sideways attacks?

Am I the only person that thinks it’s retarded a card can’t attack sideways? If your opponent gets to the bottom of ur map you can’t attack him even if he only has 1 hit point. you could just tank past cards if you had enough hit points. apparently without ‘kill creature’ magic cards or that tower taht can hit in every direction (in the right place), you just lose the game if someone gets to your end of the board.

I mean, what is this, checkers?

It is planned to provide more creatures with back and side attack in the long run. You are right, there are not enough at the moment. There are the towers (you mentioned) and two elves with the ability. But there should be more.

In practice, however, I never saw the strategy happen – you described (tank through). It is not easy to enter the last row without building destroyers. Most time someone enters the second last row (2nd rank) and you have to discard some of your last row cards to play a defender.

The whole problem is the balance between being an abstract card game and being realistic. If this would be a simulation or rpg, the units should have the ability to turn. But cards have no facing, and there is no easy way to implement one. So we decided to stay abstract on this issue, an allow only attacks to the front. This provides the opportunity for specials like “attack sideways”, “attack back” or “attack in all directions” which can make some interesting cards.
It also makes movements more tactical.

I’m sure it is debatable, if units should have the ability to attack sideways in general. It might be more realistic, but it would reduce the opportunity for interesting cards. I personally think, it’s more fun the way it is. If, however, most players would like to have sideways attack – I have no problem changing it.

Does anyone else have an opinion on that?

nope, i think it is ok so. (feels like chess)
but there must be much more cards which can attack sideways
dont reduce the tactical point of the game. and… you cant be realistic, this is a card game.

even if not more cards that can attack sideways mayby some cards that can attack backwards

i often seen the cpu getting to my second row within a couple turns and being unable to be hit. It wasn’t until after i was done later that night that I ever considered the possibility of discarding a mana producing building in order to play a defender and drop the baddie.
but that would be a huge loss to lose a mana producing facility just to drop a unit. it would seriously detract from later in the game.

It’s true that it allows for ‘more powers’ by taking away certain functions, but that doesn’t mean every basic function should be taken away so more powers can be issued, should it? More importantly, because its such a huge loss to lose a mana producing building just to block a guy, that basically means that EVERY deck requires several cards that can blast a 2nd row creature or a card that can attack sideways. I think if every single deck requires a certain power, that’s not really a power anymore, that’s a neccessity.

@raptorAZ: have you played chess before on a competitive level? Pawns are the only piece that can only move and attack in a forward direction. The ONLY one. What you are thinking of is checkers, a very simplistic, very limited game.

I think you are better off making ‘most’ cards have the ability to attack sideways, or at least half, and give relatively good reasons why other units- like brutes or something- cant attack to the side. That would still allow depth without giving far too much movement/placement planning required.

that 6/1 card can drop a guy in 4 turns if he gets to the 2nd row, and if your next 4 cards aren’t a sideways attacker, it’s game over if he gets past. (which he can easily because of his cheap cost)

Yes, i played chess on a competive level. Of course, pawns are the only one who can move and attack forward direction. But the feeling is the same.
Hmm, your example is really good. ….really good.
i thought a little bit about “building placement” but it seems that it cant solve the problem.
i agree with your suggestion.
and units who can attack in each direction? skirmisher, high skilled fighters?
units who can attack only backwards? the assassin
units who can attack only forwards? the battleram
units who can attack only sideways? maybe the cavalry? (flank attack)
i think we can improve the tactical gameplay without much new coding.

Hmm. Ok, perhaps I should just activate side-attack for all units, so we can test how it affects gameplay.

@raptorAZ: alright, maybe I was too quick to judge. But I still disagree. I have played many games of chess and was very close friends with a state chess champion as well as the second best in the state. I have played chess since a very, very young age. And I must disagree that anything about this game has the feeling of chess, besides the existance of a board, pieces, and a battle of wills against an opponent. In chess while it is true that having a piece on your opponents side of the board can be an advantage, it can also just as easily be a weakness. Chess involves a limited amount of pieces that all start on the board, never increase, and all but the pawns can reach any square on the board given enough time. and with no health bar… the difference between getting a ‘piece/card’ past your opponents lines of defense in this game and in chess is overwhelmingly differnet. in my opinion.

Like I’ve said before in my other posts though, I’m not a master TCGer or a master game maker or a master advertiser or master at judging what will work well and what won’t.

The last thing I need is for my ‘off-the-top-of-my-head suggestions’ to be written in stone simply because nobody else would speak up.

It’s active now. see http://www.fantasy-cards.net/forums/7/topics/95…

Im really glad that you help the developers to improve the game.
And the thing with the “chess-feeling”:
A !normal chess-player (like me) and a normal FC player (like me) see similar things between this both games.
There are other people here in the forum who compare this game with chess.

In my point of view Thai boxing and kickboxing is the same. Im sure the athlete wouldnt agree.