Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×

More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
April 16, 2012
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
287
Favourites
0
Comments
9
×
Email to EQGaming sent, but the game doesn't technically meet what they usually post about.
Email to EQD sent, got reply stating they'd post it (Seth stated that Phoe would post it), but no post yet.
r/mylittlepony is as aware as they'll ever get. The ccg's subreddit is now at... 12.
Ponychan... not unless I absolutely have to.

As I thought, the game needs a client and a website. Great.

I may be able to afford the website, if I remember my business plan well enough. But an original client will take months (and probably over a year), and I'm pretty sure the client isn't going to be ready until the -entire- card game is done because of effects.

What can I do to increase the amount of playtesters and thus, feedback?

EDIT: Site incoming soon-ish. Time to start putting that plan into usage... I mean, I've been paying it for 5 years :X

---
Another thing.

1 card Draw Step vs 2 card Variable Draw Step... and neither of them win.

1 card Draw makes each action count, but players were running out of cards too fast, ruining the pace of the game after the 12th overall turn (unless you were Rainbow Dash). This made discarding a very powerful, noticeable effect.

2 card Draw gives the player more choice, and helps make Prison-style more rewarding (making it give card advantage), but most games were ending with players having 7 to 10 cards in their hand, which is entirely too many. It also gave a bit too much power to Blitz-style decks, which could more reliably earn 10 apples in five turns. This also ruined quite a few effects. Card drawing effects were lessened along with the power of discarding (unless you played Derpy).

So really... neither of them are a choice. Too little destroys the pace, and too much destroys the significance.

The real answer is 1.5 card Draw, but there's no easy way to implement that without rules outside of the cards... but there are multiple options.
:bulletblue: You draw 2 if you're behind on Apples. This would allow for a comeback mechanic, but can very easily turn into a game of leap-frog (which is... bad. It makes games predictable). it can also be abused by players who willingly stay behind to draw more options, but that style of play has its own perks as well. It would make the player that's ahead feel like they were being punished by being in the lead.
:bulletblue: You draw 2 after a certain amount of Apples, which is the total of the two numbers shown on your MCs. This is an interesting option, as it would diversify MC choices even more with little change to how people play currently, but it strengthens the stigma of the "meta", which you have to use certain combinations to be "viable". It can be used as an additional balancing tool; instead of the line system of MC effect <-> Card Pool, it would be a Triad of MC Effect, Card Pool, and Wait Count.
:bulletblue: Spending Phantom Apples to draw cards. Normally, with this you would be able to draw one card a turn, with the option of spending a Phantom Apple to draw another card. This allows the Phantom Count to go into late-game (right now it effectively goes away, wasted, after your fifth apple), and rewards good deckbuilding over the current system. However, the overall impact is going to be small, as most of the time you're still only drawing one card (making it like 1.1 or 1.2 card draw overall), so the problems will be similar to 1 card Draw. If I did this, I would be much more comfy with making cards that actually interacted with Phantoms.

So, what do you think?
  • Playing: MLP:CCG in LackeyCCG
Add a Comment:
 
:icontrivial1888:
Trivial1888 Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012
I don't know what to say about the advertising. I'd love to know where I can spread word about my Anachronism set. A website would be good, however (especially if you're paying for space already). I wouldn't worry about EqD. It took me 2 weeks to get my cards in the Nightly Roundup (Seth was reluctant because he never saw anything like them before), but I got it. If you don't see a post soon, just remind them, but be polite.

About the card draws: first, about the "after a certain amount of apples," which numbers are shown on the MCs? I don't see any. Anyway, I don't think I like that option. The phantom apple option is the best of those three. Here's another suggestion you might want to consider, although it would mean changing some existing cards: give the player the option to use an MC's action for the turn (or both MC's actions that turn) to draw cards. Let me know what you think.

Thanks!
Reply
:iconmasterage:
masterage Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
That's... a really interesting idea, actually. I mean, seriously, I'm going to be running sims all night for that idea. Thanks!

And there ARE no numbers on the cards, I haven't added them yet; won't until I find something to use them on. I think I'm going to have to have a third balancing feature, but the card thing may not be it. :D

As for the post, I was told I'd get a full post from Phoe, but she hasn't posted at all since what I sent. She's probably busy or something. That, or the game fried her brain o.o
Reply
:icontrivial1888:
Trivial1888 Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012
You're welcome! Hope it works out.

Yay! I'm helping!
Reply
:iconmasterage:
masterage Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
The playtest has actually been a success, just wish more people were playing so I could get more data.

I'm curious which cards you're thinking of that will break when I test your idea. Especially as it would be obvious if they couldn't draw an extra card if they were face-down.

I mean, really, that's such an elegant solution. Rarity would be proud, dood. It keeps Prison's power from 2Draw, but reduces Blitz's to 1Draw levels. And the MCs with Draw engines would feel powerful (they wouldn't need to not act), but the ones with Discard engines would have an actual impact (as they would punish MCs that Rest). Attach decks that Rest would still work as intended (I'm seeing a lot more decks that rely on Pinkie Pie to auto-earn for the team). It would provide the buff [Into the Everfree Forest] is looking for. Each action would still be valuable while not limiting player choice, and it rewards "pure" skill (because risk assessment, by Resting you essentially give your rival an opening to use, but if you had nothing to begin with it's nothing but a boon. But a great player will see two or more turns ahead...)

I might hurry to put that rule in before the EQD post. Seriously, dood, gold-freaking-star, and a well-earned one.
Reply
:icontrivial1888:
Trivial1888 Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012
Wow! Uh, thanks!

I didn't think of most of what you listed, actually. The idea just sort of came off the top of my head (there's some [card/board] game I played out there that did something similar, but, for the life of me, I can't think of what that is).

I was mainly thinking of "Just A Drink" and other "single-draw" cards that might lose power if a player could just optionally draw as an action.
Reply
:iconmasterage:
masterage Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
well, [Just a Drink] was changed in v1.03 to be an optional, Apple-earner, Counter-type (since it could be used while face-down, making it quite usable against [Dark] decks). And, if the MC -is- face-down, it's the better choice (since Resting couldn't be done while face-down)...

It is more suited for a sideboard, really.

I was looking at the single-draw cards, but so long as they're easier to play than Resting, and do more than Resting (with proportional costs), I'd think there will be no complaints and they will have some place. I was avoiding pure, does-nothing-else "Draw a card" because of the action system anyway.

I mean, it opens up some possibilities. How about an Attachment that allows you to Rest while face-down? Or one that can force a Rest action at a cost? Or a MC that improves the Rest action of your other MC? I mean, it adds a whole new exploitable mechanic to the game...
Reply
:icontrivial1888:
Trivial1888 Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012
Well, glad you like it! Thanks!
Reply
:iconhalestorm6:
Halestorm6 Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012
I don't think the first two options listed would work very well. Using an MC's action to draw would be a very interesting idea worth some testing.
Reply
:iconmasterage:
masterage Featured By Owner Apr 17, 2012  Hobbyist Interface Designer
Yeah, I'm about to throw it in. Even as a test I would think it would be better than the current 2Draw.

And well, playtesting. It's legit!
Reply
Add a Comment: