Deciding card resources/availability/visibility
Hello everyone,
I am designing a 1v1 turn-based strategy card/board game in which players create buildings which in turn create units (like an RTS), but I'm caught up on a rather early point of design: how the players get/use cards.
The current options I see are:
- Players build buildings from a communal deck (likely like buying in Ascension/King of Tokyo/etc.).
- Players each have preset faction decks
- Players each mix 2 or more faction decks
- Players each build decks (with a large available pool, including a full coverage of neutral cards—I would like this to be a "limited" style game, not ccg)
Additionally, in terms of visibility, I'm unsure on the best approach:
- Players are able to freely build any cards (if we go with decks, the decks are fully revealed and available)
- Players draw cards and can play them from hand
- Players have an always-available, visible, limited set of cards to play (for example, can see/play the top 3 cards of their deck)
Each of these options comes with positives and negatives in terms of information provided/hidden, player interactions, replayability, etc. and I feel unsure what would produce the best overall game feeling. Combat and other smaller actions should cause a reasonable amount of player interaction, so I'm not sure if the acquisition of cards should also contain interaction or if it might cause a player to lose their sense of control (like the guess I lose because you got to buy the best things first and snowball present in so many deckbuilders).
While I will likely play around with various forms of these, there's a large component of design related to which approach is chosen (for example, having preset faction decks allows for far more strict mechanical interactions and balance, whereas mixing cards leads to more loose/general mechanics).
If you've experimented with or experienced these forms of design, what worked best and why? Is there a better form of card management I've missed?
Thank you for your time and have an excellent day.
Posted Dec 31, 2019, 9:48 PM UTC · edited
As you said I think each of those options has there pros and cons. I think it depends on what you want from your game, do you want an open shop which rewards strategy, or closed decks which then varies based on faction, or a communal draw which then can swing the game based on luck of the draw or a combination of those above. I can't say I've dabbled much with them but I think I've always ended up with a slight combination of them, an open shop potentially with draws. So a common deck of maybe basic cards and then an open shop of more elite / specialist things. Good luck though, keep me posted on any plays or playteaters required, I love the idea
This right here. There is no objectively "best" design. Each player and group is going to have a different combination of things they want in a game at any one point in time. Some games go for mass appeal, some want extreme fulfillment for a niche audience, etc.
Your job as the designer is to make decisions about what feel you want your game to have, and then align the mechanics with that experience you're trying to create. Without knowing what kind of game you want, we can't help you figure out the right answers.
I suppose that's why I'm asking this; I'm trying to see how these very different approaches to design have led or misled others in their pursuits.
This is an influential point in the process (as it leads mechanics), so I thought it might be prudent to see if I could draw from the expertise here and see what others have experienced before I take the plunge and invest a lot of time designing my way into dead ends.
I'm not attached to any of these systems in particular, as I've played/enjoyed each of them in various forms—I'm just unsure how well these handle during the design process.
I guess I'm looking more for anecdotes, warnings, or other perspectives than I am looking for "right answers". It's enlightening to hear what people have tried and how that made their work more easy/difficult, what complexities they ran into that they weren't expecting, notes on things to keep in mind, etc.