I have finally gotten the core game loop running smoothly and revised the turn structure so that it is easier to follow. The game theme is also changed to something that fits the mechanics more closely and is a bit more palatable. The original theme of spiders triggering a nuclear war was novel and punchy, but it was an awkward fit for the game and a bit of a depressing theme. The spiders are now living in a secret military lab. They’ve grown intelligent and learned how to get along without eating each other. The “Hoover-Bot” is still getting closer and closer, threatening a “Hoovergedoon” but the spiders have gained enough intelligence to build an EMP. Can the spiders find enough spare parts and to build and trigger the EMP to destroy the Hoover-Bot?…. You’ll have to play the game to find out.
You can check out the Tabletop Playground Simulation of this game Here.
Pack your bags, we’re heading for a trip down “Denial”. So far, I’ve wrestled with my creative muse, wrangled with game mechanics, and tackled the near vertical learning curve of computer graphic design. I thought I had this game design gig licked until I was derailed by the insidious specter of Denial.
Recently, the design of the Arachnid game was going OK. I was at version #24 when I decided to change things up.I modified a few things to make the game more interesting, which seemed to be working. I also decided to tackle the biggest problem, quarterbacking, which can be a serious issue with cooperative games like mine. I scraped the shared tableau where players selected their actions, for individual hands of cards for each player. It would work similar to the hand of action cards in the game “Concordia”. This way, the players can manage their characters on their own, without an alpha player constantly telling them how to play. This seemed to work….sort of.
I ran through a few simulations of the game, but kept getting hung up at a certain point in the game. I would tweak a few things, then try it again, just to end up at the same impasse. I kept tweaking, and running tests, but amazingly, something would always distract me or I would discover something else that had to be fixed around the same time that the strange flaw would appear during the game. I even put the game aside for a while, hoping the flaw would somehow work itself out. I was in a serious state of denial.
It took a lot of effort and a little soul searching to finally face the fact that the game was currently broken. My new fangled solution to the quarterbacking problem just didn’t work. Reluctantly, I scraped the new card based action system and replaced it with individual player boards with worker placement spaces. Not only did this get the game back on the right track, but it proved to be a more flexible system, while still reducing the quarterbacking issues. I had wasted a great deal of time and effort because I didn’t want to admit to myself that the game was broken. It was surprisingly easy to lie to myself, rather than face the possibility of a long hard path in front of me.
Designing, whether it’s machines or board games, can be a really fun and challenging endeavor. It can also be an arduous and tiring task. Those are the times when we’re tempted to overlook the flaws or settle for something that is just barely good enough. It is important to recognize these biases that arise during a design. Taking an impartial look at your project through another person’s eyes is a simple concept but it is definitely not easy.
I’ve gotten over myself and busted through the latest wall of Denial. The design is back on track. I hope, after all of this, the game works well. I guess the players will have to decide this for themselves. Just like Martin Luther King Jr said, I just have to “keep on keeping on”.
The Arachnid game has gotten a serious overhaul. Version #25 created on “Tabletop Playground” is shown above. In spite of all the changes, the theme remains the same. You are part of a colony of intelligent spiders living in a missile silo. You struggle to survive, and fend off waves of invaders as you build your web and try to solve the mystery of “The Red Beacon”. You must unlock and activate the launch beacon to start the new age of Arachnid. Time is limited because the “Hoover-Bot 3000” is getting closer and closer to the web, threatening to destroy the colony in a horrible “Hoovergeddon”.
Under the Hood
In the previous version, the actions were performed by a worker placement system. The quarterbacking, however, became a problem, especially when there was an alpha player or one player more experienced than the others. A completely open system just provided too many opportunities for quarterbacking. I decided to go back to an action card system, much like the one used in Concordia. Each player has a hand of cards representing various actions. Each round, players select an action, then they are simultaneously revealed. The players can discuss a general plan of action before they select their cards, then debate the order the action cards are used after they have been played, but they cannot tell another player which card to choose. That is the intent of this new system, but we will soon see if this actually works.
The prior version of Arachnid also had too many moving parts and the administration was excessive. The AI used to activate the “Critters” invading the web and Flies being trapped has been added to the ever growing scrap pile. It involved of a bag of chits, a die with a weird action table, and an action track. This, combined with various scripted behaviors of the Critters resulted in a ridiculously overcomplicated system. Players used to flip over rocks as well, revealing some bonuses as well as new Critters. All of this is gone. The new “Event” deck will be used to trigger Critters invading and Flies hitting the web.
Better Decisions
In the prior few versions, players flipped over tokens as the web was expanded up to them. They contained bonuses, keys to the Beacon, and new Critter Spawn points. This did the job but the game decisions were too obvious and even a bit boring. These tokens were also eliminated in the latest version. Players still have to gain a number of keys to unlock the Launch Beacon, but it’s a bit more complicated to do this. There are a number of action cards available for purchase, but you can’t spend money or food to get them. These cards also have keys on them, and you have to sacrifice a portion of your web to gain the card. This is costly because you need your web to catch food and evade Critters. At some point during the game, players have to permanently discard these powerful action cards to unlock the beacon. Timing is important because you need the abilities of these cards.
Each card you play stays on the table until you play a “Rest” card to retrieve them back into your hand. This, however, will trigger the Hooverbot advancing closer and closer to the web. Do you retrieve that card you desperately need and get the colony one step closer to annihilation?
Will it Work?
This is an extreme overhaul of the game. It might just result in my own private Armageddon with the game going up in smoke. I guess we’ll find out soon. Fingers Crossed.
The Arachnid game was coming along quite nicely. The cooperation between players works quite well. Each player tends to have their own speciality, but they also have to depend on each other to get things done. The mechanics are smooth and intuitive and the game length seems just about right. In spite of all this, I still went and broke the game.
Working out the earlier kinks made the game run smoother. Unfortunately, it started to make the game a bit boring and predictable. There was no compelling reason to come back and play the game again. The players had experienced most of what the game offered. I needed to inject some replayability into the game or it would just end up on the shelf after one play, never to be taken out again.
I started with the current main objective. Players have to acquire 4 or 5 keys to enable the launch button before “Hoover” ends the game by finally reaching the web. This worked fine, but would just be a boring repeat if the game were played again, in spite of the different ways the spider characters evolve during the game. I decided to mix it up a bit. Players can play their introduction game with the keys displayed on the corners of the hex shaped player board as before, but they can choose to randomize the positions in subsequent games and hide the keys under rocks. This way, a player never knows when lifting a rock, whether it will reveal a new ability, be one of the sought after keys, or reveal a dangerous critter. This will create some variability to the game.
I also decided to start working on the action cards, increasing the count, so that only a small subset of the total cards would be in play in any given game. This should greatly help with the replayability of the game. It’s a real challenge coming up with new and interesting spider behaviors and ways to implement them, but I’m slowly picking away at solving this puzzle.
The third way I plan on dealing with the replayability problem is by introducing different scenarios with unique objectives. I will address this after I work out the latest kinks in the game and expand the deck. Some of the new cards can even be specific to certain scenarios. I will get to all of this after I fix what I just broke in the latest version of the game.
One of the complaints from the paytesters was the excessive administration of the “Critters” during their activation phase. This caused a break in the rhythm of the game which broke the players immersion of the game. This needed to be dealt with, so I decided to simplify the critters to eliminate redundant behaviors and reduce the administration of these A.I driven beings. This is how I actually broke the game……BOOGERS…..!
Originally, as you tried to acquire the keys, you activated Critters from the same location which could start chasing you around the web or wreak havoc in other ways. There were some logistical problems with the new, hidden, critters which were revealed as you turned over the rocks so I had to change this. In an effort to simplify the rules, I decided that the critters would enter the web at one of the six points of the board. This would be decided by rolling the A.I. die, the same way as they entered when drawn from the event bag. This simplified the rules, but turned out to be a very bad decision.
The result was a reduced risk of exploring and acquiring things because the critters would enter the web in places that didn’t immediately affect the spiders. This removed almost all of the tension from the game and made it very easy to win. It sucked the life out of the game, just like a spider drinking a “Critter Shake”. I now have to backtrack a little and find another way to deal with the introduction of the critters as they are revealed. They absolutely must start out from the rock under which they are revealed. This will create a tense moment whenever a rock is flipped over. I don’t know what I was thinking when I eliminated this in favor of a simpler rule-set. I just have to find an elegant and intuitive way to do this. I’m always amazed at how easy it is to derail a game with a simple rule change. It’s time to put my thinking cap back on and fix this game, then start making it better. Piece of cake…..LOL!
Arachnid has gone through some major changes to reduce the number of components, simplify set-up and streamline game-play. I was worried for a moment after I finally worked out most of the problems with the action deck and action board. Once the game flowed smoothly, I realized that there weren’t enough interesting decisions throughout the game. I thought this game might just end up on top of the ever growing scrap-pile of dysfunctional games.
I took a short break from the game before deciding it’s fate. After taking a fresh look, and getting some good input from my #1 playtester (my wife) I was able to narrow down the problems. To start with, the game was too easy to win and the path to victory was too obvious. The “Critters” attacking the web weren’t really much of a threat and the end-game countdown (Hoover) wasn’t very dramatic. This all made for a boring and predictable game. With just a few tweaks, I was able to turn all this around.
The main objective in the game is to acquire the four keys in order to unlock the “Launch Button”. I made this task more complicated so players had to work together or find different ways to get them. I added more Critters and gave them more interesting and dangerous behaviors. This really ramped up the tension in the game and forced some tough decisions between defending the web and acquiring the keys. Having so many things to do and limited time to do it, automatically, made the end-game count-down much more dramatic.
It looks like the game is back on track and it’s time to write a final set of rules. Writing the rules is an important part of the design process. It reveals logic errors and provides a completely different perspective on the game. I’m really looking forward to ironing out the final glitches. I just hope there aren’t any really big issues I’ve missed. The “Kinda” “Sorta”, simultaneous turn-order (but only if you need to…) is going to be tough to explain. This should be fun!
Recent Comments