$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 114.2

6,983 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
44% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Crisis» Forums » Variants

Subject: Variant: Increase randomness in companies rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jaime de Marcos
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
As the game is according to the rules, 42 companies out of 48 are available for purchase in the 7 rounds of the game and are placed according to the austerity plan card. That means that some Level II companies are not displayed.

In order to increase randomness and playability, the following variant might be used. This variant allows to randomly skip companies from Level I and III as well.

VARIANT: During setup, mix Level I, Level II, and Level III companies separately as stated in the rules, then randomly take 2 Level I companies, 2 Level II companies, and 2 Level III companies, and remove them from the game without looking at them.

This leaves a total of 42 companies in the three stacks. All of these companies will then be available during the course of the game.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morten K
Denmark
flag msg tools
mb
I have no idea why you would want more randomness in the game - personally I would like to have less in it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jaime de Marcos
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Tigrillo wrote:
I have no idea why you would want more randomness in the game - personally I would like to have less in it.


I love randomness and variability in games!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Case
England
Epsom
Surrey
flag msg tools
designer
https://www.facebook.com/amuse.ment.92
badge
mbmbmb
Tigrillo wrote:
I have no idea why you would want more randomness in the game - personally I would like to have less in it.


QFT

Each to their own but increased randomness results in absolute un-playability for me. I guess it comes down to whether you prefer to drive or be a passenger.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pantelis Bouboulis
Greece
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmb
In my opinion randomness is an inherent property of real life and thus any good game must include some kind of randomness. However, this shouldn't mess with the gameplay and the players should be able to plan ahead. So there must be some kind of balance. The absence of randomness means that there could be a pricise algorithm that could win the game at any time. But this is only my opinion.

Crisis was designed so that the random events do not determine the players' strategy. Nevertheless, the players must adjust their strategy to cope with those events (or exploit them), as it happens in real life as well. If we succeeded or not, it is for you to tell.

For example, the randomness proposed by Jaime is much "stronger" than what we intended. There are some Level III companies that are extremely powerfull (e.g., the freighters and some industries). You must purchase one of them if you want to win the game. If you remove the "chemical" freighters from the game, for example, then you reduce the winning chances of a player that has invested in chemicals.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Case
England
Epsom
Surrey
flag msg tools
designer
https://www.facebook.com/amuse.ment.92
badge
mbmbmb
I think there is a danger of us having three separate conversations here. So in the interests of drawing them together, the key phrase here is 'increased randomness'. I don't necessarily agree that a good game MUST have some sort of randomness, but most will inevitably hold an element of chance. However a game is primarily supposed to be fun and as such shouldn't be a die-hard mirror of real life if reality is a chore and joyless.

Different players like different things in games. If you love rolling dice, don't let me stop you, but when a game (like Crisis) has been designed and tested and demonstrated as a working finished product, its a bold and dare I say, arrogant statement, to say that the level of randomness needs to be increased in order to improve playability. A prefix of 'IMHO' goes a long way to soften a dictatorial pronouncement down to a personal belief or observation.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jaime de Marcos
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Big Bad Lex wrote:
I think there is a danger of us having three separate conversations here. So in the interests of drawing them together, the key phrase here is 'increased randomness'. I don't necessarily agree that a good game MUST have some sort of randomness, but most will inevitably hold an element of chance. However a game is primarily supposed to be fun and as such shouldn't be a die-hard mirror of real life if reality is a chore and joyless.

Different players like different things in games. If you love rolling dice, don't let me stop you, but when a game (like Crisis) has been designed and tested and demonstrated as a working finished product, its a bold and dare I say, arrogant statement, to say that the level of randomness needs to be increased in order to improve playability. A prefix of 'IMHO' goes a long way to soften a dictatorial pronouncement down to a personal belief or observation.


Remember that this forum is called "Variants". Feel free to ignore them if you don't like them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Case
England
Epsom
Surrey
flag msg tools
designer
https://www.facebook.com/amuse.ment.92
badge
mbmbmb
I'm not challenging the validity of your variant. What I'm at odds with is your unilateral statement that the increased randomness will absolutely improve playability. Thats where the IMHO comes in.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jaime de Marcos
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Big Bad Lex wrote:
I'm not challenging the validity of your variant. What I'm at odds with is your unilateral statement that the increased randomness will absolutely improve playability. Thats where the IMHO comes in.


If your concern is about the word "playability", I am happy to remove it from my post. I also pay attention to what the game designer mentioned in his post, so the variant should be reconsidered according to his arguments. For example, leaving all Level III companies in the game and applying variability only to the first two levels.

Again, this is just a fan-made variant and in no way it pretends to replace or "improve" upon the original design. That is what the Variants forums in BGG are for. Thanks for your comments and explanation.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pantelis Bouboulis
Greece
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmb
Guys, from our part, feel free to create your own variants. I am betting that some of them will be better than others. Jaime's example has some "flaws" (considering the arguments I give above) but it is certanly playable. Some might like it, others may not. Nevertheless, keep in mind that we designed the game in a specific manner, and the analogy between different companies is not random. We have planned it very carefully. In my opinion there is very little randomness in the game. Meaning that nothing random can destroy your game. (However there is a lot of variability).


Other simpler variants you might like:
1) You can remove the random events, if you don't like them.
2) You can create your own austerity plans (if you gain a lot of experience).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.