Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
So the first image above gets us started on one particular game. It uses 6 assaulter pieces against 6 defender pieces set up longside. The configuration is in the shape of a canyon, so I'll call this Canyon Assault. This is an Assault vs. Defense type of game. The object of the game is for Defense to neutralize Assault's conquest of the "canyon." The action taken by pieces are equal, but the lingo is different. Assaulter goes first.
The mat shows 24 tiles on a 4×6 mat, with symbols that are placed. There are 4 different types of symbols, with four in each set. Each symbol on the mat denotes an action that can be taken by a piece. An action taken prevents the piece from being able to move one round. You'll have to move another. Initial play would see the game getting set up, so the assault can begin.
For movement of pieces to be restricted enough, diagonal movement is not a thing in this particular game, so pieces can only move left or right, front or back. To prevent an unauthorized stalemate, where two stubborn players refuse to end the game, you can't reverse an action you took as the next move, meaning, you can't move a piece forward and then move it back on the next move.
An authorized stalemate can be requested and accepted if both sides can can't move any piece without a significant action being taken, so that the rule above is ineffective. If a piece's movement is high risk, a threat of stalemate can't prevent its assault/neutralizing. Last piece on the board wins.
Now, you might be thinking why go to this trouble? I mean, who is going to RP playing against their companion, or any kind of RP in a singleplayer game. Well, once we've ironed out the rules, I'll challenge someone in the forums. Maybe even have a short tournament. And if no one wants to try it, well, I'll just take my pieces and the victory trophy and go home.
What game with rules could you devise using the mat and pieces? There is a set of other pieces, Snowlord vs. Shadowqueen.
I welcome any feedback.
(I saw the following article from 10/10/2023 and wanted to take up the challenge.
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/starfields-greatest-mystery-is-a-boardgame-nobody-knows-how-to-play)
ROUND 1
I reminded him that his current slot is a Rhombus slot and that he could transport to another slot with a starburst, i.e., a1. He opted not to take the action but to remain in the current slot. Which is strategically sound, because I have an assaulter in a2, and could take an action to "assault" a defender piece in a1. If he did opt for the transition, such as a1, the tracker would show the transit, i.e., c5-c4-a1.
Edited to Add:
I currently occupy three assault slots, a2, b3, and a6. He has one neutralize slot, d4. I might have to add a rule that allows a diagonal assault/neutralize, but not a diagonal move.