Players take turns picking a level. You score points based on the levels you pick. If you pick a level 2 under the other player, they don't score and you take their points. If you pick level 1 you will always beat someone who picks level 6.
====
2 Players dig beneath the surface to subvert control of the super structure!
The deeper you go, the more you score.
Undermine a rival 2 levels above you to steal their point!
Control the structure from the top to prevent level 6 from scoring.
GL HF
((You could also play this with 2 dice.
For added subversion, cooperate with the second player and help them win - they'll never see it coming!))
Sorry, maybe I should have made the text more clear. Players take turns picking a level. You score points based on the levels you pick. If you pick a level 2 under the other player, they don't score and you take their points. If you pick level 1 you will always beat someone who picks level 6.
Interesting idea, but I feel like the player that if a player always chooses 6, as long as the other player chooses not 1 a few times, the 6 player will win...
Also had a bunch of the text cut off for me in the web player.
The core gameplay is interesting enough, but there's really no reason to pick number 1. You're preventing your opponent from scoring, but you're only scoring 1 point.
The game is pretty interesting. I thought this was going to be a Tower of Hanoi type game but it wasn't! It's cool.
neat idea. I assume that players aren't supposed to see each other's moves until after both choices have been made? This isn't extremely clearly communicated, but it made sense to me and made for a fairly intriguing bluffing game.
@burgerdare right! that's why you move your mouse below the tower between turns - so the other player can't see what you chose.
@ThingoStudios totally. Scoring 1 is way too weak. I'm thinking it should score you 6 instead -- or maybe drop the layers down to 4 and 1 beats 4 for 4 points.
I really like the idea, but the mechanic doesn't quite seem there yet, mostly because 5, and 6 appear to be the only sensible choices. Since choosing 5 guarantees a gain of either 3 or 5 with no way to undermine, and 6 can only be undermined with 1, sticking with either or switching between those two randomly beats dice rolls the majority of games.
Assuming your opponent plays randomly, choosing 1 or 2 averages a loss of -3/2(-1.5), 3 averages -5/6(-0.88), 4 averages +1, 5 averages +5/3(+1.66), and 6 averages +11/6(+1.83)
If you want there to be more depth of strategy, you need to rethink the mechanic some in order to make lower point plays potentially more valuable.
Comments12
Also had a bunch of the text cut off for me in the web player.
The game is pretty interesting. I thought this was going to be a Tower of Hanoi type game but it wasn't! It's cool.
This isn't extremely clearly communicated, but it made sense to me and made for a fairly intriguing bluffing game.
@ThingoStudios totally. Scoring 1 is way too weak. I'm thinking it should score you 6 instead -- or maybe drop the layers down to 4 and 1 beats 4 for 4 points.
Assuming your opponent plays randomly, choosing 1 or 2 averages a loss of -3/2(-1.5), 3 averages -5/6(-0.88), 4 averages +1, 5 averages +5/3(+1.66), and 6 averages +11/6(+1.83)
If you want there to be more depth of strategy, you need to rethink the mechanic some in order to make lower point plays potentially more valuable.