Card cost, an alternative way of looking at things
Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2016 18:01
Hi folks,
The card's cost is a hard thing to figure out. Sure we have this formula for calculating the cost, based on the creatures att/def and pos/neg abilities. For none creature cards, its a bit more difficult.
In the end we look at the card's strength, and compare it to other cards. And finally we tend to put up a value based on intuition. Some people then tend to rate the cost higher, some people tend to have the cost lower, but basically we try to look at the card as an individual item.
Recently I tend to take an other approach, and look at the card cost from another perspective. Here it goes.
Each turn, you, the active player can do a number of actions and play a number of cards, depending of course on the number of resources. Each action or card played 'changes' the battlefield and the situation on the ground, and hopefully tip the balance of the game towards you. At the end of your turn you have tried to create the best possible situation on the ground in order for you to win the game. Ok, stop right there and freeze that layout. (say layout A)
If you didn't have an opponent, and you could take another turn, you'd be happy to continue to change the field in your advantage. However, you're 'ideal' layout will soon be ruined by your competitor on the other side of the table.
So your opponent starts his turn, and does his/her actions, and plays his/her cards and again 'changes' the battlefield and the situation on the ground. He/she ends her turn. Ok, stop right there once more and freeze this new layout. (say layout B)
Now compare layout B and layout A, and try to rate how much was changed and what the new balance of the game is.
For me, as the active player, I'd like to be able to 'change' the situation on the ground to a good degree. It gives me the feeling I made some good progress, I can make my plans and execute them.
For me, as the non active player, I'd feel unhappy that my previous setup is ruined by the opponent.
These highs and lows, are what the game makes more attractive (in my opinion). So we actually want that a good deal of actions/cards can be played. However, we'd also want to safeguard that a player can also build up a strategy (or game plan) over multiple turns. In that regard, we'd actually want to reduce how much a player can 'change' the field in a single turn. That balance is what make the tempo/progress of the game and is very very important. In the arc, by our 0,1 or 2 cards draw and 2, 1, 0 resources, a player can actually influence how much he can 'change' the situation by choosing wisely. (and a portion of luck from the draw)
So, what's the relationship with the cards cost?
Let look first at a few examples how a card 'changes' the battlefield.
A simple creature with no abilities doesn't change the situation all that much, but...
It could for example still block a key creature of your opponent, and given that, you could have tipped the balance in your favor for good and win the game. However it didn't 'change' the situation to a high degree, and a simple countermeasure in the opponent's turn could kill it, or deal with it on an other way.
An event card is by default a non-permanent effect, however it could still change the situation to a great extent. E.g. All your creatures get +2/+0. The same is true for magic cards.
Effects or abilities that target all, 'change' the situation to a bigger extent.
We might also want to consider how much effort is needed to undo a 'change' made by a card.
Bring it all together: the ramp up time/game progress. Finally, we need to take into account how much 'change' we want to allow during T1, T2, T3, T4. Personally, I like that the options and allowed 'changes' increase rapidly. Nothing more boring then empty turns putting out resources, luckily we don't face the resource-issues some other card games have.
So, taking all that into account, I'm still rating the costs on a gut feeling, but I'm not 'comparing' to other cards. But analyze how much 'change' it does, and overall I tend to choose lower costs,
just to get the speed, and the mood swings in the game going.
So, hooray for the over powered cards, still we want to keep the swing going and give the opponent a chance.
Kind regards,
Nico
The card's cost is a hard thing to figure out. Sure we have this formula for calculating the cost, based on the creatures att/def and pos/neg abilities. For none creature cards, its a bit more difficult.
In the end we look at the card's strength, and compare it to other cards. And finally we tend to put up a value based on intuition. Some people then tend to rate the cost higher, some people tend to have the cost lower, but basically we try to look at the card as an individual item.
Recently I tend to take an other approach, and look at the card cost from another perspective. Here it goes.
Each turn, you, the active player can do a number of actions and play a number of cards, depending of course on the number of resources. Each action or card played 'changes' the battlefield and the situation on the ground, and hopefully tip the balance of the game towards you. At the end of your turn you have tried to create the best possible situation on the ground in order for you to win the game. Ok, stop right there and freeze that layout. (say layout A)
If you didn't have an opponent, and you could take another turn, you'd be happy to continue to change the field in your advantage. However, you're 'ideal' layout will soon be ruined by your competitor on the other side of the table.
So your opponent starts his turn, and does his/her actions, and plays his/her cards and again 'changes' the battlefield and the situation on the ground. He/she ends her turn. Ok, stop right there once more and freeze this new layout. (say layout B)
Now compare layout B and layout A, and try to rate how much was changed and what the new balance of the game is.
For me, as the active player, I'd like to be able to 'change' the situation on the ground to a good degree. It gives me the feeling I made some good progress, I can make my plans and execute them.
For me, as the non active player, I'd feel unhappy that my previous setup is ruined by the opponent.
These highs and lows, are what the game makes more attractive (in my opinion). So we actually want that a good deal of actions/cards can be played. However, we'd also want to safeguard that a player can also build up a strategy (or game plan) over multiple turns. In that regard, we'd actually want to reduce how much a player can 'change' the field in a single turn. That balance is what make the tempo/progress of the game and is very very important. In the arc, by our 0,1 or 2 cards draw and 2, 1, 0 resources, a player can actually influence how much he can 'change' the situation by choosing wisely. (and a portion of luck from the draw)
So, what's the relationship with the cards cost?
Let look first at a few examples how a card 'changes' the battlefield.
A simple creature with no abilities doesn't change the situation all that much, but...
It could for example still block a key creature of your opponent, and given that, you could have tipped the balance in your favor for good and win the game. However it didn't 'change' the situation to a high degree, and a simple countermeasure in the opponent's turn could kill it, or deal with it on an other way.
An event card is by default a non-permanent effect, however it could still change the situation to a great extent. E.g. All your creatures get +2/+0. The same is true for magic cards.
Effects or abilities that target all, 'change' the situation to a bigger extent.
We might also want to consider how much effort is needed to undo a 'change' made by a card.
Bring it all together: the ramp up time/game progress. Finally, we need to take into account how much 'change' we want to allow during T1, T2, T3, T4. Personally, I like that the options and allowed 'changes' increase rapidly. Nothing more boring then empty turns putting out resources, luckily we don't face the resource-issues some other card games have.
So, taking all that into account, I'm still rating the costs on a gut feeling, but I'm not 'comparing' to other cards. But analyze how much 'change' it does, and overall I tend to choose lower costs,
just to get the speed, and the mood swings in the game going.
So, hooray for the over powered cards, still we want to keep the swing going and give the opponent a chance.
Kind regards,
Nico