Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
26 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Eclipse» Forums » Variants

Subject: Too few interaction? Why not try this? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Giacomo Peroni
Italy
Milano
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
One of the few cons I've found in this game is the absence of interaction between players (except combat, of course...). This said, I think that allowing people to trade resources could be a really good idea: something like that...

Instead of trading resources 2-1 (or 3-1/4-1 for aliens), players are allowed to trade between them at any rate they like, but only if they have diplomatic agreements between them.

What do you think about that? Does it risk to be gamebreaking?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gleb Semenjuk
Estonia
Tallinn
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It seems, game was made to protect persons from attacks from joint forces of other players (last incomers to hex fight first, pinning, being at war when ships meet over any territory) - if we will allow this free trading, this would be severely changed. But anyway, only playtesting will show, does this rule play well.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lonnie H
United States
Everett
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To even this out some, you may consider some additional cost like needing to use a colony ship for each 2 resources traded.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giacomo Peroni
Italy
Milano
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gleb wrote:
It seems, game was made to protect persons from attacks from joint forces of other players (last incomers to hex fight first, pinning, being at war when ships meet over any territory) - if we will allow this free trading, this would be severely changed. But anyway, only playtesting will show, does this rule play well.


That's true, it could impact the balance of the game. The only thing that I find not perfect in this game, tho, is the lack of interaction outside of military conflict. Adding political agendas like TI3 would just make the game longer, but an easy trading "à la Catan" is not a bad idea, IMHO. Surely, it should be playtested.

Lonster wrote:
To even this out some, you may consider some additional cost like needing to use a colony ship for each 2 resources traded.


That's a good suggestion. I was thinking too that this free trading should use some kind of additional cost, and using colony ship is a good idea. It could also be set to be linked on the exchange ratio of the relvant specie, like turning as much colonist ship as the exchange ratio. So humans should turn, for example, 2 ships for every 2 resources traded (an arbitrary number), while the Egemony should turn 4 of them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Pietrocupo
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
how about having trading ships that recovers with the influence action like colony ship?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Pittock
United Kingdom
Cambridge
flag msg tools
Another idea would be to have more dynamic ambassadors.

Each ambassador comes into play with 3 states, one of which you cover with the cube you place upon him. These states are placed in a circle like so:

......Economic
Culture.....Science

Each of these states grants you a different power if your cube is upon it:

Economic: If your ally has a greater economic production than you gain +2 wealth at the start of your turn.

Science: If your ally has a greater scientific production than you gain +1 science at the start of your turn.

Culture: If your ally has a greater material production than you gain +1 material at the start of your turn.

Once in each of the 9 rounds you may move your cube from one state to another. However both players may never occupy the same state at the same time. So it’s possible for one ally to block another if they so wish, though doing so would likely be to their own disadvantage as well, but there may be situations where it’s tactically sound to do so.

Anyway, just a really quickly thought up and rough idea of how you could implement something a little different. This would of course increase the attractiveness of entering into an alliance with another player, so you would have to decide if you wanted such a thing in your game.

I thought also about adding additional states (religion, intelligence, social/artistic) and allowing players to shift only 1 state back or forth around the circle each turn… but that would be something to flesh out later.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott M.
United States
Winter Springs
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
[shameless plug]

Why not play TI3? whistle

[/shameless plug]

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pieter
Netherlands
Maastricht
flag msg tools
Good intentions are no substitute for a good education.
badge
I take my fun very seriously.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
atraangelis wrote:
Why not play TI3? whistle

How long was that again?
5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Giacomo Peroni
Italy
Milano
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
atraangelis wrote:
[shameless plug]

Why not play TI3? whistle

[/shameless plug]


...time?

And I love TI3...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Petri Savola
Finland
Espoo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
gixx wrote:
One of the few cons I've found in this game is the absence of interaction between players (except combat, of course...). This said, I think that allowing people to trade resources could be a really good idea: something like that...

Instead of trading resources 2-1 (or 3-1/4-1 for aliens), players are allowed to trade between them at any rate they like, but only if they have diplomatic agreements between them.

What do you think about that? Does it risk to be gamebreaking?

I like Eclipse because you can look at opponent's board and see what he has and what he will be able to do during the current turn. You can easily calculate his options (can he afford an action for movement/upgrade? does he have enough materials to build a ship?) and base your own decisions on this information. If you allow "free" trading of resources, this cool dynamic is broken because people would have the ability to do unpredictable things. It would slow down the game, because it's not enough to check what your neighbor can do, but you'd also need to check what he would be able to do after trading resources with his other neighbor.

I don't enjoy "take that" action cards either. It's simply not fun if you plan and carefully execute a clever offensive maneuver for several turns and then it's simply blown away by some very chaotic thing, which was impossible to predict.

In my opinion there's a lot of interaction in Eclipse, especially in 4-6 player games. The interaction will definitely not be limited to tech pool if players decide to create an open map, change a lot of ambassadors and a few neutron bomb technologies are drawn from the bag.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Pietrocupo
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
I like Eclipse because you can look at opponent's board and see what he has and what he will be able to do during the current turn.


You actually take the time to look at other people's board? I am so preoccupied at managing how many actions I can do and what actions will I do that I do not have the time to analyze other people's board. The only time when players seem to do this is when they want to attack somebody and want to check their opponent's ship configuration.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Petri Savola
Finland
Espoo
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
larienna wrote:
Quote:
I like Eclipse because you can look at opponent's board and see what he has and what he will be able to do during the current turn.


You actually take the time to look at other people's board? I am so preoccupied at managing how many actions I can do and what actions will I do that I do not have the time to analyze other people's board. The only time when players seem to do this is when they want to attack somebody and want to check their opponent's ship configuration.

Yes, I think it's important to take a look what the opponents are doing. Just like in Puerto Rico and Agricola. If you only look at your own board, you will often end up playing suboptimally.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott M.
United States
Winter Springs
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Petri wrote:
gixx wrote:
One of the few cons I've found in this game is the absence of interaction between players (except combat, of course...). This said, I think that allowing people to trade resources could be a really good idea: something like that...

Instead of trading resources 2-1 (or 3-1/4-1 for aliens), players are allowed to trade between them at any rate they like, but only if they have diplomatic agreements between them.

What do you think about that? Does it risk to be gamebreaking?

I like Eclipse because you can look at opponent's board and see what he has and what he will be able to do during the current turn. You can easily calculate his options (can he afford an action for movement/upgrade? does he have enough materials to build a ship?) and base your own decisions on this information. If you allow "free" trading of resources, this cool dynamic is broken because people would have the ability to do unpredictable things. It would slow down the game, because it's not enough to check what your neighbor can do, but you'd also need to check what he would be able to do after trading resources with his other neighbor.

I don't enjoy "take that" action cards either. It's simply not fun if you plan and carefully execute a clever offensive maneuver for several turns and then it's simply blown away by some very chaotic thing, which was impossible to predict.

In my opinion there's a lot of interaction in Eclipse, especially in 4-6 player games. The interaction will definitely not be limited to tech pool if players decide to create an open map, change a lot of ambassadors and a few neutron bomb technologies are drawn from the bag.


And this is why Eclipse will be nothing more than a EURO with a space theme pasted on. IF the entire game is based on what exacting calculations you can make based on what finite things your opponent can do, then why bother playing. At some point you will realize you cant win or lose based on what every one else has and that's fun?

golf clap.. bravo.. bravo..

In no war in the history of man kind and i will wager in the galaxy.. has one force known with 100% certanty what an opponent was capable of doing...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter O
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
atraangelis wrote:


And this is why Eclipse will be nothing more than a EURO with a space theme pasted on. IF the entire game is based on what exacting calculations you can make based on what finite things your opponent can do, then why bother playing. At some point you will realize you cant win or lose based on what every one else has and that's fun?

golf clap.. bravo.. bravo..

In no war in the history of man kind and i will wager in the galaxy.. has one force known with 100% certanty what an opponent was capable of doing...


So you appear to be claiming Eclipse has no random elements. It amazes me how many people level so many different and contradictory charges against Eclipse. Considering how much people have complained about random elements, your comments make me laugh. With your phrase "And this is why Eclipse will be nothing more" it's clear your point is to slander the game and what follows is merely pretext for dissing it. I don't know why you (and others) feel threatened that Eclipse has surpassed whatever your favorite game is in the rankings and feel the need to come to the Eclipse forums to rail against it. If you don't like the game your free to say so. But at some point please leave us to talk about the actual merits of something, or god forbid, what fun some of us have with the game. Your game is fun too. Whatever it is.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott M.
United States
Winter Springs
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tranenturm wrote:

So you appear to be claiming Eclipse has no random elements. It amazes me how many people level so many different and contradictory charges against Eclipse. Considering how much people have complained about random elements, your comments make me laugh. With your phrase "And this is why Eclipse will be nothing more" it's clear your point is to slander the game and what follows is merely pretext for dissing it. I don't know why you (and others) feel threatened that Eclipse has surpassed whatever your favorite game is in the rankings and feel the need to come to the Eclipse forums to rail against it. If you don't like the game your free to say so. But at some point please leave us to talk about the actual merits of something, or god forbid, what fun some of us have with the game. Your game is fun too. Whatever it is.


YA know what, your right....
I came off like a dick and that sucked.
I was trying to make a jab at the post i quoted about Luck and randomness. It gets under my skin when folks complain about the Random in a game and want it to be about skill alone. A predetermined order of events they can plan for %100 percent of the time..to me at that point its not a game, just an exercise in proper execution.

The assertion that i implied eclipse had no random elements is false. Those random elements are mechanically induced in the game via dice for combat or a tile pull. But not wanting an element of player introduced randomness that would generate interaction and reaction by those affected seems Euro-ish to me, thus my commentary.

In the end, I have experienced the nightmare that is plasma missile death and the speed of play that that the game has over my space game of choice, so by no means does it not have a place in my game group.


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter O
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
atraangelis wrote:


YA know what, your right....
I came off like a dick and that sucked.
I was trying to make a jab at the post i quoted about Luck and randomness. It gets under my skin when folks complain about the Random in a game and want it to be about skill alone. A predetermined order of events they can plan for %100 percent of the time..to me at that point its not a game, just an exercise in proper execution.

The assertion that i implied eclipse had no random elements is false. Those random elements are mechanically induced in the game via dice for combat or a tile pull. But not wanting an element of player introduced randomness that would generate interaction and reaction by those affected seems Euro-ish to me, thus my commentary.

In the end, I have experienced the nightmare that is plasma missile death and the speed of play that that the game has over my space game of choice, so by no means does it not have a place in my game group.


Gotcha. Thank you for your response and my apologies if I was a little testy.

Your comments strike at a deep level and I'm still processing. On one level, zero luck games such as Go or Chess are clearly games to many,but I can understand your viewpoint that because they are theoretically solvable that it is execution. To go further is to argue the semantics of what "game" means which is not really this discussion.

To bring it back to Eclipse, the dynamic you are talking about strikes me as similar to playing small world. On any particular turn, a player can plot out their moves and the next few opponents moves with a level of certainty. The odd die roll and the rate at which new races comes up means a relatively predictable game state assuming best play. But there is the rub. What is best play? Is a game like Eclipse (and I'm thinking 4-6 player) complex enough that even though you can figure out all possible moves THIS turn, that you know the best possible play for the rest of the game? Certainly on turn 9. Maybe turn 8. But how about turns 4-7? I personally find I think a fair amount in Strategic level in Eclipse and not just tactical computations. I'm going to have to give this more thought and get back to you.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Pietrocupo
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a reason why I want to make a war oriented eclipse variant. So that the "Interaction" between players, that cannot be "predicted" consist in being attacked by your opponent and having to deal with that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter O
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
larienna wrote:
This is a reason why I want to make a war oriented eclipse variant. So that the "Interaction" between players, that cannot be "predicted" consist in being attacked by your opponent and having to deal with that.


How is what you are describing different from current Eclipse? Eclipse can have a lot of combat that can't be predicted (dice rolls). Are you suggesting cards that allow fleets to appear out of nowhere?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter O
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Combat and randomness in Eclipse is already greater than your standard chit and hex wargame. Similar in moving units which then exchange fire based on dice. Possibiliites are increased by units able to be upgraded, built, and new tech researched.

I've surprised opponents and have been creative with movement in plenty of Eclipse games so far. I've maneuvered to peoples back areas, I've threatnened to attack one player and launched an attack on another which surprised the table (and I went on to win).

I personally see no need to introduce cards, hidden information, or other stuff into Eclipse. The game already creates situations that offer me plenty of options and ways to out-think opponents, none of which feels scripted. Even on turn 9 when it's easier to map out all of the possible moves, the fact that my moves are intertwined with the opponents creates games of brinkmanship. They are moving fleets into this hex. Do I give it up for points elsewhere, or do I fight for it? Can I get my opponent to overcommit there? Is my assessment of combat odds for this battle accurate? Is there something I can do to change odds? Can I out-action my opponent? Am I good with a percieved 60% odds in this hex, or do I want 90% odds and forgo other moves? I've committed into battles, ended up losing them, and then realized I could have spent my resources on Monoliths instead. I've worried about being backdoored by an opponent who never tried. Did my proactive steps keep him away, or did he never actually hae interest in doing so?

No, Eclipse doesn't have galactic council game mechanisms, or major trading aspects. You'll never win by being "the trading race". It does have plenty of options to create these in game with a little imagination. I have intentionnally withdrawn from systems in exchange for political gains (and won in some of those games because of this). I could forsee swapping systems with a neighbor if our Advanced techs made it profitable. I am constantly diplomasizing with the table whether its called that or not. I'm constantly worried about this person getting a tech lead and this other person building up for monuments. I don't just expect to do things on my own though. I talk to other players, try to get them to see its in their best interest to do something about it, and I'll sweeten the deal if I can.

So I'm fine with the level of interaction. I can see where some people want more scripted ways to interact with people, but I would suggest that is a different game. A matter of tastes. TI3 sounds (I haven't played) like it does script much more into the game. Eclipse took the path of building a strong base game and leaving the more specific mechanics up for the players to define on the fly.

The epitome of diploamce games is Diplomacy. It is a very interesting game because even though the game is about diplomacy, it has no rules about diplomacy other than anything said by players is non-binding and you have so many minutes to talk. The rest of the game rules are set up to allow for simulataneous movement and cooperative unit movement. That's the whole game. No European councils, diplomt rules, embassy rules, trade rules, hidden objectives, cards, or anything like it. Yet the game is brilliant because it allows players to do creative and occasionally suprising things in a zero luck and full information environment.

Eclipse is closer to this side of things than it sounds like some of you want. It sets up the basic galaxy and leaves players to their own devices rather than trying to script a story for you. Some games do more scripting and have more specific case rules. Eclipse is not that game. Eclipse can play quick because of this streamlined rule set. It also can play long (like with my group) because we diplomasize the heck out of our game states. I don't need or want a galactic council or cards. That would make it a different game.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Pietrocupo
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
How is what you are describing different from current Eclipse? Eclipse can have a lot of combat that can't be predicted (dice rolls). Are you suggesting cards that allow fleets to appear out of nowhere?


My only problem is that combat between players starts on turn 8-9. In other words, the war starts when the game is over. So I intend to do a few tweak, like adding resources, so that players have some resources/time/energy to focus about other things than running their empire.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mr. Octavius
Canada
Chilliwack
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
larienna wrote:
Quote:
How is what you are describing different from current Eclipse? Eclipse can have a lot of combat that can't be predicted (dice rolls). Are you suggesting cards that allow fleets to appear out of nowhere?


My only problem is that combat between players starts on turn 8-9. In other words, the war starts when the game is over. So I intend to do a few tweak, like adding resources, so that players have some resources/time/energy to focus about other things than running their empire.


That's the play group, not the game. I have two groups I play with, one has people that won't even attack other players on turn 9 without provocation, and are happy just attacking ancients. The other has people that will attack you on turn 3 if you give them the opportunity.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wim van Gruisen
Netherlands
Den Bosch
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
tranenturm wrote:
The epitome of diploamce games is Diplomacy. It is a very interesting game because even though the game is about diplomacy, it has no rules about diplomacy other than anything said by players is non-binding and you have so many minutes to talk. The rest of the game rules are set up to allow for simulataneous movement and cooperative unit movement. That's the whole game. No European councils, diplomt rules, embassy rules, trade rules, hidden objectives, cards, or anything like it. Yet the game is brilliant because it allows players to do creative and occasionally suprising things in a zero luck and full information environment.

What Diplomacy has is a currency that people can trade with. That currency is called 'giving support'. This is something missing from Eclipse. The mechanic that comes closest, I guess, is the exchanging of diplomats. And that is a scripted form of player interaction.

I would love to have some kind of currency that players can use to smoothen negotiations between them. TI is a game with highly scripted player interaction. You can only engage in trade agreements (which are like diplomatic relations in Eclipse) when a certain card is being played. One player has the right to veto such an agreement. You have cards that initiate talks about politics, and those talks are about a randomly chosen law that changes the game rules. Players cannot modify or alter the proposed laws.

But the big difference are the trade goods. 'Trade good' is a currency that players can freely exchange between themselves. There are no rules involved in this exchange. You can use a trade good to replace the resource to build a ship or to vote, so they are in demand.

I'd like Eclipse to have a currency like that. Sure, you can make deals and you can, say, give away a hex you possess in return for a favour from a fellow player. You can gather a mob to attack the person currently perceived to be in the lead. But having some currency would help those negotiations.

In Eclipse the currency could simply be VP. Give everyone a starting amount of 5 VP that can be traded with others, and see if and how that changes the game. For an interesting variant, make the VPs only worth something after they have been traded away.

BTW, I would set Chinatown at almost the same level as Diplomacy, as far as diplomatic engagements between players is concerned. The unscripted trading phase is the heart of that game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mr. Octavius
Canada
Chilliwack
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Whymme wrote:


In Eclipse the currency could simply be VP. Give everyone a starting amount of 5 VP that can be traded with others, and see if and how that changes the game. For an interesting variant, make the VPs only worth something after they have been traded away.


Actually, that sounds like an interesting variant to try. Although only making them worth something after being traded won't do much, as it will just result in players trading VPs in order to 'activate' them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wim van Gruisen
Netherlands
Den Bosch
Unspecified
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
Sure, but then players will have to trade. And have to decide who to swap counters with. It's a starting point for diplomacy.

If players don't get five trade VPs at the start, but one at the start of every turn, the trading aspect gets more to the foreground. Will you trade your VP with a former trading partner who is now threatening to invade you?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Pietrocupo
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In Elemental video game, they created a diplomatic currency called "Diplomatic capital" which are points you could accumulate and use to pay for a part of the diplomatic trade. So it a trading option less valuable to a player to prevent fair trade, the other player can compensate by spending diplomatic capital to balance the trade.

In the master of orion 2 video game, there was research and economic treaties. This is somewhat abstracted by the diplomat right now.

Else for more interaction, the fact that you cannot support other players in battles prevent the possibility to help other players to defend their system or make joined attacks. That could be another possibility, players in the same system fight each other only if one of them want to. Maybe having 1 ambassador is required to be able not to attack each other. (Equivalent of Non-Aggression pact in master of orion 2).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.