Skip to Content

RPS in a card game

1 reply [Last post]
X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

Since I scrapped that mechanic about elimination. I am going to try to put something together using the vanilla combat of MtG. (But then with my own RPS system)

A simple question:
Where MtG has a, 1 sufficient hit = card is defeated.
I would like to have 2 or 3 or more hits required for defeat.

But, without tracking health.

This means that you can only start killing opponents when you have at least 2 or 3 or more cards.

The reason why I want to do this is to have big tanks with big weapons, not being able to strike down simple soldiers in just 1 hit. Because this would mean that the simple soldiers would die off before there are sufficient on the table to fight back. With health 2, the dying goes half the speed. etc.

What would be the acceptable range of cards needed?


With costs, I have
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 etc.
My old system for the board game had
1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36 etc.
My last system that I tested for my card game had
1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21 etc.

My goal was to have overkill and insufficient firepower, bringing the RPS in the games. For my board game, it is a 100% success. But there is health tracking. For my card game, the first list is a bad idea. After all, I don't want to have health tracking on my cards. Simply an elimination system by comparing 2 numbers.

But I tested my ass off. The system provides RPS, but you need to invest in a lot of cards to pull it even off.

As my favorite example, I have 6 infantry equal to my battle tank. With health tracking, the infantry have a good chance. Even with the second list. 6+5+4+3+2+1 is a dead tank, and in return, the infantry die one by one.

But is there even a way to remove health tracking?
I already tried the double health, then you need more cards. And both sides die to... 1 set each.
But the game never ends this way. It is always a remise with both players standing.
I need a game with both players dying.

Help? Any one?

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Sure, edit a post, but no

Sure, edit a post, but no bumb after editing. -.-
Bumb it is.

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut