Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SHAD0Wdump]

It wasn't really a mistake given the context, I have no more plays. Its effect only works when face down and allowing me to receive damage, which was unacceptable at 10 damage to my 7 hearts.

So after drawing I play nothing and you win next turn. GG.

I might talk more about the deck but I have to go to work.

[notquitethere]

I've been thinking about the card costs-- whether we should try to standardise or set a minimum for common effects like drawing cards, playing cards, generating stars. One neat balancing thing is that the attack and hearts stats are balanced 1:1 (two cards with equal total hearts and attacks will always kill each other at the same time no matter what the specific heart or attack value of each card is).

[flabort]

I've been thinking about the card costs-- whether we should try to standardise or set a minimum for common effects like drawing cards, playing cards, generating stars. One neat balancing thing is that the attack and hearts stats are balanced 1:1 (two cards with equal total hearts and attacks will always kill each other at the same time no matter what the specific heart or attack value of each card is).

1A,4H vs 2A,3H (both totaling 5)?
I believe the second card would survive with 1H.
In most situations, yes, that does apply, however.
As for standardizing, that does go against the spirit of the game, if not the rules. The point is to do what you like.

It wasn't really a mistake given the context, I have no more plays. Its effect only works when face down and allowing me to receive damage, which was unacceptable at 10 damage to my 7 hearts.

So after drawing I play nothing and you win next turn. GG.

I might talk more about the deck but I have to go to work.

GG. Sorry about the 9 overkill damage. And yeah, in context, I guess it wasn't that bad of a move, assuming you had no more 0-star cards in your hand?

I also never got to use two of the card designs in my deck. I did draw one of them, but after I spent the stars required to play it.

[notquitethere]

Ah yes, it all worked out for the examples I ran through in my head, but you're quite right, it doesn't always hold.

I suppose the spirit of the game is to keep things as minimalistic as possible-- though the GM might have their own rules of thumb for balancing.

I know when I was making my deck I considered additional effects worth about two points if they were pretty minor or temporary, three points if it was an oncoming effect, with a reduction of one point if there was a restriction.

[Supernerd]

If it seems about right, I'll generally accept it. A key part of this game is creativity. If a card needs to be "Standardized" then you're probably designing the card wrong.

[SHAD0Wdump]

GG. Sorry about the 9 overkill damage. And yeah, in context, I guess it wasn't that bad of a move, assuming you had no more 0-star cards in your hand?

Yeah, my hand was full of modules, support cards, and things just slightly too expensive to play.

Which brings me to mention the big downfall of my deck, it is just so star hungry. Several 'pay 1 star' effects and generally my actual fighters are 2 cost or more. Furthermore is the requirement for mechs to attach modules to. I only managed to get one on the battlefield, and only drew one more right at the end, all of my other mechs never saw my hand even with the aggressive drawing my Cypher allowed me.

And that starting hand... I actually had the thought to propose a mulligan. I started with no mechs, and no star producers, only usable cards were a plasma mine and that spatial distortion.

[Kashyyk]

Once you've both finetumed your decks, do you fancy playing notquitethere and myself?

We could do 1v1s, or a 2v2? There's the MTG variant "Two Headed Giant" where teammates share life and act on the same turn. That might be possible, assuming we can line each phase of actions easily.

Or we could just do a standard 2v2 where we cycle round each player in turn like a 1v1v1v1, except people are in teams.

[notquitethere]

I'm definitely up for another game. We could play a team game, though as we're in different time zones it's probably best to keep the exact turn order loose-- two headed giant would be fine if both team members act on the same turn but it doesn't matter which of them plays first-- it'd go speedier than 1v1v1v1.

If we do Two Headed-- would we share star pools as well? And, for card effects, will team mates share a board?

[flabort]

I've submitted my deck modifications.
I don't think I'm ready for a Two-Headed game. I could do a 1v1v1, or 1v1v1v1.
Or two 1v1s simultaneously, if nobody minds me playing two games at once and doubling my post size.

Once my deck changes and 2 new cards have been approved.

[Supernerd]

Honestly I should consider the use of different threads if the main thread is getting cluttered.

[notquitethere]

Well in that case let's start a game a 1v1+ and we can open up another thread if necessary. I'm happy to go first...

Game begins with 5 cards, I draw 1 card up to 6.

I play Active Toilers which allows me to play another card, so I play another Active Toilers. I could play another card but there's nothing decent to play so I leave it at that.

Spoiler: Board (click to show/hide)

Hearts: 20
Cards: 4
Stars: 0

[Kashyyk]

I'll let flabort or SHADOWdump play you notquitethere, and I'll play the other one. Unless one of the peeps who has a deck but hasn't played yet wants to join?

[SHAD0Wdump]

I'm still working on my ideas for a few cards, it's amazing how hard it is to find a decent image for a cloaking field without it looking like a blueprint or being related to harry potter.

[notquitethere]

 Looks like I'm facing Flabort 1v1 then!

[flabort]

Looks like I'm facing Flabort 1v1 then!

I forgot background colors for the new cards in my deck, so as soon as Supernerd gets back to me now that I've submitted colors, I'll get a turn in then.