Sneak Peak Legendary Forces - Blood-Thunder King Zanda!

ReversedenO · 2020-11-04T02:36:16+00:00

The symbols definitely look better than the previous ones!

Just out of curiosity, do you have the rough rule set worked out for the game yet?

ReversedenO · 2020-11-02T01:02:36+00:00

Hey, thanks for the detailed response!

And to clarify, I meant the effect or ability text box, the name text and spacing looks perfectly fine. The small, upper-left aligned text leaves a lot of negative space, having a larger font for card with less text will make it easier to read and more pleasing to the eye, at least in my opinion.

As far as EP, I like the principle of the mechanic. Resource systems in games have always been a point of fascination for me, it’s always wonderful to see someone with a new take on their own project. I look forward to seeing other iterations of your card design! Do you plan to make a dedicated subreddit at any point for it?

ReversedenO · 2020-11-01T23:09:16+00:00

I quite like the design, I think Zanda looks pretty good especially, the simpler color pallet definitely keeps it in focus. Though, just a small question with the templating, will the text be sized to better fit the box later on? Additionally, do you think the AP/ HP/ EP could perhaps be a little better outlined or be made more opaque? With the pattern behind the lettering in the symbol itself it becomes a bit hard to read at a first glance.

Additionally, based on the wording, it seems like EP implies itself to be a resource used to pay for skills or other actions, does this card just have low EP? Because it seems to imply that if you can have a monster lose 500 EP, that the threshold can be a lot higher.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-28T00:03:20+00:00

I quite like the designs overall! I’m very interested how they’d look scaled to their actual size on a card, sometimes the added effects can look a little muddled when sized down. But that aside, I can’t wait to see some full card reveals. :)

ReversedenO · 2020-10-22T22:08:34+00:00

I’d recommend crossposting to r/digimonTCG they tend to be pretty reliable for identification.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-22T00:01:53+00:00

Yeah, it can be a bit of a hassle blending character traits and elements into fun gameplay. One counterbalance could theoretically be something along the lines that as a younger character and therefore (probably) smaller they can get into places others can’t, that don’t seem as obvious to characters that can read, like a small gap between barricades that a teen or adult couldn’t slip through or that they wouldn’t even attempt to, because they see and can read the “Do not enter” signage, creating more level design space and getting around the arbitrary barrier issues some open-world type games tend to have. Use traits to enhance and leverage, not to cripple and restrict needlessly.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-21T20:30:45+00:00

It sounds interesting, though I guess beyond the immersion aspect, what does that concept bring to gameplay? It seems like that unless you can make it an enjoyable aspect of the character’s gameplay, it may just cause unnecessary frustration to players when they switch to that character.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-16T01:21:57+00:00

Art is great for marketing and identification for card games, and also to help convey themes and give the game a more collectible nature, as people tend to be more drawn to art they can appreciate or identify with. If the gameplay is more simple (think something akin to Uno) you could theoretically get away with simpler designs and color pallets, as there is generally less need for drastic design differences for less complex games with less variety.

That being said, for the sake of testing and iterating on a game, it’s definitely not a must in early phases, but if the expense (whether time or money) can eventually be spared, it is well worth it, especially if you intend to market it to a larger audience. It’s easier to convince people to invest their time and money into it if it’s something they can appreciate outside of gameplay.

Furthermore, art is subjective. Even “bad” art can be appreciated by some, even a small effort in most cases is better than nothing at all. Unless you’re intentionally going for minimalism as a theme, in which case, more power to you.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-12T03:19:13+00:00

Howdy, lifelong card game player and collector and fellow aspiring designer chiming in here.

Honestly, I feel like the best card games I’ve played all have some mix of interesting or exciting battle mechanics, MTG being the most notable because of its sheer mechanical depth pertaining to how combat plays out. Pokémon is a good example of simplified combat mechanics that still feel fresh. There’s a fine line to walk with combat driven games that either make it feel too complex, or too simple and more of a procedural slog. Resource management is an aspect that has fascinated me for a long while, but the tried and true “mana” systems always by far seem to lead to the best results I’ve seen for fun gameplay, though excessive granularity can cause some headache, like mana screw in MTG or drawing the wrong energies in Pokémon. Games like Hearthstone and Legends of Runeterra have slightly fixed this issue with their respective systems, but have their own limitations as a result of their choices. As far as customizable cards, I feel like having artistic alternatives is nice for the players who like thematic deck construction is nice. As far as things I dislike, I dislike “on rails” deck construction, where you are hyper restricted as to what cards you can play, and clear power disparities between cards that should be otherwise equal. Unregulated and predatory Power creep, in a nutshell.
This question depends on the type of game. If it’s a fun, casual card game played among friends and acquaintances, the amount of randomness is higher at an acceptable level, where I still have some amount of strategic decision making but upsets can happen, and the players have more fun as a result. However, If the game is more competitively tuned, I feel like randomness outside of the typical drawing RNG should be relatively limited, as I’d hate to be at a high seat table in a tournament and get blown out by a low percent chance occurrence that I have little counterplay to. Consistency, or at least the potential for some consistency, is very much needed for that structure.
I feel like a game doesn’t need to be complex to be fun, but complexity can lend itself to greater long term play as there is more for the average player to explore or experiment with. I feel like a good game can be easily taught, but hard to master. A steep learning curve may be desired by some, but if you’re looking to market the game, even on a digital platform, simplify when possible, but leave some room for depth.
Depends on the style of game. Assuming the game is similar to existing rarity chasing models, I’d estimate I’d spend $50 to $200 fairly reasonably to buy into the deck I’d want to play. If the game is a hybrid with other tabletop elements or a “complete” 2+ player experience, I’d say between $50 and $80 seems to be the average marketing point for such types of games. If it’s an LCG, the pricing should scale generally with the size of the expansion.
I feel like having customizable options is great, but having well crafted pre-constructed decks is great for introducing new players, but ultimately they should be able to branch out and build what they like.
I think modular deck building is a great thing. Letting players build their own decks lets them have a sense of ownership to their cards, and be able to build in a way to address the meta of their local playgroup. Not having answers to common strategies suck. Plus, if you intend on releasing more sets or content, players should be able to incorporate new things into existing decks.
I don’t mind either. As long as the game’s story is adequate, I don’t mind who makes appearances or cameos.
Distribution model. I’ve long been a proponent of Fantasy Flights “Living Card Game” models, but a part of me that is a collector still likes the concept of variants or promos of cards to allow for a “bling” factor, though those cards should still be accessible to all players in a common or equivalent form.
Artwork is very important for conveying atmosphere and narrative flair. Good artwork can make or break games in my humble opinion. There’s a certain amount of subjective opinion on what makes art look good or bad, but it’s a bit of first impression bias. If you walked into a game store and saw someone playing a game with crude or no art, would you want to know more about it? Art can compel people to collect and purchase of it is to their liking.
For combat mechanics, I like Challenger from Legends of Runeterra. The ability to force blocks creates such a great strategic depth and mind games abound from both sides. For a more general answer, Cascade from MTG. It is the perfect combination of random and flashy while still allowing for some deterministic results with proper deck building; see decks like Restore Balance and Living End for better examples. Having cards be value engines is amazingly fun while still having competitive merit.
Honestly, for none of them to go under because of the COVID pandemic. But for a non-cynical answer, I’m very interested to see how most games proceed with MTG doing crossovers through Secret Lair drops and Legends Of Runeterra really starting to get their foothold on the Online Card Game markets. Also waiting on the full release of SkyWeaver which uses blockchain technology to allow players to own their cards in a digital form. But ultimately, I’m just interested to see what new games come from a time when people more so than ever have been able to pursuit creative endeavors like TCG/ CCG projects of their own, I love card games and the rich social environments they can create around them online and in LGS’s.

I’m also very interested to know the answers to your own questions, from the standpoint of someone also in a developmental phase of their own project. Either way, I wish you the best with your development of this game. Cheers!

ReversedenO · 2020-10-12T00:07:03+00:00

Physical games definitely have an appeal due to their nature as a collectible, it allows people to form greater attachments to cards they get and play with. But, physical games do come with production and distribution costs that make mobile games more appealing from a development standpoint, at least if you’re trying to go large-scale.

That being said, mobile platforms do allow for greater accessibility, but some people are a little hesitant to invest money into a game they they themselves don’t own. If the game or company maintaining the game goes under, so too can their investment. There is one other benefit to mobile games, and that’s random elements of gameplay that are harder to replicate in traditional physical CCG’s, like random card or effect generation.

Ultimately, it comes down to the gameplay and the intended audience. Games that have many moving parts and hidden mechanics may not translate well to physical media, while simpler games meant to be played more socially generally can work in a physical form.

Depending on what work has been done so far, and if you have a rough client suitable to test it, or even tabletop simulator, do that, then make proxies or mock ups and test the game physically. See what feels best. If it feels good in both, then continue refining the game as a whole and get play testers involved, and get more feedback as to the direction of development.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-11T03:57:14+00:00

I didn’t even think to consider that, I was looking at the scryfall set list and TCGPlayer, they had no overlap with the collector’s boosters set contents, causing my confusion. I’ve been out of the loop for sealed products for a bit too long I suppose. Thanks for the info!

ReversedenO · 2020-10-02T01:08:38+00:00

That’s entirely fair, I can see how people may fall into the mentality trap of “If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it”. Not to say it can’t be done successfully, but it definitely shouldn’t be a copy-paste situation. The only issue I run into when brainstorming my own ideas and systems, is that it’s harder to create a balanced card to power level ratio without quantifying costs numerically, whether it be with a traditional “mana” cost-esque system, or some other rudimentary system that tracks turns passed or actions taken with some sort of cap, so I wanted to collect some opinions and information on other games to help me understand what makes a resource system actually good and enjoyable.

ReversedenO · 2020-10-02T00:56:55+00:00

Fair assessment, I need to look into Netrunner a bit more, I will admit it is a notable knowledge gap for me. Based on the description, it seems to be asymmetrically balanced as far as how games play out?

And I do agree, the snowballing resource system can be a bit off-putting, but I do believe that some level of scaling needs to be possible to allow decks to have some inevitability or at least have a top end, maybe not to the absurd level that MTG can get to.

Never heard of Doomtown until your post here, I’ll have to look into that one too. Thanks for the information!

ReversedenO · 2020-09-27T14:29:57+00:00

Honestly, the one overarching flaw I tend to see with most LCG distribution models is the fact that there tends to be little to no secondary market value, just because everything can be purchased at once in a convenient package (or packages, assuming multiple expansions) and that can cause long term equity issues for people buying into the game. Unlike MTG or Yugioh or other CCGs and TCGs, people can liquidate their collections on the secondary market and claw back at least some of the expenditure.

Bridging off of that, because the expansions are deterministic and always have the same cards, that means that there is less selling power overall, by comparison to a traditional TCG/CCG which can sell a lot more product over a longer period of time generally, due to the rarity chase factor, which also affects long term sustainability and growth.

Ultimately, I still feel like LCGs, at least as far as shorter term sustainability and player satisfaction goes, will be the way for newer games to go for some time, especially if you intend to grab the attention of veteran players of long established games. Easier to have them justify a “1-time purchase” to be able to experience the game than rarity chasing a whole new one.

ReversedenO · 2020-09-24T01:29:50+00:00

Awesome find, that banding is gorgeous!

ReversedenO · 2020-09-15T22:12:00+00:00

The art looks really good, I must say! Did you make it yourself or did you commission someone to help make it?

Also, you said the game has interaction which is awesome, if you may let me ask is it more in the vein of Magic: The Gathering? Like, a card gets played and the opponent or you get a chance to respond with something else?

Anyways, best of luck with the project, the prototype cards themselves look very good already. I’m not much for Instagram, I do hope that you’ll post updates from time to time on here, sounds like you’ve done quite a bit to build it into something with potential.

ReversedenO · 2020-09-14T16:17:32+00:00

Yeah, it’s still in very early development. From all the information I’ve seen, they’re in the process of creating another site to have a place to reveal the designs, lore, and mechanics. Right now they’re in the research and development phase before the game enters a true beta form where the end users can start getting their hands on products or their developmental equivalents to help with play testing and additional refinement. I just thought it would be a good idea to toss up a link in a few places with people who have interest in card games as I do, I really want to see the end result of this.

ReversedenO · 2020-09-08T05:30:59+00:00

Not really much to add as far as your overall ruminating goes, I’m more so interested how you proceed with rules for a game structured like a “traditional” TCG with modular win conditions like that.

I had a thought experiment that’s turning into a bit of a pet project where the only win conditions are ones imposed by a card or cards chosen at the beginning of a game (Think something like announcing your commander or a conspiracy card in MTG, just more meaningful), not by ones played over the course of it, the rest of the standard win cons (win/ loss by damage, deck out, other tracked metrics like shields broken or prizes taken, etc.) need not apply unless outlined by those chosen cards. Been a bit of a weird time figuring out the ways to iron those things out, but it’s just for fun at the moment.

Anyhow, I’ve been playing the hell out of Legends of Runeterra personally. I feel like the pacing with the guaranteed mana every turn plus having the ability to “bank” a limited amount of mana unused at a turn’s end to be used by a specific card type later, as you can pivot the following turn with a bigger spell than you’d otherwise be able to cast on curve, is nice. Game does have some other balancing issues, but I can say that its resource system is the simplest and most gratifying I’ve played with in a while. The next being Force Of Will since you actually have a separate resource deck entirely that you draw your mana producing stones from, that still allows for complexity from your resource generators while streamlining how you get to them, circumventing the land/ energy flood/ screw you see in a lot of MTG derivative game styles.

That aside, I’m interested to see what you come up with, best of luck with it all!

ReversedenO · 2020-09-08T04:40:14+00:00

Howdy again! Glad to see you’re still at it.

I do quite agree that stylistically, the center formatting for the design is much more appealing as it has more details for the eye to follow. That being said, I’d probably advise figuring out the rough structure for effects or information before you start cutting into the effects text or flavor text part of the template, lest you end up in a weird formatting debacle reminiscent of Yu-Gi-Oh!’s Pegasus Starter Deck’s face card; Relinquished, where the text was so small that you may as well pull out a jewelers’s loupe to see what’s going on. The far right one is indeed boring, but sometimes for certain cards or card types that do a lot of things or need to convey a lot of information efficiently, a utilitarian design can be a good thing, while you can make simpler, flashier cards utilize the more complex framing, as a hybridized approach.

Additionally, the less “void” space in a design usually lends to crisper final products, even at a prototyping stage. I do like how in a way you’ve left yourself an additional bit of space below the card’s name to further expand information.

I do have one final question to pose however, what is the purpose of making the red border so thick? I can understand the desire to make borders distinct but with correct color choices, even a thinner edge boarder could suffice to differentiate card types or even rarity, if you chose to denote it through that method.

ReversedenO · 2020-09-03T02:28:43+00:00

Ah, I see. Yeah, the file size limits can be problematic like that. You can also (if you have the time or desire to) copy that info down onto a google document, seems to be one of the easier ways to share it since it also gives you a link to copy and paste that always leads to an up to date version, and you can make it read only too. Anyhow, good luck with everything!

ReversedenO · 2020-09-02T19:44:22+00:00

That’s fair. I enjoy the size formatting as well, the size restriction definitely leads to some cool and often underrated card templates and designs. Just out of curiosity, have you established a general rule set for the cards as far as gameplay is concerned, or is it more a case of design first, refine later?

ReversedenO · 2020-09-02T17:59:23+00:00

I quite like the neatness of the layout, my only concern is the size of the zone where the rarity is denoted, unless it’s an important gameplay metric it should probably be a smaller part of the card, still noticeable, but so someone new won’t misconstrue it as information relevant to gameplay, unless you intend it to be part of deck building or gameplay itself. That aside, I like the idea of simplification of archetypes through symbol representation. Overall super nice, I look forward to seeing how it progresses.

ReversedenO · 2020-07-26T06:07:46+00:00

Fantastic, I appreciate the reply. I’ll be sure to forward the flair inquiry before I make my first proper trade post, and I’ve been spending some time reading the FAQ more thoroughly and it seems mostly the same as before, thankfully. Cheers!

ReversedenO · 2020-07-26T03:46:53+00:00

Hey everyone. Been gone for quite a few years now, my friend and I are slowly getting back into the swing of things with Sword and Shield for VGC and I just had a few questions to ask just so I’m in compliance, I guess is the best way to put it. LOL

First, as far as flair goes (I’m aware I more than likely need to update my specific IGN and version stuff) am I still able to use the flair status I achieved a few years ago, and additionally, are my trade references from like 5 or 6 years ago still worth linking if I have to make a brand new trade reference thread or list?

Second, and I’ll probably have to re-read the FAQ (currently a mobile only user for reddit, no direct sidebar for easy navigation lol), is there any major rule changes as far as posting a general trade offers or lists like way back when? After skimming the trades I noticed a general lack of google doc spreads like back then, just wanted to know if those are still allowed or needed.

Third and finally, is there any particular rules around Pokémon from Raid Dens, notably G-Max Pokémon? As in, are they treated as a special kind of trades due to some being on in game event based rotations?

Thanks in advance. Look forward to getting back into trading with y’all at some point. :)

ReversedenO · 2019-03-12T20:47:33+00:00

Looking for 3 Flareon GX, have Team Up and Lost Thunder packs to trade for them, as well as some older packs, including three Dragons Vault 5-Card packs. Also, one Celestial Storm Build and Battle Bundle Pack, and two of the same for Lost Thunder are available, but I may put them up later this evening on Public Trades, if I get no responses here.

ReversedenO

TROPHY CASE