""Gameplay" Philosophy in Wargames" Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Utter Drivel Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article A cheap way to pick up on the latest fad and get your own dice cup for wargaming?
Featured Workbench Article The Editor learns about downloading, printing, and binding a ruleset.
Featured Profile Article Building blocks?
Current Poll
|
The Membership System will be closing for maintenance in 5 minutes. Please finish anything that will involve the membership system, including membership changes or posting of messages.
| Tango01 | 15 Dec 2014 10:02 p.m. PST |
"A lot of wargame designers spend a lot of time coming up with the lastest whiz-bang mechanics but there are only a certain amount of ways you can resolve combat. But game mechanics are just means to an end. I've already talked about Design Philosophy " – having an overarching goal with a series of self-imposed success criteria; but this article is more "Gameplay" Philosophy. Gameplay: the features of a game, such as its plot and the way it is played, as distinct from the graphics and sound effects. Sid Meier calls gameplay "A series of interesting choices."…"
Full text here
link Amicalement
Armand |
| basileus66 | 15 Dec 2014 11:47 p.m. PST |
Interesting article. Thanks for the link! |
| OSchmidt | 16 Dec 2014 8:41 a.m. PST |
Rewarding and punishing players? That may work in video games, it don't in Historical miniature gaming. You're not dealing with twelve year olds in miniature gaming, and even when you are, they act more like 30 year olds. Try to make your players play the game a certain way and you'll have no one playing the game. Let them KNOW you're trying to get them to play in a certain way and they'll tear it apart just for spite. |
| Tango01 | 16 Dec 2014 10:23 a.m. PST |
Glad you enjoyed it my friend! (smile) Amicalememt
Armand |
| Zematus | 16 Dec 2014 2:56 p.m. PST |
The reward/punish concept is in regards to the mechanics of the rules. If "getting in the right position/flanking" is worth a +5 bonus and "having a better weapon" is only a +1 bonus, then you are "rewarding" positioning instead of choice of weapon. This will naturally encourage players to try to out-maneuver each other rather than picking more advanced weapons. If you flip the values, then you get a game that is more about weapon-selection than maneuvering/positioning. If both values are only +1, and you try telling people "This game is about maneuvering", then you are artificially trying to make people play the game in a way that is not "encouraged" by the rules. |
| Zephyr1 | 16 Dec 2014 3:09 p.m. PST |
The power gamers will always figure out a way to beat the system… |
| evilleMonkeigh | 16 Dec 2014 4:28 p.m. PST |
Zematus, it's people like you who restore my faith in humanity. It appears you read and understood the article. This differs from the usual TMP practice of picking a random quote out of context in order to argue with it for the sake of airing an opinion. Are you sure you belong here? |
| Tango01 | 16 Dec 2014 11:28 p.m. PST |
Agree with you my friend. Amicalement
Armand |
|
