Welcome back to Part 3 of the interview: Scope and Balance of Civolution.
Anni:
Are you worried that people might see it as ‘too much’?
Stefan:
Yes, you can counter that you'll never please everyone and that we have to manage to avoid creating expectations in the wrong direction, so to speak. And we're already doing that quite well. There are elements of luck in it, which Viktor has already tried to capture really well with the thematic description. Viktor once said to me that my games always work like this: I throw chaos at the players and they must get control of it somehow and we have to reach the point where control is just about possible, and that's why it's quite clear that there are some elements of luck in it. That will be the case for some players who say it's too random for them, and I also say that if you only ever roll the wrong dice, then you'll have difficulties actually winning the game. But the influence is high enough and if you know what you're playing for, then you have enough influence to play well and in the long run, the better player will prevail.
Anni:
And you can always adjust your course. I rolled the dice disastrously in this round and still won.
Viktor:
Yes, absolutely. Yes, but that's what's ‘dangerous’ about the game. I think that most people who don't manage to win that often let themselves be guided too much by the dice. If you focus too much on the dice and take actions that match the dice, then that's more of a risk than if you fundamentally focus on one thing and try to play in a certain direction. And allowing yourself to be distracted by the dice because so much is possible, is a trap that you shouldn't fall into so much. But even then, the game is still fun. I think there's a lot more influence in it than most people realize at the beginning. That's why Moritz can outplay everyone else. Because he knows exactly that. I know that too, up to a certain point. That's why I don't think that's really an argument. Of course, there's a bit of chance involved with the cards. Of course, you can have a great starting hand. By pure chance, it can all fit together perfectly, but it's just not repeatable. Not in any way. And that's why people may say, oh, I've got this and it's far too good. Yes, but you'll never be able to repeat it like that again. And that's the good thing about it. That's what I like about it. You just have to read things and somehow make the best of them. There are always combinations that I still discover while playing: Wow, that combination is great. In this case, you can't test all combinations perfectly. And that's what makes this game so open-ended. Actually, that's all you need. I thought that was great.
Stefan:
And to the critics who are already assessing strategies on Boardgame Geek without having played the game: I just don't give anything about it anymore and in the end, it will prevail and I've now stopped defending my games against that. So where mistakes really do happen, and they do happen from time to time, there's no question about that, but this feeling, this expectation that some people have, that it's impossible to always fulfill. Viktor has already described it, there are so many degrees of freedom and so many parameters in this game that there are of course better combinations and worse combinations, but they have to be read and then it depends on the player to see them. As Viktor said about the dice, I'm also prone to being distracted by them. But, and I think that's the huge strength of the game: There are other games where you can lose yourself and then at some point you get the feeling that nothing is actually happening. And that's different here. Of course, you see the others run away from time to time and so on, but these massive final scores mean that you somehow never know exactly where you're going. Later, of course, but. (?) And that the feeling of the game is just so satisfying. Regardless of whether you're ahead or not.
Viktor:
I would like to play the game again for the first time now. It's a shame that you can't switch it off somehow to actually know how it actually works for first-time players, and how they get into it.
Anni:
Then another question about the illustration of the game: To what extent did you follow the process, Stefan?
Stefan:
Sure, Viktor always showed me the current stuff and we looked at it. But I think I only spoke to Dennis about it very briefly once. But I've already worked with Dennis elsewhere and worked so closely that I was really happy when Viktor said Dennis would illustrate it. It really suits my taste. And I knew that this whole iconography, which Viktor developed very early on, that he would realize it really well here. And so, I think you'll agree, Victor, that he always brings in such nice thematic ideas. I've only seen the final card illustration very briefly, but I'm really looking forward to seeing what's been created.
Anni:
And how do you feel about being in the game?
Viktor:
As the Director God, yes, that's great.
Stefan:
What am I supposed to say now? It's embarrassing for me, but on the other hand it's nice for your own ego.
Viktor:
I didn't ask if that was okay for you. I wasn't really sure about that. But that was relatively early on. Or rather, when we went into this academy topic. Agera, which is derived from the Latin field, Aga, so to speak, is ultimately this figure. And then Dennis came up with such a funny idea that I thought, yes, why not? But I had the same problem with the solo mode, which we somehow ended up calling V.I.C.I. I didn't know if I wanted that at first, but now I like it!
Stefan:
But I mean, the publisher isn't called Deep Print for nothing. Then we can leave our footprints too.
Anni:
Thank you both for all these insights!
That's it for now!
There's an upcoming interview with Dennis Lohausen, too, before the end of the pre-order campaign. But coming up next is Paul Grogan!