Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines

I'm glad you liked the intro and aesthetic ^_^

Yes, the trouble is that all cards need to be relatively simple so that they can be combined with others, but that can make them sound uninteresting when they are offered. I think my leading idea to address this is to simply disallow the player from combining a card with itself. By removing Block + Block, the player would be forced to take new cards if they want to take advantage of skill binding. Which should force the player into a more fun play pattern all around, and also make it a lot harder to turbo stack armor. Thank you for highlighting this issue!

Would you say the confusion is due to the fact that cantrip is a keyword? Or that it is unclear how the cost gets determined? The way it works is that the cost of cards is averaged together and rounded up. So a card costing 1 + a card costing 0 = 0.5 which rounds up to 1. Does that part make sense? Does it need to be explained in game? I was hoping being able to see the preview would be enough. I think it can be confusing because I have the cantrip keyword which just poofs. I just worry that it wont be very clear that a card is free without it.

What makes you say that Reckless Assault is a flavor fail? I don't think I want anything which deals damage to automatically be an attack, that is very limiting design-wise and makes skill centric decks not viable. What did you feel like makes a card an attack versus a skill?

Yes, I probably need some means of going back during the Magpie Event. Its a little clunky to implement so it was deprioritized. You can also choose a number that you cannot use, which is a higher priority. I'll try to address both issues when I revisit.

Agreed about Seymours, it's basically impossible to correctly predict. I think I will try your lock in EOT suggestion. 

I have also noted down the other small items to look for: anchor interactions, scrap pile bug, conclusive values, stretch outdated wording.

Thank you for bringing up your concerns on the balancing/problematic play patterns which can emerge. I think they can be a little hidden in the playtests because people generally try out different things, but if I don't address it and leave a clear optimal way to min/max the early game, then the replayablity of my game suffers horribly. I really appreciate the insight on that front!!

(+1)

-Banning Block-Block may be a good idea to solve the issue, yes. It would make the "plan" quite different. 
-I was convinced a combined cantrip would be free because of the keyword and because the effect of the base cantrip card was so weak.
-I don't have any problem with the fact that reckless assault is a skill per say, but I feel it should be called something else. Reckless assault evoke an melee attack card, not a skill card. Maybe something like "Barrage" (I am not good at finding names)

Glad you found my feedback interesting. ðŸ§š

(+1)

About "banning a Block Block", basically yes, you shouldn't be allowed to combine any two same cards, not only Blocks. This feature meant to be used to merge two different actions into one card, not to double-strengthen the only one certain.

(+1)

Yep, I'm working on a patch right now which disallows combining of the same card. I think this will encourage more fun experimental gameplay and removes the simple strategy of block + block = win :P