here are the rules: the game starts with the players having 30 health each. or maybe a selected amount The player takes it in turns rolling the dice, attacking each other. The health is deducted from the player the dice roller chose to attack. When a player gets killed, the killer gets to choose a bonus, attack (+1 on his attacks damage, does extra damage), defense (he receives 1 less damage when he gets hit) or health (he adds 10 more health points to his current total) And the game ends when everyone but one person is left alive.
2. Vojvoda ,
Is anything else included in the game than pressing enter?
the selection of your bonuses on death of another player
Is this the new game for RS?
5. Vojvoda ,
Sounds really good for them
why does rs have to be here? I'm sorry, but it seems like some don't like rs sometimes
Because the last games on there, war and left center right are not games. They are random number generators meant to make you feel like you are playing a game, or poor simulations of games which are not fun online. If it is fun for someone to press enter and pick a winner, then I don't know what to say. It was just a comparison to that.
left center right is good. have you played it
I don't know what makes it good.
The rules of this game seem effectively to be quite press-enter, except to choose who's going to lose. At least it doesn't look especially fun to me, as such. There's no strategy, only luck.
ABout left-center-right, it's probably a fun game to play with young children in the real life. But such games badly support digitalization, and that's why I don't want to put them on the playroom. All interactions like throwing the dice, counting tokens and passing them around can be done automatically, reducing the game to something boring where you juste have to press enter without making a real decision.
However, you are effectively right that a battle-style game is lacking on the playroom. Those games are usually rather complex, if you think about things like Magic, yugio or even crazy party battle, but if you have something really interesting that isn't too difficult, why not!
I would certainly like to see a card battle game, but as you have said it takes a long time to create, and even then constantly update and fix the balancing. Even with the same cards CP is using it would have an advantage of being cross platform, I've always wanted to play that part of crazy party on mobile.
I don't know if we can think about a battle game that would be inspired from magic, but be simpler. Perhaps we could elaborate a game mechanic all together ?
To be a little critic about CP battle, there are two things I find discutable:
I like the type system, but I find that there are too many types. If it's obvious for everyone that water is strong against fire, relations between fairy, dark, psy, ghost, etc. feel much more unrealistic and non-sensical to me. Same critic goes to pokemon and manamon of course.
I don't like the fact that, once everybody has chosen his deck, you may be out of luck for the whole game without being able to adapt your strategy afterwards. For example, what if I choose a plant deck while my opponent choose a insect deck ? I'm screwed from beginning to end, and multi-types isn't always the panacee. 1 vs 1 games are sometimes very difficult because of that. In fact the more players, the easiest it is. IN pokemon and manamon you haven't this problem because you have a team of 6 to choose from. I don't know how it is for magic and yugio because I have never actually played them, but it seems more open because you can better balance your deck so that to handle more various possible situations.
Now, CP battle is a very good battle game, though.
An additional thing to think about: If a battle game whould be to come in playroom, I think it should remain a game we could well imagine playing in real life with real cards on a real table, so to stay in line with the general playroom spirit. Even if it would practically be impossible because it would be invented cards. CP battle would obviously be completely impossible with real life cards. Because for example of stat levels (fear/sleep/poisonned/paralysis/etc.) and randomness (accuracy/critical hits/etc.). It would be a funny nightmare of dice and tokens.
Latest edition by Aminiel, Dec 21 2019 17:21:35
a variant for shut the box where you do math problem to get to the number on the dice (of course, there could be a maaximum of 3 boxes you can shut at once) and in turn, the opponent could press space if you made a mistake and win some extra points?
The pass space when another player made a misstake option isn't very popular in scopa, and people generally don't like much math. So I don't think people would be interested in this.
15. Vojvoda ,
Aminiel I think not many people use that because it doesn't make any difference, if a player wants to steal and you press space there are penalties, but if the players did not make any mistake and you press space nothing will happen. so the only difference is that you have to press space after each turn. If you would implement penalties for wrong signalizing then it would make the option much more interesting.