Guys, you really aren't going to follow anything I'm talking about here, so I may suggest a good ol' fashioned tldr and move on. Eventually, you'll find out more about the stuff, but I just need to collect my thoughts on a very large project that I'm spearheading until I can get other people on board to help. Can't do that though until it's initially playable. Sadly, games aren't supposed to be started with a single person, since there's a TON of things that are needed under multiple opinions.
How it's supposed to work -
GREENLIGHT FOR PROPOSAL, BUILD TEAM, GET PAID BASE RATE TO BEGIN WORK, SUBMIT DEMO/DRAFT FOR CONTINUATION OF PROJECT, AWAIT PROJECT COST ANALYSIS AND PUBLICATION COSTS, FOCUS GROUP TESTING, MULTIPLE CONSULTATIONS FOR REVISIONS BETWEEN NEXT DRAFT AND FOCUS GROUP,
How's it currently going?? :P Silly goose.
It's going fine. Though well outside of that general matrix. I only wish I was able to focus on this day in and day out, since I've intrigued myself, and can turn this idea into a gem.
Trying to work on something.
Having trouble when I realized the current play set has the players putting too many things on the field, creating a very cluttered experience.
Casual game type, but the depth is there for solid strategy each play type.
Biggest problem is I have to design cards once the mechanics are in play, and through each personal test, the mechanics change very slightly, meaning I have to go back, mark for editing, and then push out more cards. Ultimately, I just don't have any other options for testing, since I'm in an excluded playtest right now meaning I have no one to bounce ideas off since the main mechanics of the game are shifting.
Had to make sure that during creation of basic layout for cards space was included for copywriting lines.
I have only myself to blame for making sure that I am taking care of a bunch of bullshit before the idea bouncing and playback phase, and making sure that everything is taken care of on backend hassles, so there will literally be a leap from playtesting to publication. Quick turn around once I get this thing forwarded on to the effected parties,
- 150 cards currently in the game, this will likely double or triple depending on the full deck additions being put forward. Is the play type singular in it's deck structure, and draw capabilities with everyone showing the equal chance for pulling cards, or is it multi tiered, where there is a deck per player and the deck's are based around the deck's personnel. Or as was brought to my attention, and a potentially viable solution, do I run with a solid core for drawing, with small personnel decks for each player.
Potential issue with this however, is that after every single game, the small player's decks have to be sorted from the main deck, each time, and this may not prove to be viable based on the generalized issue of both a player's capability of paying attention to ownership of the cards, and barring a non collectable process we still deal with the issue of the cards themselves being printed in a list that the players would have to double check. No good. Ultimately, there'd have to be a small indication on each card as to what deck it belonged in. However, that in of itself could be supplemented via the addition of a character head, possibly showing the flavor text coming out of the mouths of the appropriate characters.
The second largest problem is the spacing on the play area (battlefield) which I mentioned. I need to make sure there's not a terrible amount of spacing issue, since I want the play audience to be able to follow the action as it goes along, however, the speed of the game may allow for board wiping constantly of cards, preventing build up of heavy resources outside of the main base area. This essentially is a large stopping point since there are multiple engagement points, it is unreasonable to make sure that players know or care enough to keep track of each and every character.
NOTE TO SELF IN MAIN DOC- Should personnel just travel past terrain with out worrying about personnel at each location? This would make the board spacing less of an issue, however the question then falls on how to show location of goal and location of each team during offensive runs. This also lessens the impact of a leader in battle, but positively lessens the need to have concerns over back tracking movement and filling a location's threshold.
NOTE TO SELF IN MAIN DOC- Should carrier be immune to Threshhold limitations? This would allow for smoother gameplay, and would need to be implemented to prevent unneeded management during Retreat phase.
NOTE TO SELF IN MAIN DOC- Scrap health chits and regeneration phase, allow full healing each turn for damage. One less thing to have anyone pay attention to, creating better flow.
- 4 card types ( not including subtypes) Personnel, Location, Item, Event
Personnel - The various subtext groups such as the first team/ second team/ third team. May introduce secondary type of NPC that stays on a location or in a structure and adds a seperate effect. Either replacing a personnel in that location and fucking them over, or going past a location's threshold.
NOTE TO SELF IN MAIN DOC - ADD Keyword Threshold
NOTE TO SELF IN MAIN DOC - ADD definition for travel from one base to foe's, signifying offensive turn vs. defensive turn.
Location - Locations and Structures
Item- SWAG (equipment placed on personnel that sticks around), Vehicles (With seperate ratings for battle, personnel carrying capability, and travel abilities)
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH
I'll fucking revise this later when I get some time. I thankfully have Sunday off and Saturday Night, and Friday.
So who's gonna see Hellboy II??