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

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 08, 2012, 12:41:26 AM »

Not to pour salt on the wound, but I believe the resource mechanic I had proposed would have resolved most of those issues, including the complication aspect, as well as not give you 4 different elements to track tokens for. You have a planet and a resource card, but if you simply put out at least one planet to start with, then you resolve that issue and don't need the resource card, because the planet would be your resource card.

2

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 06, 2012, 06:55:32 AM »

I like that. That's sweet.

3

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 06, 2012, 04:34:19 AM »

I couldn't figure out how to make the raised bevel, and the marbling wouldn't look good without it.

4

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 06, 2012, 04:26:29 AM »

I didn't know how to express a slant that came to mind, so I thought I'd just throw up a mock-up.

5

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 06, 2012, 03:40:39 AM »

That's perfect. It does indeed look more alien now. It also has more of the "all-seeing eye" feel to it. Though, since the other spikes were removed, the eye line looks a bit thin. Perhaps thicken it? Maybe even make it look like an eye-lid in shape? (No extra lines, just thicken the line to look like an eye-lid. Perhaps even a sideways eye-lid, though I can't be sure that would work.)

Come to think of it, the secondary ridges do make the fist image look "shaky" or hand drawn in the smaller image.

Any way you could get that raised beveled look in the picture? Perhaps even marbleize it?

6

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 05, 2012, 03:48:40 PM »

As a point of information, Mark Rosewater, the head of M:tG card design at WOTC, regrets ever having made the colorless mechanic.

On that point, just because you make the mini-icons have a color and a raised, beveled edge, doesn't mean the watermark also has to have it. You can have a gray watermark, but the symbols can be colored and beveled in the number slot.

Also, I like the gear and the alien fan, but for the Von Neumann gear, I think you might make it a little more simplified. I love the idea, it just needs to look less static. Making the inner parts of it look larger and more visible, maybe even designed based on a real Von Neumann gear, it wouldn't fade out in the number slot or look so cluttered as a watermark.

The eye you could make have fewer radiating points. I think it would look good with three radiating points on top and 3 on bottom, grouped a little toward the center, with the center point a little longer.

Great work, by the way.

7

CCG Design Forum / Re: Testing the Waters

« on: January 04, 2012, 03:40:33 PM »

Yes, TCG's are as addicting as hydroponic marijuana. 

8

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 03, 2012, 09:21:30 AM »

@Ascent: Well my idea wasn't very creative - but your comment wasn't very constructive either.

Offering alternatives was constructive. 'Nuff said.

9

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 02, 2012, 04:35:16 PM »

I also think score is fine, its from the netrunner CCG because they also use the word "score" in combination with "agenda" cards. this is where the similarities to that game end ;-)

The most important mechanic in the game is just like Netrunner, so we adopt the same nominclature to highlight that fact?

10

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 02, 2012, 03:00:38 AM »

More intuitive words instead of "score" might be "reset" or "clear".

11

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 01, 2012, 06:25:29 PM »

Okay, I think I missed the definition of "score". What does it mean? I guess it just means to complete the Agenda? No special action?

We might have to work on some terms that are less ambiguous. Either way, we'll need a glossary.

12

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 01, 2012, 11:23:35 AM »

Producing a standardized mechanic for them all would be the way to keep the rules down. Otherwise, I have no ideas at this time.

As for cardgameforge.com, I say use it as a staging area, and if anyone drops by there, go ahead and incorporate any ideas they have that you like and perhaps direct them here to help out. Nothing wrong with expanding the base.

13

CCG Design Forum / Re: AdventureQuest CCG Project

« on: January 01, 2012, 10:57:32 AM »

Is it just me or do these cards look AWESOME?

Reducing the difficulty as a result of quests discarded from the track seems to be a balanced idea.

I like the option of using a hero's effect and discarding it.

The quest track sounds like a great way to depict a unique story each time you play. An Illiad in card form.

14

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: January 01, 2012, 10:26:48 AM »

It's set to private. Are you sure you want to limit your pool of helpers?

Not to be negative, but that site looks like a graveyard for failed CCG projects.

15

CCG Design Forum / Re: Theoretical Community CCG Project

« on: December 31, 2011, 09:45:02 PM »

Should they "Pilot" or should they "Crew" the Fleets?