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.

Well the market has places for many different styles of game design.

Besides a game developer can turn an 80 pages rules into a dozen pages without loosing the essence of the game.

I'm going to be honest, I'm a hobby guy first and foremost. The rules, I don't care about. It feels harsh to say that considering someone has obviously put effort into writing them, but I'm really much more interested in having really cool looking figures. If the figures end up getting used in any games, it will probably be as Authorized Bounty Hunters and TAGs in Infinity or they will wind up being used in generic rulesets like Song of Blades and Heroes.

I would actually be perfectly happy if they just ignored the rules right now and focused on getting the minis produced. Back when they originally began teasing the line, I suggested producing a handful of figures to get yheir name out in the community first and then start pushing for the game. I still stand by that idea, too. That's what Shieldwolf ddid, it's what Dreamforge did, and it's what Minion Miniatures did. So, I think maybe just leave the rules out for now, focus on figures, and work on the rulebook later.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Well the market has places for many different styles of game design.

Besides a game developer can turn an 80 pages rules into a dozen pages without loosing the essence of the game.

I really think if they decide on a more concise presentation philosophy it'll help. Dropping the font size down to 12pt will help. Reducing oversized diagrams in size will help. It's very likely that it could get down to the 12-20 page range with effort. That said.. the essence of the game is still along the lines of Mordheim or as I mentioned a light rpg.. maybe World of Darkness type stuff. This is ignoring that they're not done adding things to the rules though.

I want to be clear, I don't think it's a failure. If your rules guy got that as the takeaway, I apologize entirely. I have no clue if the intended system is successful or fun or manageable. At no point did I mean to criticize that. It's why I pointed out that my review was more from an editorial standpoint. That's a very very important distinction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Barzam wrote:
I'm going to be honest, I'm a hobby guy first and foremost. The rules, I don't care about. It feels harsh to say that considering someone has obviously put effort into writing them, but I'm really much more interested in having really cool looking figures. If the figures end up getting used in any games, it will probably be as Authorized Bounty Hunters and TAGs in Infinity or they will wind up being used in generic rulesets like Song of Blades and Heroes.

I would actually be perfectly happy if they just ignored the rules right now and focused on getting the minis produced. Back when they originally began teasing the line, I suggested producing a handful of figures to get yheir name out in the community first and then start pushing for the game. I still stand by that idea, too. That's what Shieldwolf ddid, it's what Dreamforge did, and it's what Minion Miniatures did. So, I think maybe just leave the rules out for now, focus on figures, and work on the rulebook later.

I think that's a good idea if they're planning on going into production soon. Work on the rules quietly in the background with community input and playtesting and then do a new KS or product launch when the rules feel tight enough to launch as a published rulebook.
In my mind this is very cyberpunk/hard sci-fi and that's a genre I hold near and dear.. so if I can help I don't mind it.

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Well the market has places for many different styles of game design.

Besides a game developer can turn an 80 pages rules into a dozen pages without loosing the essence of the game.

I agree with both points, although I think the essence of a game should be distillable into 8 pages. Or less.
___

 Barzam wrote:
they will wind up being used in generic rulesets like Song of Blades and Heroes.

I would actually be perfectly happy if they just ignored the rules right now and focused on getting the minis produced. Back when they originally began teasing the line, I suggested producing a handful of figures to get yheir name out in the community first and then start pushing for the game. I still stand by that idea, too. That's what Shieldwolf ddid, it's what Dreamforge did, and it's what Minion Miniatures did.

The notion of licensing or partnering for generic rules is a good one, and I don't understand why more minis companies don't go that route. Someone has already done the heavy lifting in making a workable ruleset, so all that's left is to assign stats, which one would have to do anyways.

Dreamforge should also be looking at generic rules, as the game design thing has kind of been sitting in the background as a huge, expensive to-do. I'm not sure Mark's at Alpha for the DFG game. Sure, there's an IP thing, but what's the payoff compared to minis that just sell? DFG makes good stuff, and that counts for a lot.

There is a distinct difference in a company making miniatures and a company making miniatures intended for their own wargame, in the second case, the rules must be solidly established so the miniatures can depict what the wargame includes.

So I think in BR case the ruleset is important.

Now that I realize how close the launch day is I wonder if a delay would help.

JohnHwangDD - The generic rule thing is my ideal solution to a lot of these miniature ranges as well.. but they have each accumulated vocal fanbases that are rabid about how they want their own special snowflake of a ruleset.. I hate to be cynical but these vocal folks tend to be darling to smaller companies so they listen to them

@PsychoticStorm - If the KS goes 30 days, there is time to prepare and release streamlined "quickstart" rules for backer review during the campaign.

@MLaw - I agree about the snowflake rules for the choir, which often prevents broader adoption of the game itself!

 Barzam wrote:
I would actually be perfectly happy if they just ignored the rules right now and focused on getting the minis produced.

That is what we plan to do with out line to a degree. We'll be doing a line of miniatures to establish us more but still providing rules, they will just be free. That will allow community testing for those that want to and playability, while getting the miniatures out and letting others choose what to do with them.

 MLaw wrote:
Dropping the font size down to 12pt will help. Reducing oversized diagrams in size will help.

Oh if that is how many pages it is at a larger font and not even a dual column book, then it is much smaller than 80 pages. Most books are font 10, sometimes 11, 12 tends to be a bit too big and at least double columns is the better layout. That should definitely compress it down to a much smaller size.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The notion of licensing or partnering for generic rules is a good one, and I don't understand why more minis companies don't go that route. Someone has already done the heavy lifting in making a workable ruleset, so all that's left is to assign stats, which one would have to do anyway.

Although there are good rules and bad rules out there, I don't think settling on the quick and easier path is necessarily the right path. Although admittedly I would like the ruleset to be generic. That was one thing that made us go back and question each step, asking why did we decide X over Y for our rules that we're working on. For me I can admit the main reason is I haven't found a set of rules that I like 100%.

As the gaming community gets older, and their eyes get worse, 12-point should be the standard font size. 10-point gets to be something of a strain.

It's not a question of "quick and easier", it's a question of playable vs unnecessarily reinventing the wheel. That's what the overwhelming majority of rulesets do. Except they then decide to "improve" the wheel by mounting it off-center. Or adding bumps. Or changing the shape from a circle to a square. And then there's this ridiculous push for exotic d10s, just to be different. Newsflash: if the game engine is actually good, it works just fine with d6s and doesn't need d10s.

That isn't to say that your game is going to be bad. But a lot of these games are bad due to the addition of "features" to make their game more "special".

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's not a question of "quick and easier", it's a question of playable vs unnecessarily reinventing the wheel. That's what the overwhelming majority of rulesets do. Except they then decide to "improve" the wheel by mounting it off-center. Or adding bumps. Or changing the shape from a circle to a square. And then there's this ridiculous push for exotic d10s, just to be different. Newsflash: if the game engine is actually good, it works just fine with d6s and doesn't need d10s.

That isn't to say that your game is going to be bad. But a lot of these games are bad due to the addition of "features" to make their game more "special".

That is true, often times what one person may think is streamline adds other complications. I use D10s mainly because it is easier to adjust stat lines, at least for me. Although Personally I'd rather use D20 but they become bulky if you are going to roll more than 4 at a time.

Hey Guys. Sorry for not commenting but we spend whole night with Shane working on the rulebook. Shane will post his thoughts as well soon. All of your feedback is taken seriously and it's helping to shape this game to what we wanted it to be.

I want to ask you some questions from a graphic designer perspective.

Right now the rulebook is a 14x18,2 cm format (5,6 x 7,5 inch) using 8 point font size.

1. Would you rather get a standard A4 format rulebook? I could fit more on the page.

2. Are the examples are too big? Could I shrink them down to save room? It's a question for people who actually got the book, MLaw, what do you think?

3. What would you like to see considering graphic material? As many examples with graphic representaion? or just where it's really needed?

4. Any other stuff that you would like to see, let me know.

We'll post a thred in the dakka Game Design subforum as soon as I finish the new pdf.

From a designers standpoint, use standardized format it helps cut down costs a lot as it does not need custom tooling and does not create waste paper.

While it has been passed in the collective consciousness that small font type and serifs make the text more "adult or important" (in reality because it saves space and makes books cheaper) reality is 12 points type font and sans serif are ideal for reading especially as the age grows.

I do not understand 3, but if the question how many pictures for examples one should have the answer is as many as possible, pictures can save paragraphs of text, but they must be correctly constructed.

As for 4 I am not sure one can really comment without looking at a working draft of the rules.

Looking forward seen you in the Game Design subforum.

Honestly I wouldn't worry too much about graphic material until the rules are more in a finalized format. Once those are more concise, then it becomes easier to do. First you add graphics for diagrams for clarity and in places that the concept is harder to give without a visual representation. The rest of the graphics are really added to give ambiance to certain parts of the book. Then additional images depends on if you need something to fill space to move paragraphs around so spacing isn't weird.

For example if you are finishing a Chapter but the left page upper column stops at one paragraph. There is a lot of wasted space on the page. It is sometimes weird to start a new Chapter on that page, so it would be moved to the right page. Then you add graphics to places within the first Chapter so that eventually that 3/4 empty page is full. It doesn't mean just add a graphic to that page, but to other parts causing text to shift around to fill spaces. Does that make sense?

 ShockworkStudio_Michael wrote:
Right now the rulebook is a 14x18,2 cm format (5,6 x 7,5 inch) using 8 point font size.

1. Would you rather get a standard A4 format rulebook? I could fit more on the page.

2. Are the examples are too big? Could I shrink them down to save room? It's a question for people who actually got the book, MLaw, what do you think?

3. What would you like to see considering graphic material? As many examples with graphic representaion? or just where it's really needed?

4. Any other stuff that you would like to see, let me know.

We'll post a thred in the dakka Game Design subforum as soon as I finish the new pdf.

I do not like 8-point font, but I understand if you are doing an A5 format "free" rulebook. If this is the case, I'd still like to see a 9-point minimum font size for readability. Really, you should not go smaller than the text on a Magic : the Gathering card. That should be considered the absolute minimum font size for any game, and rules text should be at least a half point larger yet again, since you're not limited to a tiny box on a 2.5" x 3.5" playing card.

1. Standard A4 format books / pamphlets are ideal; however you should not look to fit more on the page. You should look to enlarge the standard font size to 12 points on 1.15 spacing so that people can more easily read it, with an 11 point minimum for notes and such. 2 column layout on most rules pages.

2. Examples should be large enough so that people can read and see what they are. If it needs to be a quarter page, make it so!

3. I'm not sure what this question asks.

4. I like to see overall organization of core rules / background / force selection so that each section stands on its own.

I look forward to that thread. Thanks in advance.

 ShockworkStudio_Michael wrote:
Hey Guys. Sorry for not commenting but we spend whole night with Shane working on the rulebook. Shane will post his thoughts as well soon. All of your feedback is taken seriously and it's helping to shape this game to what we wanted it to be.

I want to ask you some questions from a graphic designer perspective.

Right now the rulebook is a 14x18,2 cm format (5,6 x 7,5 inch) using 8 point font size.

1. Would you rather get a standard A4 format rulebook? I could fit more on the page.

2. Are the examples are too big? Could I shrink them down to save room? It's a question for people who actually got the book, MLaw, what do you think?

3. What would you like to see considering graphic material? As many examples with graphic representaion? or just where it's really needed?

4. Any other stuff that you would like to see, let me know.

We'll post a thred in the dakka Game Design subforum as soon as I finish the new pdf.

1. Was the copy I saw using 8 point because if so.. it's either that typeface or the resolution or something else.. the text was massive. This resulted in sections stretching over many pages making just reading about how to move a matter of flipping pages. Try to format in a way that the main idea for the mechanic the unit is based on are contained within a page or two if possible. Then if explanations or elaborations are required, that part can go past.

2. The graphic examples are in fact very large. Using detailed 3d renderings for the graphics and trying to preserve every detail in those is not serving the actual purpose of those images. Simplify what's in the graphics so you can reduce them without creating a visually busy graphic. The ideas they're explaining aren't always that complex and some of the graphics felt repetitive. Check the text and make sure you've simplified the concepts before applying graphics.

3. Well.. two things on this. IF you're going to have illustrations.. include the placeholders (usually just a big rectangle with an X and a bit of description about what the graphic will be). This helps you get the formatting without having to deal with the art side. Don't go overboard. If you've had a few pages without anything but text.. yeah.. break that up a little. If you have 4 images on a 2 page spread.. maybe look at what's really necessary for that section. I do graphic design work and illustration (for comics as well as miniature companies) and when you get there we can work something out if you need.. though it does look like you have staff that's capable of this already. As far as graphics for explaining complex materials.. On that, I think using vector graphics that are simplified versions of the actual models is the way to go. This means, clear printing but also.. people looking at a PDF can zoom in and out and the image should retain all of it's detail.

4. Organization is the big thing again. In my mind, start at the base level of explaining the simplest of mechanics.. Line of sight, movement, measuring. Then the unit card. The unit card will lead to discussion about stats. That's a good intro to the basics of combat and perhaps an opening for a tutorial session for a combat turn or something. This gets largely into the philosophy of how you guys want to present this.. and it's your baby just make sure that there is a flow to how everything is presented. Something as an artist and even as a writer that I do pretty often is look at what's out there. Reference other material for a sense of direction. Don't rip them off.. but learn from their approach and make decisions from an informed standpoint. Stabbing in the dark and hoping for a few brave souls (who .. I might be the only one who has read the rules..) to offer help.. that will only take you so far. Crack open some books from Gates of Antares, Gruntz, 40k, Infinity, Void (it's a free download from Scotia Grendel), Warmachine, etc. Look at who they format. How they use graphics. The ways they use tables and charts. There is usually a rhyme and reason.

Finally.. there was a lot of talk here about streamline, complex, rp or tabletop wargame, etc. I also have preferences but IMO, follow your vision. As an artist, one thing I've learned (through hard knocks no less) is that your audience/customer doesn't always know what they want. Very often they think they want one thing until you show them what you actually have. Remember that people's perception only exists based on what they know or expect. The call for a super compact ruleset might not be the vision or dream you guys have.. if it's not.. remember that it's your vision. Having said that, I would urge you to aim for elegance. IF it's not a fast play type game, then make sure it's elegant in concept, flow, design, and presentation so that people have as few barriers to play as possible.

 MLaw wrote:
Finally.. there was a lot of talk here about streamline, complex, rp or tabletop wargame, etc. I also have preferences but IMO, follow your vision. As an artist, one thing I've learned (through hard knocks no less) is that your audience/customer doesn't always know what they want. Very often they think they want one thing until you show them what you actually have. Remember that people's perception only exists based on what they know or expect. The call for a super compact ruleset might not be the vision or dream you guys have.. if it's not.. remember that it's your vision. Having said that, I would urge you to aim for elegance. IF it's not a fast play type game, then make sure it's elegant in concept, flow, design, and presentation so that people have as few barriers to play as possible.

The push for conciseness is coming from me, specifically, because I have noticed that conciseness tends to correlate pretty strongly with clarity and simplification, which makes it a lot easier for me to pick up and teach someone new. I have seen multiple games with nice minis that I passed or stopped playing because the rules and mechanics were too clunky. I have focused on simpler games that become a joy for the ease of setup and play.

If the true vision is for something grander, that is fine, but be sure that everything supports that vision. Usually, a big chunk can be culled so that the vision becomes clearer. There is a tendency for rules to bloat, because it is generally easier to add stuff than to make decisions over which items to keep. If there are two (or more!) similar things, just pick the "best" one and re-use it. It is very rare that one needs to distinguish something as fine-grained as .40 cal from 10mm in a gaming context. Heck, in most cases, one won't even have to distinguish a .22LR pistol from a Desert Eagle. If it's going to be big, then organization and presentation becomes even more important.

JohnHwangDD - Sorry if it came across as a criticism of your call for conciseness. My message to them was, if that fits in their vision.. great.. run with that. If not.. don't try to make it that.
I agree with what your saying for what it's worth. Infinity looks super cool to me but every time I try to read the rules for it my eyes roll back into my skull and I start drooling down my chin.

That's kind of why I said no matter what, strive for elegance. Something can be complex but if it's handled gracefully, it flows so smoothly that the complexity is diminished by how logically everything flows together.

I didn't take it as a criticism of any sort, no apology necessary. I just wanted everyone to be clear that this was just my single lone voice speaking for myself, rather than some formal representative of a larger movement. The extent to which they're looking for backers like me will determine the extent to which they incorporate my suggestions going forward. And as always, if they can communicate the rules in an elegant and graceful way, then that would be fantastic.

Hi everyone.
Thanks for being patient with us as we try to get feedback from everyone and give some true thought to things.
So far all the feedback even if a little negative has been really good for us. We’ve taken a little more time to look over how we’ve presented the project and is maybe we’ve tried to cram too much in all at once making the format a bit hard to understand as far as the rules are concerned as well as the KS itself.

We’ve decided with heavy heart to delay the Project for a little while we regroup and take all of this in. as of right now the KS has been reformatted and we are deciding on a final layout.
The book has been revamped with a lot of things removed or simply relocated to other aspects of the game. Really the feedback has helped us so much and we thank each and every one of you for it.
I’m positive the time we take will end with a better product. It was a real eye opener.

As a creator we tend to become so entwined in our creations we take it for granted that other will see and understand “our” vision (rules, designs etc.) Sometimes it’s better to introduce this vision in smaller, more comprehensible pieces instead of trying to pack 10lbs of in a 5 lbs bag…
Knowing this now we've made some very positive changes and I'm even happy with the direction.
Please if you have other thought or question we are here…

Hey Shane, sorry it came across as negative. It was always meant as constructive criticism... so please don't take it personally. The fact that people are putting energy into posting should show you guys that you're in a ball field people are looking to play on, you just gotta get your vision a bit more clear before we can do it

Looking forward to it!

Keep in mind Shane, that a lot of times gamers don't know what they want until you give it to them. Or rather, they think they want something too close to what they already have.

Here's something important to remember, and a point towards trying to keep things a little different:

40k, Infinity, Dark Age, etc... they all already exist and have existed for a long time. If you try to be like them, you won't be getting their audience, you'll just be something that isn't that game and why would anyone bother switching?

Sure, refine the rules for clarity and game flow, but try to keep what makes your game unique and you will find players if the quality is there otherwise. You already have miniatures that are of a good enough quality that you won't have trouble getting people to buy.

Yes other games have failed and they were different, but I look at them and see that most of them tried too hard to be just like the others in a big way.

Infinity, on the other hand, had abysmal rules translations and questionable early sculpts, but they've made it pretty big over time.

 MLaw wrote:
Hey Shane, sorry it came across as negative. It was always meant as constructive criticism... so please don't take it personally. The fact that people are putting energy into posting should show you guys that you're in a ball field people are looking to play on, you just gotta get your vision a bit more clear before we can do it

Looking forward to it!

None of it was personal. There was even input on design ideas and people going back and forth about gorilla arms on a Ulysses. Now i want to see what it'd look like even if it breaks the Design Style of the North American Union.
I was thinking a Character Mech maybe some gear head drug runner mech for higher from Sinaloa...
Which leads me to

 Vertrucio wrote:
Keep in mind Shane, that a lot of times gamers don't know what they want until you give it to them. Or rather, they think they want something too close to what they already have.

Here's something important to remember, and a point towards trying to keep things a little different:

40k, Infinity, Dark Age, etc... they all already exist and have existed for a long time. If you try to be like them, you won't be getting their audience, you'll just be something that isn't that game and why would anyone bother switching?

Sure, refine the rules for clarity and game flow, but try to keep what makes your game unique and you will find players if the quality is there otherwise. You already have miniatures that are of a good enough quality that you won't have trouble getting people to buy.

Yes other games have failed and they were different, but I look at them and see that most of them tried too hard to be just like the others in a big way.

Infinity, on the other hand, had abysmal rules translations and questionable early sculpts, but they've made it pretty big over time.

Thank you so very much for those words.
BlackRain: Alpha Strain is a very cool project. We didn't change anything from a design perspective. We just took a look at a better way to present it.
After the feedback Michal and Myself spent a few days (15+ hour) rewriting/editing the original Doc.
Michals also adding more picture examples of rules explanations we both feel this would really help the learning process as someone mentioned. [who?]

All the big game companies had to go through there birth pains too.

Heres the crazy part... I want to make the coolest games ever. I want you guys to all play them and I want it to be the footprint I leave. Thats why we brought it here in all of its bloody cyberpunk glory. You guys can help us make this game -

When is the launch date / time for this? Cheers

We'll have a new launch date soon.

It will be interesting to see how the feedback shaped the project.

I have to ask a few details, what is the vision of the project? what is the size? squad based, platoon based? , what do you think is the "eye catching" aspect of it?

As a general advice the following things are considered helpful for kickstarter projects, rules in a good but not necessarily complete state, physical models shots of prototypes (I see you added one of those with a ruler, nice), comparison shots with models of other ranges and a clean layout of the pledges and streachgoals that is clear on what each includes and a good introductory video that is short and points out the key points of why the project is awesome.

As a personal advice I would give the following, reevaluate your shipping, even consider a tiered shipping, big projects can offset expensive international shipping but even those have reverted to more practical shipping, plan a cut off point if the project becomes a runaway success, see what you can deliver and don't get tempted to add more, don't do ala cart, it may generate a few more pledges, but the logistics will cost more than you will gain, Zhendu A is problematic, too problematic, most will not see a cool dynamic pose they will see a model with just one small contact point and an easy to break model, if you do not want to change it, don't have it as a "poster boy" model, the renders are on non standard bases, if these are not the bases you intent to supply change them on the bases you intent to supply, if these are the bases you intent supplying there better be a good gameplay reason for the extra cost it will cost you over getting standard normal bases from a supplier, bigger pictures of the test prints and test sculpts, nothing says more "I am confident" than showing big pictures, a few more test casts would be nice to have too, don't be afraid to delay the project a couple of months.

I would also advice you to see a few vids and blogs about kickstarter, Dicetower has a series of videos centered around business from some designers and publishers than can give some impact,Jamey Stegmaier from Stonemaier games has extended articles and resources on crowdfunding which can be useful and the series of articles on beasts of war from shattered earth and how their preparation translated in reality can give valuable hindsight.

As always, if you want, come to the game design subforum for feedback on your game, which can be for more than just the rules.

ShockworkStudio_Shane - Thanks will definitely be backing when you decide to go live with it! Mostly just for a few cool minis

Looking forward to this Kickstarter! It would be better to focus on getting the miniatures out first and refining the ruleset later, since it's the miniatures that people want.

Rules are optional.

First post updated with Kickstarter launch date

 ShockworkStudio_Shane wrote:
First post updated with Kickstarter launch date

Cool. Will there be early birds? If so, what time will the KS go live?

March 16th! I'll be there