AStudy on Asymmetric Board Game Design Based on War Settings : Focusing on the Vietnam War = 전쟁을배경으로한비대칭보드게임디자인연구: 베트남전쟁을중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study focuses on the design and development process of <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;, a board-game
wargame simulating the fierce historical context of the Vietnam War (1955–1975),
specifically within the Củ Chi tunnel system. The game recreates the direct confrontation
between two forces: the Vietnamese guerrilla fighters operating within the secret tunnel
system and the United States military, with its superior firepower and technology on the
surface. The asymmetry inherent in the actual conflict posed a significant challenge during
the game’s development, design, and balancing phases.
To address the issue of balance in game design, the thesis proposes and applies an integrated
Balanced Triadic Asymmetry model, anchored by the core theory of Triadic Game Design
(TGD). This theory serves as the backbone, helping to shape the balance among the three
constituent “worlds” of the game: the world of Reality (rules and system), the world of
Meaning (historical context and message), and the world of Play (the actual player
experience). The ultimate goal of the model is to achieve ‘harmony’, where historical
elements and game mechanics are mutually supportive rather than contradictory.
Through this integrated model, the research identifies three core values and significance that
the game aims to achieve to define the world of Meaning: Representative, Educational, and
Experimental. Specifically, the design of <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt; not only aims to fill the gap regarding
the lack of Vietnamese perspective (Representative) in history-based educational
entertainment products (Educational) but also poses a design challenge in simulating the
asymmetric warfare experience (Experimental) through its operational mechanics.
In constructing the world of Play, the MDA (Mechanics- Dynamics- Aesthetics) framework
is utilized as the principal tool to define the specific experience for each faction in Below Us.
By analyzing from the player’s perspective, the MDA framework helps determine the desired
emotional states (Aesthetics), from which appropriate mechanisms (Mechanics) and
dynamics (Dynamics) are designed. Specifically, the Underworld (representing Vietnam)
faction is designed to experience a sense of concealment (Prospect and refuge) combined
with Strategic Deception and Cunning/Outwitting by the player, while the Outlander
(representing United States) faction faces Disorientation in searching for the enemy, the
Near-Miss Effect from narrowly missing or neutralizing the opponent’s basement, and the
sense of Fiero upon mission completion.
For building the world of Reality, the Elemental Tetrad framework is applied to design the
physical foundation and system of <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;. This process begins with the core element of
Story, featuring the specific context of the Củ Chi tunnels. From this narrative foundation, the
remaining elements Aesthetics (visuals), Mechanics, and Technology (physical game
components) are synchronously developed to serve the goal of historical storytelling and
simulation.
To further analyze the specifics of the conflict, the Asymmetry Bricks framework is
employed to measure and “dissect” the level of asymmetry in Below Us. The analysis results
show that the game possesses a very high level of endogenous asymmetry, evidenced by the
complete difference in objectives, resources, information, and viable actions between the two
factions. This disparity is a key factor in historical recreation but is also the source of game
balancing challenges.
The high degree of asymmetry required the research to rebalance the world of Reality to
ensure fairness in the player experience. The core conflict was identified as the pursuit of
historical authenticity in the world of Meaning creating complexity and disparity in the world
of Reality, impacting the world of Play. The research determines that <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt; achieves
balance when it ensures three factors: Playability, Perceived Fairness, and Expandability. The
balancing process did not merely target the win-loss ratio but aimed for “elegance” in game
design, by maximizing Strategic Depth while minimizing Perceived Complexity.
The research findings, obtained through an iterative playtesting process utilizing a mixed
methods approach, indicate that the initial imbalance issues were effectively resolved. Data
driven adjustments helped bring the win rate within the target threshold and significantly
improved the player experience. The final version of <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt; demonstrated smooth
operation, creating a diverse, strategically deep playing experience while preserving the core
historical and educational values set forth by the research.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본연구는베트남전쟁(1955~1975)의 치열했던 역사적 배경,그중에서도 특히구찌터널시
스템을시뮬레이션한전쟁보드게임<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;BelowUs&gt;의개발및디자인과정에초점을맞춘다.이
게임은비밀스러운터널시스템내부에서활동하는베트남유격대와지상의우월한화력및
기술을앞세운미군이라는두세력간의직접적인대립을재현한다.실제분쟁에내재되어있
던비대칭성은게임의개발,디자인,그리고밸런싱단계에서중요한도전과제로작용했다.
게임디자인에서의밸런스문제를해결하기위해,본논문은삼중게임디자인(TriadicGame
Design, 이하 TGD) 이론을 핵심으로 하는 ‘통합적균형삼중비대칭모델(IntegratedBalanced
Triadic Asymmetry model)’을 제안하고 적용한다. TGD이론은 게임을 구성하는 세 가지 세계,
즉현실의세계(규칙및시스템),의미의세계(역사적맥락및메시지),플레이의세계(실제플
레이어의경험)간의균형을형성하는중추적인역할을한다.이모델의궁극적인목표는역사
적요소와게임메커니즘이상충하지않고상호보완하는‘조화(Harmony)’를이루는것이다.
이러한통합모델을통해본연구는게임이의미의세계를정의하기위해달성하고자하는세
가지핵심가치와의의를도출했다.이는대표성(Representative),교육성(Educational),실험성
(Experimental)이다. 구체적으로 <!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;의 디자인은 역사 기반의 교육용 엔터테인먼트
제품(교육성)에서 그동안부재했던베트남의관점(대표성)을보완하는것을목표로할뿐만
아니라,운용메커니즘을통해비대칭전쟁경험을시뮬레이션하는디자인적도전(실험성)을
제기한다.
플레이의 세계를 구축하기 위해 MDA(Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics) 프레임워크가
<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;의 각 진영에 대한구체적인경험을정의하는주요도구로활용되었다.MDA프레
임워크는플레이어의관점에서분석하여원하는감정상태(Aesthetics)를결정하고,이에적합
한메커니즘(Mechanics)과 역학(Dynamics)을 설계하는 데 도움을 주었다.구체적으로 지하세
계(Underworld, 베트남 측) 진영은 플레이어의 전략적 기만(StrategicDeception) 및 허를 찌르
는 전략(Cunning/Outwitting)과 결합된 은신과 관망(Prospect-refuge)의 감각을 경험하도록
설계되었다.반면이방인(Outlander,미군 측)진영은 적을 수색하는과정에서의방향감각상
실(Disorientation), 상대의 지하 기지를 아슬아슬하게 놓치거나 무력화할 때발생하는 실패효
과(Near-Miss Effect), 그리고 임무 완수 시의 성취감(Fiero)을 마주하도록 설계되었다.
현실의 세계를 구축하기 위해서는 4 대 요소(ElementalTetrad) 프레임워크를 적용하여
<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;의 물리적 기반과 시스템을 설계했다.이과정은구찌터널이라는구체적인맥락
을 담은 ‘서사(Story)’라는 핵심 요소에서 시작된다. 이러한 서사적 기반 위에서 미학
(Aesthetics, 시각 요소), 메커니즘(Mechanics), 기술(Technology, 물리적 게임 구성물) 등의 나
머지요소들이역사적스토리텔링과시뮬레이션이라는목표를위해동기화되어개발되었다.
분쟁의특수성을심층적으로분석하기위해비대칭브릭(AsymmetryBricks)프레임워크를사
용하여<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;BelowUs&gt;의 비대칭 수준을 측정하고‘해부’하였다.분석결과,이게임은두진영간
의목표,자원,정보,실행가능한행동이완전히다르다는점에서매우높은수준의내생적비
대칭성(endogenous asymmetry)을 지니고 있음이 확인되었다. 이러한 격차는 역사적 재현의
핵심요소인동시에게임밸런싱난제의원인이기도하다.
높은수준의비대칭성은공정한플레이어경험을보장하기위해현실세계의재조정이필요했
다. 핵심적인갈등요인은의미의세계에서추구하는역사적진정성이현실의세계에복잡함
과 격차를 유발하여결과적으로 플레이의세계에영향을미친다는점이었다.본연구는
<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;Below Us&gt;가 플레이 가능성(Playability), 인지된 공정성(Perceived Fairness), 확장성
(Expandability)의 세 가지 요소를 확보할 때 균형을 이룬다고 판단했다.밸런싱 과정은 단순
히 승률을맞추는것을넘어,전략적깊이(StrategicDepth)를 극대화하면서 인지된 복잡성
(Perceived Complexity)을 최소화함으로써 게임 디자인의 “우아함(Elegance)”을 달성하는 것
을목표로했다.
혼합연구방법을활용한반복적인플레이테스트과정을통해얻은연구결과는초기의불균
형문제가효과적으로해결되었음을보여준다.데이터에기반한조정은승률을목표범위내
로안착시키는데기여했으며플레이어경험을크게향상시켰다.최종버전의<!-- Not Allowed Tag Filtered -->&lt;BelowUs&gt;는
원활한운영을보여주었으며,연구가제시한핵심적인역사적,교육적가치를보존하면서도
다양하고전략적깊이가있는플레이경험을창출해냈다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 1. Introduction 1
• 1.1 Research Background 1
• 1.2 Research Goal & Objectives 4
• 1.3 Research Structure 4
• 2. Historical War Board Game 6
• 2.1 Board Game History 6
• 2.1.1 Overview 6
• 2.1.2 War Game Genre 9
• 2.2 Vietnam War Game 13
• 2.2.1 The Vietnam War in Popular Culture 13
• 2.2.2 The Absence of the Vietnamese Perspective 20
• 2.2.3 Củ Chi Tunnels in Board Games 24
• 3. Game Design Theories 30
• 3.1 Elemental Tetrad Framework 30
• 3.1.1 A Language for Game Anatomy 30
• 3.1.2 The Four Elements of A Game 31
• 3.1.3 The Integrity of the Elemental Tetrad 32
• 3.2 MDA Framework 34
• 3.2.1 Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics 34
• 3.2.2 Designer’s vs. Player’s Perspective 35
• 3.2.3 The Difference 36
• 3.2.4 The 8 Kinds of Fun 38
• 3.2.5 A Tool for Game Analysing 42
• 3.3 Game Balance 44
• 3.3.1 An Inconsistent Definition 44
• 3.3.2 12 Common Types of Balance 48
• 3.3.3 An Iterative Process 53
• 3.4 TriadicGameDesign(TGD) 54
• 3.4.1 Overview 54
• 3.4.2 The Three Worlds 55
• 3.4.3 The Ultimate Goal 56
• 3.5 Asymmetry Bricks Framework 58
• 3.5.1 Redefining Asymmetry in Game Design 58
• 3.5.2 Endogenous vs Exogenous Asymmetry 60
• 3.5.3 Components of Endogenous Asymmetry 61
• 3.5.4 Asymmetry Bricks 63
• 3.6 Elegance in Game Design 64
• 3.6.1 Game Complexity and Strategic Depth 64
• 3.6.2 Elegance Definition 67
• 3.6.3 Design Guideline from Case Studies 69
• 3.7 The Balanced Triadic Asymmetry 85
• 4. 〈BelowUs〉: An Asymmetrical Deduction Historical War Board Game 90
• 4.1 Game Concept 90
• 4.1.1 Overview 90
• 4.1.2 Design Direction 92
• 4.1.3 Development Process 94
• 4.1.4 Rulesetand Gameplay 101
• 4.2 TGD Analysis 106
• 4.2.1 The Anatomy of 〈BelowUs〉 106
• 4.2.2 Core Conflict 107
• 4.3 The Desired ‘Aesthetics’ 108
• 4.3.1 The Overall Experience 108
• 4.3.2 The Underworld (VN) Faction’s ‘Aesthetics’ 110
• 4.3.3 The Outlander (US) Faction’s ‘Aesthetics’ 112
• 4.4 Asymmetry Analysis 115
• 4.5 Proposed Balancing Framework 117
• 4.5.1 Redefine Balancing Goal 117
• 4.5.2 Playability 117
• 4.5.3 Perceived Fairness 119
• 4.5.4 Expandability 120
• 4.5.5 Balancing Framework 122
• 5. Balancing 〈BelowUs〉 127
• 5.1 Balancing Method 127
• 5.1.1 Playtest Design 127
• 5.1.2 Questionnaire Design 129
• 5.1.3 Target Playerbase 131
• 5.1.4 Data Analysis 133
• 5.1.5 Research Ethics 134
• 5.2 The First Phase: Playability 135
• 5.2.1 Goal & Purpose 135
• 5.2.2 Playtest Progress 135
• 5.2.3 Applied Adjustments 138
• 5.3 The Second Phase: Perceived Fairness 153
• 5.3.1 Goal & Purpose 153
• 5.3.2 Playtest Progress 153
• 5.3.3 Applied Adjustments 157
• 5.4 The Final Playtest: Expandability 180
• 5.4.1. Goal & Purpose 180
• 5.4.2 Playtest Progress 181
• 5.4.3 Applied Adjustments 184
• 6. Conclusion 221
• 6.1 Results and Discussion 221
• 6.1.1 Elegance in 〈BelowUs〉 221
• 6.1.2 Desired ‘Aesthetics’ Accomplished 227
• 6.1.3 Balanced Gameplay 229
• 6.2 Valueand Meaning 231
• 6.3 Limitations 233
• 6.4 Future Research 234