced" by a change in the win conditions.
The intent in these is almost never a competitive, tournament-style game but one where the emotional balance is intact. (Which to my mind requires some degree of mechanical balance - nothing near perfection, but at least getting close.)
I so excited for what I've been working on. I drank this up.
Really enjoyed this and can't wait to hear from the other Blaster-ers! Hopefully followed by a chat with Owen where he gets a right of reply 🤣
Awesome, awesome chat boys, keep em coming
Your point about how long a unit stays in the game being the real measure of its worth is my takeaway from this talk. Definitely a lesson to keep front and centre when I get around to deciding how (or if!) points will work in my current game project.
Any time Battlefield presence determines outcome (so any game where being present near X earns VPs) then it’s a really good starting point for value. You can shift based on its negative presence (ability to remove the enemy) but I’d start my value assessment there.
@@GuerrillaMiniatureGames Good advice! Thank you!
I'm really digging the game design series. Here I thought that a Selfless warband with crossbows and bows was the Last Days killer ;)
"The most wonderful thing about Tigger, is that Tigger's a wonderful thing!"
Loving this series thank you Ash and Joe
These game design videos are absolutely helpful!! It gives me perspective as to what I want to convey to the players and what should be achieved when playing games as I make my own wargame. Thank you Ash!!
I feel like Patrick Todoroff (Zona Alfa) would be a good fit for the blaster crew.
These have been fun
Prefect balance is never needed. but here are some REAL Balance Issues:
1)Too many games focus on the makers "pet armies" and if you play those you WIN.
2) Winning should also never "require" that your opponent does not roll higher than 2 and you lower than a 5 for an extended amount of time.
3) It is bad when you field an army that can't beat your opponents but completely ridiculous when your FACTION has no chance.
Those are the balance issues I have a problem with. Winning or losing is part of the game but you should be required to play the game to tell who will win. (I could Rant about this for awhile but these are the main problems I can think about right now)
"What is the difference between a miniatures game and a board game? Is HeroScape a board game? is Kingdom death monster a miniatures game? do you have to move across a table with a ruler? or are the defining characteristics something more abstract." Is a question i think about a lot and would like some perspective on. I honestly would rather hear more nuts and bolts type topics in the short term though.
Oh, Ash. Admit I sparked this! 😂
I love these talks! I guess a question I have would be, is writing supplements (that no one cares about) to existing games worth while, or should time be spent more on original endeavours? And if someone were to write a game, what do they do with it (other than play it themselves/with friends). Do bigger companies accept submissions from random people?
Pts are for allowing people to pit their minis against eachother in fun games. If a dagger wizard is always (not just during high tide or in a forest) equal to or better than a staff wizard then you incentivise everyone to use the same wizard and you make the game a little less fun for staff wizard players that are unaware of the option. That's why even upgrades of little worth needs to cost something, as long as the cost isn't way off the staff player can have fun with his extra boys and the dagger player can enjoy his toys.
When balancing a game whether units can get a 5, 10, 25, 50 or 100% return on investment per turn is super relevant, if you don't balance for this factor one player will be wiped out. In 40k a multi-melta does on average 20 times the damage a boltgun does against a Rhino transport vehicle, that absolutely has to be accounted for.
But what if the enemy has no Rhinos and only us 1 Wound Orks? Is the Melta weapon worth the same points then?
Ash, are you going to do a let's play on Oathmark?
Of course!
Very interested in this. I am making scenarios for RoSD and working out the balance of scenarios is difficult without there being a guidance system like RPGs have.
I as a player, want to play a balanced game, because that's fair right?
Fair and ideal right?
However, there is evidence to support the notion that players both don't actually want to play a balanced game i.e. finding way to push the limits of balance up to and including cheating. It happens. Also playing an unbalanced game can be fun, even if your loosing.
On top of that, life itself is unbalanced.
It's so unbalanced infact one could argue: "Where did we even get the idea that ANYTHING should be balanced, and fair?"
I am begining to think the only place we truly "need" balanced gameplay, is tournament play.
Guys i would love to see some kill team solo rules like rangers of shadowdeep with 40k minis. Im not good at doing this and it would be amazing if one of you guys could work this out. A lot of ppl would be happy to be able to play something like that ecpecially in pandemic lockdown.
I would pay for that
I’m already noodling on it :)
@@GuerrillaMiniatureGames youre amazing. This would make my lockdown so much more bareable. Thanks a lot :D
@@GuerrillaMiniatureGames how is it going ash? Are you making progress with the game? Im so so curious :)
Best wishes and good health
around 55:00, I love the part about a table/bestiary doesn't mean you need to collect exactly those models. I've seen so many posts of people having finally completed collections for that purpose and it always stuns me lol
well its an achievement and also its an excuse to finally justify buying a frost giant, or at least painting one. it also sometimes gives more purpose to painting. i might need this in frostgrave (even thought there is a less than 1% chance of getting a frostgiant when you play and in 50 games so far weve never had one), so i can push it up my queue and get excited about painting it. its the difference between having to and feeling accomplished becuase you wanted to. some of us wish there were more monsters.
@@Grendelnz For that reason I've thought about having a Tier system for homerule games. So you just see what Tier baddie is rolled and then select from the models you have. So say a Tier 3 could be four Tier 1 models or two Tier 2. Mostly because I painted a frost wyrm, a troll (or giant, who cares, honestly?) and a bunch of spiders, wolves, etc. but will never get the full bestiary done.
My no 1 gripe with gw games - absolutely excessive dice rolling. It is absolute work. Boooooooring. 10 dice. No more. I liked how bfg just uses a chart to cut this shit out
Bookmark only, please disreguard 30:00:00
Any thoughts on building/using apps to bolster the player experience and connection to the game world? Passed mere list builders that is. Loot and encounter generators, character and inventory management, NPC AI systems, etc.. Does anyone do this?
If I play a game that doesn't need a protractor to measure the angle of the staircase in order to calculate the square root of the hypotenuse then I know it's not a balanced game.
hmmm... can't balance a game if you can't balance the players?
All I hear over and over from game designers is "balance is impossible, balance is boring, we can't fully balance blah blah blah". We all know games have been balanced badly and we can do better. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is just not doing your job as a game designer. Balance may never be perfect, but then again a games lore, art design, tactile feel can never be perfect.
Who’s throwing out the baby? All we’re saying is manage your expectations when you pick a game. Some games are designed to strive for balance, some aren’t. It’s intentional design choice, not an abstention of responsibility.
I like that gender and race doesn't figure in the stats of characters in Frostgrave and Last Days, e.g. a thug is a thug regardless. I heard, only in passing (about d&d I think) there was a push against using Fantasy race classes with defined pros and cons, because perhaps they enforced or encouraged stereotyping for young people when coming away from gaming to the real world. Oathmark's decision of promoting for the old alliances around typical fantasy hatreds to be ignored, could be viewed as a progressive idea rather than just a way to open up more options for collectors and storytelling.
Do either of you feel that some games would be less accessible or fun if you took away classes, tropes, fantasy races and shouldn't the escapism of games set primarily in fictional worlds be free from political scrutiny?