K2

K2 is a mountain climbing game game by Adam Kałuża and published by Heidelberger Spieleverlag.

The Game

1-5 Players

Age 13+

60 minutes to play

Expansions: K2: Broad Peak, K2: The Avalanche

Awards: 

2011 Golden Geek Best Family Board Game Nominee

2011 Gra Roku Game of the Year Nominee

2011 International Gamers Awards - General Strategy; Multi-player Nominee

2011 Japan Boardgame Prize Voters' Selection Nominee

2011 Nederlandse Spellenprijs Nominee

2012 Spiel des Jahres Kennerspiel Nominee

This, again, is quite a simple game that establishes a tense atmosphere. The aim is to get your two climbers as high up the mountain as you can, and keep them alive till the end of the 18-day game.

The Play

There are three phases to each turn: draw, movement and environmental. 

First you draw six cards into your hand, then choose three to play that turn. The cards display points on either movement or acclimitisation, which acts as life. When everyone has decided, you all reveal. The player who reveals the highest tally of movement points takes a 'risk token' from the three random risk tokens that are maintained upturned. The risk token is a penalty on either movement or acclimatisation and can be taken off the acclimatisation meter each player maintains.

The second phase is played in turns as each player moves their climbers. The player going first rotates around the table. The movement points are used to move to ledges along branching paths. Each ledge has two numbers on it, movement cost to move into it and acclimatisation cost/bonus, which is resolved during the environmental phase. Ledges have a limit to the number of climbers allowed to stop on them, determined by number of players and altitude. A tent can be placed per climber, for the same cost as movement onto the ledge, which provides environmental protection and can be used by either of the player's climbers.

The third phase is when all players resolve the environmental effects for that day. A weather bar progresses each round and indicates the total number of rounds played. It gives an altitude range and acclimatisation penalty to the climbers within that altitude range. Another environmental factor is displayed on the ledges, which again affects acclimatisation but at lower levels can give a boost rather than a penalty.

Climbers score points on a scale on the board, which relates to the highest altitude they have achieved. Climbers die if their acclimatisation falls to zero or below. If at any time a climber dies, he is removed from the board and his points marker is moved to zero, except in the family version of the game where a one time rescue card can be played to move the climber back to base camp.

The Mechanics

The first phase is about card selection. The choice here is how to balance out acclimatisation with movement, while preparing a contingency plan in the case of having to pick a risk token. As the risk tokens available are always on show you can decide on which one you will take for your contingency. 

Is this fun? Well... yes, IF you like planning and analysis as it is the planning phase for the rest of the round. You have to weigh up options, review your position and potential routes, then ensure your acclimatisation is high enough to survive the night. After that the prudent player will check other players options just to make sure they aren't going to cut you off or be stuck with an unplanned-for risk token. 

I've found that even the chattiest gamer will sit silent, moving cards around, checking the board, looking at other players, checking the board for who they are looking at, then moving cards around again. There is an air of anticipation, knowing that any mistake here might just cost you the game. But you know its not just you that decides the outcome. the best plan can be put back two turns by an inconsiderate, or shrewd, move by you opponents. You need to have those contingencies. 

The movement phase is where direct competition comes into play. Whoever has the move first marker has the advantage when a ledge is in competition, particularly at the higher altitudes where only one climber can be on a given ledge. The placement of tents is also a weighty decision as being able to reach them when recovering from a summit attempt is imperative, and although there is no limit to tents on a ledge you will find that your good mate Pete, who will lend you his car at a moments notice, will camp out on that ledge for an extra turn so you cant use your tent, sending you to your frozen death.

Is this fun? Fun and nail-biting. As this is the phase where you compete directly with your opponents and the mountain. The best laid plans last only as long as first contact with the enemy, and in a large group you will find that your plans change quickly, especially when you are the last to move.

This is the tactile part of the game. Anything where the player moves their avatar around a board feels more personal. As such, even if the plan doesn't change, this phase gives a sense of satisfaction and involvement.

The final phase is where the mountain takes its turn. Each climber has the acclimatisation effects from weather and altitude subtracted from their acclimatisation total. This is the maths phase, the test of your planning. I have seen failure and defeat take hold when players lament that they should have played that extra point two moves ago. or not taken the risk and waited, or told Pete he's no longer the godfather of certain children because he waited on that ledge, blocking or diverting a climber onto a deadly path. 

Is this fun? This is more a maintenance phase than a fun phase. It doesn't detract from the game at all due to how quickly it is done. There is a buildup created for the next round as your position becomes obvious but that's about it, unless you are in a gaming group of shit talkers, then this is best known as the sledging phase.

Conclusion

K2 revolves around calculation and planning but masks it well behind simple, well designed mechanics. The game plays quickly and disaster strikes just as swiftly. It gives a sense of satisfaction when a plan comes off well and there is plenty of room for discussion and interaction with other players, even if the direct competition is limited.

Deconstructing Theme to Determine Mechanics

One of the things I mentioned in my first post is that I had started to develop a board game called The Heist. As I was working on it I had decided to use a mechanic that I enjoy in other games such as Flashpoint: Fire Rescue, where you move around a location using AP and perform roles as stated on cards. The issue I found was that I had started with a mechanic and attempted to create a game around it, this resulted in having created a game more akin to 'The Robbery' rather than 'The Heist'. I scrapped the game and started anew, with a different focus.

The thing that stood out was when discussing it with friends and online was that a lot of people were commenting on the great theme and how exciting it could be to play. No one commented that they were looking forward to playing the mechanic, not that it wasn't good, but our imaginations don't lend themselves to playing a mechanic that has been used before.

This was a good sign for me. It meant that I had hit on something that people wanted to act out as part of the fantasy that is a game*. All I needed to do was to work out what mechanics best replicated people’s expectations, and delivered them in an exciting way. As I haven't finished the mock up I'm yet to see how it goes but I spent a good amount of time thinking about different mechanics and how they play out. I then compared these to some reference material to determine what the expectations were and how to deliver this as a game.

Establish the Expectations

The reference material was easy. Heist movies are a genre of their own. Why movies? They are pure fantasy and written and produced to be engaging. A movie has to get people to pay to see it, and then hold their attention through all distractions. If a game can achieve the same aim, then it should play well. 

For this I developed some criteria for the game:

1. Must follow the classic heist formula.

2. Must not stall or have any long waiting periods.

3. Must provide options for achieving victory.

4. Something or someone must be actively working to prevent the player's success.

5. Simple elegance in gameplay requires simple elegance in rules.

It seems like a pretty hard list to adhere to, so some of them won’t be as strong as others. It’s about finding the right balance to make it feel like a heist.

Tease Out the Mechanics

Stories are usually told in 3 acts, in a nutshell: 

Act 1 is the establishment of the characters, their relationships and their world. It introduces the struggle that they have to face. Act 2 is the development of the team/protagonist and eventual failure, this is to set up for the final act. Act 3 is the final challenge. The team/protagonist works his way back up to triumph (or fail) over adversity. The final result isn't as important as the character development that occurs because of it.

A heist film generally looks like this:

• Act 1: ID the Mark. Gather the team and resources. Conduct initial recon. Develop a plan.
• Act 2:  Conduct detailed recon. Make an attempt. Discover the competition. Realise the plan doesn't work / someone has taken a critical resource away / get caught.
• Act 3: Fix the plan / get the last resource / pull off the heist or get caught properly.

Act 1 gave me two options. Either have it as co-op with each player having a role or have each player build their own team and work against each other. The former was how I initially envisioned the game so I am going with the latter. 

I developed a bidding system for character cards in order to allow each player to fight for resources. This created an economy which I could also use to have players purchase equipment to provide bonuses. For initial recon players can buy a look at a security system on the board, then place it back down without any other players seeing it, or show it to anyone they wish.

This allowed the players to develop their own plan to how they wanted to attempt the score. They could go in with a lot of muscle and fight their way through, get some good thieves to sneak in, have a few mechanics to engineer their way in or buy some conmen for a smooth talking operation.

It also gave insight into how the actual heist should play out. There needed to be multiple routes in with different types of security along each. For variety's sake a board with randomised security systems can provide this quite easily. 

Act 2 can be covered by the initial mechanics. Players can bid against each other and attempt to sabotage their opponents. To conduct detailed recon players can enter the Mark at any time for further recon or to steal other items to gain cash. The players will also have other ways to hinder their opponents which will depend on the resources they already have.

I’m attempting to create a sense that the player isn't just doing the maths, but fighting for the best outcome and trying to prevent an opponent from achieving theirs. It also opens up the possibility of creating alliances and negotiation for trade. Players will have to be aware of what their opponent is doing, creating interest between turns (point 2).

Act 3 is the conduct of the heist itself. Players move their team through the building, disarming alarms, picking locks, conning guards and escaping from dogs.  The players can move in at any time, creating a race in the planning and preparation phases. Players can also work together by sharing resources or against each other here by placing traps, alerting guards and all out confrontation.

This will create real time tension and pressure. It is essentially a card play dungeon crawler where the use of resources and decisions on contingency plans will affect the outcome. The penalties for failure will range from loss of characters to ‘arrest’, causing some serious disadvantage.

Conclusion

Working from what people will expect from a heist to finding the mechanics to deliver it required research into the popular expectation. By breaking down the story that is told during a heist movie I’ve decided on the following mechanics:

- A bidding system to recruit characters and purchase resources.

- A randomised board to create options.

- Card/stat based PvP and PvE allows players to work with or against each other.

- Two integrated phases of preparation and action which creates an ‘open world’ in which to play.

- Penalties for failure causing set back and re-analysis of the plan.

The only point that isn’t apparent here is point 5: Simple elegance in gameplay requires simple elegance in rules. You’ll have to wait to see the game before that is explained.

*Although there are many games which have a mundane theme but an interesting mechanic which draws attention and interest.

Galaxy Trucker

So, my first critique falls to the most recent game I've acquired and certainly one of my favorites, Galaxy Trucker by Vlaada Chvatil and published by Rio Grande Games. SUSD have a great play through with the expansions here.

The Game

2-4 Players

60 minutes

Age 10+ (probably lower)

Expansions: yes, lots, to many to list here.

It's quite a simple game. There are three rounds with two phases each. 

Each rounds starts with you grabbing face down tiles to try and build a ship that combines cargo holds, crew compartments, lasers, shields and engines. There are different types of connectors and different configurations for modules so it becomes a kind of crazy jigsaw. If you can't use a piece you place it face up for all to see and take. This round is loosely timed, with the round ending after players have grabbed their position markers after finishing and the last timer has run out. These markers start your position on the board. You also get to look through the cards that will be played during the second phase, but they get shuffled before they get played.

The second phase of each round is where you flip cards over to tell you what event is occurring to your ship. It can be combat, meteor storm, picking up cargo from a planet, taking an abandoned space station even a epidemic which wipes out crew under a condition or several others. Each of these events forces you to use up resources, lose position on the board, and at the worst (and most often), destroys your ship.

The round ends by tallying up your cargo credits, bonuses for position and best looking ship (least damage) then subtracting the cost of lost modules. You then get a different template board for the next round (bigger or different configuration) and start again. This goes on for 3 rounds (or 4 if you want) and a the end the person with the most Credits wins.

The Mechanics

There are no tricky mechanics here. The first phase is a hectic grab for jigsaw pieces as you decide how to set out your ship and what modules you need. Do you fit a double engine and an extra power cell to run it or two single engines, if you can find the connections. Do you fit another cargo module or some more lasers. Do you rush through to get first position on the board or have you got enough engines to overtake in dead space. Why has the bloke across from you got a ton of cargo but few lasers? Why has the girl next to you got a heap of alien crew compartments? Better look at the cards again... wait... times up.

The second phase you have little control over except for your decisions on what cargo you pick up, if you use your crew to take station and a few others, but you choose in the order you are on the board so its first in best dressed. The damage is decided by dice roll and its not uncommon for entire sections of a ship to go floating off into the deep dark after that last connecting piece was taken out by a large asteroid. Some cards will pit players against each other through comparison over who has the most crew/laser strength/etc. Over all choice is somewhat limited in this phase, mostly determined by the choices you made in the first.

The Play

Because the game is played in two quite different phases I will look at each one individually.

Phase 1: Tile McGrabbiness.

I think the big question I need to ask first is "Is this fun?". Yes. This phase is fun. Throughout I find myself watching the timer, the other players evolving ships, flipping tiles and checking that what I'm looking for isn't already flipped. It feels like time gets compressed as you rush to get everything you need in before someone decides to flip the timer or grab first position.

It's tactile. Not in the way that there are well produced items to fidget with, but the whole round relies on you grabbing at tiles and flipping them over. You are active as you reach across the table and everyone is a flurry of movement. This amount of activity and movement seems fairly rare in games. 

It creates an energy and adds excitement to the game. That excitement carries over to checking out each other's ships at the end of the build phase and comparing just how stupid your ship really is. I feel attached to my creation by this point and am excited to see just how fast it will disintegrate in a meteor storm.

You feel time pressure. The timer is counting down. You can't really tell how far along your mates are but you still have to figure out how to fit a shield and close of those open connectors. Then someone flips the timer and everyone starts eyeing off the position markers. Do you keep building or go for position? Do you have time to check the cards for phase 2 or should you be grabbing for those single engines? 

Again this creates energy and excitement. The pace feels forced on you, but you only go as fast as the quickest player. 

There is competition for parts. Suddenly all the universal-connector engines are gone and you are cursing across the table at Johnno who has the fastest ship in the universe. Then all the crew compartments are gone except for the left facing ones, when you only have connectors on the right. And my GOD why do I keep flipping over single hazardous cargo holds, I NEED DOUBLES! 

Scarce resources are a common part of eurogames but rarely do you have to physically snatch them away from your competitors with such a finite time to do so. Again this creates energy and excitement while forcing you to improvise on your plan, giving ownership to the tangled mess of a ship you just created.

Phase II: A road paved with broken dreams.

Is it fun? Yes, but because it is part of a larger game. Without the ownership of the ship... ship... ship... and the excitement built from the first round this would be a very mundane exercise in card flipping. Therefore my main point for phase two is:

Personal investment reigns supreme. You think you are doing well - and you should be - but Johnno raced ahead of you in the last 'open space' so you missed out on the good cargo. Now speed is a factor in a 'combat zone', and although you are bristling with lasers you cop a massive shot to from the left which blows away a critical module scattering cargo and crew across the galaxy.

This combines with the unforgiving nature to grant broken dreams.  I know, is this a Thing? Yes it is. It's a theme that shows up in many games, especially ones like Pandemic, where the best laid plans are destroyed by a ruthless game A.I. Is this a Good Thing? Only when all players suffer the same. A game that can ruthlessly dismantle a player's strategy while leaving everyone else untouched quickly becomes frustrating and the game is blamed for a loss rather than bad tactics or even just bad luck. 

In Galaxy Trucker everyone suffers the same. The only time there is a difference is during a 'combat zone' but even then the victory criteria are available to view during the build Phase to work towards.

We recently played a game where it was pretty smooth sailing. Most cards were cargo or open space with a couple of meteor showers and a combat zone. Everything went pretty well, lots of cargo was gained and much Credits earned. And you know what? It was boring. There is great joy in watching your mate's well crafted ship disintegrate beneath them, right before your own. The pleasure is in the mutual misery and the smack talk that happens between.

Conclusion

The build is exciting and the journey gives you something to build towards. The journey works because you can exalt in the misery of others, right before you are dragged down with them. It is tactile, has time pressure and mild competition which creates personal investment in something that the game will chew up and hand back broken dreams.

Overall it's a bit silly, a bit cartoony, and comparisons of others' ships highlight the absurd. The focus is not on well thought out strategy and deliberate planning, but rather a rushed grab for resources followed by a frantic, short, flight to squeeze the most Credits you can.

I'd call this a party game.  It works best with a happy crew that are willing to smack talk, insult and role play their way through the game. 

An introduction, of sorts.

When my wife was in hospital with our first child I realized that we were about to experience a gap in our relationship. Usually when we wanted to chat and spend time together we went out for dinner or to a pub, generally did 'date' type things. But now we had a child imminent I was left wondering what we would do to hang out.

Usually at home we have our own pursuits. She sews and watches odd British mystery/dramas. I play EvE Online or tinker in the shed with blocks of wood to make poorly constructed furniture. None of these are really complimentary, except when she did a great job of upholstering a poof that I had knocked together to hide the crap engineering job I did on the brackets.

So, to the problem, I ducked down to my local games shop and picked up some Magic: The Gathering starter decks to play while we were waiting for the bub/waiting to be released from hospital. She enjoyed it ok but had trouble following some of the more abstract concepts. After Aline was born I again ventured down the local games shop to look for something more suitable for a new mothers addled brain. I'd spent some time sorting through the shelves there but was unsure on what modern board games are like. The themes were either heavy in sci-fi or fantasy, odd 'why is this a game' or abstract. I spoke to the bloke behind the counter who suggested Carcassone. Took it home and just like that we had gone cardboard.

Today our collection is growing quicker than we can play with a nice range of games with different mechanics, styles, themes and involvement. We have some great games for gamers and some for family. Some Eurogames and some that border on Ameritrash. Overall we haven't found a game that at least one of us doesn't enjoy and have successfully gotten our families over the fear of sitting around a table rolling dice or drawing cards without a single flashback to childhood games of Monopoly.

I've always had an interest in the mechanics of any video game that I play. Understanding why games are engaging and how the mechanics create an emotional bond and a drive to keep playing is something I wish was a subject that I could have studied when I was younger and looking for a career. There are some great web series and blogs out there for video games, in particular PA's Extra Credits, and some great board game review series which delve into this too. A series stands out, recently adopted in the video form by PA, Shut Up Sit Down. Another great one is the Dice Tower videos with Tom Vassel on the tubes.

Recently I've started to look at game design from a creators point of view. Mucking around with friends and occasionally testing simple ideas I am working on a proper game which one day I hope to see produced, even just a couple for myself and mates. Part of this process has caused me to think harder about the mechanics of the games we are playing beyond 'Oh, I see how that works, that's a pretty cool." What I want to do is explore the WHY of these mechanics as a way to engage the player. And as such I created this blog.

I hope to get some people reading this and I hope that some of the ideas that I throw around cause some discussion. I don't care much that you agree or disagree, more that you tell me why so I can develop my own sense towards these things.

Enough talk. To the table...