Theoretical Community CCG Project

[Malagar]

@Ascent The wording idea sounds interesting, but maybe not for this project. But maybe the name, picture and flavor text of a card can be chosen carefully to really suit the rules on a card (like they managed to do a few times in magic the gatherin).

Nothing new, we have too much work at the company right now. Expect an update in a couple of days.

[Dragoon]

I tried that wording idea once on a card game. It doesn't fit for long effects and most people found it very annoying to read all it. A better idea would be "Embargo - Your opponent can't draw during their next draw step." Still captures the flavor, but doesn't interfere as much with the wording.

[Malagar]

@Dragoon Yes, keywording effects with atmospheric ability names and such is a very good idea. They did it a lot in the "Dreamblade" collectible miniatures game and I use it in my games as often as i can (haven't thought about it for the Galaxian CCG project tough).

[Ascent]

What if it is still done as flavor text, per normal, but put the flavor text at the top of the text box, instead of the bottom? So the text is still distinguished, you just have to look below the flavor text, Like this:

Your opponent's suppression of sapient rights leads you to perform an embargo on carbonized cosmium.

Your opponent can't draw during their next draw step.

[Malagar]

Some news, i think i am a step further with the resource system for this game. this is how i thought it could work:

@Resource Cards
RESOURCE cards in the Galaxian CCG span everything from planets to space-stations, outposts and other urban areas or points of resource generation. during your income phase, resources provide you with SOLARIS the INCOME of the game. this does not require a resource to be tapped, you just get the income once per turn, at the beginning of your turn. But Resources also feature one or more ATTRIBUTE ratings. usually, the resource cards cannot make use of their attribute ratings (but there are exceptions). the main reason for theese attribute ratings is that they function as PLAY COSTS to bring the resource card into play.

@Fleet Cards
Fleet also feature ATTRIBUTE ratings, most fleets can use their MILITARY rating while its FACTION is AT WAR to attack an opponent. But fleets can also EXPLORE while their faction is in PEACE mode. Exploring allows a player to bring new resource cards into play. In order to do this, he has to declare an explore maneuver during his main phase and then tap enough fleet cards to provide an attribute total to overcome the attribute rating of the resource card he wishes to play. Please note that a player can choose wich attribute of a resource card he wants to overcome, beating just one of the printed attribute ratings is enough. this allows a bit more variety and strategy when selecting and playing resource cards.


Example 1:
A player has a fleet with military 3 in play and wants to play the resource "Proxima 3" wich features a military rating of 2. he taps his fleet and as it provides enough military, he is allowed to bring the resource card into play.

Example 2:
Player fleet with military 1 and science 6. he wants to play "Mars" wich features military 5 but no other attributes. the player is not allowed to tap the fleet in order to bring mars into play. altough his fleet provides lot of science, it has not enough military strength to overcome the mars military rating of 5.

Example 3:
A player has two fleets with military 1 and science 2 each. he wants to play "Venus" with features military 4 and science 3. he taps both fleets and decides to overcome "Venus" science rating. The science total of both of his fleet cards is 4, the science rating of Venus is just 2 - so he may bring venus into play.

@War-Machine
This is a special ability found on fleet cards. it actually represents a drawback, as fleets with the "War-Machine" ability are not allowed to participate in EXPLORE maneuver.

@Explorer
Another special ability, this time found on CHARACTER cards. usually, groups of people and individuals cannot participate in EXPLORE maneuvers. but cards with the "Explorer" ability may be tapped during such a maneuver to add any of their attributtes to the total.

any thoughts?

[Dragoon]

Good idea's. Maybe we should have characters that can pilot fleets, increasing their attributes.

[r0cknes]

Just so I get this straight. Resource cards require "payment" through fleet attributes, while all other cards only require solaris. Right?

[Malagar]

@r0cknes: Exactly. So there are actually two interweaved resource systems. i hope this does not make the game unneccssary complex, but there has to be a limit to both: bringing resources into play AND playing other cards.

plus: i dont expect this game to be easy, or mainstream - as it develops this will be more like a full blown "twilight imperium" in CCG form, with  bit of "Throne World" and "Cosmic Encounter" mixed into it.

PS: i started working on the first few cards, just some basics to begin with, but they will be cool ;-)

[Ascent]

Should they "Pilot" or should they "Crew" the Fleets?

[Dragoon]

Crew would be better. Then engeneers may help in the fleet

[Malagar]

Happy new year!

2012 brings more Changes:

1. CONSTRUCTION
cards with this keyword can be brought into play face down, you have to pay only a part of its cost. put counters on it equal to the costs you already paid. during each turn you may continue to pay the cost of this card, once there are counters equal to the cards cost on it - you may turn the card face up and it is considered to be in play.

2. VICTORY POINTS
i decided to increase the number of victory points needed to win the game. its currently 10 but this has to be decided during intensive play testing. 2 or 3 VPs are just not enough to provide design space for longer games and more complex cards/card interactions.

3. CARD TYPES
cards that feature a attribute rating are considered to be of that card type, in addition to all other card types. this allows to shorten card text and target cards that feature one or more attribute ratings. Wording definition:
* A card with  a military rating is considered to be a military type card.
* A card with a science rating is considered to be a science type card.
* etc.
Wording example:
* Destroy target military card (means: destroy target card with a military attribute rating on it).
* etc.

4. CONFLICTS
whenever players compare attribute ratings (like miliitary or science) this procedure is called a conflict. conflicts can also be target of effects. wording example:
* Target a military conflict
* When you participate in a intrigue conflict
* When you loose a diplomatic conflict
* etc.

5. RESOURCE CONFLICTS
as explained earlier, a player has to beat a resource cards attribute in order to bring that resource into play. this equals a conflict, because you compare attribute ratings - this whole procedure is called a RESOURCE CONFLICT. resource conflicts can be target of effects. wording example:
* When you win a resource conflict
* Target a resource conflict
* etc.

thats all for today. cards are in progress, stay tuned!

[r0cknes]

Where does the resource card go if you fail the resource conflict. Does it go back to your hand or to the discard pile. This is how I envision this taking place.

1. Player declares a resource card to explore, by placing it face up on the table.
2. That player then taps cards to explore it.
3. Other players have a chance to counter that exploration through effect cards. These can be peace or war cards.
4. If the result is a failed exploration then the resource card is discarded.

If it goes back to the players hand then it is almost pointless to counter it. I don't think that it should happen often, but it is a nice touch to the game i think.

[Malagar]

@r0cknes: Yes, this is how i thought it should work.

I am creating a space on cardgameforge.com for our project, i also recommend to really check out that site because it offers a lot of tools for ccg game creators.

the project on www.cardgameforge.com is set to private, because there are so many spammers on the site. if you want to participate you have to register and tell me your user name and i add you to the group of people allowed to access the project.

i will publish all cards on that site, because it provides a free and easy, searchable and commentable card database. its a perfect tool for ccg designers.

[Ascent]

It's set to private. Are you sure you want to limit your pool of helpers?

Not to be negative, but that site looks like a graveyard for failed CCG projects.

[Malagar]

@Ascent: yes you are right, that was a stupid idea. i will remove the protection when there is something to see.

@All:

i encountered a design problem, but dont know if its severe. its about how and when certain conflicts are played.

right now players can initiate both Military and Resource conflicts easiliy (by attacking or by bringing resources into play)

but all the other conflicts (like diplomacy, intrigue, science etc.) can currently only be accessed when a player uses cards to produce theese conflicts.

this means that military and resource conflicts are much easier to access and therefore are more common and appear more often than the other conflict types. this sets back the other conflict types. if a deck misses cards to initiate e.g. a science conflict, there is the chance that there wont be any science conflicts during the whole match.

a solution would be, to allow players to initiate the others conflicts without having to rely on special cards alone. but - this would increase the amount of base rules the players have to learn and remember.

example: similar to attacking, players can also tap cards with the "Diplomacy" attribute to initiate a Diplomacy conflict during a players main phase. this is only possible while peaceful. if you win the conflict, you may draw a card (or whatever).

then we need mechanics for the other attribute types as well (intrigue, science etc.). i guess this would "bloat" the core rules a lot.

is there another idea to make conflicts more common? your ideas?