Days Without Strife - The Telegram Update

The Telegram Update

Days Without Strife has been a relatively small passion project for me for quite some time. Anyone who knows me will tell you that it’s my favorite project and the one I’ve put the most elbow grease into, both into development and into the work required to schedule a game of 22 players. Thanks to a recent video by DiploStrats, this project has recently got quite a bit of attention, so I am ready to take it to the next level.

This “Telegram Update” marks the beginning of what I am intended to be a two-week update cycle, with each Sunday alternating between update notes and playtest launches. The playtests will alternate between US and European time zones, and if I get enough interest I might try to run multiple games as once (but no promises for now, we’ll take it one step at a time)

I am happy to announce that the upcoming March 1st Euro playtest will be a full 22 player game! I’d like to thank my long time playtesters for helping me get this game off the ground, and the many new faces for taking a chance on such an unusual experience. I promise you won’t regret it!

Below, you’ll find a list of the changes for the Telegram Update and a link to the Full Rules for this playtest.

 

Major Changes

Telegrams no longer cost Electrum, they instead use a special currency called Dashes
The Electrum cost of Telegrams was meant to instill hesitancy in Factions to encourage a thoughtful decision between Telegrams and Forum chat. However, in practice, most Factions were either too hesitant and rarely spoke, or so liberal they had notably reduced money to hire Wildcards. Though I am hesitant to introduce another currency to a game that has so many already, it does seem warranted in this case. Note that with this change, Wildcards no longer get free Telegrams!
(For more information, see page 24 of the playtest rules)

 

Telegrams have a new look, and a 300 character limit
I’ve wanted to distinguish Telegram and Forum chat for a while now, and I think this major visual change really helps get the point across.

 

Trade is now conducted by sending Trade Offers through Telegrams directly
When constructing a new Telegram, you will now have the option of adding a Trade Offer to that Telegram. You will fill both sides of the Trade Offer and send it to the other party, where they can choose to Accept to Reject the Trade Offer. The Offer can also be Cancelled early if you change your mind.
This system should play better with the asynchronous nature of the game allowing fire-and-forget Trade to be concluded as schedules allow.

 

Express Rail can no longer be paid for with Capital
The ability to instantly transport any Agent anywhere at any time makes the board feel sort of volatile, so for this playtest I am vastly restricting the amount of teleporting that can happen by removing the possibility to pay for Express Rail with Capital. Certain Agent Abilities still grant access to Express Rail, but hopefully the reduced presence of instant speed travel will result in a more stable board and less intense menuing.

 

Military Governors now Recruit new Soldiers equal to their Renown plus their City’s Renown
This is actual a reversion of a previous change. Much has changed about the rest of the game since the Military Governors could recruit this many Soldiers, so I am interested to see how it affects the game now. This should also give City Upgrades and Monuments a bit of a boost.

 

Increased the number of Reserves gained by Augmenting to 4
Brass has been the weakest of the metallic triangle of Resources in basically every playtest, so this change should give you more bang for your Brass. As a bonus, it should help ailing Factions the end up with a lot of Wounded.
A more significant overhaul to Augmenting is planned for a future playtest.
Try to to think about the Soldiers being split into 4 Augmented though. They’ll be fine.

 

Appointing an Agent as Governor is no longer required to have the City perform an Action (Collect, Renovate, or Upgrade)
The requirement for Cities to have Governors to Collect was meant to be a tax on larger empires, as more territory required more bureaucracy to manage it. However, I’ve found that larger empires simply have more Agents available anyway, so this limitation rarely manifested. As a side effect, coordination Collection between different players on a Faction team was difficult, as most Agents were controlled by the Speaker or Commander, but the Planner controls Collection. While I am still looking to put more checks on larger Factions, I am interested in seeing what happens with this change alone.
Note that Agents can still be appointed as Governors for other effects, such as opening Forums.

 

Agent Bidding now uses a blind bidding system where each Faction can win up to 1 Agent each Turn
My attempt to make Agent Bidding flexible in the past lead to a system where sniping was required, so it needed an overhaul. The new system is blind, allowing for truly asynchronous bidding. Previous versions of Bidding let winning Factions reliably get 2 new Agents each turn, leading to a large power spike and a board choked with Agents. This new system all but guarantees each Faction gets exactly 1 new Agent, leading to a more even playing field and few Agents in the board overall.
(For more information, see page 43 of the playtest rules)

 

Foundries now only generate Resources in their Vats when Collected from that Turn
Right now, the Faction Resource Collection strategy orbits around Foundries. This is mostly intended, but its a bit too significant at the moment. This lets Foundries keep much of their incredible Resource output, but now as a trade off when compared to Upgrading. This is also a balancing measure to counteract the fact they no longer need Governors to Collect.

 

Monuments now get +2 Renown per Collection
Monuments have been so weak in recent playtests that some Factions have Renovated a City into a Monument as a way to spite their opponents. Hopefully this buff and the buff to Military Governors will give them a more significant niche.

Minor Patch Notes

Snips have been temporarily removed
The new overhaul to the Telegram system leaves Snips in a weird place, so they are out for this playtest. They will return in another form in the future.

 

Checkpoints only occur during the Day
Previously, Checkpoints would also happen every even hour at night, but the Train wouldn’t run. This was confusing to many players. So for clarity, Checkpoints only occur during the day, and Cooldowns for many Agent Abilities have been adjusted accordingly.

 

Non-Leader Agents are now also referred to as Followers
This is just a terminology change for clarity.

 

Faction Diplomat Agents are now called Envoys
It was pointed out to me that having a Diplomatic Agent called the Diplomat when hypothetically all the Diplomatic Agents are diplomats was confusing. Even that sentence was confusing. So the Diplomats are now called Envoys. Hope that clears things up.

 

SpyTech Changes: Thieves Tools now only Steal 0.50 Electrum, and Cloaks have a reduced Brass Cost
A pair of a simple nerf and buff to tweak the SpyTech game. SpyTech will be getting a more significant overhaul in a future playtest.

 

Wildcard Merits have been removed. Commending a Wildcard now gives them a free 1.00 Electrum instead.
Merits were intended to be a medium for Wildcards to trade favors, but in practice they just traded the Merits. I would like to find that Wildcard trade medium someday, but for now Merits are more trouble than they are worth. So they are out!

 

The Infrastructure no longer grants 1 Renown
This Upgrade was cheap before and is now even cheaper since it does not require a Governor. This Upgrade is not intended to be chosen often, so it has been weakened to compensate.

 

The Renegade now creates 4 + 4/Base Soldiers when Ambushing (down from 5 + 5/Base)
The Renegade can be an oppressive force on the board, especially early game. Now, this is mostly intended, but I think it needs some tuning down. This might not sound like a noticeable nerf, but it is made in the context of the Factions having generally more access to Soldiers as well.

 

The Spymaster has a reduced Electrum penalty on Denouncement
This is a placeholder Denouncement Penalty, but it seems too harsh, so it’s getting tweaked down.

 

The Spymaster Bases have a new effect that reduces Telegram Dash cost passively
I’ve not been happy with the Spymaster’s Base ability as it makes them play in a sort of boring way. This Telegram updates offers an opportunity for a new effect, one that keeps the Spymaster as a tempting option for cheaper messaging… as long as you don’t mind the Spymaster having al your secrets.
(For more information, see page 55 of the playtest rules)

Playtest Rules

Here is the link to Full Rules for this upcoming playtest, starting March 1st!
Feel free to leave comments on the document or ask questions in the Days Without Strife Discord Server.

 

Patreon 

Finally, if you’d like to support Days Without Strife, please consider contributing to the Patreon.

 

 

New Days Without Strife Playtest in March!

I'll be running a new playtest of Days Without Strife starting on March 1st!
This playtest will be based in UTC+01:00 time zone, so more convenient for European players.

If you are interested in participating in this upcoming playtest, please sign up using this Google Form!

Or you can read more about it on the Days Without Strife Discord server!

Days Without Strife: Anxiety and Loneliness, Factions and Wildcards

Days Without Strife

I've been working on a project called Days Without Strife. It's an online asynchronous team multiplayer game of negotiation, strategy, and intrigue heavily inspired by the classic game of Diplomacy, modern reinterpretations such as Subterfuge, and day long megagames like the one featured in this video by Shut Up and Sit Down.

For right now though, I'd like to focus on Diplomacy.

 

Diplomacy

Diplomacy is board game created in 1954 that sees 7 players take on the roles of world power fighting a battle royale version of WWI. Military power is heavily limited as each territory can only hold a single army and every army is of equal strength. Armies can only be displaced and defeated by the combined strength of multiple adjacent armies, and making any progress at all often involves making deals with other players. However, since all combat moves are chosen in secret and executed simultaneously, you only have their word as to whether they will support your advance against a mutual foe, as they could just as easily support your enemy's advance against you!

It's a timeless game, and for good reason, but it can be a nightmare to actually play. The experience is intense, and you have to be constantly watching out for betrayals while planning when you will commit your next betrayal. The simple rules create an ocean of depth but offer no emotional safeguard against the players freezing in Diplomacy's ice cold waters.

This creates two problems: 1) Only a certain type of player can comfortably play Diplomacy, and 2) they can only play with each other, as there is no one else to play with.

I aim to solve both problems in my current project by tackling what I believe to be their root cause.

Anxiety and Loneliness

The major issue I've found with Diplomacy stems from the incredible anxiety the game generates from the high stakes all-or-nothing combat system at the core of the game, the tension of not truly knowing your opponents’ plans, and the resulting loneliness.

This anxiety is not entirely a bad thing, as it is often a game's emotional impact that drives the players’ engagement in it, and both the high stakes combat and the uncertainty of opponent agendas is responsible for a lot of the emotional impact the players are seeking.

I do not think, however, anyone plays high-pressure negotiation games like Diplomacy to feel lonely. Uneasy alliances and betrayals are part of the experience, but if every alliance is uneasy and every betrayal is inevitable then many players will not bother trying to form any kind of connection beyond a temporary practical ceasefire. Any unnecessary connection or divulgence of information to another player is another potential tool they can use to betray you, incentivizing players to keep to themselves. 

Trusting others is never worth the risk, and so the game feels lonely.

Factions

For Days Without Strife, the first solution to the loneliness problem was straightforward: Make each world power in the game into a 3 player team called a Faction.

A player on a Faction can never be alone, and their teammates have no capacity to betray them. Being on a team also has the benefit of diffusing and redirecting the negative emotional energy from a betrayal, as when a group suffers a loss it often sparks a sort of righteous anger instead of lonely depression. Teams can support each other emotionally as they find a way to fight back.

This change also allows each player to specialize and focus on the part of the game they like best (and more importantly, stay away from the parts they dislike). Each Faction features 3 roles: The Speaker (in charge of diplomacy and espionage), the Commander (in charge of the military), and the Planner (in charge of resource management).

These Faction roles open up the game to new kinds of players. Silver-tongue liars, mechanics-focused wargamers, and the mathematically-minded can join the ranks of the bloodthirsty backstabbers, all without having to get their hands dirty if they don't want to. This in turn grants a greater variety of game experiences for the traditional fans of the genre, as now they have a team to share the game with and new kinds of opponents to interact with.

Wildcards

The second solution came about when I had a few playtesters who wanted to participate, but could not get a team together. I created a new role for them that I call the Wildcard.

Instead of controlling armies and capturing territory, each Wildcard instead has a unique ability that was largely disconnected from the map, such as generating free resources to sell, eavesdropping on conversations, or taxing certain actions. The Wildcards are given a separate victory condition from the Factions: They have to sell their unique services to the Factions and collect as much money as possible. Though these players would be alone, they had little actual stake in the world map and therefore had nothing to lose beyond a sale. Betrayal could not really hurt them.

Though the idea of the Wildcards was created to let a few extra players into the game, it had the side effect of giving every player exponentially more diplomatic and tactical options. Each Wildcard is essentially parasitically linked with a certain mechanic, and if the Factions want to interact with that mechanic, they have to at least consider that Wildcard and their influence. It’s as though every button on the interface had an associated personality. Meanwhile, the Wildcards are often hyper-focused on their respective sphere of influence, with each one trying to convince the Factions the game is all about their mechanical slice.

The Wildcards themselves escape the issue of loneliness not by having explicit teammates, but by instead lacking explicit enemies. It's in the Faction's best interest to be on good terms with the Wildcards, and even rival Wildcards have no real method for direct competition. Wildcards can feel free to take it relatively easy, safe in the knowledge that no one is out to get them.

The role of Wildcard again opens up the game to new kinds of players. Crafty merchants, sneaky rogues, and renegade warlords can now find a place in the game, all while giving the experience much more depth for the Factions, who now have access to many new tactical options... for the right price.

The Ecosystem

These are pretty radical changes to the base game of Diplomacy, and I am glossing over the many additional rules that have been added to accommodate the increased player count such as resources, the new combat mechanics, and the system of agents (more on those in future entries). The major result of all of these changes and additions is that the game is now a much more complex and dynamic experience. It plays like an ecosystem, with each player finding themselves a small part of it.

This new ecosystem allows each player to decide for themselves how much they invest in the game and its world. Some Faction players act as dutiful civil servants content to simply balance the budget, some Wildcard players will try to run the board themselves, and I've seen others create informal Faction-Wildcard coalitions that lasted the entire game. Though built on the skeleton of Diplomacy, Days Without Strife is now a different kind of experience, one that is much more about the journey than the destination.

In Summary

The Faction and Wildcard systems have been the standout developments of Days Without Strife. Created to make the game feel a little less lonely, these systems have transformed the experience into something that feels more like a living world and less like a brutal strategy game. The primary impact of these systems is that for any given player, most of the game is spent surrounded by other players who are either truly friendly or at least neutral towards them. Players that normally would never play a brutal strategy game can now find a place to express themselves, and in the process make that same strategy game all the more unique for the veteran tactician.

The more the players can get out of each other, the more each one will add to the experience. That’s why I became fascinated with games like Diplomacy in the first place: It’s a strategy game that acknowledges that the most interesting part of the game is the interaction between the players.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I hope to write more about this project and these ideas soon. If this project sounds interesting to you, please check out the Days Without Strife page to see the current status of the project and any upcoming playtests.

RyanMakesGames

Hello, my name is Ryan and I make games (hence the moniker).

I really can't overemphasize that point though. I've been interested in game design as far back as I can remember, long before I knew the term "game design". In elementary school I was fascinated by the many variants of playground four square. In middle school I spent endless hours making maps in the Warcraft III World Editor and forced my friends to play them with me. And in my junior year of high school I finally considered making a career of it. To this day I spend most of my waking hours thinking about games and how they are made and how they are experienced and how they differ from non-interactive forms of art and on and on.

I've wanted to write a collection of my many thoughts on the subject of game design for a long time, but I've never had a place to start. I always feel like I want to add to an existing body of work, but never had one to add to. So today I've decided to start one, and this is it. A blog of my very own. I don't expect anything I write to be revolutionary, and this exists mostly as a place for me to get these thoughts out of my head in a productive way, but I hope these posts end up helping someone else on their own path someday.

Incidentally, if you are just starting out, I recommend Jesse Schell's The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses as a good place to start reading.

I also want this blog to be a living portfolio of my past work, including the terrible Warcraft III maps and GameMaker prototypes. I anticipate that reviewing those older projects will be unpleasant, but I promise the games get better eventually. Hopefully as I analyze my own work I will start to understand my own biases or gaps in my understanding. There is always more to learn.

Let's get started!