Lesson 1.2.11

We began with addressing the pros and cons of the modes of transport, and separating this from the sabotage scenarios because the former referred to the rules of the game and the latter referred to the mechanics. The mechanics, we elaborated, could be cards that players earn and then can place on the board to hinder another players journey, forcing them to take distant route, bypassing the sabotage card and situation or by continuing their journey but having to miss a go due to the inconvenience. This will make the player think tactically, planning in advance, looking for other directions they can take if this one gets sabotaged.

At first we chose to use a hex board, however we decided to simplify this to a basic square grid board, like Snakes and Ladders, to work out the pros and cons of how far one can travel. However we still had trouble balancing out the advantages and disadvantages, so we tried out a new idea: all players begin as pedestrians. And linking this with an older idea: all players start at the corners of the board gave us a starting point with the balancing problem, although it opened up new challenges, since the other vehicle facilities, like train stations, cars and bicycles racks (Borris Bikes), needed to be equally scattered and arranged so that one route or starting point did not have a dominant strategy and gave the player unfair advantages. Although, making the 4 quarters of the board the same would mean the players are playing on separated maps.

We tried out our idea with a map of the Elephant and Castle area, I picked one corner and Matthew picked another, however, the map was too small of an area and only included one tube station, so we used cars, bicycles and walking as our modes of transport, trying to get to university which was conveniently in the middle of the map. We marked off where we would go, opting for the car, trying to be devious and working out loopholes, we decided that you can’t get too close to the university in the car as there is no place to park! So finding a small narrow road, the car was parked and the route carried on by foot.

Although this was just a trial of a trial, we learned the importance of marking out areas in strategic locations, not having too little facilities so the player has no choice and not having too many, cluttering the board, also it showed how we could use our daily commutes as ideas, seeing the infrastructure of transport, how in some areas favour certain modes of transport; making the journey more accessible for them, like cycle lanes. And how some make it a little difficult, a bit like our sabotage cards! Yellow lanes in shopping areas, forcing you to either take public transport or pay for parking in multi storey car parks, either way rinsing out your wallet well before you make it to elephant and castle mall.

In the next lesson we will split the map up into grids and play with more regards to the rules. Fearing our game would not have much content if we only focused on trains, cars, pedestrians and bicycles, we began adding other forms of transport, like pedalos, trams, cabs and buses. This would give us more to work with if we didn’t have enough, after refining their characteristics, and it would give the game variety, although if they needed to be cut, we would still have our 3 or 4 main modes left to work with.

So the changes we have put on the table:

1.       All players begin the game on foot

2.       Starting points for players are the corners of the board

3.       Having a map drawn onto the board, with transport facilities being available (and unavailable due to sabotage cards) to the players

4.       Sabotage is in the form of cards than are awarded to the player (we still have to work out how, perhaps by detouring to collect them as bonuses) the player can place these on the grid to hinder players. This’ll involve thinking strategically; working out where the opposing player will want to go, attacking their shortest route will cause the most damage

5.       Hex board replaced with square grids, mirroring co-ordinates on maps.

Aims for next lesson

1.       Work on balancing the game objects

2.       Begin the design on the playing board

Lesson: 25.1.11

Today, we set about arranging the board of the game, we decided on a hex board, with the centre being the destination; the job interview. Next we needed to give each vehicle their special characteristics, advantages and disadvantages ad ways to sabotage other players. At first, we thought of quite a few of each, however they were imbalanced. For example the train seemed to be the most advantageous, with it being the fastest, being at the top of the ‘food-chain’, where a bike can hinder a pedestrian, a car can hinder the bicycle and the person can hinder both, the train seemed unstoppable. The train would quickly become a dominant strategy, we needed to give it disadvantages and have the effect of sabotage balance its advantages. One idea was a person jumping on to the tracks, another included

Being able to cover straight distances quickly seems an advantage, but if the route includes turns, this would prove difficult, however, we still have to discuss this idea of routes, after a while, the players will learn the shortest distant, another dominant strategy, one idea that could be implemented would be where players can be awarded sabotage cards so they can leave them in the route of other players, for example, leaving the sabotage card: person on track in the route of the train. Another example could include the cyclist leaving the sabotage card: flat tyre, in the shortest oncoming route to the destination, disrupting the car, the car player then has a choice, suffer the flat tyre and therefore miss their next turn but still be on the shortest route or to change route but still be able to play their next turn.

Jerry outlined the idea of giving the player lots of things to remember, that by having multitasking in the game, it requires more effort and is for older audiences, keeping this in mind, we needed to elaborate our idea of fuel depleting, he pointed out that in a digital game, the code would do this, keep an eye on it and stopping the vehicle when fuel = zero, but here, the player will have to do it, while planning their next move and sabotaging players, how would it be done? Will there be a timer, like chess, but the fuel will deplete even while everyone else is playing their turn? Also, this fuel concept only affects the train and the car, so the pedestrian and cyclist will need a similar depletion of something, like energy perhaps. This time/fuel/energy-limit element would add the sense of ever-present urgency to the goal; Costikyan believes that the goals should ‘guide our behaviour in the game’ (2002, p.12) Similarly, Crawford defines game as a ‘conflicts in which players directly interact in such a way as to foil each other’s goals.’ (2003, p.8) which could reflect our idea of sabotaging other players so they don’t get to their goal before you do.

The table below shows some of the advantages and disadvantages of each mode of transport:

Pedestrian Advantages Freedom of movement Disadvantages Slow Has to stop at railway crossings Have to wait to cross roads Depleting energy	Car Advantages Fast Disadvantages Restriction of movement, has to follow roads Has to wait at traffic lights Affected by road works Depleting fuel
Cyclist Advantages Can skip traffic lights Relatively free movement Disadvantages Can get a flat tyre Can get hit by car Depleting energy -	Train Advantages Fast Disadvantages Affected by people on track Affected by engineering works Restricted movement, has to follow tracks Has to stop at stations

We also discussed implementing move sets similar to Chess, e.g. where the knight can only move 2 grids forward and one left or right. What we drafted was trains moving 4 grids forward and only turning after two goes, cars moving 2 grids at a time and turning on their second go, pedestrians being able to move one grid and turn on any go and cyclists being able to do the same. However this may mean the players will have to remember what go it is and whether they are permitted to turn or not. Although it poses other problems, we need to calculate the amount of grids that need to be traversed to win and if using the train, is more difficult because there is less movement, so if they are 1 grid away from the destination and there turn dictates that they have to turn, they will not win, needing to perform an awkward U turn while the other players get closer to the victory condition.

So our main aims for next lesson are:

1)      Balance the pros and cons of each mode of transport

2)      Balance the sabotage scenarios

3)      Work out the movement on the hex board.

References

Costikyan, G. (2002) I have no words & I must design: Toward a critical vocabulary for games [internet] Available from <http://www.costik.com/nowords2002.pdf> [Accessed 28 January 2011]

Crawford, C. (2003) Chris Crawford on game design. United States of America: New Riders Publishing.