Card-driven ASL

[Mister T]

You said price TBA. But can you give a general idea about the # of cards and rough direction of $/€?
von Marwitz

The deck contains 108 cards. The majority draw their inspiration on Chapter A rules. Some draw their inspiration from Chapters B, C and D of the rules.
On price, there will be a launching price for those at ASLOK. More on this later. Ein bisschen Geduld, bitte

 

[Bob Walters]

I'm in the Spencer camp on this, not villainy, but bleh ...

Of course cards, due to the need for uncertainty in the opposing player's mind, would not suit solo play, my main mode.

The plus for cards is that they introduce extra fog of war and uncertainty. The negative is that if not limited in scope then card play may have the effect either or both of skewing the balance and taking over the player's attention. I don't want ASL to become a Card Driven Game.

Cards are one way, drawing chits from a common pool, say the player whose player turn it is gets to draw a chit just before his/her player turn. That chit can be used any time after drawing and then discarded. To avoid buggering up balance keep the meanings weak, like a 2nd line HS or a ±1 DRM to any single dr/DR or a wire counter, etc.

Eg. The ±1 DRM could be applied as a -1 to the player's dr/DR or as a +1 to his/her opponent's dr/DR, whatever the first player wants. Keeping the effects weak means there is extra FoW without either upsetting the balance and avoids card/chit play dominating the players thinking.

Actually if one drew cards as random events (and did not peek) it could add quite a bit to a solitaire game. The rules for the use and application of the cards would likely be different but if applied appropriately to a solitaire game it would add uncertainty that is not normally present.

 

[kcole4001]

Interesting concept.
I likely won't play it, but interesting nonetheless.

 

[Paul M. Weir]

Actually if one drew cards as random events (and did not peek) it could add quite a bit to a solitaire game. The rules for the use and application of the cards would likely be different but if applied appropriately to a solitaire game it would add uncertainty that is not normally present.

That's a point worth teasing out.

It depends upon what the cards represent. If they are pure random events, then solitaire games would work just as well. If they are ASL game event dependent, like a once off DRM, a auto repair or rally then you need to "play" the opposite side to give that side its optimum card. In solitaire play you have to act a bit schizophrenic and even then you can't completely forget what your "opponent" has on part of the board. Concealed stacks are not particularly more affected than unconcealed stacks. HIP units can be gamed with some pre-game randomising of possible optimum HIP locations. Dummy stacks are more strongly degraded than any other type in solo play. If your "opponent" holds cards that could likely neutralise your next possible shot, won't that influence you?

It's not that cards will necessarily really break a solo game on their own but cumulative with your existing solo game excess of knowledge could break your solo experience. Straws and camels backs? That would be my worry. In the end not my cup of tea, but if it's yours, then have at it hoss.

 

[Yuri0352]

Actually if one drew cards as random events (and did not peek) it could add quite a bit to a solitaire game. The rules for the use and application of the cards would likely be different but if applied appropriately to a solitaire game it would add uncertainty that is not normally present.

Yes!

I would be very open to the concept of it were applied to solitaire ASL. Anything reasonable and fun that could better model the fog of war in a solo game... such as the minefields in the Crucible of Steel scenarios.

I have not been sold on the cards for FTF play however, especially the 'cancel out your opponent's card' ideas. Way too gamey/silly. Besides, my opponent is already very unpredictable as it is.

 

[xenovin]

This sounds like applying the fate cards from Combat Commander to ASL. I've thought about this as well but in the end a new game system seemed more appropriate. Still interested to see how this would actually work

 

[bendizoid]

Be sure to include a 'SNAFU' card that cancels out any of the others, and yes a SNAFU can cancel another SNAFU.

 

[Steven Pleva]

Be sure to include a 'SNAFU' card that cancels out any of the others, and yes a SNAFU can cancel another SNAFU.

You mean this card?
"Battlefield Insight - Negate any one card just played by the opponent."

SNAFU is probably a better name...
Steve

 

[bendizoid]

"Battlefield insight"-negate any one card, except SNAFU, just played by the opponent.

 

[bendizoid]

I like "Throw the genade back" a infantry unit, who attacked with PBF/TBF ,attacks it's own location with TPB Fire.

 

[Sparafucil3]

I like the "Exploding Bishop" card that makes the Bishop explode at the end of its move killing itself and all pieces adjacent to it (note this has nothing to do with Jim)...
Steve

I don't know. Ever seen me behind the wheel of a car? -- jim

 

[bendizoid]

I think there should be a discard phase where a good card might be randomly lost, you shouldn't be able to rely on this stuff too much.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Too many tight asses in the ASL world.

Please, share your enlightened opinion on the IIFT? What about CH and all the interesting ASL they bring to light oh open-minded one -- jim

 

[BattleSchool]

I am asking for one sample card.

Nichts zu danken!

 

[Mister T]

Be sure to include a 'SNAFU' card that cancels out any of the others, and yes a SNAFU can cancel another SNAFU.

It is not called SNAFU, but there is one in the mix which has similar effects.

And there's another card called SNAFU, but with a different effet, but well in the 'Snafu' spirit (as far as i understand it).

 

[Mister T]

I like "Throw the genade back" a infantry unit, who attacked with PBF/TBF ,attacks it's own location with TPB Fire.

That is in my opinion a bit too nasty, especially in small-size scenarios.

 

[Steven Pleva]

I think there should be a discard phase where a good card might be randomly lost, you shouldn't be able to rely on this stuff too much.

At the beginning of the turn you could draw a number of cards equal to the number of your leaders. Any cards not played by the end of the game turn are lost. That would keep players from hoarding. Alternatively, you could hold one card to the next turn. However, there is a 1 in 6 chance of it being discarded unplayed. One could make all kinds of cool tweaks to this to make it an experience...
Steve

 

[Mister T]

That's a point worth teasing out.

It depends upon what the cards represent. If they are pure random events, then solitaire games would work just as well. If they are ASL game event dependent, like a once off DRM, a auto repair or rally then you need to "play" the opposite side to give that side its optimum card. In solitaire play you have to act a bit schizophrenic and even then you can't completely forget what your "opponent" has on part of the board. Concealed stacks are not particularly more affected than unconcealed stacks. HIP units can be gamed with some pre-game randomising of possible optimum HIP locations. Dummy stacks are more strongly degraded than any other type in solo play. If your "opponent" holds cards that could likely neutralise your next possible shot, won't that influence you?

It's not that cards will necessarily really break a solo game on their own but cumulative with your existing solo game excess of knowledge could break your solo experience. Straws and camels backs? That would be my worry. In the end not my cup of tea, but if it's yours, then have at it hoss.

You've indeed highlighted the particular challenges linked to the adaptation of T-cards to solo play. As you mention some events are indeed closely linked to the flow of the game. This is something that fosters interactivity and fun in a regular, two-player game, but require thinking about how to integrate it into solo play. But solo play are often able to make reasonable compromises with themselves

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

But solo play are often able to make reasonable compromises with themselves

Really? The main reason I don't play solo is because of the endless arguments.

 

[von Marwitz]

At the beginning of the turn you could draw a number of cards equal to the number of your leaders. Any cards not played by the end of the game turn are lost. That would keep players from hoarding. Alternatively, you could hold one card to the next turn. However, there is a 1 in 6 chance of it being discarded unplayed. One could make all kinds of cool tweaks to this to make it an experience...
Steve

I believe that such a number of cards would be too many. In my mind it would be maybe three cards per side for a 'normal' 6 Turn scenario. Of course, it would depend a bit on the effects the cards have.

On the other hand, as the deck is intended as an add-on not supposed to have a significant effect on scenario balance, I reckon players just could agree on how many cards, cards per turn or whatever they want to include.

von Marwitz