How many cards can you create in 3 weeks?

[yudencow]

Hypothetically, you got the money and the personnel of any card game publisher out there, how many can you create in 3 weeks?

[Dabem]

good ones or absolute crap?

A game is not made from cards, it's a combination of mechanics, feel, story and player interaction. Once you have an idea for the basic mechanics, general feel, a good story to tell, and the experience you want to create I found cards sometimes make themselves. If you already have a great idea I could see making 100-200 cards in 3 weeks. But a great game is not about quantity it's about quality. If you're just pumping out cards quality will likely suffer. I would focus on making a basic prototype, with essential cards, and expanding from there once you can see does and doesn't fit your theme, or which mechanics don't work, or what causes undesirable player interactions.

It would be much better to use those three weeks to playtest than just hammer out cards.

[yudencow]

This is the best answer I could look for. Thanks for the input. Initially, I wanted to release cards on weakly basis, like a comic book company, but as you put it, it is very unhealthy. One thing I attempt to do with all my games is to figure out what will be the tagline of every card i'm planning to design. This affects both lore and mechanics. I'm thinking of making in the first year 230 cards per 6 weeks and on later years tuning it down to 115 per 6 weeks. Do you think you can make high quality cards, with enough time for playtesting?

[Kevashim]

6 weeks seems quite an aggressive target to aim for. One of the most prolific and successful companies (Wizards) release new major MtG sets 4 times per year with 1 core set and 3 expansion sets. They seem to like having 249 cards in their core sets (with a July release month) now, with between 150 and 170 cards in each of the expansion sets that are released in October, February, and May. They have extensive playtesting in that period and a very comprehensive approach to card and set design, yet still some cards slip through that are "broken" and get banned at tournaments!

I guess, if you are already a well entrenched CCG making firm then you may have an idea of your capacity to produce (in which case why ask us ), otherwise I would set a more reasonable target and especially extend the 6 week objective. If you are looking to make hard copies of cards for physical play of the game then bear in mind that multiple print runs will be needed to get from first play-test to final release.

[yudencow]

The problem with my game is that the deck building is quite complex. You have 1 of the 3 moralities to choose from with at least 40 cards in your deck being of the same class. Then you have a hero and 2 out of 3 special cards of the same class. As you can see there are a lot of limitations, and this is without all the more limitations I'm withholding. I need tons of cards to be existing. For me, 234 cards per 6 weeks in the first year and then 117 cards per 6 weeks in latter years seems reasonable.

[Cyrus]

why that specific number of cards?

[DavidChaos]

To be quite honest, if you feel your card game requires that many cards that frequently, then the issue may be with your card game.  I've never heard of a card game making releases that quicklyk with that many cards.

In fact Vanguard is just as specific, if not more.  Decks require 50 cards, including exactly 16 Triggers.  Typically, your deck will either contain only one clan, or be almost entirely of one clan.  These packs average out to maybe every 8 weeks, and were 80 cards during the first 5 sets, with the 6th set introducing a size of 102.

Another thing to consider about this; do you think you might be overloading the player's ability to keep up with releases by bringing them forth so quickly; the reason Vanguard averages to 8 weeks, for example, is because sets 1 and 2 and sets 4 and 5 were released closer together.  (7 and 8 are a bit closer, too)  You may want to consider if your game is calling for too many cards to be released too quickly.

[Dabem]

DavidChaos brings up some great points.

I'm not sure I would want to read 117 cards every 6 weeks. This is part of why I got out of CCGs and am loving the ECG (expandable card game) or LCG format now. It allows me to focus on getting cards I already know I want.

Remember games like vanguard and magic have huge teams working on them at least 40 hours a week. That includes a ton of playtesting and quite a few writers. If your team isn't as big as theirs with as much capital you may want to space your releases out a little more.

[Kevashim]

1840 cards in the first year alone might be a bit of a tall order, and asking a bit much of any potential collectors. You would need to come up with enough significant variation in your cards to avoid having lots of what are effectively the same card with a different name/picture. If you are thinking of reprinting some cards in multiple sets then it is far too short a time frame to reprint the same card in more than 1 set in a single year really.

In short, I think either the amount of cards, or the short time frame you are going for is far too optimistic. Either work with slower releases or make fewer cards per release. You could have smaller releases that focus mainly on one faction and add a smaller amount to the others. So 1 "Core" release to start off, then 5 expansion releases that focus on 1 faction and offer some new things for the others.

[yudencow]

why that specific number of cards?

Well because i'm reverse engineering the game. I know how many cards will be and where do they belong.

To be quite honest, if you feel your card game requires that many cards that frequently, then the issue may be with your card game.  I've never heard of a card game making releases that quicklyk with that many cards.

You're right. I am worried, that's why I'm asking. The problem isn't the card game per se, but how I plan to release it. The story if of 9 different civilizations from the same proginator. I thought earlier to focus on each civilization at a time, and then bring them storywise together. So I thought, why not work on all fo them from the start so all nexus points match. This caused all the problem I am trying to solve.

Another thing to consider about this; do you think you might be overloading the player's ability to keep up with releases by bringing them forth so quickly; the reason Vanguard averages to 8 weeks, for example, is because sets 1 and 2 and sets 4 and 5 were released closer together.  (7 and 8 are a bit closer, too)  You may want to consider if your game is calling for too many cards to be released too quickly.

It is not going to be a CCG format. This is my surprise.

I'm not sure I would want to read 117 cards every 6 weeks. This is part of why I got out of CCGs and am loving the ECG (expandable card game) or LCG format now. It allows me to focus on getting cards I already know I want.

Nothing I make is expandable muahuahuahuah (it's a pun).

Remember games like vanguard and magic have huge teams working on them at least 40 hours a week. That includes a ton of playtesting and quite a few writers. If your team isn't as big as theirs with as much capital you may want to space your releases out a little more.

True, I might need that.

1840 cards in the first year alone might be a bit of a tall order, and asking a bit much of any potential collectors. You would need to come up with enough significant variation in your cards to avoid having lots of what are effectively the same card with a different name/picture. If you are thinking of reprinting some cards in multiple sets then it is far too short a time frame to reprint the same card in more than 1 set in a single year really.

I never had such dirty thoughts like recreating cards. As I said the game is built in a grid so there won't be many cards fitting the same description.

In short, I think either the amount of cards, or the short time frame you are going for is far too optimistic. Either work with slower releases or make fewer cards per release. You could have smaller releases that focus mainly on one faction and add a smaller amount to the others. So 1 "Core" release to start off, then 5 expansion releases that focus on 1 faction and offer some new things for the others.

If i would have a core release, it will be huge. Do you think it is worth epanding each civilization on its own, in seemingly different card games that can mix and match? (each civilization is planned with unique keywords)

[DavidChaos]

Honestly?  I think your card game is too big for itself.  Most games don't have such a divisive focus, and if they do, particular sets focus on particular things.

What is the limit on cards with the same name in your game?  YGO makes only 5-15 cards, give or take, when they first introduce an archetype.  Why?  Because at 3 per deck, decks can have 15-45 cards from just the archetype.

[yudencow]

Honestly?  I think your card game is too big for itself.  Most games don't have such a divisive focus, and if they do, particular sets focus on particular things.

The main focus was suppose to be each civilization, but I tried to make them all move forward together so the same class. I'm easying up the deck building to be less strict.

What is the limit on cards with the same name in your game?  YGO makes only 5-15 cards, give or take, when they first introduce an archetype.  Why?  Because at 3 per deck, decks can have 15-45 cards from just the archetype.

There is a 3 copy limit, and there are different kinds of archetypes varying between 8 and 18 cards. Archetype in my game means they share the same civilization, morality and class.

I give up on my idea to release card of all the 9 civilizations at once. I'll focus at each at a time in rotation.

There are no limits on using cards from all civilizations even though in the story it doesn't happen  until a certain point.

Is releasing 234 cards per 8 weeks in the first year and then releasing 117 card per 8 weeks is good?

[yudencow]

Is releasing 234 cards per 8 weeks in the first year and then releasing 117 card per 8 weeks is good?

I'm going to release a new set every 9 weeks.

[DavidChaos]

Wait, there's no rules that restrict you from using multiple civilizations together?  And there's a 3-copy limit?  In that case, you definitely don't need 234 cards in a single set; if you do have that many, then it should be an all-factions set.

Keep in mind that the first set in my game has 6 factions with very rigid mechanical requirements, and I'm having trouble coming up with even 20 cards I want to tie to that faction (although it does help that I'm now basing card individuality on both name and faction).

[yudencow]

Wait, there's no rules that restrict you from using multiple civilizations together?  And there's a 3-copy limit?  In that case, you definitely don't need 234 cards in a single set; if you do have that many, then it should be an all-factions set.

So we will be ont he same head, I will specify the building completely:
There is a 60 card deck, a hero and 3 dogmas in your build. 1 dogma and 20 deck cards must have the same class and civilization as the hero. There are more rules regarding neutral which do not appear in the first sets. The civilizations can be mixed very well.

The cards are divided to 3 factions that don't mix together at all, the 3 moralities: face, guts and heel. All cards but the dogmas belong to each one and they can't mix.

Keep in mind that the first set in my game has 6 factions with very rigid mechanical requirements, and I'm having trouble coming up with even 20 cards I want to tie to that faction (although it does help that I'm now basing card individuality on both name and faction).

For me it is very easy, I divided the faction cards into specific cards with specific functions and I cross it with the specific civilization and morality. It helped to make keywords for each civilization and making them stand out in certain cards.

After knowing that, do you think 234 cards/9 weeks 9 times and then 117 cards/9 weeks is a bad idea?