There's a little art-less gameplay at the end where I show the tutorial. It's still a WIP and I will probably just grab some artful cards - these are just the simplest cards in the set. You can also export the rules as a PDF.
Put a lotttt of work into these recently - ~40 unique artworks now, so expect that demo soonish ;)
Put a lottt of work into this lately. I've done about ~40 unique artworks, so expect that demo soon...
Put a lotttt of work into these cards so far. I've done about ~40 unique artworks, so expect that demo soooon...
I'm a big fan of MTG (except where I'm not which is why I was inspired to make a game in the first place). There's no concept of "upgrade-ability" in traditional TCGs. I prefer this personally, I don't like the idea of a card being able to change or grow. I'm into competitive multiplayer, not really into single player (although I plan on building out a really nice story mode campaign for offline play, still storyboarding that however)
Anyway, with CCGs being digital now, evolving cards is an obvious thing we can do. Now if I do this, it would be for a really specific case - "Avatar" cards (the main characters). I would *only* allow you to pick a separate spec, so you can build decks with cards from a class (faction) your Avatar doesn't belong to, or perhaps swap your power for another power of equal-ish but different effect.
Pros of evolving cards:
Cons of evolving cards:
What tends to make players come back? Anyone with experience in this aspect of releasing a CCG? If you can sell me on it as a superior option, I might implement the mechanic.
The first three are after the face icon changes, last two are the "before", for reference.
I think it adds more character to the faces, but it also made it harder to read at a distance (might be able to fix with some font-weight tweaks though). Let me know your opinions!
The first three are after the face icon changes, last two are the "before", for reference.
I think it adds more character to the faces, but it also made it harder to read at a distance (might be able to fix with some font-weight tweaks though). Let me know your opinions!
Some people have been following along, but for those who haven't - recently I made major efforts to make my DCCG 100% prettier!
Redesigned the board - totally new layout, plus has perspective and camera "breathe" now based on mouse or pointer input.
Changed field behavior - although that's not evident here, you can now "set" cards face-down YGO style then pay for them later when you flip them up.
Added "pawn" behavior - also not evident here, but added the ability to toss any star card for 1 star resource during planning phase. You can throw as many as you like.
Adding all-custom art - yep I am doing it all myself, some drawings take 20 mins some take 10 hours, so no way to estimate. I have 10 (of 17) more cards to do in the first demo deck, and 12 (of 15) more to do in the second demo deck. Once I have both decks painted, I will release an itch demo...
Title basically says it all. These are some custom pieces I drew using Krita and a cheap tablet. Do I continue doing this, as it is a large amount of time (this selection represents ~1 week, but to be fair I have a day job and I'm not Bob Ross), or should I consider outsourcing? I am pretty strapped for cash so I don't really know if I'll be able to afford anything more professional...maybe I change my style, or is this OK?
In games like MTG, like-but-lesser effects can exist on cards at the same technical cost. Such as R for 2-3 damage, obviously you want the option that does 3 damage for one mana right?
Question is, is this a loved aspect of card games or a hated aspect?? Trying to decide for game balance whether variable effects should exist at the same cost! (gated by rarity perhaps; my mechanics are not like mtg at all but this is a good baseline for the discussion)
There are a secondary factors at play too that can affect how we think about this, such as card type (what it can count for as a valid target for example) - is a card with cost N and type X equivalent to a card with cost N and type Y (or types [X,Y])??
Thanks to everyone who gave me advice on this, also thank for letting me know I needed to change my working title :D
I've been working on some backfaces for my cards - I currently have them all spread into layers on my painting application. I think I'm OK with any of these variants, but which one makes the most sense to players?
A) Clean, full-title
B) Minimalist
C) Grunge, full-title
I've got a few backfaces spread into layers that I'm working on right now. I already got rid of one that was wayyy too convoluted. But for these backfaces, which makes the most sense?
A) Clean, Full-Title
B) Minimalist
C) Grungy, Full-Title