Skip to Content
 

Input on container colours (ccg)

6 replies [Last post]
Fri, 07/13/2012 - 20:45
snowdrop
Offline
Joined: 07/13/2012
WTactics.org Colouring

Check out the pic. Look at the colours for the ATK & DEF containers (Red circle + Green shield). Currently they are identical on the two differently coloured creature card templates that we use. Each faction will have it's own colour when it comes to the templates. Here we see the Gaian (brown/green) and the Shadowguild (green/purple).

What I need input on is if it is good or bad to keep the colours and the rest of the appearence of the ATK/DEF-containers identic on all cards, no matter how the faction template happens to look like. My direct answer would be that it is best to keep it the same due to it being easier for the player to locate and immediately read them, as means of "standardization". Or should aesthetics be considered even more in this case and prioritized more due to me overrating the need of consistency in appearance of how/where ATK/DEF values are displayed?

Original size: http://www.bgdf.com/sites/default/files/images/SGpreviewColouring.jpg

Top
Fri, 07/13/2012 - 21:24
#1
Matthew Rodgers
Matthew Rodgers's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2012
I've found in playtests that

I've found in playtests that the more "readable" an icon or informational category is, the faster the game plays. So I'd say keep them standard.

Your goblin deserter text is a bit wonky, How about:

If Goblin Deserter is being attacked on a front, and the attacker's army has a gold value three times your army in that front, throw a die. On an odd number, discard an allied creature in the Kingdom.

Top
Sat, 07/14/2012 - 14:57
#2
moltengold
Offline
Joined: 07/09/2012
Some thoughts...

I like the overall design of the cards and the muted, natural colors overall...

I think consistency is very important to learning the game, and constant evaluation of the game as you play it. No need to add extra layers of complexity with things like U.I. - put the complexity elsewhere if you want/need it.

Here are my other thoughts:
1) I think that the ATK/DEF numbers should be a heavier weight (bold or semi-bold or with a stroke)
2) I think the numbers should have more contrast: darker background icons, or a lighter font color, or a heavier drop-shadow, or some combination of all three.
3) The red circle doesn't = attack to me, instead I thought "health" - but either way I think it should be more saturated, the green shield as well. Adding a tight shadow to them (or just a dark stroke) would make them pop a little more.
4) Also the number at the top-right (cost?) is much larger than the ATK/DEF. Is it really that much more important. If all three numbers were that size, with that much contrast between the number and it's

The overall color scheme avoids a pure white - which is fine - but the body copy and the number at the top are: C11 M11 Y41 K0. While the numbers for ATK/DEF are much darker @ C18 M24 Y44 K0. Seems like they could at least be as light a value.

5) If there was some specific reason you want to differentiate between types of attack - and you wanted to completely change the attack icon for this reason - I'd put the ATK on the other side of the card, always.
Bottom left = ATK
Bottom right = DEF/Health.
This is standard for most TCG that I can think of...

Other thoughts about the art/design:
The undead archer's drop shadow is hanging out of the frame - compared to the Goblin Deserter whose neatly contained at the bottom. This creates a nice effect I haven't seen in other card designs and I like it a lot. However the skeleton looks like he's (or she's) floating above the frame and it doesn't look as good.

The effect on the Goblin Deserter looks very awesome, the other looks like an amateur copy. This seems small, but to me makes a big difference. Admittedly, I am a graphic designer so I evaluate things from a designer's perspective. And it is probably not intentional... just a minor layering mistake - but I appreciate the effect on the 2nd card, and wrinkle my nose at the effect on the 1st.

And the lighting effects on the cards overall is different. This isn't bad, just think there is some value in subtle consistency. It makes the differences more pronounced.

Re: the rest:
I agree with above... the Goblin text is wonky.
I would try to standardize the game terms so that you can just say: if an attacker is X with Y condition, then Z.
Where X, Y, and Z are all standard terms you can define once - and then you can use the same consistent terms on all the cards as needed.

Think of MtG's "First Strike" or WoWTCG's "Protector".
Once you understand the particular rules of those terms - any time a card uses them you don't have to have a paragraph of text explaining all of that.

I know you might not be the one who created the rules and effects content of the cards...
These are just some thoughts.

Top
Sun, 07/15/2012 - 09:36
#3
snowdrop
Offline
Joined: 07/13/2012
Update: Here's what I was

Update: Here's what I was originally asking about >> http://i.minus.com/i5zsuGQEaPLHo.png

@Matthew:

"I've found in playtests that the more "readable" an icon or informational category is, the faster the game plays. So I'd say keep them standard."

I agree with the overall idea. What I question is if it would matter at all in this specific case where we always only have two numbers, always placed in same geometrical shapes and in same position whatever faction you were looking at. It's hard to "measure" this among players in some kind of experiment... = /

"Your goblin deserter text is a bit wonky, How about:"

Yups, indeed, yours were better. =) Texts were just made up on the fly to have something there... usually we go with lorem etc.

@molten

Yay, thanks for the extended input! I believe all your points are valid and really only have a question about one of them that I didn't follow:

Why would you want to separate the placing of ATK and DEF when it comes to having them in a game with several different ATK-types, and not necessarily in our game, where we have only one single ATK-type for all creatures? (Or maybe I misread you... = P ) Maybe part of the answer depends on us using HP or not, and we don't - all creatures die when damage >= DEF. :)

I think using space between them accomplishes the clarity, but it also brings the drawback of the eyes having to wonder to two different corners of the card for picking up it's combat-stats. This is maybe a subjective matter, and as an old MtG-player I am very biased, but my guess is that you whenever you are in combat or plan it would want to know both of the numbers (but yeah, that could indeed differ from game to game depending on if both variables are used or not in the average combat situation, which they are in our case) and preferably at the same time/glance.

And while at it, as graphics designer, how would you make our keyworded abilities look like? Currently I'm thinking just "Bold" and then have the reminder text in italics (regular).

Top
Sun, 07/15/2012 - 13:41
#4
moltengold
Offline
Joined: 07/09/2012
I think the arrangement works.

I think the arrangement of both in the bottom-right works as you have it.
I think you are right, having to look at two different spots on a card will add some APM - so to speak.

RE: different attack types
Different damage types (ranged, fire, melee, holy, etc...) would probably be best represented by a different kind of icon behind the number - World of Warcraft's TCG used this system and it worked very well. I believe MtG just has the five colors of cards = types of damage. So a Black Knight was immune to White damage.

But with WoW, there were more types and they sometimes mattered and sometimes didn't. But from a design perspective, it was laid out it an innocuous manner such that you could ignore it when it wasn't relevant, but it was there when/if it mattered in the game. Because the numbers were on opposite bottom corners of the card, with health always on the bottom right, the icons could be more complex without overwhelming each other (as they might if they were side by side). The icon for health was always a red drop of blood with a number - but this could have been different as well if they had needed that.
...
RE: Colors
As to the color of circle and the shield matching the border and the background of the card as in the examples...
I think you should keep them all the same (red circle/green shield), although I think you could do something different with the ATK/DEF colors you have. Why is hunter green = DEF?

I think you should make the icons more vibrant or distinct - so that they aren't tied to the colors of the faction.
But I could conceive of doing it the other way and looking good and completely themed... but again, regardless: I would make them more saturated and vibrant and larger. As much as I want the card to look great overall (illustration/typography/layout/details)... the crunchy bits are the most important parts and you need to be able to see them at a glance from across a crowded table-top.

RE: keywords
Just bold should work. I'd keep the body text as you have it. Save the actual italics in case you need it.
Although I like it, and it adds a literary feel to the card text, you might need to lose the drop cap on the body text because it might prove unwieldy - but that text is mechanics, not flavor.

Also - and again, since you've said this is just basically lorem ipsum text I probably don't need to explain further (but I will just to be clear what I mean): While some things should be Keywords:, other things just need to be standardized terms. For instance in MtG, words like "targeted" "creature" "block" "defender" are all standardized, defined terms - but not really what I would consider Keywords.

Top
Sun, 07/15/2012 - 17:35
#5
snowdrop
Offline
Joined: 07/13/2012
Thanks again.

Thanks again. =)

http://i.minus.com/i6nXK4qTToRDD.jpg

ATK-types
Agree with that different ones should have different icons etc.

While at it, and as a sidenote, what is your take on what having different attack types of them actually bring gameplay / strategy wise, in most games? I myself would answer "usually not much, if anything at all". If we use WoW CCG as an example, from what I can recall it really doesn't add anything more than an excuse to create more cards for the game, which is a direct result of it (but doesn't need to be). Admittedly I haven't played WoW CCG that much and maybe I miss out on some kind of "depth" that the attack types added?

Larger / Bolder
I have a hard time figuring out how large they should be or not, bold or regular. I think bolded makes it look more "childish" somehow = / The dilemma is that a player either knows the card or not and that usually, in more or less all CCG:s, a player has to pick up the card from the table to read them on a regular basis. Especially if it's the opponents and they are more or less unknown.

So, while being in own hand all is perfectly readable. That and the fact that you often play more than once with a pre-built deck means you tend to learn the cards pretty well. The main issue is knowing the abilities of opponent's cards, and their combat stats. There I guess it helps to have larger or bolder text, but that only solves the issue partially - ability texts can't possible be made readable from the other side of the table... = /

All in all, it mainly relates to newcomers and learning curve. That said, combat stats will be used more often than the abilties, and all have them while some lack abilities.

Flavor
I decided against having any flavor text if there is any other text around. Mainly due to space and rather having air on card instead of cramming more text just because we can. In addition I don't think flavor text adds much flavor at all for most players, while hilarious texts are quite cute for more hardcore players and nerds (i fall into both categories myself and damn proud of it ; )

Keywords
With keyworded abilities I meant what you are describing, so we're on the same page there: Only ones that should be keyworded are reoccurring ones that will last and probably be around in future expansions also. Everything else should not have it's own keyword.

Syntax
You're correct that a solid syntax is needed. Most of the time I think it's nailed in MtG. We haven't done this yet though.... if you're up for it you're welcome aboard ; )

Top
Mon, 07/16/2012 - 18:03
#6
moltengold
Offline
Joined: 07/09/2012
.

Larger / Bolder
I think the size of the numbers on the new example you posted are good.

Re: the keywords being bold.
I think that in cards with a lot of text it just serves to indicated to me that the card across the table has some type of special power.
Moreover, I don't need to be able to actually read the word letter by letter to identify it as "Protector" or something like that.

Flavor Text
I agree, most flavor text is ignored most of the time.

ATK-types
Yeah, it didn't add much - except that some cards which were worthless (compared to other options you could choose from) became useful and thus worth playing.

If designed into the game, it adds a variable.
Just like Cost, ATK, DEF (or HP), and special powers all are variables which are used to balance out a card...
A card might be weak for it's cost - except if you use it in a deck where it's atk-type creates a synergistic effect. At which point, if it was a stronger card - it would be overpowered.

I will say that when cards finally made use of it (2 or 3 expansions after the initial set) it did add a refreshing new build consideration and at the time (when I was actively playing) it affected about half of my decks in some fashion.

But it is certainly not a variable every TCG/LCG/CCG must have.
And it makes balancing an even more complex issue (which in this kind of game is difficult already).

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut