Basics of game design: 20 board games. Part one
The article by John Harris from the Fundamentals of Game Design series provides a detailed overview of the most popular board games, including traditional chess and go, role-playing like Call of Cthulhu, European ones like Colonialists, and many others who have a lot to learn.
I am very biased towards video game developers, their fans and thematic resources. This is my personal dislike, and I can't do anything about it. The fact is that they constantly identify “games” and “computer games”. Thus, they ignore the rich cultural traditions, gambling entertainment and even individual sports, as if they mean nothing at all.
I do not speak about those cases when the meaning of a word is clear from the context. I'm talking about people who call themselves gamers. Sports games existed long before the release of Pong, and the history of chess dates back centuries, therefore only the notorious chauvinists can use the term “game” exclusively in the sense of a computer program.
')
One of the symptoms of such chauvinism is manifested in the fact that the sources of inspiration for most game designers can be counted on the fingers. One gets the impression that these people only do that they play video games, read comics and watch Hollywood movies.
One way or another, it is obvious that popular culture has a tremendous impact on game design. Personally, I think this is a monstrous mistake - “hardcore” games have never been considered something special.
I am of the opinion (which I can justify, if necessary) that the growing popularity of casual games is nothing more than a protest against the bored clichés that lie at the heart of big-budget projects. In my opinion, this is a cause for serious concern - a similar monotony contributed to the beginning of the crisis of the computer games industry in 1983, from which the arcades had departed for another ten years.
Contrary to popular belief, new ideas do not arise out of the blue. Like the flies in the Francesco Redi experiment, they cannot appear from nowhere. To some extent, originality is a fiction, because any idea is based on another one. The more knowledge, the more room for imagination. The main thing - the right to choose what and how to borrow.
Even famous game designers, such as Shigeru Miyamoto, specifically devote time to activities like gardening in search of new ideas for their games. If you are limited to watching movies and reading comics, then all your work will be like them. And if you only play video games, your games will not stand out from the rest. There is no other way.
In previous articles in the Essentials of Game Design series, we looked at open-world games and projects from developers like Atari Games. This time we will talk about board games, including card games, role-playing games and puzzles. If you are a game designer and you are depressed by stagnation in the computer games industry, here you can learn a lot of useful information and direct your imagination to a new direction.
My friends helped me, to put it mildly, to thoroughly playasting the majority of the games represented here. Any game depends on the players - their decisions make each game unique.
I would like to thank these people for their invaluable help in my research and iron patience in times when I was too obsessed with the rules. Tests included: Brian Ricks, Larry Trowell, Amy Quirrell, Trevor Carroll, Ray Ginel, Ryan Downey, Matthew Chew, Dr. Julia Griffin, Jerrod Love, Samaria Guttmann, and Katie Berhau.
Note
The most difficult thing in this article was to summarize the rules. To those who have never played any game, I tried to give a general idea about it, without going into too much detail. For some games, this was obviously an empty idea, but I tried to make the descriptions as concise as possible.
Some words in the descriptions are in italics. These are key gaming terms, and you should pay attention to them. At the same time, I deliberately did not mention terms that are not related to the main essence of the game. This is especially true of the bridge, in describing which I omitted a lot of terminology and theoretical information. Excess wording can confuse those who play for the first time, but the rules in this article will help to gradually understand the game.
Of course, this list is not exhaustive - other desktops may be of equal interest to designers of computer games. Perhaps there will be another article dedicated to the twenty other games. Maybe.
1. Go
Traditional game
Type: abstract-strategic game to capture the territory of the enemy for two players
Level of difficulty: high
Creator: unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: none
Description: 2 players take turns putting stones on the board, capturing the territory and attacking the opponent's stones.
Game Review
Go is based on the seizure of territory. Players take turns placing white or black stones at the intersection of lines, or points, on a 19 Ă— 19 board.
The main way players interact is to capture stones, which is carried out by surrounding an adversary's adjacent group of stones in such a way that it does not have any points of freedom, that is, free points that are closest in vertical or horizontal. After this, the opponent's stones are removed from the board, and the player is awarded points for the capture. In fact, points are awarded twice: for each captured stone and for the territory of the board freed from it.
In essence, this means that it is not necessary for players to try to capture hopeless areas of the field, since this can turn into a waste of moves and stones. But the question is that it is not always possible to determine exactly which position is hopeless. Any free board area can theoretically be captured, but there are 2 exceptions. It is impossible to place a stone where it will be immediately captured - except when a retaliatory capture is carried out with such a move, and the stone saves itself. It is also forbidden to make a move that leads to an exact repetition of the location of the stones on the board, which has already been encountered in the game before (otherwise the game may get stuck).
The adjacent stones of the same color are considered one unit, or group, and “live” on the board, that is, remain in the game, or “die”, that is, captured by the enemy, together. Large groups of stones are harder to capture, but the survival rate of a group is not proportional to its size. If you think about it, in order to capture 1 stone located in the center of the board, you need 4 enemy stones. And in order to capture 2 stones, you need 6 enemy stones, that is only 50% more. Stretched across the board groups are usually more tenacious than heaps.
But single stones cannot capture the territory, and groups are more difficult to kill for other reasons. In particular, if the group is on the verge of death, it is possible to save the situation if you add another, free group to it by uniting their points of freedom.
The territory is captured by surrounding it with its stones, but this is not enough to win. If the second player has surviving stones in the encircled area, the struggle continues, and points are not counted. A territory is considered to be uncovered if the enemy can form so-called two eyes inside a group of enemy stones (several adjacent empty points, surrounded on all sides by a group of stones). In practice, this situation is negotiated by the players. If players do not agree, they must play until it becomes clear whether the surrounded group will survive or will have to give up.
It follows from the rules of capture that a group with two eyes cannot be captured unless the defending player by mistake himself fills one of the free points. In order to form a position, it is necessary to determine the place for the eyes and the sequence of moves to accomplish the maneuver, not forgetting that the enemy can prevent this.
Separate topics for discussion are questions about how large the territory should be in order to form eyes on it; how to form clusters with eyes within a group, blocking the adversary’s attempts to create such “safe” areas on their territory; deep strategy of the game, aimed at isolating the territories on the board and protecting them from attacks.
What can be learned from this game?
Go - one of the greatest classic games. It still remains something exotic, and one of the first tasks for many beginning players of non-Japanese origin is to get used to the game. It differs significantly from most Western board games in incredible depth, but its basic rules are not so complicated.
Guo is also known for the fact that it is too tough for computer programs. Chess programs beat grandmasters, but average players can win the best go-programs. The difference is that, firstly, the combinatorial explosion of possible moves in go is greater than in chess, which complicates the solution of the problem by searching for options. Secondly, a distinctive feature of go is the importance of applying strategy in the early stages of the game, which sets the tone for the ensuing battle.
Note: the article came out until the moment when the computer still managed to beat Lee Sedol.
What you can read: The Interactive Way to Go - an excellent guide to the game of go.
2. Chess
Traditional game
Type: abstract tactical game to capture figures for two players
Level of difficulty: high
Creator : unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: none
Description: 2 players take turns moving pieces with different ways of moving and attacking the board, lined up on the cages, trying to capture the opponent's king.
Game Review
On a board of 8x8 squares, 2 players lead an abstract tactical battle. Each of them has 16 figures, which are divided into 6 types. Each type of figure has its own unique way of moving around the board.
During the course the player can move only one piece. True, there are a few exceptions, but they are not worth talking about in the framework of this article. You can learn more about chess anywhere.
In chess there are the following figures:
• Pawns go only forward in a straight line. They cannot move if another figure stands in their way, but they can beat diagonally on the front. This is the only way to move a pawn, except in a straight line. If the pawn reaches the other end of the board, it becomes any other piece except the king. In 90% of cases - the queen.
• The rook goes to any number of free cells horizontally and vertically. This is a pretty strong figure, but using it to the maximum in the game is difficult because it starts walking from the corner.
• The elephant walks only diagonally. This piece is weaker than the rook, but it can be entered into the game much faster. Because of the way he travels around the board, an elephant never goes to a different color cell - if it initially stood on a black cage, it cannot walk on white. Thus, the bishop attacks only half the cells on the board.
• Horse - a strange figure. He walks on 2 cells vertically and one horizontally or one vertically and 2 horizontally from the current position. He jumps all the pieces in his path. Other figures do not interfere with the horse to walk on the board, but the trajectory of his movement and the choice of moves are very confused. A knight needs at least 3 turns to stand on the next square. A knight is the only piece whose moves the queen cannot repeat, therefore it is the knight that is the second most popular piece into which the pawn turns. On the first turn of the game, the knight is behind the pawn's wall, but this does not prevent him from jumping over them.
• A queen or queen is the strongest piece on a board that moves both as a rook and as an elephant. Each player has only one queen (except when pawns turn). The loss of a queen is one of the most critical losses in the game, unless the player gains a significant advantage by giving up the queen.
• The king moves in any direction, like the queen, but only one square per turn. This means that he is a little stronger than a pawn. Since the loss of a king means defeat in a party, this figure must be guarded and defended.
When a piece makes a move to the cell where the opponent’s piece is, it “hits” it, removing it from the game and reducing the number of opponent pieces on the board. No figure except a horse can walk “through” and “through” a figure, which sometimes leads to situations where one's own figures prevent the player from walking. This often happens at the beginning of the game, when the rows of pawns of both armies block the course of more powerful pieces.
The king is a very weak figure in the attack and movement on the board, but he is very important - the loss of the king means defeat in the game. In fact, it is very rarely "killed"; the game ends when the king is in a hopeless situation.
Therefore, the essence of the game is not to catch the king on the mistakes of the enemy, hoping that the opponent will not notice the danger. It consists in creating situations that are dangerous for the opponent's king, cutting off the paths to salvation and removing the defenders from the game. The emphasis on creating such situations and finding a way out of them, rather than creating meta-game distracting maneuvers, is an important distinction of serious gameplay. Chess lovers lift this strategy to unprecedented heights.
Other figures have their own styles of movement, and the study of the interaction of the figures with each other and the comparison of their value is a key component of the game. In the end, tactics and individual moves are especially valuable in chess, but a good sense of the strategy of the game gives a significant advantage.
What can be learned from this game?
If you are developing a tactical board game, learn chess, and you can't go wrong - all games of this type are indebted to chess. Here is a simple example: in many military video games, players have a unit, the loss of which means immediate defeat. In many cases, this unit is like a king in chess - it is relatively weak, so it is better not to send it to the front.
Recently, a lot has been learned from the progress of computer programs on the game of chess. Their main advantage lies in the fact that they are an unusually powerful tactical machine that is able to find strong moves with the help of rough calculations and selection of moves, rather than human analytical thinking. But only the number of moves that the program has to go through in order to calculate the simplest situation in the game means that to this day the best chess programs use heuristic and strategic methods.
Another indisputable advantage that such programs have is that they contain a lot of information about possible game situations and their variants - the history of the games played before is stored in the form of databases. This information has the greatest value in the initial stages of a game game, when the situations that are played out are very characteristic of most games.
Throughout the long history of its existence, chess has somewhat lost its complexity. In the end, most multiplayer games have decisive strategies that only become apparent after a long and thorough study. The main goal of the developer of multiplayer games is to minimize the likelihood of playing such strategies in the game, which is difficult to achieve without studying the extensive history of the game. And what game can boast a more extensive history than chess? This is perhaps the most studied game in the world, and it contains a huge variety of useful lessons.
3. Parchis
American adaptation of the traditional Indian game
Type: game for 2-4 players
Difficulty Level: Low
Creator: unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: high
Description: Players take turns moving the pieces in a circle. The goal of the game is to get your chips in the central field before other players can knock them down and at the same time knock down the opponents chips.
Game Review
This is a variation of the Indian game “Pachisi”, which is played on a similar board. There are other games that are derived from the traditional Indian pachisi - for example, the British game "Ludo". Both of these games are considered competitive - in which players move their chips along the tracks in order to lead them to the “house”.
Moving around the board is determined by the numbers drawn on the dice, and if a small number drops out, the player cannot do anything about it - this is a matter of luck. For some, this is an advantage of the game, because sometimes even children can beat experienced players. But more advanced players who want to show their strategic skills are annoying.
The game board is marked up in such a way that each player (the maximum possible number of players is 4) has a starting house from which you need to move the pieces in a circle, first along the outer track of the cross, then along the inside. The way the chips move along the board and their interaction with the opponents chips gives this essentially simple game a strategic interest.
Players roll the dice and move their chips clockwise, trying to walk from the starting position to the central field, which is slightly away from it counterclockwise. , . , , . .
, , , 2. , 3 5, 3 , 5, 8 . (), , ( 7 ). .
, , , , , . , 5 . , .
, , , , . , , , , .
, . , , , . .
?
. , . , . , , .
, . , , – . , , . , , , -. , .
: «-». – , ( ), ( Sorry! Hasbro).
I am very biased towards video game developers, their fans and thematic resources. This is my personal dislike, and I can't do anything about it. The fact is that they constantly identify “games” and “computer games”. Thus, they ignore the rich cultural traditions, gambling entertainment and even individual sports, as if they mean nothing at all.
I do not speak about those cases when the meaning of a word is clear from the context. I'm talking about people who call themselves gamers. Sports games existed long before the release of Pong, and the history of chess dates back centuries, therefore only the notorious chauvinists can use the term “game” exclusively in the sense of a computer program.
')
One of the symptoms of such chauvinism is manifested in the fact that the sources of inspiration for most game designers can be counted on the fingers. One gets the impression that these people only do that they play video games, read comics and watch Hollywood movies.
One way or another, it is obvious that popular culture has a tremendous impact on game design. Personally, I think this is a monstrous mistake - “hardcore” games have never been considered something special.
I am of the opinion (which I can justify, if necessary) that the growing popularity of casual games is nothing more than a protest against the bored clichés that lie at the heart of big-budget projects. In my opinion, this is a cause for serious concern - a similar monotony contributed to the beginning of the crisis of the computer games industry in 1983, from which the arcades had departed for another ten years.
Contrary to popular belief, new ideas do not arise out of the blue. Like the flies in the Francesco Redi experiment, they cannot appear from nowhere. To some extent, originality is a fiction, because any idea is based on another one. The more knowledge, the more room for imagination. The main thing - the right to choose what and how to borrow.
Even famous game designers, such as Shigeru Miyamoto, specifically devote time to activities like gardening in search of new ideas for their games. If you are limited to watching movies and reading comics, then all your work will be like them. And if you only play video games, your games will not stand out from the rest. There is no other way.
In previous articles in the Essentials of Game Design series, we looked at open-world games and projects from developers like Atari Games. This time we will talk about board games, including card games, role-playing games and puzzles. If you are a game designer and you are depressed by stagnation in the computer games industry, here you can learn a lot of useful information and direct your imagination to a new direction.
My friends helped me, to put it mildly, to thoroughly playasting the majority of the games represented here. Any game depends on the players - their decisions make each game unique.
I would like to thank these people for their invaluable help in my research and iron patience in times when I was too obsessed with the rules. Tests included: Brian Ricks, Larry Trowell, Amy Quirrell, Trevor Carroll, Ray Ginel, Ryan Downey, Matthew Chew, Dr. Julia Griffin, Jerrod Love, Samaria Guttmann, and Katie Berhau.
Note
The most difficult thing in this article was to summarize the rules. To those who have never played any game, I tried to give a general idea about it, without going into too much detail. For some games, this was obviously an empty idea, but I tried to make the descriptions as concise as possible.
Some words in the descriptions are in italics. These are key gaming terms, and you should pay attention to them. At the same time, I deliberately did not mention terms that are not related to the main essence of the game. This is especially true of the bridge, in describing which I omitted a lot of terminology and theoretical information. Excess wording can confuse those who play for the first time, but the rules in this article will help to gradually understand the game.
Of course, this list is not exhaustive - other desktops may be of equal interest to designers of computer games. Perhaps there will be another article dedicated to the twenty other games. Maybe.
1. Go
Traditional game
Type: abstract-strategic game to capture the territory of the enemy for two players
Level of difficulty: high
Creator: unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: none
Description: 2 players take turns putting stones on the board, capturing the territory and attacking the opponent's stones.
Game Review
Go is based on the seizure of territory. Players take turns placing white or black stones at the intersection of lines, or points, on a 19 Ă— 19 board.
The main way players interact is to capture stones, which is carried out by surrounding an adversary's adjacent group of stones in such a way that it does not have any points of freedom, that is, free points that are closest in vertical or horizontal. After this, the opponent's stones are removed from the board, and the player is awarded points for the capture. In fact, points are awarded twice: for each captured stone and for the territory of the board freed from it.
In essence, this means that it is not necessary for players to try to capture hopeless areas of the field, since this can turn into a waste of moves and stones. But the question is that it is not always possible to determine exactly which position is hopeless. Any free board area can theoretically be captured, but there are 2 exceptions. It is impossible to place a stone where it will be immediately captured - except when a retaliatory capture is carried out with such a move, and the stone saves itself. It is also forbidden to make a move that leads to an exact repetition of the location of the stones on the board, which has already been encountered in the game before (otherwise the game may get stuck).
The adjacent stones of the same color are considered one unit, or group, and “live” on the board, that is, remain in the game, or “die”, that is, captured by the enemy, together. Large groups of stones are harder to capture, but the survival rate of a group is not proportional to its size. If you think about it, in order to capture 1 stone located in the center of the board, you need 4 enemy stones. And in order to capture 2 stones, you need 6 enemy stones, that is only 50% more. Stretched across the board groups are usually more tenacious than heaps.
But single stones cannot capture the territory, and groups are more difficult to kill for other reasons. In particular, if the group is on the verge of death, it is possible to save the situation if you add another, free group to it by uniting their points of freedom.
The territory is captured by surrounding it with its stones, but this is not enough to win. If the second player has surviving stones in the encircled area, the struggle continues, and points are not counted. A territory is considered to be uncovered if the enemy can form so-called two eyes inside a group of enemy stones (several adjacent empty points, surrounded on all sides by a group of stones). In practice, this situation is negotiated by the players. If players do not agree, they must play until it becomes clear whether the surrounded group will survive or will have to give up.
It follows from the rules of capture that a group with two eyes cannot be captured unless the defending player by mistake himself fills one of the free points. In order to form a position, it is necessary to determine the place for the eyes and the sequence of moves to accomplish the maneuver, not forgetting that the enemy can prevent this.
Separate topics for discussion are questions about how large the territory should be in order to form eyes on it; how to form clusters with eyes within a group, blocking the adversary’s attempts to create such “safe” areas on their territory; deep strategy of the game, aimed at isolating the territories on the board and protecting them from attacks.
What can be learned from this game?
Go - one of the greatest classic games. It still remains something exotic, and one of the first tasks for many beginning players of non-Japanese origin is to get used to the game. It differs significantly from most Western board games in incredible depth, but its basic rules are not so complicated.
Guo is also known for the fact that it is too tough for computer programs. Chess programs beat grandmasters, but average players can win the best go-programs. The difference is that, firstly, the combinatorial explosion of possible moves in go is greater than in chess, which complicates the solution of the problem by searching for options. Secondly, a distinctive feature of go is the importance of applying strategy in the early stages of the game, which sets the tone for the ensuing battle.
Note: the article came out until the moment when the computer still managed to beat Lee Sedol.
What you can read: The Interactive Way to Go - an excellent guide to the game of go.
2. Chess
Traditional game
Type: abstract tactical game to capture figures for two players
Level of difficulty: high
Creator : unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: none
Description: 2 players take turns moving pieces with different ways of moving and attacking the board, lined up on the cages, trying to capture the opponent's king.
Game Review
On a board of 8x8 squares, 2 players lead an abstract tactical battle. Each of them has 16 figures, which are divided into 6 types. Each type of figure has its own unique way of moving around the board.
During the course the player can move only one piece. True, there are a few exceptions, but they are not worth talking about in the framework of this article. You can learn more about chess anywhere.
In chess there are the following figures:
• Pawns go only forward in a straight line. They cannot move if another figure stands in their way, but they can beat diagonally on the front. This is the only way to move a pawn, except in a straight line. If the pawn reaches the other end of the board, it becomes any other piece except the king. In 90% of cases - the queen.
• The rook goes to any number of free cells horizontally and vertically. This is a pretty strong figure, but using it to the maximum in the game is difficult because it starts walking from the corner.
• The elephant walks only diagonally. This piece is weaker than the rook, but it can be entered into the game much faster. Because of the way he travels around the board, an elephant never goes to a different color cell - if it initially stood on a black cage, it cannot walk on white. Thus, the bishop attacks only half the cells on the board.
• Horse - a strange figure. He walks on 2 cells vertically and one horizontally or one vertically and 2 horizontally from the current position. He jumps all the pieces in his path. Other figures do not interfere with the horse to walk on the board, but the trajectory of his movement and the choice of moves are very confused. A knight needs at least 3 turns to stand on the next square. A knight is the only piece whose moves the queen cannot repeat, therefore it is the knight that is the second most popular piece into which the pawn turns. On the first turn of the game, the knight is behind the pawn's wall, but this does not prevent him from jumping over them.
• A queen or queen is the strongest piece on a board that moves both as a rook and as an elephant. Each player has only one queen (except when pawns turn). The loss of a queen is one of the most critical losses in the game, unless the player gains a significant advantage by giving up the queen.
• The king moves in any direction, like the queen, but only one square per turn. This means that he is a little stronger than a pawn. Since the loss of a king means defeat in a party, this figure must be guarded and defended.
When a piece makes a move to the cell where the opponent’s piece is, it “hits” it, removing it from the game and reducing the number of opponent pieces on the board. No figure except a horse can walk “through” and “through” a figure, which sometimes leads to situations where one's own figures prevent the player from walking. This often happens at the beginning of the game, when the rows of pawns of both armies block the course of more powerful pieces.
The king is a very weak figure in the attack and movement on the board, but he is very important - the loss of the king means defeat in the game. In fact, it is very rarely "killed"; the game ends when the king is in a hopeless situation.
Therefore, the essence of the game is not to catch the king on the mistakes of the enemy, hoping that the opponent will not notice the danger. It consists in creating situations that are dangerous for the opponent's king, cutting off the paths to salvation and removing the defenders from the game. The emphasis on creating such situations and finding a way out of them, rather than creating meta-game distracting maneuvers, is an important distinction of serious gameplay. Chess lovers lift this strategy to unprecedented heights.
Other figures have their own styles of movement, and the study of the interaction of the figures with each other and the comparison of their value is a key component of the game. In the end, tactics and individual moves are especially valuable in chess, but a good sense of the strategy of the game gives a significant advantage.
What can be learned from this game?
If you are developing a tactical board game, learn chess, and you can't go wrong - all games of this type are indebted to chess. Here is a simple example: in many military video games, players have a unit, the loss of which means immediate defeat. In many cases, this unit is like a king in chess - it is relatively weak, so it is better not to send it to the front.
Recently, a lot has been learned from the progress of computer programs on the game of chess. Their main advantage lies in the fact that they are an unusually powerful tactical machine that is able to find strong moves with the help of rough calculations and selection of moves, rather than human analytical thinking. But only the number of moves that the program has to go through in order to calculate the simplest situation in the game means that to this day the best chess programs use heuristic and strategic methods.
Another indisputable advantage that such programs have is that they contain a lot of information about possible game situations and their variants - the history of the games played before is stored in the form of databases. This information has the greatest value in the initial stages of a game game, when the situations that are played out are very characteristic of most games.
Throughout the long history of its existence, chess has somewhat lost its complexity. In the end, most multiplayer games have decisive strategies that only become apparent after a long and thorough study. The main goal of the developer of multiplayer games is to minimize the likelihood of playing such strategies in the game, which is difficult to achieve without studying the extensive history of the game. And what game can boast a more extensive history than chess? This is perhaps the most studied game in the world, and it contains a huge variety of useful lessons.
3. Parchis
American adaptation of the traditional Indian game
Type: game for 2-4 players
Difficulty Level: Low
Creator: unknown (information lost in time)
Luck factor: high
Description: Players take turns moving the pieces in a circle. The goal of the game is to get your chips in the central field before other players can knock them down and at the same time knock down the opponents chips.
Game Review
This is a variation of the Indian game “Pachisi”, which is played on a similar board. There are other games that are derived from the traditional Indian pachisi - for example, the British game "Ludo". Both of these games are considered competitive - in which players move their chips along the tracks in order to lead them to the “house”.
Moving around the board is determined by the numbers drawn on the dice, and if a small number drops out, the player cannot do anything about it - this is a matter of luck. For some, this is an advantage of the game, because sometimes even children can beat experienced players. But more advanced players who want to show their strategic skills are annoying.
The game board is marked up in such a way that each player (the maximum possible number of players is 4) has a starting house from which you need to move the pieces in a circle, first along the outer track of the cross, then along the inside. The way the chips move along the board and their interaction with the opponents chips gives this essentially simple game a strategic interest.
Players roll the dice and move their chips clockwise, trying to walk from the starting position to the central field, which is slightly away from it counterclockwise. , . , , . .
, , , 2. , 3 5, 3 , 5, 8 . (), , ( 7 ). .
, , , , , . , 5 . , .
, , , , . , , , , .
, . , , , . .
?
. , . , . , , .
, . , , – . , , . , , , -. , .
: «-». – , ( ), ( Sorry! Hasbro).
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/283350/
All Articles