Skip to Content

Something between a board and a card game?

126 replies [Last post]
X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

Been talking with my cousin about this.

And I always had some issue's with any of my game designs.

Either, there was too much handling. Or too simple. Or it was too painfully unbalanced.

I tried many games with the RPS mechanics in mind. And I love my proto-type version the most. But it is better suited for a pc game at this point.

So, what if I combine my proto-type version, my public version and my cardgame version in such a way. That the things I had to test out and add. Are sorted out?

Here is my new idea.


I have a board with smaller hexagons than usual. The terrain is now solo. And a number will indicate if a force fits.

The player can have 1 hq and 6 forces. Numbered 1 to 6.

Maybe you already have guessed it, the map now functions more like that of a radar.

A force can either move, or attack.
A move is done for each force, it will be the slowest unit in that force.

The last issue's are with the attack.
The issue will be mentioned soon.

I think an attack is possible at a certain range. Including some, maybe all units. Then, the attack will have to continue until a certain situation is met.

What I mean is that when an attack occurs. Both players pick the force deck.

The deck has cards that are similar to Unit Statistic Cards (USC's). But then really as a deck. There are rules on how big the deck can be. But let's say, each player can have up to 8 decks. A stock deck (to purchase from), an HQ deck, and 6 force decks.
The right deck is chosen for both players(if the HQ attacks or is attack, it is chosen).
There will be 1 counter on the distance the 2 forces have to each other.
The players place the cards on the table in a cover configuration. I keep the 3 lines. But triangles are allowed now. Either way, break to the front line in order to reach something behind.
Both players can either fire, or move. Maybe I arrange something for an assault (I still love that move)
When a move occurs, the distance counter can either be reduced or increased. Only units that have the required attack range, can fire.

The combat repeats until. One or both sides are destroyed. Or the forces are to far appart.

The last issue with this
Once combat is over. The force pieces have not moved on the map itself? Or should I allow this? It would mean that during combat, the force pieces that are not in combat are frozen. And only the 2 pieces that are in combat move on that map. At least, this could allow for some high ground effects or something. Not sure about this, what do you guys think?

As end result.
I have no more action points. Which also costed a lot of handling. I believe my Ogame variant also didn't have these. They instead made use of a salvo mechanic. But I rather refrain of that. But perhaps I still will use it in a way. But it requires a second counter during battle. And it would be reset if the battle ends.

Health tracking will certainly be easier on a card. Simply place counters. Previously, the proto-type was with 20x20mm whiteboard with numbers written on them. But for a card, I could use a clip, or multiple clips, that point to the total damage a card has. But only for when it goes back into the deck. In fact, the deck is only out when a combat happens. And stays out until the combat ends. And a combat can take a long time.

I think I will post on this a bit more in the future. If I get something sorted out.

Cheers, X3M

PS. I do this out of "dissapointments" that I currently

Joined: 01/27/2017

Are you envisioning the "distance between forces" as a number of map hexes, or a more abstract distance within a hex?

If it's inside a hex, then it doesn't make a huge difference if the combat resolves all at once while everyone else is frozen (kinda like Risk or Dragon Dice) or if each force gets a single shot each turn.

If it's across hexes, that can make a big difference. Other units can come into range or leave range during the fight. I'd recommend each side get a fixed number of shots per turn, probably one. If moves/attacks happen smoothly enough, it can start to feel like an RTS video game.

In either case, you'll need some way to track which units have acted or not each turn. Or for a bit more complexity you could put a cooldown counter when it acts (which might even be different for attacking and moving, and even vary by what terrain one moves through), but I can definitely understand wanting to avoid that if it's not a big part of the theme.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
What I want to prevent

Is that the combat resolution is not sufficient or overpowered.

1 attack per round is the same handling as what we do in our prototype game. The pieces fight, then are returned to the map (in this case, a deck).

Health is tracked this time. That is a primairy goal.
I could do the same as my Ogame variant. Which used threshold mechanics (do more damage than the target X in order to destroy it).
But since I want to do health tracking. I cannot have the sides combat till destruction either, without movement

So, a salvo would really be best. Which is multiple attacks in a combat.
My Ogame variant has a salvo of 3 subturn.
The pieces are tapped each subturn when used.
And out of range means, no roll.
But with health tracking, the balance of a salvo will be harder.

A h/d ratio of only 3 might be too short here too. But I could try it out. If it doesn't work, I need to reduce it back to 2...
But if it works, I could experiment with a higher ratio and maybe bigger salvo's.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Minimap and the Cards

I guess, I have to make sure that the map itself will have only 7 pieces per player. The HQ and then 6 forces.

A round can have multiple turns.
A turn can have multiple subturns.

I want to keep in, movement speeds and attack ranges.


Right, so lets summarize the options I have for the mechanics here.

1. Terrain properties:
- There are none.
- A number representing space for a force.
- Space for different possible propulsions.
- Height levels.

Very important to know is that I will not allow a force to split up and come together through multiple rounds. This was possible in my prototype game with the help of action points. I want to scrap the action points.
A force will be completely exhausted after use.

Not sure how deep I want this. But it is of influence on how I choose the combat to be.

2. Actions:
1 per force or hq.
I think that the player has to completely tell the plan it has for a force for that 1 action.

3. Combat:
I really think I should do movement on the board.
If it is within the hexagon only, it makes no sense to be honest.
I have been rethinking and retyping this one post now.

4. Duration of Combat:
After considerations. The maximum duration of a force should be 1 salvo. I think, I want the salvo have a size of 3.


A possible solution that makes sense...?

An attack consists out of a salvo.
I imagine it is like 3 subturns.

Now, when a player can move a force, and/or attack with it. But no matter what the player chooses, a salvo starts at the first subturn. So, if a salvo is 123. And the force moved one time, the salvo portion 1 and 2 are still usable.

This could mean that an assault unit should simply have all damage in the first subturn by design. And moves first, then attacks. Perhaps even move again afterwards. But it is at a price.

And a support unit that has to aim before firing, and has this in the third subturn. Simply cannot fire if the force moved around at all.

If I design the game like this. I am still pondering on how an enemy can respond.
What if the target already spend their action?
Can they still return fire? Probably not.
What if they can return fire, but I give them the option to not do so?
What about the target also gets to move?

Either way, if the target does respond. It should be completely exhausted as well.

So, the player in turn has freedom in which force it will use, if all are still avaiable that is. And the player that is targeted. Has to either simoultainiously do an action with the targetted force, or NOT.
If it is not, it risks to loose a lot of cards.
But if the player does respond. Then this force cannot be used for that round anymore.


The Ogame variant allowed for players to design their unit. If I work with decks, I cannot do this.

A card could contain the following info:

- Name
- Cost
- Maximum Health
- A health bar (for tracking)
- Armor Type
- Armor
- Propulsion
- Movement Speed
- Attack Range
- Damage (per subturn)
- Flavour text
- Special ability text (but I refrain from this in the vanilla)

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
I think, it is still a bit too much

This is regarding to health.

I am not sure how high I can get with 8+, 12+ or whatever.

But I prefer to have a force survive 3 attacks on average.
This means that I need a lot of health tracking.

How to track health on a card that goes back into the deck?
And the health remains as it is???

Edit: the numbers are preferably 2 to 3 digits in this regard.
But at most 3 out of 12 cards are affected in a round.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Alright, the plan solifides

A card could contain the following info:

- Name
- Type (unit,structure/biological,mechanical)
- Cost (1 digit, common 2)
- Maximum Health (1 digit, rarely 2)
- Armor (1 digit, rarely 2)
- Propulsion (Land, Water, Hoover (both), Obstruction, Air (all three))
- Movement Speed (1 digit)
- Attack Range (1 digit)
- Damage+Accuracy (per subturn, value is 9, 12, 16, divided by 37)
- Flavour text (blah blah blah, and more blah)
- Special ability text (but I refrain from this in the vanilla)

Right, the basics again.
I am happy that I am using the H/D ratio of 3. This means that every Movement Speed is +33% on Body and +50% on Weapon.

Not sure what I should do as default costs. But I can copy my prototype in this. Which results in...

Biological Unit
100 Cost
5 Max Health
1 Armor
2 Movement Speed
2 Attack Range
1<5/6> 1<5/6> 1<5/6>
"Your basic light infantry"

Obviously, I need to toy around a bit with the salvo first. Before getting a good grip on the rest.
That 100 as costs is going to be lowered.

As for special abilities...
Basic stuff like, this unit has a different size. And this unit deals +1 damage on biological. Will pose no problem.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Prototype values on threshold mechanic

Right, so I used the prototype values in the above example.

These are 50 for the body and 50 for the weapon for the first tier.
But every tier is multiplied by this 50.
The default movement speed is 2.
The default attack range is also 2, but the accuracy is then 5/6th.
In both cases, a 0 for movement speed and attack range, would result in 30 as value.
An invalid rifleman that can only stab around would cost 60 instead of 100.

When using the threshold mechanic. The tier is not following a lineair system linked to a squared system, any more. But an exponential linked to a higher exponential instead.

1 is 1
2 is not 4, but 3
3 is not 9, but probably 6
4 is not 16, but 9

Things shift, so I need to make a good map of this.
Half tiers can also be used now. Only because the second tier provies us with 3. Thus the 2 is a valid option now.

In the old prototype, we had this 2 as well, but then the 50 would become 70. I never made proper rules for this part.

But we can certainly toy around a bit with 50, 75, 100, 150 and 200.
With 0 as movement or attack range. We get 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120.
The common divider is 15 for the 0. But 25 for the default.

5 in both cases. So, I think that the cost would be 20 for a rifleman. Not 2 or something low. Still, I have to design a lot in order to see what I can do with the cost value. The lower, the better.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
New players

When a new player starts this game. It would have perhaps just a few riflemen. Not 12, let alone 24. But how to solve this? And how to reduce the number of cards in a deck?

Ok, so I got this advice from Kristopher.

Group cards.
However, I am not a fan of this.
What if I add see through cards that tell the player how many cards 1 card is worth.

- Less cards needed, "24" goes down to 2.

- Damage tracking gives limitations. You cannot retreat damaged cards unless you have more of the same.
- Damaged cards also cannot join another group, if one of them is already damaged. Unless you sacrifice 1 in joining the damage together.

- The number of cards of the original allow for additional tactical moves by the player.
- While keeping the damaged card vulnerable, exchange of whole cards is possible.


So, we make groups of 1 card?
What happens? What if the player has only # of a certain card?

1 group will go down triangular.
2 groups will be able to exchange once with each other.
3 groups would allow for 3 lines of cover in 1 force. However only 2 exchanges are possible.

Either way.
With an HQ and 6 forces. The player doesn't need much cards if it has a lot of grouping cards to attach.

Oh, just had another idea. What if 1 card has multiple group cards? This way, we can track damage of multiple cards.

For example, 3 cards are played with a group card of 9.
All cover positions are taken.
An unit gets damaged and exchanges with the support group.
A second unit gets damaged and also exchanges with the support group. But one had 2 damage, the other suffered 3 damage. So a group of "1" is created.
A see through card with 1 for groups and a see through card with 3 for damage are placed on top of the other group card with behind a damage card of 2.

Now, since the group cards are going to act as tabs. Perhaps have them act as tabs. You know, like tabs in a folder.

This reminds me of a very old game we played a long time ago. Where we used the white board, not only for health but also for number of units.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Grouping makes the game more interesting

I did some thinking.
Correct me if you think it is a bad idea.

Rights, so I think limiting the stock deck itself to X number of cards. While allowing players to put in as many cards of one design as they like.

Will add to flexibility of strategies with cards.

What I mean is....ok, here is an example.

Lets say, a player has 6 cards in stock.
Each card can be 1 to many units, depending on the limit set on a force.
With 6 cards, you can have 6 forces.
Or, you arrange these cards in less forces.

With every card added to a force, things like cover formations and the exchange of damaged units will increase.

Now, if the player is allowed only 1 force. You got 6 cards in that force. You can have up to 5 damaged units taking cover.

However, if you have 2 different types of units. Like riflemen and combat tanks.
Lets say, you have only 3 of each.
And thus, only 2 damaged units of 1 type can take cover.

The advantage is for the more expensive cards.
But a player could choose to have only 2 tanks and then 4 riflemen cards.
In a sense, the riflemen can have up to 3 damaged units take cover, while the tanks can have only 1 damaged unit taking cover.

And the tanks are now more forced in being destroyed triangular, than the riflemen.

Just a reminder, I did design the RPS and threshold mechanic in such a way. That fodder was going to be the better choice. But in a sense, this advantage is now competing with how many cards a player will put in the deck of a certain unit type.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Divider of a salvo...

When I used the ratio of 2. The salvo had value's to balance each subturn in terms of damage. This was nessesary in order to keep a game balanced. And of course a reward for not using your weapons till the last subturn.
The common divider was 19. But I think, I used 18. And the projectiles really picked a moment.

Now, with this attempt. I have a ratio of 3. The salvo common divider is 37. I think, I should use 36 somehow. The projectiles however, are not really going to take a specific moment?

No, I want salvos that are thematic. Like a gattling gun doing more damage, but has to warm up.
A sniper that needs to aim, then has a cooldown.
Stuff like that.

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
This is maybe going to SOUND stupid ... But hear me out!

What about using REAL MONEY as Tokens: Nickle ($0.05), Dime ($0.10), Quarter ($0.25).

The Nickle is DAMAGE, the Dime is GROUPS and the Quarter is IDK(???) ... Something else you NEED to track.

I'm not saying you NEED a TON of change... But maybe like under $5.00. And I really don't know what you can use the Quarters for...

10 Nickels = $0.50
10 Dimes = $1.00
10 Quarters = $2.50

$4.00 per player... Not UNREASONABLE. It's something that is EASILY available and not very costly (under $5.00)...?

I know it may sound funny... I thought so too when the IDEA came to mind. But in truth, this is a VERY "practical, cost-effective and SIMPLE" solution to the various things that need TRACKING in your Card Game.

Think about it and let me know what you think of this "crazy" idea!

Cheers @Ramon!

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

No worries. For playtesting, I got it all covered already :)

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

While trying out some numbers. I realized that charging and cooldown should be part of the attack. (charging in like charging up a weapon, aiming more precisely etc.)

In my proto-type version.
Charging and cooldown would cost action points.
Charging required the target to remain in range and costed 1 AP per turn.
Cooldown immediately required all AP.

In my public version.
I never used charging and cooldown.

In my Ogame variant.
You couldn't move during an attack.


In the game without AP...

Charging would not be a problem. The target is the only other piece that can either move or return fire.
In both cases, it simply works out.

It is the cooldown that worries me. If you attack with any weapon that shoots in the first or second subturn. The third subturn kinda acts as a cooldown. The enemy can still return fire in that subturn. And the weapon is cheaper if it is the first or second subturn only.

This means that I need to rethink this for a while. Perhaps change the values. Or a rule. But I don't know what would be best at this point.


What I want to keep is the fact that if a force moves once, only the first 2 subturns of a salvo can be applied. No matter when the move happens.
And if a force moves twice, only the first subturn of a salvo can be applied. Again, no matter when the move happens.

This means that charging is extra difficult.
Yet an assault is simpler.

- I change the value's of each subturn, allowing movement if a force doesn't shoot. But is still reloading. Probably doubling the charging bonus damage, since it is a yes/no. I try with 50% instead. Pretending it is a ratio of 2.
- A force simply may not move after firing at all. After all, charging doesn't work like this either.

I need to think about this.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Salvo weight

I will try to keep this short.

We have the following rolls at the moment:

Damage roll;

Accuracy roll;
Roll # or less in order to hit

The target moves into or out of range;
Roll 3 or less in order to hit

The target moves;
Roll more than the targets'Sp in order to hit
(Maximum speed is 6)


As for the salvo balance. I am unsure how to do this yet.
The projectiles and accuracy roll are depending on this.

The point of view that I desire for designing cards is still hard to work with.

I prefer to have a weapon shoot in the same way for every subturn. But with the balances that I had in mind I got either a sum of 6.5 or 6.33. Which is not simple.

I could have a design method with a sum of 6. But that one means that the third subturn does 3 times as much damage as the first subturn.

These weapons are going to be used in order to attack the HQ. But 3 times more is worse than 2 times more. Especially since the ratio is 3. I need to think about this.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
I have been thinking

I decided to have the following weights:
First shot is 100%
Second shot is 67%
Third shot is 33%

This means that the damages that are weighting the same are:
1 for the first shot.
1.5 for the second shot.
3 for the third shot.


Let me know if this is clear.

Apparently the subturns are hard to grasp?
I honestly think that it was explained wrong then.

We got 2 parts of the game.
A minimap with a piece on it, representing the force.
This piece can move around on the minimap.
Then there is a deck of cards for each force.
It can be 1, maybe even 10. There is plenty of room for 10 cards.

The players have a round, consisting of 7 turns.
Each turn, the player can use 1 force.
In this turn, the player gets 3 subturns for that force.

The force can either move or attack per subturns.

If the force is in battle. The force will be placed on the table. Spread out, for fighting purposes. There is no need to do this if the force can safely move around only.

When fighting. Each card has a salvo.
A salvo cosists of damage and accuracy per subturn.
But for simplistic purposes, I will only show damage.

An example is the basic salvo:
This salvo will deal 3 damage per subturn.
But ONLY IF the force didn't move.
If the force doesn't move at all. 9 damage in total is possible.
If the force moves once, only 6 damage in total is possible.
Obviously, moving twice, in-shoot-out, the force will do only 3 damage.

The confusion might be in which 3 is being used.
It ALWAYS starts at the first shot.

Now, if a player wants to deal more damage with for example. Moving in, shoot, then move out, tactic.
The salvo 6-0-0 is a better option.
In the long run, it does only 6 damage.
But for the gurella fighting, it also does 6 damage.
It can do this 6 damage in 1 turn. It doesn't matter which subturn.

If you want to compete with this 6 damage. And this card is still moving towards you. If in range, a 0-9-0 salvo would be great. You aim at the card, while it moves. Then in the second subturn, both cards will shoot. The 6 damage card is still in the first shot. The 9 damage card however did "shoot" 0 damage. And is now allowed to shoot 9 damage.

I hope that these tactics are clear.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Playtesting was fun!

Right. So i did some playtests.
So far, it shows a very good potential.

I can get the rules down so far.

I can build a list of possible actions during a subturn.

I can design the numbers.
How much each card should cost in the game is still a riddle.

I need to design the layout of a card.

I need to gather art for the picture part of the card.

In a sense, I would like to have pictures first. Then put them in the card. And crunch the numbers that would fit this units/structure.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Card plan

How the card should look like from top to bottom.

The name and cost should be on top.
Then a picture of the unit, structure.
Armor, movement speed amd attack range.
Salvo, which is; number of projectiles, accuracy, damage. And this 2 more times.
At last, some special features and flavour text.
The very bottom is gona have a serie number, i guess.

The maximum health is very 5. In fact, it is going to be as much 5 as possible. Exceptions will have a mention in the special features.

If a portion of the salvo has no projectiles. Only a 0 is shown.

If the unit or structure does something different than shooting. Then this will be dispayed instead of the salvo.

8f tye unit or structure has more than 1 weapon. This will be placed in the special features. Or, I can mamage to squees it in.


I will design right away with 1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 as types.
4, 5, 7 and 8 might be possible. But have limits.
The basic values have brackets of 1/3rd's. And the 2 has as basic value a 1.5.
But that will be ok.

I am not going to do factions.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

I am testing the complexity of the info on the cards.

I have the feeling they are easier to understand than the special abilities that MtG cards have.

90% of the info are numbers.

Movement and Attack Range are linked to the minimap.

Attributes are linked to production and perhaps future special effects.

Costs... well, i hope to keep these at 1 or 2 digits. It is just 1 resource.
Maybe, just maybe, a theme can turn this into 2 resources. And I will have no problems with turning the costs into 2 to 3 digits.

Armor amd damage are types. Cover the threshold, and a damage is dealth to the unit.

Max health is almost always 5. Exceptions are mentioned in the special abilities.

Then, the new thing to players, is the salvo.
It is a 3x3 box. Or a line that has 3 segments.
1 segment will have 3 numbers.
Number of projectiles (dice)
Damage type


When combat commences.
The damage resolution is per subturn, or segment.

The number of dice are picked per damage type.
- roll for accuracy, a miss is a removal of a die.
- roll for movement effects, a miss is a removal of a die.
- roll for terrain effects, only height differences. And/or the force takes cover inside a location. In between locations are not used in this game.
- roll for damage. A 5 or 6 is removed. Unless there is a special ability for the die.

The damages are added together by the attacking player. And see's if there are threshold breaking.
Every threshold breaking means 1 damage to the card.

5 damage means the card is defeated.
The card is removed from the deck. And cannot add damage in the next subturns.

If the threshold is not broken. As long as subturns can be played. The little damage will be tracked as well.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
2 objects to track damage

I was thinking about see through cards that go with the card, back into the deck. For tracking the permanent damage.

But if the threshold is not broken yet during the first 2 subturns. This should still be tracked as well.
If only to give the fodder even more of an edge.

For this, I am thinking about acrylic cubes of different colours.
I am only going to allow those of power of 3.
1 Red
3 Orange
9 Yellow

So, when the damage roll has occured. And those dice that resulted in permanent damage have been replaced by a permanent damage marker.
Acrylic cubes are placed on top of what the attacker thinks is the next target.


Now, I did playtests with and without new cover formations during the 3 subturns.

Here are some examples, if reformation is not allowed:

Group 1 consists of an infinite riflemen.
There is no use in giving them a cover formation.
Since a damaged rifleman cannot take cover during the subturns.

Group 2 consists of 1 tank and 4 riflemen. The tank is a size equal to 4 riflemen.
Or, we put the tank in front. And it stays there for the entire turn.
Or, we put the riflemen in front. And they stay there for the entire turn.
If the tank falls, the riflemen are next. If even 1 rifleman falls, the tank can also be targeted.

Group 3 consists of 1 tank and 8 riflemen.
Or, we put the tank in front and have the riflemen take cover in a 2x4 formation.
Or, we put the riflemen in front and have the tank take cover. But the riflemen are better put in a 1x8 formation. Such that there have 5 riflemen to fall before the tank can be harmed.

In a sense.
I rather have the player do a reformation between subturns.
Although, the cubes might mostly become obsolete this way.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
The salvo

I am rather curious if players and you fellow designers. Understand the salvo...

The thing that is displayed on a card would be... here are some examples:

1-5-1 / 1-5-1 / 1-5-1
(Basic Value = 1)

Each segment has 1-5-1.
This means that in each subturn, this card will provide with.
1; Die.
5; The accuracy that this die should roll in order to remain a hit.
1; The damage multiplier.

After the number of hits are confirmed. A last roll is required, in order to determine the ammount of damage.
All 5 and 6 are removed as well.
What remains is the damage this roll gives.
And each result can be applied to only 1 target.

The result can be 1, 2, 3 or 4.
And for simplicity purposes, we say that this is actually a hit multiplier.

Here is another example:

0 / 3-5-3 / 0
(Basic Value = 2)

In the first and last subturn, this unit cannot fire.
In fact, if this unit moves twice during a turn, it cannot fire either.
This unit needs to attack, but will receive 0 dice.
Then, in the 2nd subturn, it will...
3; dice.
5; The accuracy that EACH die should roll in order to remain a hit.
3; The damage multiplier.

Now then, again after confirming the number of hits. The damage roll is once again the deciding factor.
This time; the damage roll will be multiplied by the damage factor.
In the first example, I started calling the damage roll to be a hit multiplier that can only be applied to 1 target.
Each hit will do 3 damage.

Versus 3 armor or above, this damage simply is counted as 3, 6, 9 or 12. Depending on the hit multiplier of course.

However, if you target a card with only 1 or 2 armor. Each hit would do 3 damage. And would simply break the threshold all by itself.
Thus each hit would count as 1 or 2 damage, not 3.

Third example:

2-4-6 / 0 / 2-4-6
(Basic Value = 3.2)

Here we have a unit with a dual rocket launcher. Not only that, but if this unit doesn't move, it can actually shoot 4 times.

In the first subturn, it has
2. dice to roll
4. as accuracy, roll this or less to keep the projectile going.
6. as damage multiplier.

It can easily move twice in a turn. This because the first segment of the salvo allows for firing rockets. But you better place yourself in a good position, if you want to deal with the enemy HQ. In that case, doing twice the damage will be a nice thing to do.


The costs of these weapons also depend on the attack range. And obviously the body part.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Effieciency Experience, by the players

I like to analyse this part.

What are the chances of defeating an enemy card?
Assuming the cards have a maximum health of 5.
Assuming the cards cannot take cover, nor move away, etc., in between the subturns.

1-5-1 / 1-5-1 / 1-5-1

The damage shows it can only harm infantry for 100%.
Let's see, how big the chances are for each subturn.

1 attacker
Armor: Chance
1: 0% / 19% / 42% Same value
2: 0% / 0% / 3%
3: 0% / 0% / 0%

2 attackers
Armor: Chance
1: 19% / 61% / 85%
2: 0% / 10% / 37%
3: 0% / 0% / 5% Same value
4: 0% / 0% / 0%

3 attackers
Armor: Chance
1: 42% / 85% / 97%
2: 3% / 37% / 74%
3: 0% / 5% / 32%
4: 0% / 0% / 6%
5: 0% / 0% / 1%
6: 0% / 0% / 0% Same value

4 attackers
Armor: Chance
1: 61% / 95% / 99%
2: 10% / 63% / 92%
3: 0% / 21% / 65%
4: 0% / 3% / 29%
5: 0% / 0% / 7%
6: 0% / 0% / 0%
9:... Same value


Clearly, the riflemen aren't that good in the lower numbers. And a tank is a much better unit to use as a beginning player.
However, if we have a tank, and it is using a similar weapon. The damage can be higher, and thus the card more expensive.

This is considered to be the exact same design, but then in a higher tier.

The tank has:
1-5-9 / 1-5-9 / 1-5-9

While 4 riflemen face of against 1 tank.
The riflemen are never able to harm this tank.
In return, the tank has this:

1 attacker
Armor: Chance
1: 0% / 19% / 42% (25% value)
2: 0% / 19% / 42%
3: 0% / 19% / 42% (50% value)
4: 0% / 19% / 42%
5: 0% / 19% / 42%
6: 0% / 19% / 42% (75% value)
7: 0% / 19% / 42%
8: 0% / 19% / 42%
9: 0% / 19% / 42% Same value
10: 0% / 12% / 30%
11: 0% / 6% / 20%
12: 0% / 6% / 20%
13: 0% / 2% / 11% (125% value)
14: 0% / 2% / 11% (125% value)
15: 0% / 0% / 5%
16: 0% / 0% / 5%
17: 0% / 0% / 3%
18: 0% / 0% / 3% (150% value)
19: 0% / 0% / 1%
20: 0% / 0% / 0%

And at the top of this list. It does have a chance in harming a rifleman.
Actually, even a 42% chance on killing the rifleman at the end of a turn.


The fun begins, when we multiply the 4 rifleman vs 1 tank.
I now can look at the chances, or even a number of kills...
Albeit, this isn't accuracte, since the damage rolls need to be combined properly. 1+4 is better than 2+2+2.

1 Squad:
R: 0% / 0% / 0%
T: 0% / 19% / 42%-3% (0.45 kills)

2 Squads:
R: 0% / 0% / 7% (value is 0.28)
T: 19% / 61%-10% / 85%-37%-5% (1.27 kills)

3 Squads:
R: 0% / 7% / 73% (value is 2.92)
T: 42% / 85% / 97%-74%-32%-6%-1% (2.10 kills)

4 Squads:
R: 0% / 49% / 99%-1% (1.00 kill, but equal to 4 riflemen)
T: 61% / 95% / 99%-92%-65%-29%-7%-1% (2.93 kills)

With 3 times the basic match. The value of losses is already in favour for the riflemen.
With 4 times the basic match. For every tank that gets destroyed, only 3 riflemen die.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
See through... upgrades

Obvious a good idea.
But needs to remain practical.

I need to leave some room for adjustments like...
The costs, and already with this, it can be only 1 upgrade per card.
Unless the extra costs are mentioned in a separate spot.

An upgrade will be body or weapon only.

Body upgrade, would be like an extra shield.
Different armor, maybe different health too.
But the costs depend on the movement speed.
I could make cards that are a propulsion only.
So the upgrade would add a body with a cost.
The downside to this upgrade is that the cost has to become a round number. Thus we get a starting cost of 3, 6 or 9. And each additional movement speed adds 1, 2 or 3.
I had this issue with my ogame variant as well.

Weapon upgrade, is simply an extra weapon.
And this weapon can have its own attack range.
If I do not do this. We get something similar to the Ogame variant again.
Of course, the upgrade would have to make sense. Like adding fire, electricity or even nuclear stuff.
This time, we have to start with 2, 4, 6 or 8. And each additional attack range adds 1, 2, 3 or 4.

There is one upgrade that has both movement speed and attack range, that makes sense...but players suddenly need to calculate stuff themselves...

And the player pays twice the cost of this unit.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
After a lot of discussion with Kristopher

I have been cutting a lot.

- No more health tracking
- No damage roll
- Multiple units can put together their damage into 1 roll in order to surpass the threshold. Their chances are a bit better now.

There are some issue's too, that come with this:

Multi dice units exist for a reason. They are supposed to deal multiple hits in order to kill multiple units if given the chance.

Due to balance issue's. I had to have a double accuracy roll.
One standard of 2 or less.
And one given by the unit design.

Should I still allow some damage tracking in order to give smaller groups a chance? For example, 3 riflemen can combine their power into 3 damage. But if the target has 6 armor, they need 2 chances. And a turn can have 3 attack phases. Thus, if they succeed in hitting, 3 damage needs to temporary tracked on the card. I find this fair to be honest.

Another issue is, I don't know....if the following battles would really be in favour of the mixed group:
- 6 riflemen and 2 tanks against 12 riflemen
- 6 riflemen and 2 tanks against 4 tanks

The issue here is, does the mix have a better chance?
Does the cover behind the tanks or fodder even work?
The riflemen can combine their forces in an all or nothing event. Here is what we thought of:


Let's begin with explaining the 3 attack stats on the card.
A flamethrower has

The first number, 3, is the number of dice this unit can bring to the battlefield.
The second number, 5, is the accuracy of the weapon.
Roll 5 or less in order to keep the die.
The same die still has to roll 2 or less in order to remain a hit.
The third number, 1, is the damage per die that still hits.

Now, you can play with these numbers a bit.
The 3 dice can be turned into 1 die, while the 1 damage can be turned into 3 damage.
The accuracy of 5 can be turned into an accuracy of 1, while the 1 damage can be turned into 5 damage.
The number of dice, can also exchange value's with the basic accuracy roll of 2.

As long as the product of the 2 new value's equal the product of the previous 2 value's.

Whatever the player does:
- The player is NOT ALLOWED to reduce the damage given. Only increase.
- The player is NOT ALLOWED to incrase the dice given. Only decrease.
- Accuracy can go both ways. But have to remain rollable with a d6.

It is possible of a flamethrower to have 1 die, have a basic accuracy of 1 and an accuracy of 1, then deal 30 damage.
But dealing 30 damage with a chance of 1/36th is a big gamble.

A rifleman has
And he too can have a 1/36th chance.
But then would deal only 10 damage.
So, in the long run, 1 rifleman has a (1/36)^3 chance to deal 30 damage. Hürâh!?.....

Either way. The thing is, combining is possible too.

A tank can have 6 Armor. In order to defeat the tank. A rifleman needs to deal 6 damage.
6 riflemen, each deal 1-5-1.
So, in a sense, we have 6-5-1.
We can change this into 1-5-6.
So instead of 6 dice, each dealing 1 damage when they hit. We have 1 die that will deal 6 damage when it hits.

Combining damage will have the same average result. But the chances in getting the desired result is much higher.
In this case, from 38% to 62% chance in defeating 1 tank.
And the chances to defeat 2 or even 3 tanks during a turn is also very realistic. 19% and 2%.

The 2 tanks on the other hand, have no chance in killing all riflemen.


My biggest concern is, will this break the game?
Perhaps I should reconsider the threshold. And change these back?

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Tests that I need to do


- Exchanges of value's.
- Threshold or Squared.
- Carry over of temporary damage to the next phase.
- Mixed army against pure armies. RT or TR vs R or T.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
X3M wrote:Yes/No: - Exchanges

X3M wrote:

- Exchanges of value's.
- Threshold or Squared.
- Carry over of temporary damage to the next phase.
- Mixed army against pure armies. RT or TR vs R or T.

Exchange of value's:
Still optional, but now we only allow the number of units combine their projectiles.
This means that 4 flame tanks with 3 projectiles dealing 1 damage.
Can either have 12 projectiles dealing 1 damage.
Or 6 projectiles dealing 2 damage each (or 2 kills of 1 armor)
Or 3 projectiles dealing 4 damage each (or 4 kills of 1 armor or 2 kills of 2 armor)

If the target has 3 armor, this mechanic is a bad idea for the flame tanks.
You cannot have 4 dice dealing 3 damage each, this is not allowed.
But, you could go for a 3 dice dealing 2 damage each and then 6 dice dealing 1 damage each. Thus 9 dice in total....
Well, still lots to think about.


It remains Threshold.


Carryining damage over to the next phase is nesesary to the balance.


We have yet to test mixed against pure...

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
X3M wrote:Yes/No: - Threshold

X3M wrote:

- Threshold or Squared.
- Carry over of temporary damage to the next phase.
- Mixed army against pure armies. RT or TR vs R or T.

Well, with just 6 dice in a game.
And at top 12 in rare cases (just roll twice)
I have no other choice.

Squared instead of threshold.
Double costs are now 4 times the effect.

Damage is always carried over, even to the next round. Repairing is possible.
Healing will be as if they are shielded. Thus 1 medic can protect 1 infantry unit, 1 time per turn.
So, this has switched sides again.

No need to test anymore. I know that this system works.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
No more Assault

I cannot have the attribute assault. Nor the action.

A force can either move or attack. And the maximum is 3 per round for a combination.

And if the attack is slow, this is simply shown in the turnorder.

The following weapons cost the same, but show how it is done.
1-1-1, deals 1 damage every time when it attacks. Can move up to 2 prior, once in between or 2 afterwards. Dealing 1, 2 or 1 damage in total.
2-0-0, deals 2 damage, only once. It can move twice prior or twice after. The best weapon for an "assault" by moving in range and then deal all the damage asap.
0-3-0, deals 3 damage, only once. It can move once prior or once after. It has to charge 1 turn, meaning units might be lost. This unit isn't that good as an assault unit. But can still be used that way. Meaning you loose twice as much as when it had the 2-0-0 damage.
0-0-6, deals 6 damage, only once. But it can never move. It has to charge 2 times. Or else it cannot fire at all. If the target is out of the way, this force is exhausted for nothing.

I still allow a shorter attack range to do their buisness first when they fight a longer attack range. This way, a short burst weapon like a flamethrower, will take damage first. But in the 2nd turn, it has a chance to do whatever nessesary.

I still allow a penalty on moving targets.
Shortest attack range is compared to the moving distance.
If the attack range is 2, and the moving distance is 1. The penalty is 1.
If the attack range is 1, yet the moving distance is 2. The penalty is still 1.

A penalty is a roll of 5/6th.
Multiple penalty can result in a replacement of the 5/6th.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
6 riflemen vs 4 grenadiers

2 credits per unit
1 damage per hit
accuracy 5
Can roll 1 die per turn

3 credits per unit
2 damage per hit.
(A hit can still kill only 1 infantry unit, or 1 vehicle)
accuracy 6
Can roll 4 dice, only in the 2nd turn


In direct combat. Leaving asside the tedious calculations.
The riflemen win with 2.89 remaining, in round 2 turn 1.

When the grenadiers have to approach the riflemen.
A penalty occurs and is 1 roll of 5/6th added to the first turn of the riflemen.
The riflemen win with 4.74 remaining, in round 1 turn 3.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
6 riflemen vs 4 flamethrow infantry

Flamethrow infantry
3 credits per unit
1 damage per hit
accuracy 6
Can roll 6 dice, only in the 1st turn

Now I know the number of dice sounds ridiculous. And the total ammounts sums up to even 24 for 4 units.
I thought it would be 12 or something at most.
And why is this number so high?
The attack range is 0. This requires them to move even closer, once they defeated some units. But it can easily be done during the round as well.
From 2 to 0 range means an increase of 67% damage.
And they have a weapons value being 80% higher than that or the rifleman as well. This is a total of 3 times more damage.
Then everything is put in the first turn. Reducing the damage back to 2 times more damage in total.

A total is from all 3 turns. So, the riflemen have 6 dice. But these are rolled 3 times in 1 round too.


In direct combat.
Things go different than expected.
First the flamethrow infantry kill of all riflemen...the end.

But when the flamethrow infantry need to approach the riflemen.
The riflemen can shoot with a penalty of 1.
The flamethrow infantry cannot defeat the rifleman instantly anymore due to a smaller squad. This happens in the 2nd turn.
In the 3rd turn, the flamethrow infantry move 1 closer, and now occupy the same region.
Still, the flamethrow infantry win with 2.18 remaining.


Not sure. 24 dice now....
I think 6 should be the max. But the player simply rolls 4 times.
It isn't like something else will be simoultainiously except for other melee weapons.
So, the complete focus would be on these dice.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Broken game

The overkill is too much.

There are several factors:
- 3 turns of average fire, pushed into only a burst in the first turn is already a factor 2.
- The RPS did soften up so much. That vehicles die 4.5 times faster too.
- While at first it was no issue. Melee does twice the damage than a default of 2 attack range.

So, the total speed up for a flamethrower is a factor of 18.... clearly a squad of 3 vehicles can be whiped out in 1 round by 4 flamethrowers.

Joined: 04/08/2012
Why so many dice rolls?

I understand you want the crunchy numbers for percentage styles. Makes the game slower and sort of more realistic in combat of how i comprehend it.

But have you thought of just using a d20 and a d4 to get results for 24 instead of rolling 6 die 4 times?

Or how about just 2 d12's the same as 24?

If you remove the percentage crunchy numbers and just with basic numbers 1-24 once time for the roll, you will see a different outcome.

You can still get percentage rolls or something of a percentage roll with the dice mentioned above in my comment.

If the roll lands on a say a 16. Half that number lowest to the number your trying to attack or defend or say the number rolled low , ie: an 8. You can half that by lowest or highest closest to the out come of each unit for defending or attack or counter attack. Something like that.

Just something to think about.

Jesse Aka StormyKnight1976

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut