A game?

[Pengwinja]

I am a board game designer, and so was my father. I am lacking inspiration, so I am making this forum because… uh… inspiration maybe? Just post things that could be a game idea, play a game in the forum, or just say some thing that is somehow related to gaming.

[Wattsthematter]

A game where a lucky dice throw is more powerful than a well thought out strategy sounds brilliant!

[Pengwinja]

Too late, they invented Risk. I could make a more luck-reliant game, which doesn’t cross into the candy-land only luck game.

[Wattsthematter]

This is also the problem I have with Catan… can’t stand that game

[Pengwinja]

Settlers of Catan, I assume? I, personally, enjoy Catan Starfarers. Starfarers is a quicker, less complex game than settlers. Plays differently too. I usually play the duel version.

[Pengwinja]

This is also the problem I have with Catan… can’t stand that game

Is the problem because of too much luck, or not enough?

[UnknownHero]

Cooperative games seem to be all the rage lately... what about a game with both cooperative and competitive aspects, so you can win as an individual but if you sabotage your opponents too much you all end up losing? Has this been done before?

[DougJoe]

Cooperative games seem to be all the rage lately... what about a game with both cooperative and competitive aspects, so you can win as an individual but if you sabotage your opponents too much you all end up losing? Has this been done before?

There was a game I played a while back named Hellapagos which is close to this. It's co-op at the start... then the food runs out - at which point it becomes competitive. Not exactly what you're saying but close. I'm sure I've played something that resembles what you are describing.

For several years (it might be a decade now, wow) where I work we've had a pretty decent lunch time board game group. It's not what it used to be because some have switched to be 100% remote since COVID, but we've played at least 5 or 6 dozen (if not more) different board games over the years. Three of the guys in the original group probably had 2000+ different board games between them so we never lacked for choice, although we were limited to stuff that could be finished in an hour-ish.

I've liked *most* everything we've played, trick takers to roll and writes to coop stuff to engine/tableau builders to euro style stuff.

[Wattsthematter]

Cooperative games seem to be all the rage lately... what about a game with both cooperative and competitive aspects, so you can win as an individual but if you sabotage your opponents too much you all end up losing? Has this been done before?

I like this idea! 7 Wonders has an expansion that allows for cooperative building of an edifice, though you’re still competing with the co-builder

[Wattsthematter]

This is also the problem I have with Catan… can’t stand that game

Is the problem because of too much luck, or not enough?

Too much luck. You can improve your odds by strategically centering yourself on higher odds or on spreads of numbers, but ultimately you will always be beaten by someone with better rolls

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

Cooperative games seem to be all the rage lately... what about a game with both cooperative and competitive aspects, so you can win as an individual but if you sabotage your opponents too much you all end up losing? Has this been done before?

What about a Survivor board game or something like it? There are team challenges in the beginning but halfway through the game it becomes an individual game?

[Pengwinja]

Hmm… I’ve seen games that are cooperative and competitive at the same time, where there is an objective, and if it is completed, the game ends and someone wins by some win condition, but if it isn’t completed, everyone looses.

[Pengwinja]

Cooperative-competitive games usually fall into:
Work toward a common goal, but try and do it better.
Work together, then become competitive.
Work together, but someone is trying to sabotage.

[Pengwinja]

Cooperative games seem to be all the rage lately... what about a game with both cooperative and competitive aspects, so you can win as an individual but if you sabotage your opponents too much you all end up losing? Has this been done before?

I don’t see where the cooperative aspect comes in. It looks like a game where you are more focused on yourself, because if you sabotage your opponents, you will be brought closer to defeat. Still, something like it could be done. It might be a game that you can sabotage, but you slowly lose protection from attacks, so the other players can cooperate to stop you from winning.

[Pengwinja]

Hear me out, I make a war-game in Europe, and all the armies are equal strength, but to get the upper-hand on your opponent, you can make alliances and then try and capture certain supply centers. There would be seven different countr… wait a second.

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

Hear me out, I make a war-game in Europe, and all the armies are equal strength, but to get the upper-hand on your opponent, you can make alliances and then try and capture certain supply centers. There would be seven different countr… wait a second.

Sounds familiar…

[Pengwinja]

I think that I remade Stratego. XD

[DiplomacyandWarfare]

Make a secret role game. They are both cooperative and competitive, and can appeal to all groups from light friend groups who joke around at the table more than actually play the game to intense gamers who hyper-analyze everything everyone else says.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

Make a secret role game. They are both cooperative and competitive, and can appeal to all groups from light friend groups who joke around at the table more than actually play the game to intense gamers who hyper-analyze everything everyone else says.

Dead Of Winter does this really well in my opinion.

It's mainly a cooperative game where players work together to defend themselves from a zombie horde. But at least some players have secret roles that encourage them to be selfish at the expense of the group.

The game ends up being an interesting balance of resource management, combat planning, and social deduction. Failure on any one of these fronts means losing to the horde, so there's a meaningful role to play for both the hyper-analyzers and those who prefer sussing out the freeloaders. It ends up being a good game for casual players too because even losing is typically fun - no matter what, they got to be part of an interesting story full of upsets and backstabs.

[Pengwinja]

I think I have a game idea that takes all of your advice into account. Except wills. Sorry, will.