While I was ranting about Why I think hills are horrible in wargames rules, I found two rules had a clever solution for dealing with line of sight on hills using geometry. I’d already thought of a similar approach, also using geometry. I call the two approaches “Parallel crest” and “Perpendicular crest”. Both solutions are clever. Which one is better?
Game Design
The ‘To Hit’ Quandary – 5 plus or 2 minus
It is very common for game systems to give different units different to hit scores. The big question for me is, is it better to (1) give good units a higher to hit score or (2) reward higher dice rolls?
Hits Remaining or Hits Taken – Game Design Musing
In our recent game of Twilight of the Britons, we used markers for the hits taken. But after the game Chris suggested moving to hits remaining. This post explains that element of Game Design and when I’m tempted to use these two contrasting mechanisms.
Three dimensions of game design: Simulation, Playability, Abstraction
My mate Chris and I often debate game design, and specifically simulation versus playability. Wargamers typically think of these as opposites, with a set of rules being either realistic or playable. Chris is, for example, an advocate of simulation and is willing to sacrifice playability to get something he considers more realistic. But I don’t think these things – simulation and playability – are opposite ends of a single dimension. I’m an advocate for playability and simulation is also important to me. I want both. Abstraction is the key to unlocking this combination and is an important third dimension.