Play game
Breaking Dawn's itch.io pageResults
| Criteria | Rank | Score* | Raw Score |
| Adherence to Theme | #50 | 2.531 | 2.583 |
| Concepts & Originality | #54 | 3.103 | 3.167 |
| Rules Clarity | #59 | 2.409 | 2.458 |
| Overall | #60 | 2.681 | 2.736 |
Ranked from 24 ratings. Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam.
Leave a comment
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
Comments
Hello, thank you for participating in the first OPR Mission Jam! Please email marketing@onepagerules.com so that we can send you the participation models! Please include 'OPR Mission Jam Participation Minis' in the subject line.
I feel like there's way too much to read here. It sounds like this could be quite a fun mission to play, but there's definitely a lot that's being squished into one page. The concept is neat. The writing could use a very minor amount of clean-up.
Unfortunately I'm going to be a bit nit-picky and say that this is a very long and complex mission for a Jam that has an objective of being, "clear, simple, and interesting."
The inclusion of printables is quite cool.
There's a one page story too!
However there is no moodboard.
A lot of effort has gone into the submission and it's very good. I just think it's missing the mark on this jam's theme.
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment, its always interesting to get constructive feedback so appreciate it and good luck on the Job Application!
I'm not a huge fan of this mission, honestly. I understand the concept, but limiting the defender to piecemeal deployments and restricting them in unit type seems really, really bad for the defender. I don't see any reason for the defender to place anything but craters, and the three pieces placed by the attacker will almost certainly be single-story buildings that are easy to destroy.
This is a great concept, but it needs to be playtested and rebalanced. It would be great if the defender could choose to concentrate their units (at risk of letting attackers freely move into undefended areas!) for example.
I think all the missions submitted for the Jam would require playtesting and balancing so agree with that, but its an asymmetrical mission (invasions tend to use weak points as a beachhead when possible) so might work better as part of a narrative series of campaign missions. Feel free to playtest and make adjustments, would be interesting to see the results!
I appreciate the idea of an attacker arriving in waves, but for a 'growth' themed jam, it felt more like a staggered deployment than true 'growth,' which was a bit disappointing.
The biggest issue for me was rules clarity. 'Core Infantry' isn't defined and there seemed to be a lot of needlessly complex scoring. This made it very hard to follow. This needs a major rewrite for clarity.
Honestly, I feel like you could take this whole concept, and create a set of three simpler, connected missions out of it. That would be great!
Thanks for the review and time to comment, much appreciated.
The picture is nice, makes it clear what the setup is supposed to look like. Having to make either 4 blocks of 250 or 500 sounds like it'd be pretty restrictive for list building, especially if you want to follow force-org. It means the defender pretty much must create a single 250p unit for all but one corner because they're only allowed 5 units total. Also what is meant to be "core infantry"? It's not really a game term, I assumed it meant something like "non-tough"?
And you mention that you can deploy "touching an enemy, as if declaring a charge" but that isn't very clear to me - does that mean you immediately fight, and then still get to activate later? That sounds like a good reason for the defender to stay in their corner because it sounds really painful.
Thanks so much for taking the time to read, apologies for any clarity issues:
1) Force organization rules are modified for this mission (what wasn't clear was the limitation removals for Army Forge box unchecked), with the intent to make the defender resisting an unexpected or sudden intrusion (like in the story text) have to react to the enemy with limited forces before the center grows too strong. Does the defender try to wipe out the growing force piecemeal? Consolidate and possibly give up objective point locations? Try to contain the growing force, etc...? Defend in place and risk enemy attacking a single weak point for objectives, etc...For the Attacker the only way to get points is to engage the enemy as well to get to objectives so it was all meant to force player engagement rather than turtling :)
2) The low points for each force during the turns were to discourage taking an overwhelming unit on both sides as well as allow for a possible last minute rescue "team".
3) Core Infantry Special rule was meant to mean a "Core Unit" from Army Forge that is not a biker, walker, hero, etc... that was to make taking less optimal units more viable.
4) The "touching an enemy" you referenced was to keep the defender from blocking Attacker deployment with a quick center rush unless they fully covered the center objective (i.e. no space rule delay), but still allow for the attacker to place units in open spots for deployment. Attacking immediately seemed a good way to clear space as well, so yes they would get to attack and still activate later - its meant to be brutal for the Defender, but depending on forces chosen not necessarily impossible to still block the attacker entry point to try to keep them off the board and possibly get VP for units never deploying.
Definitely needs polish, but I hope you get an opportunity to try it sometime!
Love the narrative that goes with this one!
Thanks so much, it was a nearly done draft originally for one of the writing jams that I ended up not using as I thought it didn't capture that theme then well enough, but when doing this one I thought it might be fun to include.