Episode 237: Night of the Card Hunter

[Rob Zacny]

Jon Chey joins Julian and Rob to discuss his new game from Blue Manchu: Card Hunter.

 

Listen

[EmperorNortonI]

I've also been playing a lot of Card Hunter recently, so this was an interesting talk.

 

I wonder if the guys at Blue Manchu might have inadventantly hit on a possible solution to a problem that has come up several times on the podcast - ship customization in space 4x games.  I think there might be a lot of potential for a space game (4x or not) where ship construction was a deck-design problem, research and tech development was a card acquisition problem, race selection modified the card library available, and exploration was a way to get wildcards.

 

Each ship is a collection of parts, each one of which adds several cards to the deck.  To keep the total number of ships low enough for this to work, maybe call them fleets instead - a low and hard popcap on "fleets" sounds much better than a low and hard popcap on "ships."  The more cards you put in your fleet, the bigger it gets, which could be both good and bad for . . . um . . . reasons.  This would make deck-destruction tactics incredibly thematic - taking damage cuts your options by forcing you to discard. 

[hexgrid]

I wonder if the guys at Blue Manchu might have inadventantly hit on a possible solution to a problem that has come up several times on the podcast - ship customization in space 4x games.  I think there might be a lot of potential for a space game (4x or not) where ship construction was a deck-design problem, research and tech development was a card acquisition problem, race selection modified the card library available, and exploration was a way to get wildcards.

 

 I'm more inclined to think the right answer to ship customization in 4X games is "don't".  Or rather, if you want to make a game with ship customization, make a game about that.  Like, say, Gratuitous Space Battles, though such a game could also potentially give you control in battle and offer more of a campaign.  Ship customization in 4X games adds complexity to no good end.

 

Having the ship building minigame is one more subsystem for the developer to focus on, and one more subsystem for the player to master.  Neither are likely to happen; the ship building minigame will be shipped "good enough" (or some other subsystem will suffer for the focus diverted to making shipbuilding good), and most players will do as much ship building as the game forces them to and no more.

 

Besides, surely someone in the imperial retinue can handle the job of keeping the fleet up to date.

 

That said, your major point stands; a ship building/fleet combat game built around deck construction could potentially work quite well.

[Gormongous]

 I'm more inclined to think the right answer to ship customization in 4X games is "don't".  Or rather, if you want to make a game with ship customization, make a game about that.  Like, say, Gratuitous Space Battles, though such a game could also potentially give you control in battle and offer more of a campaign.  Ship customization in 4X games adds complexity to no good end.

 

Having the ship building minigame is one more subsystem for the developer to focus on, and one more subsystem for the player to master.  Neither are likely to happen; the ship building minigame will be shipped "good enough" (or some other subsystem will suffer for the focus diverted to making shipbuilding good), and most players will do as much ship building as the game forces them to and no more.

 

Besides, surely someone in the imperial retinue can handle the job of keeping the fleet up to date.

 

Not to keep a thread off-topic, but isn't this the truth. Even when presented with a relatively minimal ship-building system, like Endless Space where you just fill "buckets" with parts, I still just settle for a balanced blend after one or two attempts to specialize. I feel like 99% of all space 4x games would be served with this design interface:

 

My ships should be armed with:

 

O All Lasers (200 spacebucks to change)

 

O All Mass Drivers (200 spacebucks to change)

 

X All Missiles (0 spacebucks, current choice)

 

O Equal mix of all (200 spacebucks to change)

 

You could divide that screen into heavy, medium, and light ships, if you really thought it necessary. Done. That's as much granularity as I've ever used, even when I was as deep into Galactic Civilization II's ship-building options as anyone else I've seen.

[EmperorNortonI]

 I'm more inclined to think the right answer to ship customization in 4X games is "don't".  Or rather, if you want to make a game with ship customization, make a game about that.  Like, say, Gratuitous Space Battles, though such a game could also potentially give you control in battle and offer more of a campaign.  Ship customization in 4X games adds complexity to no good end.

 

As they have been implemented, yes, I think you're right.  Deep systems aren't made well enough to matter, and as Gormongous the APCCGNN commented, bland systems just lead to bland designs, which leaves you wondering why you bothered.

 

However, I've always been one of the guys who fiddles with this stuff just because there's something intrinsically cool about it, somehow.  I'll totally admit, I'm being won over by the theme, and it's made me put up with pretty marginal systems.   In fact, this is the theme point that I find most compelling, and I spent a ton of time on ship design in MOO2, just because.  More recently, it's much more interesting than "build science colony 14" or "bribe race Y" and "expand for no reason, because there's nothing else to do."  Keep just enough of the 4X stuff to string battles together in a meaningful sequence, but not so much that it's the main focus of play - I'm imagining something along the lines of XCOM, actually.

 

And for a game like that, the Card Hunter system would work great.

[Fhnuzoag]

I've also been playing a lot of Card Hunter recently, so this was an interesting talk.

 

I wonder if the guys at Blue Manchu might have inadventantly hit on a possible solution to a problem that has come up several times on the podcast - ship customization in space 4x games.  I think there might be a lot of potential for a space game (4x or not) where ship construction was a deck-design problem, research and tech development was a card acquisition problem, race selection modified the card library available, and exploration was a way to get wildcards.

 

Each ship is a collection of parts, each one of which adds several cards to the deck.  To keep the total number of ships low enough for this to work, maybe call them fleets instead - a low and hard popcap on "fleets" sounds much better than a low and hard popcap on "ships."  The more cards you put in your fleet, the bigger it gets, which could be both good and bad for . . . um . . . reasons.  This would make deck-destruction tactics incredibly thematic - taking damage cuts your options by forcing you to discard. 

Heheh, I'm (not really)working on a space combat game design that is basically this.

 

Essentially, your deck is your fleet, and when you warp reinforcements into battle out of hyperspace, that's equivalent to drawing cards into your hand. You don't design *every ship*, only your flagship, and maybe a small number of 'hero' ships that are basically special cards you get out of special events/completing side objectives. The difficulty in making the design work is ensuring the cards are different and interesting enough to combine in fun ways, and not ruining the theme in the process.

 

The genius of the card hunter mechanic, really, is the control it takes away from the player. I mean, the problem with ship design generally is that the player can 100% control what he brings to the battle, so once he's figured out the system, he can build basically the optimal design and every battle is the same. It's a sort of self-destructive mechanic. The randomisation of the card hunter system means that even if you were to get the items you require for the 'optimal build', there's no guarantee that the cards you need would be drawn. This forces the players to react to unexpected shifts in his own capabilities.

 

It should never be an option to build 100% mass driver ships, just like in Card Hunter it's never an option to make a character be kitted out solely with the best attack and move cards.

[Procyon Lotor]

(Staying way off topic):  I've always thought that MOO1 had a wonderful ship design system, but it was wonderful because of the incredible (and, incredibly, never imitated) technology mechanic, which was itself very "deck builderesque".  If you recall, in MOO1 you only had the opportunity to research some portion of the entire tech tree, which meant that you had to design your fleets (and your strategy) based on the available technologies that you drew.  For example, you may have had great success last game with highly shielded beam weapon ships, but if you don't draw any early or middle-tech beam weapons in your current game, you will have to go with a hit-and-run missile fleets until you manage to get a decent beam weapon.  

 

In fact, I don't think the problem with space 4x games is with ship design.  I think the problem is with overstuffed technology trees with no randomization.  I can't stand the giant tech tree from Gal Civ II.  Just thinking about it makes my heart sink.  I am terrified that Gal Civ III is going to be even more bloated.  I know Troy G. wrote about the MOO1 tech system on Flash of Steel when he was doing his technology series.  IMHO, MOO1 has the best tech system of any 4x game out there.  It boggles my mind that no one has imitated it.  

[Arathain]

 I'm more inclined to think the right answer to ship customization in 4X games is "don't".  Or rather, if you want to make a game with ship customization, make a game about that.  Like, say, Gratuitous Space Battles, though such a game could also potentially give you control in battle and offer more of a campaign.  Ship customization in 4X games adds complexity to no good end.

Sword of the Stars is pretty much a game about ship customisation. It has nice stripped down 4x mechanics that don't really get in the way, and a lovely big tech tree full of toys that are more interesting than Laser 3. The ship designer is easy to use and lets you produce some very varied designs for whatever tactical or strategic (stealthed bio-war bombers!) goal you might have. Battles are real time, so you can play with the toys you've made, with every turret and projectile lovingly modeled. There's still the issue of having to update your designs for no-brainer upgrades like better engines. It's doesn't take that long, but it feels like there's a lot of make-work clicking involved. Still a great game.

 

What? It's a thread about Card Hunter? Oh, I like Card Hunter. I can't remember which podcast I heard it stated this way, but it was the clearest description of why this game works as well as it does. Tactical RPGs have the issue that once you've settled on your skill set you tend to deploy the same optimised rotation for most encounters, which becomes boring. The card draw mechanism means no turn is the same, and you always have to think carefully about the options you have available. Card games suffer from the luck of the draw- you can just draw a bad hand and be screwed. Playing on a tactical map allows the player to use movement and terrain defensively until they can draw the cards that they need.   

[sclpls]

Yeah, I think you are exactly right about why card draws are a good mechanic for performing different actions in a tactics game. To my mind, that's a better way to simulate the uncertainty of battle than other types of fog of war mechanics that you see in a lot of war games. That's why I prefer a game like the Combat Commander series to something like ASL, which is maybe more robust, but also more difficult to play without necessarily being a better game. Of course some players won't like the amount of control that's taken away from them by including the random draw of cards so the downside is you will turn some people off that way, but the more varied game play certainly makes it an attractive feature.

[dibs]

May well ask it here. I also have a dwarven warrior. Any tips for making him more mobile:/ He gets left behind so often despite how many attack/move cards and whatever nifty boots i put on him.

 

Really enjoyed the episode. I've been playing carhunter for a month and a half now and haven't got bored. It is bloody hard up around level 16 though.

[osmosisch]

I use charge boots, dwarven mobility race card and a lot of step attack weapons. That automatically tends to lend itself to penetrating, which tends to be my weapon type of choice anyway.

[riadsala]

anybody still playing this? I've recently been playing it quite a bit, it's a good time filler.