I have a deck of cards that players win. There are 95 cards to be won each have a unique number, one of 6 colors, and one of 15 symbols. I want to reward players for certain things, so there are extra points at the end for each color you collect, and for getting symbols in specified combinations.
Any ideas on how to have a scoring incentive based on number? In general I want the higher numbers to be worth more.
It seems ODD that you have 95 cards instead of 90 cards. 15 symbols are NOT divisible by 95 ... but are by 90. And oddly enough they match 6 colors... Are you sure the card count is NOT 90???
I have no clue how this game is played... So the only possible method to score that I can offer and be "agnostic" is (High Card - Low Card = Points).
So if I had a 10 and you had a 9, I BEAT you... but only earn 1 POINT.
That's as simple as it can be. And this ensures that the card "spreads" are respected and turn out to be strategically viable.
Cheers!
Something linear could be used. In principle, it's sort of like a GUTTED RPS.
So what you would have is a BEATs link. Something like this:
Red -> Orange -> Yellow -> Green -> Blue -> Purple -> Red
But no INNER relationships. So ORANGE ONLY BEATS Yellow and is ONLY BEATEN BY Red. If you use the color rainbow... This is EASY to remember.
If there is NO BEATS relationship (Say Blue vs. Red), the the Card Power is what determines the points (High - Low = Points).
Something like this could introduce some COLOR-Play ... And also not OVERWHELM the design with too many relationships to remember (memorize).
Again good luck with your design!
To represent the "relationships" of the GUTTED RPS (Beats relationships), you can use a CIRCLE that goes AROUND ONLY. No inner relationships. And like I said IF you stick to the Rainbow of "colors" it will be rather EASY to figure out what are the "Beats" relationships when playing the game.
Granted "Orange", "Red" and "Yellow" may not be the most "color-blind" friendly colors... They are the easiest to remember without needing a chart or circle in some rulebook, nobody wants to really read.
So there are PROs and CONs when wanting to use the Beats RPS... Cheers!
Having a symbolic link can also help with the exclusive nature of one symbol having power over another, and provide a thematic link of some kind where there originally was none. Sure beats the Uno curse, eh?
EDIT: Here's a recent, upcoming example of what I mean: Gorinto. The symbols on each tile are different, so at a glance you can likely tell which tile is which, even if colour differentiation is an issue.
https://grand-gamers-guild.pledgemanager.com/projects/gorinto/participate/
I must admit that the "concept" is very cool (namely using symbols with the colors to improve visualization). Of course this would greatly help people who are color-blind because they would most probably rely on "symbols" rather than just colors.
But ... IMHO ... Gorinto is a "poor" example. Why? Because I feel like the symbols are much too linguistic. I get it: it is a Japanese writing. And while it does achieve this (theme), it does so at the price of more "obvious" symbols.
I would personally choose SYMBOLS that are more "representative" of the game... And this could be things like "elements" too... All six (6) of them.
Anyways I like the concept... Just not this implementation.
Note: Obviously the symbols need to be more "in-sync" with the design and what the game's theme is. Is it "Fantasy" or is it "Sci-Fi" or is it "Western", etc. That should help (YOUR theme) to determine which are the best symbols for your game.
Yeah... I was unsure what type of game it was... And so could only offer you a general adaptation of a "combat-oriented/duel-type" sort of game.
Okay this is really different than what I was "expecting"... But it's good you made the clarification.
Aside from what you have explained. The WAY I could see such a game to EXIST is by having "secret objective" cards and an "actual" Periodic Table. See I don't think MANY people are sciencey-ENOUGH to figure or know by memory molecules that are common except for the well known H2O, CO2, CO...
But if you have a "Molecule" card which determines what molecule you must secure... Well then MAYBE I have some ideas.
If you DON'T have an "Objectives" card (secret or not) ... Forget it... Only a Chemist will play the game... Not your average Board or Card Gamers.
Please share with us MORE about the game (How it's played, a player's turn, etc.) Because as someone who HATES "Chemistry" and knows very little about your game... I can't offer up any ideas without MORE information.
Cheers!
You could have the numbers displayed along the edge of a card, so that by overlapping them you could come up with a new atomic number, with the primary element being on the top layer.
For example, you might provide bonus points for a player who creates Uranium-238. So they would need the Uranium card in hand, along with any other cards whose atomic numbers can be layered next to one another to create the atomic number 238. This is not addition (who wants to do math, AMIRITE?), it's just matching numbers.
They might have 23 (Vanadium) and 8 (Oxygen). Or they might have 2 (Helium) and 38 (Strontium). Finally, they might have 2 (Helium), 3 (Lithium), and 8 (Oxygen). These three combinations, when layered underneath Uranium, would create the needed isotope and help the player score points.
This way, you're not paying attention to the Group or the Period of the Element, just the numbers.
Hopefully this is useful. :)
The game boils down to a set collection where you are trying to farm stars for elements (all elements are the result of nuclear fusion via stars). Players balance the mass of the star to get it to supernova (the upper half or so of the elements are only generated via supernova) and are also bidding on which elements from the current round they want to get.
The players do have secret objective cards that they are scoring with in the game, and are given a periodic table to check off to keep track of which elements they got.
When the tableau of options is revealed for which elements can be collected the game slowed way down as all the players hunted through their objectives and periodic table to see which elements they cared about more.
I don't mind players taking time to record which elements they won, but I want them to be able to just look at the card and decide if it is valuable to them.
That's why the symbols are there, players don't have to remember which elements are named after Nobel prize winners, they just have to know I have an objective card with on it, and this element shares that symbol.
What I would like to do is give an additional incentive to go after the higher elements that can only be acquired through a supernova (based on the atomic number) but have this incentive be presented in an easy to process paradigm such as "The higher numbers are better" as opposed to something difficult to remember (Bad example: elements 1-19 give 1 point each, elements 20-39 give 2 points each except Krypton which is worth 3 due to being a noble gas...)
Let-off, I like the matching and building idea, but I worry that it strays too far from what I want this game to be, where the stars are the ones creating the elements.
Could you have players use one of the digits to create a straight? Meaning they would start with 1. It could be 1 or 14 or 51 just so long as it had a 1 somewhere. The next card would have to have a 2 and so on. Maybe start with the value that is the square of the number of cards and adjust as appropriate.
 | Hidden Movement: What Makes it Cool? (19) by larienna |
 | Dymino Monsters Update 4-18-2024 (0) by Stormyknight1976 |
| Wizardry Legacy: the Forgotten Academy (12) by larienna |
| TradeWorlds — Tactical Core (3) by questccg |
| Introducing, Jacob! (that's me by the way...) (0) by Jacob |
| Chat GPT: Testing as a design assistant (8) by larienna |
| Winner Announced for the Meta Progression Community Challenge! (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Hi guys ~ Gameland and Yaofish are officially accepting board game design submissions! (1) by questccg |
| A programmer's dilemma (16) by larienna |
| Qubits: a solo trick taking game (9) by Wobt2 |
| Worker placement, Role selection and Action cards: Is it the same thing? (11) by larienna |
| Site Ads and Google Experiments (0) by questccg |
| TradeWorlds — Smuggler's Run (7) by questccg |
| Single Item Shipping at The Game Crafter (0) by The Game Crafter |
| Protospiel Indy 2024 (May 24-26) (0) by The Game Crafter |
| How to avoid being blocked at content creation (10) by questccg |
| Protospiel Indy 2024 (0) by sirvalence |
| In need of some IDEAS concerning a "Battle" System (15) by questccg |
| How to avoid quarterbacking in an adventure game (7) by larienna |
| How complicated could math get? (23) by X3M |
| Can we have gaming ads on this website (7) by questccg |
| Dice Mitigation Challenge - Winner Announced! (0) by The Game Crafter |
 | Delving! - " That is when it hit me, it was starting to feel like other games" (3) by MarkJindra |
| Game Purchase Contract (0) by MarkJindra |
| Blackboard Boogie Board: a bit of a REVIEW... (2) by questccg |
I suppose I should be more open to be clearer with my question. I am making a sciencey game and I would like to use the periodic table for scoring.
The unique numbers are the element's number. The color is it's section in the table (such as transition metals) and the symbols would be for scoring some bonuses such as precious metals, or element's named after nobel prize winners.
I want to give incentives to these multiple paths to victory, and I have good ideas for the colors and the symbols, but I am drawing a blank for the element's number.