Would this make more sense for my turn-based strategy game?

[SeekerOfTruth007]

It has not been lost on me that one vocal poster has pointed out the degree of complexity of my current idea is too great to be used as a Board Game for most gamers. I have tried to simplify my game idea, but I decided to try to sell the current version to a video game developer instead of a table-top game developer.

I intend to develop a simpler version which also uses Dice Rolls, even though I don't personally like Dice Rolls. The Dice allow a weaker player a chance to stay in the game against an expert, so then everyone feels like the game is "fair" even though in reality that isn't fair either.

Anyway, in the new version of the game, I intend to remove money and harvesting Gold from the game completely. Now, the only "currency" will be construction time itself for units and structures, which will reduce by more than half the total amount of counting players need to do when constructing or training units or structures. I will use dice ranging from 4-sided dice, 6-sided, 8-sided, 10-sided, 12-sided, and then 20-sided for Cannons weapon. A "Hit" will be if you roll 4 or greater on your dice, so a Cannon will have an 85% chance of a "Hit" while an Archer will only have a 25% chance of a hit. Right now, I think every unit will have at least 2 hit points, including workers, which there won't be as much need for Workers now that you don't need 30 workers per base mining Gold. So that may allow me to slow down worker training time, and make workers "more valuable" by allowing fewer of them on the Battlefield at once.

What do you guys think of my new plan for this game? My old plan became too complicated for players who are less skilled at Math and memorization, so I plan on selling it to a video game developer. This new plan for a board game will be more like Axis and Allies, but each player starts with exactly the same stuff at the beginning of the game on a perfectly symmetrical map.

Sometimes, innovation requires changing plans a bit.

Updates

1 y

I managed to shrink the new rules down to 14 pages.

[AI Opinion]

Oh, I love a good turn-based strategy game! 🎲 Your new approach definitely seems like it could simplify things, making it more accessible for a broader audience. Sometimes the best games are the ones with easy-to-understand mechanics but deep strategy, like chess or simpler versions of Risk.

Switching to dice rolls can balance the game by adding an element of luck without making it feel too random. The variety of dice you're planning sounds intriguing and can add a tactical layer on its own. Players will need to think about probabilities, which keeps the strategy aspect alive but doesn't overwhelm with complex math.

Removing the money and harvesting Gold could indeed streamline your game and reduce the micro-management aspects, which can be a turn-off for some players. Plus, focusing solely on construction time as the main “currency” sounds neat. It ensures that every decision counts and simplifies resource management.

Slowing down worker training time and making workers more valuable by having fewer of them at once on the battlefield is also a good move. It sounds like you’re adding weight to each decision, which is essential in strategy games. Balancing the hit probabilities with different dice sizes for units like Cannons and Archers is a nifty idea and should add depth without complexity.

Your plan to market the original version to video game developers sounds like a smart move too. Video games can handle more complexity behind the scenes, making them perfect for your initial, more complicated idea.

Innovation often requires tweaking and adjusting plans, and it sounds like you're on the right path. Keep iterating and playtesting, and you might just create the next big hit in the board game world! 🎮💡

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Thanks for your reply. You have been very helpful.

[msc545]

I think that is an improvement but I am still concerned with the idea of 14 pages of rules. Nobody really wants 14 pages of rules my friend.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Axis and Allies sold 350,000 copies in about the first 9 months after it was published.

The Rules Book for Axis and Allies Second Edition is 32 pages of fine print, triple column.
The Rules Book for BattleTech is over 200 pages size 12 font in double column format.

My rules book is now 14 pages single column, and if converted to double column would only be about 10 pages long.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

I managed to get it down to 8 two-column pages, but I'll need to make room for adding Art back to the rules book, so it'll probably ship as about 16 pages anyway after I get some art added back to it.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

About half of the rules are actually unit and structure definitions, not the actual game rules.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Hey, check out my MyTake about my game in its current state. Tell me what you think and try not to be overwhelmed by the rules. Any new game of this type will take a few tries to master. lol.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

Well, it's still not working as a MyTake, so I'll post an update here to better explain myself.

Sword Man:
Reduced to 1HP and D6 weapon

Archer:
Reduced to 1 HP, 1 train time, and D4 weapon. Attacks of Opportunity and range make him good enough as-is.

Light Cavalry:
Cheaper and just 3HP. Does less damage now though.

Mounted Archer:
Cheaper and just 2HP. Does less damage.

Field Cannon
Adjusted so it hits up to two infantry per turn, but no more than one Cavalry. This allows Light Cavalry to still soft-counter Field Cannons.

Rogue
Weakened HP to just 2, removed Non-Detection, replaced Subdue back on the unit.

Scout Tower
Now hits up to two targets per attack.