Jump to content

Denithan

Members
  • Content count

    151
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Dragon Ball Z Trading Card Game

Star Wars Destiny

Dragon Ball Super Card Game

MetaX Trading Card Game

Calendar

Everything posted by Denithan

  1. Set 10 Decks

    I thought about it some more, and there's not even really an advantage with Oppressive > Rampaging in regards to Sword Skill. You still need to HIT to get the opponent to skip, which means Rampaging would give you the extra anger anyway. The only things you really gain are the ability to go for stages instead of anger (which you won't), the draw/discard at start of turn, the Rejuv, and the ability to rely on Freestyle cards that force skips to get anger. And the last one isn't even relevant if you look at Gohan MPPV instead of Trunks, and I daresay, Gohan has better MPPV tools in Gohan's Power Punch. Heck, it might not be that relevant overall? I mean, I guess it turns all Styled attacks into a skip at start of turn? And honestly, if you're running Kid Trunks, I 100% think Oppressive is the better deal hands down. It works beautifully, and you have in-built skip to stop the opponent as well as the ability to draw into extra cards. I'd also say that rogue personalities like Broly and Nappa would probably do exceptionally well in Oppressive with unrelenting survival beat. But Future Trunks? The more I think about it, the more I feel he'd probably do better elsewhere. Slam and Knee Bash aren't especially potent for Oppressive, and about the only HUGE play he has is his Defiant Level 3 being able to force skip and then end combat. Which I guess is insanely potent, given how you're gaining anger each time you do it and the opponent is unable to really stop you, but even that might operate better functionally in Rampaging since you can pull the same strategy. Especially given the lower anger needed to jump up to 4, which means less puzzle pieces need to be stalled out for. What I find hilariously is in trying to test them against each-other, you can't really say which is better. Both are going to hit Level 4, and if you don't have an insane number of blocks on the ready to stop Sword Skill procing, both are probably going to hit MPPV. Heck, even the recipes between the two of them should only diverge on like, 3 cards. But outside of the draw and discard at start of turn, I cannot figure out how Oppressive Trunks would be any better in function than Rampaging. And I don't know if the draw + discard is worth more than the lowered anger cost? EDIT: Thought about it some more, and I can see the point with the Level 3 as you can force skip to grab a combat ender, then force skip with any Saiyan style card, then end combat, so you get 2 anger and end. But this feels as dependent on combat enders as Rampaging does on Sword Skip, so I think this is going to need to be constantly revisited if and when the meta adapts to stop Trunks' combat ending.
  2. Set 10 Decks

    I've been thinking about this a little bit, but when considering Oppressive Mastery, couldn't you take almost the exact same deck recipes, and apply them to Rampaging? It's not like Sword Skill is a new card, nor are any of the cards restrictively useful for Oppressive. Even the extra Anger gain from Oppressive isn't unique, since Rampaging offers similar levels of anger gain. This is probably more true for Gohan decks, since everything becomes styled, but like... Well, okay, everything becomes a "Hit:" anger gain instead. So your opponent can block their way out of some of the anger you're gaining. But the same general note of "force the opponent to skip, end combat" can be used, and honestly should be used in Saiyan MPPV anyway (it's literally the only thing that made my Rampaging Gohan MPPV work pre-Set 10). Honestly, MPPV in general should use that strategy where possible (I'd argue everyone should). And in theory, wouldn't the 4 anger to level up eventually match up to the same rapid hurtling towards MPPV that the opponent sure as sh*t can't stop?
  3. Namekian Restored & Saiyan Empowered are Frozen

    Weirdly, I feel like it's finally safe to say that maybe there's an actual use for cards that counter combat enders. At long, long last xD
  4. Set 10 Decks

    @Artificial Human I actually feel like that might be where Goten could really shine, with a mixed survival/MPPV Orange build that's just designed around quickly setting up necessary drills to hurtle up to MPPV while giving yourself decent defense. That said, I'm not sure if you'd want to do Combative Mastery over Retribution Mastery since Ret would always net Goten an extra drill to help more quickly set-up, but there's something to be said for the extra defense offered by Combative existing. It's funny you bring up Rampaging Gohan though. That's actually probably my favorite deck pre-Set 10. My current schtick is just trying to figure out if Saiyan Oppressive Gohan is as good, since my old Rampaging Gohan was entirely based around the idea of making my opponent skip until I'm done leveling anyway, and then ducking out of combat with combat enders. So far, the loss of the on-hit anger gain and 4 anger required to level has actually hurt the deck more than you'd think (since you're on average needing 2-3 extra cards to get the level), but I'll continue editing to see if there's anything amazing there. Oppressive Future Gohan could be neat, but he's probably got a better home in Namekian.
  5. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    I'm going to be the slightly obstinate one when I say I actually have a very vivid hatred for GT as an anime, but that may have something to do with the fact that I had nightmares for around 5 months of Baby speaking in my head and bursting out of my chest after the Myuu arc. What's weird is that like, seeing Cell literally drink people with his tail did nothing but excite me, but Baby... Ooo boy, somehow that one messed me up when I was a kid. This said, having gone back and watched GT as an adult, I have so many grievances with it that I don't think I can really give it the same pardon as @Majin Goo. I think SS4 was a bit too "edgy" for me to take to, especially in how Goku talks and acts a lot of the time while in the form. I also think they probably could've departed SS4 from the normal SS line since it was a separate transformation based on the Oozaru form. Maybe referring to it as Primitive Saiyan or something given how it calls back to the Saiyans former racial traits and characteristics. Regardless, there is something to be said for it being the "next level" of the Oozaru transformation. I will definitely concede that the Shadow Dragon arc was a really good idea though. Just, terribly, terribly executed... Separate from that though, I mostly want to see cards because I think there could be some interesting contrast and mechanics to come with the series. Especially with characters like Trunks (GT), who honestly seemed to become more and more like Future Trunks for the sake of it. And I do really like the idea of GT sets replacing Movie Sets after we finish up. I think that one works best mechanically for players and balance
  6. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    Honestly, I like that Future Gohan can no longer be used with the normal Gohan stacks. I also like that they found a way to do it without taking away all of Gohan's named cards from F!Gohan (though, this could also have been done with a parenthetical effect treating him as Gohan). It's a good move from a meta balancing standpoint, and has a lot of potential for the future. Goten being Drillku 2.0 is really interesting to me. His level 4 isn't quite as strong as Drillku's, but I feel like it shows Goten's intuition and creativity in how it differs. He's a lot less direct, but still quite powerful, when compared to his Father. As for Trunks and his skipping, that is going to be incredibly infuriating to play against. As much so as his Dad's. Strangely, I'm probably alone here, but I kind of hope we get cross MP named cards in the future. Things like Trunk's Finish Buster or something having a parenthetical letting it be used by Kid Trunks (where certain attacks crossover, anyhow). Insanely curious how they'd handle a Trunks (GT) stack tbh, if they ever decide to do GT, given the distinction so far.
  7. How much do you care about Fan Z now?

    It's kind of interesting to me that @Artificial Human's reason for progressively losing interest in FanZ is the same reason I'm progressively gaining interest. The reality is that the archetype concept in PanZ was a bit flimsy from its introduction, and they may have needed small, dedicated boosters here and there to make cards more accessible and purely support each one. A Future of Trunks booster, for example, which expanded on the "Sword" archtype for Trunks (similar to the Yu-Gi-Oh!'s "Duelist Packs," and how they'd introduce/expand on Archetypes.) Alas, PanZ didn't do this, and what we're living in with FanZ is the scattered remains of those half-fulfilled archetypes. This is part of why I'm so pumped for this upcoming set, and for FanZ in general. With FanZ's first set, we saw some level of support for a previously underdeveloped archtype off the bat. With Set 10, we're going to be seeing a notable expansion of the Sword archetype across different styles. By no means, and I emphasize this, by no means is there an easy, quick fix to this problem. But gradual support that is errata'd to suitable levels over the course of several sets offers the potential for old archetypes to slowly get worked into something really viable. The staples will never go, of course, and while I'd love to see miniature sets that are dedicated to specific styles and fleshing out their archetypes, I respect that it's extra work load when you have people waiting on Majin Vegeta, Adult Gohan, the movie sets and the like (all of which will dictate the survival of FanZ). So, to me, FanZ at this juncture is slowly starting to represent a chance to actually flesh out and fix the issues leftover by PanZ.
  8. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    A badass Black Sword card, and a pretty neat Blue Sword Setup. My current only issue is I am so confused about when this set is meant to be taking place given what personalities we've gotten. I understand that the card art of the attacks doesn't necessarily betray the set's time period, but FanZ has had a pretty 1:1 way of doing attacks to date. Also, with all these depictions of Gohan using that damn Sword, we better at least get a Level 1 Sword Mastery from him at some point |:
  9. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    Holy damn, Dabura is actually a really good Sword MP. And what I quite like is he's also a really understated MP, who comes across as generally a bit lacking. I will say that it feels like they got his levels really mixed up. His level 1 is incredibly good, and could easily be a level 2 (though i like it as his level 1). His level 2 should probably be his level 3, his level 3 attack is easily good enough to be his level 4 with the ability to banish 4 cards from the opponent's discard, swing for 2 6 stage attacks, and no prevention of Sword Damage, and his level 4 should probably be his level 2. Thematically, it carries on the most directly from his level 1 as it improves the top 5 screen to a direct tutor, and like his level 1, it gives all his swords an additional effect (maybe make it lower 1 stage instead if it was converted to his level 1). My only issue with it is that it's all made Dabura utterly dependent on a "Sword" deck, which is just dismissive of his character. It also might step a bit too much on Trunks' toes for me, but I'll need to actually give them both a go. My current best deck is a Blue Sword Trunks which just dedicates to getting 6+ cards in hand per combat, and I see the exact same potential for hand advantage in Dabura but without the ability to tutor Freestyle Drills at 1, it might not be as reliable to set up. Dabura's Evil Sword Slash may full-well need a nerf in the future, but let's wait it out and see how that particular one goes. My only concern is how much tutoring is possible. Assuming your opponent is out of guard and you have a Dabura's Evil Sword Slash in discard for whatever reason, Dabura hits and gets + from his level 2 hitting, then up to 4 Dabura's Evil Sword Slash to end on Dashing Sword Attack to grab any other Sword card from drop (including other copies of Dashing Sword Attack), then add on Aggressive Sword Drill to make it so damage cannot be prevented and give you another + at the start of combat, and you can be looking at up to a maximum of (check me if I'm wrong) 9 chained attacks without looking at the + 3 you drew to either open your turn, or open combat. For no stage cost, that DESS could be incredibly devastating if your opponent is caught even mildly off-guard.
  10. Style Preferences

    I always used to really adore the Freestyle Masteries in the ScoreZ games. I loved how they pretty much told the opponent bugger all about all your plays, and depending on your MP stack and personal MOs kind of dictated what your deck became. I mostly used it for Sword Tapion/Gohan, but hey, whose judging? With the advent of PanZ, I really took to the Blue Styles. I really loved the control they offered, alongside the delevelling. Anger Control is also another big feature I'm pretty big on, and while I initially started off focusing on Energy Beats for MPPV with Blue Trunks, I eventually discovered the strength of Blue in controlling the board when combined with decent hand advantage, good ally control and block teching. Besides Blue though, the Style I've definitely played the most is Saiyan. This is probably more because I've tried out every MP in the game to date, and will probably keep doing so, and certain MP stacks really needed Saiyan Empowered to shine through to their fullest, but it's also a little bit because I find the style the most straight forward to play. Plus, forcing the opponent to just keep skipping actions with Saiyan MPPV Gohan just made me ridiculously happy. Realistically, I could probably make a deck with the same theme with Drill/Drawku and the new Mastery to great success, but eh. I wouldn't overall say this is a favorite style, so much as a very convenient one to boost B-List personalities up. Honestly, my second favorite is probably Orange for the toolbox-ey nature of their Drills. Combined with a decent undershining personality like Pikkon, and you can pull some really interesting stuff like extending plays and rejuvenating up to 8 cards a combat. It takes a bit of doing and manipulation, but the beautiful thing about Orange is that you can do that kind of toolboxing. That said, I really hate how out of hand the style can get with continuous effects, and I think it's the one style with the largest number of questionably well-designed cards.
  11. Mentors as a Mechanic

    Off the top of my head, Master Shen. Then Frieza, who mentored Tagoma/Ginyu Force, Ginyu, who mentored Ginyu, Cold, who mentored Frieza/Cooler presumably, Gero, who programmed all the Androids (and acted as a direct supervisor to 19), arguably Cell to the Cell Jrs though I wouldn't go for it, Babidi for all the Majins.
  12. Pan/Fan Z and not fleshing out archetypes

    tbh, I think a big one with this is going to be mastery dependent. So if you go with Empowered, for example, you get around the PUR by gaining stages for each hit. This kind of ducks around the inherit issue with Suppression Drill. Now you just need to find a viable way to camp to stop yourself from discarding your drill. That, or find ways to burn your own anger into the ground. Honestly, a really good combo you could work on with this is Sword Drill Trunks. His level 1 sets up Aggressive Sword Drill immediately, and you can use searchers to drop Suppression to the field. Saiyan Sword Skill is straight up netted from the deck on the following turn if you want it, which presents a consistent searcher for solid attacks in your Sword cards, and also gives you the ability to freely level up without dropping your drills. This presents extra set-up time to get Extreme Training to the board, and at his level 2, you have a physical block + rejuv. It's not perfect, but in effect, you'd be mixing three themes to powerful effect. Force the opponent's skip + low PUR, swords searching and all-around punishing nature (Dashing Sword Attack, I bloody love you), and Trunks defensive effects and ability to force disruption.
  13. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    Wonder if we'll see Drill Android 20 again at all with that new Efficiency Drill. Hrm. And it seems like we're going to see a bit more correlation between Sword and Majin then, huh.
  14. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    tbh, that kind of begs the argument of what things really needed traits, and what didn't. For example, there's a very real, and reasonable, argument that we should've gotten traits based on fighting styles AND species. For example, Kamehameha is an attack used by Turtle-School Students, and Dodon Ray is Crane School. Should Turtle School and Crane School been traits, to help denote the similarities in how their students fight? The only huge flaw in this logic is the need to keep track of the large number of traits going down, but on a personal level, I don't see that argument really. At the end of the day, all you're doing with traits is matching the icon on the attack with the icon on the MP, so you can have as many as needed so long as the developers can keep track.
  15. Cardfight Vanguard (and other bushiroad games)

    I'd actually argue that Season 2's lore had more to do with the resurgence of an ancient clan in Aqua Force, and the ensuing fight to save the Royal and Shadow Paladins (the Gold Paladins were actually originally the force brought forward out of leftovers from the two, to save those who were held). Both in lore and in the anime, we were only given hints that Link Joker were the people pulling the strings. For the most part, it was just all out war against Aqua Force. And it should probably be noted that part of the old lore for why Stride was suddenly possible was because of the time-space disruptions caused by Season 4 (with the creation and destruction of an alternate timeline as a result of the Seekers saving Blaster Blade). Also, is anyone else disappointed that the return of "The Vanguard", Majesty Lord Blaster (who was hyped as being the entire reason season 2 and 4 happened), was REALLY anti-climatic with Messiahnic Lord Blaster? Like, shit, we've been waiting for a new MLB LITERALLY SINCE HE FIRST APPEARED. And we finally get him, and he is just... UTTERLY disappointing. On a side, I liked that Season 4 actually argued against a very big point in the lore about how important Blaster Blade was. You remove him from the equation, and Alfred still beats PBD/Dark (which, why did Dark turn? Dark turned originally because Ahmes was chosen as Blaster Blade's wielder. Remove him, and there's no triggering event to make him become Blaster Dark), PBD/Dark are still one half of the "Vanguard" and become major leaders in the fight against LJ, and Dragonic Overlord still goes along Overlording. In fact, even AqF turned good again without the defeat at the hands of Ezel. That said, I did really hate how the lore of Season 4 argued that Blaster Dark and Blaster Blade were the two lights, and had all this foreshadowing in Dark's short stories and a lot of the lore on either side about how Dark was going to save Blade, and then Ren just kind of sat out the entire end of the series. Especially when you think about how narrative-ly satisfying it would've been for Ren to save Aichi at the end after the inverse in Season 1. But nah, Kai. Sure. Why not.
  16. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    For clarity's sake, we all do realize that we're yet to actually see that Dabura IS a sword MP, right? Unless Dabura got revealed and I didn't see? I know there's the connection with the new Sword card with Majin-specific effects, but this game isn't always so good about making up promises or early allusions. Also, again for clarity, you know that Dabura actually uses a sword in combat? xD Gohan trained with one, and Gohan + swords is 100% my dig (favorite character + favorite archtype), but his training with the Z-Sword was limited and based entirely on intuition and the swordplay he learned when he was a kid with Piccolo. Dabura 100% makes more sense as a sword MP when compared to Gohan. And that being said, it's not even saying that Gohan won't get a sword-based stack, and we 100% know that when Tapion shows up, he's going swords too. It just means we get Dabura as an extra Sword MP IF he is a sword MP. Chances are he'll have an odd level, maybe Level 1, with an effect that CAN support Swords, but more realistically supports cards with the Majin trait.This would mean the new sword card, as well as any other Majin-traited ones, would be supported by him while he remains a general Majin MP.
  17. Pan/Fan Z and not fleshing out archetypes

    No real disagreements with anything you've said, but I've got to be that guy. Doesn't this come in as part of the "sad reality of Pan/FanZ"? xD
  18. Red Ruthless Turles

    YOU'RE ALSO PLAYING RED RUTHLESS TURLES. AND YOU WENT LEVEL 1 CAMP FOR DRILLS AS WELL. I am way too hyped right now.
  19. FanZ Set 10 - "Revelation"

    You're kidding, right? While the Majin-only skill is solid, that's flat-stage damage on a searchable attack that isn't stupidly costed like a lot of the other Sword attacks. Trunks is ready and waiting to abuse something like that, especially in defensive builds that are aiming to recycle the hell out of sword attacks. Keep 'em coming imo |:
  20. Dragon Ball FighterZ

    Yeah, the Closed Beta. Admittedly, we only had a limited number of characters, and it's definitely not signatory of the final product, but it's been about the only chance I've had to interact with the game beyond demos and hype. This said, I will actually submit that A18 was fun af to play. And Krillin was neat, as was Trunks' sword moves. But even with those few dissimilarities, it really doesn't hold up to the range I found in even the early Guilty Gear games (Ky is bae, ftr), and I just didn't really feel the game.
  21. Dragon Ball FighterZ

    That's fair, and I'm not really trying to change anyone's feels here. If you're hyped, be hyped and I really hope you enjoy. But I really just can't get hyped, or interested, for the above reasons. Even if we move away from the MvC comparison and more towards Guilty Gear, it still just feels... Meh? idk, I had fun with GGXrd, and I just found myself really heavily bored by the FighterZ demo all the same.
  22. Dragon Ball FighterZ

    It's a bit late to weigh in, but I wanted to get as much information as I could about the product before I really cast my opinion into the mix. On a personal level, FighterZ seems really disappointing so far. And not because of the limited roster, though that adds to it very slightly, or because of the Season Passes early announcement, but because of the actual gameplay. It's been stated quite a few times in here that the game plays like MvC with a Dragon Ball skin, and while most of the people saying so have cited it as a good thing, it just killed any interest I had in it when I actually got to play the demo. Add on the fact that the basic gameplay with each character doesn't really change (I know they have niches, unique ranges, certain times where certain moves are preferred, but in terms of combo execution), and I just don't feel like this has enough to make me buy the full game. I agree with @Majin Goo that this is going to be a serious fighting game, but even so far as serious fighting games go, this feels really bland, to me. Which is really sad, because it should be rife with personality. This isn't the 2D Dragon Ball fighter for me. That said, I'll probably get my own level of enjoyment from the game just watching the finals of high-tier tournaments. So many pretty explosions.
  23. So over the course of the handful of months I've been on this site, I've participated in and observed a lot of theory and thoughts on what card games are good, what makes them good, and what characteristics can make them bad/unappealing. From discussions of distribution models like LCGs VS CCGs VS TCGs, to flat conversation about straight up the worst games we've played, there's been a significant amount of ground covered in what not to do. Combine this with projects that involves card design, and discussions in my university coursework surrounding a similar topic, and I've been spending a lot of time thinking about what makes a card game A. easy to adopt, B. sell well, and C. satisfying, and these are my thoughts so far. Note, this is mostly from a marketing perspective since that's about the only thing I'm qualified in. What Makes a Card Game Successful? 1. Simplicity, but with room for Complexity This is one that the Dragon Ball TCG definitely missed out on, as has UFC and quite a number of other smaller CGs. Simplicity in the card game is important for its uptake, and the development of an initial playerbase. To go by example, Yu-Gi-Oh! had a huge uptake in the early years based on the simplicity of the game, where even younger kids could follow the rules and understand what was happening. Similarly, Pokemon's card game is simple at its core, as is Vanguard's and Magic's. This makes the game easy to teach to people, and in cases where they might not be inspired by the IP to play (ala. Dragon Ball), having too many complex systems in play from the offset makes the game unwelcoming. Now of course, some games will have playerbases specifically because they have a level of complexity that kind of makes it like a private club, but these historically don't nearly have the level of success financially. This said, you need to ensure that the game can still have some greater level of complexity. This can just be in the expansion of basic mechanics like Yu-Gi-Oh's GX and 5Ds eras, Vanguard's LB4 Era, Pokemon EX/Legends/ex/Shining/GX, etc., but there needs to be an extra layer for long-term players to sink their teeth into. To refer to FanZ, this would be Traits. It's an extra layer of complexity, but really it's just a contextualization of mechanics already present (Gohan could already use Namekian, Cell counted as all, Majins were always Majins). It adds an extra layer working off of the base mechanic. A warning exists here, however, with maintaining the balance of simplicity to complexity. If a game goes too far into the complex region, you'll start to see huge drops in playerbase as the more casual audience gets alienated. This is actually shown with the playerbase with Yu-Gi-Oh. While the introduction of Links was fairly controversial, I would argue that the true driving force behind huge drops is just how long turns are taking and how many actions and procs there are in a turn. When someone is setting up a Chain Link 8 with no interactions from the opponent, or just endlessly dropping cards from their hand to bring out Links, to bring out fusions, to bring out Synchros, etc., the game is just having too many actions for the casual player to follow. After that, you lose your casual player-base and a huge portion of your market value. 2. Financial Viability for adoption, prominence in Secondary Market Value This one will seem as contrary in presentation as you'll get in these factors, but I feel this shows the importance of rarity design. The reality is that in the adoption phase of a card game, people will not want to risk significant money in an investment that they may not enjoy. This is actually one of the issues we outlined in a recent discussion about why LCGs aren't more popular, as there is significant upfront investment cost with the potential for no benefit. As an ex-Yu-Gi-Oh player, an ex-Magic player and an ex-Vanguard player, I've noticed a lot of people have moved over to card games like the Pokemon TCG, the Final Fantasy TCG and even the Dragon Ball TCG (this was actually how I was introduced to Panini's version of the game). The main reason I get given for this is because the prior TCGs were too expensive, and these people only have a little bit of money they CAN set aside each month for a hobby. While there's an argument there for "why don't they just play casually?", the reality is that these games have all at different points tried to force their casual playerbase to purchase/pull high-rarity cards to complete their budget decks. This also acts as a huge barrier to the casual market, and while it creates very good secondary markets, those secondary markets ultimately dwindle as a result of poorer playerbase. Pokemon is a really, really good example of the necessary balance. A structure deck in Pokemon costs comparatively little to the other big card games, and individual packs are purchasable with couch change. THIS said, rarity hoarders are still able to get their fill with full-art high rarity cards. This is actually a similar model to what we're seeing with the Dragon Ball Super card game, though it seems they might be departing from this much to their future detriment. In short, you need to have a cost-effective game to build an initial audience with your low-risk investments, but also have higher rarity pulls that offer some kind of real world value. This real world value will generate a strong secondary market, which will in turn reward rarity hoarders and also create a cost-effective means for your casual/budget audience to finish off their "for fun" decks. 3. Interaction and Pacing Don't. Make. Solitaire. This is something that Yu-Gi-Oh! has hugely failed in historically, as has Magic the Gathering. When a deck gets too powerful, and has too many plays without the opponent being able to interact, the drive to play the game starts to fade. It might be fine for the people winning, but "coin-flip metas" are a spat-out term. We saw a similar discussion about this respect around PanZ and ScoreZ and GT awhile back, but this extends so much further than those three games. There needs to be room for constant interaction and back and forth between players. The reason why Quickplay Spells, Hand Traps, Quick Effects and Trap Cards were so game-shaping in Yu-Gi-Oh is because higher interaction between players creates a more engaging game. Vanguard's moves with G-Guardians and skills that activate during the opponent's turn, as well as just guarding from your hand in general, are all considered good mechanics for this reason. Sure, there's a game balancing aspect of this, but ultimately, it's just fun to interact with the opponent. Competitive card games are inherently a social event, if we wanted to just play solitaire or against AIs, we would do. The second point here is pacing. Your game needs to be well-paced, playable within a certain time frame to make it convenient, and not take too long to get set-up.Two elements here is one, engaging the player, and two, time constraints. To touch on the first point, you don't want players to come in, and wait 5-10 minutes before they're even interested in the match to actually start making moves. Likewise, you don't want them to come in, get completely overwhelmed by their opponent's turn 1, and be left unable to do anything. Frustration and boredom set in very quickly, and while its a valid feeling that these "normies should get out", the reality is, they will. And they will not buy your product. So this kind of design cuts off your nose to spite your face. Ideally, you'd want a turn or two to set up, and then start instigating play. In Magic, this is in the form of placing fields, in Pokemon, it's attaching energy, in Vanguard, it's riding up to Grade 3, and in Pan/FanZ, I'd argue it's probably your first turn or so of grabbing drills/setups to your board and setting up your plays. This ensures that turn 1, you can see your own moves, your opponent has time to start up, which lets you see theirs, and then you contest your respective decks against each-other after you've both gotten rolling. This also touches upon interaction between players. On the second point: A large number of card games are simply unplayable because they take too much time for a hobby. If you're working a standard 10-hour shift day, and you need to eat, socialize, maybe watch a movie, unwind, and prepare for the next day, you're not going to be as inclined to dive headfirst into a 60 minute+ per game card game as you would one where you could get through an entire round in the same time. This is essentially Bo3 VS Bo1, but in terms of how long the game takes and pacing. 4. Theming In both artwork and playstyles. How your card looks is your selling point. Simple as that. From your card's design, to the artwork, to the naming, to the playing. This isn't, however, to say that you need good artwork. You don't. You just need to have a style and theme that people can identify as yours. To be honest, this section isn't one I can dive into too heavily as I'm not qualified in design, nor have I ever studied design. The closest I've come is studying distribution and what is visually appealing. But one big point here is consistency in art style and design, so that the game is clearly your product. For YGO, this is in the card borders, in Magic, their watermark is actually the tidbits of lore you get on every card, and in Vanguard, it's the small quotes from each unit. You also get consistency/themes in archtypes and colors. For me, a good example of how this can help sales is in Vanguard's Shadow Paladins. I legitimately only got into Vanguard originally because I liked Blaster Dark's aesthetic, and the game was cheap. I liked the dark colors, the purple-red hues, and the theme of G2s/1s that superior call to pay for the costs of their G3s retires was really engaging to me. This is also part of what has driven me away from Vanguard since the introduction Claret Sword and Luard, as the deck departed from a lot of its original themes and instead became a more prominent counterpart to Royal Paladin. Not to say the original theme is gone entirely, but that it's definitely now playing second fiddle. This is actually a really pressing issue for Vanguard of late, where it was formally one of their greatest strengths; The themes of clans are overlapping more and more as the game goes forward. Every clan is getting a re-stander, formally a NG and Kagero trademark, every is getting Glory skills, which were an AqF trademark, and so on (this was always somewhat an issue with Narukami/Kagero, Aqua Force/Nova Grappler, etc. but it has been aggravated). But more on-topic, the ultimate point is that if someone identifies with a card's theme, they will most likely move towards a deck centre'd around that theme. And if that theme clearly identifies the game as yours, all the better, as you become a more distinguished and prominent part of the market. 5. Community Engagement Uuuuuurgh, I preach this way too much, and I'm aware I do, but trust me when I say I had it preached to me so much more at University. Oh, fun side note, I actually graduated this Friday gone. Now I need to find a job. Look, community engagement is vital. It helps keep conversation around the game live, it lets people know about your merchandise, it helps you build PR and a repeat-consumer base, develops customer loyalty, it is genuinely invaluable. If you want a successful, satisfying card game that will sell well, listen to your fans. Even occasionally contact them and ask them if you can use a few of their ideas if they seem good enough. Fan archetypes are a really normal thing in any card game, and if they're genuinely interesting and have enough conversation around them, don't put up your nose to asking them if you can use the concept. Most would just be pumped that you took their ideas, and you can reimburse them by giving them free copies of all the cards based on their idea. But companies/sellers should engage in forums, keep up with complaints and praise, present a wide-variety of avenues to contact them directly, and should be consistent in getting back to their audience. A Facebook group alone is not enough, a Twitter page alone is not enough, and a YouTube account alone is not enough. Even these three specific things combined are not enough if they can't talk to you openly and in an convenient manner. And for god's sake, if you have an official page, then make sure you post every update on there. Large periods of silence mean huge lulls in playerbase and chatter surrounding your product/service. There are a few more points to what makes a card game satisfying/successful, but I feel like these are the most obvious points. If anyone has any thoughts, examples of companies that have done it well, or anything else, feel free to engage.
  24. The Sad Reality of Fan Z

    Definitely does. If nothing else, FanZ is removed from the corporate structure that PanZ was held to, as well as the release dates. There's not really anyone standing over the design team now, they are the end game and the authorities on development. This inherently means less pressure, and guarantees that this is genuinely a labor of love now. Of course, they still need to shape up a bit in some areas. But I do remain hopeful that as we progress further, the product/service will increase.
  25. Characteristics of a Successful Card Game

    This was not something I knew, and holy shit does that explain way, way, way too much. Thanks for sharing o-O I actually think Pokemon's attitude with instant effects is part of what gives it it's flavor with the modern format. The speed with which newer decks can set up means that it fits into the pacing niche, and the confidence that comes from knowing that you can pull off your desired play without interruption gives a very different kind of experience to most other games. That said, it's not necessarily better, or worse, but different. I personally feel it means that it's lacking in the interaction between players region, and makes it overall a less social game, but they've done a hell of a job with generating a unique atmosphere and balance to itself. The fact that they have continued to have a very diverse meta despite the lack of instant reactions really speaks for itself in this regard.
×