Skip to Content
 

What makes "Magic" so special...

36 replies [Last post]
Thu, 12/19/2019 - 16:10
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011

I wanted to briefly discuss "this" topic a bit. Maybe there are aspects that I may have omitted and I'd like to hear/read more opinions about this topic.

We all know that players who build their OWN "Deck" (or Deck Construction) is a powerful concept. And I agree that allowing off-line customization of a set of cards is an activity that (in Magic) can take hours of time. While I may say that another game which streamlines the process a bit (my Monster Keep) it still allows full customization with very simple guidelines to how to customize a deck.

So YES customization is a way to encourage people to be more INVESTED in your game. It's also ONE (1) source of revenue. It encourages players to BUY cards in order to "improve" their deck by "chasing rare or mythic" cards... Boosters sales are a direct result of customization. Aftermarket sales are another source of revenue too...

But I personally think it's (Magic's) Draft and Sealed game formats that are pure "evil" genius. I won't dive into the details only to say that basically IF you have a couple Magic Decks... Those two (2) formats which are very FUN and popular ... Just make you SPEND MORE MONEY on cards that you'll never ever use again!

The idea (and to me it's Rocket Science) is that while you have your OWN cards... You need to BUY MORE in order to play in one of these two formats. Basically in "Draft" you choose a card and pass the rest of them along to the player next to you... You do this until all the cards are chosen. So you're buying EXTRA cards (3 boosters to be exact) If you draft every week... You're spending between $10 to $15. Not a LOT... Mind you that you might ALREADY have cards...! So if each Draft player needs to drop money for more boosters... This is a GREAT way to help keep the game (Magic) ALIVE!

The other format of interest is SEALED. I personally see LESS of an appeal that the genius of "Draft" but you buy 6 Boosters in a SEALED tournament. This is also great for Magic since again you are buying MORE boosters and that results in greater sales (of cards). So while you might have several custom Decks constructed off-line, a sealed tournament means that you have to buy MORE boosters and play with whatever you get.

Again the concept is remarkably SMART. Add MORE cards and play with new cards, instead of using your own Decks...

I think these two (2) formats (Draft and Sealed) are art of the reason that Magic is SO SUCCESSFUL. If you're always paying to buy MORE boosters just to play ... even thought you may have already spent a bunch on your own custom decks... These formats ENCOURAGE the propagation of more sales in FLGS that deal with Magic cards.

IMHO I feel these two (2) formats are what breeds life into the Magic CCG.

Without them, there would be far less players and the game would be more about COLLECTING than PLAYING!

Please feel free to share your comments, feedback, questions, etc.

Top
Thu, 12/19/2019 - 16:58
#1
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Just answering you heading: I

Just answering you heading:

I said once:

"People play Magic because people play Magic"

Beign the first CCG and the most popular game is the key to their success. It's like monopoly, the game is crappy, but everybody knows and play the game, so they play it.

Top
Thu, 12/19/2019 - 17:36
#2
Jay103
Jay103's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/23/2018
Magic as a game is in

Magic as a game is in constant flux, so I'm not sure you can simplify it to "this is crappy". There are certainly aspects to it that are very good, and it did capture an audience that grew and grew.

Top
Fri, 12/20/2019 - 11:09
#3
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
I am talking more about the

I am talking more about the core rules here. Because sure with new cards expansion and replacement, they can "patch" the game to fix the issues it has. But the core rules remain the same.

I compared magic once to like if cars had no breaks, no signaling lights and no wind shield. Sure you could have compensating mechanism to prevent those flaws like slowing down, using a scarf, using hand signaling panel. Those tools would reduce the occurence of accident. But you are still rolling in car which has those issues.

The 2 main issues in my point of view is the mana system (shortage and overflow)[fixed in duel masters] and the card drawing system (no more cards to play, wait for the card to win). Sure you can have cards that makes you draw more lands or cards in order to fix the issues above. But those issues are still there. It's just the player needs to design a deck while thinking of fixing those issues.

Again for the car analogy, if you drive a car that naturally shift right, you'll have to think to compensate the movement by going left. Yes, you could say that in the end, you drive straight, but should the driver be responsible for making that compensating left movement, or should the car be fixed instead.

Top
Fri, 12/20/2019 - 14:43
#4
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Hmm... I think the discussion has de-railed a bit

I think flaws and problems are not part of the topic at hand! I'm not saying nothing about the game being PERFECT (and not having flaws)... I'm more interested in discussing HOW "Magic" manages to stay afloat when a bunch of other CCGs/TCGs have failed.

@Larienna first said: "It's because they were FIRST." But I can think up other card games like "Chaotic" which were FIRST in physical to online game play... They lasted for a short while and then disappeared too! People play because other people play is a valid argument. This is like saying there are no GOOD "alternatives" to "Magic" (in essence). So people play what is POPULAR.

But being first means nothing if the game DOESN'T SELL!

@Jay103 says the game is in constant flux. Meaning they are improving the game from one edition to the next. Which is kinda true... I mean yes they release new cards and I assume they also release new mechanics for the cards themselves.

And I guess this is another reason why "Magic" is special... New cards and new ways to use them... How that intermixes with all the other cards, IDK TBH. The innovation of THEMES is probably also a part of their success... I mean they think up of Ravnica (City of Guilds) and release all kinds of cards relating to the guilds or vampires released in that same edition...

So themed editions is another reason for so much variability and richness in terms of content too... I guess that's another reason to their success: coming up with new Editions which offer new cards relating to the theme of the edition.

Are there other aspects of the game that could make it "special"???

Top
Fri, 12/20/2019 - 16:05
#5
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Maybe I should rectify my

Maybe I should rectify my statement as "first CCG to be popular"

Sure they kept the fire burning by realeasing new cards and ideas which kept people in the game.

But what makes me wonder (and we will never know the answer). If magic the gathering was not the first CCG to be popular. Let say Legend of the 5 rings was the first CCG and was popular. Then magic would came one or 2 years after L5R. Would magic have surpassed L5R and become the #1 game?

If the answer is yes, then that means there was something good with the game.

If the answer is no, then that means that it's not the game that gave them success.

But again, well never know.

Top
Fri, 12/20/2019 - 23:37
#6
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
I would also ADD

I don't know IF it was the FIRST CCG/TCG to have COMBATIVE gameplay?!

Now everyone seems to be releasing card games that are about dueling or battling. I can still remember demo-ing "Quest AC" at the Hamilton Con... And one of the young players said during the game: "Is there any battling?"

It struck me that kids actually enjoy the BATTLE aspect from games like Yu-Gi-Oh! and Pokemon. It seems like it fuels their desire to defeat their opposition.

I wonder because I had collected other CCGs before Magic like: Star Trek: The Next Generation, L5R, Bloodwars, Vampire TES. The last three (3) were all COMBAT-oriented games also.

So it seems like is WAS NOT the first BATTLE game... So it's NOT about them being FIRST. TSR was around when the launched Bloodwars and Vampire TES was also in the early 90s...

Top
Sat, 12/21/2019 - 00:01
#7
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
1993 is when the Magic happened!

Well I guess Google can't be wrong. TSR launched Bloodwars in March 1995... So that's more than 2 years earlier that WOTC first printed Magic. It may had been in its infancy back then... But it still looks like it was the FIRST one! It seems that EVEN "Star Trek: TNG" was released by Decipher in 1994... A year after Magic's first printing!

Top
Sat, 12/21/2019 - 08:16
#8
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Yes, you are wrong. Magic

Yes, you are wrong. Magic appeared in 1993. Here is the list of CCG on wikipedia. Sort them by date, and they are first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collectible_card_games

Here in Quebec, it might have arrived a few years later. So it might have looked like if many CCG appeared at the same time. I remember my friend calling me from edmonton asking to buy magic deck and ship them there since there was a shortage and decks were sold pretty high.

That is how I learned about magic.

Top
Sat, 12/21/2019 - 13:09
#9
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
My apologies... Indeed you are CORRECT!

I am really surprised that Magic came FIRST! I thought some other small CCG appeared and disappeared too (like Star Trek: TNG or Bloodwars). But indeed it seems like you are CORRECT: Magic came FIRST (I'll say it again)!

Wow in this case there were PLENTY of other games that came out. But did not have the longevity of Magic. In this case, something must have been different with Magic such that it managed to survive while the others (competition) did not.

My apologies... You were correct!

Top
Sat, 12/21/2019 - 13:17
#10
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I always loved the vanilla

I always loved the vanilla version, normal combat if you will. Maybe that was the reason why many people loved the game to begin with.

Later on, they lost me with their inability to keep balance.

Top
Sat, 12/21/2019 - 13:37
#11
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Although a great "core" game... I'm not sure that its...

The real "Magic" from "Magic"!!! Vanilla is good for a couple of years... then what? You've got to keep players MOTIVATED to "COLLECT MORE" and buy more boosters... Otherwise that would be the END to "Magic"! And that's why I think MOST other CCGs FAIL: not enough incentive to buy more cards.

Of course with each NEW Edition comes NEW cards and abilities. The nature of the game changes... allowing for things like DRAFT and SEALED to actually make a difference. Because it's the SAME "core" game with some minor tweaks and additional cards.

So if WOTC would cater to players like YOU... They would have been dead in the waters... WHY? Because you only played for a limited time. Magic wants people to be playing ALL THE TIME. And it's like a "calling", you never stop collecting cards because it's cool to be in with the popular crowd.

The KEY is this: if you stop playing... Your neighbor might START playing. You've got to be able to ATTRACT NEW players to the game even when old ones leave. That's another factor of importance... How do the do this WELL???

Top
Sun, 12/22/2019 - 11:00
#12
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Expansions fine Balance

Expansions fine
Balance rollercoaster.... no, please god, no!

Top
Sun, 12/22/2019 - 20:57
#13
Warklaxon
Offline
Joined: 11/27/2019
Magic: the Gathering

The key to the success of this game has been:

First its’ originality when first released
Second it’s distribution and wide field of play
This created a wide and broad market penetration.

Followed by:
Ease of play and time it takes for a game / tournament.
adaptability
Branding: Theme and art
Focus on the player/ customer
Cycle of new product
Economy (TCG Player and other in game valuation)
Hosting of different levels of competitive play - supported by the brand
Ways to play And play styles.

This is a game that started its’ own ecosystem and doesn’t cannibalize itself with each iteration.

It allows the customer to do exactly what the customer wants to do- cast spells and kill opponents in many ways and with lore they haven’t seen or heard of or have.

The fact that it exists still today with the advent of mobile games, apps, computer games proves it is the heavyweight of tabletop games.

It is possible to make a better game, and there is plenty of room for others, but it is an uphill struggle to take the crown on each and every segment that it is so successful at. It’s almost not worth trying.

But it so is worth trying because the mechanics show their age, the leadership of WOTC changes and vectors away from the core of the gamer, and there are other ImaginatI’ve worlds to explore.

If you want to make TCG now it has to do better and be better than MTG. IMO I haven’t seen any better yet and not for lack of effort.

Top
Sun, 12/22/2019 - 22:26
#14
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Monster Keep in "comparison"

Warklaxon wrote:
If you want to make TCG now it has to do better and be better than MTG. IMO I haven’t seen any better yet and not for lack of effort.

I agree. I would say that I'm working on "innovating" in the domain. So let me share some thoughts about "Monster Keep" (MK). At it's very heart, it aims to SOLVE a "deep" problem with CCGs/TCGs... Overwhelming NEW players to the game.

Think of it this way: if I had to explain "Magic" in 5 minutes, you probably agree this is NOT possible. It can take HOURS of looking at cards and trying to build the "best" possible DECK.

Lesson #1: Offer something playable from the get-go.

MK allows you to use the First Twelve (12) card as your Micro Deck READY-TO-PLAY. This is like having a game that you can play straight out-of-the-box. Newbies will adore this because they can rest assured that the "starter deck" is designed for competing against others.

Lesson #2: Let the newbies learn HOW to customize.

MK makes it SIMPLE to "customize" your Micro Deck. Simply choose a Block and REPLACE IT. For example the Melee Block "A" can be replaced with any other Melee Block "A" (Example: replace A001 with A002). And voila you've CUSTOMIZED your deck so easily.

Lesson #3: Don't limit the experts in their own customization.

MK allow you to "customize" even further. Any Melee Block "A" card can be replaced with ANOTHER "A" card. Any one! Since each Block has three (3) cards, potentially you could have "A001", "A003" and "A005" cards from different editions of the game. FULL FLEXIBILITY with Block customization rules.

Again the point of this is to SIMPLIFY "customization" for newbies while offering sufficiently flexible customization for experts. These are the "innovations" for MK. First it's a game (2 or 4 Players), next it can be "customized" as per the available cards (and editions)... The sales model is similar to the "Living Card Game" (LCG) and expansion cards will be available "per edition". As such it's not really a CCG/TCG ... It's a hybrid of some sorts. The idea is to make MORE cards available with a simple "customization" mechanic that EVERYONE can learn in one (1) minute.

So MK was design for "customization" but is NOT a CCG/TCG.

It's real purpose is to establish some kind of "credibility" in the design of future cards for the game. Allowing some form of GROWTH in terms of packs. PLUS "expansion" cards are also playable out-of-the-box too! So you can be a newbie to the game when Edition #3 is out or you can be an experienced player trying to gather some NEW cards for his "custom" Micro Deck!

Your thoughts on the issues tackled by MK? Feedback, comments, questions, additional ideas all welcome!

Cheers.

Top
Sun, 12/22/2019 - 22:55
#15
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Feel free to continue discussing Magic

I just wanted to "throw it out-there" the GOAL of "Monster Keep" (MK)! And IF all goes well with MK, I will afterwards LAUNCH a real CCG with Boosters and ALL, provided people believe in my brand and are interested in having more. That product would of course be "Quest Adventure Cards(tm) - Second Edition" ... I'm not 100% sure, because even IF I can get the game made... Not sure of WHO the "audience" would be for such a game.

Right now, it's more of a DREAM PROJECT.

So what else do you think makes "Magic" so special, huh???

Top
Mon, 12/23/2019 - 09:50
#16
Warklaxon
Offline
Joined: 11/27/2019
What else?

questccg wrote:
Lesson #1: Offer something playable from the get-go.

MK allows you to use the First Twelve (12) card as your Micro Deck READY-TO-PLAY. This is like having a game that you can play straight out-of-the-box. Newbies will adore this because they can rest assured that the "starter deck" is designed for competing against others.

—-This is an ideal approach. The starter pack offered something similar from Magic that was playable. I had the same idea for a base game, establish a system, establish a following and release an ‘advanced’ expansion to customize. The biggest issue then becomes immediately : potentially a much smaller pool of people who initially play the game will be interested in the advanced version. So I think you have to sell both the expansion and the base game in the initial release. Boosters and starters. Encourage the players to start with just the starter and then modify with the booster.

questccg wrote:
Lesson #2: Let the newbies learn HOW to customize.

MK makes it SIMPLE to "customize" your Micro Deck. Simply choose a Block and REPLACE IT. For example the Melee Block "A" can be replaced with any other Melee Block "A" (Example: replace A001 with A002). And voila you've CUSTOMIZED your deck so easily.

— I believe The standard deviation curve applied to regular board gamers has their intelligence a Standard deviation above the normal population. Simplicity is good but also make sure that flavor and theme come through in the cards. Generally the gamers can handle it. (You state this below in #3). Don’t sacrifice fun for simplicity.

— I would recommend calling the deck just ‘deck’ and not ‘micro deck’. If you don’t have a larger deck coming out late, there is likely no need to describe it thus.

questccg wrote:
Lesson #3: Don't limit the experts in their own customization.

MK allow you to "customize" even further. Any Melee Block "A" card can be replaced with ANOTHER "A" card. Any one! Since each Block has three (3) cards, potentially you could have "A001", "A003" and "A005" cards from different editions of the game. FULL FLEXIBILITY with Block customization rules.

Again the point of this is to SIMPLIFY "customization" for newbies while offering sufficiently flexible customization for experts. These are the "innovations" for MK. First it's a game (2 or 4 Players), next it can be "customized" as per the available cards (and editions)... The sales model is similar to the "Living Card Game" (LCG) and expansion cards will be available "per edition". As such it's not really a CCG/TCG ... It's a hybrid of some sorts. The idea is to make MORE cards available with a simple "customization" mechanic that EVERYONE can learn in one (1) minute.

So MK was design for "customization" but is NOT a CCG/TCG.

It's real purpose is to establish some kind of "credibility" in the design of future cards for the game. Allowing some form of GROWTH in terms of packs. PLUS "expansion" cards are also playable out-of-the-box too! So you can be a newbie to the game when Edition #3 is out or you can be an experienced player trying to gather some NEW cards for his "custom" Micro Deck!

— The customization is great; however, customization is complex. I feel a video showing the process off and how fun and easy it is would be best description for it.

— the biggest questions board games ask are: is this fun? Does it set up for a fun event? Is it necessary to get to the fun? If your game mechanics don’t Answer these questions with at least one yes, you may want to consider replacing with ones that are more thematic, tension building, or in line with the fun that is your game. the game mechanics should be easily explained in the simplest manner possible. I guess I still don’t have a good flavor yet for gameplay for this game which is why I am posting this. In two sentences, can you describe the point of the game? You may have mentioned in prior posts, but I am too lazy to go back and dig through.

—if you haven’t already, Identify your target audience, like an actual person - are they a 12 y/o gamer or 16, or 21? What should they hope to do with this game? What gets them excited for it? This will help you identify the reading comprehension required for understanding the game rules and their attention span.

—one thing that makes MTG great is the collaboration of multiple designers. Definitely a challenge for self publishing such a monumental game

—These explanations are great for us to discuss as designers and I am thankful to have the opportunity to discuss them.

questccg wrote:
Your thoughts on the issues tackled by MK? Feedback, comments, questions, additional ideas all welcome!

Cheers.

Top
Mon, 12/23/2019 - 10:57
#17
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
What surprises me in magic is

What surprises me in magic is the possibility space of the text abilities. There are more than 30000 cards out there, and there are still possibilities that are available.

On the other hand , Duel Master, which is also a WOTC game, got cards with same abilities and strength combination after aproximately the 500th card. So the possibility space was much shorter.

That is the only thing that I don't know how they do it.

Top
Mon, 12/23/2019 - 14:03
#18
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Closer to 18,000 as of 2018

larienna wrote:
...There are more than 30000 cards out there, and there are still possibilities that are available...

Woah ... there were 18,000 as of 2018. I doubt that they would design that many more in 2019. You'd have to DOUBLE it (almost). There is no way that they designed 12,000 cards in 2019...

But still there are a LOT of cards, 18,000 is still a bunch of cards!

The real deal is that NOT all cards are USEFUL in play. Some cards and their abilities are USELESS... So it's like fodder or filler to simply produce more cards and editions. When I found out that NOT all Magic cards are good to play with, I was a bit surprised... I naturally though cards all had purposes and you played with the cards that you had. Well it turns out this is NOT true (except for the Draft and Sealed formats).

Anyhow that's neither here nor there... But yeah there are a LOT of cards to be collected.

Top
Mon, 12/23/2019 - 14:31
#19
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Warklaxon wrote:—-This is an

Warklaxon wrote:
—-This is an ideal approach. The starter pack offered something similar from Magic that was playable. I had the same idea for a base game, establish a system, establish a following and release an ‘advanced’ expansion to customize.

My approach to "encouraging" player to follow is NEW "races". So while the First Edition is "mostly" HUMANS ... More races to follow like Orcs for example!

Warklaxon wrote:
The biggest issue then becomes immediately : potentially a much smaller pool of people who initially play the game will be interested in the advanced version. So I think you have to sell both the expansion and the base game in the initial release. Boosters and starters. Encourage the players to start with just the starter and then modify with the booster.

This depends. It could go 2 ways. Like you stated a "smaller pool" who will want the Second Edition. OR it could go the other way and attract MORE attention and more gamers interested in playing.

Remember that each package that is published will allow either 2 or 4 players to play the game. So IF you missed the First Edition, no problem. You can just use the cards from the Second or Third Editions...

Warklaxon wrote:
— I believe The standard deviation curve applied to regular board gamers has their intelligence a Standard deviation above the normal population. Simplicity is good but also make sure that flavor and theme come through in the cards. Generally the gamers can handle it. (You state this below in #3). Don’t sacrifice fun for simplicity.

My idea is to keep the game simple to START. Making it more accessible to all kinds of players from different walks of life. Tweens, teens, young adults, parents, etc.

Warklaxon wrote:
— I would recommend calling the deck just ‘deck’ and not ‘micro deck’. If you don’t have a larger deck coming out late, there is likely no need to describe it thus.

The game is played with EACH player having his/her own "Micro Deck" of twelve (12) cards (4 Groups of 3 cards each). The game last at most twelve (12) rounds too!

Warklaxon wrote:
— The customization is great; however, customization is complex. I feel a video showing the process off and how fun and easy it is would be best description for it.

It will be documented (either a video or document). Could be "extended" rule in the rulebook (How to "customize" a deck).

Warklaxon wrote:
— the biggest questions board games ask are: is this fun? Does it set up for a fun event? Is it necessary to get to the fun? If your game mechanics don’t Answer these questions with at least one yes, you may want to consider replacing with ones that are more thematic, tension building, or in line with the fun that is your game. the game mechanics should be easily explained in the simplest manner possible. I guess I still don’t have a good flavor yet for gameplay for this game which is why I am posting this. In two sentences, can you describe the point of the game? You may have mentioned in prior posts, but I am too lazy to go back and dig through.

Yes I AGREE, the game must be FUN. But also it cannot be TOO SIMPLE either. That's another challenge... making the game to have sufficient DEPTH that it can be enjoyed by a variety of players.

Warklaxon wrote:
—if you haven’t already, Identify your target audience, like an actual person - are they a 12 y/o gamer or 16, or 21? What should they hope to do with this game? What gets them excited for it? This will help you identify the reading comprehension required for understanding the game rules and their attention span.

Like I said, I plan to open the game to tweens, teens, young adults and parents. So there is a variety of players interested in playing the game together...

Warklaxon wrote:
—one thing that makes MTG great is the collaboration of multiple designers. Definitely a challenge for self publishing such a monumental game

Well I have reached out to the BGDF crowd of designers for ideas and help regarding the "Tactical" layer of the game. I am planning to work on this today and tomorrow and see how some of the ideas are in the game. They were merely IDEAS, I need to convert the suggestions into real content.

Warklaxon wrote:
—These explanations are great for us to discuss as designers and I am thankful to have the opportunity to discuss them.

Glad you enjoyed the "comparison", it's not often that I find someone who is interested in discussing points like this (Magic vs. another game).

Top
Mon, 12/23/2019 - 23:48
#20
AdamRobinGames-ARG
Offline
Joined: 02/11/2015
As an avid dinner table player

I play a Magic with a small group of friends. We're casual players, but have fairly large collections, as we've been playing since the 90's. Some points of interest for us that keep us coming back:

1. Complexity - Magic, generally speaking, offers a wide range of complexity factors, which have already been covered but my two cents:
A. Deck Construction - You can build a simple deck of creatures and combat tricks, or a rube goldburg machine that requires a lot of thought to play.
B. Card Selection - The sheer volume of cards and interactions really allow personal play style to show through. WotC comes out with several new sets every year, creating new mechanics and a new journey of who can figure out how to break old cards or abuse the new ones. The constant flow of new content really makes it difficult for competitors to challenge them in selection.
C. Strategy - Mathematically speaking, this is the most complex game in existence. So much so, it is the only known game to be "Turing Complete". Fun aside, look up turing complete magic on youtube for how to turn the game into a computer.
D. Synergy - While not as strong early on, over the years, WotC has gotten better about grouping new mechanics that really interact well with one another within a set. Meaning if you really like one mechanic, you can build several very different decks around that one idea.

2. Formats - There are a broad range of game types. Standard, EDH, Team, Two-headed, Emperor, Brawl, Booster duel, Pauper and a whole host of others. Not to mention, I have a friend who came up with a deck builder style of play that can use even the "crap" cards in a way that makes them useful. Someone can become a top champion in one format and not ever play any other. I think most other TCGs and CCGs have one or two formats, so your group of "elite" players will remain smaller. So to really break into TCG/CCG, I think you need enough ways to play for people to Champion the game without newcomers feeling like they can never compete.

3. Nostalgia - Many of us who play started in the 90's. Now we have kids we can introduce to it. I have not known a competitor to produce to the point of having a new generation of players. This ties in to what "larienna" said near the start of the thread.

4. Story - As noted above, originally it was fairly vanilla. But as sets started coming out, so did stories. Now there is a storyline which gives a reason for nearly every card in a set. While I personally never got into the lore behind the game, it was the primary reason my best friend got into it and why he continues to buy certain sets. He tends to like the narrative as much as the deck building and game play.

5. Gamer collaboration - One thing MtG's players did (whether intentionally or unintentionally by WotC) is collaborate over deck ideas. It may have been coincidence with the tech boom, but sites popped up with deck building strategies, discussion of card's power, combos, etc. popped up everywhere.

Other notes: "questccg" stated "Meaning they are improving the game from one edition to the next." which is not always the case. Frequently something gets through that just dominates play and breaks the game as "X3M" alludes to later. It's a chore just keeping up with the list of banned and restricted cards, which is why we are casual players. Also, since you asked for it "questccg", feedback I have is format and gamer collaboration. Have the base game play, but offer other formats, so as champions dominate in one format, rather than burn out young or less proficient players can try another format. Also, make it easy for fans to collaborate. An online card catalog and easy way to manage collections and discuss deck ideas, combos, strategies or what ever goes in your game. I think these elements have been critical in MtG's long term success.

While I agree, Draft and Sealed provide the consistent money flow, there is so much out there, one can get into Magic without giving WotC a penny. Being a kitchen table player, 3/4th of my collection is collections of former players I bought.

Lastly, I am fairly certain they recently broke the 20,000 unique cards threshold. The 30,000 is likely including reprints of a card (exact same card, different sets).

Top
Tue, 12/24/2019 - 10:21
#21
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:When I found out that

Quote:
When I found out that NOT all Magic cards are good to play with, I was a bit surprised

The cards are designed according to 4 player archtype which I forgot the names. One of them is having strong cards, one of them is using useless card in a weird way to make them efficient.

Quote:
Strategy

Personally, I think there is no strategy in PLAYING magic. The strategy is only in the deck building phase. When the game start, it's pretty much scripted. The decision tree is very narrow and the stacking of the cards is more likely to influence you chances to win than your decisions. This is one of the reasons why I quit. Chess has a wider decision tree.

Top
Tue, 12/24/2019 - 15:13
#22
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Very interesting comment

larienna wrote:
Personally, I think there is no strategy in PLAYING magic. The strategy is only in the deck building phase. When the game start, it's pretty much scripted. The decision tree is very narrow and the stacking of the cards is more likely to influence you chances to win than your decisions. This is one of the reasons why I quit. Chess has a wider decision tree.

This is VERY interesting! So your argument would be that the game is only subject to the content of each player's deck. I'm not familiar enough with the game to agree or disagree. BUT it is a debatable point.

I kinda like this... To know that the game is predictable only by the content of a player's deck...!

This is where "Quest v2" may be DIFFERENT. Although you customize your deck fully (like a CCG), the players can play cards off of each other. And even if you have masterfully designed a great "Build Engine" with deck-construction... You opponent may have a better strategy to make HIS/HER "Build Engine" BETTER. And this is because as you play cards into YOUR quest, HE/SHE can counter with cards into your quest too...

I THINK (I'm not 100% sure) the interaction of the opponent's cards and your own... make for much more strategic depth. The game is not designed yet... So I can't ask someone to prove this or not.

I may (or may not) be onto something. We'll have to see as I find the time to finish editing TradeWorlds cards (for printing) and Monster Keep, plus my other designs. So we'll have to wait.

But interesting viewpoint/comment!

Top
Tue, 12/24/2019 - 15:36
#23
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:This is VERY

Quote:
This is VERY interesting! So your argument would be that the game is only subject to the content of each player's deck.

One way to test this would be to take multiple copies of the same deck stacked in the same order fighting the same opponent.

Then see if the outcome really changes from a game to another.

There will be minor variations, but I suspect that very few decision will have game breaking effects.

Another way to test this is with the possibility to rewind, or save state in video game. If you lose, rewind at the start of the game and try to see how you could win knowing the cards that you are going to draw or are going to get played.

In Duel Masters, I managed to reverse some loses, but not sure I have been able to do it all the time.

Top
Tue, 12/24/2019 - 20:02
#24
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Not sure I understood correctly

Let me paraphrase and you can correct me if I am wrong.

Quote:
So basically you are saying that given the SAME decks and ordered in the SAME way... There would be no additional or permissive decision making.

Is that what you mean???

If so then what the game BOILS down to is (as you have said) the composition of the deck ONLY. Given then same cards, the result is near identical. Not much in TRYING to use a "different" approach because "all roads lead to Rome"... Right?!

This touches a "chord" for me and it resonates. WHY??? Because it makes me THINK and see if my own (future) CCG offers deep enough strategy in terms of choices during the game.

Because I think that's what you are saying, right???

You feel like there is a LACK of meaningful choices that are ALTERNATIVES to the cards you get from your deck. Am I correct? Meaning that any given game is solely based (in entirety) on the pre-game Deck Construction...!

This leads me to believe that "Quest v2" might be DIFFERENT. The Engine Building is rather unique and the abilities that are triggered by the cards can vary and help players to determine when to best use them. So you might choose to play entirely different cards on your turn ... and to nobody's surprise, the outcome of that move results in a different result.

I am hoping that the game goes in THAT direction. But also that ONE or even TWO misplaced cards would NOT drastically swing the game to the opponent's favor. I think this would need balancing...

So I will keep this in mind when working on the "Quest v2" design.

Thank you for your deep insight. It's helping me better understand what Magic looks like "under the hood".

Cheers!

Top
Thu, 12/26/2019 - 13:12
#25
larienna
larienna's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2008
Quote:So basically you are

Quote:
So basically you are saying that given the SAME decks and ordered in the SAME way... There would be no additional or permissive decision making.

Is that what you mean???

Roughly, yes.

There could be other path for playing with the same card stack, but there are not that many meaningful decisions. I have not measured it, so I cannot know for sure how much decisions there is in average, but I suspect it's less than 10 per game. From past experience, there is generally 3-5 tense moments in a game.

There will be meaningless decisions. Like for example: do I play my swamp on the first turn and my forest on the second turn or vice versa. If you have no cost 1 cards, the path you chose is meaningless. If you have a cost 1 black card, then the choice is obvious, it's swamp then forest. If you have cost 1 card of each color, then you have a "real" choice, but now it depends on the card you are about to summon, does it really changes something that the black card get's played before the green card.

To give you an idea of measurements, on the first turn, chess has 20 possible moves. Afterwards, according to the piece played on the first turn, the number of possible moves increases.

A comparative to Magic is Duel Masters. In duel masters every card can be played as a land. that basically means that on the first turn, you have 5 possible cards you can put in your mana zone. Which creates almost 5 semi distinct path, because that card will not be able to be played for it's content anymore.

So which card you sacrifice is a meaningful decision on the long term. Personally, I sacrificed strong cards to spawn lot of weak cards rapidly. While my friend sacrificed weak cards to summon stronger cards later. Both path are viable solutions. Chess probably still have larger branches, but Duel Master have much larger branches than Magic.

Now what we game designer are interested in knowing how to make sure the decision tree remains wide and meaningful. There might not be a single solution to the problem, but I think the multi function of cards could be an interesting solution.

Like in duel masters, each card is a land and a spell. For one of my design, I though in having 3 functions: land, spell or creature. Giving much more possible ways to play a card. Some players could summon less creature and focus more on direct attacks and powering up single creatures rather than summoning a large army.

This is what you actually want, offer various style of game play for various kind of players with the same stack of cards. Making deck design less mandatory. Like in chess, players have the same pieces, but can use them in various kind of ways.

That is another issue with magic and many CCG, is that since the strategy is in the deck design, the game is not playable out of the box. Player feels they need to design their deck to really play the game. And this is due to the fact that there is little decision making after the deck is build. If you allow decision making during the game, players will not feel cheated this way.

Top
Thu, 12/26/2019 - 17:38
#26
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Meaningful decisions

larienna wrote:
Roughly, yes.

There could be other path for playing with the same card stack, but there are not that many meaningful decisions...

I hear you. I wonder if "Monster Keep" (MK) will be more interesting. Not sure. There is a STRONG "Area Control" mechanic and each player decides if and when he will play a card into a controlled space. The thing that concerns me the most is NOT "combat", it's more about how to collect "LOOT". What bothers me, is that I have tried several attempts to draft up a "Tactical" layer above the combat and area control. The first attempt was NOTHING, that needless to say made the game TOO SIMPLE. The second attempt was LOOT drops and moving around the play area to collect LOOT. It just doesn't feel RIGHT. It's like following a player to collect loot and moving for the sake of requiring Action Points (APs) to get around... Not very interesting TBH.

This results in the third attempt which was suggested by Stephen (@let-off studios). The idea is that you roll dice to try to control positions in the play area... It's a bit of Catan meets Carcassones. The idea is that you would get three (3) rolls and you could "control" three (3) locations in the play area. The operative word is "COULD". Not sure about a BUMP mechanic and a "round-oriented" looting mechanic.

I still need to "work-on-it"... Unfortunately MOST of my free time is occupied with EDITING "TradeWorlds" (I'm no longer the "back-up") ... I'm the only one with the skills and knowledge to EDIT what remains to ensure that the right assets are sent to the Manufacturer.

Put in another 2 hour today. May do some more LATER in the evening.

Note #1: I am also thinking about a PYL mechanic. Not sure about this (Push-Your-Luck). I guess I might need some suggestion on how to implement this!? Assuming that you only have ONE (1) Token/Pawn. You could choose to roll the 3d6s once and go to the matching location for loot... But you could RISK it "somehow"...

Not sure... Ideas/feedback/comments ALL welcome!

Top
Fri, 12/27/2019 - 21:24
#27
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
The useless cards

Are one of the reasons why I didn't like the game any more.
You hardly had this issue in the beginning.

This is also the reason why I absolutely hate, making useless units in my board game. Or at least a set of rules that allows the design of useless units.

Sure, speed of 30 or range of 30 is pretty damned useless when a map is practically 24 wide. But those designs are obvious.

I try to prevent the hidden failures.

Top
Fri, 12/27/2019 - 21:46
#28
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Cannibalizing your initial design

X3M wrote:
This is also the reason why I absolutely hate, making useless units in my board game. Or at least a set of rules that allows the design of useless units...

One of my fears is that as "initial" design cards, they can't be too weak or too powerful. Let me explain...

If you make the "First Edition" WEAK, players will opt for using future edition cards (which might be stronger) and forget about the "early" weak cards. But the result of this is that the "First Edition" cards are pretty much useless in terms of game play (in the future).

Now if you make the "First Edition" TOO STRONG, players will opt to NOT buy future edition cards (because they can always be beaten by the initial set of cards) and forget about collecting future cards because they are just weaker.

So this makes for an OBVIOUS path: make initial cards "in the middle". Not too weak but not the strongest.

Another way to look at, make cards "strong" in one sense but "weak" in another sense. Sort of like achieving some kind of BALANCE. I'm still working on this... It's sort of how I plan to DESIGN the "Orcs" but have yet been able to do this, since I am still trying to figure out the GAME that I am designing (commercially). What is it that I want to achieve?!

There is always a design issue of NOT cannibalizing some edition of your game just because you didn't think out properly ALL the cards that you will PLAN to release with future editions.

That's my primary concern ATM.

Top
Sat, 12/28/2019 - 09:38
#29
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Expandable plan

I never understood why they didn't do an expandable plan?

Like, "we make basics", then "synergy" and then "upgrades".
And switch between these 3 constantly.

At least, that is how I think about it.
While I can only look at the basics and synergy these days. I removed XP for reasons.

In a sense, I am still designing my armies from scratch, over and over again.
Thinking of new mechanics. And make sure these work before hand.
MtG thinks of mechanics. But only look at the balance, when the cards are already out?

Well, at least they got paid for those cards.

Top
Sat, 12/28/2019 - 16:47
#30
questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Further explanations needed...

X3M wrote:
I never understood why they didn't do an expandable plan?

Can you explain what this is and how it works??? It might be good for me to see if it may be used with "Monster Keep" (MK).

X3M wrote:
Like, "we make basics", then "synergy" and then "upgrades".
And switch between these 3 constantly.

I think this is related to ABOVE. Can you explain further???

X3M wrote:
MtG thinks of mechanics. But only look at the balance, when the cards are already out? Well, at least they got paid for those cards.

I can't understand WHY(?) they design cards and then put them on the BAN LIST...! This too me is like fncken retards. Like WHY(!) do they design such cards that they need to BAN them later?!?!?! TOTALLY LAME IMHO!

Note #1: Yu-Gi-Oh! was the OPPOSITE: they would design impossibly hard combos that are super powerful to beat ... maybe only by using a counter of ANOTHER super hard combo... Like you unlock YOUR super powerful combo... And then the next round your opponent unlocks his/her super powerful combo and then it's a REAL battle until the end!

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut