Hi all,
I know I asked for comments on the earlier version of the card layout (See thread: http://www.bgdf.com/node/13088/)
That thread had the *preliminary* version of the rendered card.
I have attached the LATEST version that Ed Wedig has been working on. I too contributed some design work to refine the look a little bit... making it more SCI-FI-ish.
Any comments on this version (it's not final yet)?
I like it, not too cluttered or confusing, nice clean art
Could you fade the tips of the banner to blend in with the picture so it looks less like a bookmark?
I used a "Gradient Layer Mask" to try to get the Flag to blend with the background (in this case the "Black Hole") - but it didn't look good. Makes the Flag look like an out-of-place "rectangle".
I know, I know, there is a lot of controversy about the *Flag*... At least it's no longer "FLAT" (one colour only).
But no one gave me any suggestions for alternatives!
I believe you were the one who said Hexes are more Sci-Fi-ish and so we added Hexes for bullets and in the background (for high-tech circuitry).
If you have factions/races/federations, you could probably get away with banners if the color matched whatever group/union/whatever you use. Then they could be royal banners, or something.
The banners are used to DISTINGUISH between CARD TYPES. The game has several types of cards: Starships, Crews, Weapons, Missions, Objectives and Achievements. Each one of these has a different colour banner and accompanying letter ("S", "C", "W", "M", "O" and "A" respectfully).
Is there any reason why you can't distinguish card types by colored borders?
If you look at the new run of Netrunner, the card types are identifiable by their border and text box (all runner Programs have the same layout), then by color (Anarch programs are red while Shaper programs are green).
You're labeling your cards twice, which is awesome if the reason is to assist colorblind players, but you could do it a different way. Like, the text box for Starships could look like riveted machine parts while Mission text boxes could have a different shape and a sonar-like background.
Well what playtester's say is this: Remembering a SIMPLE rules like "S+C+W" or "S+C+M" is really good. They even want those rules to be on the *Role Reference* card.
Basically when you *Configure* a Starship, you pick one and choose a Crew with either a Weapon or a Mission. This is like using 3 cards to dynamically "define" a starship.
So I would not want to get rid of the LETTERS because playtesters feel that is what helps them (or reminds them) about how to play the game!
The card layouts could blend/slot in to each other like a three sided poster when places side by side. I forget hte name but there's a dueling wizard card game that does this with Rat Fink art...
The cards are placed a top each other, one next to the other such that you see the "Right-most Top Button". There are three rules:
1-A Hexagon button determines your Capacity (or Energy Rating)
2-A Square button determines your Resistance (or Crew Rating)
2-A Circular button determines your Firepower (or Weapon Rating)
And you can see this information from across the table at any time - because it is visible at all times.
The rules is: Capacity <= Resistance + Firepower.
I hope my artwork can be as *ambitious* as this photograph... The bridge was supposed to have *crew members* and then I thought "WHY?" Why not just have a bunch of cool *bridges* for all different types of crews...
You now have three identifiers per card: color, letter, shape. I think that's one too many, but I'm not going to harp on it anymore. :-)
Are the trio of cards organized in any order? If they are, you can have it set up that the shapes dictate the order.
For example, if ships were triangles, crews were squares, and missions were pentagons, then you could just remember "3, 4, 5" for the order.
Are the trio of cards organized in any order? If they are, you can have it set up that the shapes dictate the order.
For example, if ships were triangles, crews were squares, and missions were pentagons, then you could just remember "3, 4, 5" for the order.
Hey, that's true. I'd just dump the banner thingy and the letter. My anticipation would be that it was conveying extra information rather than redundancy. The color with the word on the description seems plenty.
After reading some of the comments, I agree that three identifiers are probably too many. You can eliminate the banner and put the letters just on the top color strip if you REALLY want the letters. The shape and color IMO are perfectly fine and in fact desirable.
 | Dymino Monsters Update 4-18-2024 (1) by questccg |
 | Hidden Movement: What Makes it Cool? (19) by larienna |
| 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 have not heard from anyone who posted on the *previous* version...
Your opinion matters - and helps us "refine" the layout!
Many thanks.