Skip to Content

G.I. Joe — Hand of Fate: New start with an amazing concept

So I have been working, here-and-there, on a NEW "design" which could potentially have like up to 8-Players in a game or perhaps more where the only real barrier is the TIME taken to PLAY the game. Right now the goal is 60 minutes or 1 hour.

And I have to admit, I'm fairly excited about this game also!

Using offline Deck-Construction, each player builds his deck of 15 Units and 3 Structures for a total of 18 cards per Deck.

Right now, it seems like the model will be $1.99 CAD (or $1.49 USD) per pack and will feature 2 "character" cards and 1 "chase" card. Character cards will maybe a total of 120 "characters" with 60 from the Joe and 60 from Cobra so a total of 120 cards!

The "chase" cards are going to be "rare" by design, and will feature vehicles, tanks, air units, and of course "base" structures (all 18 of them - as of today). The "base" structures are common to both sides and the other "chase" cards will have an equal mix of both Joe and Cobra units.

The goal is simple: destroy all 3 "base" structures controlled by the opponent.

Once all 3 "base" structures for one (1) Player are destroyed, that player is eliminate from the game. Joe forces battle Cobra adversaries so there is a team or cooperative method of play.

2-Players: Joe vs. Cobra

4 / 6 / 8 are the other additional player counts that I will be exploring with this design. We'll have to wait and see the "play-time" required for 4 players and then see if it will be possible to do 6 or even 8.

For now that's all I have to share. Seems promising and I would of course be very intrigued about the G.I. Joe licensing and could be something that I can approach with some of the people working on this project.

In any case, the popularity of the "design" once I have a prototype ready will allow me to be determine what needs to be "fleshed out" more and the various aspects of the design that will need more "streamlining". Right now it is more of a "concept" and a variation on the "Deck-Building" game that I was wanting to design.

But I realized that I did NOT want to "design" a Wargame or an RTS, etc. I wanted to focus on something more "compact" and straight-forward. Ergo the 18 Deck of cards per player... And we'll see how many players can play in one (1) hour.

Keep you all posted on this NEW design. Cheers all!

I know that I spoke with @X3M about a "Deck-Building" Wargame and that idea has come and passed. Instead I wanted to working with something more flexible for kids (in terms of rules and complexity) and wanted to also have the collectors feel for the game also.


For your information, there

For your information, there has been a GI Joe deck building game released recently. You might want to take a look at it. Also, the GI Joe theme is screaming for a 2 player game. So you should focus on 2 Player. Unless players are sharing the same side like starwars rebellion.

I gave it some thoughts about it myself. One of them was to have a system similar to Minotaur Lords and Scarab Lords, where you are placing cards in various areas to increase you chance of success. Some cards could be played face down which required reconnaissance from your opponent to reveal those cards.

I was not sure how the mission would resolve. It could be like Smash up where if you have more than X cards, the mission is resolved.

Also, don't think about how to commercialize a game before having a solid playable game. You know the saying: "Don't sell the [insert animal name here]`s skin before killing the [animal name].

Start with a PLAN and then move forwards

larienna wrote:
For your information, there has been a GI Joe deck building game released recently... the GI Joe theme is screaming for a 2 player game. So you should focus on 2 Player. Unless players are sharing the same side like starwars rebellion.

This ^^^. The goal would be not "Deck-Building" but instead "Deck-Construction". This is different because one exercise is done "while playing" and the other "before playing". So I would say it's a bit more like Magic in that players construct their decks PRIOR to playing.

Secondly indeed the primary focus is 2-Players. I agree there are plenty of other G.I. Joe games in the market (I actually was surprised that they even had a TCG: Trading Card Game). I did not know that this "theme" was so POPULAR.

Thirdly is that YES players share the same side. So a Joe player will NOT attack another Joe player only the Cobra players. You are correct in that it is a bit like Star Wars Rebellion.

larienna wrote:
Also, don't think about how to commercialize a game before having a solid playable game. You know the saying: "Don't sell the [insert animal name here]'s skin before killing the [animal name].

I like to have a CONCRETE direction of what I want to do. And it HELPS to know the release FORMAT and sometimes how to monetize it. Otherwise it becomes a bit DIFFICULT to figure out "How many cards of ... this or How to package the game ... or How to sell the game"

I know it is premature ... But seeing as I WAS planning on a "Deck-Builder" Wargame or RTS (something in that area) and I've change the concept a bit to something MORE "manageable". And then I wanted to go the "micro deck" concept and was trying to see a SALES MODEL and went to something more "modern".

What I mean is that I've learnt about NEW ways to SELL cards. Sure you can do like in Magic a Deck of 15 Cards... But I've seen more "streamlined" collector versions of "Booster Packs" nowadays.

However I'm maybe thinking about $2.75 CAD (or $2.00 USD) in terms of pricing. Why? Because I have to pay for the IP License and that may be like $0.75 CAD (or $0.50 USD) ... I have to go above and beyond a bit to ensure that there is enough margins to actually make some monies too!

Plus I need to commission art.

I need to work with ALL of that to see if it is FINANCIALLY VIABLE!

It's nice to "design" games... But I plan to bring the ones that I see as being "good" to MARKET. And so you have to keep an eye on the prize so-to-speak. I still have more figures to run too. These are only embryonic ideas ATM. Everything else requires more analysis. Cheers.

I try to design kid-friendly games

I don't want to make a game that a 12-year old could NOT play. I know kids learn a lot of "strategy" and "decision-making" at the age of 9-years ... But I think by selling to a bit OLDER "crowd" might mean then the younger players may be more attracted by the game. Sorta like: "Seen my older brother play that... Looks like a lot of FUN!"

I've also decided on the requiring 2D6s as standard dice but does NOT come with the game itself (you've got to bring your own dice...) So you can borrow a pair from one of your "least" favorite Board Game and use it to do Battle with "HoF" (Hand of Fate).

Right now I'm still THINKING about the "design". Once I make a prototype, I will be in a much better position to determine how FUN the game is. Right now, it's all "concept" and while I might want it to take 1-Hour, maybe that is like a 4-Player version (with 2-Players clocking-in at 30-Minutes)... This IDK. And that will be for certain a big part of playtesting.

There is some dice play and I'm working on Soldiers (why they are REQUIRED). I'm still actively "working" on the design. There are still A LOT of variables left-over to "nail-down". Cheers.

This concept is a variation of one of my other "designs"

I was thinking about 2/4/6/8 Players when I think back to the LIMITATIONS that "TradeWorlds" (TW) has when it comes to HIGHER than four (4) Players. For TW, the addition of two (2) Players would bring the Player Count to six (6) Players but would be a very costly "expansion" to produce (mostly in terms of additional artwork and some Graphic Designing too).

That was one "constraint" that I wanted to lift ... And basically now it boils down to "PLAY TIME" which is the restrictive factor.

Another design had me working with a "minimal" deck in "Monster Keep" (MK). While this design has a prototype, I don't see the design advancing much further in the space of "marketability" and as such this design will be dormant. But it did inspire me to have a smaller Deck and have a strong 2-Player design.

Then there was "Archon", another card game with some innovative mechanics but the whole is NOT coming together as I would like it to. Some of the IDEAS are NEAT and even again a 2-Player Duel game ... It just doesn't all come together as a design and even IF I don't have a working prototype, I doubt this game will ever make in the design space of something which is "commercially viable".

So I borrowed some ideas from other designs.

And it's funny that we should talk about 2-Player games ... Because both MK and ARCH were going to be 2-Player games. Of course, now I feel like both of those design are "irrelevant" and will not go further in terms of evolution be it prototype or concept. While MK is another "Monster" Game, I don't really feel like making ANOTHER game while I have "Crystal Heroes" (CH) which is advanced and already has a real "nice" prototype with quality art and a Fantasy-Theme.

ARCH may be trying to be more innovative in terms of "mechanics" but again it's another Card Game with a Fantasy-Theme... I've got too many of those types of designs on my "development" slate and realize that the design will also not go any further as it is.

Basically I'm choosing CH as my Fantasy-Themed Tile Game.

Which kills two (2) designs: MK and ARCH. Enough of the "too much Fantasy" and that's why I wanted to work on a Wargame or RTS as something with a different theme for me. HoF came about when I realized that IF I made a "military" game, there would be issues for the ART and how to get content to DRIVE the game. And then the IDEA of "G.I. Joe" came along (as I was thinking about how to make the illustration process SIMPLER) and I knew this would be a winner when I started to do more research into the Universe which is G.I. Joe.

Another concept was killed: my Wargame Deck-Builder. So I wanted to go with something original in the "Wargame-space" and found that there was no Deck-Builder in this GENRE. And then the whole MULTI-PLAYER issue arose and I was thinking: "How do I get it so that there is COLLABORATION and COMPETITION?"

That's when G.I. Joe came to the RESCUE!

I knew that IF I had two (2) SIDES: Heroes and Villains. I would be able to have players COOPERATE against their enemies. Both COLLABORTATION and COMPETITION! This also made me realize that in this SPACE there is a lot of "content" to explore and I could MAYBE have HIGHER player counts (We'll have to see about this one... IDK yet)!

So there are a few contributions to the game (as it stands) and I've found myself "benching" a couple designs ... And favoring CH over them. We'll see a lot of development on "HoF" is required even with all the borrowed ideas.

We'll have to wait and see how this design EVOLVES because ATM it is in it's very own "design-space" and I like that A LOT!


There are some important consideration when designing

larienna wrote:
Also, don't think about how to commercialize a game before having a solid playable game. You know the saying: "Don't sell the [insert animal name here]`s skin before killing the [animal name].

While I agree that putting "the cart in front of the horse" is not recommended, there are some important considerations: card counts.

If you are going with a 310 gsm Black Core product, it can be like 55 cards per sheet or if you are talking about uncut sheets, that's like 11 x 10 or 110 cards. Or some places are 54 cards per sheet (like Lijia).

Knowing what you can and cannot produce serves as a limiting factor or in the other case, an important FIGURE to know in how you can make decks. I'm still not an expert on it and wonder if a Magic Sheet is what I would need to produce, I'm not sure just yet! TBH.

I'm going to research this more... And work with the figures to get a better idea of what are the OPTIONS. Cheers.

Note #1: For example: having a 55 or 54 count doesn't matter much on the "Character" Cards that's either +1 or -1 card from each Faction. So no biggie there.

But where it gets complicated is the "Chase" Cards.

See 54 / 2 = 27 / 9 = 3. Works good. But 55 doesn't... There is an extra card that just doesn't work for the card count. So there are CHALLENGES aside from coming up with the GAME. You need to understand the printing capacities in order to DESIGN the "correct" game for the manufacturer who is going to print your order (or future order).

And then I have 18 (9/9) x 4 = 72 cards. Those are the "Chase" cards minus the structures.

But you can see that the acceptable card counts are 55 or 54.

This 72 cards doesn't WORK! So IF we add "structures" we still don't get a multiple of 55 or 54. So we have 110 or 108.

110 - 72 = 38
108 - 72 = 36

36 / 3 = 12 each. That could WORK, it means that there would be 12 Joe and 12 Cobra and 12 Common "structures". Moreover 36 / 9 = 4 ... That too would be great.

The 38 adds +2 cards... And I guess you could have 14 Common "structures" but it doesn't work with 9 (cards per page in a binder).

So all of this means that you need to be conscientious about the CARD COUNTS and what it is you NEED to produce. I know this seems moronic to many... But figuring out how to lay things in print AFTERWARDS could yield problems in the event that the card count is too much, doesn't work, etc.

I personally think, understanding HOW your game is to PRINT and knowing how to design around the limitations or extra "card" counts is IMPORTANT.

Real Talk

Here are two suggestions for you.

First: drop the idea of making a game with GI Joe characters and then bringing it to them, expecting them to pick up on it. If they want a game from you featuring their IP, they will let you know. GI Joe practically defined typical adolescent boys' life in the 80s. They have movies. They have decades of comic books. They know what they want.

What I suggest instead is to approach your design idea like any other: create your prototype, perfect it, trim it down until you have only what you need to make a great game.

Use any number of readily-available public domain characters, or develop your own. That's what authors, artists, and game designers have always done. And for the most part they've done well, if my current understanding serves.

The great game comes first. Make them come to you.

(As an aside... Who even owns the GI Joe IP, anyway? I've lost track in my old age.)

Interesting question. Does

Interesting question. Does Hasbro has it, or they just manufacture the toys.

I though you mean a GI joe like theme. For example, in my case, I have Erician, a theme you know nothing about but that could be adapted like GI Joe which means characters, vehicles, and other military stuff.

So yes, do your own theme. Trying to license anything is either very expensive, you need very good connections, or you must have an very high noteriety.

Yes Hasbro has the ownership of the G.I. Joe IP

But to be completely honest, this is what got me "recharged" and motivated by this design. Look at it from MY perspective:

1. I want to design a "combat" game but NOT a "wargame".

2. In RTS the amount of units is rather low, however in your Traditional Deck-Builder, you can have over 500 cards per edition.

3. Designing 500 cards does NOT interest me. Sure Dominion has multiples of the same card... But I came to the conclusion that I DON'T want to design another Deck-Builder. TradeWorlds is my Deck-Builder and it is rather unique in design.

4. Of course a couple of "personal" factors are: Player Count, Time to Play and Number of Unique cards.

5. If want a minimum of 2 to upwards of 8 players who can cooperate and compete against each other. Having two sides is PERFECT.

6. Time to play will be determined by playtesting once I have a prototype.

And lastly...

7. Number of Unique cards!

This is where everything gets complicated. From Printing to die-cutting, to sheets and gsm, to randomization and collation, etc. This is where the reason for using an IP like "G.I. Joe" is INTERESTING. First there is a TON of lore to pour through. So 55 or 54 Joe/Cobra units is NOT impossible. But creating my OWN "Characters" would suck for two (2) REAL REASONS:

1. Nobody will know jack sh!t about who my "characters" are.

2. It's much too difficult a task to invent over 100 unique characters. Sure I can design some (and I have ideas already) but to be truthful ... That's way too much to design.

3. With an IP, I can research the IP and see what works and what does not.

So to ANSWER BOTH of you: "No it's not a RIP of G.I. Joe, I want it to be an actual G.I. Joe GAME!" Secondly if it's going to be COLLECTIBLE ... There needs to be an IP. You know how CCGs and TCGs fail... Why? Because they are all the same thing over-and-over: Fantasy-theme with unknown cards and some NEW universe. If you want your CCG or TCG to succeed, you need a MARKET for the game.

But with a KNOWN IP, the popularity of the IP can help drive sales too!

Anyhow that's my strategy to NOT "get burned" a 2nd time by releasing something UNKNOWN where there is little recognition and no notoriety. For me it's the opposite even if I may be on my 5th or 6th published design.

And so this is VERY MUCH "REAL" ... It's just further down the pipe (so-to-speak). I'm working on the concept... But trying to clarify the printing constraints. If anyone has information or a clue about this topic, please respond to:


Sorry but you are putting too

Sorry but you are putting too much thoughts in the marketting and not enough in the game design. I said it before, stay away from collectible games, even LCG. The most you could be expecting is expansions. But expansions should happen only if the original game release was a success.

So instead of thinking about making 500 cards, think about maybe making 50 cards. I had a discussion about this with another designer when trying to make our own card game, and his view was to have less variety and more copies of the cards, because we don't have the same resources as those big companies.

You know, Domininon did not realeased tons of cards on their initial core game. But they said they had ideas for almost 8 expansions. You want to use that route.

If you want a more computer development perspective, go the agile way. Implement a few functionality and create a working product. If all goes well, add new functionalities into a new working product. How does this translate to game design: Make a game with few cards. If it's fun and it's a commercial success, then expand and add new cards.

Sure if you have an IP things could be more inspiring. Take a look at Sentinels of Multiverse. Many characters are a rip-off a a super hero you know. Wraith is Bat Man, Skyscraper is Ant Man, Guise is Deadpool, etc. So literally look at GI joe material, and make your own out of it. A character like Snake Eyes can easily become another ninja character with another name.

I understand what you mean...

larienna wrote:
Sorry but you are putting too much thoughts in the marketing and not enough in the game design. I said it before, stay away from collectible games, even LCG. The most you could be expecting is expansions. But expansions should happen only if the original game release was a success.

I think this is WHY(?) most independent CCGs and TCGs fail. Because the game may be "good" but with an "unknown IP" and without any better understanding of the market, those game fail because they are generally regarded as being "Un-popular". Most people think people will "consume" anything they design... I know this is UNTRUE because of "Quest Adventure Cards(tm)". I learnt the hard way that a TCG or CCG with unknown Branding would not gain traction in the market UNLESS a "Canadian Distributor" bought into the concept...

My plan was simple: Make the game and sell it to a distributor.

And at that time I only knew of one distributor: Universal Distribution in Saint-Laurent.

Well they were NOT interested in re-selling the TCG/CCG. It was a major flaw to ASSUME that IF I MADE IT, someone would SELL IT. That's not true... I got rejected by the only distributor that I knew and then I went to various stores and TRIED to "sell" my game again without any success.

larienna wrote:
So instead of thinking about making 500 cards, think about maybe making 50 cards. I had a discussion about this with another designer when trying to make our own card game, and his view was to have less variety and more copies of the cards, because we don't have the same resources as those big companies.

True that this makes sense: having a prototype with a FEW cards and PLAYTEST that and demonstrate that it is FUN. Yes this I agree could HELP for sure.

Doing things in piece-meal is a more approachable method. Like say I have 54/55 Joe Characters (and Cobra Characters), I can DESIGN and DEVELOP maybe only 5 of each Faction (10 Cards in total)... And prototype and playtest with those cards ONLY.

larienna wrote:
Sure if you have an IP things could be more inspiring. Take a look at Sentinels of Multiverse. Many characters are a rip-off a a super hero you know. Wraith is Bat Man, Skyscraper is Ant Man, Guise is Deadpool, etc. So literally look at GI joe material, and make your own out of it. A character like Snake Eyes can easily become another ninja character with another name.

I'm sure there is a chance to be sued. You are still plagiarizing the IP. If they can prove enough that you COPIED their "Characters" that would be a violation of their copyright, no doubt about that. I'm betting that Wraith and Guise don't look like Batman and Deadpool (for sure). Otherwise they would have gotten sued for copyright infringement.

Don't worry, I'm not going to DESIGN all 200+ cards in one-shot. But I will get some more information regarding the feasibility of the project.


My little scythe and Hasbro

I would recommend that you reading up on my little scythe. This was originally themed as my little pony scythe. However, it was not possible to to get the IP from, yep you guessed it Hasbro. I recall reading that there was even an inside connection in Hasbro and still could not get the my little pony IP.

Good luck with your game.

My Little Scythe vs. My Little Pony

I think it's a bit "Stretched" the use of the Hasbro IP in that situation. It really wasn't a My Little Pony game TBH. I mean to be REALLY HONEST... It was just a chance to profit on an IP for My Little Pony to TRY to sell more games.

My Little Pony Scythe ... Just doesn't make any sense. Is it Scythe or is it My Little Pony???

But thank you for sharing... I appreciate the feedback. Right now I am in-process with "Crystal Heroes" (CH) and have just received the corrected Game Tiles from "The Game Crafter" (TGC). The last order from TGC came without any Game Tile fixes (omitted in the order) so TGC had to print and send me express those items since they were not included with the original order which was express as well.

I just did a NEW playtest, I've done a ton of playtest simulations (me vs. me) and there really isn't any issues with the game as far as I can tell. This last playtest, Player #1 won by gathering 3 Chaos Crystals but had he not collected the 3rd Crystal, Player #2 would have won by collecting his lord's Fervor! So it was a close match even if the game ended in the 8th Round!

Is there a WAY to compute ODDs for a single "chase" card?

I'm in need of someone GOOD with MATH! Hehehe. I have a specific MATH problem that has to do with ODDs. And this problem is a "real issue" because it makes it so that my plate design needs to WORK with the correct ODDs.

Here are some FACTS:

1. Joe Faction Character cards either 54 or 55.
2. Same for Cobra Faction.

This puts the "common" cards at 108 or 110 cards. Depending on who and what paper is used. Not a big difference and is a manageable change (design for 55 and cut one card from both Factions if 54).

3. "Chase" Card.

What I know is that there should be ODDs here. But I don't know or understand HOW to choose the cards for the correct sequencing.

A. Category I: 18 cards
B. Category II: 18 cards
C. Category III: 18 cards
D. Category IV: 18 cards
E. Category V: 36 cards

How do I compute ODDs for these various Category of "Chase" cards???

Like D. 1:24 or C 1:12, etc. I'm not quite sure HOW to do this. I know 1:24 is an ODDs based randomization, but how do I compute this???

I tried to use a SPREADSHEET and put 100 packs and do 1:24 as of Card #4 so:

4, 28, 52, 76, 100

And then I did the same thig for 1:12 as of Card #3 and I only get 9 out of 100 which is 1:12 out of 108.

Right now ... It just doesn't seem to WORK. Anyone with some ideas on HOW to compute ODDs or maybe how to use a SPREADSHEET to distribute the ODDs in sequences...?

I'm trying ... I'm just not getting the right results. Thoughts???

I am finishing a stats math

I am finishing a stats math class this semester, so the content is fresh in my memory. I am looking at your numbers and I don't really understand what you want to acheive. It seems related to picking cards in various pools.

Most probability problems can be solved with

Basic (Multi use) : n^m
Permutation (In order, one time use): n!
Combinations (no order, One time use): n!/ (r!(n-r)!)
Arrangements (In order, one time use): n!/(n-r)!

The variables are:
n: Number of elements
r: Number of items to select in the pool.
m: number of times

How many bits permutation can a byte of 8 bits have: 2^8
How many words of 5 letters can I make with letters ABCDE: 5!
I want to draw hand of 5 cards from a pool of 25, how many hands can I get: 25!/(5!(25-5)!)
If the order of those cards matter: 25!/(25-5)!

Some calculator can do those formulas for you. The buttons are marked as: nCr for combinations, and nPr for permulations (which includes arrangements).

Probabilities is always a fractions: Number of desired elements / Number of possible elements.

EX: So rolling 5+ on 1D6: The number of desired elements is 2: You can roll a 5 or a 6. The number of possible elements is 6: There is 6 faces on the dices:

2/6 = 1/3. That is the probability to roll 5+.

This is ODDs based. Not permutations or combinations.

For every 1 in 24 packs (1:24) you get a "Category IV" (D) card. This rareness is what drives the collection and sale of packs. I think I have a spreadsheet that allows me to figure things out. But I ran out of columns, so I needed to take a NEW approach.

1 in 24 for 18 cards = 432 Packs in total.

432 / 108 = 4 (exactly!)

So to print (54 cards/sheet) that's 8 sheets (4 x 2).

I don't know if the other odds will hold true... It's a matter of "Trial and Error". It's a very complicated spreadsheet (For sure). If I ran out of columns in this last TRY... I have to use more ROWS now and that should help. I believe it will take four (4) cut tables (I had to cut them at 108 and will have 4 tables in total to allocate sufficient cards in the set).

As for the MATH, IDK. It's all ODDs based. I just need ONE (1) SET of 8 sheets and that should determine the PLATES needed to print the game. As of today I think it will be 12 sheets in TOTAL. I'm still not sure, I have to complete the spreadsheet to see if it works or not.

Anyhow I don't know how this works with "combinations" or "permutations". Like I said it's all ODDs based. For example:

D. Category IV = 1:24 = 8 sheets or 432 Booster packs (but only 18 have this card category). So 1 in every 24 packs has a Category IV "chase" card. That's pretty significant because it means some cards are harder to get/collect.

These are the HARDEST to collect and are obviously COOL to play with too!

So it's good for the collectors and of value for the players. You don't need ALL 18 Category IV (D) to play. Maybe 1 or 2 only... But if you want to collect the ENTIRE set... That's more of a challenge and is pricier unless you find people to TRADE with or BUY/SELL for exchanges.

Did I explain myself correctly???

Here's what I mean

The Top Table is a 100-sized Table. The Middle Table is a 108-sized Table. And the Bottom Table is a Work-In-Progress. It's not really working out as I had planned. The Top & Middle Tables are identical (except for the last 8 entries).

The Bottom Table, I have just started to work on it. It's a pain in the butt... Because I fudged some values in the other tables (not perfect but works generally so-to-speak)!

This is HOW I am computing my Distributions... This seems like the most LOGICAL method. I don't know or anything better TBH. But it gives you an idea of HOW I am working out the distributions.


Some additional thoughts

The last entry (216) is a "fudged" position. The distribution is 4.5 for 1:24 odds. It is on position 20 out of 24. And if one (1) Table has 5 entries, the logical conclusion is that the OTHER Table should have 4 entries. Why?

5 + 4 = 9 / 2 = 4.5 (Which is 108 / 4.5 = 24)

So this method and the odds that it presents are "fudged". It generally looks not too bad EXCEPT when you get to over 100 entries (that 101 to 108 or 209 to 216)... That's the messed up part of the sequence. I've taken loose liberties at the ends to MAKE IT WORK.

I don't know how else to compute these odds. If someone has a BETTER method, please feel free to share.


One small comment

Those two (2) Tables (108 entries) represent FOUR (4) Plates. So generally speaking 8 Plates is going to be 4 Tables (2 x 4 = 8)... It's not SUPER complicated, it's just more complex than I had initially thought of. And a Booster Box only has 100 packs... So even if the plates go up until 108 ... The Booster Box cut-off is at one hundred.

How many copies of each category to include on 8 sheets

So let's look at the 8 sheet set, which as you mentioned has a total of 432 cards. You have sets of 18 cards that you want to have a 1:24 or 1:12 odds of drawing and a set of 36 cards that I am going to say that you want a 1:12 odds of drawing.

So to get a 1:24 or 1/24 odds of drawing a category IV card, divide 432/24 to get 18, multiple 1/24 by 18 to get 18/432, so there should be 18 cards out of 432 to produce 1: 24 odds. So the set of category IV cards would have to be included once per 8 sheets

Do the same process with 1:12 or 1/12. Divide 432/12 to get 36, multiple 1/12 by 36 to get 36/432, so there should be 36 cards of 432 to produce 1:12 odds. So the category(s) with 18 cards would need to be included twice per 8 sheets. This makes sense that having twice as many cards would double the chance of drawing them.

For the category V (which I assumed and shoehorned 1:12 odds on) do the same calculation as above. Divide 432/12 to get 36 multiple 1/12 by 36 to get 36/432, so there should be 36 cards of 432 to produce 1:12 odds. So this category would need to be included once per 8 sheets, since it consists of 36 cards.

Good luck with your game.

Personally, I would use the

Personally, I would use the LCG technique and not randomize anything.

Or my personal favorite is to have X unique stand alone playable decks which contains a portion of the cards from the collection. But when you buy all decks once, you get all the cards in the collection with the maximum number of duplicates.

This way, if you are a casual player, you can only buy 1 deck and play the game. But if you want to have all the cards, you can buy all the decks in the collections and you'll have everything.

In that case, you generate X copies of each card depending on the max number of duplicates you want in your game, then distribute then over Y decks.

You know what I have heard???

Gamers saying that LCG is boring. There is no element of surprise and no element of chance (or randomness) when you buy LCG "expansion" packs/decks. The word on the street is that LCG is just not offering anything for "collectors" (in terms of value of goods).

Whereas some of the modern Collectible Cards (and I'm drawing on Hockey Cards), they offer that bit of randomness and unpredictability. Buyers develop their own strategies and system when buying to get better cards... I personally had my own system which worked pretty decent. I managed to sell duplicates for $70 CAD for only 4 cards (yes they are valued at $80 CAD - but still best to sell and helps to buy for the missing cards...) and only spent $20 CAD extra to get a TON of missing Inserts/Chase cards.

Like I said, for PLAYERS you may opt to include 1 or 2 Air Support Units but it's for PLAYING the game. Meanwhile collectors will need to TRADE or BUY/EXCHANGE a lot of "Chase" cards to complete their set. Collecting everything is COSTLY. But PLAYING the game with a few cards here-and-there is relative affordable. Plus you can get deals from Collectors who just have an excess of "core" cards for relatively inexpensive price allowing the Collectors to buy more Packs to get more "Chase" cards.

Again nobody is interested in LCG games. I know, I've been exploring this and most players feel like it's boring. There is little to no incentive for people who like to COLLECT things, because LCGs are not collectible. They are designed for players to have a lower price point than CCGs or TCGs. But again without any incentives except to collect EVERYTHING in one purchase. Nothing too very exciting UNLESS you really LIKE the LCG Game your are buying into!

If you've never COLLECTED ANYTHING in your life... Well then maybe you won't understand the joys of collecting. But if you collected pennies, stamps, books, toys, games, cards, coins, comic books or other collectible content (like NES or SNES Video Games - @larienna)... You'll understand the joys of ADDING "to your collection". Could be through a Trade or a Purchase... Either way... It's FUN growing your collection and when you have people you can BUY from ... That also is cool too!

I used to be an avid collector... I've collected (in the past) a lot of what you see in that list above. My best memory with my Daddy was going to different Couche-Tards to buy E.T. Movie Cards (and trying to collect the 100 cards in that collection). I don't know where those cards went... A lot of stuff that I had has gone missing... IDK who has been stealing it. But someone has. So much for honesty in the home that I was living at. #2 on THE LIST.

And it's also good for Gamers too...

Like I said, there are multiple ways of buying cards... But 20 packs for $55 CAD is really affordable to PLAY the game. It's about the average cost for many board games out there. But you can SEE how "affordable" this method of randomization is for PLAYERS.

Collectors that's another story.

If it builds a wide-network of people selling "cores" for "Chase/Insert" cards that too is possible. The model that I have seen is "3 cores" for "1 core" of your choice. "Chase/Inserts" should be "3 Chase" for "1 Chase" and for the hardest category (1:24) "2 chase" for "1 Chase" of your choice.

How do you establish pricing? IDK... Someone figured out the VALUE of MANY of the "Chase/Insert" cards and sold on eBay. And that drives stores too... Or people selling online too (via Facebook and Paypal). It kinda creates it's OWN "Market" and that's pretty neat to experience too.

So there is a HUGE UPSIDE. The downside is that it is COSTLY and requires an initial investment to get the game going. In any event, the prospect of making and bringing something like this TO MARKET feels "exciting". Not because of the revenue potential ... But because you've gotten yet another game in another way OUT-TO-MARKET and into the hands of gamers (and collectors alike).

Very interesting TBH!

Thanks Fri, I understood ... But not 100% certain I am correct

Fri wrote:
So let's look at the 8 sheet set, which as you mentioned has a total of 432 cards...

Thank you for that bit of mathematics. Makes sense. The problem I am having is that suppose on 8 sheets you should have 18 cards. And you have as a total 8 x 54 = 432 cards. 432 / 24 cards = 18 cards (1:24 or once per sheet).

If I do this for 1:12 odds. Again we 432 / 12 = 36 cards. So this means on the 8 sheets, I have to repeat ALL cards "twice" (as per your explanation and I agree).

If I do this for 1:8 odds. This time we have 432 / 8 = 54 cards. So this means on the 8 sheets, I have to repeat ALL cards "three" times.

Lastly if I do this for 1:4 odds. We have 432 / 4 = 108 cards. So this means on the 8 sheets, I have to repeat ALL cards "six" times.

108 + 54 + 36 + 18 = 216 cards ... Leaving 216 cards (50%)

Here's where I am not sure about the remainder of the MATH...

432 / 6 = 72 cards. 72 / 12 = 6. Means that on the 8 sheets, I have to repeat ALL cards "six" times.

72 x 3 = 216... Or 50% of the cards.

216 / 36 = 6 ... So this means that the "Base" cards are each repeated "six" times on the 4 sheets. Now while this is true, the 36 cards and divided into three (3) sets of 12 cards each (3 x 12 = 36).

216 / 12 = 18(?) What does this mean???

How do I get the number of duplicates per sheet (using 50% of the cards)???

The one thing that I understand an APPRECIATE... Is that 50% of the "Chase" cards are going to be "Base" structures. That is really good odds. So 1:2 that you will be getting a "Base" (Joe, Cobra or Common).

18 subsets

Let's add some labels to these numbers to understand them better. There are 216 cards and 12 card/subset. So if you divide 216 cards/(12 cards/subset) => 216*1/12 cards*subsets/cards => 18 subsets.

To look at if different way, suppose that each of your subsets consisted of the cards ace,2,3..queen but were three different suits. There would be 18 aces, 6 of each suit. 18 2s, 6 of each suit. Ect.

Quote: But 20 packs for $55

But 20 packs for $55 CAD is really affordable to PLAY the game.

It depends what is the minimal number of packs required to play the game. I would not pay 55$ as an entry cost to a game where I have zero control on since it's a CCG.

It might be a personal preference, but this is why I like closed game, because I can get control over the game and change the rules to my taste. I like control in my life in general.

Finally, I might be repeating myself, but it was been discussed here in bgdf in the past that CCG and LCG, it's a thing for huge companies. Because you cannot play the game on your own, in order o find partner, the game must be extremely popular and wide spread. You cannot achieve this as an independent game designer. The only solution is to have a digital game with an AI (Online multiplayer leads to the same issue, less worse, but same problems).

So it's always better to have a good game, playable out of the box, without deck construction, that you can play anywhere, anytime with anybody, than having a collectible game with deck construction. Again, the only solution is if you go digital single player, in that case, the presence of AI and the lack of resources required to produce that kind of game is not an issue anymore.

I do have a CCG style game idea based on duel masters on my check list, and I am considering going digital for this one for the reasons mentioned above.

Minimal amount may be less than 20...

I think you could get away with 10 to 12 Packs @ $2.75 CAD + 15% Tax. So about $32 to $38 CAD (under $40 bucks). I don't know what you mean by "zero control". Either you buy packs or you don't... Nobody is screwing with your head to buy more... Plus you can TRADE with Friends if the game supports 2/4/6/8 Players.

I personally like developing my own "system" for buying packs. And I do have one for this type of CCG. I really don't know what you mean by "control in your life"... Because you can get hit by a bus while walking on the sidewalk and you are done. Or you can be crossing the street and some stranger misses the stop or goes through it (like the young Ukrainian Girl who was killed - hit & run).

So I don't know what kind of CONTROL you are talking about. You mean you are very susceptible to being "tempted" into buying "just one more pack"??? I think many people have that "syndrome" and it is normal... So you spend an extra couple bucks, here-and-there! No biggie.

I know of a store that BUYS AND SELLS collectibles. And believe me they are so cool that they also do TRADES. No doubt this type of CCG would be ideal for them... Magic Shops probably NO. Unless there is a Pokemon Day and then maybe G.I. Joe could be "exciting" (random chance buying packs). Make some kind of event to play could make some sales (mini-tournament, some kind of prizes).

Like I said, collectors would get excited. They're in their late 30s to 40s and remember the Comics, Cartoon Show and Figurines. Which were rather small in size but cool to COLLECT! Not the original JOES in the 70s which were larger than Barbie Dolls. The ones the same size in the 80s as their Star Wars counterparts.

You'll have to explain to me the whole "closed game" vs. "control" vs. ??? I'm not so impulsive... But I get the FUN of buying packs. Like I said you can get away with probably 10 to 12 Packs to PLAY. And what I have researched is that to buy a GOOD Starter Deck in Magic is $50 to $100. But I have seen some Battle Decks using USED Cards being sold for about $10 USD plus shipping from the USA (sold online).

Anyhow ... please explain the bit about "control" ... I don't generally have these kind of "issues". But that's me and I'm my own type of person. I was brought-up to be kind and respectful of people. And to hold my tongue and not say anything bad about people. To generally understand someone they say you need to walk a mile in their shoes. I take it one step further and say if you don't know someone treat them with respect. Instead of forcing people to earn respect, I don't forgive as easily. Does that make me bitter... Not really. Some people you can just do fine with them not being a part of your life... An Annex here-or-there isn't the end of the world TBH.

Bottom line: I'd rather spread kindness and help people (as best as I can...) With the things that we do (as Game Designers).


Note #1: But hey that's just me... I'm not suggesting anyone do any less than what they believe. @Soulfinger (who hasn't been online for a couple of years) said that I worry too much about what people think. So I guess generally speaking as the Admin, I try to accommodate as many people as I can... It's the way that I am wired (I guess)!

By control, I mean control on

By control, I mean control on the game I own. For example, let's take a deck building game in general. If there is a card I don't like, I can just set it aside and not play with it. I have the control over my game.

In a CCG, I don't have control on the pool of cards I will be able to play with, unless all players agrees not to use certain cards. It was the case in MTG years ago, players found circle of protections and the channel card too abusive, so they agreed to play without those cards. Duel Masters also had an abusive game breaking cards once.

Some years ago, I tried to pre-design duel masters deck to make the game playable out of the box without any deck building from the user. But doing so, I am stuck with the cards I could collect as I do not have access to the entire card collection. Therefore not getting the optimal experience.

In a CCG, the game is shared between players. It's like an MMORPG in video games. I need to consider the others when playing my game.

Also, we currently have a shortage of resources, inflation, upcoming war, Energy crisis and many other troubles ahead. Some people are starving right now because they cannot buy food. So If they have a choice between buying multiple packs of cards to maybe have a chance to play a game if they manage to find other players, or just pay once for a small 10-30$ game they could play with anybody, the choice will be quite obvious. They will buy food first, and if they can afford it, maybe the second option.

You know what I cannot figure out???

If you watch documentaries about the 2nd World War and the people of Poland who were put in Death Camps and forced to flee Poland and even Europe... These people were starving on much of their journeys... And yet there were people FILMING these people in dire circumstances. Those journalists who were granted access within war zones and considered to be conflict-neutral ... How were they getting food and water ... When all the refugees were NOT!?

So someone had to be feeding the journalists while the war was on-going and they were as I said "conflict neutral" (they were not on any side ... Just there to report on the FACTS). But the rest of the populace were left to whatever means that they had left to get food and water...

It would seem "heartless" to feed yourself while hundreds of other people are starving or at the very least suffering from mal-nutrition. I know it's kind of a situation like you or them...! Like IF you don't feed yourself and you don't have enough to feed everyone.

Anyways those kind of "strange" happenings in how there seems to be a two-tier system in-play. I've wondered about this since Family had me watch a video about women and their children from Poland who travelled from Poland to Africa (exiled from Russia).

That's not always TRUE TBH

larienna wrote:
...or just pay once for a small 10-30$ game they could play with anybody, the choice will be quite obvious...

The problem is that there are few $10 to $30 games out there. One fact is that most people like playing BIG GAMES. What do I mean? Look at any and ALL the games that Jamey Stegmaier (Stonemaier Games) publishes and you'll notice a BIG "board" is the center-piece. Why? Because people like BIG GAMES! They love the attractiveness of the board and in some cases like Scythe, you could combine two Boards into one MASSIVELY HUGE Board (2/3 bigger)!

Secondly most small games don't get the visibility they deserve ... Because quite frankly there are a TON of medium to small games each with different amounts of quality and development.

If you look ONLINE and do a quick search (at least from my own)... You'll find games in the $30 to $80 USD mark. That's $40 to $110 CAD + 15% Tax = $46 to $126 CAD in terms of pricing... So recession or hard times ... The price of games is going up. The cost of food is also going up too... (Inflation).

I'm not saying there are not SALES and DISCOUNTS ... There are many games with all kinds of rebates too...

What I am trying to say is people with Families and two incomes with children and all ... Are still making good living and have disposable income for things like Games and Toys for their kids and maybe Board Games for the Family.

And LASTLY... I have an LCG-like product: "Crystal Heroes" (CH). It comes with Fixed Booster Packs of 16 Game Tiles. You need 4 Packs for 4-Players but the Base Game comes with 2 Packs for 2-Players. What's the DEAL??? Well like yourself, I wanted to lower the investment in the initial game. If Players like the 2-Player Game ... Well maybe they'd want to buy a couple more packs for the 4-Player Game which is Tactically "different" than the 2-Player game. I'm not saying that the rules are any different... It's just that certain Actions will be more "useful" in a 4-Player Game vs. the 2-Player Game.

So I already have a kind of LCG with Fixed Booster in Development.

I'm looking for a Publisher to pick-it-up and take it to the NEXT LEVEL. We'll see... Hopefully someone likes it and decides it's worth developing the game further... TBD.

Therefore I am already engaged with a product that is LCG-like with Fixed 16 Game Tile Boosters. What a Publisher will do with this IDK!? Will they decide to go with a 4-Player Box and just publish extras every year (more 4 Booster Packs or 1 Booster Box with sufficient tiles for 4-Players)... TBD! There are big decisions to be made ... And I'm leaving them up to the Publisher.

In any case, we'll see what happens with that design (CH). I hope it finds a good Publisher interested in continuing the Brand for many future years... There is the potential as there are NINE (9) Races and I've only explored like 2 in the First Booster and 1 more in the Second Booster (which never got made due to the high cost of art and the lack of wanting to invest too heavily into the concept without someone interested in the work).

Because people like BIG

Because people like BIG GAMES!

I think that is a false statement. Some prefer small, some prefer big, and some don't have any preference.

Gloomhaven, Frosthaven, Kingdom Death, Zombicide, etc.

If you check the top grossing games on Kickstarter, you will see very Familiar names even if you know very little about the games themselves. And most of those games are BIG PRODUCTIONS with BIG BOARDS and many Miniatures. The ONE (1) exception to this rule is "Exploding Kittens". Here, take a look for yourself:

Do I think the store space is different... Yes. Because some stores have more variety. So in that context ... There is small, medium and large games in places where it's ONLY Board & Card Games (well MOSTLY).

MtG shops or stores that cater to Magic Players... Have limited shelf space and from my experience they have mostly BIG Games. Yes some smaller ... but limited.

I recently was (not) surprised that another Game Shop closed ... This one was in a local Mall. I guess the HIGH PRICE for rent drove them out-of-business. Too bad... There aren't too many Game Stores around, so seeing another one close is a bit disheartening.

But I understand your impressions ... I'm just going by what SELLS. And BIG Productions seem to do very well.

Also one other COMMENT: LCGs are copyright Fantasy Flight Games (FFG).

So you cannot use the term LCG in whatever you plan on making. I created the XTG3 designation as an open "alternative" to games "designed for expansion".

The GOAL is when you see the XTG3 LOGOs, you know that this game was designed so that the creator or fans could release more content for the game. Of course as of Today, the major contributors to the XTG3 designation are TradeWorlds and its expansions.

Anyhow enough about that. You may get the impression that BIG GAMES are NOT popular ... I offer examples from the KS scene which demonstrate the opposite. Even Scythe is on that list with $1.8M USD (in position #115). And BTW it should come as no surprise that Miniatures are often accompanied by larger boards and require larger playing surfaces too.

I know when you go to a real FLGS... They sell a variety of games. But those places that are "hybrid": Toys & Games or Books & Games or Magic & Games ... Usually carry the larger format games. Again this is only my POV. I know there are many places where this is not true, I'm just citing places near to where I live in Montreal ...

Kick starter is not the

Kick starter is not the entire board game market.

Kick starter is very likely to have big games, because most of those projects would be hard to justify the investment for a conventional publishing.

A publisher will not take the risk to finance a huge 200$ game. But if there is enough Kick Starter supporters, then they have proof that the project can be funded.

On the other hand, if somebody publish a small 50 cards card game, he might not need to go through kick starter. He could either self finance, print on demand or use a publisher.

You make a good point...

I guess, I get the impression that a LOT of people prefer BIG Production over smaller games. Tradewars had a very "broken" distribution model. It's concept was that everyone would have their OWN "Box of Cards" and each player would bring his box to the table to play.

Well, now, you can't imagine how BAD that was as a concept. TradeWorlds is an ALL-ENCOMPASSING game with over 500+ cards in the Vanguard, Tactician and Bravado pledge levels. It's from 1 to 4-Players and now features asymmetric powers. It's a massive production and is in that PREMIUM level of content.

That was Mike's vision on how to take it from something SMALL and not well suited for the market, into something more streamlined.

You are correct, most FLGSs have a variety of games. I'm just so used to going to "Tour de Jeux" and seeing Dominion selling at $49.99 CAD. Or Scythe FR at $139.99 CAD. Or SmallWorld at $74.99. And a lot of the Evergreen Games that are "not small".

Perhaps it's just the impression I get from visiting most Game Stores.

I don't disagree with you... But when I look at the Evergreen games in stores, most of them are not "small games". Yeah sure if I make my way further into the stores maybe there are smaller games to be had... But I get the impression that most of those "popular" games are SOLD in larger boxes.

Like I said, you make a good point ... But it's the impression that I get that leads me to believe that your average Evergreen game is fancier in presentation and offers more eye candy to the customer.


Note #1: And some games have BIG Boxes with limited content inside. I think back to older games like "The game of Life" which didn't come with a Quad-Fold Board (only bi-fold)...

IDK, I have a Small Stout Box for "Crystal Heroes" (CH) and while everything FITS into the box nicely... The SMALL-ISH box just doesn't IMPRESS "anyone" TBH. Sure the Box Art is "NICE" ... It's just this SMALL box that doesn't carry much weight in terms of appearing to be "grandiose" or awe-striking.

Now that you mention some

Now that you mention some FLGS, "Tour de jeux" down town have shelves in the center that only contains small games.

Years ago, when I went to "Le valet de coeur", there where shelves almost going to the ceiling with small card games. There would probably have hundreds of different games in there. I don't say they they are all good games, but smaller games is a thing.

I even made a geeklist in BGG called "Deep and small games". People made ton of suggestions and I think it became my most popular geeklist. The max size of the box to be an accepted game was a FFG small box dimensions (ex: rune age and elder sign)

Even myself, who tries to reduce the size of my collection and the space it consume, I am more fascinated by small games. Microcosm could be one of those fascinating game that has less than 50 cards. I still love those square 12"x12" boxes, they stack well. But Rune age and Elder sign deliver a good game experience without oversized boxes.

Like I said in another post, small simple games seems harder to design. So if I had to design a game, I would go a bit bigger. But in another thread, I also explained that bigger games, does not make the game more fun. Too small could lead to fluff (but some people like fluff), to big leads to over production. So it depends on the type of game you want to make.

Lately, I learned that the majority of people cannot read. So my idea years ago of making a game with rules not exceeding a page was not a bad idea after all. This would not be recommended if you are aiming at mass audience. My stock market game could fit that description, there rules could fit on a page and it's simple enough to be played by anybody.

Hmm... All about the game

See where you see "promise", I see "horrible failure". And that's not anything of yours, I'm talking about my "Crystal Heroes" (CH). Essentially the game boils down to twelve (12) Game Tiles per Player (2 or 4-Players only), some tokens, some game pads, a dry erase pen and a pouch of gems. That's it.

The Box that I have now ... Is a Small Stout Box from "The Game Crafter" (TGC).

Everything fits "nicely" and it's a very COMPACT "design". But that REALLY and HONESTLY "scares me". Right now I have two (2) Booster Packs OPEN and two (2) Sealed. Just for presentation purposes and what a potential Publisher might see as an opportunity to do something with the game.

I don't imagine what the product CAN BE... Because it is NOW in its most MINIMALIST form as possible. I'll leave that to the Publishers to decide IF there is MORE potential in the game (and maybe the rules themselves). Like Mike did with "Tradewars" and transformed it into "TradeWorlds" (TW)... I expect the Publisher to have their OWN "vision" of what the game can be.

Maybe this means a re-haul in the Graphic Art or maybe a different vision for the game (how it could sell and what the approach could be) or maybe it's a different form-factor (that too might be another direction). I really don't know... I'll let the Publisher decide on what THEY want the game to be...

I don't under-evaluate the role of "Development" by Publishers because I have worked with @The Professor (Joe Pilkus) and TBH ... He's taken TW in new directions with the Adversity AI which is a BONUS way of playing solo and it was masterfully done too...

Mike re-designed ALL the Templates, Rulebook(s) and Box to match a self-contained game rather than my mini-box sets from TGC. Together, both he and I, created the Faction Logos (I gave him ideas and he's execute on them to his own liking)... So there was also "Development" done by Mike (the Publisher at that time). And his direction was AMAZING TBH.

So I'm not finished with CH. I realize that in its present form ... It may not sway enough people to the game. Will it be sufficiently memorable ... Are there mechanics that have yet to be explored that may prove useful, IDK?!

I gave my Doctor a copy of TradeWorlds because she has a Teen Son and they sometimes play "games" together. She's been very good to me (as my Doctor) and so I wanted to give her a copy of the game. I also bought sleeves and will be giving them as a Stocking Stuffer. But I've shown Archon (which is dead) and CH (we'll see what Publishers think) and nothing COMPARES to the HUGE TW Box!!!

Maybe CH has a place of a game the size of "Epic Spell Wars of the Battle Wizards: Duel at Mt. Skullzfyre" ... Which is like 8.5" x 11" (like a page of paper) and they maybe make a insert for the game and make it playable 4-Players out-of-the-box... Or design something flexible for Expansion Boxes... IDK. Maybe!

Or establish a limited lifespan for the product and Nine Editions with the various Races/Houses of the game's universe... Again IDK. I definitely THINK there is POTENTIAL... But at this point in time, I really believe that the product needs some "Fresh Ideas" and a new/novel approach.

Maybe it's just me... But it feels like Tradewars 2.0 TBH. (In need of a REAL Publisher)... I just don't see the present product to becoming anything AS-IS!

Perhaps that's because I doubt myself or that I under-value the game. Maybe it's my insecurities in the product that I've made!? IDK. I just feel it needs someone ELSE's Masterful hands to shape into the perfect product.


Note #1: I didn't mean for this to be an TL;DR Post about CH... It's just because you understand Small Games and I'm still working on them to becoming something BIGGER. (At least in my case)

Inflation and the rising cost of MAKING games!

Don't be fooled... You think you are going to make some "small" game and sell it for $10 to $15 dollars... Guess what? Think again! The cost of MAKING Games has risen considerably since COVID-19 and in some cases DOUBLED the cost of Freight and Fulfillment costs have also "sky-rocketed" and require 80% deposits on the total amount of the fulfillment!

While you may think making "inexpensive" games is possible... The question is can you preserve the low price point as compared to larger games with better margins??? TBH I applaud anyone trying to make affordable games... But what you need to know is that "games" are LUXURY items (not food, shelter or clothing) and therefore will no doubt be more expensive in 2023 than anytime before.

I was discussing this with my Publisher and he says everything is now more expensive than ever before. We are faced with the exorbitant pricing of fulfillment which is much HIGHER than what it used to be in the past.

In addition the UK & EU are taxing people with VAT Taxes for all outside businesses and the rates average out to about 20% the value of the item!!! So while you want to get your game out into the market... The market may be slowly "squeezing" you OUT!

So just be prepared and understand that NOWADAYS NO GAME IS INEXPENSIVE. They all cost money to design, make, ship, stock and fulfill. You'll realize that the real problem is whether or not someone wants to pay $45 USD for a SMALL game or $60 USD for a LARGE one...

Just a bit of a fair warning from someone who is daily in the trenches with regards to pricing and such...


This is why I try to focus on

This is why I try to focus on digital games.

Still, I would be curious if we could calculate the optimal price point for cost and size. For example, the most expensive part in a can of coke is the lid. So making the can taller does not increase much the price of the container and allow selling more liquid, so the profit margin is better.

There is probably the same thing in board games, when small game boxes could be almost as expensive and medium size box, so aiming for a bigger game, might have a better cost/profit ratio. Not sure if the optimal game size could be calculated considering that the content of the game can vary a lot in cost.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Syndicate content

blog | by Dr. Radut