Frequently, when I am designing or working on a game one
of the least exciting of the 4Ms is
movement. I would spend a great deal of
time thinking about the Melee, Morale, or Missiles but very little on
Movement. Most of my effort was put into
activation and turn sequence. However,
now I see I may have been trying to use activation/turn sequence as a way to
bypass a potential core issue with movement itself.
I tend to take Movement for granted, and instead use the
basic Movement stat and a measuring tape to call out the distance. That is what I have grown up with and what I am
most familiar with. For years I took it
as a no-brainer decisions and something I did not even think about. However, my mind has been opened up on this
subject recently, and I feel like Movement may now be the new hotness for
everyone to explore and play around with.
So, what caused this big change in my thinking? I mean, I have done movement related gimmicks
for games like Total CARnage, Green Army Men: Plastic Men, Steel Resolve,
and Redline before. However, the first two were for purpose built
dexterity games, and the third still uses the base Movement stat and Measure as
the base. Instead, I tried to make
movement interesting by tackling activation/turn sequence or looking at the
interaction between maneuver and firepower. I also tried to make
movement interesting by using a “Unit Leader” mechanic similar to Chosen Men where the movement and
measuring is all done form a leader model and the rest just kind of “fill in”
from there. What opened my eyes was
going back and reassessing the FlightPath system from Wings of War and X-wing
fame and looking at how other games have utilized similar ideas, and then
diverged from it.
The FlightPath system essentially allows the player to
choose from a series of templates which then dictate the movement path that the
models follow. Besides X-wing you can see this mechanic in
many other games, but especially Fantasy Flight Games miniature games. They also used it in Rune Wars. To me, this
method makes sense for some flight and sailing ship games as those types of
genres tend to use fixed turn radii and travel distances.
However, how would such systems apply to other
genres? I had two places that I looked
first. Initially, I looked at a tutorial
for the game Tanks! A Tank also has limited turn radius and
travel distances, but has more ability to back-up, traverse terrain, use a turret,
etc. How did they tackle it? Well, the template was used to measure
distance, and then at the end of the template, it could be adjusted, and the
final position of the vehicle just had to touch the template somewhere on the
tank.
Then I looked at Mercs. In this game, each model had a stat card, but
the stat card also was a tool for movement as it had various arrows on the card
that you could align the model with and move to the opposite arrow on the card. A movement and a stat card in one.
Curious, I then started to cast my gaze further
afield. I found a number of new and
interesting approaches to moving beyond the movement stat and measure with
ruler model. I saw movement sticks- Of Gods and Mortals, Fistful of Kung Fu, and
Song of Blades and Heroes- which
essentially acted as templates for movement.
I also saw the use of playing cards as a measuring tool such as Kobolds
and Cobblestones and Pirates of the Spanish Main.
The biggest innovations I found were with Rogue Planet and Squad Leader. In Rogue Planet everything either was not
measured or was only measured with a few fingers. Squad
Leader had infinite move as long as you were going from cover to
cover. Squad Leader is not a new game by any means, but this method had eluded
me for so long.
The most interesting aspect of Squad Leader is that your opponent can interrupt your movement as a
form of Overwatch. Thereby movement is a
permissive aspect of the game where a player can move as much as they want
between cover until an opponent stops them.
This reminded me a bit of Force-on-Force
but even that had a measured movement range.
These “Discoveries” rekindled my interest in
Movement. For many years, the basics of
movement in my mind were static. I never
questioned my preference or even looked beyond it. However, my base assumptions around movement as
its own set of mechanics has been static.
I encourage you not to make the same mistake as me.
That's some interesting stuff to ponder.
ReplyDeleteIn the wargame I am designing, I have movement arranged as per pulses within the turn that enables en passant interruptions. Also, movement must not be treated deterministically, and I have methods of including chances of loss of direction, breakdown, and fatigue (which has a reflexive effect on further movement). And I do not think this is going to make the game unplayable. If you want we can discuss this further (loneyeti25@gmail.com)
ReplyDelete