Switch Theme:

Wargame Design Discussion- Strategic Choice  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Battlefield Tourist




MN (Currently in WY)

Greetings designers,

Today I would like to discuss adding strategic choices into games. For definition purposes we are defining Strategic choices as choices made outside the game that impact a game. Tactical choices are decisions made internally to the game play.

For example, list building is strategic and made outside of the game. Campaign upgrades are also strategic. Tactical would be choosing which unit to shoot at with yours. Where unit X will deploy. I hope that helps illustrate the differences.

The more I interact with fellow gamers, the I feel strong strategic elements are critical to a games long term success. The more players can debate strategic choice outside of the game, the more engaged they will be in long term game play.

Thoughts on this hypothesis or strategic choices in general?

Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing 
   
Made in nz
Primus





Palmerston North

I have been thinking about trying out Oathmark, and the whole process of making your own Kingdom first seems very interesting to me.
   
Made in ca
Decrepit Dakkanaut





One of the interesting points about getting people to think about the game outside the game is making it a product. Something I recall from playing 40k (stopped summer of 2019? Near the end of 8th edition) was planning purchases which would help me make up for a shortfall in the traditional arms-race, and when I was ahead in that, options to let me field something different from the successful build that I was getting bored with.

There's also players thinking about how they would play the game differently the next time, but I've noticed wargames, particularly the GW variety, tend to be more of a spectator sport in that you bring your army, set them up, and see what happens. Partly I think that's because the plethora of strategic options overshadows any options for tactics, and being outplayed makes people feel dumb and bad (and being able to blame the dice is key here), so you have a constant cycle of fighting the last battle and trying to build that perfect deck/army/strategy for the next.
   
Made in si
Foxy Wildborne







Big fan, especially of various campaign leveling systems and the, sadly very rare, faction builders.

Posters on ignore list: 36

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in ca
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Hmm. Maybe Rogue-likes are a handy model for strategy, particularly across campaigns.
   
 
Forum Index » Game Design
Go to: