carlpgoodrich wrote:I think right now the objective is a little too easy. For example, someone who starts with 3 of 4 in the bedroom only needs to take 4 more territories to win. Even if there are high neutrals, thats kinda boring. I suggest instead of having the objective be ANY room, suspect, weapon combo, have there be a some specific room, suspect, and weapon combinations. Then, be sure that the magnifying glasses in a given room don't point to corresponding weapons/suspects. That way the player has to do some "investigating," e.i. move around a bit.
carlpgoodrich wrote:Can I also suggest a slightly different bonus structure for the weapons/people? Right now, I see the gameplay as being: attacking weapons and people, then stockpile armies to protect those bonuses. Instead, what if you got a bonus of 1 for 1 weapon, 3 for 2, 6 for 3, etc, or some sort of escalating thing like that (and the same for people). That is similar to the Clue where knowing 1 weapon isn't very helpful, but knowing 4 is VERY helpful. I also think it would make for more interesting gameplay.
Finally, I like that there is no way to go from the evidence rooms to the main rooms. There probably needs to be a losing condition there that if you don't have one spot on the main part of the map, you are eliminated.
Industrial Helix wrote:1) The weapon magnifying glass and suspect magnifying glass are extremely confusing with each other. Maybe use fingerprints or something for the suspect and magnifying glass for weapon. I dunno, be creative. But they should have different indicating items.
Industrial Helix wrote:2) What about introducing Detective stating points that can not be attacked by any other territory. That way players MUST solve the crime rather than kill off all the other players.
Industrial Helix wrote:3) The motive... I would say the winning objective is enough motivation to take that territory. There should be no bonus for it, perhaps only a negative bonus to ensure it is the piece of the puzzle taken last.
carlpgoodrich wrote:I still think the winning condition is stalling the gameplay. Right now there is virtually no incentive to move around in the crime scene, which totally ruins the idea of simulating a Clue game. If I'm playing this game right now, I pick either the Bedroom, Garage or Office (which ever I drop more in), take that bonus and stockpile on the single door. Then I take a weapon and a person and build up until I have enough to take the motive. Or, if I don't drop a lot in any of those rooms, I go for a lot of weapons or people. Boring.
carlpgoodrich wrote:I think the idea of having starting positions is definitely a suggestion you should strongly consider. You have plenty of room in the middle of the map, so thats not a problem. If you are worried about unbalanced starting positions, that can easily be fixed. First, I would suggest adding more hallway territories, so that each starting position has at least two hallway positions between it and a room. If you think a room is too "attractive", you can do things like play with neutrals at its door.
carlpgoodrich wrote:Also, I really think you should reconsider the winning condition being so general. Make players look around a bit to try to find the correct combination of suspect and weapon. I don't know any crime scene or clue game where you could just go to one room and solve the case/win the game. If you want, I can go into more detail about why I think there should be specific winning condition combinations and how you could implement it.
Users browsing this forum: DearCyrus and 1 guest