brainstorming

I would like to solve 2 problems

Maybe you recognize that we have a new card,
the Mind Soldier

He is the stronger version of the mind warrior
Warstorm use this system, they has for every card a stronger Version.

offtopic——

In my opinion Warstorm is a realy bad game
i mean, you cant do any actions!!!
you just sit and watch how the CPU plays for you…

a much better card-browser-game is this one

http://www.thefarwilds.com/download.html

but it is still a normal turn-based tcg
but with a great card design (i mean the effects an so on)

To recognize the stronger cards Warstorm use different frame colours.

In FC we have the problem that all our colours are used for different card types.
Warstorm has only 2 card types or so.

Ok, we can use different names for the cards.
But can you really differentiate what card is stronger?
The mind soldier or the mind warrior,
it sounds the same.

Second Problem,

Some players said that some cards should be legends
(there can be only one card on the field with the same name) like in magic the gathering
cards like Yato, the Angry Wizard should be legends
Sure
But the legends in Magic has a huge backgroundstory, they are characters in Magic books.
And i dont want a “copy”, i want a own system.

My solution:
Lets combine these problems to one solution!

Here a example,

The Armor Guard
gets a stronger Version

Siegfried, the Armor Guard.

The normal Armor Guard gets to a legends, he gets a name, because he has more experience and power than a normal Guard.

1. the “Name” of the cards is warrantable.
2. Everybody can differentiate the strong cards.

And of course, Sir Aran, the Elite Knight can get a weaker version.
the Elite Knight

your voices pls

I proposed something similar a few weeks ago about Unique Cards.

http://www.fantasy-cards.net/forums/3/topics/37…

Limit unique cards to 1 per deck. These could be cards with specific names as mentioned above.

I agree that Warstorm the game sucks. I think giving cards a stronger version of themselves is good. I wouldn’t give EVERY card multiple versions of itself, but maybe 50% -90%.

i think we missunderstood each other

The main problem is:

How can you differentiate the strong/weak cards?

but you are right 50% for the units would be ok

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I was just replying to one part of your post about the named cards.

Warstorm uses different color fonts to differentiate the card tiers (rarity/strength). It uses frames to differentiate the factions.

If you are looking for a way to display the cards rarity, maybe you could use the top right corner of the card. You could put both the card rating and rarity in the top right corner. For example, using a square…

• A card with 1 rating and common would have a yellow square with a 4 on it.
• A card with 4 rating and rare would have a blue square with a 4 on it.

I think you might want to consider a way to display effects on cards. The top right corner might be a good place to do this. For example, a card with attack bonuses vs. buildings might have a symbol in the top right corner, etc.

In the same regards, a card that gets an artefact played on it should have some type of of notification. Warstorm uses a card underneath to display artifacts. Since the cards name is at the top of the card, this works well for Warstorm. The card names are not displayed in FCRT, so this method probably wouldn’t work, but maybe it could.

This is where you might be able to use symbols in the top right corner again to display effects whether it’s part of the card of boosted by an artefact or event.

For example, cards with…

• +4 attack bonus vs. buildings – a building symbol with a 4 in the middle of it
• +3 attack bonus vs. humanoids – a humanoid symbol with a 3 in the middle of it
• +2 attack bonus vs. undead – an undead symbol with a 2 in the middle of it
• fire resistance – a symbol denoting fire resistance
• fire immunity – a symbol denoting fire immunity

The symbols would be great for solving the problem of knowing when a card is modified by the artefact/event such as Dagger of the Spider Queen.

One way to display Rarity could be the color of the card name – this isnt used yet. Like common: white, uncommon: silver, rare: gold. In addition I would then give the ultra rares a unique name, like raptor suggested. This wouldnt, however, solve the problem with the power display.The current system (behind the name in brackets) isn’t pretty.

Hi guys:

I think it might be kind of interesting — and also unique among online “card” games — to have cards gain experience by being played and living through a battle. So, at the end of any game, if you will all the cards you own on the field get 2 experience. If you lose, all your cards get 1 experience point. You can manage your cards and “spend” the experience to raise the level of a card. When you raise a level, you could increase the power, armor or health, reduce the cost, maybe add abilities (from a tech tree). That way, in a game where all the cards are available, there’s incentive to use the same cards and “invest” in a deck. And it would lead to differentiation between the same kinds of deck. With the new power rating system, you could still preserve decks without too many experienced cards by putting a cap on deck value…

What do you all think?

One of the top online TCG’s has a format similar to this… Urban Rivals.

I’m not opposed to this, but it doesn’t work well in Urban Rivals. People usually play non-rated/practice games to level their cards and it just becomes a boring grind.

If it was somehow implemented to FCRT, then I think you would need to come up with a format that wouldn’t alter game play. If you give a bonus to each card for killing or surviving a battle, then people who have a win locked up might not play for the early win and instead drag the game out to level up their cards.

I actually like the leveling system that Warstorm uses of a personal leveling and achievement system. Warstorm gives experience for games won. There are also many achievements for reaching certain plateaus, winning with certain types of decks, completing a daily achievement (win 3 games), etc. Both achievements and experience reward additional cards.

@deadwolf

I think this would change FC too much to a RPG

just make the “upped” cards harder to get. so the mind soldier would be harder to obtain than the mind warrior, and the same thery for other cards. i wouldn’t change the game too much and coul dbe easily implemented with the collection mode when it is imputted.

I still working on the new client. Its much more work than expected :(
But the collection will be next.

Hooray that will make the game funner than it already is. and good job on the work so far