Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[notquitethere]

Do extra turns count as a "last turn" for the purposes of "if it didn't act last turn" rules? RAW they would seem to, but I'm guessing that isn't intended.

[RoseHeart]

Oh, it's definitely intended that they do not count as your last turn, that's why they are "extra".

[RoseHeart]

I suppose I can rename ever instance of 'Turns' to 'Regular Turns', but let's just have an informal understanding about that one.

Edit: Actually, I just added a disclaimer to Extra Turns.

[RoseHeart]

So it was! Easy to miss when the game has two different types of turns, with different conditions that have to be met to take them and neither has to be declared. Carry on.

I found out a bit about myself, and why I have an issue with deadlines. Apparently people with Autism are prone to something called Demand Avoidance.

Though if it really is too complicated, and even if it isn't I have an idea to simplify things next go around. (Probably just turns)


I was diagnosed late in life, and I am still just learning how to quantify aspects of my experience of Autism. I really could not do the daily turns exclusively, I tried twice and I either forgot completely or was just stressing about it. I definitely want to be a player, so my designs will accommodate my disability, one way or another. (Even if I don't, I'll want to preserve the option.)


This is a big topic, so if anyone wants to discuss it I invite them to to so in Gaming Block. I can't promise I'll participate but if my input feels valued perhaps I will.

[notquitethere]

The two types of turn thing is not really a big deal, it's just that it's complex, right? In a way that is not intuitive to grasp, so it means mistakes are quite likely.

I don't think I'm especially dense or unobservant (maybe I am!) but I managed to mistake a regular turn for an extra turn and an extra turn for regular turn. Well, maybe the first mistake made it more likely I'd make the second because I had primed myself to be aware of Cheetah turn sequence. Still, these kind of mistakes are going to be more likely the more you have different ways of doing the same thing, and the only way to tell is whether or not somewhere on the grid a box is greyed out or not.

It's a balance though, I get it. Between trying to design a game that works for different player preferences, and designing a game that is straight-forward to understand, and also limiting the overhead needed to make a turn.

--

As for demand avoidance: I think it's something everyone experiences to an extent, putting things off, but I get that some people struggle more with deadlines than others. For me, having a deadline is a nice jolt of urgency that ensures I prioritise getting something done. For that, a 24 cycle is quite useful, it has to be done by the end of the day, but I don't have to be in the thread at any given point. I think if this was a 100% cheetah game, I'd be constantly checking the thread every hour, eager to post a turn so I don't miss out. It would be more compulsive and so less healthy (though a lot quicker).

[RoseHeart]

Don't beat yourself up, it's a lot going on in this one.

[RoseHeart]

As for demand avoidance: I think it's something everyone experiences to an extent, putting things off, but I get that some people struggle more with deadlines than others. For me, having a deadline is a nice jolt of urgency that ensures I prioritise getting something done. For that, a 24 cycle is quite useful, it has to be done by the end of the day, but I don't have to be in the thread at any given point. I think if this was a 100% cheetah game, I'd be constantly checking the thread every hour, eager to post a turn so I don't miss out. It would be more compulsive and so less healthy (though a lot quicker).

Hmm, if that's the case, then perhaps switching to turns isn't the best scenario.

[notquitethere]

I'm not down about it, I'm just trying to illustrate that increased complexity always means increased mistakes.

Hmm, if that's the case, then perhaps switching to turns isn't the best scenario.

If a game is going to be finished over a few days, then regular checking is manageable but if it's a longer thing, then I find that sort of schedule a bit too consuming/distracting.

Your hippo/cheetah solution is a reasonable enough compromise between two incompatible playstyles: wanting to post once per day and no more than once vs wanting to post when you get in the thread and not have it matter too much if you miss a day. It just gets even more complex when you've got extra turns with different triggers, wait times for actions (like switching animal type or opening beacons) of different durations. For a tactically simple game, it's quite a lot of complicated overhead.

[RoseHeart]

Extra Turns also haven't come up very often, making it when they do more unfamiliar. I think if we had even 1 more player, it would see significantly more frequent use.


You can kind of think of Extra Turns as a component of Cheetah mechanics. So you can think of it as still being two systems...but, since Hippos are compatible, I allowed them to do it too. But it stemmed from making Cheetah mode more faithful to its' hourly playstyle intended design.

I see Hippos using it as a middle-ground, for people (a bit) more active than once per day.

[notquitethere]

I would definitely take extra turns if I could double post with them. They're risky because it exposes the unit for a long time. I considered setting up my top-right soldier to get ready to shoot your engineer with an extra turn, but if you'd managed to get a turn in between, the plan would have come undone.

Don't get me wrong, because of the no double-posting rule, there hasn't been too much I-have-to-post-at-the-right-time-to-win stuff in this game. If there was, I'd go back to exclusively posting at 11.59 then at 12.01.

[RoseHeart]

ha ha

It's all about the right amount of cheese!

[King Zultan]

I find the two systems confusing so I picked one and stuck with it then ignored the other.

[RoseHeart]

I find the two systems confusing so I picked one and stuck with it then ignored the other.

Good. I'm glad we can provide options and make them viable without necessarily paying attention to the other. (Though I am sure advanced play may involve knowing everything in-and-out!)

[RoseHeart]

GG guys.

Yeah I think 3 is a bit slim.

[notquitethere]

But if the aim of the game is to win all the armories, it doesn't matter how many players you start with, a non-stalemate game is always going to come down to two people.

I won a sort of morale victory just now: losing beacons is quite demoralising, as each one is several days wasted. Making the other players miserable is probably not the funnest game strat, however.