$18.00
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 106.6

6,644 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
41.9% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Way of the Fighter» Forums » General

Subject: Any reason to back? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Joe Nothin'
msg tools
I really love fighting games, and Battlecon is on my top 5 games of all times, so naturally I was very interested in this. The art is amazing and on first glance it looks really solid.

However, upon further inspection, the game looks somewhat shallow and lacking - the random draw means you have no idea what the other side is going to do, so the entire game seems very random and guess-y; the dice just add to the randomness and really don't add anything more. I also have reservations about how movement doesn't happen simultaneously but rather with the player having initiative going first and in the open - it seems like it would be a major disadvantage.

Other than the mechanical issues, 10 fighters for 80$ seems very steep. Battlecon already offers ~70 fighters (EDIT: I've looked at the prices - BAttlecon: Devastation costs ~50$ and offers 30 fighters, while Battlecon: war costs ~30$ and offers 18 more - so that's 48 fighters for the same price point. You can also get Battlecon: Fate, and soon Battlecon: Trails, and that's before we count the promo characters).

So, the only thing going for it, as far as I can tell, is the stunning art. Am I missing something?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Y.
United States
Huntington Beach
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
So let's see if I can help you here, you have a few mechanical concerns:

- Card Draw: this is definitely a reality with any card games (BattleCon being somewhat of an exception). It is addressed in different ways, you can choose your starting hand which guarantee a 1 to 3 turns with cards that you want. Also the game has been play-tested to death so each technique have the right amount of action type to be balanced. Finally the hand of 8 is fairly generous and the chance to draw are pretty numerous.

- Dice Randomness: this was a major concerns of mine when designing the game, contrary to what it may look like, I do not like too much randomness in my games. But I wanted dice, to replace what is in fighting game is player reflex and dexterity by risk and resources management. The priority range on action are from 1 to 8, with 5-6 being an average; dice goes from 1 to 3 and you play for up to 4 of them. With such a narrow range, dice create randomness BUT each dice added to a roll have real impact. In other words, when rolling dice you will most often get you the expected results.

- Hidden Movement / Initiative: I did not go the route of hidden movement for 2 reasons. In a fighting game, movement is never truly simultaneous, one player act the other react and I wanted to capture that feel with the Initiative. Finally BattleCon is 1 dimensional, in 2 dimensional arena hidden movement become extremely hard to predict and fighters keep missing each other.

About the price range, I am just the designer so I would rather not comment, but you should look at the component and you will see that the price is quite fair.

I hope that my comments are helpful.



4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Chandler
Arizona
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm personally backing as I'm a fighting game fan and this game introduces new mechanisms like hitboxes, crouching/jumping, and fireballs flying across the 2d plane. Much like Exceed, it's more of a 1 to 1 simulation of fighting games than something like BattleCON. I'm not saying Exceed/WotF are better games than BattleCON - they just have different takes on what they are all simulating. I personally enjoy those different takes.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Christensen
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
JoeNothin wrote:

Other than the mechanical issues, 10 fighters for 80$ seems very steep. Battlecon already offers ~70 fighters.


I'm not sure what you're comparing here. You just mention number of fighters for BattleCON but not price. So I'll address both things. BattleCON has been around for a lot longer then WotF (WotF hasn't been around at all) so it would have more fighters. Additionally 70 fighters can be seen as a negative.

Comparing fighters to cost is always going to look favorable for BattleCON because in BattleCON a fighter is 7 cards (with some exceptions) and one piece of unique art. Wotf characters have 46 cards each with 8 unique pieces of art.

I have some reservations about the game play myself so can't help you there. But I will probably be playing the PnP some time next week.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Nothin'
msg tools
the_yoshi wrote:
So let's see if I can help you here, you have a few mechanical concerns:

- Card Draw: this is definitely a reality with any card games (BattleCon being somewhat of an exception). It is addressed in different ways, you can choose your starting hand which guarantee a 1 to 3 turns with cards that you want. Also the game has been play-tested to death so each technique have the right amount of action type to be balanced. Finally the hand of 8 is fairly generous and the chance to draw are pretty numerous.

- Dice Randomness: this was a major concerns of mine when designing the game, contrary to what it may look like, I do not like too much randomness in my games. But I wanted dice, to replace what is in fighting game is player reflex and dexterity by risk and resources management. The priority range on action are from 1 to 8, with 5-6 being an average; dice goes from 1 to 3 and you play for up to 4 of them. With such a narrow range, dice create randomness BUT each dice added to a roll have real impact. In other words, when rolling dice you will most often get you the expected results.

- Hidden Movement / Initiative: I did not go the route of hidden movement for 2 reasons. In a fighting game, movement is never truly simultaneous, one player act the other react and I wanted to capture that feel with the Initiative. Finally BattleCon is 1 dimensional, in 2 dimensional arena hidden movement become extremely hard to predict and fighters keep missing each other.

About the price range, I am just the designer so I would rather not comment, but you should look at the component and you will see that the price is quite fair.

I hope that my comments are helpful.


Thanks for the reply!

About the draw - I understand you've tried to fix the inherent randomness that comes with drawing cards, but why does the game need to have cards drawn from a deck at all? It just doesn't fit the theme, or the game-play, of fighting games; if I learn a combo with Ryu, I can always do it - I don't need to wait to draw it from the deck, and it doesn't go away after I use it. I just feel that the "draw cards from a deck" mechanic doesn't fit the game-style.

Why not, for instance, use an action selection mechanic, like in Mission: Red Planet? You could have all of your abilities and combos ready in hand, and then burn them until you use a card that lets you pick them all up? I'm sure there are many other mechanics that would fit much better with the style of the game, and won't force you to relay on random draws.

About the dice - I understand what you wanted to do, but I'm just not sure what they add, other than a second layer of randomness; why is it good for me, as a player, to be able to predict my opponent completely, out-wit him, and than just fail due to a bad roll? In one of the videos on the KS, the red player rolls a 1+1 and the blue rolls a 3+3; an extra die wouldn't have changed anything for the red player, and everything else he did in that round was negated - the movement, the card choice. I just don't feel this adds anything good to the game.

About the movement and the initiative - that sounds good, actually, and does mimic how both players react to one another. After you explained it, I think this is indeed a good mechanic that adds more information to the decisions and to the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Nothin'
msg tools
ClanNatioy wrote:
JoeNothin wrote:

Other than the mechanical issues, 10 fighters for 80$ seems very steep. Battlecon already offers ~70 fighters.


I'm not sure what you're comparing here. You just mention number of fighters for BattleCON but not price. So I'll address both things. BattleCON has been around for a lot longer then WotF (WotF hasn't been around at all) so it would have more fighters. Additionally 70 fighters can be seen as a negative.

Comparing fighters to cost is always going to look favorable for BattleCON because in BattleCON a fighter is 7 cards (with some exceptions) and one piece of unique art. Wotf characters have 46 cards each with 8 unique pieces of art.

I have some reservations about the game play myself so can't help you there. But I will probably be playing the PnP some time next week.


Yes, you are correct. I should update the OP; I've taken a look, and you can buy devastation for ~50$ and war for ~30; dev has 30 fighters and war has 18, so that's 48 fighters, almost 5X for the same price.

I agree that it's easier for Battlecon to offer more fighters due to each fighter requiring less material, but that's a point in favor of battlecon - it does more with less. It's a good thing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joshua Christensen
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
JoeNothin wrote:

I agree that it's easier for Battlecon to offer more fighters due to each fighter requiring less material, but that's a point in favor of battlecon - it does more with less. It's a good thing.


The point still stands that more components are going to cost more money. If WotF sold one complete fighter for $10 and BattleCON sold a 3 pack of fighters for $10 it wouldn't make sense to get upset with WotF because their offering is still more stuff.

And even though each BattleCON fighter is only 7+ cards they still could have given them 7+ pieces of unique art but they didn't because they wanted to make their product cost them and us less. I'm sure WotF could have had one piece of art for each Fighter and made their game less money but they went the other way and gave us 8 pieces of art for each character.

You are also quoting online discounter prices for the BattleCON games. Devastation costs $75, War costs $50, and Fate costs $30. Comparing deep discount prices to retail prices is always going to look good for the discounted game.

I'm not sure how I feel about this aspect of the game but WotF technically has more then 5 fighters to a set because of the whole Technique Pack switching aspect of the game. Ren essentially becomes a different character and should provide a different experience if you give him two different Chi packs then the ones he starts with or 1 different Chi and 1 different Hard. Or any combination of that.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Y.
United States
Huntington Beach
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
JoeNothin wrote:

About the draw - I understand you've tried to fix the inherent randomness that comes with drawing cards, but why does the game need to have cards drawn from a deck at all? It just doesn't fit the theme, or the game-play, of fighting games; if I learn a combo with Ryu, I can always do it - I don't need to wait to draw it from the deck, and it doesn't go away after I use it. I just feel that the "draw cards from a deck" mechanic doesn't fit the game-style.

Why not, for instance, use an action selection mechanic, like in Mission: Red Planet? You could have all of your abilities and combos ready in hand, and then burn them until you use a card that lets you pick them all up? I'm sure there are many other mechanics that would fit much better with the style of the game, and won't force you to relay on random draws.

I completely understand where you are coming from. At the very beginning the game was like this, but the plethora of choices create analysis paralysis and was making the game a lot longer and more cerebral. Having card drawn make for more instinctive and introduce different element like hand management and adapting to situations

JoeNothin wrote:

About the dice - I understand what you wanted to do, but I'm just not sure what they add, other than a second layer of randomness; why is it good for me, as a player, to be able to predict my opponent completely, out-wit him, and than just fail due to a bad roll? In one of the videos on the KS, the red player rolls a 1+1 and the blue rolls a 3+3; an extra die wouldn't have changed anything for the red player, and everything else he did in that round was negated - the movement, the card choice. I just don't feel this adds anything good to the game.

They add a lot of excitement and tactical play to the game, as you need to play with probability, but it need to be played right. The player on the video did not play optimally, playing a priority 1 action with a single die, is a tactical mistake as the chance of succeeding a close to nill. The randomness range is very narrow and a single dice can make a lot of difference, similarly using a power dice instead of core dice make a huge impact.

Playing dice involve this type of basic decision:
- Playing a low priority actions with a lot of dice, possibly power dice to compensate.
- Playing a low priority actions with a a few dice, if your opponent his dice starved (good player should not be dice starved, but it can happen)
- Playing high priority actions with less dice to save dice.
- Playing high priority actions with a lot of dice to ensure that your actions will succeed
- Playing any actions with 1-2 dice to be able to chain a combo. But you can play more dice, if you actions have the Chain ability.

JoeNothin wrote:

About the movement and the initiative - that sounds good, actually, and does mimic how both players react to one another. After you explained it, I think this is indeed a good mechanic that adds more information to the decisions and to the game.

Thanks.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Nothin'
msg tools
the_yoshi wrote:
JoeNothin wrote:

About the draw - I understand you've tried to fix the inherent randomness that comes with drawing cards, but why does the game need to have cards drawn from a deck at all? It just doesn't fit the theme, or the game-play, of fighting games; if I learn a combo with Ryu, I can always do it - I don't need to wait to draw it from the deck, and it doesn't go away after I use it. I just feel that the "draw cards from a deck" mechanic doesn't fit the game-style.

Why not, for instance, use an action selection mechanic, like in Mission: Red Planet? You could have all of your abilities and combos ready in hand, and then burn them until you use a card that lets you pick them all up? I'm sure there are many other mechanics that would fit much better with the style of the game, and won't force you to relay on random draws.

I completely understand where you are coming from. At the very beginning the game was like this, but the plethora of choices create analysis paralysis and was making the game a lot longer and more cerebral. Having card drawn make for more instinctive and introduce different element like hand management and adapting to situations

JoeNothin wrote:

About the dice - I understand what you wanted to do, but I'm just not sure what they add, other than a second layer of randomness; why is it good for me, as a player, to be able to predict my opponent completely, out-wit him, and than just fail due to a bad roll? In one of the videos on the KS, the red player rolls a 1+1 and the blue rolls a 3+3; an extra die wouldn't have changed anything for the red player, and everything else he did in that round was negated - the movement, the card choice. I just don't feel this adds anything good to the game.

They add a lot of excitement and tactical play to the game, as you need to play with probability, but it need to be played right. The player on the video did not play optimally, playing a priority 1 action with a single die, is a tactical mistake as the chance of succeeding a close to nill. The randomness range is very narrow and a single dice can make a lot of difference, similarly using a power dice instead of core dice make a huge impact.

Playing dice involve this type of basic decision:
- Playing a low priority actions with a lot of dice, possibly power dice to compensate.
- Playing a low priority actions with a a few dice, if your opponent his dice starved (good player should not be dice starved, but it can happen)
- Playing high priority actions with less dice to save dice.
- Playing high priority actions with a lot of dice to ensure that your actions will succeed
- Playing any actions with 1-2 dice to be able to chain a combo. But you can play more dice, if you actions have the Chain ability.

JoeNothin wrote:

About the movement and the initiative - that sounds good, actually, and does mimic how both players react to one another. After you explained it, I think this is indeed a good mechanic that adds more information to the decisions and to the game.

Thanks.



I understand your reasoning. Thank you very much for your time and insight.

I've posted about the KS in my local FB board game group, and recommended it to our resident Yomi players. They have been very enthusiastic, and I am also reconsidering - I might pledge before the KS is over.

Again, thank you for your time.
3 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Y.
United States
Huntington Beach
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
Thank you for the conversation. It is my first game, so I am on the edge of my seat, not easy to have its baby out in the open like that
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Riccardo Fabris
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I own Yomi and EXCEED and thought about backing this when I saw the kickstarter but I find there are a few issues, mostly concerning the dice. I understand that they were introduced to model reflexes and dexterity, but the problem I have with that is that there is no meaningful way to improve your reflexes and dexterity in this game, because it is, in the end, random luck if you roll high or low: there's no way to improve on that. In a fighting game it is possible to train yourself to react in the appropriate way (so, for example, you can train yourself to either continue a combo or stop if you notice that your strike was blocked).

The dice in this game seem to have too much post-decision randomness: you only roll once you have selected the number of dice for a particular move, and since you don't know what either your opponent has picked in terms of attack or the number of dice he selected (you only know the total number of dice he has available). This adds three layers of randomness to the game: you don't know what your opponent has played in terms of cards and you aren't sure what he's picked in terms of dice, and you aren't sure what you are going to roll.

With the dice rolls, you are basically playing the probabilities, with but with so relatively few dice rolls in the game (considering that the possible maximum is gonna be 47 dice rolls if you are the first player, and 48 dice rolls if you are the second player, and really this is the best case scenario of you having 4 dice for every dice rolls, so really you are looking from 20 to 30 opposed dice rolls per game), every single dice rolls has too much of an impact in how the game turns out. It's within the realms of probability that your die rolls for the entire game will be crappy.

I'm not sure if it wouldn't just be possible to just replace the dice with resource tokens that either give you +2 on priority or +3 for a power resource. This would still allow for quite a lot of upsets, and would still need to take in regard the elements of risk and resource management. To me, wondering how many resource tokens your opponent has used and what card is played create enough decision randomness already.

I guess that there is the raw appeal of rolling dice, and if that is something that is required in the design, then maybe pre-rolling the dice could be a viable alternative: the issue I'm having mostly is that the post-decision randomness doesn't seem to materially add to the game apart from creating situations in which, after selecting the right option to go against your opponent, you end up losing anyway because he rolled well and you rolled poorly.

The other reason to include dice might be to allow newbies to be on comparable level to a more experienced player. I think this is not necessarily a bad thing if you want to encourage players, so if that's the ideal, then fair enough.

The other issue I have is the ability to be hit out of block. I think overall reinforces attacking as one of the premier actions within the game. Looking at the videos, I could see that blocks tended to have the same priority as the faster attacks in the game, which means that resolution in those situations would be in the hands of the dice.

It wasn't clear from the rules if you got hit out of a block, if you burned out all the dice on it as well? If you do, it would make low-dice blocking kind of useless, since not only you are likely to be hit out of it, but if you do manage to perform it in time, the dice that you are hoping to save will likely be burned out by the attack itself.

Also, the ability to out-speed a block leads to situations where grabs are either weaker, or redundant. If you can get the same value out of playing a high priority attack vs a low priority throw, the attack will always be safer. If you are intending to make attacks be countered by blocks, and blocks countered by grabs, the balance seems to be distorted if you allow attacks to beat blocks AND grabs, because the safest possible option will always to play something that beats anything else in priority.

Ideally you want to use grabs to pressure your opponent when he's low on options, but in this game, block is not something that you do when you are low on resources: if you have a low number of dice, you don't want to waste them on a block that might get out-prioritized and if it even does get through, will prevent less damage.

The best option when blocking seems to be when you have a minimum of 4 dice, to make it 'worth it' and hope that some of the dice don't get burned out.

On the hand, I think that some of the innovations included in this game are pretty sweet: I like the hit matrix and how jumping is included as a mechanism (and I can see that there is even a design space for mixups/crossovers included in the game), which I think is missing from many other fighting games. I generally like resource management as well and I prefer two-tiered resources systems, so both Way of the Fighter and EXCEED allow for a better representation of position and meter than Yomi and BattleCON, IMO.

It's going to be mostly for the reasons above that I personally wouldn't back the project. I do enjoy fighting games overall, but at least to me, EXCEED is simple and fast-playing enough to make it a better proposition, and it hits that sweet spot of randomness that makes it accessible to new players, without taking too much control out of the player's hands.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Johnson

Athens
Ohio
msg tools
mbmbmb
Interesting thoughts by Riccardo above. I'm wondering if the designer is going to respond to some of the concerns mentioned?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Y.
United States
Huntington Beach
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
I have been thinking about how to answer Riccardo for a while, but breaking down his expose would be argumentative and counter-productive. Notice that I have already answered some of his concerns about the dice earlier on thread. Overall, the basic premise is the issue, it assumes that players would tend to throw the maximum of dice (4) whenever possible, and it simply not the case.

You get 2 core dice per turn (you can get 1 more if you crouch), which means that each time your use 3 or 4 dice, you spend more dice than you can recover (baring special abilities), so most player will spend about 2-3 dice. This is obviously an over simplification because many ability can aid or impair that dice flow.

Also there is a lot more that 48 dice rolls (12x4), combo can create many more roll and keyword like Chain have a multiplying effect.

At then end, the rule by themselves are not enough to understand the full complexity of the game, even the PnP only show 4 out of 10 characters.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Johnson

Athens
Ohio
msg tools
mbmbmb
Thanks for the response!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Riccardo Fabris
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
the_yoshi wrote:
I have been thinking about how to answer Riccardo for a while, but breaking down his expose would be argumentative and counter-productive. Notice that I have already answered some of his concerns about the dice earlier on thread. Overall, the basic premise is the issue, it assumes that players would tend to throw the maximum of dice (4) whenever possible, and it simply not the case.

You get 2 core dice per turn (you can get 1 more if you crouch), which means that each time your use 3 or 4 dice, you spend more dice than you can recover (baring special abilities), so most player will spend about 2-3 dice. This is obviously an over simplification because many ability can aid or impair that dice flow.

Also there is a lot more that 48 dice rolls (12x4), combo can create many more roll and keyword like Chain have a multiplying effect.

At then end, the rule by themselves are not enough to understand the full complexity of the game, even the PnP only show 4 out of 10 characters.

I wasn't trying to be argumentative, so I apologise if it sounded like that.

What I meant by the maximum of 48 dice is that those are the only dice that are actually opposed by your opponent's dice. That's the maximum number of dice that are possible to be used in direct comparison to the ones being thrown by your opponent.

I do point out that 48 is just the maximum number of opposed dice-rolls, but you are likely to roll no more than 20-30 (depending on how the game goes), which is the average. This is still a relatively low number of dice considering how impactful they are. As well as that, lower number of dice have much lower probability curves.

This is why I omitted mentioning the dice that are brought back using the Chain keyword or dice-rolls made due to combos: they aren't rolled in opposition of your opponent.

I do grant you that I've only done my analysis based on the PnP characters/rules, so it might not be representative of the entire game. If you do think that I'm unfairly judging the game based on incomplete knowledge, let me know and I'll edit out my two posts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Benjamin Y.
United States
Huntington Beach
California
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmb
Hi Riccardo, you are correct but combo rolls are indirectly related to the opposed roll as running high would making any combo more difficult.

The lower value and the somewhat low number of rolls are here to find the sweet spot between randomness, dice management and probabilities. Also dice are not the only factor in the game, you can win by bluffing or spacing yourself tactically.

Like many card heavy games, it is hard to judge WotF just based on what you read without playing it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron White
Australia
Bathurst
New South Wales
flag msg tools
Bennett from Brawl
badge
Slow and Thoughtful
mbmbmbmbmb
I really want to back this game, but I am broke. Technically I do not need it, as I own lots of tabletop fighting games. But I really like the ideas it presents and that it feels new. Plus the character designs have grown on me, at first I only saw other characters but now they click and are nice.
I have backed for a dollar, maybe later on I will have money and can do it through the pledge manager.
 
 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.