CCG based on skill not luck

[quinflecher]

its still in the idea phase right now but how do u guys feel about a CCG based on skill with no luck in it at all, as in they choose the cards in their hand etc. Also would anyone want to help me with it?

[Trevor]

Randomness does not mean luck. Calculating probability and assigning probability-based cost-benenfit analyses for multiple scenarios is a skill in its own right. Having some randomness in a game's mechanics doesn't mean the person who won just got lucky. The nature of a CCG is that you come into the game with a particular deck to fight whatever deck your opponent has. Even if you don't shuffle your deck and when you "draw a card" you can instead search your deck for any card you want, then you still have to deal with random elements, such as if the deck you brought happens to be a good match for the style of deck your opponent brought.

[Cyrus]

Randomness does not mean luck. Calculating probability and assigning probability-based cost-benenfit analyses for multiple scenarios is a skill in its own right. Having some randomness in a game's mechanics doesn't mean the person who won just got lucky. The nature of a CCG is that you come into the game with a particular deck to fight whatever deck your opponent has. Even if you don't shuffle your deck and when you "draw a card" you can instead search your deck for any card you want, then you still have to deal with random elements, such as if the deck you brought happens to be a good match for the style of deck your opponent brought.

I was going to dig and try to find the old thread about this topic, but Trevor was nice enough to provide a summary of it!

[MLaRF]

The title of this thread is exactly what I wanted to hear. However, I do agree with what Trevor said.
But yeah, card game based more on skill than on luck is exactly what you (everyone) want(s).

[Cyrus]

Play Decipher games, especially Star Wars (as if this dead horse has not yet been kicked a million times on this forum... by me). Very, very little luck involved, tons of skill, planning ahead, risk/reward assessment, unit management, all sorts of good stuff. Just enough luck to keep things interesting, AND (double bonus) the more skilled you are at the game the less luck is involved.

[Typherion]

I believe there are some card games that completely remove the randomness of drawing cards from a deck and instead allow players to just choose cards straight from the deck. In effect your deck becomes your hand. Unfortunately, that's all I know about them.

[quinflecher]

as you said on your guide to creating a CCG you mentioned that it added freshness to the game so that a begginer could beat an expert. In my game there would be two types of costs all based on how strong the chracter cards on the field were. Some would only activate if you were so far ahed and some the other way around. So a begginer could still beat and expert.

[DavidChaos]

Not really...all that does is make it easier for someone to be able to come back (assuming, of course, the costs/skills when you're behind are better than when you're ahead).  That doesn't really change the fact that someone new to the game, in a purely skill-based game, is far less likely to attain victory over an experienced player.

Imagine a new player facing off against one of the best players around, as a more extreme case.  The new player is going to get demolished.  Why?  Since there's no luck factor whatsoever, there's no way for the new player to hope for a comeback; they have to know that they can comeback, and chances are, if they know, then the really good player already has a plan for it (since you took luck out, there's no way he doesn't have an answer for the answer he expects the opponent to have).  Every single game has a luck aspect to it; that's why a less experienced player can have fun gaining experience and getting better.

[Typherion]

I'd just like to make a couple of points.

There is a difference between randomness and having hidden information. It would be possible to make a game where a player has access to their entire deck without their opponent knowing exactly which cards were in it. This would allow beginners the possibilty of beating more experienced players without needing to be luckier with card draws.

Also, the chance of favourable or unfavourable deck matchups is a different kind of randomness to drawing cards randomly. It's external to the game itself and occurs as a result of the decisions of the players, unlike random draws. The game itself is still determined without randomness. It's like saying your opponent might eat some bad sushi and have to withdraw before the game even starts.

Interestingly, highly skilled players can often struggle against less skilled ones exactly because they don't make the optimal plays that more skilled players are used to dealing with. Weaker players can be dangerous because they can be unpredictable and don't conform to the established metagame.

[quinflecher]

ok so, i just need to make sure the person who was winning the game cant use any cards pin the opponent down but have enough advanteges to make yourself the winning player disirable.

[havanuf]

I would like to weigh in on this topic.

I was curious as to how you could make a game like this be fun and fair? 

If on each turn either player has an equal chance to win, how can that be fun.  I mean if the game was like a boxing match and after 5 rounds of one player just getting beat down, how can it be based on skill that they come back and win in the sixth round?  Would that not just be lucky?  In this example, both players are skillful boxers each doing damage to the other, but over time one just get ahead of the other in terms of winning.  If some event occurred and the pre-conceived losing player wins the game, it would appear to be luck and as the winning player knowing that the next round I could lose leads me to believe that you might as well flip a coin to see who wins if through out the game both players actually have an equal chance of winning.

Sorry if I am looking at this the wrong way.

[havanuf]

CCG based on skill with no luck in it at all

I though some more about this and feel that if you were to move ahead with a game that is purely based on luck you would have to design it in a way as to have both players have access to the exact same cards from the start of the game.

A good example of this would be the board game chess.  Not random, and each player starts with the same set of pieces that have the exact same abilities and function as as their opponent.   Skill will determine what cards a player loses throughout the game similar to losing a playing piece in chess.  I image the game too can become lop sided, but the player could still get a "draw" from a stalemate just like in chess.  The losing player can gain back some strength by getting a pawn to the end of the board and get a piece back, so that takes some skill as well.

I am sure some design factors would have to be consider along with a tight rule book, but I think the key to this game would be to have each player have the same cards at the start, some can be lost, and gained back during the game, where the winner can be eventually determined.

Any thought about this approach?

[Kevashim]

you would have to design it in a way as to have both players have access to the exact same cards from the start of the game.

Only problem there is that you no longer have a CCG really. Though I do agree that is probably the simplest way of ensuring that the game is wholly dependent upon the skill of players as opposed to their luck. Perhaps a game in the style of Dominion in that certain cards are publicly available for purchase with each player brining along a selection of cards for the public pool. So all cards brought to the table are available for any of the players to buy and play. Certainly better players could build stronger decks however nothing stops their opponents buying and using their cards.

In this way you would have beginner players likely to bring a simpler selection of cards, with more advanced players bringing more advanced cards. The beginner would be able to take advantage of the advanced players cards IF they could see the potential strategy. Indeed there could well be unexpected interactions between the cards brought by each player to the table.

This would make a game of pure skill, whilst still allowing deck building and a collection aspect.

No idea how the actual game mechanics would work though!

[Trevor]

Skill VS Randomness is a false dichotomy.

[Kevashim]

Skill VS Randomness is a false dichotomy.

While that is true, it is also irrelevant. The original post author was asking about ideas in which there is no luck.