what is the best mouse for gaming

Jesse Catron is a man with whom we don't get to talk nearly enough. Read interviews he's done with various websites, peruse articles he's written about design, or casually glance at his twitter feed and you'll realize that the intricate machine that is his brain operates at a very high level. I first became aware of Jesse's game Pond Farr (now Salmon Run) through an UnPub post by John Moller.

The theme made me laugh out loud, but the more I researched the game, the better it sounded. It has great underlying mechanisms to it and doesn't seek to be just another DBG. In the interview below, Jesse outlines the process of designing Salmon Run, thoughts on Kickstarter itself, his top 5 favorite games, and his take on positive/negative feedback loops.

We'd like to thank Jesse for taking time out of his schedule to answer these questions for us. Scott and I are both on board as backers and encourage you to head over to the campaign site and plop down some clams for fish makin' babies. And, if you like this interview and think the game sounds great... stop back in a few weeks when we take a prototype of Salmon Run for a whirl.



1.) The idea of Salmon racing upstream is a wonderfully creative and unique theme. What inspired
it, and how did it change from initial concept to what Backers/Customer will receive?

It started with my desire to design a game that I, as a gamer, would enjoy playing with my nephews and
nieces. I looked to nature and animals for a universally appealing theme. I remember thinking that there
had to be a compelling theme in nature that hadn’t been done before. I thought of mass migrations and
eventually salmon and their quest to spawn. Salmon probably came to mind because I had worked on a
small game about tides and fishing a few months earlier.

While many early concepts have remained the same (or at least very similar), Salmon Run has undergone
a number of significant changes mechanically. Early versions used simultaneous turns and a fixed board.
The simultaneous turn concept did nothing to speed up the game and made card play too much of a
guessing game. Currently, the turns in Salmon Run are streamlined and flow quickly from one player
to the next. Downtime is minimal. Changing to a modular board system made a huge difference for the
game’s variability and therefore its replayability. The river now offers a new experience each game and
can be customized by both difficulty and length. This gives Salmon Run a huge amount of flexibility in
tailoring the game to new and casual players as well as experienced gamers.

Another significant change was the mechanics of the river’s current. For those who haven’t played, the
hexes on the board have an arrow or arrows to indicate the direction that the water flows. When the current
is activated each salmon moves downstream along the current. At first the current was activated after each
round of simultaneous play. This made for a very long and frustrating game. At one point, the current
was activated by a die roll at the end of each round. This lessened the frequency of the current but was too
random. Eventually I moved the activation of the current to a card. Not only did this speed up the game, it
also gave players control and provided some nice tactical decisions on when to play it.

2.) In an article written for Grant Rodiek's Hyperbole Games website, you touch on something known as "positive and negative feedback loops." Can you give an explanation of what these are and how they were instituted in Salmon Run?

Sure, I‘d be glad to. A feedback loop occurs when the output of a system affects its input and consequently
changes subsequent outputs. With positive feedback, the output of the system creates greater subsequent
outputs. Positive feedback results in an ever amplified output. Left unchecked, positive feedback loops are
unstable and spiral out of control. On the other hand, negative feedback results in a diminished output of
the system. These tend to be stable systems. Applying negative feedback to a positive feedback loop is a
useful way to keep the positive feedback system under control.

Salmon Run (and deck-building games in general) use a positive feedback system. In Salmon Run, the swim deck is the basic system. As movement cards are used to move onto special hexes, more powerful cards are added to the discard pile (output). When these cards are eventually cycled back in, the system now has an amplified capacity to obtain better cards (enhanced movement). The subsequent output of the system is greater and will increase with each cycle. The problem with positive feedback loops in a game is that it can lead to a runaway leader. The player who gets an early lead gets more and more powerful and can’t be caught. This is unacceptable in a racing game like Salmon Run. There needs to be a way to enable players to catch the leader.

One limiting factor to the positive feedback system is that rewards (the more powerful cards) are not just
limited to the first player to reach them. If the lead player swims into a Double Swim hex to gain that
card, later players can also swim there to gain the card. To really keep the positive feedback system in
check and to prevent a runaway leader problem, I used a negative feedback loop. This is in the form of
the game’s fatigue mechanism. The more a player exerts themselves to get ahead quickly the more fatigue
cards accumulate in their deck. These fatigue cards function to jam up the player’s swim deck to limit
their options and slow them down. Another additional way to prevent a runaway leader are the player
interactive cards like the current, rapids, and eagle. Player’s who are behind can use these cards to hinder
the leader. I am happy to say that nearly all games of Salmon Run I have played have been close races!

3.) Between 3012, Ascension, Penny Arcade, Nightfall, and numerous Superhero iterations this year at GenCon, some people feel there is a saturation of DBGs in the market. How does Salmon run differentiate itself from other DBG (i.e. mechanisms, etc.) ?

I agree that there are a lot of deck-building games out there. Most of which are clones or near-clones of
Dominion and don‘t really offer anything new. I feel that for DBGs to stand out, they need to be games
that utilize a deck-building mechanic as part of a greater game and not merely deck-building as the game
itself. Salmon Run is a racing game that uses deck-building rather than a just a deck-building game. To
me, Salmon Run is a unique application of the deck-building mechanic. As far as I know it is the only
deck-building race, and the only game with a path-dependent deck-building mechanic. The real “currency”
in Salmon Run is movement. The path you choose upriver determines what cards you can add or remove.
The deck-building mechanic also enables the fatigue mechanic to function. In a lot of DBGs negative
insertion cards are not a big part of gameplay. In Salmon Run the fatigue cards are an integral and
important factor and occur from multiple sources.

Another more subtle difference is that Salmon Run has a much greater hand management factor. In most
DBGs, you must discard whatever cards you don’t play from your hand. In contrast, Salmon Run allows
you to keep those cards for future turns. This allows players to have much more control of their path
upriver and provides a strategic decision point.

4.) I first heard about your game via John Moller's UnPub program. How important was this
program to you, and what advice would you give to people looking to get involved with playtesting
program(s) and pitching to publishers?

The UnPub program is fantastic and is getting larger and more and more impressive. John and Darrell do a
tremendous job. Taking my prototype to UnPub was absolutely worth it and I would highly recommend it
to any aspiring (or established) game designer. Even though I was already signed with Gryphon, I received
a lot of great feedback from both gamers and designers. This was valuable assurance for me that Salmon
Run was really ready for publication and only needed some minor tweaks. However, the relaxed and
constructive atmosphere of the Unpub program is very conducive to provide help for a prototype at any
level of completion from very rough to very polished. I look forward to attending as many Unpub events
as I can. I have also heard good things about Protospiel.

Here is my advice for pitching to publishers:
- Make sure your game is unique in some way. It needs something to make it stand out. Preferably
mechanically and thematically
- Make sure your game is thoroughly tested and ready (including blind testing)
- Don’t spend to much time or money on art, focus on gameplay
- Make sure your game needs only a reasonable and realistic number and type of components
- Do your research on which publisher is a good fit for your game; theme, target audience, and complexity
- Craft your pitch to that company accordingly, clearly spelling out what makes your game unique and why
it’s a good fit for their company.

5.) In your opinion, what makes a good game? What are your top 5 games, and did any of them
influence the creation of Salmon Run?

There are a lot of things that go into a good game. For me the essence of a good game is that it provides
players meaningful decisions, invokes palpable tension, and elicits fun and a desire to play again from its
players. Free will in game decisions is vital and those decisions must affect the outcome or progress of
the game. Tension amplifies how players feel in making each of those decisions and how the weight of
their series of decisions accumulates over the course of the game. Fun is the result and the ultimate goal of
playing games.

I have never before thought of my top 5 games but I will give it a shot (subject to change, in no particular
order, and excluding my own designs):

1.) Settlers of Catan: this is the game that introduced me to Euro games and the one I have played the most.
I know there is some amount of randomness that causes frustration, but experienced players can often
mitigate/overcome this. The interactivity of trading is great fun. A sentimental choice.
2.) Steam: This game just works so smoothly. A great blend of form and function.
3.) Zooloretto: perhaps an odd choice. I love and greatly admire the elegant simplicity of the design. The
rules are quite basic and easy to learn but elicit great tension and decisions. Its sum is much greater
than its parts. (I could substitute Ticket to Ride here instead)
4.) King of Tokyo: maybe because it is shiny and new for me, but this game exudes FUN! This is the
quintessential light game and the light game that all light games should aspire to.
5.) Revolution!: This blind bidding/area control game with simultaneous turns is quite fun. The
psychological aspect of reading your opponent makes for some great tension. This is probably
heightened for me because I usually play against my brothers. We think alike (mostly) and can often
play RPS for 10 or more rounds before there is a winner! Victory in sibling rivalry is that much
sweeter!

I imagine every game designer is influenced on some level by the games that they have played. I had not
played Steam or King of Tokyo before Salmon Run. The earliest version of Salmon Run had simultaneous
turns so it was probably influenced by Revolution! in that regard. I can certainly tell you that my desire
to keep Salmon Run elegantly simple and yet with hidden depth was forefront in my mind due to my
admiration for Zooloretto and Ticket to Ride.


6.) Finally, your game is currently on KS. What are your thoughts on the Crowdfunding site and what things have you and Eagle/Gryphon done to assure success in your particular campaign?

That's right; Salmon Run's campaign is currently underway and runs until October 28th!

I may be biased, but I am very glad that Kickstarter exists. Without it Salmon Run would be in the Gryphon
Games’ queue for another 3 or more years. Sure, there are a lot of sub-par games on Kickstarter, but I
believe in free markets. People can choose what project to back and accept the risk or not. Of course there
is some risk that the game will be terrible or that the backers will be swindled, but if people do their due
diligence the likelihood is minuscule. I only back projects where I can read the rules, I know the designer,
and/or the publisher has an established record. Plus I do enjoy helping others fulfill their dream. I am not
big on exclusives but see them as sort of a necessary "evil" (evil may be too strong of a term) to attract backers.

I wish Salmon Run’s success was assured! One good thing is that our funding goal is very low and
obtainable [ed note: obtainable indeed. Salmon Run has already Funded with 50+ days to go]. Another is that Gryphon has a good reputation for putting out a quality product with top notch components, and a timely delivery. I have demonstrated Salmon Run at two Unpub events, my local game store, and the Dice Tower Con. I wish I could have gone to larger Cons but my day job occupies a huge amount of my time. I am a marketing novice but I have conducted a number of interviews on Salmon Run and game design. I spend a good amount of time on twitter talking about games and game design, not to sell my game but because I enjoy it! However, networking with others doesn't hurt! Gryphon has purchased advertising as well. Hopefully it will be enough!

Thank you for some great questions and taking your time to interview me.

Thank YOU Jesse. We look forward to following the success of Salmon Run, keeping up with you online, and paying close attention to anything you might design in the future. ~ G&G

As an aspiring designer myself, I try to make it a habit to read all the UnPub reports put out by fellow writers and reviewers (e.g. Jason Tagmire, Cartrunk Ent., etc.) In doing so, I came across a game called "The Market," a set-collecting, economic game utilizing timing mechanisms by a gentleman named Ben Rosset. Everyone who wrote about this game raved about it, and everyone I asked for information about the game loved it.

Ben subsequently took his game to more and more UnPubs. There it gained more visibility, became more streamlined, and caught the attention of Bryan Fischer and John Sizemore of Nevermore Games (Chicken Casesar) who decided to re-theme the game into a steampunk setting and entitle it "Mars Needs Mechanics." In July, Ben brought the game to Origins. It was on my radar to play. Unfortunately--or fortunately for Ben and Nevermore--there was never an open space into which I could squeeze and take the opportunity to play, so I made the game one of my top priorities at GenCon.

After playing twitter/email tag with Ben for a few days, I finally got to sit down with him and a three other convention goers (including a father and his 9 year old son) to try out the game. The first thing I noticed was the lengths to which Ben and Nevermore went to add some thematic spice to their demo version of the game: the starting player token was a bolt with some heft, and the board itself was affixed to a piece of metal. I highly doubt the final game will contain these components (ultra stretch goal!!) but it definitely helped things feel immersive.

And things didn't stop there. After we had settled into our seats and had a chance to look everything over, Ben launched into storyteller mode, spinning a yarn about the game's setting and generally making me wish that every copy of the game came with a mini-version of him you could take out of the box in order to hear the story again; it wasn't necessary for him to do this, but it was greatly appreciated and really got me excited to play.

The gist of that story and the setting for the game? ... 1873. The British Royal Academy of Space Exploration has been asked by the Queen to explore Mars by year's end through the use of the H.M.S Victoria VII. As one of the Empire's leading Aether Mechanics, you have been invited to compete for the title of Royal Astronautical Engineer. To win, you will need to prove your mettle by earning the most cogs by the competition's end. Can you build it... YES YOU CAN!

To start the game, each player receives 2 scrap metal cards which act as Wild Cards when making sets throughout the game. Players then receive 30 cogs (the game's currency) and three component cards; cogs are placed in front of the player and are always public information. Next, the 7 component tokens are placed randomly on the order line located at the top of the board and their corresponding markers are placed on the board row showing "5" (i.e. the direct middle of the board). Finally, 4 Mechanism and 8 Component cards are set out and the player with the best English Accent is given the starting player token. Got all that, chap? Jolly Good.


As the game progresses, you'll be purchasing Component cards from the center of the table for their market value (always 5 in the first round of the game). If a component card is purchased, its corresponding token is moved to the head of the line at the top of the board. When a player doesn't want to--or can't--purchase any more component cards, he/she passes. When all players pass consecutively, or all component cards have been purchased, the market prices are adjusted: the three tokens at the back of the line cause their corresponding markers to go down 1 in value, the 4th stays as is, and the 5-7th tokens (i.e. the three purchased most recently) get their value increased by 1.

During their turn, players may also build or break down one of the 4 mechanisms on the board. These mechanisms give you special powers such as giving additional cogs when you sell a set, or allowing you a bit of efficiency via the ability to build and break down a mechanism in a single turn. It should be noted, however, that you can (typically) only have one mechanism built at a time, so choose carefully.

After the round ends, players are then free to sell sets of 3+ cards at market price. Scrap may also be used to complete a set, though you won't get any money for it (e.g. if you sell 2 Wires + 1 scrap at the market value of 4, you'll only receive 8 cogs, not 12). Once this is done, the component cards are restocked up to 8. When there are no component cards left in the deck (or players purchase nothing for 2 consecutive rounds) the games ends, market values are adjusted, sets are sold, and the player with the most cogs wins.

If all this sounds streamlined and easy to grasp, it is ... until it's not. When you get the explanation of the rules, it seems simple enough: buy low/sell high. Admittedly, this would be easy if you were the only one controlling the market. It's not that easy though. Opposing players might steal your components (thus driving up the cost for you to get them on a subsequent turn). If you opt to not buy a component in hopes of driving down the price, you're going to need to buy it more in future rounds to drive the price back up in order to turn a profit. If you purchase them at the wrong time, the cost is going to go up, and your profit margin is going to get slimmer and slimmer. It's all about WHEN you buy and HOW you manipulate the market.



This, in my estimation, is what makes Mars Needs Mechanics so great. It's an incredibly streamlined and accessible game (as proof, the 9 year old with whom I played picked the game up after about one round) that still manages to achieve a deep strategic element. In my game, for example, I was hording aether tubing. I knew I didn't have to get all 8 of them, so I let the kid's father purchase the stragglers, thus increasing the cost of the commodity until it maxed out at nine. I then built a rocket booster (+1 when selling sets) and sold my set of 4 tubes for a profit of 37 cogs. I was up to 55 cogs and thought I was in good shape. I was... aside from the fact that I had no cards in my hand and there were (by my estimate) 2 rounds left in the game. The 9 year old played a fantastic game those final two rounds and only came up short of beating me by 3 points {55-52}, but the tension of those final rounds simply added to the excitement of play.

If you haven't figured it out yet, I really enjoyed my play of Mars Needs Mechanics and I'll be one of the first people to support it's kickstarter campaign when it hits the sight on August 31st. Ben, John, and Bryan have a great game on their hands, and I encourage people to check it out. Having met all three of them at GenCon, I know they are great people and great designers, and it's always good to help people like that succeed.