Justin Gortner
United States
Egg Harbor Township
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Howdy!

This game looks cool. But I generally do not get satisfaction out of playing games solo. Could this be played with maybe 2 or 3 people? Is there any logical way of breaking up decisions or areas of the game to more than 1 person?

Clearly we could just group-think everything. But I was wondering if there is any way to break things up.

Thanks all!

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Taylor
United States
Lake Forest
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
Microbadge: Transmetropolitan fanMicrobadge: Sci Fi Games fanMicrobadge: Tactical Space Combat Games fanMicrobadge: Nemo's War fanMicrobadge: At Dawn We Ate Sugar Smacks
I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but there really isn't a way to play it with 2 or more people except for group decision making.

We considered two-player a long time ago but decided to keep the focus on solitaire play.
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Gortner
United States
Egg Harbor Township
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
anarchy wrote:
I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but there really isn't a way to play it with 2 or more people except for group decision making.

We considered two-player a long time ago but decided to keep the focus on solitaire play.
Nooooooooooooo ...
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Juan Crespo
United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason C
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
Microbadge: Level 02 BGG posterMicrobadge: 1 Player Guild - Together We Game AloneMicrobadge: New York Jets fanMicrobadge: New York Mets fanMicrobadge: Victory Point Games fan
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
Agreed, Nemo's War would be a wonderful game for all types of players, the first edition i played with my wife (both of us love a Jules Verne) and we made decisions of who to attack, what objectives to choose it was wonderful.

This is just really a elegant game, my wife even took our first edition copy to her book club it was a hit, this 2nd edition she will be spokesperson for it.
5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Gortner
United States
Egg Harbor Township
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
salex724 wrote:
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
Agreed, Nemo's War would be a wonderful game for all types of players, the first edition i played with my wife (both of us love a Jules Verne) and we made decisions of who to attack, what objectives to choose it was wonderful.

This is just really a elegant game, my wife even took our first edition copy to her book club it was a hit, this 2nd edition she will be spokesperson for it.
Care to elaborate on how you and your wife enjoyed the solo game together semantically?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Emrich
United States
Irvine
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Clearly we could just group-think everything. But I was wondering if there is any way to break things up.
No, there really isn't any way to create true competitive gameplay the AI is wired. Sorry.

As for "group think," remember that NEMO'S WAR has a very profound role-playing element to it. You are Captain Nemo! But the Captain is well-served by his crew, and this is where "group think" (i.e., an "officer's council") could be role-played into the game.

There are 5 (6 with a Stretch Goal) character tiles in the game...

If I were the game's developer (hey, I am!) and challenged with this thought-problem (hey, you just did that!), I might suggest to the designer (hey, that's Chris Taylor, and he's reading this thread!) something crazy like this:

NEMO'S WAR second edition: co-op play variant

During set up, assign each player one or more Character Resources (e.g., Ned Land, Chief Engineer, etc.) by any agreeable method (e.g., randomly, drafted, negotiated, etc.) and cooperatively agree upon Nemo's starting Motive.

Captain Nemo
(i.e., the player making the decisions) is the player with the most total Victory Points (include the value of Science for the Professor based on Nemo's Motive) for their current (surviving) Character Resources (resolve ties with a roll off). That player makes the final decisions about everything BUT Sacrificing another player's Character Resources (only their owner can do that; when you're Captain Nemo, sometimes you must ask players to make such sacrifices).

While you are "channeling" Captain Nemo, keep your own PASS Pile (face up) and FAIL Pile (face down, under the PASS Pile, so you have one "stack") for Adventure cards resolved on your watch -- including end-game Adventure card (only, not Nautilus Upgrade card) placement if you're Captain Nemo when the game ends.

Whenever Nemo FAILS at a test that results in a loss of Resources (this includes Action Points, KEEP cards, etc. -- i.e., you have to LOSE something for it to matter), any other player can call an "Officer's Council." At that Council, each player calculated their current VP score for their still-active Character Resources and adds 1d6 to that total; that is the indivisible amount of "Influence" that each player has at that moment.

Players are urged to negotiate at this meeting. Then, beginning with the player TO THE LEFT of the player serving as Captain Nemo, each player must assign their Influence to a player (they can "vote for themselves, if desired), going clockwise around the table, with the current Nemo player declaring last.

Whichever player gains has the most Influence takes command as Captain Nemo (until this process alters matters once again). Roll a die to break a tie vote, if required.

AT THE END OF THE GAME, players score individually for their share of the voyage's journey as follows:

1. Each surviving Character Resource's VPs (check Nemo's Motive to add the Professor's Science VPs);

2. Roll 1d6 and add that many VPs to your individual player score for each of your Characters that did not survive (e.g., they were Sacrificed during play).

3. Subtract the number of FAIL cards from the number of PASS cards you have, and add that value to your individual score (this could be a negative number!). Then pool all the PASS and FAIL cards in their respective Piles on the map where they belong so that they can be tallied in the final score of the journey.

Each player sums their points. The player with the highest total has earned the most glory, and so on for each lower-scoring player!

...anyway, something along those lines is what I might do/propose. This is all just "off the top of my head" thinking.

Now, if I were the game's publisher (well, shazam, I'm that too!), I would be wary about adding such a feature to the game at this juncture. It would need testing (of course, there are several beta copies floating around out there -- perhaps one of their owners could try some actual or simulated "coop" gameplay?), and I would have to discuss with the artist, Ian O'Toole, if there would be room for it somewhere within the component list already agreed to and sent off to the printer for an estimate.

But if those obstacles could be overcome, I might just publish something like that.

Does that make sense?

Alan Emrich
21 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason C
United States
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
Microbadge: Level 02 BGG posterMicrobadge: 1 Player Guild - Together We Game AloneMicrobadge: New York Jets fanMicrobadge: New York Mets fanMicrobadge: Victory Point Games fan
jgortner wrote:
salex724 wrote:
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
Agreed, Nemo's War would be a wonderful game for all types of players, the first edition i played with my wife (both of us love a Jules Verne) and we made decisions of who to attack, what objectives to choose it was wonderful.

This is just really a elegant game, my wife even took our first edition copy to her book club it was a hit, this 2nd edition she will be spokesperson for it.
Care to elaborate on how you and your wife enjoyed the solo game together semantically?
Simple, we think together and make decisions, most the time we play "what would Captain Nemo do" it's great, remember 20,000 leagues under the sea is about a group of people working on a mission together in what they believe is righteous.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Morten Monrad Pedersen
Denmark
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
salex724 wrote:
jgortner wrote:
salex724 wrote:
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
Agreed, Nemo's War would be a wonderful game for all types of players, the first edition i played with my wife (both of us love a Jules Verne) and we made decisions of who to attack, what objectives to choose it was wonderful.

This is just really a elegant game, my wife even took our first edition copy to her book club it was a hit, this 2nd edition she will be spokesperson for it.
Care to elaborate on how you and your wife enjoyed the solo game together semantically?
Simple, we think together and make decisions, most the time we play "what would Captain Nemo do" it's great, remember 20,000 leagues under the sea is about a group of people working on a mission together in what they believe is righteous.
I've played solo games this way with my non-hardcore-gamer wife and it's been a nice experience every time. We usually divide the bookkeeping work between, and one of us might be the dice roller, and the other is the card drawer. This keeps both of us physically involved with the game and makes the bookkeeping go faster.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Egbert
United States
Woodbury
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
Microbadge: Level 18 BGG posterMicrobadge: Warhammer Quest forever!Microbadge: "TCAT" - Member of the Twin Cities Ameritrash GroupMicrobadge: Space Hulk fanMicrobadge: Con of the North attendee
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
I thought it was an interesting question as well, since many non-solitaire games have the opposite question posted.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Gortner
United States
Egg Harbor Township
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mortenmdk wrote:
I've played solo games this way with my non-hardcore-gamer wife and it's been a nice experience every time. We usually divide the bookkeeping work between, and one of us might be the dice roller, and the other is the card drawer. This keeps both of us physically involved with the game and makes the bookkeeping go faster.
This sounds pretty good even if we get nothing official. I think it would be enough to make me pledge now! And a nice benefit of having the bookeeping go faster is a plus.

pekin2121 wrote:
juanma99 wrote:
What's interesting here is that, for a change, we have gamers interested in making a solitaire game multiplayer, and not the other way around.

It attests that the upcoming 2ed has a lot of potential of being a crossover hit with the BGG community in general, including gamers that prefer their games mostly multiplayer.
I thought it was an interesting question as well, since many non-solitaire games have the opposite question posted.
The game is too gorgeous and theme too cool to pass up! I only wish we could convince them to do something official for 2 players.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Emrich
United States
Irvine
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
The game is too gorgeous and theme too cool to pass up! I only wish we could convince them to do something official for 2 players.
We really can't. The game engine just doesn't work that way. Trust Chris Taylor, he knows...

Alan Emrich
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin Gortner
United States
Egg Harbor Township
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alan Emrich wrote:
Quote:
The game is too gorgeous and theme too cool to pass up! I only wish we could convince them to do something official for 2 players.
We really can't. The game engine just doesn't work that way. Trust Chris Taylor, he knows...

Alan Emrich
No problem. I am probably still going to be on board and just use the "shared duties" suggestion in this thread.

Actually it might be fun to introduce an additional resource: decision tokens. One player starts with 2, the other 3. Disagree on a move? Bid blind. Ties go to whomever has less unused tokens! Loser gets all tokens bid.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Ku
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
badge
"You can spend all your time making money / Or you can spend all your love making time."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Buy two copies and play side by side! See who gets more points?
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Taylor
United States
Lake Forest
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
Microbadge: Transmetropolitan fanMicrobadge: Sci Fi Games fanMicrobadge: Tactical Space Combat Games fanMicrobadge: Nemo's War fanMicrobadge: At Dawn We Ate Sugar Smacks
futhee wrote:
Buy two copies and play side by side! See who gets more points?
That's a plan I approve of. ^_^
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Simons
United States
New York
flag msg tools
The developers might or might not have read this thread, but they have placed a 2-4 player co-op version into the Kickstarter campaign as a stretch goal!! Looks like this is well on the way to being a granted wish.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Sweeney
United States
Clinton Township
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Strangely enough, I was hoping for a "confrontational" style expansion. One player gaming Nemo and 2-4 others representing the various Navies or Organizations attempting to stop him.

A) a search map with the Sea Zones of the world could be printed inside the box lid with cubes showing searching units and/or possible sightings of the Nautilus. A group of Admirals could be generated giving bonus (or deficit) values to ships in their command and search ratings?
B) the ships searching for Nemo come from competing Nations so Ship vs Ship actions could occur as well. Probably resulting in the need to expand ship choices.
C) devices, ships and crew counters could've expanded and allowed to be used by all players.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls