"I don't know how this guy fits into my strategy?" || Problem #1 to Fix.

      Still waiting for testing data to percolate some more; however, that doesn’t get the goblins off my back, so here we are.

      From the get-go, I wanted Goon Game to be the type of game that requires a certain amount of thinking turn by turn to win, but without overloading players with information and paralyzing them before they even move one piece. Saw that in action last time I tested, so something is amiss. Now, an argument could be made that Goon Game, and games like it, aren’t for that player and those like them. That, however, misses the larger problem that was mirrored across the table: players were unaware of integral parts of the unit’s kits.

      Typically, when you design a game system – especially in something like Turn-Based Strategy – it should be apparent how that system fits into the larger whole of any given strategy without much thought. The Overwatch ability in XCOM: Enemy Unknown, for example, is self-explanatory once you read it: it’s to be used after clearing choke points so that you can maintain said choke points on the enemy's turn so you can push further up the map on your next turn. The key to victory in Enemy Unknown is careful planning and preparation, elements that are emphasized through its design choices. Shotgun units are harder to hit when moving, making it easier to get them into effective range; Snipers need a turn after moving before shooting, so to be used effectively, you need to place them in range of multiple targets or give yourself a turn to reposition; Riflemen are Swiss army knives, practical at any range with a myriad of options but not to the point of being the only solution making them the play makers or play closers. And yes, each of these units gets more complex the longer you play, as the enemies evolve and situations require less direct solutions to solve; those answers are made clearer by the role and playstyle dictated to the player by the system.

      It’s why even in more open-ended systems like Dungeons and Dragons, combat still breaks down into a question of how well your DPS can lay into targets, how well your supports can keep the DPS up and chugging along, and how well your tank can keep agro off the other 2/3rds of the party so they can do their jobs properly. I, for example, just beat the Avatar of Myrkul on Tactician. And I could only do so because Shadowheart kept the DPS units (Tav and Karlak) from getting Frightened with Calm Emotions. Meaning they could disengage and heal after taking a beating. At the same time, Halsin and his summons kept breaking the Incubation eggs, so fewer Necrophages spawned, preventing Myrkul from healing himself or accessing his most potent abilities.

Now this could have been done better – Calm Emotions is a bit of a non-bow with Barbarians, cause it prevents them from raging, so I lost out on top-end damage with Karlak; however, it was only possible because this was the moment that I was forced to think of the varying systems working as a whole. It was this moment that made me realize that Clerics can do more than heal, but also remove or prevent harmful debuffs. Or that since Druids specialize in summoning and concentration spells, I can hold back enemy adds more effectively by focus casting Call Lightning and having the summons deal with adds rather than just turning into an Owl Bear and trying to fight them.

      In both cases, a deeper strategy emerges from understanding the role of the units within the system you are playing in; so, a key area of design should be to make those roles as clear as possible to the player for them to best utilize the tools available to them. In my own game, there are three distinct play styles as of now: Plot, Brawl, and Swarm.

      Plot wants to gain Mana and cast spells to manipulate the Reverb deck so they can introduce more advantageous board changes.

      Brawl wants to get in and start swinging as soon as possible to knock people out in the first few rounds.

      Swarm aims to capture objectives and multiply, emerging as the new threat on the board – one that replaces the Automatons.

      However, as of this last testing session, none of the play testers played to these strengths 100%. This could be attributed to their general inexperience with the system. But there were enough confused questions and long turns around the table to signal to me that something on a fundamental level was off. Leaving me with plenty to go back to the drawing board with, which I hinted at in my testing report. Expanding on that, the following should be taken into consideration when fleshing out these play styles further.

General

Each Commander should have a Favored Spells section on their card so players know at a glance what they should be gravitating towards.  

Plot

1.  If Reverbs and Plots are their end goal, then the resources put in should be in line with their turn-to-turn goals.

2.  If Plots are the main way Plot players get a leg up, then there needs to be certain plots these players will want to see pulled from the deck so they are encouraged to add them to the deck.  

Brawl

1.  These players need to be able to get into and out of action faster than other players.

2.  These players need a Support unit that helps sustain aggression.

Swarm

1.  These players need to be encouraged to take objectives and throw units at problems because they will be getting said units back.

2.  These players should have spells that increase the number and power of units regained.

These lists are due to grow as Goon Game comes into its own and the strategies within it become clearer. A process that can only be improved with more testing. Another test is set up for Aug. 16, 2025. With this being the same group of players’ second time with the system, I hope to see some of the understanding problems eroded with repeated play time, so I can better devise my time between new additions and whether or not they are actually fixing that understanding problem.

More on that as data emerges.