Page 1 of 1
Deal another deck
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:41 pmby Piestar
<Body>:
Suggestion Idea: Optional decks
Specifics: The defalt deck is fine, but maybe there is some additional game play in variants. For example, four colors, and a set of four to turn in. Of course there would be lesser turn in values for combinations. (This would particularly suit escalation games, as it would draw out the escalation. Yes, this is what most players enjoy about it, but those who avoid the current form might give it another try.) Or perhaps a deck of cards, played out like poker. Various hands are worth a 'pay off' in armies. When you have five cards, you 'discard' one at the start of your turn if you don't want to turn in Queen high nothing, for 4 armies.
I'm sure there are other possibilities out there...
Why it is needed: Variety is the spice of life.
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:45 pmby hecter
Sounds like Mission Cards, which has been rejected.
Mission: Impossible
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:07 pmby Piestar
By the title, I assume mission cards are cards that give you specific goals. If so, then no, this isn't like mission cards.
If somehow you mean a deck with picturesque photos of the Spanish missions that dot the Camino del Rey in California, gee, that would look neat, but no, that's also not what I am suggesting.
Any comments from anyone that actaully read my suggestion?
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:15 pmby BaldAdonis
Do you have any numbers on how the sets would look, or what they'd be worth?
Supposing you want four of a kind or one of each for a set of four, you could have a maximum of 9 cards without a set. Do you really want to wait until round 11 to cash in your first set?
Re: Mission: Impossible
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:20 pmby GreecePwns
Piestar wrote:If somehow you mean a deck with picturesque photos of the Spanish missions that dot the Camino del Rey in California, gee, that would look neat, but no, that's also not what I am suggesting.
I think it would be a good idea and would like it to be accepted, but I have a feeling it won't. Don't know why, but I just do.
yup
Posted:
Fri Oct 26, 2007 9:51 pmby Piestar
Bald Adonis - Look at the demographic we have now, we already have people who like the longer, drawn out no-card option, players who like the sudden-death lightning of the Escalating game, and an option in the middle.
With a four color deck, certainly you could have an 11 card wait, but the odds of that happening are pretty slim. If you feel that's too extreme, you could easily arrange it so all possible combination of six cards, or eight cards would be turn-in-able. Heck, you could even squeeze it down to a five-card max, with a wider ranger of pay offs.
Each of these would provide different game play.
Not every option will produce a good game, but decks that fails can be removed after the fact.
But if even half of the decks suggested provide a variation that people enjoy, I think it's worth it.
Plus the number of colors isn't the only variant possible.
In my face-to-face RISK games, we would experiment with some wild options.
Imagine getting two armies in every country you turn in! A new form of 'airborne' unit, to mix things up.
(I like this one in particular, because it has the highest percentage chance of affecting the players who has the most countries, i.e. is winning.)