The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Total War
Mage Knight: Board Game
Fantastiqa
Libertalia
The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Eclipse
Mice and Mystics
Doctor Who: The Card Game
Lords of Waterdeep
Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Dungeon Fighter
Android: Netrunner
Virgin Queen
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Glory to Rome
Infiltration
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Dominion
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Twilight Struggle
City of Horror
Snowdonia
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Goa
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
Agricola
Among the Stars
7 Wonders: Cities
7 Wonders
The Swarm
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Arkham Horror
Village
Ora et Labora
Battles of Westeros: House Baratheon Army Expansion
Race for the Galaxy
War of the Ring
Trajan
Kingdom Builder
The Castles of Burgundy
Zombicide
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Space Alert
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Hacienda
Battlestar Galactica
Ground Floor

BoardGameGeek News

To submit news, a designer diary, outrageous rumors, or other material, please contact BGG News editor W. Eric Martin via email – wericmartin AT gmail.com
Recommend
49 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up

Designer Diary: Charon Inc. – Moving Markets to the Moon

Emanuele Ornella
France
Dijon
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The idea of Charon Inc. came to me just after Hermagor was released in 2006. Hermagor received good feedback, but there were two main concerns:

-----1. The theme did not appeal to a significant number of players (who were expecting something different for a fantasy-themed game), and
-----2. Too much "manipulation" was needed for each action.

Hermagor is, in fact, a gamer's game and it takes up to two hours to be played. It's tense and strategic, though as mentioned above, probably it is too "fiddly". In spite of this, the main mechanism of the market was really appreciated and enjoyed. That was also the most tense and strategic part of the game.

Before I proceed, let me explain something more about this market mechanism.

The market is basically a rectangular board where tiles are placed at the beginning of each phase. Tiles have goods that can be sold later in the game, but you can consider these as general resources. Each player on his turn must place one of his pawns on one of three possible positions on the board:

-----• Directly on a tile
-----• In between two tiles (on tile edges)
-----• In between four tiles (on tile corners)

Depending on these positions, a single pawn is able to "touch" or influence 1, 2 or 4 tiles. When all pawns for each player are placed, each single tile is checked and the player who has the most pawns "touching" the tile will win the tile. Any tie is broken in a clever way: A pawn that touches more tiles has less tie-breaking power. Because some positions were more useful than others, the cost to place a pawn was different.

So I started to think about ways to create a smoother game and also one that could be played by families as well, while still using the same core mechanism of the market. At the same time, I started to think about simplifying my design for two main reasons. The first was that the market for bigger publishers seems to be for simple games – easy to learn and taking between 30 and 60 minutes, if possible. The second was that it was a challenge for me to try to design good games that are not too complex.

Too often my games came out geared only for gamers (think Hermagor, Il Principe, Assyria), while the game which had the most success was Oltremare – the simplest one.

I started to think of how I could keep the Hermagor market mechanism flavor, yet have a different game. The way, I knew, was to simplify it. So I started to get rid of money. In Hermagor, each time you place a pawn, you need to pay money. The pawns you played, at the end of the phase, will earn back that money. So you first pay money, and then you gain money for the pawn placement! That was something I thought I should remove for sure. And that was one of the main reasons for the length of the game: paying, exchanging banknotes, and calculating how much you would have earn in the end was very time-consuming.

However, money in the Hermagor market was a way to balance one of the main problems of the market: If you play your pawns on the center of the market, you will need to fight more to retain the market spots. That's simply because there are more chances that another pawn will remove your hegemony. So money was the balancing factor: If you placed a pawn in the center of the market, you paid less than if you placed the pawn on the corner or on the border.

Hermagor market – image courtesy of Dave Lartigue

I needed to find a solution for this to balance the mechanism. The solution arrived one day when I realized that another way to balance the position was to offer more resources in the center of the market keeping the "cost" of the pawn the same for all the markets. In other words, instead of differentiating the cost for placing a pawn, I differentiated the reward. So on the corners, where it's easier to maintain the superiority on a spot, I decided to reduce the number of resources a player could earn. While in the center, where the competition is more intense; the reward, in terms of number of resources earned, should be greater.

Because the cost of placing pawns was equalized, I was able to remove it completely, so in our new game there is no more money, and no more payment for placing a pawn. That was the greatest simplification of the game.

Then I wanted something easier to play as well. The first part of the game is therefore to collect resources from the market by placing pawns on strategic positions. What then to do with the resources? Well, the easiest way to use resources is to build something with them! So I decided to have cards depicting resources to be built.

As it usually happens, I then started to think about a theme for the prototype. When I am happy enough with the core mechanism, having a theme to think of helps me to go ahead with the rest of the design.

I needed something different from a market theme, and certainly different from a fantasy theme. My choice was an historical theme – the emperor Charlemagne. Pawns became the tax collectors, and resources were needed to build part of Charlemagne's huge castle!

Unfortunately my design was still not simple enough, and I realized that because the game was still too long and too complex to be explained easily. However, I started to show it to publishers. Gryphon Games, and specifically Rick Soued, wanted to test it. Rick was able to see how good the core mechanism was, but he confirmed my hypothesis: The game was still way too complex for the mass market.

Rick and the Gryphon team really enjoyed the game, and while we arranged to sign the contract, they started to re-think and simplify the game more and more, paring it down to just the two essential elements of the market and the flag selection (see below). They also changed the theme from an historical one to a science fiction one, and I really appreciated that: I love science fiction, but I was always told that publishers are not willing to have SF themes for games, though maybe this is a trend that is changing in the last few years.

Rick and his team did a great job on simplifying the game, leaving the strategy and the fun part intact. The artwork, by Charlie Bink, and the theme are also great. In Charon Inc. each player is the CEO of a futuristic company that is settling the main Pluto moon (Charon indeed!) to extract the minerals from there. Using the same minerals it's possible to build buildings directly in the moon. These buildings are the way to score!

We did a lot of playtests after each change, and in the end we agreed on all of them! Rick coordinated some great team work, even though many of us live remotely from each other.


For those who have played Hermagor already, I wanted to add something, a completely new and original mechanism to make Charon not just a simplified version of Hermagor, but a completely new game, with a similar idea, but with a very different flavor and strategy. Together with the main mechanism of the market, that new action is positioning flags with which to stake claims in Charon.

Each player now has five flags to be positioned on the regions of Charon regions. There is one flag more than the number a player is allowed to use to stake claims on regions. Each flag is initially placed on a "special action area." Placing a flag on the moon requires the choice of flag, and therefore the choice of which special action that player will not be able to use. At the end of the "staking" phase only one flag remains on a special action area, which will trigger a special ability. This is a mechanism where each turn you need to select not only where to position the flag on the moon, but which special ability (area) you are going NOT to use. Rick and I spent a great deal of time in choosing and refining these special actions, working hard to create a "balance" between them which makes the choice of which action to retain another difficult and challenging decision for the players to make.

A bonus that I am very pleased with is that the game works very well (I would say better than Hermagor) for two players only. For any number of players (2-5), the game is tense and the interaction between the players, while contesting the limited resources of the shared moon of Charon, is incredibly high. All in all, I think Charon Inc. is an excellent game, with terrific components, art, and thematic "flavor" that plays very well for gamers and non-gamers as well. I hope you will enjoy this game as much as I enjoyed the process of designing it, and I would love to hear feedback from you about this game.

Emanuele Ornella

Editor's note: This preview first appeared on BoardgameNews.com on August 31, 2010.
Twitter Facebook
1 Comment
Subscribe sub options Sat May 28, 2011 6:30 am
Post Comment
Gláucio Reis
Brazil
Rio de Janeiro
RJ
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Emanuele, it was a pleasure to read your article. I agree with most of your points, and I think you stated the good and bad of Hermagor very well. I'm not fond of the trading theme, but I'm a Fantasy fan and really wanted to like the game. I owned and traded it away twice. I don't think it's a bad game at all (I rate it 6.5), but the fiddliness of paying or receiving small amounts of money for doing everything really annoyed me. Besides, it seems to be a common feature in your games that there are so many small and unintuitive interactions that it is very difficulty to calculate the results of your choices, or everything is so balanced that it seems not to matter. Il Principe and Oltremare suffer from the same problem (IMO). But I think you got it right in Assyria, which is by far my favorite among your games.

When I first heard of Charon Inc, I really liked the idea of using the market from Hermagor as the core mechanic for a simpler game, and even better, with a Sci-Fi theme. However, I think something was lost in the process. In Hermagor, it isn't too hard to secure some needed stuff, and there is always something useful to do even if you don't get all you want from the market. In Charon Inc, you don't only need certain resources, you need them in specific quantities. It's impossible to predict what you will end up getting, and one single missing resource unit may severely impact your plans. The game feels random and it is quite chaotic with the higher numbers of players. I wonder if your original Charlemagne game would be better, and I would love to know more about it.

One last thing... I don't mean to be harsh, but I have to disagree regarding the "terrific components, art, and thematic flavor". I found the art very bland. As for the components, the resources are nice (glad they are not wooden cubes), and I love plastic miniatures, but... flags?! Seriously?! Rockets or astronauts come immediately to mind as much better choices. On the "thematic flavor", we have totally generic resources, buildings that only differ in number of resources needed and VPs, and each building has several versions requiring different resources. It actually feels quite abstract to me.

I don't know if this is the feedback you expected to receive, but you did ask for feedback, and I hope you take my criticism constructively, as intended.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue May 31, 2011 4:17 am
  • Posted Tue May 31, 2011 4:16 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.