Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm having a think about how best to design the different factions for my game, and want to start off on the right foot for giving balance to the game, but also for keeping it interesting.

My thought is to create a list of playstyles I would like to see in the game (EG fast, horde, elite, tough etc.) and then create each of the factions with two of these in mind - one faction for each pairing. This would let each faction be built in a minimum of 2 ways (more if the game is versatile enough and players imagination isn't stifled) which is my favourite thing about my Orks in 40k (I can make damn near any type of army I want, and that's great!). This should give each faction a depth of play which I want in my game, I don't want a faction where they are efficient killing machines and that is all. I like the idea of each faction having options that are all equal but different.

How do people usually go about designing fair asymmetrical gameplay? Factions in a wargame is one example, but if you were making a shadow of the colossus game with one player being the colossus and the other the attacker, or with multiple factions you can choose from with their own bonuses and foibles.

know one aspect is to balance by points, but that's not always the best way to do it.

One which was badly done - Dystopian Wars. They brought out the original factions, which were reasonably balanced, and then brought out new factions which were clearly more powerful. I had Kingdom of Brittania, and they used torpedoes. Due to how powerful torpedoes could be, everything got really good torpedo defence in wave 2, so brittania became almost impossible to achieve anything with as their main guns were meh. some ships only had torpedoes, and weak ones at that because they were on small ships.

Might be an idea to figuring out how to achieve these things with basic, universal game-play, and then give the factions incentives for playing a particular way.

First you need combined arms forces..... I.e. shooters, fighters, movers, blockers, etc.

As much as people do not like 40K, is any army really focused on 1 "type"? No. They all have a combined arms approach where they have a specialization or use. I could make a mobile elite ork army, a horde SM army, and a shooty Tyranid army if I wanted.

Balance then comes not from units and armies, but by creating scenarios and objectives that promote the style of play that I want the game to have.