Building a Set

[yudencow]

Can someone explain to me how to build a set well:
How do I make sure it is not overpowered or underpowered?
How do I prevent busted synergies and explotations without banning and limiting?
How do I measure its speed?
How do I introduce a new type of card into the game, and keeping it balanced?
How do I divide the set, meaning giving cards to each play style while presenting new ways?
How do I maintiain and increase the game's hype?
Any other additional tips?

Thanks for all the helpers.

[Ascent]

Play-testing!

That's the answer to all but 3 of those questions.

You have to have in mind how powerful you want the game to be and then fulfill that power level. Games like Magic: the Gathering and Yugioh thrive off of abusing the game and fixing it to create an ultra-powerful and exciting environment. Games like Star Wars TCG (WOTC) require a more balanced approach, if not low friction, in which abusive cards are discouraged and discouraging. Whatever your focus is, that is going to be the game you create. The balance for that level of play will follow as you play-test and learn more about how your game works and how its cards interact. Whether building a set from scratch, balancing it, preventing abusive cards, adjusting its speed of play (and length of game), introduce new card types, you need to Play-test, play-test, play-test.

To maintain hype, you have to keep development active. Most companies release 3 or 4 expansions a year to keep the customer base happy and interested. Start off with a fairly decent sized expansion (180 to 210 cards is a good start). After that, you can create a bunch of smaller expansions from around 60 to 120 cards. Every now and then toss in another 180 card set.

Another thing to maintain interest are weekly/bi-monthly articles (1 every week or 2 every 2-3 weeks) about the game. You'll need pre-made deck articles, deck strategy articles, combo strategy articles, card development articles, spoiler articles, release articles, tutorial articles, rules articles, and any other kind of article you can think of. Also provide a home page for each expansion.

Besides a home page, forums are the single most important tool to creating and maintaining interest in a game. They give players an outlet to learn about the game from others and to discuss their decks and strategies with a community that they don't have in their local area. Start off with a single forum where people can discuss the game or any other subject. Don't create a bunch of different forums at the start, you'll kill the game. And don't put the forum on a page with forums for other games unless its on a TCG game hub website. The important thing is that people know where to go to find what they're looking for. Close or delete heckler posts without argument. (A game's website is not the place for heckling. It's a place for supporting the game.)

I hope that helps.

[Ascent]

How do I divide the set, meaning giving cards to each play style while presenting new ways?

I answered two questions above, but this one needs special attention.

The fact is, don't measure. There are too many card types. You can keep a database of what cards serve what strategies and give attention where it appears to be lacking, but don't break your back on it. You'll eventually cater to every deck strategy as time goes by, but 180-210 cards is not near enough to cater to every deck strategy. Start off with the 3 basic deck types in your first expansion. Then you can feed the other deck types as you create expansions. The most important thing is the 3 basic deck types and the 3 psychographic profiles (Timmy, Johhny, Spike). It's easy to meld those together into 3 types, period: Aggro = Timmy (Playable out of the pack), Control = Spike (Tournament-worthy), Combo = Johnny (Creative tricks). The subcategories of those will take care of themselves and can get love over time. (More on the psychographic profiles here and here.)

Don't cater to the business tradition of using filler cards. There's no excuse for it. It's just lazy design that only serves to cause fans of the game to buy more product to get the cards they need. Every card should have purpose and be playable within the current environment. But you should have a number of easy, no-nonsense cards that are easy for new players to use in every expansion. Also providing a beginner's demo deck list and starter instructions in the larger expansions helps.

Also, as explained in the psychographic profiles link above, you need to cater to the game's overall experience, incuding 1) consistency and clarity of mechanics, and 2) the interconnectivity of a theme and its synergy. The careful blending of these things is important to the overall quality.

[Ascent]

I suppose another thing about design you need to know is the lists. You have the preliminary set list, the draft lists and the cleared list. A preliminary set list is a list of card names that have been discussed about what fans are most likely interested in seeing (Creatively and mechanically). Put 5 to 10 extra cards in the list, because you will likely end up throwing some out as time goes by. Then you will go through several draft lists as you develop those cards. A draft list is a list of cards you sketched up (the stats and text, not the card images) for play-testing. As play-testing finishes on a card, you move it to the cleared list that sits waiting.

A draft list starts off with a list of cards with their initial stats and text. Then carefully evaluate the list for the consistency, clarity of mechanics, interconnectivity and synergy I mentioned in the previous post. You also decide upon if you have sufficiently addressed the psychographic profiles and deck types you wish to address. If all seems well, then you refine the list for your next draft.

In the next draft, you are getting into serious play-testing, refining the cards and making sure they work and aren't too weak or too abusive. Any cards that are boring or unfixable you toss out. As you get familiar with the game and its line of cards, it will be easier to just look at a card and know it's both playable and not abusive, though the majority of cards will still need play-testing refinement. Just keep refining the list. As you do, clear any cards that you're done play-testing.

The cleared list is not set in stone. Sometimes you come across another card in the set that you realize produces an abusive combo with a card on the cleared list. Then it's time to re-evaluate. If you find the card on the cleared list causes you to redesign other cards to keep it from being abusive, then the card you need to re-balance is that card, not the other cards. Though sometimes you need to re-balance or redesign both.

As long as your focus is to create the best possible expansion in the time allotted, you should do fine.

[yudencow]

Thank you so much, Ascent. I feel that now I have some grounds to work with.

I have some other thing I want to make clear:
Is there a measurement for power and speed in card games? What I mean is I need to playtest to feel the speed I want and the power I desire but is there a scale or a unit I can work with?

About the psychographic profiles, it feels so caging. I thought to put in my game card combos that manifest different emotions, rather than goals. I want that all cards will fit each one in that spectrum, is that possible? or is it even desirable?

I don't want to abuse the game, but I want that every "Block" or "Era" would be played with a different mind settings. For example, aggro deck in the first block will specialize in swarming, aggro deck on the second set specialize in direct damage, aggro deck in the third block will specialize in quick summoning big monsters etc. Is that cool?

[snowyy]

I think you need to give each play style a chance in each block. You can aim the set towards a specfic play style, like if you want aggro have alot of small power cards, however to keep everyone interested in the game you need to alow people with different play styles a chance to play each set.

[yudencow]

You're right Snowyy. I meant these is the main road to take for aggro, but it can be any other option.
But I am still not sure about following the psychographic profiles, I think there is a way to make all cards appealing to everybody, they just need to be:
1. low on text.
2. open-ended.
3. balance between risk & reward.
I still don't if there's a scale or unit for speed and power.

[Ascent]

Don't take the psychographic profiles as a rule. They are simply niches that you need to be sure to address. The fact is, every card is going to appeal to one of those 3 profiles in some way if it's made well. The point I was making about the psychographic profiles is that you don't want to give too much focus to one or not enough to another. Sure, you can have more focus on one than others, but just don't get carried away. The most common tendency is to go too much Timmy. If there's too much Timmy, it's going to be all about power and not about the strategy.

If you look at the huge number of decks listed in the Wikipedia article, you'll see that every type of deck is cared for under one of the 3 deck types.

Your mention of blocks reminds me of this article. Don't take that as the end all beat all of game design. There is merit to each of the design styles Mark mentions.

Also, a single card can appeal to all 3. You don't have to make cards appeal to just 1 of the profiles. But the idea is to help those profiles to create decks that appeal to them. For instance everyone needs a draw/resource engine to fuel their deck, but Spike is going to want that synergy that pulls out ahead, while Johnny is going to want a combo cards, and Timmy's eyes need to shine on a couple of cards to make an aggro deck with. But if all you got is aggro, then there's little fun to be had for Spike or Johnny.

[yudencow]

Thanks for the article. I read all State of Design columns. You are right, it's easier to think about it relating to the aggro, control and combo.

You know there should be a scale for how fast a game is or how powerful a combo is, i'll work on that.

[Dragoon]

Generally, this all depends on what kind of set you want to make.
If you are going to build a starter set, you have a different mindset than when building an expert set.

Also, another good way to build a set is to create a cost/effect table. Allowing you to keep consistent costs. This creates a better balance.

I.E. mine
Effect - cost

Draw a card - +1
+1 strength - +1, +2 for each beyond the first.
etc.

This would create
Someguy  cost: 4
Character
When Played: Draw a card.
2 str.

EDIT: 200 posts WHOOHOO!

[Ascent]

I forgot to link the other two psychographic profile articles. They're essential to rounding out the discussion on the profiles:

Timmy, Johnny and Spike Revisited
Design Language

By the way, the psychographic profiles are for designers more than they are for players. It's interesting to know your own profile, but it's not essential to any aspect of the game for a player to know their profile, but it is essential for a designer to know the profiles of the players they cater to.

[yudencow]

The cost/answers table answers the way to measure power. Thanks Dragoon. I just need to make some equations containing different types of effects and multiple ones.
I think the amount of actions a player does in a turn, basically and with effect determines the speed of the game. In that case Ark Age iseven slower than magic because of the sheer number of actions you can pull of every fucking turn. Im going to cut down the hand size and the power you gain every turn so it would go faster, meaning less actions per turn.
I'm going to put these into considiration.

Ascent, I f*cking hate to use the profiles. I understand magic follows it and it works for them, but I want to have a new angle. I'm going to base it on grapple. rushdown and keep away the rock-paper-scissors of fighting games. Thanks, for sending all of these links.

[Ascent]

I simply noticed that I forgot the links where it says "here and here" above. I won't bring it up again. For the record, it's not "rock-paper-scissors". It's market research demographics.

Grapple and keepaway seem to be deck constructions (read: strategies) belonging to the control deck type. Rushdown sounds like a deck construction belonging to the aggro deck type.

[yudencow]

If you have any good columns and articles to send please do, Ascent.
I thought to have Grapple as aggro (tank), keepaway as control (heal/support) and rushdown as combo (dps).
I do like to think of it as rock-paper-scissors, and I think the psychographics are more intrecate than what he presented among gamers in general, but only time will tell. http://dippykitty.hubpages.com/hub/Psychographics-marketing

[Ascent]

I think you're in far left field with a pinch hitter regarding your interpretation of what's been said in those articles from Magic's lead designer. The success of MtG speaks for itself.

I think the amount of actions a player does in a turn, basically and with effect determines the speed of the game. In that case Ark Age iseven slower than magic because of the sheer number of actions you can pull of every fucking turn. Im going to cut down the hand size and the power you gain every turn so it would go faster, meaning less actions per turn.
I'm going to put these into considiration.

This is spot on. This is exactly how you control speed of play when designing the base game. Designing from set to set, however, requires more control of the board position and the strengths and weaknesses of the cards on the field.