- 5
- 8 318
Sam London
Приєднався 27 сер 2023
Microverse Launch Video
This video starts with a pitch for Microverse by GMT Games, before moving on to a rules teach and an example round.
Preorder here: www.gmtgames.com/p-1147-microverse.aspx
00:00 Quick Pitch
00:51 Overview
04:10 Future Plans
05:38 Start of Rules
06:00 Player Turn
08:08 Victory Conditions - First Three
09:05 Actions - Mobilize
10:07 Actions - Build
10:46 Actions - Colonize
12:20 Actions - Explore
14:18 Victory Conditions - Last One
16:06 The Senate
17:30 Combat
22:38 Faction Research Abilities
24:43 Example of Play
25:30 Start of Round
25:50 Trading - Whoops
27:32 Wildcard Actions - Whoops again
28:18 End of Round
29:23 Faction Spotlight
29:48 Faction Types
31:24 Shiku Strength
32:03 Shiku Weakness
32:47 Shiku Research Ability
34:12 Outro
Preorder here: www.gmtgames.com/p-1147-microverse.aspx
00:00 Quick Pitch
00:51 Overview
04:10 Future Plans
05:38 Start of Rules
06:00 Player Turn
08:08 Victory Conditions - First Three
09:05 Actions - Mobilize
10:07 Actions - Build
10:46 Actions - Colonize
12:20 Actions - Explore
14:18 Victory Conditions - Last One
16:06 The Senate
17:30 Combat
22:38 Faction Research Abilities
24:43 Example of Play
25:30 Start of Round
25:50 Trading - Whoops
27:32 Wildcard Actions - Whoops again
28:18 End of Round
29:23 Faction Spotlight
29:48 Faction Types
31:24 Shiku Strength
32:03 Shiku Weakness
32:47 Shiku Research Ability
34:12 Outro
Переглядів: 1 153
Відео
Firefight Tactical Solo Bot Demo
Переглядів 90611 місяців тому
After much teasing I reveal the FFT solo bot. Here I cover core bot functionality and walk through a couple of a turns of the game playing against it. 0:00 Intro 0:52 Bot Overview 1:24 Bot Card Anatomy 2:45 Bot Card IDs and Deck Building 4:26 Bot Turn Resolution 7:44 Bot Op Fire 9:44 Bot Dice Drafting 11:07 Rules Disclaimer 11:48 Scenario Description 11:33 Bot Use of Concealed Units 12:53 Game ...
Firefight Tactical Example of Play
Переглядів 2,1 тис.Рік тому
An Example of Play video where I play through a couple of turns. This isn't intended so much as a rules explanation, but more to give an idea of what the flow of play actually looks like. I am playing both the Americans and Germans through turns 3 and 4 of the scenario Purple Heart Lane. Pre-order: www.gmtgames.com/p-1065-firefight-tactical.aspx BGG: boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/401970/firefight...
Firefight Tactical Intro Video
Переглядів 2,1 тис.Рік тому
A brief intro to Firefight Tactical by GMT Games covering the core systems of the game. Pre-order: www.gmtgames.com/p-1065-firefight-tactical.aspx BGG Page: boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/401970/firefight-tactical 0:00 Intro 0:20 Dice drafting 0:33 Dice driven gameplay 1:17 Card battle grid 2:02 Action resolution 2:24 Replayability 2:52 Outro
Firefight Tactical Rules Overview
Переглядів 2,1 тис.Рік тому
A quick rules overview of Firefight Tactical by GMT Games going over most of the basic infantry rules. Pre-order: www.gmtgames.com/p-1065-firefight-tactical.aspx BGG Page: boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/401970/firefight-tactical 0:00 Intro 0:29 Components - Units 2:55 Components - Terrain cards 3:35 Terrain impact on vision 4:52 Components - Dice 5:54 Scenario setup 9:02 Turn structure 12:04 Basic...
"...thematically ...in the game. " phew
Looks like a lot of fun! (BTW, the Tarqa Superhive faction card has a typo in the 3rd ability - "cruisers" is a missing a C. 🙂)
I know. Shame. The corrected version is on the preorder page but it didn’t arrive in time to make it into the video. It will haunt me forever.
@@DeathByBoardGames It's OK, it happens to us all! (I'm a tech writer, so especially to me! 🙂)
Awesome! I p500ed the game and am looking forward to the finished product. Can you speak briefly about how the bot works? I'm particularly interested if/how the bot trades. Thank you!
The bot is a simplified version of my Firefight Tactical bot. Each bot turn you flip a card and evaluate top to bottom. The card will give you an action and one or more sectors to target. Pretty simple. For trading you select a bot and flip top card to see what suit the bot wants. For each card you trade that way you increase your resource points of the action you are playing. Your traded cards go under the bots faction card. During the bots next turn they increase their resource points by the number of cards under their faction board (regardless of what suit they were) and then discard them. You can only trade with one bot per game round. Thems the rules.
@@DeathByBoardGames Fantastic! Thanks for the reply!
Will this game comes with tech tree? ⚗
Short answer: no. Longer answer: the concept of a "tech tree" has been broken out into two mechanics. Your faction specializes and grows stronger in specific actions by way of colonization. Rather than colonies just giving you more resources, they expand your abilities. Because colonization gets progressively harder it isn't a matter of just colonizing whatever you can, but rather selecting the planets that will help you pursue your intended strategy. The second mechanic is the faction specific research ability that gives you the more flavorful expansion of abilities. In play these combine to give you the same effect of a research track. When one faction at the table has so many mobilize worlds colonized that a single mobilize card will let them move across the galaxy they definitely feel like their ships are more advanced than everyone else's.
This certainly looks interesting and is now on my RADAR. As an often, solo player I'd like to see how it plays with bots. It would be great to make the TTS mod available, even if it had limited game components and factions (maybe just the tutorial Humans?) so potential buyers could try out the game first. This seems to have been a very successful strategy for many games in development and often provided valuable feedback from the "free" playtesting the game gets on TTS during this phase.
I personally have no problem with this, but it is out of my hands. I imagine GMT would be okay with it too, but I am not sure at which stage of development.
If you ever have to send out a prototype copy to a passioned solo player, remember me! 🙂
Looks interesting, but maximum 4 players would make it a "no" for me. Could two sets simply be added together to make it an 8 player game?
Assuming the game does well enough (which it already seems it will, yay!) there will be a second expandalone core box with all new content that can be combined for up to 8 player. Technically, you could already do it with just two copies of the base core box but you would run into two issues. One: there are only four player colors in the box, so you would need to come up with a way to differentiate them. Two: you would double on the sector deck, which means you might see duplicate planets. This isn't a mechanical issue in the slightest but aesthetically isn't great. If neither of those bother you, you could totally just combine two core sets to go to 8 players from the get go.
@@DeathByBoardGames Thanks for the swift reply. Thing is, GMT's usual production schedule means even if this does well it will be several years until it sees print and a "this did quite well so let's do some more" expansion will be years after that. So, very sadly, this is probably a "no" from me.
@@MarcGillhamAll good, though you may end up surprised. Either way, I hope I can convince you to jump in when the second core comes out.
"I'm going to throw up on the screen ...." ... sounds like your day and mine have had much in common :D 100+ factions ... the Cosmic Encounter of 4X? There's a market for fast 4X in space .... or at least it's a common question, evergreen, perennial. While that's not for me, I'll happily point others who are looking for this toward this one!
Thanks a lot for the help!
This looks great. I just preordered it on p500.
Looks like a great game when the group isn't feeling up for Space Empires 4X. Will definitely be keeping my eyes on this one!
Pretty sure I'm not a fan of the explore action being "spend points until you get what you want". To me, explore is about finding what's there, good or bad. Makes this game a 3X for me. The same thing happened with Voidfall. I expected a 4X, and it ended up being a 1½X.
Not sure how well it read in the video, but in play it doesn't feel like "spend points until you get what you want". It is much more about risk management. Commonly you are choosing whether to spend all of your resource points on a single sector to get exactly what you want (in which case I believe you should), or to spread your points across multiple sectors at once. In the former case you have a generally safer exploration at the cost of action economy and being behind in the game. In the latter case you are well ahead in the action economy with considerably greater risk in what you may find. The latter is almost always the optimal path.
@@DeathByBoardGames Right, but in the end you are sort of "choosing" what's there rather than discovering it. In a euro game, it makes sense, but it's not thematic at all. Regardless, the game is on my radar.
@@ekted I hear where you are coming from. We will have to agree to disagree. I personally find it much more thematic to spend resources on an expedition to increase the likelihood of finding what you are searching for rather than simply flip a card/tile that is the only thing representing an enormous section of the galaxy. To each their own though.
@ekted - just house rule you can only spend one point. ;-) I see what you mean, but I'd be willing to try it out as written and house rule it if I don't like it.
Yea, I also felt it strange to "spend points until you get what you want"... 🤔
Thanks for an overview, this one will probably be a hit with a crowd 😀 Sounds like we'll get a GMT update soon...
I really hope so… There is enough content to keep this one alive for a long while if people dig it.
really cool game and seems not difficult to learn how to have good fun with it !
Wow this is really promising ! I love the dice mechanics...
Sam very impressive by your left field take on Combat Commander. Definitely in the spirit of that design and yet such an original angle. What inspired the dice approach? Luke (lead designer Burden of Command) p.s. P500ed :-)
I wanted to spill some euro into the wargame space. I was thinking about some crunchy euro mechanics that I get excited about, and dice drafting won the fight. Ultimately for each mechanic I was asking myself what it could represent in a tactical engagement. What excited me about the dice draft is too much to put in this reply, but it just so happens it is the subject of my first InsideGMT article that goes up tomorrow.
Read the design article. Nice work sir. @@DeathByBoardGames
Thanks for thinking about and developing this solo bot!
Thanks for filming this. Despite me playing most of my wargames solo I generally don't like learning another set of rules to govern AI - much prefer to handle the game 2-handed. I'm assuming (from the previous vids) that the game handles this quite well?
Generally yes, however you will be missing a lot of concealment based gameplay.
@@DeathByBoardGames Agreed, always a tricky thing to play the game with hidden information 2-handed. This game is shaping up to be an excellent addition to my collection - I'm not really a tactical gamer but like chucking dice 😀
If a unit and becomes pinned can take a die to try and rally?
Sorry. Not sure I follow your question. Ordinarily you cannot rally without assigning a die to a pinned unit to make the attempt.
I was wondering if a unit that was moving came under fire and broke could that unit rally in the same turn
@@thehappywargamer9122 Ah I see. Generally no, because they would have already had a die assigned to them to move, which would have exhausted them for the remainder of the Game Turn. If however the unit was available and moved as part of coordinated move triggered by a leader, the unit would still be available and a subsequent draft could attempt the rally in the same Game Turn.
Thanks @@DeathByBoardGames
Odds mitigation, I hope. Games designed on computers turn out fiddley.
I wanted to play this at GMT West (October)… didn’t get a chance. Looks like something I would really enjoy. I’ll watch the play example you have, but pretty sure it’s going on my P500 list!
If this game is an evolution on the Up Front system, I'll pass. If it is an evolution of Fields of Fire, I'm all in.
What if it's neither?
Looks pretty cool. Kinda what I really wanted warfighter to be like. Definitely interested in seeing more. Curious. Is the game grid always 4 x 4 cards, or do do the sizes vary by scenario? Would be cool if it were variable.
Yes 4x4 is just for the first scenario to keep things simple. They can get to quite a bit bigger.
Sam, I had the opportunity with a friend to watch you demo play your game at last April's GMT gathering. You were very patient in explaining the rules and strategies to us, and I was surprised how compact your game (great for traveling purposes) was to provide such a large WW2 combat field of play with tons of decision making and with built in game-to-game variability in addition to the dozen planned additional scenarios. The best part was your game was instantly "FUN" and very reminiscent of my favorite WW2 game to play...UP FRONT. Today, after getting GMT's 2023 October update which showcases your game, Firefight Tactical, as a new P500 listing...I ordered two copies. I am curious to see how you will expand this game in the coming years. With best wishes for great success.
Sounds a bit similar to Up Front--one of the best wargames ever made.
Thanks for the video, the game looks really interesting and exactly what I'm looking for from a tactical game. One doubt I have is the way that terrain surprises troops similarly to "Up Front" - at a higher level presented shouldn't there be more planning involved and shouldn't troops "see" e.g. 1 space away?
Hey, good question. I am ultimately trying to represent two things here: planning and the heat of combat. On the planning front, each scenario contains a number of "recon cards", which are zones where a player can privately view the facedown card during setup. In other words, at the start of the scenario the players know everything about the first terrain they will encounter. Once the game is going, there is Recon Squad's Scout action, which allows you to view multiple cards and select the one you move into and the leader's Survey action which allows you do the same thing at range without moving into the chosen card. On average it is only maybe 2 or 3 times a scenario that a player moves a unit into terrain genuinely blind and it represents a gambit in the heat of battle. Hopefully that addresses your concern.
@@DeathByBoardGames it does indeed, I remembered the scenario's 'recon cards' from the previous video, but not the recon action. Yes it does😁
Yep, as I mentioned on BGG, already P500'ed after watching your intro videos. Looks really interesting and I'm definitely interested in seeing more about the solo mode!
Sam, this really looks interesting. So much so that I placed my P500 order today.
Looks awesome!
Looks great - feels like the system has the potential to be applied to a range of conflicts. Crunchier than Undaunted, but simpler than Warfighter.
Depending of course on demand, I have big plans for the system. Thanks for the call out on Undaunted and Warfighter. That's exactly the weight class I am shooting for.
@@DeathByBoardGames You have targeted a gap in the market - looking forward to seeing this develop!
Thanks, really looking forward to the game - seems like it's a really quick playing design with low entry point but a lot of choices and randomness.
Looks really interesting, thanks for filming this intro vid.
Very cool, reminds me a little of Up Front. I was unable to find the game on bgg. Are you planning to do a video on the automata?
My major inspirations for the design were Up Front (and by extension Squad Leader) and Combat Commander. The BGG entry should be up in the next couple of days. I will definitely be doing a video of the automata after it gets some more playtest time. I don't imagine the design is going to change very much at this point but I would prefer to not put out a video until I am confident it represents what players will be up against.
Very interesting as a solo tactical system.
@@DeathByBoardGames I haven't looked at Up Front before. I keep almost buying Combat Commander, but when I watch gameplay videos, there appears to be a lot of card flipping going on, with very little actaully happening on the board. I'm new to wargaming though, so perhaps this is typical of tactical level hex and counter CDG games?
@@NiceOneChameleon That is fairly typical for wargames. They are trying to represent conflict with a certain degree of realism. In truth the outcomes of battles are decided by morale rather than casualties, so there is a certain bias towards inaction from a "hollywood" perspective. How much game time is dedicated to the bookkeeping of these concepts though definitely varies.
@@DeathByBoardGames that’s really interesting, thank you. Aside from what I said above I’m very keen to try Combat Commander, some of the block games, and your game as well. As a long shot, are there any systems you could point to that have a little more movement on the board?