Brass & Iron. A football GM game that plays like building a team, not filling in a spreadsheet.
I design every screen and rule, and decide what ships. Claude writes the code to my specs and runs the tests I set. It's at version 24 now, and every balance change is measured.
The problem: every GM game is a spreadsheet
Football GM games are deep, and most of them look like a database. I wanted the same depth in a game where you see people, a place and a season, and can still find every number.
How I work: I design and decide, Claude builds to spec
Every feature runs the same loop: rules in text, a sketch I judge, a final, the build, then a measured balance check. Seven written documents carry the decisions between chats, because the AI forgets and the docs don't.
- 01BriefWhere we are, what to read
- 02RulesDecided in text first
- 03SketchGrey boxes, no colour
- 04FinalFull visual, dark and light
- 05BuildOne version per feature
- 06MeasureTwo bots, same leagues
- 07Hand-overUpdate the brief, commit
Rules before screens came from a mistake. The Staff screen took seven sketch rounds because its rules were decided while sketching. Once rules came first, each board took one round.
The work: rows into people
Four places where a table became something you'd want to open.
Testing: blind testers, real logs
Five simulated players played the game without ever seeing the docs: three who don't follow football and two who play management games. Every turn was logged with a screenshot, a thought and an action. A separate agent scored the logs blind. I fixed what they got stuck on, then ran the same tasks again.
| Task | v22 | v23, after the fixes |
|---|---|---|
| Find the team's number | 6–15 actions | 1–5 actions |
| Find out why we lost | 1 of 5 testers | 4 of 5 testers |
How I measured this
Each number above comes with how it was made, and what it can't tell you.
Wins must be earned
A good GM and an idle GM play the same 8 leagues for 10 years each. The target is the gap between them. On v24 the good GM wins 13.0 games a season, the idle one 8.1, and the idle one is fired in 7 of 8 careers.
A walkthrough with a log, not user research
The testers are simulated, not people. They're good at showing what's hard to find and poor at showing how it feels: an agent can only pretend not to know football. Real players come next.
Looking back: the hard part moves from making to deciding
The written system kept the quality up, not the prompts. Next time I'd test with real people sooner.