Battle of the Cards

RAMERAKI
Feb 4
5 min read

Updated: Feb 5

When thinking of new ways to incorporate creativity and family time, the idea of creating a card game came to meet both needs in a surprisingly helpful way. Instead of simply creating another collaboration of art, creating this game would create a mini legacy - token memory in a physically printed product that could be experienced beyond admiring the artistry of it.

The general concept was great, but the real challenge was putting it into practice. That begged the question: How do you make a simple, but engaging card game from scratch?

Since this idea began during a time when the kids were mostly in primary grades (with only a couple just entering secondary grades), the idea was to work on something simple enough that they could understand the concept, but room to have some strategy and consider further develop in the future. Not only this, but this card game should also avoid the shortcomings suffered by other games. So the initial brainstorm sessions revolved around core concepts that would build the foundation of a collectible/strategy card game.

Core Tenets of the Card Game

Simple gameplay, with option of adding layers to improve strategy
Design and/or artwork created in collaboration with or by kids
Card design is focused on artwork; minimal border, etc.
Gameplay shouldn't be cumbersome (counters, trackers, dice, etc.)
Player choice and strategy should have greater overall impact than luck
Every card should have some purpose; No card should be inherently useless
A player should never feel outclassed and want to give up remaining rounds
The "collectible" element has little to do with gameplay; mostly cosmetic
Digital/print cards could "upgrade" (cosmetic) - higher rarity, different art

Even though art was a substantial part of having family time and collaboration, the gameplay would be the primary driver for the details of the card game. This meant that the theme, style, or artwork was technically arbitrary, which should be molded to fit the core mechanics more than the other way around. This meant that aesthetically, the game could be a conglomeration of themes, which meant a fatasy-eque setting would provide the prefect vehicle for the design while not hindering changing the evolving versions of gameplay.

Early concept art for card design and commander ideas.

ProtoType Versions

Considering that blank cards weren't readily available at the time, the next best thing was to design a card game using a regular ol' deck of cards. This would serve as the vehicle for designing the foundational gameplay mechanics. The main idea centered around a card battling game that uses a combination of two card types - commanders and attack units. The premise would be that the commanders would be the targets to capture, using their units to attack, and the winning condition being a certain amount of commanders captured to win the war.

The face cards (K, Q, J) would represent the commanders, and the number cards represent those number values (making the Ace equal 1). Initial testing versions revolved around the idea that all attack cards had a a single value, while commanders were treated as bonuses to attackers in a rock-paper-scissor style format. In the same way, elements were added to additionally give another built-in bonus to use. Health points were considered, but ultimately, the card game should be played at a fast enough pace as not to have to stop and track HP data.

Notes for gameplay ideas.

Commanders would lead attack units, and each battle there could be two attack units placed with the commander in play. In order to ensure cards are all viable, there was an idea to split the number values from 1-4 and 5-8 (removing 9-10), and of the two attacking units, one would have to be a high-value and the other a low-value card. The thought behind this was to simplify the math needed so that round winners coulde be determined with mental calculations. There would be attended ways to atack (using a high and low card) or you would suffer a penalty, reducing the attack. Complementary elements (e.g. earth + fire) would result in a bonus to increase that attack as well.

Gameplay Testing

Gameplay finally evolved into something that could be properly play-tested. Using a modified version of the plain card deck, mock battles were initiated. The refined pre-alpha rules were used for testing - 12 commanders (face cards) and 24 units (1-5 value cards). The results were promising. Gameplay was seemly (except for recording the data to see trends), and there was a fair balance of back and forth winning that occurred between players, which was especially important because at no point did one player feel like the "already lost" even though it was still early in a particular game.

(Left) Card stats and gameplay testing data. (Right) Card layout and gameplay process.

Pre-Alpha Gameplay

This iteration of the gameplay is what was used for this set of testing. The flow of the game worked well, but even so some elements of the rounds still felt heavily luck-based. Final gameplay instructions will be posted on this page, when revised.

Separate commander deck (12 cards) and unit deck (20 cards):

Unit decks are shuffled each round.
Deal out 3 commanders, face down.
Draw 7 unit cards, playing 2 under each commander, face down.

Ace cards are 1 point value, but have an ability:

Fortify = place final card from hand with the other two units on this commander
Decimate = remove the lowest attack value on the facing opponent commander
Ambush = lowest total attack value wins this battle (instead of highest)
Gamble = unless the total unit attack value matches (even/odd), you win this battle
NOTE: if each opposing unit has an ability card, both abilities are ignored and it reverts to the highest attack value.

Synergy Bonus:

Same or complimentary (earth + fire; water + air) elements +1 attack
If commander is same/compliment element as both units then additional +1 attack

Feedback & Reflections

Prototype testing didn't include using the abilities, so this was the first time utilizing all aspects of the most recent gameplay rules. These additions changed gameplay in a way that benefited the 1-value cards, but showed a rising issue with 2 and 3-value cards not being useful enough to deploy. The solution could be to create abilities for all units valued at 1-3, with 1-value having the most prominent impact. The ability "activation" order would occur with lowest card first, or if a tie, follow this order: commander advantage, then next lowest unit determines, or finally toss a coin.

Another issue was the size of the unit decks. With only 20 cards, it's difficult to shuffle and cards must be recycled too quickly. Additional low-value units (duplicates) may be added, making 4 and 5-value cards less frequent. A fifth, colorless card set is also considered, which will naturally synergize with any color its associated with. These implementations should increase the commander deck to 13-15 cards, and the attack units to 35-45 cards. One final improvement in battle rounds may be needed. Considering a revision on how units attack and are destroyed. For example, possibly leaving them in play more than one round.

The core mechanics are still promising, but what's interesting is how subtle changes to any element can drastically shift the entire experience. With balance and engagement being the focus, this make this quality assurance process so vital. We're looking forward to how this game will evolve!