Welcome back to Part 2! Todays topic:
Game mechanics, Fine-tuning, challenges
Anni:
Stefan, what do you think of the finished game now? You played it again last year for the first time after a long break, didn't you?
Stefan:
Exactly, I think it's sensational and it's so, so much better than what I brought in as a rough draft back then. I think it's really good now and I really enjoy playing it myself and always just for fun, never to win, when I play with the gentlemen (from Deep Print Games), I don't stand a chance. But it turned out to be exactly what I had hoped for, or rather what I had hoped for from a civilisation evolution game. And the engine-building part that Viktor helped to develop, so to speak, with the console. That has a completely different appeal in terms of the Euro-game mechanics. So from that point of view, Viktor got 100 per cent more out of it.
Viktor:
Yes, and that was actually one of the aspects of tripling these 21 actions. The fact that you don't just have to hope for card luck but can improve certain things yourself. It was simply this step to really have more influence on the fact that you can still go in a certain direction, which was previously only possible via the cards as they came. That was a very important aspect. That's why upgrading is of course one step more. But it gives you a lot of additional control to want to go in a certain direction. But you still can use it for the cards and, from that point of view, you don't really have any more effort in that sense.
Stefan:
And that was also a milestone. And I sometimes underestimate that, but many players, especially the expert players, just want to be able to play it their way. And that often doesn't work with my designs, because if you don't get the cards, then you can't play the way you want. But that's crucial for many people. And the way you describe it now, Viktor, is the crucial thing. At least you have the feeling that you have more control.
Viktor:
Which also helps a lot.
Anni:
Is there one thing that you say took the longest to develop or was the most complex?
Stefan:
I think we spent the longest working on this displacement movement mechanism. A thousand different approaches on how to do it. And I think that was also crucial, it was very difficult. I think it was also your idea in the end, Viktor, but to manage it in such a way that we didn't have such a high potential for conflict. That was my approach from the start. I wanted to have a civilisation game without the direct confrontation. So, it really should always remain in the Euro area. And that wasn't quite the case at the beginning. It was frustrating at times, also helped by some of the cards. And the new version is nevertheless coherent and does it in a very reduced way. And I think that was the point where we worked on it the longest.
Viktor:
Yes, I think so too. But the cards were exactly what he gave me at the beginning. He had 32 cards of each type. Well, there were also 32 for the events at the beginning, so we reduced that a bit and restructured it, of course. But in terms of the basic principle, it was all there. Of course, we reorganised and adapted a few cards. But this basic thing was already in the very first prototype. Namely, that you have so many cards, that they all do something different, that they have certain costs with these 18 resources and so on. That was all already there. Partly a bit different, of course. And the resources were one of our first ideas. You just had to pay everything that was on it to do it. And I don't know exactly when the idea came about to say, okay, we'll make it dependent on the rounds, how many resources you have to pay for them. In the beginning it was just the one. In the beginning it was still dependent on the rounds. But a lot of things were already there. And I only ever tweaked it a little bit in a few places.
Stefan:
And because you mentioned that it was also a big concern of mine that the cards should be somewhat coherent. These 18 resources naturally came about from a game mechanics perspective, because there were six times three things, but also because the things you build with the resources should be connected in a meaningful way. A sail or a boat is tarred, and so on. That was also a new approach for me, to go broader in terms of the cards. And I actually wanted to take a bit of a thematic approach to this civilisation, and I don't know if you know that, but I actually had a flavour text with all these cards that was supposed to take it in a vague direction, because I couldn't think of a clever theme. So I tried to stay relatively thematic.
Anni:
And the fact that everything is built into the console was there from the start?
Stefan:
No, no, that came from Viktor, he already had it in his first self-made prototype. Originally it was a pyramid but fanned out the other way round. And then Viktor said that we should somehow add lines like that and that there would be a bonus for filling them. And then I had the things in my hand, and then we put them the other way round. And then the new game plan was created, so to speak. And then it was relatively easy to say, let's stick with it.
Viktor:
Originally, the cards weren't even that present. My approach was just to say, okay, I'd like to make it so that you actually link what you get points for in the end. And that was just this approach, that you puzzle the cards in and use them to trigger other things and link everything together. And it was precisely on these topics that we were able to pass on new ideas to each other.
Stefan:
The fact that you only get immediate bonuses for many cards has worked very well. The new rule makes playing cards more attractive. I only got more points for cards played later. That's much better with this console system, because then I also play cards to fill the console, even if the effect doesn't bring me as much. And that's another natural progression, or rather it brings more satisfaction. And because you're talking about this ping-pong, and I think I've already told you that myself, Viktor, it's just a pleasure to brainstorm with someone who immediately understands what it's about and in which direction it should go. And that you say, okay, if we tweak this, then it's going in this direction and what we're actually doing something for and so on. And that doesn't work with all editorial teams in the same way, to put it diplomatically.
Viktor:
Not with all authors either. As far as that goes, I don't think you couldn't have a more grateful author. The collaboration was the best thing we've done here in this direction. And I think the result is also very much in favour of the fact that we were both able to do exactly that. And which perhaps others don't always manage to do in the same way. I think that's definitely a point in our favour.
See you tomorrow for part 3!