Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
23 Posts

Duel of Ages II» Forums » Variants

Subject: Creating a pace more like DoA I rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
After quite some time with DoA II, I've found that it's changed from DoA I in some ways that aren't quite as much my cup of tea. Specifically, there's a lot more carnage in DoA II from a few specific changes:

* Entry - rather than 2 by 2, forces come on quite a bit faster. Which causes a lot of combat right from the start.
* Character count - DoA I recommend 8-10 characters for 4 platters. DoA II recommends 12. More density results in more combat.
* Starting equipment - DoA II gives out quite a bit more starting equipment than DoA I, resulting in more ranged attacks early.
* Alt labyrinths - DoA I's alts didn't give cards (well, Ruins of Cany could as a side effect). DoA II's alts do on success, leading to more equipment and thus, again, more combat cards.

None of these things are inherently good or bad, but it's a definite shift from DoA I and it has shifted the game balance/focus away from maneuver centric game I liked in DoA I. DoA II is superior in many ways though, both in production and mechanics, so I want to use it rather than go back to DoA I.

So, my question is, what recommendations do folks have to shift things back towards the style of game I liked so much in DoA I?

* Character count is simple, I can just use the 9 I used to use rather than 12.
* The entry system is slightly trickier. I can go back to 2 by 2, but I'd probably want to keep the respect based entry ordering in place. Though I did like in DoA I thinking about who I wanted to enter first/last, trying to get the "right" pairs of people out each turn.
* Alts giving more equipment - not sure how to deal with this. There are variants for DoA I style alts I could use.
* Starting equipment - I'm at a complete loss on how to change this as starting cards is a significant part of character value. I could do something like only get 1/2 of them until they've hit an adventure or the HQ...

Note, I'm not here to debate/advocate for DoA I vs. DoA II on any area, so if you love DoA II the way it stands, that's great . I'm looking to crowd source some advice on tweaking my home games of DoA II towards a game that basically featured a bit less combat.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Bordelon
Canada
Mississauga
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
doa 2 seems to give a reasonable amount of items, at the start, when many encounters have not been flipped. it means, 1 character out of 3 can get something useful within 3 turns, doing logistics to carry items to one another.
After that, it seems there are still more cards to draw. Maybe you could convert 2 cards into a +1 experience point?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:

* Starting equipment - I'm at a complete loss on how to change this as starting cards is a significant part of character value.

David came up with a pretty cool idea in another thread of favoring low starting card characters in your initial selection. My first cut at that would be to separate out the characters by number of starting cards and dishing out a much heavier distrubition of low starting card characters. David did this breakdown:

104 characters with no starting equipment;
49 characters with 1 item;
39 characters with 2+ items;

So, rather than ~55% of your team being 0-card characters, you start with 66% of them. Off the top of my head, doing something like this for a "12 pick 8"

8 0 card
2 1 card
2 2+ cards

So, you'd cycle through low starting card characters more often relatively speaking, but you'd still use the higher starting card characters and you'd have NO adjustments required to the characters themselves.

I really like this idea (thanks again to David).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Bordelon
Canada
Mississauga
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
the survivalist starts with many cards but is very weak. i do not see the point of starting char. with lots or few cards. they seem all balanced.
to have less combat is not easy to solve.
maybe more domes, like minimum 2 of each color, would spread the character entry.
maybe no hit allowed as long as all char. are not yet in play.
maybe on the first 5 turns, it is forbidden to get weapon cards?
maybe allow only max. 1 range weapon per team per elapsed 5 turns, that is at turn #9 each team can have max. 1 range weapon.
maybe remove the Combat achievement altogether.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
Well, some 2.5 years later and a number of DOA 2 games played, my feelings on this haven't changed. Rather than start another thread, I figured I'd just update this one. As before, if you're someone that feels DOA 2 strikes the perfect balance, then at the risk of stating the obvious, you're not the audience for this post whistle

It saddens me to say so, but I just don't enjoy DOA 2 nearly as much. I kept hoping it was a matter of getting used to the changes, but it's deeper than that. Some of the changes, while appearing subtle, had some pretty dramatic changes to game play, resulting in a game that isn't as fun for me to play.

The tl;dr summary of what I enjoyed more with DOA 1 vs DOA 2:
1) Faster to play
2) Less overwhelming (primarily due to less equipment)
3) Less things to forget (ongoing status effects)
4) Less combat, particularly in the early game

1) Faster to play: It'd take me about 3.5-4.5 hours to play a 4 platter, 9 character game in DOA 1. DOA 2 takes 5-6 hours. I've tried the game with multiple people and it's a consistent increase in game time. The biggest contributor by far is the increased amount of cards in players hands and the time it takes to absorb what the equipment can do and plan for how to use it.

2) Less Overwhelming: DOA 2 pared down the rules by replacing the DOA 1 alternative labyrinths, that had unique rules, with the new alternate labyrinths. However, it's not the rules that seem to overwhelm people. The changes to the labyrinths might have reduced the word count on the rules, but it ramped up the mental complexity. The biggest culprit again, by far, is the increase in equipment.
- Starting cards: DOA 1 had maybe a dozen characters that started with cards, where as nearly half do in DOA 2 and they frequently start with multiple cards. DOA 2 quite literally has about 7-10x the amount of starting equipment.
- DOA 1: The alts had static challenges (not random guardians, but known challenges like bases) and didn't pay out cards. The reward for passing them was winning the alt, plus each has a special value if you dominated the alt (like a new character). The DOA 2 alts seemed like a subtle change, but the increase in equipment doled out by the DOA 2 alts adds mental complexity and increased the combat firepower in the game.
- Personally, I also really liked that the DOA 1 alts had static challenges, I thought that provided a nice game play and strategic difference in how and why you'd use the alt.

Each person I've exposed to DOA 2 has noted that managing all the equipment cards was daunting. I never heard that complaint in DOA 1, partly due fewer cards and partly because the cards come into play more slowly.

3) Less Things to Forget: DOA 1 had almost nothing to keep track of in the way of ongoing effects, while DOA 2 has made ongoing effects a core part of the redesign. This means a lot more to keep track of...or forget. This goes hand in hand with the "Less Overwhelming" as well.
- The labyrinth bonuses: DOA 1 didn't have any ongoing effects from labyrinths. We've forgotten these at least once in every single DOA 2 game I've played. By mid-game you've got a few of these to remember. And to make it even harder, they can come and go as labyrinths challenges get passed so you have to recheck them frequently. If it was a 1-time change, it'd be more manageable (I have a variant idea on this below). Personally, the current bonuses bother me as they create/exacerbate a "rich get richer" problem. Winning the labyrinth and getting cards was already pretty damn good...now it makes your characters even stronger.
- Base status effects: We've forgotten these several times. DOA 1 just had 1 ongoing effect from the HQ being destroyed.
- XP markers: These are cool additions, but it's another status effect. At least this one is right on the character being affected. I wonder whether a "burn it and get one-time +2 on a roll/move" might have been better.
- The Lith tribute "who can challenge the caves" status. Brett actually changed this rule recently because people would forget it. I found that somewhat amusing since it was the least fiddly of the ongoing status effects in DOA 2. The visual reminder of who owned Lith was right there, literally an inch from the challenge being done .
- Equipment: again, DOA 2 gives out a lot more equipment. This is mostly mental complexity, but the increase of equipment means a lot more things to track, both for how to manage your own equipment and what equipment your enemies are trading.

4) Less combat. This is directly related to the large increase in equipment in DOA 2. Early DOA 1 games were dominated by movement and melee and there was a shift to ranged as equipment came more into play. I rather liked that game play arc, it almost felt akin to ramp in power you'd have due to "research" in a 4x game. In DOA 2, ranged combat is a significant factor from turn 1. DOA 2 also recommends substantially more characters to start with, which in turns creates more combat. And the reinforcement phase is accelerated, bringing characters into conflict faster.


So...where does that leave me? Well, first off, I understand the reasons behind the changes. Brett's shared a lot of detail here in the past. Each change seemed good in isolation and addressed problems in DOA 1. Change alts for fewer rules, that's reasonable. DOA 1 could have a dearth of equipment, particularly if you were unlucky early, so a bit more starting equipment seems reasonable. Add some strategic choice with labyrinth paths, sounds good. Make bases more fully fleshed out, yea, I'm on board. Unfortunately for me, the whole ended up being lesser than the parts.

For house rules, I'd look at accomplishing two primary things:
1) Reduce equipment in play.
2) Reduce ongoing status effects.

Reducing equipment:
- Bring back the DOA 1 alts. Perhaps alts filled with face up Encounter chits with path styles like the Merc Camp. The goal being they're static/known challenges and they don't get card rewards.
- Starting equipment: I've tilted initial characters towards those without equipment. I have a "equipment" and "non-equipment" character piles and deal a 1:2 ratio. Perhaps another option would be forcing multi-card characters to cache in some cards for the equivalent point worth in XP markers and/or some other starting bonus (like dumping them as pre-tribute to Lith's challenge).

Reducing ongoing status:
- Labyrinths: Make the Labyrinths look like the Merc camp and if you want a bonus, you divert off the path and take a 1-time bonus. When your opponent makes the same choice, they can take a 1-time bonus or remove yours. Like the Merc camp, this is also the mechanism used in DOA 1 alts for some 1-time bonuses.
- Bases: I'm at a loss on this one, maybe keep it the same. I like the way bases work in DOA 2 and most of the status effects aren't board-wide...like a gate being blow up just affects that gate.


Realistically, I'll probably never get to put these into practice because I no longer play the same person each time . But, I wanted to commit the thoughts and if someone else feels similar to me, then perhaps it'll have value to them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Judy
United States
Cottonwood
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I can't say I agree with you 100%, I do enjoy DOA II much more then DOA I, and I have made a few adjustments to help alleviate some of your issues.

First of all, I find it invaluable to have extra tokens from other games (wood discs, plastic discs, etc...) that I use to help track ongoing effects and bonuses. I even have pair of tokens marked hunter #1/ hunted #1, #2 etc. Different colored discs can be placed on characters that have labyrinth bonuses as a reminder too.

As for the old DOA I Adventure keys, I have adapted them for DOA II. I had to adjust a few of the numbers, and I believe it was a scan and print at 125% that made them the larger size. So, I can use the Royal Tournament, Mercenary Camp and the Field of Honor keys from DOA I.

As for the tracking of the cards, the only thing I can suggest is maybe less characters per player.

It is nice to hear that DOA I still has a following, but for me, it's DOA II all the way!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm still surprised that the amount of equipment is a big deal for you. All of the different character powers seem to me far more to keep track of than the equipment. Sure, occasionally I forget and have to check exactly what some equipment card does, but that happens much less than forgetting exactly how a character power works. Most of the equipment is pretty straightforward, e.g., "Joe has a Point weapon." Not that hard to remember and not that important to remember exactly what its stats are.

As an alternative to the seeding of more characters who start without cards, you could deal a larger number of characters at start but restrict each side in the characters they can choose, placing a cap on the total number of items they can have.

I do agree that keeping track of ongoing effects (labyrinth bonuses, base penalties, etc.) can be a bit distracting. I've thought of making a "status board" on which all of these could be tracked so you could see them at a glance. Maybe I'll try to mock something up.

If you want less combat from the start you could play the jump scenarios rather than the standard scenarios.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
corum irsei
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bassfisher44 wrote:
First of all, I find it invaluable to have extra tokens from other games (wood discs, plastic discs, etc...) that I use to help track ongoing effects and bonuses.
This would have been my recommendation, as well.
Imho, the game clearly doesn't include a sufficient number of tokens to track stuff.

Regarding the starting equipment I unfortunately don't have a better idea than what was already suggested (i.e. separating the character deck).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
Bassfisher44 wrote:

It is nice to hear that DOA I still has a following, but for me, it's DOA II all the way!

I appreciate your feedback. I wouldn't expect anyone to agree with me 100% since there's a high amount of subjectivity in what people like in a game! I remember in DOA 1, people had variants to make it more of a tactical combat game, and those folks probably really like the shifts in DOA 2.

I really wanted DOA 2 to feel like a better game for me too. Hell, I took another 2+ years of playing DOA 2 before I updated this thread

DOA 2 has cleaned up mechanics in several ways that are much better. The way equipment specialties work, for example. And obviously the components are much better. The balance and pace though changed dramatically.

DOA 2 turned several knobs to ramp up combat:
1) More characters (though I choose to play with DOA 1 character counts)
2) More starting equipment
3) More gathered equipment for 2 big reasons:
3a) Alts give cards
3b) Labyrinths get challenged much faster now

That last one is a subtle, but powerful, change. In DOA 1, you had to usually travel 1 turn further to make a labyrinth challenge because the challenge spot was in the depth of the labyrinth rather than near the entrance. In DOA 2, it's now frequently possible to challenge a labyrinth in 1 turn. More challenges => more cards => more combat potential.

In DOA 1, making a challenge in 1 move was only really possible with the Alts that didn't give cards. I FREAKING loved that tradeoff! I thought it was a brilliant bit of design on Brett's part. Challenge faster and get no cards or take a longer trip to a guardian labyrinth? A strategic choice that's almost completely gone in DOA 2 soblue

At one point there was a "What's new in DAO2" and Brett did a "why" behind the changes. Higher production quality, streamlining some of the rules, and moving to base 10 stats to give better differentiation were the big highlights. None of the DOA2 goals said anything about ramping up combat as a design goal.

If ramping combat had been a stated goal...well, I probably would have bought it anyway as a big DOA 1 fan, but maybe going in with different expectations I might have house ruled things much earlier.

Edit: Found the why document:
https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/81663/duel-ages-ii-why-ve...

Bassfisher44 wrote:

I find it invaluable to have extra tokens from other games (wood discs, plastic discs, etc...) that I use to help track ongoing effects and bonuses.

Yea, I do that too. Icehouse pieces work well. I just plain don't like the ongoing status effects as a mechanic though, or at least they need to be in severe moderation. With 6 labyrinths and 2 bases, you can have over 20 possible ongoing effects in the game! And regularly I've had 10+ active.

Five is a good target for working memory for words/concepts (see the George Miller Princeton study). And that's for 5 that don't change. The DOA 2 status things come and go which makes them more difficult for working memory to handle. When someone mentions a game is "fiddly", it's exactly this sort of thing that drives that perception.

Something like how the Alliance gives 1-time permanent benefits would have been my preference. I'm going to try and create a Labyrinth variant that keeps the option of a status bump, but makes it a 1-time permanent change.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
I'm still surprised that the amount of equipment is a big deal for you.

Well, not just me, but literally each person I've played with has mentioned it. Granted, that's only around 6 people , but we're at 100% so far.

I can remember maybe 5-7 important pieces of equipment, pretty much the classic rule about what fits in working memory. Shooters with guns being the more important. In DOA 1, that'd usually get you through 75% of the game before equipment overload became an issue.

Perhaps just as important, maybe more, is noting which dangerous enemies (big shooter, big melee) have equipment, especially things traded to them being key to track...which is harder to keep track of now because enemies have so much more equipment.

As for character powers, yea, that's a very good point. Remembering those has always been something of challenge, but I think it's less difficult for me because:
1) They don't change, where as equipment keeps changing
2) Only maybe 1/3-1/2 the characters have critical special abilities (side switch, auras, etc), which gets close to fitting in that "working memory" bucket.

Many characters are unique via things that don't require constant awareness, such as being able to use lots of equipment, high movement, or a bonus with a stat they're already good with (e.g. a Leapgrip's stealth).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
I created an idea for replacing the labyrinths with something that tries to split the difference with the DOA 2 labyrinths vs DOA 1.

* kept the status bumps, but made them less transient
* removed the risk-free nature of the bumps, made them effectively cost an extra challenge to achieve
* kept the ability to reach labyrinths in 1 move, but made it harder to do so as the markers get pushed

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/141911/doa-2-labyrinth-do...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
Well, not just me, but literally each person I've played with has mentioned it. Granted, that's only around 6 people , but we're at 100% so far.


I wonder if you're suggesting/implying it to them.

I don't agree that it's particularly important to track whether enemies have equipment that was traded or acquired at random. The random equipment can still be effective, and trading could be something much better but it could be just as random. And if someone has a good unrevealed weapon, they are going to get a shot with it eventually; that's the benefit of the K system, that there's not that much advantage in avoiding such foes, they can kill you now or later, they are probably going to kill someone.

It sounds like mostly you just want a game with less complex interactions and different things that could happen than I do. In the end it all comes down to taste, of course. To me, having more equipment in play from the start is a big plus.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
I created an idea for replacing the labyrinths with something that tries to split the difference with the DOA 2 labyrinths vs DOA 1.

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/141911/doa-2-labyrinth-do...


It seems a bit odd to me to have a problem with having too many things to track, and then have every character potentially have multiple different stat upgrades. The standard system is a lot simpler because the same bonus applies to all characters of an age.

I do like the idea, that I mentioned earlier, of a status sheet that tracks all of the active bonuses and maluses, so you don't have to look around the map to spot them. I'm going to try to mock up something like that, soon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:

It seems a bit odd to me to have a problem with having too many things to track, and then have every character potentially have multiple different stat upgrades.


That's why I suggested putting changes right on the characters, makes it visible and the relevant information is in one location. If I look at a character, everything affecting that character is on their cards. By tracking, I meant having to hunt around the board across 6 labyrinths to derive true stats. For me, that's bad human factors design.

That said, you could do add status updates right to the characters with the current labyrinths. We'd have to invent some markers, but it's feasible. Though my proposal would also result in fewer changes, which was a goal, reducing the flux in status changes.

DaviddesJ wrote:

It sounds like mostly you just want a game with less complex interactions and different things that could happen than I do. In the end it all comes down to taste, of course. To me, having more equipment in play from the start is a big plus.

That's absolutely a fair characterization, no question.

I want what I thought DOA 2 was originally trying to accomplish: better bits, cleaned up mechanics. The significant shift in game play that resulted doesn't suit me. Hence, I'm here in the "variants" forum

I wouldn't have minded a bit more starting equipment than DOA 1, a dearth of equipment could be a problem, but DOA 2 starts with literally ~10x the amount of equipment. Plus with the new alts and the shorter paths to challenge, it raised the number of card generating adventure attempts by 2-3x (anecdotal from the couple times I counted and compared to how far old DOA 1 labyrinth markers would move).

DOA 2 didn't just tweak equipment allocation, it cranked the knob to 11
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
The complexity point got me thinking... I like complex games for the most part, tending towards heavier games. If you list BBG games of complexity 4+, a good chunk of those are in my wheel house. So what leaves me flat with DOA 2's changes?

I think it's how complexity changed. DOA 2 dropped a lot of rules, that was something touted by Brett in the redesign. So it lowered complexity there. But, if you look at the BBG complexity value for DOA 2, it is higher than DOA 1. Not hugely, but a definite bump.

How does DOA 2 have a higher complexity rating if it has simpler rules? That's because DOA 2 ramped up complexity largely through complexity by volume (items simultaneously in play):
1) More characters
2) More equipment
3) More status effects

My preference is for complexity by adding more rules for interesting game options (e.g. different labyrinths) rather than complexity by volume. I think that's why I love the DOA 1 alts so much more, they add new wrinkles, each having a different flavor of strategic impacts beyond their age category. I thought board building in DOA 1 was substantially more interesting, particularly combined with the 2x2 entry.

Changes I really like about DOA 2 other than cleaned up mechanics (e.g. weapon specialties) and better bits?
- equipment categories (common/secret/elite)
- more interesting bases
- Lith tribute

The commonality there, complexity of options. It didn't add volume, we have the same number of bases and still have 1 lith lair, but each now has more things to do.

Anyway, I'm just outlining the motivations for my suggestions, not trying to convince someone to change their view. For someone that really loves complexity by volume, what they enjoy is coming from an entirely different place.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
My preference is for complexity by adding more rules for interesting game options (e.g. different labyrinths) rather than complexity by volume.


I think that makes sense. I also think you're generally in the minority---more people seem to prefer relatively simple rules but lots of interactions. It is the complex interactions between all of the different elements---location, terrain, character powers, item powers, sentinels and henchmen and hunters and monuments---that makes the game for me. So I do like having lots and lots of those elements and seeing how they all interact.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
ckessel wrote:
My preference is for complexity by adding more rules for interesting game options (e.g. different labyrinths) rather than complexity by volume.


I think that makes sense. I also think you're generally in the minority---more people seem to prefer relatively simple rules but lots of interactions.


Maybe...there are LOTS of examples of well received games with complexity through rules/options vs complexity by volume. Through the Ages, Mage Knight, any number of war games. Heck, arguably the most successful game in the last 30 years, Magic the Gathering, is built around the concept of thousands of tiny unique rules.

The very core of DOA itself is built on having lots and lots of rules in the form of all the unique characters and many items with unique rules.

So, if I'm in a minority, it's a pretty vibrant and well recognized minority.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
corum irsei
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
Maybe...there are LOTS of examples of well received games with complexity through rules/options vs complexity by volume. Through the Ages, Mage Knight, any number of war games.
Either I don't understand the distinction, or Mage Knight is not a good example for complexity through rules:
The rules are fairly simple, but there's a thousand ways of combining your action cards, allies, spells, and artifacts, especially when considering which ones to boost with mana.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In MtG or DOA2, each card is relatively simple; the complexity comes from the trillions of trillions of ways you can combine different sets of cards to work together. In DOA2, that's augmented by the map, where the exact positional relationships make a big difference. I thought that's exactly what you're calling "complexity by volume". Playing one character vs one character in DOA2 would be very uninteresting, it only gets interesting when you have lots of characters on both sides and there are many ways they can interact. Same with MtG, the interest comes from all of the different cards you can combine in a deck and all of the different ways they can interact. MtG with 10 card decks would be pretty boring, I think.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
Complexity by volume is the volume of items (or global effects) in play simultaneously. If you had 500 DOA characters per side, that'd be complexity by volume. Or 500 pieces of equipment in play. I couldn't think of a better term than complexity by volume.

Complexity by rules, or maybe by variation is a better term, is the number of unique rules/items, but they're not all in effect at any given time. MTG is essentially a game of all unique things, but you only ever have a fairly limited number of them simultaneously in play. The bulk of them are either to be drawn or in the discard. Similarly with Mage Knight, the number of hirelings and enemies is fairly limited in any one combat (which is good, by the end game, even those combos get intense!).

I suppose final complexity is some sort of multiplication of volume and variation.

I prefer variation over volume, though extremes on either end don't usually make for good games. MTG would be crazy with 100 cards in hand and 500 cards actively in play on the table per side. On the other end, MTG with a 1 tableau card limit would be pretty damn boring.

DOA 1 hit my sweet spot for items simultaneously in play vs variation. DOA 2 ramped up volume pretty significantly with a lot more equipment and status effects simultaneously in play. Plus it recommends more characters. That changed the game significantly and not in a way I find enjoyable.

Hence...a proposal in the "variants" forum

I hadn't intended a meta-discussion beyond describing my motivations such that people looking at the variant could decide if it might be something they'd enjoy. If my motivations strike a similar chord, great! If not, that's fine too. Folks are presumably looking at variants precisely because they might find a change that suits their style. Not that I mind the meta-discussion, as long as we're all just gamers talking about what floats our respective boats.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
DOA 2 ramped up volume pretty significantly with a lot more equipment and status effects simultaneously in play. Plus it recommends more characters.


DOA1 has standard scenarios ranging from 6 to 16 characters. DOA2 has standard scenarios ranging from 6 to 30 characters (but there's a warning not to take the largest ones seriously). That doesn't seem much different. If you find that there's more equipment in play and that's too much to keep track of you could always play with slightly fewer characters than you would have played DOA1 so that the amount of stuff to keep track of comes out about the same.

Have you played the Jump Labyrinth scenarios, much? As I wrote above, these might be a bit more to your taste.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Kessel
United States
Beaverton
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:

DOA1 has standard scenarios ranging from 6 to 16 characters. DOA2 has standard scenarios ranging from 6 to 30 characters (but there's a warning not to take the largest ones seriously). That doesn't seem much different.

DOA 1 recommended 2-2.5 characters per side per platter.
DOS 2 recommends 3 characters per side per platter, an increase of 20-50%.
DaviddesJ wrote:

Have you played the Jump Labyrinth scenarios, much? As I wrote above, these might be a bit more to your taste.

I have. It recommends the same characters per side. It does replace 2 Alts with 2 escape points, so that does reduce card influx a little bit, but otherwise the game doesn't play much differently.

I liked the distance=respect entry rule, that was fun. The preset-board setup made for a more balanced board, but it removed much of the strategy behind board building.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ckessel wrote:
DOA 1 recommended 2-2.5 characters per side per platter.
DOS 2 recommends 3 characters per side per platter, an increase of 20-50%.


If you're deciding how large a game you want to play, I think you're choosing the number of characters, which determines the complexity and scope, and then building the map for that number of characters. DOA1 recommends 0.38-0.50 platters per character, while DOA2 recommends 0.30-0.38 platters per character. So the recommended DOA2 maps are a bit smaller, but of course you can use any size you want.

Quote:
I have. It recommends the same characters per side. It does replace 2 Alts with 2 escape points, so that does reduce card influx a little bit, but otherwise the game doesn't play much differently.


I thought you didn't like that the standard scenarios start out with potential combat as early as round 2. Since Jump scenarios start out with the sides separated, using Distance entry, there's a bit more early, independent maneuvering and optimization, and you can make some decisions about when you want to get more entwined in combat.
 
 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.