ORC final for playtest is done

Anything related to dev. & that doesn't fit in below categories.
Post Reply
User avatar
snowdrop
developer
Posts:798
Joined:Mon Feb 01, 2010 15:25
Location:Sweden
Contact:
ORC final for playtest is done

Post by snowdrop » Thu Apr 07, 2016 19:00

As title suggests, the original rules concept is pretty much done for playtesting. I've done plenty of revisions and have nothing to add unless questions arise in this thread about needec clarifications or problems that you spot and I have missed.

I think that what is around in http://wtactics.org/wiki/index.php?title=Quick_Rules is what I believe could be working and deep enough, while still keeping it as simple as possible and trying to connect various parts of the game to get synergy and tactics in-between them.

I don't consider the ORC as finalized, it's just as far as I can come with it in a meaningful way without creating cards and playtesting it, so, that is my next move the coming months.

Meanwhile, everyone is welcome to suggest cards for it if you feel you want to but please don't if you haven't read the rules and grasped them.
User avatar
Peter
Posts:96
Joined:Thu Oct 16, 2014 20:13
Location:Germany

Re: ORC final for playtest is done

Post by Peter » Thu Apr 07, 2016 20:38

Looks like great work. :) Now I have to read it. It's a lot.

Civilians and domains and some details of payment are new, right? Or have I just overlooked them last time I read it?

Would it be a good idea to implement these rules in the card/deck tool? I guess it's probably better to write a new program for playing because database and match are two different applications. But then we should have a way to export the deck and cards to the playing program. So I don't know what is better.

EDIT: I have read it and I can see the rules are reduced, which is nice :) And there's a lot that is not like Magic, which is important.
Kind regards and happy coding :)
User avatar
Ravenchild
developer
Posts:131
Joined:Sat Sep 04, 2010 19:21
Location:Germany

Re: ORC final for playtest is done

Post by Ravenchild » Sun Apr 10, 2016 11:33

Cool. I've read the whole thing and I have a few comments:

I don't get why we have marking and assignment. What's the benefit of having both and what is the difference? The rules say that you can't mark or unmark cards that are assigned, which makes these concepts dependent on one another.

In the section "payment activation": Are the colors part of the ruleset or are they only used to explain the different payment types more clearly?

The section on region cards should explain if the HP value is replenished after each turn.


It is quite an extensive "quick" ruleset. But everything has to be defined to avoid unclarity. We should still try to streamline it, find common elements and summarize them as such. We also need to do playtesting so that we can see what makes sense and what doesn't.
User avatar
snowdrop
developer
Posts:798
Joined:Mon Feb 01, 2010 15:25
Location:Sweden
Contact:

Re: ORC final for playtest is done

Post by snowdrop » Mon Apr 11, 2016 19:30

Ravenchild wrote:Cool. I've read the whole thing and I have a few comments:
Long time no see...:P Thanks for taking the time to read.

I don't get why we have marking and assignment. What's the benefit of having both and what is the difference?
Strictly speaking, Assignment isn't necessary.

What it is: It works like a "hard or double mark". Meaning, it is an card exhaust state, just like mark, but the differnece from mark is:

1) it takes more time for the card to recover to it's unexhausted state (== unmarked, unasssigned).
2) it doesn't automatically unmark in the unmark phase.

A card is either exhausted, or it's not. If it is exhausted, then it's either marked or assigned. As you wrote - it can't be both.

So why is this around? Simply because it allows us some design space and it also minimizes administration of certain types of cards that need to be "dedicated to be exhausted" in order to activate their beneficial ability.

Example 1: (The mark-way)

Code: Select all

Mark this creature: Gain 1 gold.
Example 2: (The assign way)

Code: Select all

1G (assign): The player gains 1 gold at the start of each turn while this creature is assigned
So, in case 1 the player would have to mark and unmark the card all of the time due to the unmark phase to get the gold. In case 2 this keeps happening.

Summed up: In some rare cases it's simpler to use the assign, and it also creates harder card exhaustion that could create more design space for penalizing ability usage. Please notice though that assgning won't be something that's as common in the game as marking.



In the section "payment activation": Are the colors part of the ruleset or are they only used to explain the different payment types more clearly?
Ah. That's just the graphics: Colors are irrelevant.


The section on region cards should explain if the HP value is replenished after each turn.
Ah, of course it should. Great find! Thanks.

I added:

"Unlike creatures a regions HP does not replenish itself in between player turns: Combat damage that is dealt to a region is permanent."

It is quite an extensive "quick" ruleset.


It is not the quickrules: Writing such extensive quickrules would doom the game ;) The page was miss-labeled. It now has a correct name that reflects that.
We also need to do playtesting so that we can see what makes sense and what doesn't.
Yes, that's the intention. Goal is to create 2 playable pre-constructed decks of opposing factions until new year.

Next step is to create the cards using the great tool that Nico kindly put together for us... after that is actual playtest.
Post Reply