System Down: The Customisable Hacker Card Game!

[3XXXDDD]

Some of the thematic titles will be reduced to purely functional ones but plenty should stay intact.

Just a clarification/revision of battle.


Offending Player targets a System to infect and taps the Virus cards who are attacking. Defending player may defend any number of Virus Cards with a single Anti-Virus.

If the total value of the blocked Virus cards is equal to or greater than the Anti-Virus, it is destroyed and the targeted System is damaged per attacking Virus (including those who destroyed the Anti-Virus) HOWEVER a System can't be infected/damaged More than it's System Value.*

If the total value of the blocked Virus Cards is less than the value of the Anti-Virus, the attacks of the blocked virus don't infect the defending players system and the Anti-Virus that performed the block is returned to the defending player's hand.

After the Battle Step (Attack/Block/Damage) for one System Card has passed, your Opponent may target another System Card (besides the one that has already being targeted) and perform the battle step again*

In writing this, I'm considering going back to one Single System, at least for a Beta anyway, I've been having many ideas lately and feel that I could think up enough useful effects of various kinds of System Cards.

Also as a note, Anti-Virus cards DO NOT terminate one or more Virus Cards when blocking, Giving a resource-fuelling card that amount of power could be quite difficult to balance.

[Dabem]

It might indeed be a wise call to move away from system cards until you can make sure the battle system is balanced. So can I defend with multiple anti-viruses or will my anti-viruses just get swarmed?

The current way that system damage is calculated rewards attacking with swarms of low cost viruses, was that your intent?

[3XXXDDD]

Single Anti-Virus vs Multiple Virus.

It was my intention so players wouldn't be so keen of decking huge cards to over-come various defensive resources of the opponent.

Although, I could do it the other way Multiple Anti-Virus Vs Anti-Virus (aka MTG Style).

Theory-wise, what do you think would be preferable?

[Dragoon]

Flavor-wise, an up-to-date anti-virus can stop multiple virusses.

However, this might mean that a player can't attack unless he has amassed a massive army of virusses.

[3XXXDDD]

Well yeah that's how it is now but what Anti-Virus cards can't do in the current format is block in unison.

The change I'm suggesting is to allow Anti-Virus Cards rather than a Single Card block various virus.

I've been changing this game up so much, that I'm losing track of it all, I forgot I added a new power value separate from the RAM value, which makes what is working now work.

[Dabem]

I'd have to see it on on paper. Basically the way I see it is the way it is currently why don't you just wait until you can get 4-5 viruses on the board then unleash a massive attack.

There needs to be a way to limit your enemy from swarming with a higher power level than all the anti-viruses you have.

It seems to support a certain strategy, so you'll have to introduce specific cards to give players reasons to play other strategies. The bot cards should also be way more expensive in this system, since they seem like they would be the favorites. We need to avoid zerg rushes from making the game end before it gets fun.

[3XXXDDD]

We'll just have to keep the Virus:Anti-Virus Power Ratio relative to stop that from happening. Maybe we could leave it up to the deck builders and work from there.

I'm an idiot. I just realised, as Dabem noted, with this method they will just rush the first attack with all the Virus cards overpowering the single card.

So that settles that debate blocking will work so that AV may defend in unison. *This could change AVs being able to block more than one but probably not.

Also this discussion made me realise, there is absolutely no risk to rushing each turn with the Virus cards. In M:TG, this is solved by the fact that the defenders strike back but I'd be wary about giving AV's too much power.

[Kevashim]

Furthering the MtG comparison, allow the defender to select precisely which viruses are being blocked by their anti-virus. If the AV has higher strength than the viruses then the viruses are deleted. For example, the attacker uses 5 viruses of strengths 1,2,2,3, and 5. The defender has an AV with strength 5. The defender decides to block both of the strength 2 viruses, deleting them. The attacker would have an unopposed attack total of 9 (1+3+5) on the system, however he would have permanently lost both of his strength 2 viruses.

This sort of setup allows a defending player to wear down the attackers strength whilst still allowing the attacker to deal some damage. It becomes a war of attrition between both players with constant attacks and defences whittling away their resources (which seems pretty on theme to me).

[3XXXDDD]

I'll test it out anyway.

[3XXXDDD]

Some interesting background concepts from Tron Fan-Art.

[3XXXDDD]

Personally I like the third and the fourth, the third because it works much more in a generic manner and the fourth because it leaves room for other background objects.

[Dabem]

ooh!!!
I like the 4th.

I think I can manage that pretty well. I'll see what I can do.

[Dabem]

New card images with some of the updates you requested. If you would like me to redo all the card images I could. If you have a spreadsheet of all the cards after adjusting them I can do the changes pretty quickly.

I haven't worked on changing the card back yet, but I do have an idea or three for it.

[attachment deleted by admin due to age]

[3XXXDDD]

Awh yeah, that looks awesome. I can probably edit in the card effects myself (I've learned how to use some editing software!). There isn't much to addy in now. Whats the font they numbers are in?

[Dabem]

the numbers and card names are both in "OCR A Std"

The URL is in "Chaparral Pro", 6pt

The collector numbers are in "Arial", 6pt. The ? is in Arial also 4pt.

The game text is in "American Typewriter" Bold, 6pt.