When you add a map to a strategy game, you're automatically implying that there's some kind of territorial element to the game. In a competitive setting or an otherwise symmetrical situation, this kind of implies fighting for territory, and as a result you often get map based war games as an obvious consequence since acquisition of territory requires deployment of tokens, and the most effective means to deny the opponent territory is often to forcibly remove their tokens from territory you wish to occupy.

I'm unfamiliar with Agricola, but I don't feel that Stone Age is a good example. It does not use a map and instead the game board basically dictates that there are a number of slots that you can occupy - the game can be played entirely without the board as it has no real significance to the actual game mechanics, it's just a visual aid / descriptor of the options. A game like Pandemic whilst asymmetrical is still at it's core much like a war game, though the rules are inherently more abstract thanks to the setting. At it's functional core, you've still got a game that revolves around occupation of territory and the deployment and denial of tokens - it is definitely moving more into the direction you want to go in though!

If you wanted to build a very different game, you're going to need to find a philosophy that does not incorporate at least one of those elements - since we already have a map, which implies that territory is important, we'll have to rethink our approach to tokens or otherwise remove them entirely. It's a difficult thing to come up with a concept quickly that isn't derivative of these elements, but have you considered an approach that instead revolves around defining your territorial borders and altering your map as it plays? Consider perhaps a game that involves a number of resource types that are required for continual development towards a victory condition, but you do not have access to them all - instead you'd need to negotiate the exchange of portions of territory with your opponents to gain the resources you require. This in itself is a good core mechanic, and should probably be supplemented with two additional layers; one that dictates player intent (such as using resources to build items to move towards victory or capitalise on resource types), and probably another of hidden strategy with a random element - for example a deck of cards with subtle modifiers.

I feel like I've just described a weird variation of Catan....

I like map games that are not too complicated. Settlers of Catan is a good example, and if you want a space related idea then a hexagonal tile with a system on it could be fun to use. As Khrom said it results in procedurally built maps.

• Maps can have points which if you control them, you will get a buff of some form. Like a beacon or control tower. It does not have to be resources.
• You can have a system where multiple political power markers can be used in the same tile, to indicate the political power.
• The tiles does not have to be owned by the players, they can be "influenced" to result in power.
• If a tile is a planet, then perhaps they can have a resource/event "card" stack from which you draw resources each time. If you have promised to help them then you would have to send aid. If you don't then the ai of that planet would throw you out. If you help them then you would get more resources. If the drawn card is not a event but a resource then you can keep it.
• The political power markers could mark the resource distribution between the players.
• You can make clusters of tiles and more remote ones. Perhaps you could have a inner circle which it is cheap to travel to, while the outskirts are more expensive. A bit like how power grid does it with the transaction costs.
• In addition to the planets you could have homeworlds and motherships/core fleets that could be moved around.

Well, I want all kind of ideas at this point, for sure. But I would slightly prefer if this discussion gravitated towards assymetric single player game. Pandemic would be the best example, the "AI" is driven purely by random cards and has completely different kind of "units" and overall play by completely different set of rules than the player. In addition I would like it to feel like if the player was running a country/kingdom/empire.

Have you considered a game that revolves around the day-to-day management of the nation in a Simcity kind of styling? Rather than focusing strictly on the dramatic, take the opposite approach and build a game that incorporates many elements of the mundane; building up energy and transport infrastructure, handling civil services and projects (health, education, emergency services). Your 'deck of cards' could simply take the form of random events and challengs, such as a natural disaster, or a sudden change in mood in the populace.

It'd take considerable research to build up your mechanics properly, but the net result could be pretty solid.

Almost all strategies (and all 4x) have a map and units moving on the map and fighting other units.

I look for ideas how such a map can be used/done, but without units killing other units.



For the purpose of this discussion let's say it's a map of provinces and you run some sort of a kingdom/country. But that's just for simplification, if you have ideas for a space map for example, say it.





My random thoughts:

- such game can (and probably should) be asymetric, like you run a detailed country, but the AI is either greatly simplified or just present as an event (invasion forces, rebels). The AI does not need to play by the same rules as played do.

- probably, all/most provinces should be owned by the player or be neutral (no other countries on the map, more like a domestic map)?

- Pandemic boardgame could be an inspiration I guess (spread of epidemy on a map, asymetric gameplay).

- Maybe some economic connections between provinces could be the way to go?

I've skimmed through a few of these replies and have a suggestion:

- Create a map (be it nations, planets, whatever) that fits whatever generation you want -- one region can be rich in certain resources while another can be almost dry, the distances can vary, and nothing has to be symmetric.

- The goal of the game can be to conquer/control the map or some other set goal (control all ice regions, have a monopoly on mining, etc.)

- To control or take over a region, you have to have the greatest influence, and hold that influence for a set time limit (which is affected by how much influence you have: control requirement = baseline requirement of nation + current influence of controlling party = influence * time)

- Influence is gained by the things you do for your region(s): ensure you have plenty of housing, have some form of entertainment to keep the populace happy, keeping a stable economy, advancing technology, etc.

- Natural disasters and diseases can exist and be a side enemy, where your region(s) have to have adequate health care technology or some way of combating the disasters, like seismographs for earthquakes to detect and prepare.

- Potentially you could have rebels/raiders that pillage your region(s) and you must protect yourself with law enforcement, walls, or something of that sort. This avoids actually have battles and units killed, and gives another way that influence can be affected: well protected areas have a happier populace and a safer atmosphere, while areas constantly pillaged are less happier and more likely to defect, if you will.

- With multiple nations/planets/regions you can incorporate a distance element where influences only spread so far, mostly by word of mouth. Technologies like radio broadcasting, mail, or perhaps having missionaries/ambassadors could increase the distance your influence stretches.

- With the influence idea, you can incorporate various sides, so it is not just one entity trying to maintain control, giving a force to work against without having actual battles, and this could even allow other players to play, and gives more variation to your game: nations could have different play styles, where one is more directed at technology upgrades, another prefers using missionaries, and a third goes for disaster and disease protection.

EDIT: Control Requirement equation adjusted.