What do you think of the game Spectromacer?

[yudencow]

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/578706

Can that game be made but with a deck? And would that be any good?

[magekirbys]

It can be made with a deck (custom or random as it was originally) but i don't think i'd be any good since the game isn't really that great as it is anyway.

For random you'd just need someone to load a deck containing all cards from each element type including both of your specialities and then you just randomly pick 1 at a time , taking turns until all your zones contain 4 cards of each element type and choosen speciality, then you play as normal.

[yudencow]

why isn't the game great to start with?

[Typherion]

I think the game overall is good, but it seems to have some design issues and some really big balance issues.

If I remember, this was the game Richard Garfield designed in an attempt to remove the problem Magic has with potential for mana screw / flood.

I like how the resource system is fairly simple but promotes a certain manner of play.
It encourages players to use multiple elements, so if this was the goal then I would say it achieved this.

I like how creatures have Attack and Health scores, and how the damage is permanent.
I've been considering such a model for my own game but decided against it because: i) you can't simply include a Defense stat; and ii) in paper it creates issues for remembering or marking down current Health.

I like how the cards are non-randomized so it makes the game focussed on strategy.
However, this means each card must be incredibly balanced because it will always be available. I thought it was fairly crazy that I could consistently get 3 Dwarven Riflemen in play, which would then deal 12 damage to each creature my opponent summoned for the rest of the game.

I don't like how you can only play one card each turn.
I think this slows down the game for no reason, limits players' options too much, and means that spells must be overpowered by comparison to creatures to counter the loss of field advantage. It also makes it impossible to come back after a board sweeping effect, which are very common. At the same time there doesn't seem to be much benefit to holding back from over committing, because you never run out of cards, only Power. This means the only real option to catch up is for players is to sweep the opponent's board in response.

I personally don't like automatic attacks, but it works well enough from a design standpoint.

[Trevor]

One thing that I don't like about it is there is not much player interaction. You can only do one thing every turn, and only on your turn. You can't play surprise effects. There is not much strategy as far as guessing what your opponent will do, or bluffing.

[yudencow]

I had an idea for something based on that but with a few changes:
     A. Instead of the card grid or whatever, you will have a 50 card deck with up to 3 copies.
     B. Instead of having 5 power sources, you will only have 1.
     C. Instead of 1 line of 6 slots per player, there will be 3 lines of 6 slots per player.
     D. When can play as many cards as you want, your power source replenishes itself each turn.

So basically it runs like a normal card game, with bluffing and everything. Cards have a Range stat for how far they can hit. Also each turn a card can move 1 space forward including into the enemy's line (conducting an invasion) if there is no enemy card in the way of course.

Will that give it a good strart, or there are stuff missing?

[DavidChaos]

One thing I should note about what's being said about keeping track of permanent damage is that it does kind of depend on the game.  Some games are really good with permanent damage methods, like Pokemon, and others simply don't work well with it.  With my game, I originally wanted to use an injured status (which disallowed attacking and halved stats), but I found that adding a third stat for Health actually made things flow better.  So, again, its case-by-case.

[snowyy]

I had an idea for something based on that but with a few changes:
     A. Instead of the card grid or whatever, you will have a 50 card deck with up to 3 copies.
     B. Instead of having 5 power sources, you will only have 1.
     C. Instead of 1 line of 6 slots per player, there will be 3 lines of 6 slots per player.
     D. When can play as many cards as you want, your power source replenishes itself each turn.

So basically it runs like a normal card game, with bluffing and everything. Cards have a Range stat for how far they can hit. Also each turn a card can move 1 space forward including into the enemy's line (conducting an invasion) if there is no enemy card in the way of course.

Will that give it a good strart, or there are stuff missing?

So basically very similar to this:

http://www.lackeyccg.com/forum/index.php?topic=1285.0

[yudencow]

It is similar. I checked your game's rulebook and cards and it is awesome. There are several differences between the games though. In my game all units can move and even into the enemy's playmat. There is consideration to range and terrain. Your game has a more intricate resource system. The real point I was asking here is wether the "Invasion" mechanic, entering to tother people's field, was cool or not. after some play testing putting stuff like zombie infestation deck that slowly swarms the fiels., and wipes limited by rows I'm happy to say it is going somewhere good.

[snowyy]

I kinda like the invasion idea actually, making it into some kind of turn-based stratagy game. Somthing to think about.

[yudencow]

Yeah, you are right snowyy, I didn't rhink about it this way. It is like a strategy miniture game, but loads of reinforcements and unknown. Wha tI really llike about it si that it is not just another line vs. line game. There is actual movement.