Skip to Content

Health tracking on cards that go back into a deck

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

Infantry have 1 or 2 digits.
Most other units 2 to 3 digits.
I don't see 4 happening at all.

The deck is not going to be shuffled.
And it will be 1 to 3 cards that will go back in the deck damaged.

It is very possible that a player ends up with 12 damaged units.

I imagine that players will be looking into their decks from time to time for planning.

Kristopher suggested see through cards with something printed on them.
Personally, this is a good solution, but expensive.

I can see how 10 see through cards have the numbers 1 to 0. And how up to 3 can be used to track health. The numbers could cover the health number on the main card itself.

But I wonder if there are other ways.
Just remember, the cards go back into a deck. And keep track of the damage. No shuffling.

Joined: 01/27/2017
Simple but not elegant

The simplest solution is to have the cards laminated and include a dry-erase marker for each player.

Even if we were to expand the definition of a “deck” to include a place where cards are stored, I still wouldn’t recommend slider-clips on the edge of the card to store a three-digit number. Might be workable if the health number always ends in 0 (in which case you’re only storing two digits of information), but I’d still lean toward the dry-erase marker unless the game involves lots of physical trackers with which the slider-clips might blend in.

Not sure about the clear card idea… wouldn’t you need a separate cover for every possible health level? And as many as 24 duplicates of each?

One out-there idea is to use thin vinyl decals on laminated cards. If you’re familiar with Colorforms from your youth, you know how those work.

Final idea is to have every card be unique, at least by name (Infantry Company A, Infantry Company B, Artillery Battery A, etc.), and give the player a track or other off-card spot for recording health. This one allows the opponent to have a reminder of the units’ status.

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
Depending on the amount of

Depending on the amount of health you need to keep track, it could be recorded outside the deck. Sure, there is more cross referencing this way.

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
I'm positive this is a "The Game Crafter" issue ONLY

It's $0.49 USD a card from "The Game Crafter" (TGC). So for a prototype, that is NOT that very expensive. I'm sure you can get them made in China for about 1/2 the price or $0.25 USD... You'd have to ASK around.

The question that remains is what is more "elegant" and "NOVEL".

While I realize that Dry-Erase Markers are a "possibility" they may smudge when in contact with OTHER cards. "Monster Keep" (MK) has all cards that you write on in play and therefore no longer part of a Deck or shuffling.

Now I realize you said NO "shuffling" just a part of a Deck. But still Dry-Erase Markers could get wiped off or the markings could disappear. Remember it is NOT a permanent solution. MK uses it because for all purposes, it is for cards on the table and that are in PLAY.

You could experiment with the "transparent" cards, like I said "Gloom" and "Redakai (TCG)" both used transparency effectively in their games. So it is not like it is "impossible"... I would study "Gloom" and "Redakai (TCG)" and see how they used it and determine what would be the simplest solution.

With "transparent" cards, you could divide the Damage into SEGMENTS. And have for example 4 Cards representing six (6) STATES of Damage:

Let's say a card had 100 HP: 100 HP (no card), 80 HP (1), 60 HP (2), 40 HP (3), 20 HP (4) and 0 HP (no card).

And if you could ALLOW for HEALTH to be in +20 HP Segments... You can RE-USE some of the cards from unit to unit. And you can have variants too:

50 HP (no card), 40 HP (1) - common above, 30 HP (2), 20 HP (3) - common above, 10 HP (4) and 0 HP (no card).

This means you introduce 30 and 10 HP cards. 40 and 20 HP can be more common. And again it is ONLY FOUR (4) Cards per Damage Tracking. Less if you can use commons (which can be shared with different units).

These are just suggestions on how to MAYBE(?) use "transparency" to your advantage... Yes for prototype it may be a little costlier... But it's only for a PROTOTYPE. in China, like I said, I'm sure you can get clear cards for half the price (or $0.25 USD each).

Just sharing some additional thoughts.

Note #1: Here is a video with Justin Gary who helped co-design Redakai TCG:

Their transparent cards "animated" use 3D Blast Technology ... You don't need that but that TCG didn't really make it in the market ... It did not succeed. It also was very NOVEL too... But again you could examine (Google) for more card examples and images... You see that they have 3 STATS on the LHS of the cards (in Redakai TCG)...

Like I said the SEGMENT concept (breaking down HP into segments) might be a nice ALTERNATIVE to explore and you can see that there are COMMON cards.

AND BTW you don't need to STACK ALL four (4) or five (5) cards... Only the one with the CURRENT Damage Level. So IF I have 20 HP, you just put the 20 HP card on TOP of the Unit Card and voila... 1 card = 1 STAT.

You could have a 2 Card System with HP and ARMOR... That would be 2 cards = 2 STATs...

I personally think this is your best bet... Like I said you can make a prototype of reasonably not too expensive. I may be pricier than regular poker cards ... But you can mix-and-match too. The UNIT can be a regular Euro Poker Card ( and the STATS can be CLEAR cards (

The normal card is $0.14 USD and the CLEAR is $0.49 USD. So yes more costlier PROTOTYPE... But a way to solve your issues in a ELEGANT way.

Cheers @Ramon.

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
And BTW ...

"The Game Crafter" (TGC) prices for Poker Cards individually have gone up from $0.09 USD each to $0.14 USD each. So the Euro Poker Deck cards which are a bit of a different format are the EXACT price of the Normal Poker Deck cards ($0.14 USD each).

I can't say for the "Clear" ones... I didn't have much of a mind to price these before the pricing increases... But they could have been LESS expensive too!

IDK... But if you are making a PROTOTYPE... It's not within reason to spend about $100 USD to get everything as you want it. Then if you want to mass produce the game, you can start getting quotes and formatting the various components into thickness (GSMs), "cores" (White, Blue, Black, None) and any wooden components like Meeples or Plastic components (dice, stands, tokens, etc.)

Remember it's a PROTOTYPE with only a one or two production span. Meaning you may only have like one (1) or two (2) copies made for playtesting purposes and doing demonstrations at conventions and conferences (Board Game Halls or something similar) like a table in a Comic Con, etc.

Let me know if you need any further explanations...

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
What if i play a bit with health??

I just reminded myself (in a drunk haze). If i keep my health in a binary form somehow. I could have 4 or 6 dots on the side of a see through card.
And up side down, this card is anotyer value.

So, with 6 dots, there are only 3 variants needed of a see through card.

A is 1 and 32.
B is 2 and 16.
C is 4 and 8.

Well, maybe I go for more dots. And I can flip a card in 2 directions.
But while needing a decent ammount. They can be at least manufactured in a simple way.

The only down side is. For every doubling of a health, you need 1 more card
1024 health would need 10 cards....

Obviously, I need less cards.

I need to think about what is more efficient.


Perhaps a ring of some sort. In a very flat form...??

larienna's picture
Joined: 07/28/2008
Now that you mention binary,

Now that you mention binary, does the cards needs to be hidden.

You could use double sided cards like war game tokens with the reduced side on one of the side.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

A card could be turned in 3 directions. Thus making 8 possibilities with just 1 pip.

I could also design the card in 4 segments. So that where the pip ends up, it has a damage value.

NW is 1
NE is 2
SW is 4
SE is 8
Upside down, which would be a different colour:
NW is 16
NE is 32
SW is 64
SE is 128

This is optional. And perhaps too complicated for players.
I did some further testing with different health value's and of course different damage dice.

It starts to look like that I have to go from a lineair build up to a binairy build up. If I choose to do this.

Then again. Let's say I only need up to 4 cards, not turning them upside down. It is a lot of handling either way. And it will cost a lot. It is different than having pins in miniatures that move up one spot, or have a different colour.

I need to cut into the ammount of health that a card has. But I want to refrain from insta killing infantry cards.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Another suggestions I had (somewhere elso)

Putting the cards back in a certain order.
Putting the damaged cards on top.
And a damage tracking card for multiple cards per force...

I think, this could work. But it has a lot of handling too.
Further more. The bars would have to be long etc. And future expands can cause trouble.

I need to change my damage mechanic a bit at least.

Not knowing what I am going to do exactly as damage tracking mechanic. I need to equalize all cards.
So, how about the following idea?


The armor is going to be a threshold mechanic.
Meaning that tier 10 is not going to be 100 armor. But less.
And low damages should be combined in order to break through the armor.

Once broken through, the card takes.... wait for it.... 1 damage.
Each card has on average 5 health. So the damage would go up to 4.

What complicates this is some new (old) balancing on my part. Probably, the Ogame variant comes in handy.
Where the value is doubled, the damage and armor are trippled.

But for the players, they need to distribute the rolled damages.

I am doubting that it is possible for players to understand.
So, do you guys understand the following?


A player rolls 7 d6.
A 5 or 6 on a die doesn't count.
A 1 to 4 are multipliers.

4 d6 was for 1 damage each.
3 d6 was for 3 damage each.

The player rolled:
1x 1346 and 3x 255
The total that count are:
1x 134 and 3x 2
1x 8 and 3x 2
A total of 14 damage. But the projectiles that do 3 damage each will count for only 1 on the 1 armor cards.

So, the total damage roll would be 1x 10. Which means 2 infantry cards die.
Or 3x 4 + 2. Which means 1 vehicle card takes 4 damage. The remaining 2 don't count. The vehicle goes back into the deck with 4 damage on it.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
See through cards, some more options

1 damage can have a nice | drawn in an explosion of some sort.
And 4 of these could be stacked on top in 4 ways, to represent 4 damage.

I could add a || drawn in a bigger explosion of some sort. And once again, 4 of these could be stracked on top in 4 ways. But this time, at places on the card that is different than the | ones.

Up to 12 damage is possible this way. But it might look a bit bland and squared.

Another option is to have numbers written in the cards. And 2 variants of each damage.

The average health would be 5. But 6 would be common too.
1+1+2 and 1+2+2 would both be situations used in the game.
Suffice to say, I estimate that the 1 damage will be used a lot. Eventually, up to 3 see through cards could be used on 1 base card.

I think, I have to go with this one. But what about the costs? And how many am I going to need?

The simplest unit will be roughly 4 times more in the game than the simplest light tank.
Here I will be needing 9 proper hits to deal 1 damage to a tank. It is a bad RPS situation, but balanced.
4 proper hits from this tank can't kill an infantry just yet. This means, I can have 4 tanks, and I get 16 infantry as well.

I now determined roughly the number of unit cards in a simple game. This happens to be 60. Distributed over 6 forces. A force should be able to hold all 16 infantry cards though.

Either way, with 60 unit cards. And probably another 30 in the HQ deck. A total of 90 cards. And if everything would be damaged. A total of 2x 90 and another 90 for the damage cards... IF I want to have everything covered.

Practically speaking, this will not happen. But it is possible for players to do this.
So, if I make a game that is kinda like MtG in terms of booster packages etc. Then each package should at least have a 1 and a 2 damage card included.
I think a booster package would contain 3 damage cards. And then 9 or 12 other cards.

I am also pondering, should I have a "4" damage card?

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
I have another IDEA for you...

If you took a LOOK at "Gloom" and I think you DID... Maybe you can use WOUNDS like you said "Explosions" with various Damage counts "1 Damage" small explosion. And go up to "2 Damage" bigger explosion (in another AREA of the Card) and then adds a "4 Damage" even BIGGER explosion (another area too) and then maybe... "5 Damage" is the BIGGEST explosion (again in another AREA too)!

This would be similar like the GLOOM concept.

I think that's what you are thinking about, right?!

So you could stack multiple cards and you can have different VALUES with different explosions. And lower the AMOUNT of transparent cards required.

When I read your last entry/comment, I was like: "Oh yeah he looked into GLOOM!" And you could see that their PRINCIPLES are much SIMPLER than "Redakai TCG".

Sometimes the SIMPLE stuff works better. And I THINK I understood that you were liking the "GLOOM" approach which is much simpler of the two (2) that I shared with you.

Anyhow... Let me know if I understood your ideas correctly!


Note #1: With values 1 to 5, you can have 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 wounds = 15 Wounds in TOTAL. That's pretty DECENT... FIFTEEN (15) is a TOP damage option and is reasonably GOOD in terms of numbers too. So that would be 5 cards. If you have "1 Damage" already and you are dealt "+1 Damage" ... you would REMOVE the "1 Damage" and place the "2 Damage" instead and so forth. Or if you have "4 Damage" you can replace with a "5 Damage" instead, etc.

A MAXIMUM of 15 Damage per Unit should be ENOUGH... And that means that AT MOST a Unit may have 16 HP ... Just sharing ATM!

Note #2: You should be able to design three (3) sets of units: Fodder (1 to 5 HP), Support (6 to 10 HP) and Tanks (11 to 16 HP).

I like things that are BALANCED in the three (3) categories... You have other ways of balancing ... I like the numbers and the odds to be similar and the amount of units (and categories) are also very cool.

Anyhow I know you're working on it to see it FIT your way. Just sharing again!

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
You can change the distribution too...!

So here's (based on your comment):

1, 2, 4, 8 (Yellow Explosions) - Right Side Up

16, 32, 64, 128 (Red Explosions) - Up-Side Down

That's another AVENUE if you want HIGHER values... This would allow for "#", "##" and "###" values of HP.

But that would mean "4" cards for 2 Sets of explosions.

1/16, 2/32, 4/64, 8/128.

It's a BIT more complicated but still UNDERSTANDABLE... I would make them in two (2) COLORS and make them in different positions on the card.

Maybe that is TOO MUCH "explosions", having "8 Explosions" on one card is a LOT.

You could trim it down to:

1, 2, 4, 8 (Red Explosions)

And the MAXIUM Damage would be: 15 so it means a Unit has a Maximum of 16 HP.

That may be MORE manageable than (4 versus 8 explosions to one unit). And this is more in-line with my PREVIOUS "Comment" that FIFTEEN (15) should be the most amount of Damage being DEALT. 4 cards per unit is ENOUGH Damage Card IMHO!

Again just thinking what would be the best alternative and what are the possible variants that you could USE and/or think-up...


Joined: 01/27/2017
A different recordkeeping idea

Compared to the cost of several transparent cards, wouldn’t it be cheaper to include a strip for each player with six or so card-sized locations? Each location represents a certain amount of damage, including zero.

You’ll still need some way of tracking damage on ACTIVE cards, and the iconography of the storage strip should mimic that system. For example, if you’re using red splat tokens to represent damage on active cards, the strip would have pictures of red splats.

This assumes you don’t mind the opponent knowing how much damage an inactive card has.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Yes, indeed, almost the same.

I think I converged my idea into something similar like Gloom. But yeah, that looks much more like what I want to do. But I have purely damage effects at the moment. Maybe I should plan some other effects. But not healing, healing simply removes a damage-card.

Maybe something along the lines of mind control or hallucination. But that is for a later concern.

The damages certainly would be 1 and 2.
4 Can be added for exchanging multiple damage cards of 1 and 2.
3 Can be added as a special card later on, collecters item :)
But then again, 3 would be very handy as well for the infantry. Might as well add it as a standard. I never tested how much chance there is on a certain damage with various ammount of soldiers. But with big numbers, the chances are equal. 1+4 and 2+3 both kill 1 soldier.

A 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 does sound better than a 1, 2, 4 and 8.
I don't think I will reach 15. Maybe some very heavy units. But their must be a counter unit with just 1 health :)

I don't think you understood the threshold mechanic mixed in, though.

Remember my Ogame variant? I had those ships carry a shield and hull. And you needed sufficient damage to go through the shield. Then again sufficient damage to go through the hull. Overkill was lost.

I am planning something similar. But then, instead of 2 health, I am thinking about an average of 5 health, which is going to be tracked.

The balanced system doubles in value, but tripples in effect. What I mean is that infantry are 1, light vehicles 3, medium vehicles 9 and the heaviest are 27. If you do sufficient damage on a tank with 27 armor. Then it will take 1 damage.
Of course, a weapon that does 27 damage can easily deal 1 to 4 damage on such a tank.

Now, that 27 is so far the only double digit with the threshold system. But it is also a threshold, thus a player doesn't track on this. Only the 1 to 5 health points.



I have been looking into that as well.

I don't mind the players knowing how damaged an unit is. It was like this a decade ago.

As for the strip. Well, I did estimate a total of 90 cards.
And I figured, what if the damaged cards are tracked per force. That means, I need 7 times a map of tracking damage that way.

But long story short. It requires a lot more handling and fairness than just tracking on the individual cards.

I can't find a better picture. But look here at the resource tracker.
I need that 7 times. And much bigger.

Also, I need to use multiple strips for units more than 5 health. Since I dislike unused parts of a game.

Unless I didn't understand what you meant by strip.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Threshold versus Normal

There is no math here for the player, just numbers.

Where breaking through the armor means 1 damage.
Value versus Armor.
1.0 : 1
1.5 : 2
2.0 : 3
3.0 : 6
4.0 : 9
6.0 : 18
8.0 : 27

You need 27 riflemen hitting a heavy tank. In order to deal it 1 damage. I am planning on giving the player only 12 riflemen, but they do 1.67 damage on average per attack. And the whole salvo will be used. Thus 3 times more. This means, they can reach on average 60 damage. So no worries. They can deal 2 damage to a heavy tank. This is 40% damage. The exact number through anydice seems to be 1,78 damage, which is only 35,6% damage. Well, 3 rounds, and the tank is dead.

Which we used in our prototype and "public" game.
Where damage is damage, but always reduced to the armor value.
Value versus Armor versus Health
1.0 : 1 : _5
1.5 : 2 : 10
2.0 : 4 : 20
3.0 : 9 : 45
4.0 :16 : 80
5.0 :25 :125
6.0 :36 :180
7.0 :49 :245
8.0 :64 :320

With 12 riflemen, we deal 60 damage on average. Only 18,75%. The Heavy tank will die in 6 rounds, that seems to be twice as long.


Clearly, I need to have the Riflemen shoot all 3 times of their salvo, In order to be able to damage the heavy tank. But if I only shoot once. The chance in damaging the tank will be 10,7% for just 1 damage. Which roughly sounds like almost 50 rounds.
While with normal, this damage is dealt for certain.
And it would take like 16 rounds.

Threshold puts the heavy tank at a disadvantage. And fodder is actually good. The tank however, can take bullets. And is still very valid for RPS usage where the tank...tanks.

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
What are you saying???

X3M wrote:
...A 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 does sound better than a 1, 2, 4 and 8.
I don't think I will reach 15. Maybe some very heavy units. But there must be a counter unit with just 1 health :) ...

What do you mean by a "Counter Unit" with just 1 Health??? That's NOT balancing that's a poor idea TBH. Are you saying each stronger unit has a diametric and opposing unit that has "1 HP" and can DEFEAT the stronger unit???

What I would do instead is allow for a "SQUADRON" of cards required to defeat the stronger cards/units.

Like 3 Tanks can be defeated with 9 Riflemen or 6 Bazooka Soldiers.

So the ratio would be 1:3 or 1:2 ... Something like that. And then you can fudge the stats with things like a "Hummer" 3:4 so for every 3 Tanks, it takes 4 Hummers to defeat them.

But I guess it's a bit HARD to balance this kind of system without a CPU...?

However I'm sure you get the idea. I know you already know this... I just was a bit CONFUSED that each Unit would have a "Counter"?!?!

Best to have Squadrons that deal COMBINED Damage. And then you need to compute Attack vs. Defense too...

Anyhow this is really not my GENRE of game TBH. Just commenting because I wanted to get to the bottom of this "Counter Unit".


questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
Hmm... A bit different than I thought

I don't think you should BALANCE in terms of Units. It's too RANDOM.

Maybe you should think in terms of DAMAGE?!

Like "1 Tank" requires "5 Damage". Therefore "3 Tanks" require "15 Damage".

But you don't need to WORRY about the product of "3"! Let me explain... This is going to be something HARD to explain (because this is a card game).

Let's say you can "4 Riflemen" each doing "1 Damage". When they ATTACK they produce "4 Damage". And if it is VERSUS "3 Tanks", the DEFENDING player can DISTRIBUTE DAMAGE how HE/SHE sees FIT!

So instead of "1" Tank having "4 Damage" (and only 1 HP before dying)... The defending player can distribute like this: "2", "1", "1".

This gives his unit a far better amount of TIME to COUNTER and RETALIATE.

Again, I think because you are TRYING to BALANCE the game with STATS... This IMHO will not be as GOOD as "determining" DAMAGE for each Unit.

This is how I would go about BALANCING the game: per Damage per Unit.

I wouldn't get much fancier than this ... Because HONESTLY you want the PLAYERS to figure out themselves AS THEY PLAY what are the squadrons that are best suited for each match-up.

And then those "3" Tanks go on the offensive and due to the limitations of the Tank (turrets) they can deal "3" Damage per TARGET. So that would mean the "4" Riflemen would be left with only "1" Rifleman at the end of the attack...

Again, I don't know HOW to balance this... I'm sure you have a way. I'm just saying that the combat is not so PERFECT. And that you can explore different CATEGORIES of units too (Fodder, Support and Tank).

Tank vs. Fodder = slaughter (like "3" Tanks vs. the "4" Riflemen above).

So afterwards you can bring some BALANCE (somehow?)... I'm not like you ... I cannot figure out the BALANCING for "1" Unit, I think in terms of TEAMS or SQUADRONS... And see what is the MIN attack to defeat. But AGAIN... The player can distribute the Damage as he sees FIT... UNLESS it is MAX Damage. Max Damage (sometimes # of targets) = destroy all opposing Units.

Anyhow you get the idea I am sure.


questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
The OTHER idea I had ... And it may be what YOU are thinking...

Because these are CARDS, you THINK it terms of GROUPS:

A> "4", "5", "6" Riflemen (as a GROUP)... So ONE (1) CARD can be "4" Riflemen or "5" or "6" depending on the nature of the CARD.

B> "3" Missile Soldiers (again as a GROUP). So ONE (1) CARD.

C> "2" Riflemen and "1" Artillery Battery (as a GROUP).

D> "1" Tank PER CARD.


And your focus is CREATING all the VARIOUS GROUPS... I PICTURE THIS could WORK for a "Card Game". Instead of thinking PER UNIT... Think in terms of a Squadron and a COMBINED ATTACK.

This, to me, sounds more REALISTIC than just "1" of this and "2" of that...

No YOU PLAN AHEAD the Squadrons and their attack and defensive capabilities.

What do you think of this??? Again just sharing some of my thoughts. I am going to start editing my "Monster Keep" (MK) cards so that I can PRINT them and CUT a new SET...


Joined: 01/27/2017
A picture worth 999.9 words

This is what I meant by a "strip," and there'd be one for each player:

For poker-sized cards, the illustration would be 4x16 inches (though obviously it can fold up). It can also be part of a larger player mat if you already need one.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Math behind, 20 page essay in 1 post

The math shows that less than 5 health makes an army more durable. But the damage in the long run becomes triangular.

What you are suggesting is a way to make any battle squared in effect. After all, each tank would be alive as long as possible.

I tend to have pointmen or other tanks. But also fodder.

Not sure how to explain the game mechanics without making an essay here. Perhaps one to discuss in Discord?


The damage distribution rules are as following:

You have a projectile number:
This number indicates how many dice the unit can roll.
A die can hit only 1 target, regardless of the roll result.

You have a damage number:
This number indicates with how much damage the roll is multiplied.
A damage number can hit only 1 armor, meaning;
if the damage number is higher than the armor, the armor is used as damage number.

The roll result is treated as 1 projectile.
It can hit only 1 target.
But can hit this target multiple times, thus surpass the armor multiple times.

If you roll better than there is health left.
The remaining damage is lost.

To better differentiate. Perhaps I should have a name for the damage dealth for surpassing the armor. And the damage dealth on the target (which is 1 with every hit).


As for group cards.
I know you would like to see cards like that. But honestly, it would remove the purpose of players compiling their decks by a big margine.

I did a lot of testing. And actually got a completed document on how to do this. Even in RTS games. But a group card kinda removes the point of having multiple cards.
Which is not the goal here, this time.

Still, I have this option open for the 1 health cards. These can be put in a group card, in order to reach the desired minimum cost of a card. Which is 1, not one-fifth.

The deck size will also not be solid.

Trust me on this one, this will be a hilarious deck building mechanic.
Cards that are defeated, go back to the main deck and can be rebuild at HQ.

There will be a limit on the number of cards in terms of cost and total cost.

A player is allowed to have 12x2, 8x3, 6x4, 5x5, 4x6 etc.
Some will be exceptions. But that will result in other being less. Either way, the total of a deck should be equal for both players. Then any variation is welcome to the cards used.

This fact should actually be in the other topic.


No worries, I got the balance planned.

I am leaning more and more towards combining health and threshold. And thus using the mentioned damage cards.

Perhaps some other effects can be added later on. As an upgrade or weapon effect.

- Poison/Acid
- Auto Regeneration/Repairs
- etc.

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut