Post by sammo on Jun 9, 2011 13:19:49 GMT -9
First off, thanks to everyone that playtested ITF. I received some good feedback and the game will be better for it.
The general thoughts were positive and people liked the units and the game-play. There are a few minor tweaks here and there that are in the works but I have a few larger issues that I’d like to get your thoughts on.
1) Troops vs. Squads. About 40% of playtesters did not pick up the difference between the squad and the troop right away and wound up playing at least one game where they added all of the troops on one card (thinking it was so much better of a use of points, because it was).
I suppose this is only a problem in communications but I wonder what you would prefer:
a) A single troop per card (with only one grit track) so there would be little confusion (one card=one unit/squad=one cost).
b) Multiple wound tracks per card (as it is now) with hammering the rule multiple times in the text and perhaps adding an icon that readily identifies troops over squads to the card.
2) There seems to be two camps (roughly 50%-50%) as to the turn order. Some players like the structured turn because it forces you to commit your forces and has a specific timing for each action. The other camp finds that the turn structure plays fine, but then the I go-U go format means that the other player just sits there watching what is happening which breeds boredom and helplessness. These folks would prefer something along the lines of I tap a card and act, you tap a card and act until all units have acted.
After some thought I am not sure how I want to proceed. Part of me likes the structured turn, but admits that as a player the downtime and “watch and see” feeling when it is someone else’s turn is a bit tedious.
If I keep a structured turn it will likely remain unchanged (except for the possible loss of the mettle round (see below). If I go to a tap your card style turn I would want some kind of special mechanic. A current idea is at the beginning of each turn a player stacks his cards in the order he wants to (in secret) and then each player takes turns drawing off of their deck and activating that unit (so you set the order your units act in at the start of each turn). Talents such as delayed strike would convert to allow a unit to be placed at the bottom of the deck or somesuch.
I’d love to hear comments thoughts and suggestions about the turn order.
3) The mettle system seems to be the biggest flaw in ITF. The most common comment is something like the mettle system is unused, few units rack up enough mettle counters to really have a chance to fail the test so you place counters and track mettle just to roll extra dice and have no in game effect. So the overall result is slowed game-play and talents like leadership and rally being useless.
Some options include discarding the mettle system entirely or making it an optional rule. Honestly I like the idea of morale in the game and I don’t want to have optional rules (I like to think of some bizarre alternate future where ITF is hugely popular and tournament play is common, so it would be good if there were only one set of rules).
Other suggestions have been for units to test mettle at specific times throughout the battle (first blood, or dropped to half health) and not have the mettle round at all. Also testing mettle to be able to charge or sprint has been suggested, as well as losing half of a squad or a leader.
My current leaning is to eliminate the mettle phase entirely. Each unit will have a mettle box (or boxes) on their damage track and when that box is filled in the unit has to make a mettle test. Mettle tests would happen immediately when the condition arose (and the effe4cts applied immediately) so the mettle round would vanish. On a certain result (say none or 1 hit) the unit becomes overwhelmed and flees, on a better result (say 3 or 4 hits) the unit is shaken and on even more hits the unit is unaffected. Units would still recover normally and talents/spells that would require a unit to gain mettle counters would instead call for an immediate mettle test. This would eliminate the bookkeeping required for the mettle round as well as the extra counters that clutter up the battlefield.
Thoughts, comments, suggestions?
These are the last few big items that I am looking into for the final version of ITF, so any comments and ideas would be greatly appreciated. (I'm also hitting my local playtesters with the same thing, I'll relay any information that looks promising and is not redundant).
The general thoughts were positive and people liked the units and the game-play. There are a few minor tweaks here and there that are in the works but I have a few larger issues that I’d like to get your thoughts on.
1) Troops vs. Squads. About 40% of playtesters did not pick up the difference between the squad and the troop right away and wound up playing at least one game where they added all of the troops on one card (thinking it was so much better of a use of points, because it was).
I suppose this is only a problem in communications but I wonder what you would prefer:
a) A single troop per card (with only one grit track) so there would be little confusion (one card=one unit/squad=one cost).
b) Multiple wound tracks per card (as it is now) with hammering the rule multiple times in the text and perhaps adding an icon that readily identifies troops over squads to the card.
2) There seems to be two camps (roughly 50%-50%) as to the turn order. Some players like the structured turn because it forces you to commit your forces and has a specific timing for each action. The other camp finds that the turn structure plays fine, but then the I go-U go format means that the other player just sits there watching what is happening which breeds boredom and helplessness. These folks would prefer something along the lines of I tap a card and act, you tap a card and act until all units have acted.
After some thought I am not sure how I want to proceed. Part of me likes the structured turn, but admits that as a player the downtime and “watch and see” feeling when it is someone else’s turn is a bit tedious.
If I keep a structured turn it will likely remain unchanged (except for the possible loss of the mettle round (see below). If I go to a tap your card style turn I would want some kind of special mechanic. A current idea is at the beginning of each turn a player stacks his cards in the order he wants to (in secret) and then each player takes turns drawing off of their deck and activating that unit (so you set the order your units act in at the start of each turn). Talents such as delayed strike would convert to allow a unit to be placed at the bottom of the deck or somesuch.
I’d love to hear comments thoughts and suggestions about the turn order.
3) The mettle system seems to be the biggest flaw in ITF. The most common comment is something like the mettle system is unused, few units rack up enough mettle counters to really have a chance to fail the test so you place counters and track mettle just to roll extra dice and have no in game effect. So the overall result is slowed game-play and talents like leadership and rally being useless.
Some options include discarding the mettle system entirely or making it an optional rule. Honestly I like the idea of morale in the game and I don’t want to have optional rules (I like to think of some bizarre alternate future where ITF is hugely popular and tournament play is common, so it would be good if there were only one set of rules).
Other suggestions have been for units to test mettle at specific times throughout the battle (first blood, or dropped to half health) and not have the mettle round at all. Also testing mettle to be able to charge or sprint has been suggested, as well as losing half of a squad or a leader.
My current leaning is to eliminate the mettle phase entirely. Each unit will have a mettle box (or boxes) on their damage track and when that box is filled in the unit has to make a mettle test. Mettle tests would happen immediately when the condition arose (and the effe4cts applied immediately) so the mettle round would vanish. On a certain result (say none or 1 hit) the unit becomes overwhelmed and flees, on a better result (say 3 or 4 hits) the unit is shaken and on even more hits the unit is unaffected. Units would still recover normally and talents/spells that would require a unit to gain mettle counters would instead call for an immediate mettle test. This would eliminate the bookkeeping required for the mettle round as well as the extra counters that clutter up the battlefield.
Thoughts, comments, suggestions?
These are the last few big items that I am looking into for the final version of ITF, so any comments and ideas would be greatly appreciated. (I'm also hitting my local playtesters with the same thing, I'll relay any information that looks promising and is not redundant).