Checkerboard lava game review
After the initial playlets of this game, I found that the general mechanics work well with little issues. The reason that it played well is because it is checkers rules with a slight twist. Since I used the standard rules of checkers as my base, it was easy to make adjustments that wouldn’t hinder or over complicate the game. My favorite aspect of the game was the possibility for the board to change (by flipping the lava tiles). Players can use this to their advantage to try to block or maneuver the opponent to their benefit. Since the initial creation I made it a rule that each player can only turn over a certain amount of tiles and disabling them. This limits the players and makes a point of incorporating strategy into the game.
Some kinks that need to be worked out include the number of pieces on the board. From the first round of playing, there were only 5 per player, but I think this makes the game start a little slower since both people have to be a little more cautious of their moves and what happens. If they had more pawns, then it would increase the initial stage of the game and allow players to get more aggressive—therefore making the game more interesting. The question is though, how many pawns should they have if more than 5. I think this ties into the size of the board. Since the board size can also be negotiated at the start of each game (allowing for a change in strategy and decreasing predictability)-the number of pawns should depend on the board size. Somehow a ratio should be worked in to this. My idea is to provide several variations in board sizes and then give the number of pawns for each potential game set. This will still allow for user creation by provide more structure as a basis to go off of.
In conclusion though, although I liked the mechanics of this game and think that it does have potential, I have decided not to pursue this idea. A major reason is because it is so heavily based off of checkers, it feels almost finished with little room for my own creativity. It’s simplicity doesn’t appeal to me and I would like to continue with a game that has a lot of room for growth and idea development. I want to challenge myself and I don’t think this game allows for much other potential.