Skip to Content

Variable Victory Points (VVPs)

40 replies [Last post]
questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011

I bought a while back a big bag with a bunch of colored Acrylic Ice Cubes. Cost me like $40 USD for 1,000 cubes (or something like that).

Anyways I really like those little gems and had a bunch of them on my table. I've had a habit of rolling them around as if they were miniature dice. Of course they are not...

But tonight an idea came when I was holding those Acrylic Ice Cubes:

Variable Victory Points (VVPs)

What is that? Well instead of each card specifying the value in terms of Victory Points (VPs), I would let the player choose his cards from his "Micro" Deck (3 minions) and then place their desired amount of points.

For example: If the player is given 10 Victory Points to allocate among his three (3) minions. Of course when the cards are revealed, you'll have a better idea about your position.

You can go the safe route: 3-3-4. Or you can take a risk: 8-1-1. And whatever combination exist in the middle. So this would be VARIABLE and decided by each player.

What do you think about this "mechanic"???

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Laws of the Jungle

There could be an additional rule which says, whatever minions (cards) survive the round... Those points are awarded back to the owner. I'm not sure 20 VPs is sufficient to determine a winner - I guess the scoring needs to be playtested some more to determine the most appropriate score.

Could be 30 VPs...

Any comments/questions/feedback/etc.?

Cheers.

Note: This "reward the owner" could lead to some better gambling with the Victory Points (VPs). Especially if you have a card you feel that your opponent's will most likely not be able to beat (during the round).

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Sounds a bit familiar in my

Sounds a bit familiar in my ears. That is, I got something similar regarding XP. But in your case, giving the VP back, that asks for more planning with your minions.

Is there a way for the opponent to reach the minion with 8 VP? Through a short cut, while it is placed all the way in the back?
If so, then it would really be a risk. Otherwise, all players would constantly do this 1-1-8.

In my game, no matter where the 8 is placed. It is at risk if certain cards are played. Players need to time their formations. Currently, there are 5 out of 45 cards that can cause trouble. And placing the 8 like 1-8-1 is more common then 1-1-8.

I hope that made sense.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
All the same

If it is 8-1-1 or 1-8-1 or 1-1-8 ... it's all the SAME. What matters is the RPS-9 rules which determine who is allowed to attack. There is no difference because of formation.

As far as REACH is concerned, all minion cards can be targeted from anywhere on the table. What matters is the RPS-9 which dictates which classes are enemies and which are allies.

Hope that makes sense Ramon... It's not convoluted where you must attack to the Left and Defend from the Right. I have seen this before and did not like that scheme. So therefore, I am not making position count (in the matter of things...)

Cheers.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Yes, that made sense. I was

Yes, that made sense.
I was unaware of your choice of not having an order of targeting.
I was unsure if my post made sense, since explaning things is sometimes troublesome for me. I never intended to say that you would not understand.

Every time you use my own name in public. Like that. I get the feeling that my posts are bothering you. If this is true, I won't bother you any more.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Personal touch

No not because I am angry... but because we've touch base on something in the past... I usually refer to all the people that have helped me in some way by using their first name. What that means is that I go out of my way to "friend" them - because they have been helpful.

Or the opposite is true, I help them and they are thankful. So I "nurture" relationships with designers that I know... So that we have people who are like at the bar: "Hey it's Norm!" To have a sense of familiarity.

It would be nice if all the people that I have helped or have helped me could still be on this forum... alas people move on to other things or are busy with life concerns, etc. It's 100% understandable.

But there is still a few that are still designing and online (BGDF).

No worries @X3M... It's just because we've chatted on several subjects before ... it's more natural to refer to you by your name ... since I have (or you have) gone out of your way to be helpful!

Cheers!

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
So you too are using Variable Victory Points (VVPs)???

My question to you is that your game also uses VVPs?! And if so, how is the playtesting going with that "mechanic"? Because right now it's just an idea that came to me while playing with Acrylic Ice Cubes. I have not had the chance to prototype it... Since the prototype is not properly developed.

Yeah I do have an "old" prototype that got me to take a 2nd look.

But that prototype is rather "random". It doesn't make sense in the context of the game and considering all that I have changed and added to improve on the game itself.

I am using 100% deterministic combat ... and the use of Deck-Building (engine) resources to drive the game. I personally think it may actually be not too bad of a design.

It's also very "thematic" too. With Lords of the Keep, Asynchronous Abilities which alter the play style, one (1) to six (6) players too... So the game has some good "content" too!

Anyways give some of your feedback concerning the use of VVPs!

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
Hmm...

I like it. But I'm finding it hard to think of reasons why I would place things a certain way. What is causing me to consider 1-3-6 v.s. 4-4-2? Or any other combination. It would be cool to have both players reveal their minions so I know what I'm up against (mirrors reality: I know what I'm fighting), but depending I which minion I choose to give more Power Points (trying to differentiate between VVP's [what is earned after the attack] and their Power Points [what is allocated before revealing and attacking]) will depict the outcome (also mirrors reality: I'm not sure what they are planning!). Could there be special abilities that trigger depending on how many power points they have after revealing the minions and before attacking? This would also give players hints on where their opponent will stash Power Points.

Turn Example:

1). Player 1 and Player 2 draw three minion cards each, both revealing their minions.

2). Both players conceal their cards, mixing them up so their opponent doesn't know what cards are what.

3). Both players place their minions face down in a row in any configuration horizontally

4). Each player places at least one power point on each minion and then may distribute the rest (7 more PP's) as they please.

5). Both players reveal their minions and execute any Power Abilities.

6). Initiate attacks (not sure what you are envisioning for this)

7). All Power Points on surviving minions are converted to victory points for their player.

-------

Am I close? What are your plans for combat? Do minions have unique attack and defense ratings?

As I was typing, I thought it would be cool as sort of a catch-up mechanic and also something that makes more sense than just discarding all minions is that surviving minions would stay on the field revealed. This way players can react better against opponents. This would also be kind of dumb if two minions survived and the new minion is basically know. Maybe you always draw three and if your have more than three minions in play the rest are support minions?

Just some thoughts. Might be way off haha.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Language barrier. I guess, I

Language barrier. I guess, I blame that.

If you don't use formations. What would be a good reason for a player to choose 811 instead of 433 or 532 or 622 etc?

That question has to be answered. (And to be frank, you are asking that)

But I can't really think of anything that would help.

Maybe, just maybe. When I look at my game. And look at all the play tests that we did.
XP serves a purpose. (Actually, my XP serves several purposes these days that we where unaware of before the play tests)

You need to find a purpose for your VP.
Aside from that they give VP to the player.

---
How does XP initially work in my game?

You gain XP/VP by killing opponents. Some opponents where often ignored in the past. But now, not any more.

Then, XP/VP was spend on your own units. To make them stronger. Players can choose which stats where improved.
---

Maybe you can give VP a purpose in making the minions a bit stronger in a certain aspect as well. It doesn't have to be much. But if both players are allowed to spend 10 points each. It would be fair, right?
Then it would make sense to put 8 VP on a certain minion. And only 1 on another.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
So it's sort of like "betting" in Poker

When you choose the minions you want to play this round, there is this conscious dilemma as to which classes your opponents are going to use...

So the idea is that you are trying to "out-predict" your opponents. And while you do this, you "bet" (or wager) points as to what minions you feel will survive the round.

This of course has everything to do with the RPS-9. A Rock-Paper-Scissors system with nine (9) elements is used to determine which minions will attack. And because it is not always the same cards your opponent plays either... The predictability or probabilities are estimated based on your own minions (vis-a-vis theirs).

So 8-1-1 means that you are betting that your first minion will survive all your other minions. It also means you are probably willing to sacrifice two (2) minions in order to help secure the "8" VVP minion.

Something along those lines...

FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
I like X3M's idea

I like X3M's idea of entrusting the minion with some Energon CubesVictory Points, and they have some direct impact on the minion.

They could be minor buffs that fit with the RPS-9 theme that activate optionally if some minimum number of cubes are on the card. If the minion is killed, all VPs go to the victor. If the minion survives without using the buff, all VPs go to the owner. If the minion survives having used the buff, then all VPs over the minimum go to the owner, and the "expended" VPs vanish.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
I think I understand

FrankM wrote:
I like X3M's idea of entrusting the minion with some Energon CubesVictory Points, and they have some direct impact on the minion.

They could be minor buffs that fit with the RPS-9 theme that activate optionally if some minimum number of cubes are on the card. If the minion is killed, all VPs go to the victor. If the minion survives without using the buff, all VPs go to the owner. If the minion survives having used the buff, then all VPs over the minimum go to the owner, and the "expended" VPs vanish.

Okay I get "All VPs go to the victor if the minion is killed". And "All VPs go to the owner if the minion survives without using 'the buff'". My issue is with "All VPs over the minimum go to the owner"...

Are we saying that EACH Acrylic Cube is like +10 Health and a player can opt to use some of these to survive longer (at the price of sacrificing VPs that he/she could have earned)???

So you would need two (2) colors of Acrylic Ice Cubes:

  • One color (say purple) for the "buff-able" cubes
  • One color (say pink) for the "used" cubes

This way you can keep track of the TOTAL amount of cubes and still know how many are available to "buff"...

Something like this @FrankM??? I think this is something very interesting... It ADDS something to the "thought process" about how you are willing to distribute your VVPs!

FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Yes, you understood

Yes, it looks like you understood my half-baked idea :-)

But I don't think it needs two colors of cubes.

After the minions are revealed, go ahead and pile the cubes "behind" the card (away from the middle of the table). This visually suggests that the minion is holding/protecting those assets. Any cubes that get used get moved to "in front of" the card (or possibly piled on top of the portrait). The position shows that they are used (worth 1VP to an enemy and 0VP to the owner, depending on who collects them) without needing to exchange them for cubes of another color.

This way, the card text/icons are not obscured so that other players can plan accordingly.

Now if you really want an excuse to use several colors, assign one color of VP cubes to each player and possibly have some alternate victory conditions:

1. Accumulate 30+ cubes of any type
2. Accumulate 25+ cubes from any combination of opponents
3. Accumulate 20+ cubes from a single opponent
4. Accumulate 5+ cubes from every opponent (only if 3+ players)

These are probably horribly imbalanced, but you get the idea that they can be confirmed by cube color.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some depth of strategy...

So there would be an interesting depth of strategy with this idea. Like using many Valor Points for a "relatively weak unit who has a high damage yield". Because it might be easy to defeat this minion, the buff can allow the unit to survive an attack and unleash more damage (if it is a highly offensive unit - with powerful Advanced Tactics).

That could be an incentive to do 8-1-1 for example...

Very interesting. Going to go to sleep - but will definitely be thinking more about this idea/mechanic.

Cheers!

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Post #9 Yes, my game is

Post #9
Yes, my game is something along the lines of out predicting your opponent. There is also counting.
But lets not forget, I also use dice. So there is always a risk.

Let me use a bit different wording this time.

Since there is order in my game like a front line, middle and back.
8-1-1 is completely different then 1-8-1 and 1-1-8.
You attack from left to right in my game. Not saying that your game should.

When I talked about buffing the minions. There could be a same reason to do 8-1-1. In your case, the order is not needed. In my game, it is.

For example, if I where to do 8-1-1. The main reason would be that the front line unit is an unit that needs either a lot of health. Or is a decent meat unit to begin with. There is also a chance that the whole squad is ranged except the meat unit. Perhaps it is the slowest unit and is simply buffed to get along with the rest. And maybe, it is a meat unit that does a lot of damage on the opponents. Yet the other 2 units are needed somewhere else.

There are a ton of reasons why my players would buff the front unit. And there are a ton of reasons why all buff go to just one unit.

The reasons of buffing just one unit. Maybe your game can have this too.

Post #10 and #11
Maybe it can be done like this:

Minion 1 gets no buffs. And protects 2 cubes.
Minion 2 gets 2 buffs. And protects 2 cubes.
Minion 3 gets 3 buffs. And protects 1 cube.

If All 3 minions survive, the player gets 5 cubes. And 5 cubes are lost.

If for example minion 3 dies, the player gets 4 cubes and the opponent gets 4 cubes. Only 2 cubes are lost.

If all 3 minions die. The opponent gets 10 cubes.

Post #12
Yes. That would be a good reason.
But there is a risk. Players might get to over protective.

Minion 1 protects no VP and gets no buffs.
Minion 2 protects no VP and gets no buffs.
Minion 3 protects 1 VP and gets 9 buffs.

Seeing as how a minimum should be used. But also a more rewarding battle then giving VP to the opponent. I get to the following distribution.

Minion 1 protects 1 VP and gets no buffs.
Minion 2 protects 1 VP and gets no buffs.
Minion 3 protects 3 VP and gets 5 buffs.

The goal of the player here is to loose the other 2 minions. They are fodder. Both giving a total of 2 VP to the opponent.
Everything is bet on that one minion that will get the player 3 VP. That is +1.

I don't know how much of an impact this strategy has on the game. But it is noteworthy to look into it. If you are going to use the cubes like this.

Tbone
Tbone's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/18/2013
Why RPS-9

I know this is a system you rather enjoy, or at least want to incorporate into some sort of game (I have all sorts of mechanics I think are really cool, but have yet to find their place). Are you sure RPS-9 is right for this? You could easily make this game elegant with a RPS-5 system.

Also, with that note, what are your plans for combat, with above comments considered? Reveal cards, if I have a minion with a Fire element trait across from a minion with an Ice element, the Fire element minion "wins" and gains VP's on both minions? Or are there attack/defense values? Fire gets +2 Attack (essentially a win) against Ice?

I think having each minion have one-three "Power Abilities" is essential. If you place at least 2 VP's on your Lava Gnome it gets an additional VP from the opponent if it wins or if you place 6 VP's on it, Lava Gnome gives all other friendly Minions the Fire element trait.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
.

I think this is his (RPS-3)^2 system.

Fri
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2017
Just some random ideas

Victory point cubes could equal health.

If you established a range of VVP that could go on each minion, but keep the max VVP that can be deployed at 10, I think it could give the players with some interesting choices:

Minions could have different abilities dependent how many VVP were used to deploy them.

Cards could give minions with X current VP enhancement and bonuses. (You could use this to incentivize a more flat alignment like 3-3-4)

If you also change the everyone deploys 3 model, then a player could deploy 5 minions with 2 VP each or 2 minions at 5 VP or well get the idea.

spaff
Offline
Joined: 11/05/2015
Though implemented very

Though implemented very differently, this basic mechanic has been around since at least Careers from Parker brothers.

In that game there are three Resources/victory point types you are trying to collect: Fame (stars) Happiness (hearts) and Money (cash). At the beginning players choose their own victory condition. Each player must reach a total of 60 VP, but may spread that number out among the three resource types (so, for example, a legal victory condition could be 10 stars, 20 hearts, and 30 money).

That victory condition is hidden until a player declares "I won!" but what and how much of the various resources players are collecting is known information, so you can guess what a player is going for and try and get in their way as best you can.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Reasons for an RPS-9

Tbone wrote:
You could easily make this game elegant with a RPS-5 system.

The game has nine (9) Factions. Each Faction has nine (9) minions. And by multiplication there are 81 distinct classes of minions.

Tbone wrote:
Also, with that note, what are your plans for combat, with above comments considered?

Given a RPS-9, I think the battles will look something like this:

1. Players seek out DOUBLE DAMAGE encounters first... to try to perform easy kills over those minions.

2. Once double damage are done, the next logical encounters are the SINGLE DAMAGE encounters (without retaliation).

3. And some players may attempt to do MUTUAL DAMAGE which means that the opponent may counter if it is still alive. So maybe if there are some weakened units - again easy kills, that may occur where a player may attack if he is certain to kill that particular minion.

4. Lastly is MUTUAL DAMAGE where the unit has no more resources to counter with and damage is only one way (to the minion in question). That's another consideration.

Tbone wrote:
I think having each minion have one-three "Power Abilities" is essential.

Each minion has a "Basic Attack" and an "Advanced Tactic". "Basic Attack" allows a minion to inflict some amount of damage and is usually available for multiple "strikes". Like [4x] which means four (4) times per round.

The "Advanced Tactic" could be a more powerful attack, could be a heal ability, Fortify/Weaken a unit (attack boost/penalty), etc. It is not restricted to forms of attack only... I have outlined fourteen (14) Advanced Tactics which come in various degrees. Like an "Advanced Attack" does like 30 damage as compared to a "Basic Attack" which only does 10 damage (as an example)... And you could only use that Tactic twice ([2x]).

I'm not planning to have "modifiers" to change class... There is a "Fire" Clan (Faction) already and they are "Orcs". Those minions do DOUBLE DAMAGE to the "Frost" Clan which are "Giants".

The RPS-9 is relatively EASY to remember:

Holy-> Chaos-> Fire-> Frost-> Life-> Death-> Earth-> Storm-> Tech-> Holy

That is the double damage (Beats) relationships. The rest of the relationships can be ascertained by looking at the card's RPS diagram.

And I just remember those Beats from memory. They are all logical and make total and complete sense. And IF I can memorize it or describe it using the logic ... well then most people can too!

Something like that...

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Not variable units/minions

Fri wrote:
...Minions could have different abilities dependent how many VVP were used to deploy them...

The VVPs are used to determine the winner of the battle for "Lord of the Keep"! And not "abilities".

Instead "abilities" rely on a Deck-Building mechanic (engine) in which each player starts with a deck of ten (10) Resource cards and may purchase more Resource cards at the cost of THREE (3) Resource cards. Each round you draw five (5) Resource cards and with those cards, you DEPLOY the minions you see best fit to do battle.

Those Resource cards allow minions to use their "Basic Attack" one or multiple times and also when "Advanced Tactics" may be used as well.

So your HAND determines what minions your deploy and VVPs are awarded as the player sees best in terms of combat outcomes.

Fri wrote:
Cards could give minions with X current VP enhancement and bonuses. (You could use this to incentivize a more flat alignment like 3-3-4)

I can think of two (2) cases where you would go "3-3-4":

  1. You use average cards to start with but in less available Factions. Which means you are counting on NOT having opponent that cause DOUBLE DAMAGE.

  2. You are already using STRONG (High H.P. Count) cards such as Soldiers or a Warlord that are already stronger than the Magic and Guild class units.

Fri wrote:
If you also change the everyone deploys 3 model, then a player could deploy 5 minions with 2 VP each or 2 minions at 5 VP or well get the idea.

Allowing more or less minions to be deployed rather than a STANDARD of three (3) in my mind leads to too much confusion. Player may be stricken with Paralysis-Analysis because there are too many variables to try to deal with... Do you deploy 5 instead of 3 or maybe 2 instead... I want to stick with THREE (3) units/minions and allow the VARIABILITY to be on selecting VVPs. Selecting what each unit/minion has as VVPs is SIMPLER than requiring the process of figuring out HOW MANY units/minions should be deployed.

So on this front THREE (3) is the REQUIRED amount of units/minions each player MUST deploy.

FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Clarifying question

Is there some rule or missed synergy that would prevent a player from mixing several factions in the same deck? Because if one has a deck of mostly Faction X, RPS dictates that its fate versus some deck of mostly Faction Y is more-or-less predetermined.

On the flip-side, if decks tend to be mixtures, the term Faction might be a bit strong.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Variety is the spice of life!

FrankM wrote:
Is there some rule or missed synergy that would prevent a player from mixing several factions in the same deck?

The "Micro" Deck (ten cards) construction follows this rule:

  • 4 Soldiers
  • 3 Magical
  • 2 Guild
  • 1 Warlord

Player building a custom ten (10) card "Micro" Deck MUST follow those quantities.

And also some cards are "Unique" in that a player may only have ONE (1) of those minions in his/her "Micro" Deck. At most a player may have THREE (3) of the same cards in his/her deck.

FrankM wrote:
Because if one has a deck of mostly Faction X, RPS dictates that its fate versus some deck of mostly Faction Y is more-or-less predetermined.

How I "picture" it:

  • New players to the game or players who only purchase the "core" deck, will have more predictable cards in that their decks will have IDENTICAL cards to another "new" player.

  • Experience players will have probably spent some more money on diversifying their "Micro" Deck and have purchased cards or SINGLES. In my mind, this is very much a CCG (Collectible game)... And so if you maybe buy some other cards, it makes you LESS "predictable".

FrankM wrote:
On the flip-side, if decks tend to be mixtures, the term Faction might be a bit strong.

Well there are NINE (9) "Factions" in the game. The RPS-9 lists all of them... Which "Factions" and "Classes" you build your "Micro" Deck depend on your own personal investment.

(Aside: And no I'm not trying to gouge players to buy more cards... This is not a Pay-To-Play business model. Instead it is actually a "Collectible" model where players can go online and BUY the SINGLES they want to add to their "Micro" Deck collection. Some players may opt to build several decks and select the deck for the game they see fit (based on their own intuition...)

You can enjoy the experience ... but you will find your "Micro" Deck's mileage may vary - depending on the players you are playing. For example if you are playing a "Deck" with Holy (Humans) and an opponent has decided to invest in a Technology (Gnomes) "Deck", he will probably be in a much stronger position than you... But again it's deck diversification too: you don't want to "put all your eggs in the same basket", so to speak.

So diversifying your deck with more than one (1) Faction is very realistic. I don't see the advantage of NOT mixing your decks for LESS predictable outcomes. And seeing as it is a SINGLES aftermarket model, you can virtually buy whatever you like and construct your "Micro" Deck to what you feel will give you the best "advantage"...

FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
Okay, so not as self-contained as I'd feared

So this is more like Gandalf who for his first deck cobbled together a bunch of Dwarves and a Hobbit, didn't like the result, then came back with an Elf, a Dwarf, a couple Humans, and a bunch of Hobbits.

The minions themselves might have strong feelings about belonging to one faction or another, but the player's in-game avatar doesn't.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
TRUTH!

FrankM wrote:
...The minions themselves might have strong feelings about belonging to one faction or another, but the player's in-game avatar doesn't.

Exactly. The player is "himself" one (1) of three (3) (Extended to six) "Lords of the Keep". Each Lord has a "Resource Ability" which determines each ROUND a "bonus". Like "Lord Asinius" has "Merchant Trade" = +2 Food.

In addition, each Lord has a "Advanced Ability" which is like an Asymmetric power which makes it unique.

The Lords are RANDOMLY "chosen" at the start of the game... And then based on your Lord, you can select which "Micro" Deck works best. Having six (6) "Micro" Decks is equal to one (1) Magic deck... So the card count is pretty realistic and should allow "ADVANCED" player a chance to bring the right deck, for the right Lord...

FrankM wrote:
...The minions themselves might have strong feelings about belonging to one faction or another, but the player's in-game avatar doesn't.

And that's the EXACT purpose for the RPS-9: minions like, dislike and "sworn enemy" the other Factions. And that determines how they will react towards an opponent and his minions!

FrankM
Offline
Joined: 01/27/2017
With friends like these...

questccg wrote:
And that's the EXACT purpose for the RPS-9: minions like, dislike and hate the other Factions. And that determines how they will react towards an opponent and his minions!

Ah, but how do they react to having hated factions on their own team? Bloodbowl had mechanic for this, though I would recommend against using their name of "Hatred".

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Sworn Enemy perhaps?!

FrankM wrote:
...Ah, but how do they react to having hated factions on their own team?

I thought "hate" was a bit much... I don't really like using those kinds of terms or terminology. So I thought maybe it should be "sworn enemy"... It's kind of like an RPG or D&D scenario: You can have a Lawful Evil Sorcerer part of a crew of Chaotic Good Dwarves!

Obviously the Dwarves are mistrusting of the use of Magic... Even worst that the wizard in question is "Evil" too! But that's the team - they need to work together for their "Lord" and make him/her the "Lord of the Keep"!

At the time - I could not find anything more appropriate.

You forced me to think about it a little deeper...

Cheers!

Fri
Offline
Joined: 09/06/2017
"Master Tactics"

Sorry I wasn't grasping that the micro-deck is the collection of minions. This incomplete understanding hindered my ability to convey my ideas, but I think that one of thenm is still worth exploring. As you explained each minion has a "Basic Attack" and an "Advanced Tactics". Minions could have something like "Master Tactics" that are available if they are deployed with at least some number of VVP.

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Not enough space

Fri wrote:
...Minions could have something like "Master Tactics" that are available if they are deployed with at least some number of VVP.

See the thing with "abilities/attacks/tactics/etc." is that they all take up a lot of space on the card. Right now with TWO (2) Card Section devoted to "abilities", that covers about 40% of the card.

That leaves a good 60% available for artwork... Which is not too bad.

If I put a 3rd ability well then it would be 60% and 40% for artwork (kinda small...) The artwork would look not too great.

So while I like the idea ... I can't implement it due to LIMITED SPACE on the cards themselves.

Feel free to share other ideas/comments/feedback/etc. Cheers!

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
If anyone has ideas...

I don't know if I should start another thread...

But what I would really like is if there were some "mechanic" by which I could "combine" actions TOGETHER...!

I don't know HOW ... but this could be pretty cool.

(Well I have some ideas I am thinking about... but nothing firm yet!)

All ideas/comments/feedback/etc. welcome!

questccg
questccg's picture
Online
Joined: 04/16/2011
Also what happens if...

Nobody kills ANY minions in a round. That means everyone will score 10 Variable Victory Points + Each Minions VPs. This isn't very logical...

I think I need to step back - and do a RE-THINK!

Because if every player decides to use their "Resource" Cards to BUY a card from the Market and save their points for a counter-attack... The odds are that nobody will attack are high and therefore all minions remain in play...

Sounds all wrong to me! Man this design requires a lot of WORK!!!

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut