Zombie CCG: What I Want, pt 2

Apparently, I have Google’s top result when people search for “Zombie CCG.”
Because my initial ideas were sound, and I don’t see any reason I
wouldn’t firmly grasp this sliver of internet relevance, I’m continuing
that project.

Options/Denial


A player should have options. Two of the most important options are hope and potence (most commonly represented by drawing cards and playing cards, respectively). Hope is the anticipation of a reversal of a game's current unfavorable state. Potence is the ability to act to affect the game's state. These two may sound similar. In fact, potence must be felt to have hope. If a deck has a solution to the threat an opponent poses, then there is hope each time a card is drawn that that card will be that answer (or at least a part of it). Whether that card has the impact on the game state that the player anticipates is another issue entirely; potence. A stalemate condition may have both players without potence, but both may still draw cards which can break the stalemate.

This means that on the one hand, the ability to blunt an established foe’s moves is important, but implies the ability of both players to do so, allowing a winning player to shut down a losing player's chances of a reversal. Changing card effects to reflect game status could avoid these effects being used as part of a ‘win more’ strategy. Victory conditions that praise imbalance and allow a lagging player to pull back a sprinting one by attacking weaknesses which emerge upon nearly victory are also good for this. A system whereby advancement brings risk--karma--would also serve to provide fuel to a player who’s falling behind, or calculated risk for a player to shoot ahead.

Those approaches risk two quickly advancing players short-changing each other, which can cause long games, as each side approaches completion, but can’t quite finish. A less dramatic alternative is to simply have a net Karma; only one player at a time has it, and if the other player gains karma, the other player loses it instead, perhaps utilizing a shifting pool, where a player can’t gain/lose karma unless another player loses/gains karma.

Despite giving lagging players a chance to catch up, the game should make moving forward hard to stop. Using alternative win conditions could give players a “moving target” in terms of being permanently stymied by a stalemate. Instead of trying A and being consistently shut down, a player can pick a victory condition that's much closer to Not A.

Ideally, I'd like to balance versatility of defense with versatility of offense; things should happen in a game, but just what kind of things should happen is a discussion for tomorrow.