Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: If SW was re made what would you change?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,342

    Default If SW was re made what would you change?

    Hi guys, if you were redesigning SW, what would you change?

    I have tried several times to create the perfect game, based on the fact that SW gives me almost what I want in terms of strategy, tactics, luck, hidden info, etc etc... but, the problem I have found, and I have read this also from other people here, is that the end result of this new game, just seems to be a copy of SW with a couple of twists, and this frustrates me a little.
    I wish I could come up with a new fresh game, similar to SW, but with new mechanics, new ideas, new ways of making the board positioning more important and make the defense to be less strong compared to attacking. If I was able to achieve this, I would make the effort to create this game for real, I know it is not easy, but I would try as a personal goal.

    Things I would change:

    1- Inevitability: I think this is well achieved with the suggestion from Waterd which is also used now in the errata project. Adding wounds to walls/summoner when you don't attack. It does not need to be exactly like this, but the idea makes sense for me, so this would not be an issue.

    2- Walls: I think walls should be less strong, also, I would have more than 3... I would think of 5 walls in a deck so that they are more reliable. For me, ideally walls would be 5 lives instead of 9, so 5 copies of walls with 5 life points. In order to make it a little different to SW I would call them Magical glades or something similar, so it makes more sense that the units are summoned in those spots.

    3- Board Control: I feel, SW needs a short/middle term goal, other than killing the summoner which would be the ultimate goal. I honestly enjoyed a lot the variant from Waterd of magic walls. I came with a different variation which I liked even more which was something like. "When attacking a wall and rolling no misses, take a card from discard pile onto your magic pile". The effect I found in the games with magic walls, was that players were forced to use more commons to protect the walls, they could not afford to wait to get enough magic for a champ as they needed to protect the walls somehow, at the same time, they would be saving to get a champ on the board. This dual thinking had me having interesting decisions during the course of the game, and having a purpose to attack an enemy wall and protect mine, made the game much more fun from turn 1, as it was not so worth it to kill your own units when you can use them to attack and defend immediately.

    The variation which I proposed, in which an attack with no misses would give you some magic reward, makes thematically sense to me, as it means you have attacked perfectly and this would remove some magic from this wall (or magical glade). Another good thing about this variation is that it would boost 1 Av units, as they are more likely to extract magic from the walls... so it would make them more efficient against walls but less against units... on the same line, champs with high AV would be very effective against units, but less effective at milking magic from walls.

    4- Starting setups: Many times I have tried SW without any units other than the summoners on board and I don't think it is better than the original SW setup. The conclusion to me is that it is good for the game to start with some units on the board, but I dislike the fact that it has to be always the same, and could even be bad in certain MU, or too good in some others. I came with an idea of having some setup cards dealt at the start of the game randomly. Such card would have the place where the wall is placed, and some spots for units, with only the cost on them. so , before starting both players would have the chance to start placing units as they think it makes more sense depending on the MU, the placement of the walls and the units already on the board. I don't have exactly the way to do it, but I would go with something like that.

    5- Randomness: I like dice on SW, I dislike the fact that dice could be so determinant in a match that has been played properly. So, I would address this issue as well, not by removing the randomness but by making it more controlled somehow. For this I have 2 ideas so far:

    A-Attack deck: Using numerated cards, not with dice results, but with hit results instead. I would have lets say, 12 cards in my attack deck, where I would have the following distribution (or something similar):

    - 4 X full misses.
    - 2 X 1 Hit
    - 2 X 2 Hits
    - 2 X 3 Hits
    - 2 X Full hits.

    The way to use it, would be that every time a unit would attack, draw a card, the number of hits is equal to the minimum value between the card drawn and the attack value of the attacking unit.

    The proportion would be that you will miss 1 out of 3 times you attack but you will be able to control and plan accordingly when you have been too lucky or too unlucky. Some new summoners would have ways to affect this attack deck.

    B-Dice track: This option is about having a small track (maybe circular one with 1 and 6 adjacent to each other) on the board will all possible results from a Die, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 each result with a place to put a marker. The way it would work would be:

    - By default, each result from a die, cover it on the track, i.e. I rolled a 2 and a 6, then I cover these 2 results.
    - When a result from a Die is already covered, you are free to take the next square available adjacent to the result, i.e. 2 and 6 are already covered, now I rolled 4 and 2, I would cover the square depicted with 1, but , as the square with a 2 is already covered as "used" then I can take the next available on both directions, so I would take either 1 or 3 as a result from the die and would cover it. This way I make sure that the proportion of misses and hits is always correct. if at any time, the track is covered, then, all markers need to be removed and the whole exercise starts again.

    6- Bad Draws: I hate when some summoners are so depending on the order in which they draw their events, or also when any summoner by bad luck, draws 3 champs and 2 very good events... it might force you to sacrifice some good cards, which might kill the whole plan, or force you to use a plan which is not very efficient, resulting this in making you lose the economic war. An Idea I have to fix this would be that every time a magical glade is attacked without misses, you can chose a friendly card from the discard pile to your hand. what would this do? well, it means you can discard cards to use the magic, but knowing that in future you could try to recover it by attacking walls (magical glades). I would make then less copies from each card, making a deck smaller, so that it would still be possible to gas out, by not having more cards (they were killed by your opponent) or, there are no more magical glades in the game (all destroyed).

    7- I would have decks with 5 champs instead of 3. Ideally the system would not allow me to be able to summon 5 champs, but instead I would be forced to chose during the course of the game depending on the pressure put on me and the order in which I have drawn the cards.

    And the worst part for me, if I had to create new cards, factions, etc, is that mos of the events, abilities, etc etc, would be so similar to SW, that it would not feel fresh to me... I mean, SW has covered so many things with all summoners released that creating something outside these abilities is not an easy task, still possible of course!
    Last edited by lcanela; 01-14-2019 at 10:09 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    A few feet from Colgha.
    Posts
    2,009

    Default

    One of my favorite aspects about SW is being forced to react to bad/weird/different situations brought on by some of the concepts you would remove. Especially bad draws. I enjoy card games like SW because they force me to take the tools I have been given and adjust my strategy accordingly. I think it would be a shame to make decision making easier in this way. Being forced to build a card you don't want to is exactly the kind of crucial decision making that makes these kinds of games come alive for me, and part of the reason SW holds such a special place in my heart. It also encourages players to build decks that can survive if they don't draw unit X or event Y early. (I, for instance will often include 1-2 off-commons or even have an entire champion slot devoted to allowing for stabilization in games where I can't get set up properly.)

    I think that some of your other points regarding other luck-based issues I also am uncertain about, but am much more understanding of. I just enjoy trying to mitigate all possibilities of failure. It's like a puzzle to me. "In case 2 dice both miss I should set up this archer to take a second shot, or maybe I should just set the archer up to attack his other unit..." or whatever the case may be. I like those decisions. Trying to determine what is more important: mitigating possible losses, or playing efficiently imagining all dice will hit? Tricky decision.

    I also have mixed feelings on magic walls. Every game I have played with them (I think only 10 or so, so not a whole lot of testing) has been a slog. Almost like a slow, underwhelming grind. I overall didn't enjoy the games quite as much, but I see the appeal, and could grow to like it more. And I think that just because you aren't attacking the enemy summoner turn 1 doesn't make mid game goal-less, really. It's all about tempo, resources, and opportunity.

    As for changes to starting setups or overall balance changes? Sure, why not. Inevitability would be good too.

    One I was thinking about recently would be just wounding a wall you control every turn, regardless of who attacked who.
    Uncleeurope was Hulgorad the Sad in RALLUL'S BANQUET
    Uncleeurope was The Seer who Drank too Much Beer in The Great Marsh
    Uncleeurope was Prince Elien the Felon in The 12 Masks of the Summoner
    Uncleeurope was Matt E. the Fatty in The Dance of Devils

    In other news, CUSTOMS!
    Quote Originally Posted by I LIKE TAU!
    As for what I hate most: ... Uncleeurope.
    Quote Originally Posted by killercactus View Post
    Sam Farthen is OP
    Quote Originally Posted by Waterd View Post
    He just rams in, his games last 5 turns...tops

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,364

    Default

    I actually really really like SW and what is has so offer. That's why I think with the errata project in the end we have a really good balanced product which comes close to what I want. However, some aspects are actually bad for tournament play (performance varriance, gampling in deckbuilds)

    If I'd redesign SW I would change the aspects of luck a bit, to make the game more depending on players skill/decision making. Some of these goals can just be achiefed by careful deck design (opting for 3x 3x events) and/or avoiding too powerful champs that are good/bad at a certain times of the game (late game Cyrus/Dinky as examples) but also avoid ANY luck based ability and decreasing the effects of dice of attacks (not completely remove them, as it adds an important value to the game).

    Another important part would be to remove the huge defenders advantage. This you can easily fix NOT by removing wall life, instead by changing how movement works. The main reason of the defenders advantage is that the attacker can't resupply his offense without giving up his board position himself -> collapsing at some point and forced into very unfaivourable trades. Now what happens if the movement rule would look like this
    "During your turn, you can move each unit once up to 2 squares. Each turn only 3 units can end their movement on your side of the battlefield."
    This will allow a player rushing on the opponents side to move ALL his units, while the defender has only 3 movements AND has bad positioning due to wall corwding. Current meta of SW would be completely shaken but for SW 2.0 I would build around this rule, creating a much more action pack / offense rewarding meta

    For Dice I would go with the Malaena mechanic for AVs
    Level 1 = 1 dice
    Level 2 = 1 precise dice
    Level 3 = 1 AV + 1 precise
    Level 4 = 2 precise
    Level 5 = 2 AV + 1 precise
    and so on. Would also allow much more graded AVs, as you basically have 1 AV, 1.5 AV, 2.3 AV 2.5 AV and so on. Unit ability then should trigger with magic/hand card/self wounding or triggers to work instead of dice (helkar, Kyndar, Kaseal mechanic instead of Skull's fear, phantom's possess)

    I agree with UE that draw -> hand management is an important part of the players skill ceiling in this game, together with wall/unit placements. So this aspect should not be removed, instead just be softened via 3x 3x event design.

    last but not least, to concentrate on the "strategic >> luck/surprise part, I'd make a rule that all 3 champs must be shown before the game and few common units also have a "reveal before the game" flag. This way, some funky units can still be used, but the opponent is aware of this certain tread. Examples are
    Thiefs, Shifter, Jungle guard, current Rune mage (which should not exist like this).
    If the deck build is kind of known there is still room for great surprise play but it's less of a unit gamble, which in my opionion is bad for a game that would opt for a more tournament based play.

    Edit: Defensive ability would work like wardens and ability like "whenever this units received more than one wound marker from a single attack or a card effect, decrease the amount of wounds taken by one. I would then not work with discard/destroy units, instead I would use "place wounds, and use if this unit is destroyed this way place the unit into your discard pile for discarding events". This way attacks, instead of attacking and event damage ALLWAYS interacts the same way with the defensive effects of units/events.
    Last edited by jwalker; 01-24-2019 at 01:29 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    A few feet from Colgha.
    Posts
    2,009

    Default

    The "only show part of the deck" idea is interesting, and makes me wonder if something "like 2/3 of the champions must be shown" or something would work, so the deck can still have an ace champion of the player's choosing.
    Uncleeurope was Hulgorad the Sad in RALLUL'S BANQUET
    Uncleeurope was The Seer who Drank too Much Beer in The Great Marsh
    Uncleeurope was Prince Elien the Felon in The 12 Masks of the Summoner
    Uncleeurope was Matt E. the Fatty in The Dance of Devils

    In other news, CUSTOMS!
    Quote Originally Posted by I LIKE TAU!
    As for what I hate most: ... Uncleeurope.
    Quote Originally Posted by killercactus View Post
    Sam Farthen is OP
    Quote Originally Posted by Waterd View Post
    He just rams in, his games last 5 turns...tops

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,342

    Default

    I believe an issue with Sw is the fact that you can move 3 but then attack also with 3 making it difficult to plan for future as most times you need to deal with the immediate threat.

    I would change the rule to, move 4 units, but only attack with 2. This would keep more units alive on the board to move, back up etc etc.

    Also, in first player´s first turn only move 2 and attack with 1.

    If you could move 4 units to attack, but only 2 of them would be attacked, you would have enough units to replenish the attack next turn.
    Last edited by lcanela; 01-26-2019 at 03:49 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •