Matrix Games Forums

I am doing some research on in game help and help files. We have rules, in game help, tutorials. I want to better instruct for the next game. While a game like Strategic Command is very easy to pick up (I never read the rules unless I needed a game mechanic) WarPlan is a more intricate game that uses various keys to simply moving many units. So there is a difference between the ease of play for the two.

So the question is how did you learn WarPlan
AND
What have you noticed

### Multiple choices are allowed ###

One thing I am not doing because it is way too time consuming and difficult is in game video walk through tutorials. There is too much to cover.

I did a bit of everything. I've watched videos made by you first i think, then i read a bit of the manual, then i ran the Okinawa scenario to check it out, then i yolo started 1941 scenario and was checking manual as needed or these forums. I rarely used '?'

The editor helped also. Growing up with Third Reich, I tend to read the manual a great deal. I'm hoping the abstract rules can be explained in detail with an example similar to other manuals of this game genre like "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" manual. I've provided an example below. I had no idea this rule worked like this until it was explained on the forum.

For me i first start to play the game, then i played the game with the manual open, reading interesting part as i was trying to figure out issues in game.
I'am not sûre what is the ? thing that everyone seems to talk about, i will try it.

I read the manual while a Hotseat game is open - and compare what I read to the game. I also read the forums to pick up on individual mechanics.

ORIGINAL: ago1000

The editor helped also. Growing up with Third Reich, I tend to read the manual a great deal. I'm hoping the abstract rules can be explained in detail with an example similar to other manuals of this game genre like "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" manual. I've provided an example below. I had no idea this rule worked like this until it was explained on the forum.

Examples are a great way to get to 101 class on game mechanisms. Recent Grigsby games have both quick visual aids and quick one-page summaries of different concepts. I am brewing ideas to create them; yours is a good start!

Yes, playing hotseat and using the editor are great ways to learn the game.

The Beatles sang, "When I'm 64." Well, now I'm 64 and just cannot learn any game via videos. So used to reading that I absolutely hate the medium for learning a game. Just me, of course.

I go for the in game help first, then for the rule book if I don't understand something, then I'll search the forum / YouTube for any further clarification.

OTOH, I follow WW2 Boardgamer0100's channel on YouTube, and watch his videos asap because there's usually something new to learn in it for me.

To sum up : everything should be explained in game and be the most intuitive as possible (aka "Don't make me think"). And I like to pick the brain of other players for inspirations.

A major way that I learn is not well represented.

When a mouse click does nothing, I would like to see a message explaining why it didn't work.

This game, with its novel rules, is especially opaque in that regard and thus difficult to learn (for me).

ORIGINAL: willgamer

A major way that I learn is not well represented.

When a mouse click does nothing, I would like to see a message explaining why it didn't work.

This game, with its novel rules, is especially opaque in that regard and thus difficult to learn (for me).

Second this, I’ve had numerous situations where my interpretation of the manual says this should happen and it doesn’t. I’ve had a surprisingly hard time sorting out why.

I’’m good also with a written tutorial in a manual working from the basic interface, such as what Strategic Command did. That to me seem like it wouldn’t be much additional work for a developer. I wish Warplan Pacific would have included one and hope an update will rectify this.

I put in hovers on why things don't work a lot in the game. But somethings are obvious like a target hex not lit due to heavy rain.

Does it really need to be said that what is obvious to the developer may not be obvious to the user??? [&:][&:][&:]

Here's Can We Make Better Tutorials for Complex Games- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GV814cWiAw

Yes, it's not directly on point for this game; yes, a single dev can't take the time; yes, wargames suck at tutorials, but...

Perhaps it can at least stimulate "thinking out the box" about ways to teach about wargames, especially wargames with complex, hidden, novel systems.

At a minimum, I suggest that this game must provide much more feedback, tooltips, etc. for anything that stops a player cold, or fails to explain non intuitive results.

HTH

I don't think there is much non-intuitive stuff in this game though. The only thing I didn't really understand on my first playthrough was partisans/rail repair. Land combat is remarkably simple, attack/defence factors are clearly shown, entrenchment is a simple combat multiplier and the defensive value of the hex is shown on the map. Effectiveness recovery requires reading the manual to fully understand but that's intuitive too, stand on a high supply hex with a HQ nearby and get the maximum recovery.

I genuinely can't think of a single time when I tried to do something in game and couldn't without a tooltip popping up to explain why. Anything I wanted to know about in more depth was found within 20 seconds by ctrl+f in the manual.

Yep, agree with above. Did a straight read through of manual then practiced a few turn ones before hopping into multiplayer. Pretty accessible after the manual non-adherent points are ironed it. Now it just remains a question of how the meta and strategies will shape up and if it provides long term replayability for veterans.