Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi all - Rocco here, designer of PRIVATIZE (http://www.mightyfistgames.com/privatize) and BGG fellow with a new entry for the July Solitaire challenge: TWO DECK SIEGE.

Two deck siege is pretty simple: A solitaire mostly card game that can be played with 104 cards (and some tokens). No dice. It's part tower defense, part resource management, and part deck building.

It's currently solitaire only, and once you get the hang of it, playable in 30-45 minutes.

I've written it, done some pre-lim testing, and am now putting it out here for all you learned folks to look at and bang on.

Unlike PRIVATIZE (and other things I'm writing) I'm sort of not expecting this to be anything other than a PnP game. I've got some placeholder art (for now). But it's interesting, a fun challenge, and a fun game.

If there's any interest, a "third" deck add-on would give the ability to add 1-2 more players as co-defenders with various roles.

Here are the files (the only version is a low-ink version):

http://www.mightyfistgames.com/design/twodecksiege-rules.pdf
http://www.mightyfistgames.com/design/twodecksiege-cards.pdf

I'd love some feedback. The only thing I ask is to not suggest things that add more cards! Right now the challenge, for me, is to stick to 104 cards or less. Replacing cards, adding more to the cards, or adding more rules are all fine.

Here's some current screenshots (these may change as I update the game):
http://www.mightyfistgames.com/design/tds-exg1-t2.jpg

EDITED 6/15/2012 - updated rules document (see thread).

EDITED 7/27/2012 - updated rules document (see thread).

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
TWO DECK SIEGE - Some Concerns
I have a few things that if someone could read or test and look at I'd be grateful.

1. Is it too easy or two hard?

2. One issue is the defender can't do anything automatically - all actions are done by playing "order" cards. This does mean situations where several turns may pass where the units you need to move can't be moved.

I had thought about doing away with the order card mechanic, but I like it (its the 'game' mechanic for the most part). I could add a rule that is something like "the player may, instead of playing an order card, discard an order to move up to x number of units or attack with x number of units". Just to offer some more flexibility.

3. For a game of this level, is tracking wounds and Tiredness a drag?

4. Right now I allow up to two "units" per wall segment. Does it make things too crowded? Should I just have on per segment, and/or compensate with more walls?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
TWO DECK SIEGE - sample turns
Below is a picture of a standard setup and the end of a single turn.


In the middle of the shot is the Courtyard with my Defender cards waiting inside. Around it are the Castle Walls cards, with the Towers in the corners.

On turn one, the Defender side didn't get any cards to move units and wasn't under attack yet, so little happened (other than to fill his hand).

The attacker side drew three units and played them 3 "card" distances away from the north wall, and then moved them all a card closer. With no clear targets, the Troll Rockthrower does two points of damage to the north wall.



On turn 2, the defender plays two cards - one to move units to the north and east walls and one to make attacks at +1 Strength. Only the archers were in range to fire, and knocked out a Goblin advance. Meanwhile, the attacker continue. The Troll holds its distance, doing 2 more damage to the wall and 1 damage to the Pikeman on the wall; and the hobgoblins finally reach the wall doing damage and killing the wounded Pikemen. Meanwhile in the east more units arrive.

After a little more testing and feedback I'll post a new game, maybe see what changes work.

Thanks all!
Rock
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Here's what I think I'm adding for playing with more than 1 player:

For 2 or more players, each player takes a role (my guess would they pickup the Wizard and Cleric cards, and maybe I have to include a Warlord special unit card to keep the deck count down and allow up to 3 players). Each role card allows some special ability printed on the unit card.

I've toyed with making this a pure tower defense game, but that implies a couple of things:

1. If the units can attack/defend on their own, then order cards are sort of meaningless.

2. It would probably be boring in that case (if the cards are doing all the work with some sort of AI) so I might need to switch the simple "if strength > defense score a wound" system with something random. Maybe every strength point lets you roll a die; and then switch defense to a # to beat.

3. Without the deck management aspects, what's the strategic challenge?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Have read through the rules and I had a question about the setup. It seems to me that the game is set up with towers at the corners and walls in between.

Is that correct? The rules imply an easy version and a hard version, but they are not real clear as to how to actually set the game up.
2 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
That's essentially correct - rules as written say put the walls on the sides, but you're right, that could be written better. I'll make some edits.

There are some "thick" wall cards that for an easier game you can substitute for the regular walls, again, I could be a bit more verbose on that front. I'll make some edits to the rules document and include all that. Thanks!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
I am still very confused about how to set the game up.

If there are two spaces on a single side of a wall, does that mean that the attackers choose one of those walls and line up to that side? And can attackers attack the towers at the corner?

The rules mention that attackers can move clockwise. Does that mean that they move to the next part of the wall clockwise? or does that mean that they go from the north side of the wall to the east side of the wall?

They also mention that they are placed at a distance of three spaces away but not on the same spot. So would that mean that you are placing enemies against the wall in the following position?

x x x
- - -
- - -

wall wall tower

Sorry for the formatting problems. I can't get it to look any better than this.

And when they move to do they go down and clockwise (assuming they had a range of one? i.e. like this:

- - - -
- x x x
- - - -

wall wall tower wall
2 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
radchad wrote:
I am still very confused about how to set the game up.

If there are two spaces on a single side of a wall, does that mean that the attackers choose one of those walls and line up to that side? And can attackers attack the towers at the corner?


Here's what the rules say:
ATTACKER DRAWS: Draw three attacker cards from the Enemy deck. If any of the new cards are units, put them in play.
For new units, each attacker unit card has a name, strength and defense, and a range. Place the card at a range of “3” on
the castle side (see examples) the deck is on. If there are multiple castle wall cards on that side, the player can choose
on which they go. If all spaces on that side are full, the player may choose where to place them (at a range of 3 on
another wall). If all range 3 spots are full, return the card to the bottom of the deck.


So by this: The attacker (the seiging side) draws three cards from the attacker deck. If any are units, they get put down. The new unit gets placed at a range of three on the side the attacker deck is on. (The attacker deck in the setup is placed on the north wall side, and it moves around the castle). If the wall in question has two lengths of wall on it, the player may choose which one it faces (at a range of three). If all spaces at range three are full, the player can place them on any range three. If all range three spots are full the unit is put back in the deck. Yes? Or should I reword it?

Quote:
The rules mention that attackers can move clockwise. Does that mean that they move to the next part of the wall clockwise? or does that mean that they go from the north side of the wall to the east side of the wall?


If an Attacker card has 2 Attacker units in front of it, it will try to move “diagonally” forward, sliding to face the
next clockwise castle WALL card,

...next part of the same wall if one is free. I should reword this.

Quote:
They also mention that they are placed at a distance of three spaces away but not on the same spot. So would that mean that you are placing enemies against the wall in the following position?

x x x
- - -
- - -

wall wall tower


You got it.
Quote:

Sorry for the formatting problems. I can't get it to look any better than this.

And when they move to do they go down and clockwise (assuming they had a range of one? i.e. like this:

- - - -
- x x x
- - - -

wall wall tower wall


Ah - I specifically say wall not tower cards. Yeah, the enemy in this game do not move in front of towers, only walls. When they reach the last wall card on a side they move around to the next side. Maybe a better way to word that in the movement rules.

Was there anything specific about setup? Basically you are just building a "square or rectangle" of walls with towers in the corners. "An easy square castle has 4 tower cards and 2 wall cards per side. " Should I reword?

Thanks for the feedback!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Rocconteur wrote:

Here's what the rules say:
ATTACKER DRAWS: Place the card at a range of “3” on
the castle side (see examples)


Well, I guess for starters ... I can't seem to find those examples. ???

Rocconteur wrote:

Quote:
The rules mention that attackers can move clockwise. Does that mean that they move to the next part of the wall clockwise? or does that mean that they go from the north side of the wall to the east side of the wall?


If an Attacker card has 2 Attacker units in front of it, it will try to move “diagonally” forward, sliding to face the
next clockwise castle WALL card,

...next part of the same wall if one is free. I should reword this.


If it doesn't have two attackers in front of it, does it just move forward instead?

And if attackers don't move in front of towers, does this mean that they don't attack towers? I have been going under the impression that attackers only attacked forward, not diagonally. Am I wrong?


Thanks for responding so quick.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Rocconteur wrote:

Was there anything specific about setup? Basically you are just building a "square or rectangle" of walls with towers in the corners. "An easy square castle has 4 tower cards and 2 wall cards per side. " Should I reword?

Thanks for the feedback!



Well, you don't mention what a hard setup would be like. That is kind of a problem and just leaves me confused.

I think in making the vassal module, I won't be able to do a different set up anyway. It is to hard trying to fit all of the information on the screen.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Quote:
If it doesn't have two attackers in front of it, does it just move forward instead?

And if attackers don't move in front of towers, does this mean that they don't attack towers? I have been going under the impression that attackers only attacked forward, not diagonally. Am I wrong?


Attackers attack anything within range. Given that it costs an extra range to attack/be attacked on towers, unless they have some sort of ranged attack, they won't. Attackers don't "move" in the space in front of towers (so therefore only attack people on towers with ranged weapons) and don't use siege attacks (ones that damage walls) on towers for the same reason. Those rules are mostly to just have the attackers coming from four directions.

And yes, if an attacker moves, and one of the two spaces in front are clear, it moves forward.

I'll work on putting in those examples!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
Rocconteur wrote:

Attackers attack anything within range.


Do they attack everything in range? Do they prioritize to the thing that is closest?

In other words if someone is on the tower and someone is on the wall, are they most likely to go after the person on the wall (because they are closer)?

Thanks for your patience.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
According to the rules, the attacker goes after:
· The defender directly in front (range 1) with the most wounds. If two units of equal wounds are adjacent, the player chooses.
· If nobody in front (or an ally is in front), the defender with the most wounds within range;
· if equally wounded, it attacks the one with the lowest Defense within range;
· if still unable to decide it attacks the player’s choice of defenders in range.
So then generally its whoever is front (adjacent but not diagonal - maybe I should add that) with the most wounds. If one is one front, that guy; if two are in front, the more wounded guy (if a tie of wounded guys in front, player chooses).
If nobody in front (or if there are only allies in front), the most wounded guy within range.
If everybody within range equally wounded, then the one with the lowest defense... and then if still tied, player chooses.

Make sense? I think if you were trying to automate it, and got down that decision tree to a "player chooses" point its mostly academic - you could use a random process to pick if that served you better.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (for 2012 July Solitaire Design Contest)
And to actually answer your question (sorry blush):
Yeah, due to the added range of the tower, people in towers will probably only be attacked by attackers with ranged weapons that get close to the towers, or by attackers once they are inside the castle.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
Hi - based on the above, some playtesting, and some private messages, I've made some rules cleanups, adding examples, and fixed a few things. A new version of the rules are up at the original links.

Thanks for all the help folks!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
And here is the vassal module. It does have the new and updated rules.

Vassal Module for Two Deck Siege

This module turned out to be a lot more work than I had originally intended. Including totally redesigning the board so that it would fit onto the screen.


3 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
Can I say I'm super stoked by the vassal module? I can!? I'm super stoked!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Hansen
United States
Riverton
UT
flag msg tools
designer
If given the option, I would prefer to play with the green pieces, please.
badge
I have two new 9 Card Games: 300 Spartans and Franky's 1st Christmas
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
Rocconteur wrote:
Hi - based on the above, some playtesting, and some private messages, I've made some rules cleanups, adding examples, and fixed a few things. A new version of the rules are up at the original links.

Thanks for all the help folks!

Did the cards change at all or just the rules? I printed the cards awhile ago and just want to check on if I need to reprint. Thanks!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
I don't think I've changed the cards, just the rules.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
OK, so I finally sat down and played my first game. Unfortunately, I did abort early because of a rules question that I had. When monsters breach the walls, do they go straight into the courtyard or do they go onto the wall space where the courtyard was?

My thoughts:

I can't say I really enjoyed having one of my walls destroyed without being able to make a single move at all. (No move cards).

I think what this game needs is either for cards to have a double function or the ability to use any card for a really weak action. This was done in Mage Knight and it works really well.

What I mean would be to use any card (regardless of what is written on the card) to either move a single unit or attack with a single unit. This would give at least a function to drawing a gollem or gryphon and just letting them plug up your hand for a long period of time.

What do you think?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
Quote:
When monsters breach the walls, do they go straight into the courtyard or do they go onto the wall space where the courtyard was?


Rules say if an attacker moves next to a wall if it's breached or if it has no defenders, it moves directly into the courtyard. I didn't want to leave the attackers on the wall space because it got too complicated to figure what happens if a defender goes on top of it, what happens if the wall gets fixed, etc. So for now: they run right in.

Quote:
I can't say I really enjoyed having one of my walls destroyed without being able to make a single move at all. (No move cards).

I think what this game needs is either for cards to have a double function or the ability to use any card for a really weak action. This was done in Mage Knight and it works really well.

What I mean would be to use any card (regardless of what is written on the card) to either move a single unit or attack with a single unit. This would give at least a function to drawing a gollem or gryphon and just letting them plug up your hand for a long period of time.

What do you think?


You got a good point. I played originally and didn't have too many problems, but that was luck of the draw - the game I just tried had that issue come up.

I think only moving or fighting with one unit might be light, though - I'll have to do some more playtesting. My initial thinking is: Basically: let any number of units in the courtyard, or any number of units on one tower or wall, either attack, or move to a new location. I'll test a game this way. Sounds reasonable?

Thanks!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
Hmm, that might be a bit overpowered. It might make some of the cards redundant. I don't think you want that, do you?
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rocco Privetera
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: WIP: TWO DECK SIEGE (2012 July Solitaire Contest - Component Ready)
I've taken some time to do some game testing and have made a few rules changes to address some of the issues above. Changes are:

1. Engineer units on wall that repair a wall get a bonus of +1 repair points on the wall they are standing on (it's dangerous on the wall but easier to repair). Engineers in the courtyard can still repair any wall, but get no bonus. Only units with specific engineering skills can get this bonus.

2. Any card can be played as a "generic order". This lets a player issue either Attack or Move order to either one unit in the courtyard, or both units occupying the same wall/tower card. If an attack issued to two units, both units have to attack (although they could be different targets); if a move order, both units have to move to the same place. When a generic order is issued against something in the courtyard it only affects one unit. It also only uses the card stats (so issuing a generic order on a Wizard only lets you use his card, not his special Wizard spells).

The only changes were to the rules so I did not re-issue the cards. I did publish up a new version of the rules if you want to download it.

Thanks for the feedback! This is my last game submission to the Solitaire Challenge! Four is enough!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Mestdagh
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that will fix the game. (It certainly works for Mage Knight!)

I look forward to playing this game in my month of August (because I will be playing games and not making modules!)
3 
 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.