Theoretical Community CCG Project

[r0cknes]

Given the Spotting mechanic will play a large role in this game, I do like how different the shapes are from each other. I am in agreement with Cyrus that the symbols should relate to what they represent, but how do we do that?

If we go with an "alien" language what language would it be? There are so many races that will be in the game. Frankly, although it makes sense in the television world, races from different planets should speak different languages. I would not hate the game for this, but it would not be something I would like. I purpose that you use those shapes, but put related icons inside of them.

Military: A sword or another weapon (RED)
Science: A Beaker (Blue)
Intrigue: A book or file folder (Grey)
Diplomacy: Peace Symbol (Yellow)

Colors would help distinguish from the others even more. I suggest not using green and blue as color blind people most often have trouble with those colors the most.

[Malagar]

@Cyrus @r0cknes : Thanks for the feedback!

@Regarding the icons: yes we should iconify them using very simple icons. the alien language was just a sudden idea, but maybe we can make the icons look more "alien"?

The color coding is a idea - but there would be problems placing the watermark in the background of the textbox. i like to keep the watermark in grey, so maybe all icons would be grey also. in addition - the cards are very colorful because the card type is also color coded, maybe this would be too much altogether? dont know... i thought about theese icons:

Military: Rocket
Science: Gearhweel
Intrigue: Eye
Diplomacy: Hand

@Why Spotting at all?

Playing a card that features three "Intrigue" Spot icons requires you to have three intrigue watermarked cards in play. This means that in an all Military deck, you just cannot begin playing strong cards from the other attributes types. Translating this into Magic: The gathering this would mean playing counterspell (blue) in an all red deck because the resource system treats all cards as colorless.

Therefore the spotting mechanic is required to branch the cards into different paths wich lead to victory. in order to use cards of all attributes, a player has to provide the right resource and consider this point in deckbuilding also.

[Malagar]

Small update. Been working on some icons...

[Ascent]

As a point of information, Mark Rosewater, the head of M:tG card design at WOTC, regrets ever having made the colorless mechanic.

On that point, just because you make the mini-icons have a color and a raised, beveled edge, doesn't mean the watermark also has to have it. You can have a gray watermark, but the symbols can be colored and beveled in the number slot.

Also, I like the gear and the alien fan, but for the Von Neumann gear, I think you might make it a little more simplified. I love the idea, it just needs to look less static. Making the inner parts of it look larger and more visible, maybe even designed based on a real Von Neumann gear, it wouldn't fade out in the number slot or look so cluttered as a watermark.

The eye you could make have fewer radiating points. I think it would look good with three radiating points on top and 3 on bottom, grouped a little toward the center, with the center point a little longer.

Great work, by the way.

[r0cknes]

I like them. I am still for colored icons. I can see your point on making the card busy, but they don't have to be ugly colors. You are doing the work so I can't complain too much. I am also thankful that you are at least considering the advice we give. Most would probably get a big head about it.

[Malagar]

Actually i appreciate your feedback at least until you start bugging me ;-)

Next version will be colored

@Ascent: yeah the details on the icons is sometimes still too fiddly. if you zoom out, you cannot really see the detail anymore. i will make the icons a bit simpler and more clear. the idea with the eye is good (three spikes, middle one longer).

BTW: if you have not realised yet, the icons are (top to bottom on the first picture):

Military, Science, Intrigue, Diplomacy

EDIT: Added a quick redo of the intrigue icon, satisfied? if yes i would continue in that manner and rework the other icons as well.

Intrigue - an eye within an eye

[Ascent]

That's perfect. It does indeed look more alien now. It also has more of the "all-seeing eye" feel to it. Though, since the other spikes were removed, the eye line looks a bit thin. Perhaps thicken it? Maybe even make it look like an eye-lid in shape? (No extra lines, just thicken the line to look like an eye-lid. Perhaps even a sideways eye-lid, though I can't be sure that would work.)

Come to think of it, the secondary ridges do make the fist image look "shaky" or hand drawn in the smaller image.

Any way you could get that raised beveled look in the picture? Perhaps even marbleize it?

[Ascent]

I didn't know how to express a slant that came to mind, so I thought I'd just throw up a mock-up.

[Malagar]

so you thickened the bottom left and top right corners a bit? i give it a try later on

[Ascent]

I couldn't figure out how to make the raised bevel, and the marbling wouldn't look good without it.

[Malagar]

okay, i reworked the icon a bit. i used the tickened lines from your example because it looks good and makes the icon a bit more asymmetrical. i also changed the eye to look less "sleepy", added a bevel and raised edge and a shadow (wich you cannot see in that picture). finally i darkened the color a bit to look more purple and less pink. i wont add a marbling or texture or relief to it.

better or not?

[Ascent]

I like that. That's sweet.

[Malagar]

@ascent: thanks

@all: i created a about page on cardgameforge.com and removed the privacy setting. i also updated my sig as the new page will be the hub for this project. not much but a start. i also plan to move the rulebook there. expect more updates within the next days

http://www.cardgameforge.com/games/galaxian

[Malagar]

hey,
i talked with a friend today about the game. its good to have some input from another person, my head is quite full with stuff i would like to share - remember this are just thoughts, not decisions:

* Resource Mechanic: We are thinking about exchanging the resource mechanic. The whole "explore planets with fleets" idea is funny but not practicable. imagine: after you draw a fleet, you also need to deploy that fleet and tap it to explore, but you also need a suitable resource card (planet) in your hand to deploy it. even if we say you may "tutor" the resource card (wich i am against) - this system is just too clumsy, slow and cumbersome. we seriously thought about switching to  a much simpler resource mechanic.

We have not found a solution yet, but the most simple system would be to assign a cost to every resource (planet) card. this cost has to be paid just like any other card. its not innovative, but easy and speeds up the game a lot. its also perfectly playable as everyone starts with a resource producing card in play (the faction card). just look at the sheer amount of mana producing cards in M:TG and all of them - except lands - cost mana to bring them into play.

* Currency: This is not important, but tied to the resource system - we tought about changing the name of the currency of the game. first of all the name solaris is from the "dune" franchise, and there is a company also called solaris. anyways - it just sounds unrealistic that all alien nations in the galaxy agreed on a single currency. instead, we decided to rename it to just "energy units" or "energy". as basically everything can be created from energy, there is no need for materials or resources. and energy would be the only thing, that is global to all races and galaxies in the universe.

* Agendas: Finally we thought about changing how agendas work. right now agendas have two variable components: the objective and the reward. for the core-set this might be too much, of course it opens up many possibilities - but to begin with, its maybe to complex and irritating. we thought about keeping the reward variable and fixiating the objective. also we decided to remove both the progression counters and the victory points from the agendas to simplify the game a bit more. we like to leave things open for the future, there might be agendas with variable goals and variable amounts of victory points - but not now, its just too much for a core set.

first, the new agendas are worth 1 victory point (VP) each, once "scored" (or cleared or whatever) the agenda card is set aside (maybe put it under your faction card). instead of increasing the VP an agenda card grants to make it stronger - we thought about increasing the reward instead.

second, we tought about fixiating the objective of all agendas for now. agendas are now geared towards one attribute (military, intrigue etc.) and the player has to apply certain amounts of this attribute to finish the agenda (for example 20 diplomacy). you tap other cards to apply their attribute rating to the agenda and keep track by adding tokens to it. so you can spend several turns and cards to finish an agenda. but your opponents also have time to hinder you or destroy your agenda. once you have enough tokens on the agenda to be cleared, you get the printed reward (like: draw a card or whatever) and put the agenda face down under your faction card. once there are - say 5 - agendas under your faction card, you win the game.

wow, thats so many changes right now - im sorry. remember: nothing is decided and everything is left open for discussion. i appreciate your feedback, although i have the feeling that it would be better to take full responsiblity for this project for now - at least until its put on a solid foundation. then we can turn it open-source or whatever, but the base rules have to be fixed, tested and put into place. this has highest priority right now.

signed - Malagar

[Ascent]

Not to pour salt on the wound, but I believe the resource mechanic I had proposed would have resolved most of those issues, including the complication aspect, as well as not give you 4 different elements to track tokens for. You have a planet and a resource card, but if you simply put out at least one planet to start with, then you resolve that issue and don't need the resource card, because the planet would be your resource card.