Car Wars Storage Tips

[beetle496]

What is AP? Armor Points does not fit the context of your use.

Originally Posted by Sam Mitschke

Obviously everyone is different, but Randy and I take roughly 10 minutes to build our cars.

I expect to get there. I think the people who up playing regularly will too.

One of the things we explicitly advise NOT to do is giving new players everything at once.

Goodness no!

Game 3: core cards
Game 4: minis sets, armory, linked, Uncle Al's

Having fewer cards to choose from obviously simplifies things a great deal. But I am not seeing any real utility with discriminating between core cards and these sets, sorry.

I am thinking game 3 or 4 should be on the smaller side of a “small games” (12-16 BP, with the recommended 1:4:1 ratio) with some limits on BP value to trim down the possible permutations:

• Driver/Gunner: max 3 CP for either
• Sidearms, Gear, Accessories: 1 CP items only
• Upgrades: 1-2 BP cards
• Structures: 1-3 BP cards
• Weapons: 1-4 BP cards

That fits the pattern on the red Player Record Sheets, and cuts the card count down by at least a third.

My intuition is that having the cards nicely sorted in a binder makes a bigger difference than giving a player half as many cards (semi-sorted, but in a stack). I am not sure who would do that kind of testing!

Game 4/5 could be on the larger side of a small game, 24 BP RAW, but maybe still no dropped weapons.

I definitely agree with the advise to hold off from the dropped weapons! The terrain height rules seem a little more complicated than the default of adding skids.

[Sam Mitschke]

AP = analysis paralysis

Having fewer cards to choose from obviously simplifies things a great deal. But I am not seeing any real utility with discriminating between core cards and these sets, sorry.

The cards in the core set represent a good spread of basic card abilities, types, and subtypes, all specifically selected to support teaching the game. That list is how *I* would do it based on my experience teaching the game many times over, but people learn in different ways. There is no wrong way to approach this — do what works for your audience AND for you as the teacher.

[43Supporter]

Originally Posted by Sam Mitschke

AP = analysis paralysis

Further data on the topic for those wishing to read about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis . (I recognize the term from The SO's studies of Usability -- she's a programmer, and uses me as a "canary" for her programs.... :) )

I have noted how, in the OG _CW_ games I've seen (and have) run at cons, the GMs invariably have a selection of pregenerated cars; and said cars are "elemental" in nature: 1 big, or 2-3 small, guns; enough armor to absorb 3 average hits from said guns; *maybe* a targeting computer; and *that's it*. "Simplicate, and add lightness."

[Sam Mitschke]

< looks at record sheets >

Hmm...


:)

[beetle496]

Originally Posted by Sam Mitschke

The cards in the core set represent a good spread of basic card abilities, types, and subtypes, all specifically selected to support teaching the game. That list is how *I* would do it based on my experience teaching the game many times over, but people learn in different ways.

I agree that the cards in the core set represent a good spread. Sticking with the core cards, absent having played a couple games with the pre-builds, is perfectly sensible.

Presumably, your teaching experience started before you had the PRS, and informed the design and creation of the PRS. All of the virtues you list from the core set are replicated on the PRS.

From even just two games with the PRS, players will have experience with crew and accessories providing re-rolls or adding dice.

Are there any game mechanics in the core card set that are not represented on the PRS?

I agree with paring down choices for players first build, but after a couple games with the PRS, I cannot see how limiting choices to the core set is the best next step.

First of all, the core set includes several high BP cards which are a distraction. Players have used the blue PRS, they already know there are bigger guns. For a first build, at ≤24BP, those add to the cognitive overload.

Secondly, the PRS include accessories and upgrades which players might well remember fondly, and want to use for their first build. “Last game, you got a lot of fun out of the Gyroscopic Stabilizer. Shouldn’t that be in here?”

There is no wrong way to approach this — do what works for your audience AND for you as the teacher.

Third, and most significantly, the build logic I would be inclined to teach and emphasize is this:

• Choice between types, Shred/Slug/Fire (straightforward).
• Choice between between fewer/bigger or more/smaller (straightforward).
• Choice between re-rolls (i.e., a linked variant) or more dice (straightforward).

I submit that a larger list with one of every type at BP from 1-4 (plus linked variants, as available) has to be less cognitive friction than a smaller list with gaps caused by sticking to the core card set. For example, a newer player might be thinking they want a large shred gun at 4 BP. But that is not a choice in the core set, so now they have to decide between a couple smaller shred weapons or a 4 BP slug. This is a reframing of their options which is not as fun/interesting/fast for this player as picking between the Vulcan or Linked Standard Machine Guns.

I do think I will trim down the first build choices for accessories and upgrades. For those, core plus anything on the PRS should be fine.

Structures is only one sheet, and laid out in a grid, the pattern is obvious enough.

[Sam Mitschke]

Are there any game mechanics in the core card set that are not represented on the PRS?

The record sheets intentionally omit an enormous aspect of the game — car building — to get players driving and shooting quickly. The record sheets provide NO choice in car design. Players are then presented with near-infinite choices when they start building their own cars. I have seen people walk away from the game when that switch is flipped. So there may just be a contextual divide in how you and I view things:

My teaching games nearly always include one or more players with little to no prior knowledge or interest in Car Wars. I will constantly ask them to tell me when *they* want more options, and then I introduce things in stages.

You seem to know beforehand that you're teaching players who are already as enthusiastic about Car Wars as you are, and that they will want every option available right up front. You've also just...decided...that my suggested approach will not be fun for them.

I've seen too many players become overwhelmed by a tsunami of cards and get frustrated...but giving your group everything at once might be just fine. Do what works for you and your audience — I just love that you're playing and getting more players involved!

[HeatDeath]

I can't blame a player that much for feeling a little overwhelmed and possibly frustrated once the car design door is flung open. This list I composed for an earlier thread is how I dealt with it, and how I'd approach teaching car building to a new player:

Originally Posted by HeatDeath

Regarding interesting vehicle types doable with the Core set, right off the top of my head:

• Big gun in the front
• Big gun in the back
• Big guns out the sides

Multiplied by

• Shred
• Slug
• Rockets
• Flamethrowers

Multiplied by

• Armor all around
• Armor front back
• Armor sides

Multiplied by

• Buff acceleration
• Buff braking
• Buff targeting
• Buff colliding

Multiplied by

• Armored Beer Refrigerator

I end up at somewhere in the general neighborhood of 200 distinct families of builds, with another 3-4 variations on each.

To the first list I would add "Medium-big guns out the front /and/ back".

But yeah. Break vehicle building down to a few big choices, and then let them color in those lines with smaller weapons and accessory/gear choices.

[43Supporter]

Originally Posted by Sam Mitschke

Players are then presented with near-infinite choices when they start building their own cars. I have seen people walk away from the game when that switch is flipped.

I can attest -- back-when, I saw people walk up to the table, take one look at _Catalog From Hell_, and walk away. This is why I am, and always have been, a supporter of the "Time-Life Books model" of game design: Divide stuff up into categories (for ex.: "Arena"; "Road"; etc.); let the players buy what they're interested in.

[beetle496]

Originally Posted by Sam Mitschke

I have seen people walk away from the game when that switch is flipped.

Me: Wait! Where are you going? This is the best part!

My teaching games nearly always include one or more players with little to no prior knowledge or interest in Car Wars. I will constantly ask them to tell me when *they* want more options, and then I introduce things in stages.

Introducing things in stages is perfectly sensible, and exactly why I am exploring how to run the first game after using the PRS.

You seem to know beforehand that you're teaching players who are already as enthusiastic about Car Wars as you are…

That is not my situation. My first game (and the next one soon) are two different friends who are indulging me.

…and that they will want every option available right up front.

Nope, that does not even describe me (and certainly not my friends). My other venue is one of the FLGS, but that has to wait for Spring, so if a player get the CW bug, the proprietor can order them a set. Those games will be with strangers, and we will be using the Player Record Sheets.

You've also just...decided...that my suggested approach will not be fun for them.

I have just observed one little thing that makes the game less fun for me. The majority of players will not notice that your suggested approach for game 3 does not include cards they have already used in games 1 and 2.

I've seen too many players become overwhelmed by a tsunami of cards and get frustrated...but giving your group everything at once might be just fine.

I am with you on the tsunami of cards. I agree it would be a mistake to present everything — or even just the subset I laid out — at game 3. I am now thinking that even the Core set is too much.

So here is another heretical idea I have been mulling over, and I bet it’s an approach you tried (at least before the PRS): Each player draws randomly weapons from the Core deck, until the Small Game BP value is reached.

This approach to “Game 3” (i.e., first game after the PRS) lets players focus on arranging their guns (not unlike @HeadDeath mentions, above, in his first set of bullets). This will still be a step up from the previous game (presumable, the blue PRS), but less complicated than the next game (where players pick cards from a subset of those available).

There are some nuances, which I have not fleshed out completely, but here’s the general sequence. Step 0 is picking BP value, for this list I will use 12.

1. Each player goes through their deck, Core cards only, (1) removing cards which will not be used (CP > 3, BP guns > 4), and (2) pulling out duplicates of guns. All copies of Structures (just the Steel Plate, I think) stay in their deck. (3) Players shuffle this resulting card deck, which will be used for drawing cards in the steps following.
2. Players take turns, round robin style, drawing card from their deck.
3. When a player draws a gun ≤ 3 BP, they also get the matching gun from their pile of duplicates.
4. Draws continue until all players have two crew and have reached CP/BP limits.
5. Once a player hits 10 BP, further gun draws are discarded and they draw again (this puts additional Upgrades into play).
6. If a draw would put a player over the BP or CP limit, the card is discarded and they draw again. Likewise, if a player draws a second Driver or Gunner, discard and draw again.

Do what works for you and your audience — I just love that you're playing and getting more players involved!

I very much appreciate the feedback.

Game after this one adds the step where players pick cards (instead of the random assignment) from a subset of all those available.

[Sam Mitschke]

@beetle496
It's a relief to hear that you are keeping your whole group in mind. I've seen too many Car Wars players refuse to play/teach a reduced version of the game to their group because it isn't as fun for THEM, and then they don't understand why no one has fun or wants to play with again.

Regarding the random draw method you described...I think this is a fun way to PLAY, I think it's a bad way to TEACH. The only thing it teaches beyond the record sheets is weapon placement, since the random draw is still telling them what they must use. It's just a complicated way to make a new record sheet. Most new players can probably build their own car after game 1. Using the core set cards and small game restrictions limits the choice (in a good way, in my opinion), but it doesn't outright REMOVE the choice.