Skip to Content

Attributes problem

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

For a card game that doesn't make use of a grid. But the players simply place cards on the table.

I have trouble with 2 attributes in the game.
Speed and Range. Or previously known as Fast and Ranged.

Fast would be applied to units. And they would do more damage in an attack. It is a simple factor in the game. But the card is relatively cheaper than its cousin cards without being fast but simply doing more damage in general.

Ranged would be applied to units or structures. And they would do more damage in a defence. Again a simple factor in the game but a cheaper card.

Then there where these fast AND ranged cards. Which seems obsolete, since other cards would have the same function and costs through multi damage. But I was curious in how to have them any way.

***

I tried to have a nullification rule.

Where ranged vs ranged, fast vs fast, and ranged vs fast would all be nullified to none.

The thought behind it was that these nullified cards would simply act as meat. Especially the cheaper, 1 attribute versions. But the 2 attribute versions causes conflict.

While it looks useful at first. Players would simply go for the multi damage any way. The 2 attribute cards are of no use at all. So I need something better. Something that makes sense to be a choice for the players.

Either that, or the one attribute per card would remain. 2 attributes are simply not possible.

wob
Offline
Joined: 06/09/2017
how does it play if you

how does it play if you completely remove the ranged and speed? if it still works leave them out.
your second issue (players always choosing one option) might be an issue of balance rather than a mechanical one ie they are still seeing one option as cheap for its effect. try playtesting with it heavily unbalanced the other way (makeing one option stupidly expensive should do it).
one problem might be that if your opponent is doing x you have to do y or you will lose. this means the game is effectively scripted from the start.
it might also be some other reason such as players being familiar with one strategy, or just that some players are more aggressive and would always opt to attack. i would ask the testers why they are opting for a over b, and maybe try some fresh testers aswell.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
maybe I should just leave it out then

Well, leaving out the nullification rule. Would simply mean that the 2 attributes on 1 card would simply have no meaning.

Players can still use one of the 2 attributes to make a card better at defending OR attacking.

The thing with attributes is that I need to design them in such a way. That they have an advantage somewhere, while having a disadvantage somewhere else.

In case of speed and range, this was simply the additional costs when using them on the wrong end of the stick. Compared to using them at the right end of the stick.

Having both ends of the stick would mean that the card would balance out again in general. But it made no sense because we already had those cards.

At first the 2 cards are technically the same:
Costs 4, armor 1, attack 3* 1
is exactly the same as
Costs 4, armor 1, attack 1, attributes range 2 and speed 2.

Every range or speed add an extra damage to either defending or attacking.

***

When using only one attribute of these 2. It makes perfectly sense. But what if both are used? Well, it makes no sense. I was hoping to find a way.

But if not. Then using both attributes would not be the case.

In my board game, I do have units that are fast and ranged. But they are always beaten by units that have either of the 2 attributes.
It seems to be much harder in a card game to simulate this effect.

Maybe a bit of a tweak of the rules that I didn't see yet.
Like for example, that range can only neutralise range. But not speed.
For speed, you need speed. But that also give conflict.

Because when a ranged+speed unit attacks. The defending ranged unit would have no range and the attacking unit would be left with speed. In which case, it would still do maximum damage here.

The board game has range and speed for both attacking and defending purposes. So I tried that first for my card game. But seeing as how speed is limited for attacks only and range is limited for defending only. I either made a big mistake. Or I made the right one, but simply cannot build upon.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
only 3 testers in total

wob wrote:
how does it play if you completely remove the ranged and speed?
The game works in other regards. But has less flavour.

wob wrote:

your second issue (players always choosing one option) might be an issue of balance rather than a mechanical one ie they are still seeing one option as cheap for its effect. try playtesting with it heavily unbalanced the other way (makeing one option stupidly expensive should do it).
This is what my playtest showed so far. I always go to the extreme with rules to test their validity. I also leave out other mechanics to make sure. Kinda like testing the strength of 1 lego block if you will.

wob wrote:

one problem might be that if your opponent is doing x you have to do y or you will lose. this means the game is effectively scripted from the start.

This is luckily not the case. Sadly, it is not "doing X" leads to "choosing Y or Z". But rather, both players do X.
wob wrote:

it might also be some other reason such as players being familiar with one strategy, or just that some players are more aggressive and would always opt to attack. i would ask the testers why they are opting for a over b, and maybe try some fresh testers aswell.

Reasons: "it makes no sense using the double attribute cards". "The single attribute cards still do".

***

Combining normal damage with multi damage cards makes much better armies than going only normal or only multi damage.
This has been tested and works very well.

Regarding the speed and range.
What other card games use these attributes? But more importantly, how?

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
What if I add a mechanical RPS??

I rather create natural RPS. But maybe it could help me by having a RPS that is mechanical.

So we have fast, ranged and neutral (not fast, nor ranged).

The designs that we could get are:
- neutral
- fast
- ranged
- fast and ranged

This looks as a worked out list of a 2x2 system. 2 intertwened triangles of RPS is what I am thinking about.

What I could do is have ranged being twice as good than neutral. Neutral is twice as good than fast. And fast is twice as good than ranged.

When both ranged and fast are used. It will have 2x against neutral and ranged. Against it, would be neutral and fast.

Fast units are normally good in attacking. But this time in general, they will be weaker.
Ranged units are their targets, which are used for defence and have extra damage against neutral.

The fast and ranged unit will be the best choice now against ranged. Since neutral has more problems defending against the fast and ranged.

Neutral with multi damage will now have fast and ranged as an equal. But are weak against ranged. And strong against fast.

I need some time making sure I find the right factors.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
...

Sorry for double post. Half was deleted :(

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Is this a good start?

Of course, more testing is needed.
But I already did some testing.

Ranged:
- Good against the normal cards. Projectiles x2
- Does extra damage when defending. Projectiles x#

Fast:
- Good against the ranged cards. Projectiles x2
- Does extra damage when attacking. Projectiles x#

Normal (not displayed):
- Good against the fast cards. Projectiles x2
- Multi damage does extra damage for attacking and defending. Projectiles x#

***

R>N>F>R
Does this make sense? Or should I turn it around into:
R>F>N>R

***

It doesn't feel right yet.

Ranged and Fast:
- Good against the normal cards. Projectiles x2
(- Does extra damage when defending. Projectiles x#)
- Good against the ranged cards. Projectiles x2
(- Does extra damage when attacking. Projectiles x#)

It's weakness is fast cards. If I invert the RPS, it would be the ranged instead.
Between the () doesn't really matter any more.
A multi damage normal card would do the same. It is just the addition of the 2 attributes that changes the card in RPS standards.

Instead of x2 on one target. It is "not x2" on one target.
Combat will go faster in a sense this time.

***

Seeing as how the average damage has gone up. I have no other choice than to double the health points of each card. This means that a card needs to be beaten twice to be destroyed.
Infantry has a little advantage in this as well.

***

If this fails. I also have the following option:
Cards have always 2 basic attributes.

Normal + Normal (not displayed)
Normal + Fast (fast)
Normal + Ranged (ranged)
Fast + Fast (very fast)
Fast + Ranged (name pending)
Ranged + Ranged (long ranged)

A double RPS if you will. Where Fast + Ranged is one of the 3 mixes.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Sigh

The last 2 tries didn't work either.
Now I am looking at neutralising again. But ranged and fast don't change each other. Only themselves.

Which actually turned put good. I have more RPS left with ranged neutralising ranged and fast neutralising fast.
The RPS that i am talking about is the one of either defending or attacking.

apeloverage
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
I don't see why being fast

I don't see why being fast would mean more damage in attack, or ranged more damage in defence.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
apeloverage wrote:I don't see

apeloverage wrote:
I don't see why being fast would mean more damage in attack, or ranged more damage in defence.

Well, the first logic behind it would be that fast units would go around obstacles. And try to hit the right targets. They are often placed behind other units to safe up the ammo.

And ranged units would be well behind other defences. Doing the damage against incoming units.

Since these 2 attributes can only be 1 dimensional. I thought of those effects to simulate most strategies in war games.

***

If you have a suggestion, I am all ears.

wob
Offline
Joined: 06/09/2017
have you tried combining

have you tried combining speed and range into 1 thing.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
wob wrote:have you tried

wob wrote:
have you tried combining speed and range into 1 thing.

In what direction should I think?

Having only one attribute?
"Support"
And then tell the player if the extra damage is in attacking or defending?
That could work.

Or perhaps replace the words by attacking or defending specialist.

apeloverage
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
X3M wrote:apeloverage wrote:I

X3M wrote:
apeloverage wrote:
I don't see why being fast would mean more damage in attack, or ranged more damage in defence.

Well, the first logic behind it would be that fast units would go around obstacles. And try to hit the right targets. They are often placed behind other units to safe up the ammo.

And ranged units would be well behind other defences. Doing the damage against incoming units.

Since these 2 attributes can only be 1 dimensional. I thought of those effects to simulate most strategies in war games.

***

If you have a suggestion, I am all ears.

I would think that 'fast' would let you retreat (avoid combat), and 'ranged' would let you attack without the other side being able to retaliate.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
How would the opponent

How would the opponent counter those two effects?

apeloverage
Offline
Joined: 08/01/2008
Maybe you can only use 'fast'

Maybe you can only use 'fast' once per round, and 'ranged' requires you to have another unit to 'hide behind' (not sure what that would mean in game mechanics).

larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I read the thread in

I read the thread in diagonal, but it remind me of an idea I sued for an MTG and Star craft style game.

I used Melee and Range.

If both units that the same type (range vs range) (melee vs range) there is no modifiers, it's fair fight

If both units have different type ( Range vs melee, Melee vs range) the attacker has some bonus modifiers.

This technique could be applied in different ways but the basics is: "same or different" generate different outcome.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
What comes to mind...

Is the use of an RPS-5 with 5 different values. Then the styles of the "Attacker" and "Defender" can be combined with a THIRD "value"...

The idea is that an RPS-5 can be broken down into FIVE (5) RPS-3s. That's right, that how the relationships break down. See the example below for more precision (using colors).

I don't know HOW to apply this to YOUR game. I thought about messaging you a couple days ago ... But I didn't think it was going to be very USEFUL to you UNLESS I can get some kind of example.

So let me TRY with COLORS:

Red (R) - Green (G) - Blue (B) - Black (K) - White (W).

R-G-B = #1 RPS-3
G-B-K = #2 RPS-3
B-K-W = #3 RPS-3
K-W-R = #4 RPS-3
W-R-G = #5 RPS-3

A color is IN three (3) of the RPS-3. So if your ATTACK = RED (R), you have 3 options:

R-G-B, W-R-G, and K-W-R.

Now if your DEFENDER = "BLUE (B)" ... The only combination with (R) AND (B) is R-G-B. This would mean that YOU would USE the "Green (G)" as the ruleset for that combat.

I know it's a bit confusing... But the idea is you INPUT "2" types and find the COMMON "3rd" rule.

Don't think of it a Speed, Range, etc. Think of finding some kind of OTHER meaning to the colors that are RELEVANT to your game.

Test it out: Choose two (2) colors and you will ALWAYS return only ONE (1) possible Color compatible with the others.

Sorry I cannot explain it BETTER. I wish I could. Hopefully you understand. And maybe you can find BETTER relationships than colors.

I didn't post this up last time... Because I thought you'd be confused since I cannot give a more "real-world" example.

If this helps, please do let me know.

If it doesn't... Well feel free to ignore this... Maybe someone else can INTERPRET my "language" and provide a better example for what I am trying to explain about "ruleset" and governing RPS-3s.

Cheers!

Update: I realize that it doesn't always work...! (Darn)

Like if your ATTACKER is RED (R) and your DEFENDER is GREEN (G).

Your options are: R-G-B and W-R-G.

So it would seem two (2) rulesets are possible: BLUE (B) and WHITE (W).

Sorry I thought it was idiot-proof. It's not...

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Just as some "ideas"...

Attack types can be:

"Shockwave" : Blue (B)
"Earthquake": Green (G)
"Incendiary": Red (R)
"Metal/Lead": Black (K)
"Electronic": White (W)

Maybe this could be some KING of alternative to the COLORS (example above).

IDK — I'm just doing a bit of rapid-brainstorming ... to give you ALTERNATE ideas than "Range", "Fast", etc. Which sound too VANILLA-ISH...

These might be more INTERESTING... Just some ideas!

Update: A "R-G-B-K-W" weapon could be... An Atomic Bomb = Made of Metal, using Electronics, Incendiary, produces an Earthquake and a Shockwave...

Could really have FUN devising the various weapons in a manner like this...

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
apeloverage wrote:Maybe you

apeloverage wrote:
Maybe you can only use 'fast' once per round, and 'ranged' requires you to have another unit to 'hide behind' (not sure what that would mean in game mechanics).

Fast and Ranged are automatically used once per round. Each card can be used only once per round.
The game follows some basis from MtG in attacking and defending. Yet, I try to simulate some RTS effects. The game looks less and less like MtG now.

Each unit can choose to run away behind another unit.

I figured that how fast units are bad in defending in general, they run and hide when defending. But when targeting something, they could do more damage since the target would be cached off guard.

Ranged units, as you said. Are good in defending since they can hide behind something else. This is automatically since they do more damage while defending. They do more damage too since they can fire more often or at least have the first strike. So, that is why to simulate this, Ranged do more damage in defending.

On a side note. Doing more damage, doesn't mean they can survive their opponents.

larienna wrote:
I read the thread in diagonal, but it remind me of an idea I sued for an MTG and Star craft style game.

I used Melee and Range.

If both units that the same type (range vs range) (melee vs range) there is no modifiers, it's fair fight

If both units have different type ( Range vs melee, Melee vs range) the attacker has some bonus modifiers.

This technique could be applied in different ways but the basics is: "same or different" generate different outcome.


I didn't try exactly that, yet. Same is no modifier. I like that idea.
Different is always a modifier in an attack.

But I got something right now that shows a lot of similarities. Yet I tried to maintain the vulnerability of fast and ranged as well.

Fast has a modifier in the attack. Against a fast defender, this is not the case. Fast vs Fast reduces the amount of shots.
Ranged has a modifier in the defence. Against a ranged attacker, this is not the case. Ranged vs Ranged reduces the amount of shots.

A fast against a ranged. If the fast is the attacker, the modifier stays 3 and the ranged also uses 3.
If the fast is the defender, the modifier on both sides is only 1 since they are both at the wrong side.

***

@ Kristopher
I don't see how colours would help me perfect the "natural" RPS that I already have.
And the Fast/Ranged effects are a mechanical RPS through some rules. But one can do without the other now.
Each attribute has to be a stand alone addition to work. Combinations of attributes are a second tier in the game if you will. Like how air units can attack ground units, that is a tier above as well.

I always tend to design with a greyscale in mind. The benefit of having a colour blind friend. It got me pretty cool effects in any game.

I had a busy week. So I never got to create even some simple cards. All is handwritten here.

***

What I can start with is showing how the 2 RPS systems work at the moment. I will put those in the next post. In this topic.

X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
RPS effects through other means

(It is supposed to be in that other topic of mine tbh)
Let's start with the first tier of RPS.

The how or why is left out, because most people have trouble with math. But I say one thing: I designed in such a way that small vs big has the upper hand in general. You will see this in the rifle men against the quads.

Consider the following 4 designs for the same amount of money:
6* €2, 1 armor, 1 damage; Rifleman
4* €3, 1 armor, 3 damage; Grenadier
3* €4, 3 armor, 3 damage; Quad
4* €3, 3 armor, 1 damage; Attack Bike

6 Riflemen against 4 Grenadiers.
2 Riflemen survive. €4.

6 Riflemen against 3 Quads.
Each of the quads can hit only 1 Rifleman at a time.
The Riflemen have to combine damage in order to destroy a quad. The only instance where health is tracked if needed.
Round 1: 3 Riflemen and 1 Quad survive. €6/€4
Round 2: 2 Riflemen survive. €4

6 Riflemen against 4 Attack Bikes.
The Riflemen have to combine damage in order to destroy a quad. The only instance where health is tracked if needed.
Round 1: 2 Riflemen and 2 Attack Bikes survive. €4/€6
Round 2: 1.33 Attack Bikes survive. This is healed to 2. €6

4 Grenadiers against 3 Quads.
1 Grenadier survives. €3

4 Grenadiers against 4 Attack Bikes.
A tie.

3 Quads against 4 Attack Bikes.
The Attack Bikes have to combine damage in order to destroy a quad. The only instance where health is tracked if needed.
Round 1: 1.66 Quads and 1 Attack Bike survive. €4-8/€3
Round 2: 1.33 Quads survive. This is healed to 2. €8

Scores:
Rifleman:
+4+4-6= +2
Grenadiers:
-4+3+0= -1
Quads:
-4-3+8= +1
Attack Bikes:
+6+0-8= -2

The Riflemen show some upper hand here. But when pitted against something better than an Attack Bike, they will perish even faster, aka no rounds. Also, 1 quad more, and they are dead too, since that is a delicate balance.

***

Second tier of RPS
This is more of this topic.

Attribute effects.
All cards are ground units/structures.

Normally, ground can attack ground. And air can attack air.

The attribute AA, Air and AG are used to indicate if a card has anti air, is air, or is air and fights the ground.
The last one, AG, is also used if a ground unit has anti air AND anti ground. The weapon costs are 150%, but still worthwhile in a sacrificial meaning.

---

The attribute Fast and Ranged are used to indicate if a card does more damage (in number of projectiles) in an attack or when defending.
Basic, making a card cheaper if it does the right thing.
Same type attributes can neutralise each other.

N €3, 1 armor, 2* 1 damage
F €3, 1 armor, 1 damage, Fast;2
R €3, 1 armor, 1 damage, Ranged;2
FR €3, 1 armor, 1 damage, Fast;1 + Ranged;1

The Normal card always does 2* 1 damage in any situation, whether it attacks or defends.

The Fast card does 1 damage when defending.
3*1 damage when attacking.
When facing another Fast card, the level is subtracted of each other.
In case of Fast 2, only 1 damage remains.
In case of Fast 1, 2* 1 damage remains. So when attacking and facing the FR card, 2* 1 damage remains.

The Ranged card does 1 damage when attacking.
3*1 damage when defending.
When facing another Ranged card, the level is subtracted of each other.
In case of Ranged 2, only 1 damage remains.
In case of Ranged 1, 2* 1 damage remains. So when defending and facing the FR card, 2* 1 damage remains.

The Fast and Ranged card does 2* 1 damage when attacking or defending. Just like the Normal card.
When attacking and facing a fast card, damage is reduced to 1. And the other card is reduced by 1.
Notice the difference between "to 1" and "by 1".
When defending and facing a ranged card, damage is reduced to 1. And the other card is reduced by 1.
When attacking or defending and facing the same type of card, damage is always reduced to 1. Making the card relatively expensive.

These cards are cheaper when doing the right thing.
More expensive when doing the wrong thing.
More expensive when facing the same type, but so is the opponent.

The Normal card is not influenced by all of this.
Equal to a Fast + Ranged card.
The Fast + Ranged card reduces both types, which can be a life saver in some regards. But in most cases, you would not get this card seeing as how it can be "stopped" in both attacking and defending.
On the other hand, it cannot be stopped in attacking and defending either. But it would be relatively more expensive than the Normal card.
Fast + Ranged is only of use truly, when combining with the right armor and damage. Thus stopping fodder fire.

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut