Finally got around to testing the core mechanics of GR. Definitely needs a lot of work, but nothing I felt disappointed by or couldn’t use work. But needs more depth. Not a problem considering I’m going for core mechanics testing right now and not a lot of the deeper features (goal cards, police, etc…)

My scoring I’m still not sure on. We tried it with the following system:

Base Score Tile + Square(level zone) (e.g. level 5 (red) would be 25 bonus points).

I feel like it didn’t get me the full score “feel” I was looking for. I think I may end up doing the original concept of a multiplier.
For example, a large tile scoring a base of 12 on a red zone w/no “hits” (e.g. full bonus)
1) 12*5 = 60 (pure multiplication)
or
2) 12 + 25 = 37 (using additive of squares).

My concern is runaway scoring using multiplication (though I feel that this may be resolved by the handcuff/police mechanic once that’s implemented).

The other issue we had was:

I had a vision of each person choosing in turn what they wanted to do by placing their pawns to reserve an action spot. This allowed for blocking people from getting in on some paint buying action, for example.

So while placing was done in one order, I didn’t have a particular concern about resolution. That is, each player placed what they wanted to do, and then, when it came time to resolve actions, I could choose to resolve an action that I chose 2nd or 3rd for my first action.

My roomies (co-testers) thought this wasn’t right and should have the same order of taking the action that we did to choose. Which makes perfect sense. I didn’t like the concern then of how to keep track and they’re like – just put a number on the pawns so 1 is 1st placed/resolved…

Obvious answer is obvious.

So that’s going to be the next thing I do.
Honestly I should check out other worker-placement type games to see how they do it. I have a little exposure, but more is better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *