Skip to Content

Overambitious?

6 replies [Last post]
Discord
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969

First a little history about me, I guess. I'm currently in the middle of my first game project, a (roughly) 200 card CCG, also called DISCORD.

DISCORD is loosely derived from M:tG, though with seven "sides" and I've given it more of a stategic feel; you hunt your opponent down through the terrain(land) in play, build structures, etc. I've created the mechanics, color-flavors, artwork and card design myself, and am currently sitting on about 100 cards completed. Wish me luck, btw.

Which brings me to my question. I consider DISCORD my "apprenticeship" game, and once it's finished I'll be starting work on my next game idea, STRIFE.

STRIFE will be a hybrid card/board game. The cards will likely be collectible, with basic decks available either with the boards or everything seperately. Essentially the boards are different sized grid-maps of a medieval city(small boards for 2 players, larger boards for longer games or more players). I'd like STRIFE to include the following features:

* 2-9 Players
* No luck or randomization beyond the cards you draw.
* Only one variable to keep track of, Gold.
* Hugely minimized "manascrew/manaflood" scenarios.
* Nine unique Factions, each with a number of different playstyles.
* The ability for each player to recruit specific characters and place buildings.
* Players and characters able to possess items, suffer ailments, and move around the map, interacting with other characters and buildings.
* Characters able to be promoted to superior characters under the right conditions, with at least four tiers of "levels".
* Villainy checks on each player/character that effectively run them out of town(remove them from game) if they become too evil.
* Difficult to actually "kill" players, and virtually impossible to "rush" them in the RTS sense....so in a nine player game, it's possible all players will still be active when a player wins the game.
* That being said, one player might be incarcerated in jail, another might be in hiding in the woods, another might be possessed by demons, etc....though none of these are necessarily "final".
* A rich world of nobles, beggars, thieves, guards, wizards, priests, courtesans, demon-summoners, and merchants.

Now....though I've only done very basic theory on all of the above, I _believe_ I have simple(well, relatively) mechanics to handle everything. So...just asking if this idea sounds feasible....or does this all sound entirely too complicated and overambitious?

Discord

doho123
doho123's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/21/2008
Overambitious?

Quote:
Now....though I've only done very basic theory on all of the above, I _believe_ I have simple(well, relatively) mechanics to handle everything. So...just asking if this idea sounds feasible....or does this all sound entirely too complicated and overambitious?

Nothing is too complicated and overambitious as long as you are working on something that you consider to be fun. Or at least, meeting some sort of target goal you have in mind. YOu can only be as ambitious as you want to be!

Now, if you are asking about there being a market for said game, that is probably another question. There are plenty of niches for super complicated games; you just have to make sure that the complications are understandable and the "user interface" of the game is as streamlined as possible.

Jpwoo
Jpwoo's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2009
Overambitious?

The only part that sounds overambitious is the 2-9 player goal.

A game of the complexity of say Magic, played with 9 would have lethal downtime. A game with the complexity of War might play fast enough for 9 but could get tediuous with 2.

The only CCG I have enjoyed with more than 4 was magic, and we played overlord, so it was essentially 3 separate games with entangled outcomes.

Discord
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Overambitious?

Jpwoo wrote:
The only part that sounds overambitious is the 2-9 player goal.

A game of the complexity of say Magic, played with 9 would have lethal downtime. A game with the complexity of War might play fast enough for 9 but could get tediuous with 2.
Ahh...I should also have mentioned that there's no player turns....which hopefully will alleviate the many-players problem.

Essentially there's four phases per round. Dawn/Day/Dusk/Dark.
Dawn/Dusk are essentially "upkeep"/bookkeeping and should be pretty fast.
Day/Dark are the main phases, and are fairly identical except for obvious restrictions/bonuses for certain cards.

The main phases work somewhat like poker...active player either makes a play or passes...if everyone passes, moves to next phase. if someone makes a play, then other players can respond or pass, etc.

Whether this fixes the problem or not I won't be able to tell until playtesting, but hopefully it will improve on a 7-phase per each player turn system.

Discord

Julius
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Overambitious?

I thought I was overambitious with my robot fighting board/card game with 450 unique cards. I'll say thinking them up was pretty mentally taxing, but cutting them out was the hard part :)

Some things I had to worry about was balancing a bunch of resources. Heat, Power, Weight, Movement Speed, Attack Range, Attack Damage, Armor Points, and slots.

Some of these resources are fixed. Your legs limit your carrying capacity, and thus the total weight of other parts. Your power plant produces a fixed amount of power. Parts that generate heat lose it at a fixed rate per round. Armor points (for each part) are balanced based on other factors.

I will say that playtesting will be your best friend. Some things came up in playtesting that I had never thought of. Things I thought were good ideas turned up to be completly too complex to play with.

Best of luck, and remember nothing is ever too ambitious!

Scurra
Scurra's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2008
Overambitious?

Discord wrote:
Jpwoo wrote:
A game of the complexity of say Magic, played with 9 would have lethal downtime. A game with the complexity of War might play fast enough for 9 but could get tediuous with 2.

Ahh...I should also have mentioned that there's no player turns....which hopefully will alleviate the many-players problem.
[...] The main phases work somewhat like poker...active player either makes a play or passes...if everyone passes, moves to next phase. if someone makes a play, then other players can respond or pass, etc.
Um, so there are player turns... :-) Anything which involves one player taking an action and other players being able to respond may not have "downtime" in the sense that you are waiting for everyone else to go before you can, but will have lengthy pauses as players work out if they can respond at all, what they can respond with, and whether they should respond. And as the board position becomes more complex, these decisions become less and less obvious.

Now in theory you can say "well, I'll just impose a fast time-limit" - if you don't respond within 5 seconds, then you've lost your chance. I would suspect that this simply won't work. CCGs are quite unusual in that respect, in allowing other players to interrupt or respond to an action, and they can get away with it because of the relative simplicity of the interruption (I have a "counterspell" which can be used in this circumstance, so it only applies when this circumstance arises) and even then, the delays when playing in a game with a control deck are noticeable.

However, I will join in with everyone else and note that nothing is ever too ambitious. Just remember the basic rules: your cool ideas won't work, your favourite parts will have to be taken out, and that it will always take much longer than you think, even when you take this into account... ;-)

Discord
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Overambitious?

Scurra wrote:
Um, so there are player turns... :-)

Well, yes...but not in the Magic: the Gathering sense of player turns, which was what we were discussing.

As noted, my method works to alleviate the problem, not solve it outright. Time will tell to what degree it actually works.

Scurra wrote:

However, I will join in with everyone else and note that nothing is ever too ambitious. Just remember the basic rules: your cool ideas won't work, your favourite parts will have to be taken out, and that it will always take much longer than you think, even when you take this into account... ;-)

Amen on the last one....DISCORD CCG is taking me forever, but I won't be designing all my own art for STRIFE, so I can at least hope it will be faster. And hopefully, one or two of my cool ideas will sneak in.

Discord

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut