State of the Game
In the world of wargames, the management of game state varies significantly, with some games requiring intricate record-keeping and others maintaining a simpler approach. A comparison between Malifaux, a complex strategy game, and simpler games like Chess and Gaslands, illustrates these differences clearly.
Chess, the classic strategy game, manages state in a straightforward manner. The position of each piece on an 8x8 board, along with a few additional binary states, such as which player's turn it is, castling rights, and en passant availability, forms the entire game state. This confined and easy-to-update state makes it simple to encapsulate and track.
Gaslands, a vehicular combat game, involves tracking cars, their damage, locations on a play area, and a handful of modifiers or tokens. While more complicated than Chess, the state remains relatively straightforward, focusing on the vehicles and their immediate statuses.
In contrast, Malifaux employs a much more involved mechanical state management system. Key aspects include multiple unique units, each with distinct abilities and stats, extensive use of various tokens and status markers, a deck-building and card resource system integral to gameplay, dynamic, situational effects, and complex interactions between units, terrain, and special abilities. Managing this state requires maintaining detailed records of each unit’s current condition, the cards in play and in the player’s hands, and all persistent effects.
Malifaux's state management is more complex and multifaceted, demanding structured record-keeping of numerous variables, tokens, and resources throughout a game. This contrasts with Chess’s minimal and fixed piece state and Gaslands’ moderately detailed but still limited vehicle and token states.
However, Gaslands faces a unique challenge in its current design. Players are required to remember which vehicles they have activated in a given phase of the turn, a task that has been a source of concern for the playtesting community. Solutions proposed include using a Handling value as a resource that dwindles across the course of a turn, resetting at the start of the next turn, or repurposing an existing game component to make the number of stick shift attempts this turn visible and apparent.
In contrast, Malifaux's complexity is necessary to support its diverse gameplay mechanics and thematic depth, while Chess and Gaslands maintain simpler states to stay true to their quicker, more accessible play styles. Understanding these differences can help players choose games that best suit their preferences and abilities.
[1] For more information on the specifics of Chess, Gaslands, and Malifaux, please refer to their respective rulebooks and official resources. [3] Information about the playtesting process and feedback from the community can be found on official forums and social media platforms dedicated to these games.
Smart-home-devices and gadgets, like the game state in Malifaux, require intricate record-keeping due to their numerous variables, tokens, and resources. Unlike wargames, however, they don't face the challenge of remembering active states during gameplay, as they're typically managed digitally for ease and convenience.
Advancements in technology, such as the development of sophisticated game design for wargames like Malifaux and the integration of smart-home-devices, showcase the potential for complexity and depth in modern gaming experiences.
