3 ms·
> I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle. From the article: The real core mechanic is how dice are used in th
by KineticLensman 2y ago
> I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle.
From the article:
The real core mechanic is how dice are used in the game. The dice act as an instant adjudicator and the system uses different sizes of dice that can be adjusted during game play.
The map and counters also encode a lot of rapidly accessible state information. Using a computer would require all of this state info to be maintained in the computer, which would be a very different game, probably without the person to person interactions that make the game what it is.
- chaostheory 2y agoThis sounds extremely inefficient and even Luddite like. Having a computer involved wouldn’t reduce interaction. It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed.
- KineticLensman 2y ago> It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed. A lot of the value of these games is the human interaction of several people working closely around the same table, not sat at separate screens interacting via the systems rather than each other. These sorts of games have real value for training senior decision makers whose day job is all about personal interactions, e.g. gold or silver commanders in a blue light emergency response scenario. They need to get into the syndicate room and immediately start to discuss how to respond to a crisis, not learn a new game interface.
- chaostheory 2y agoYou don’t need a separate computer per person, just per team. You probably only need a single computer for the entire game. This is really bad mental gymnastics.