Colloquium on Games of Strategy: Chapter 11

Click here to directly download the MP3

Click here to watch the unedited version on Youtube

Welcome to the Colloquium on Games of Strategy.  Games of Strategy is a textbook on game theory written by Dixit (not the game), Skeath, and Reiley that we are reading to help improve our analysis of board games and board game design.  Paul Owen (owns 3rd edition) and I (own the 2nd and 1st editions) record a discussion about a chapter or two from the book every few weeks.

In the eleventh episode we talk about the Prisoner's Dilemma in board games.  Highlights include a discussion on different ways Paul's wife will prevent him from ever ratting her out to the police, multiple ways of escaping the Prisoner's Dilemma within a game, and how repeatedly paying games with a group of people creates an opportunity to escape the Prisoner's Dilemma within board games.

Note: Aaron misspoke when he said gambling is not a zero sum game.  Aaron was trying to emphasise that games with gambling can provide a marginal benefit or loss that changes player behavior when compare with games where either a player just wins or loses (e.g. a 12 run win and a 1 run win in baseball is still one game win).

You can find our previous discussion on Games of Strategy here.

Colloquium on Games of Strategy: Chapter 10

Click here to directly download the MP3

Click here to watch the unedited version on Youtube

Welcome to the Colloquium on Games of Strategy.  Games of Strategy is a textbook on game theory written by Dixit (not the game), Skeath, and Reiley that we are reading to help improve our analysis of board games and board game design.  Paul Owen (owns 3rd edition) and I (own the 2nd and 1st editions) record a discussion about a chapter or two from the book every few weeks.

In the tenth episode we talk about how strategic action - in essence the art of creditable threats or promises to deter or compel other players to alter their actions within a board game. Highlights include a discussion on how to apply these tactics to Setters of Catan and the question whether or not people what to play games with players who are good at using these tactics.

You can find our previous discussion on Games of Strategy here.

Colloquium on Games of Strategy: Chapter 9

Click here to directly download the MP3

Click here to watch the unedited version on Youtube

Welcome to the Colloquium on Games of Strategy.  Games of Strategy is a textbook on game theory written by Dixit (not the game), Skeath, and Reiley that we are reading to help improve our analysis of board games and board game design.  Paul Owen (owns 3rd edition) and I (own the 2nd and 1st editions) record a discussion about a chapter or two from the book every few weeks.

In the ninth episode we talk about how players respond to uncertainty and information within games.  Highlights include a discussion on the benefits of holding asymmetric information and tactics to counter your opponent's information edge.  Can players provide a creditable signal in your game or is everything just cheap talk.

You can find our previous discussion on Games of Strategy here.

Colloquium on Games of Strategy: Chapter 8

Click here to directly download the MP3

Click here to watch the unedited version on Youtube

Welcome to the Colloquium on Games of Strategy.  Games of Strategy is a textbook on game theory written by Dixit (not the game), Skeath, and Reiley that we are reading to help improve our analysis of board games and board game design.  Paul Owen (owns 3rd edition) and I (own the 2nd and 1st editions) record a discussion about a chapter or two from the book every few weeks.

In the eighth episode we talk about games with mixed strategy nash equilibrium.  Highlights include a discussion on the effectiveness of mixed strategy nash equilibrium when other players cannot do math and the growing importance of knowing game theory at the start of the design process when players are going to repeatedly play your game. 

I cannot help but also point out we took some time in this episode to rip on our good friend Keith Ferguson whose game Santa's Workshop is coming out December 2017.  (Great game, you should buy it).

You can find our previous discussion on Games of Strategy here.

A Dr. Wictz List: 10 Ways to Procrastinate within a Board Game

After having a hard time getting this weeks post down on paper I decided in a moment of panic to think of all the different ways I could procrastinate writing this post within a board game.

1. Engage in no trades in the game of Monopoly.


2. Only conquer one territory a turn in Risk.


3. After castling in Chess only move your king back and forth for rest of the game.


4. Hoard resources in Settlers of Catan by never turning in any cards to get anything.


5. Never move your back line in checkers.


6. Order all units to support in Diplomacy.


7. Every move of Clue goes between the Kitchen and the Study.


8. Shoot no one in Bang!


9. Do not complete any objectives in Firefly.


10. Play Twilight Imperium.

What Makes a Good Rule Book?

Andy Low of Random Access Podcast asks Dr. Wictz and TC Petty III what makes a good rule book.




You can also directly download the discussion from archive.org here

Classics Lecture Series: Conclusion - Diplomacy

We have discovered, as I argued in the first lecture, that even as Alpha gamers, we can look back at “old standards” and discover they do not have inferior mechanics.  Instead, they contain the mechanics that we rely upon today for the great games in our board game Renaissance.

What you may not realize is that I was not teaching you about great old mechanics just so we can play one of the games from the Board Game Renaissance.  Instead, I have quietly been subverting your defenses to draw you to a game that was around when Avalon Hill was still in business.

From the get go, I have been listing all the mechanics that drive the game Diplomacy.  That’s right, I used Candy Land to trick you to play Diplomacy with me.  Without practicing good play etiquette prior to playing Diplomacy, there was no guarantee you would still talk to me after we play Diplomacy.

Diplomacy is not a bland game where we just roll a bunch of dice.  Diplomacy is a game, like Life, where we collectively tell a story about our rise and fall as great leaders. Where brilliant negotiators actively mess with other players heads before crushing their armies on the board.

Each turn is tense.  Tense because each player has secrete information.  Tense because you only have so much time to negotiate with all the other players what you are going to do.  Tense because you have a hand of units to manage, each must move at the same time, and often in precise coordination with other units outside of your control, or your plans will fail.

You must look at the board before you submit your final orders and decide if you need to keep building trust or if the time has come to mess with your opponents.  You will be eyeing the board, thinking ahead of your next move, and eyeing to see what other players are communicating to you with their own game moves. What one says and what one does can be very different, and you have to decide at that moment who you trust.

And after all of that tension.  All of that thought.  After committing to paper your irreversible decisions, you become a pawn to fate as each player reveals their orders.

Why do I want you to play Diplomacy?

I want you to play diplomacy because I want you to acquire the skill to emulate the mechanics that make Diplomacy a great game and for you to learn from it how to engage me on how I can design a great game.

Diplomacy is an example of great game design. I want to make great games; and through Diplomacy I understand that great games are based on tension, strategy, interaction, and thinking in new ways.  In Diplomacy players achieve complicated outcomes with simple mechanics.  The game comes from people playing each other, not the game playing people.    Good mechanics are used in Diplomacy to reinforce other good mechanics.

Diplomacy is not the last great game.  Nor is this discussion about Diplomacy the last word on how to make a great game.  Quite the contrary, this discussion on what makes Diplomacy great invites a longer conversation about what can still be done to create a great game.

Classics Lecture Series: Communicating With a Partner Through Game Play - Euchre

Euchre is a Michigan obsession.  At lunch time in high school there were Euchre tournaments in the cafeteria.  I carried a Euchre deck with me when I worked maintenance so we could play Euchre on our federally mandated breaks.  I met my wife in D.C. because she stated in her online profile she was looking for someone to play Euchre with and she spelled Euchre correctly.  Turned out she also had ties to Michigan too.

Why focus on a regional card game popular in the Great Lakes region?  In Euchre, the best players learn to read what their partner is doing without ever exchanging a word or hand signals.  Talking about your hand is illegal during gameplay.  Just imagine playing Pandemic without telling your teammates what you are going to do till after you have done it.  No pre planning.  No verbal hints of what you are about to do and where you are going next.  Only observations of what your teammates are doing on the board to give you any insights of what they are up to.  That is the challenge to the game of Euchre.

Below is a Quick Run Down How to Play If you do not know how to play.  If you do know how to play skip to the heading Euchre Communication.

Euchre is a four player trick taking card game.  You are paired up with a partner who is on the same team as yourself.  Your partner sits across from you and the opposing team players are split with one on your left and one on your right.

In each round 20 of the 24 cards are dealt.  The four remaining cards are placed in the middle of the table and the top card is flipped up.  Starting left of the dealer each player is asked if they want the card to be trump.  If anyone says ‘pick it up’ the dealer puts the card into their hand and then discards a card from their hand.

If the card is not picked up you go around in a circle to ask if anyone would like to call trump.  If everyone passes then the cards are throw in and the next person deals.  Once trump has been set upon the person left of the dealer leads in the first hand.  Players must follow suit of the lead.  Only cards from the same suit as the lead can take a hand (known as a trick in Euchre players) unless trump is played.  The lead changes within the round based on which player played the highest card that took the last trick.

If you and your teammate take all five tricks you earn two points.  If you and your partner take three or four tricks you earn one point if you called trump and you earn two points if the other team called trump.  When you call trump and you lose you have been euchred.  If a player calls trump and announces they are going alone, they play the round without their partner.  If they take every trick that round the team earns four points.  The first team to score ten points wins the game.

Euchre Communication

Communication is key in Euchre.  Without talking to each other you want to maximize the ability of your combined hands to take as many tricks as possible.  The biggest danger is you are going to nullify your partner's good cards by miss playing your own or call the wrong suite for the style of Euchre your partner plays.

To help new players they are taught a set of conservative rules on Euchre strategy.

1. Do not over trump your partner.

2. If you are starting a round lead with your highest non-trump card.

3. Do not draw out your partner's trump if you cannot take enough tricks on your own to win the round.

4. Do not call trump unless you have 3 trump cards and at least one is either the left or right bower.

Notice I did not claim that these rules by themselves always give you your best chance to win.  That is a fallacy perpetuated by even some experience Euchre players who consider it a mortal sin to violate these rules.

There are numerous times in Euchre with experienced players where you should break these rules.

That said, violate these rules as a new player and you risk a tongue lashing from your partner.  (Euchre is a serious game to Michiganders).

Why are these rules so important to new players?  These rules are important to new players, because if you follow them your partner knows what you are doing and can adjust their strategy accordingly.  If you are not taught to play in any sort of pattern your partner has no idea what you are doing and cannot plan any strategy based on your hand contributing to the teams success.

Advance players do not need the four rules.  Advance players learn during a game how to read their partner.

Why can advance players read their partner and not beginners?  Advance players understand enough Euchre strategy to read their partners playing patterns and are much better at counting cards to produce winning combinations.

Advance players, like advance diplomacy players know that the way you play your hand communicates to your partner what is in your hand.  In Diplomacy if you move your ship to the English Channel there is a good chance you are planning an attack on either France or Great Britain.

There are different levels of advance play.  There is the intermediate level of Euchre communication based just on knowing the rules.  Intermediate level of communication does not rely on any knowledge of deep strategy.

Standard strategy dictates that when a non Trump card is led; all the other player plays before you; and everyone has followed the suite that you play a trump card to take the trick.  When you do not trump the suit you are communicating to your partner that either you have no trump in your hand or you have only one trump in your hand that is the highest trump card not yet played.  This information will let your partner reassess their hand strategy to better utilize their own trump cards.

Advance intermediates start counting cards.  They are able to hand off trump to their partner by purposefully playing an off suite they know their partner does not possess.  They also realize that when their partner calls trump and does not lead with either bower that they are missing at least one of the bowers, possibly both.

Advance, not based on player patterns, recognize certain situations, such as trying to stop someone from taking all the tricks and start reading each other’s cards in an attempt to cover as many different suites as possible to increase the likelihood they have the proper suit led to have a chance to take the last trick.

Advance players can adjust how they communicate their cards by identifying the playing style of their partner. Advance players quickly figure out in the first few hands if their partner is a conservative play or an aggressive player.  Does your partner only call trump if they have a loaded hand or are they willing to rely on their partner to pick up a trick or try to win the hand with a bunch of off suites?

Once you figure out how your partner plays Euchre then you can start better utilizing moves to communicate that are appropriate to your partner's strategy.

In Euchre, if your partner calls hearts trump, they think hearts are their best shot of getting points.  Right away you can look at your own hand and think to yourself what do I know about my hand that my partner might find useful to know.

For example, if you have the left or right bower you decide you might want to find a way to let your partner know so they can play their hand more freely.  If your partner is a conservative player and your hand has little value for taking any more tricks you might play your high trump on a low trump to let your partner know its location so they do not feel constrained to act out the rest of their hand.  If your partner is an aggressive player you will only communicate to them you have a high trump if it appears they are not going to be able to take the trick since you cannot risk losing one of their trump cards if they called it on a weak hand.

None of this change in strategy is from talking to your partner.  All of it comes from watching how your partner plays their hands and adjusting how you play your cards.  By reading your partner you are able to more efficiently communicate with just your game play.

Faculty Lounge: David Palay of Random Access Podcast

Here in the faculty lounge I get together and talk to other board game interested podcasters and bloggers to learn a little bit more about what they do.

 

Today I talk to my friend David Palay who co-hosts Random Access Podcast with Andy Low.  I have known David and Andy since middle school and David was kind enough to be my first victim...cough…I mean first interviewee.

 

Dr. Wictz: So David could you give a quick breakdown about RA Podcasts in case someone is not familiar with your show?

 

David Palay: Hmm.  You'd think with 6 years behind us, this would be an easy question.  It's a weekly topical show that focuses on technology and games, but really it's whatever Andy and I have found interesting or want to talk about.

 

Dr. Wictz: Why did you guys start the podcast?

 

David Palay: We wanted to do something new and exciting, and have some way of telling other people about all the cool things we were seeing.  At least, that's what I recall.

 

Dr. Wictz: If you were to introduce someone to your show and you could only play for them one episode, which episode would you play?

 

David Palay: Wait.. which of the THREE HUNDRED PLUS episodes should someone listen to?

 

Dr. Wictz: Yes, you have to pick one. 

 

 David Palay:   Probably one of the early PAX10 episodes...  I think those were some of our best work.  http://www.rapodcast.net/postset/view?id=116

 

Dr. Wictz: What is your favorite type of board game and why?

 

David Palay: That's really hard to say.  I like a wide variety.  Particularly games that pit you against the board (Pandemic, Forbidden Island, etc.) or where there is a hidden traitor (Shadows over Camelot, Pandemic w/bio terrorist, Resistance).  Maybe the latter category, if we just expand it to "unknown alliances", then it could include things like Twilight Imperium and Diplomacy too.

 

Dr. Wictz: If I wanted you to review my board game on your podcast what should I do?

 

David Palay: Just ask.  You can e-mail us at mail@rapodcast.net .

 

Dr. Wictz: Do you ever have any guest board game designers?

 

David Palay: We had Dave Schrader on a few times from Shrader Heavy Industries.  (web: http://www.lightweightrpg.com/ twitter: @SchraderHeavy or @LightWeightRPG)  He came on to talk about the Light Weight RPG that he's been working on, which sounds really really cool and everyone should go check it out.. http://www.rapodcast.net/postset/view?id=250

 

Dr Wictz: How do you invite guest onto your show?  Is there anything I could do (as a board game designer) that could get me invited to by a guest on your show?

 

David Palay: Andy and I knew Dave from PAX, so he actually approached us.  Get your name out there, send email to press, and if possible go to conventions.

 

I know Andy mentioned to me there have been a handful of times when he has reached out to people to get them on the show, but most of the time we get an e-mailed about somebody willing to do an interview.

 

Again I want to thank David for taking the time to talk to me today.  Random Access Podcast comes out once a week every Monday.  You can find the podcast at www.rapodcast.net or by searching for Random Access Podcast on itunes.  You can also follow the Random Access Podcast on Twitter @RAPodcast .

What To Ask On a Blind Play Tester Feedback Form?

My game Post Position is traveling across the country so playtesters can test the written rules for the game.  Players will be participating in a blind playtest - learning and playing the game with just the rulebook.  Usually after a game I get feedback on that specific game through conversation with other players, and some written reviews.  Without being present to observe, I need a feedback form that lets me know how well the group understood and implemented the rules. 

To help construct a good feedback form I am breaking down some of the questions on my form and explaining why I think I should ask them.  The word think is underlined because I do not know yet how well my form will work. I will write a follow-up blog later this year on how well each question worked.

There are many good feedback forms other folks have already put together.  UNPUB has a very good standard form they use at all of their game testing events.  The challenge is the UNPUB form is used at UNPUB events where the designer is personally teaching the rules to the player...aka not a blind play test. 

Also, the UNPUB form is used in situations where you can watch the play testers play the game.  So I need a feedback form that really tries to capture what actually took place within the game. These are the questions I think will tell me if the rules are working. 

Feedback From Questions

Were you able to play the game?

Silly? I think not.  The whole purpose of sending the game out to people who have never played the game before is to learn if they can play the game using just the rule book.  You pray the answer to the first question is some sort of yes, otherwise you can stop reading the survey at this point and start burning your current rule book so you can start over.

How long did it take you to learn the game?

Just because someone learned the game did not mean they learned it in a fast enough time for other people to enjoy it.  For example, I love the game Diplomacy, but I spent over 4 hours learning how to play the game with my high school friends.  If we were not dedicated board gamers then there was no way we would have the patience to spend so much time to learn to play the game.  (I know, you are rolling your eyes because only dedicated board gamers know of the game, yet alone consider playing it).

In your own words summarize how to play Post Position?

"Wait," you say, "didn't you already ask them if they learned to play the game?  Why do you need to ask them to summarize how to play the game?"  Just because they think they learned to play the game does not mean they actually learned to play the game I designed.  I am not there to see them play it, so I need to find questions that will reveal to me how they actually played the game.

What was your mood before learning the rules?  What was your mood after learning the rules?

Yes, I am asking questions about emotional stuff.  Why, because I want to gauge how emotional wearing it was to learn the rules.  Rules not only exist to make sure everyone keeps in line when they play the game, rules exist to entice people to want to play the game.  If my rules drains the fun out of the room there is a decent chance that the game goes back into the box before a single horse moves along the race track. 

What was the hardest rule to learn and why?

Notice I assume that a rule was hard to learn.  This will bias their answer to find a rule that was hard.  I am ok with this because no matter what they will identify the most frustrating rule explanation in the rule set.  Odds are improving that one rule will by itself make people much happier with your rule set.

Did the graphics make it easier to learn the rules?  Please explain why or why not.

Post Position includes some graphics to help explain the game.  That said, we need to know if the graphic made it easier to learn to play or just created more confusion.  I ask why or why not because it creates another opportunity to let me know if they created their own house variant of the game or if they actually learn to play the game I intended to teach them with the parchment in the game box.

Did you understand the rules better after finishing your first game?

Some people learn by doing versus reading.  Everyone has a friend who never reads the rules and relies on someone who knows the game to teach them.  I want to find out if those who could read the rules were able to teach the other players how to play by playing the game with them.

How comfortable would you feel teaching someone else the game, why?

Confidence in your ability to teach the game is a measurement in how much you think you know about the game.  I ask why because it tells me which part of the game they are the least comfortable with.

Describe what strategies worked or didn't work for you in the game?

I find it a good idea to ask the same question in a different form.  Details may come out that helps clarify players answers on previous questions.  By describing in this question what strategy did or did not work for the player they are also describing the rules of the game they used when they played.

 Conclusion

So are these the only set of questions that you should be asking?  No, you should also include a number of the standard questions found on the UNPUB game review form.  Do you like the game?  What was your least favorite part of this game? etc.

And now we wait.  You wait to see if my forms succeeded to illicit useful feedback. I wait to see if Post Position's rulebook needs minor tweaks or a trip to my fireplace.