Suggestions for SpiritWars 2013

[Psyclone]

MOST OF THIS IS JUST SOME IDEAS TO THROW OUT THERE.  I FIGURE NOW IS THE BEST TIME TO TALK ABOUT THIS IF SOMEONE IS GOING TO BE REBUILDING THE GAME FROM SCRATCH.

IMPLEMENT AI IF POSSIBLE

If you can implement AI (Computer Opponent), that will really open up the possibilities with this game. 

• TUTORIALS - Players can play against the computer starting out to learn the game, earn basic cards by defeating the computer as they level up (gain experience).  For example, one of the initial opponents in the tutorial could introduce the player to scouts and explain their benefit.  Upon completing the scouting tutorial, they are awarded a couple scout spirits to add to their kingdom. Have them learn what defenders and spells are and award those at the end of their respective tutorials as well.  Next, have them build a small deck (maybe 10 spirits) and give them advice on what to their dungeon.  Once they are able to beat the tutorials, open the game up to PvP, Raids, Campaigns, Tournaments, etc. and let them try to build full decks and populate their kingdom with spirits.
   
• CAMPAIGNS (SCENARIOS) - Have challenging campaigns and campaign packages (which have a cost to enter) in which a player has to defeat certain themed decks, or fight epic mythical battles, special maps, etc., using either their decks or a provided deck.  Have increasing difficulty levels and offer rewards (gold, spirits, etc.) for defeating each campaign.  A campaign may have multiple levels/sub-campaigns.
   
• RAIDS - Multi-player team challenges where players team up to fight tough challenges, raid bosses, etc.  For example, a 2-player raid might be a slightly larger map where 2 players have to work together to take out a computer army, or defeat a dragon with unique abilities (like double strike, or an AoE flame breath).

LEVELING/EXPERIENCE SYSTEM

As players complete campaigns and win battles, they earn experience.  As they level up, players receive rewards, such as gold to be used to purchase card packs, or a unique spirit.  For example, for reaching level 4, a player might receive 200g. At level 5, he is awarded an Apulian Lancer or Lowlands Skeleton.  As players level up, different Campaigns, Tournaments, Raids, etc., become unlocked.

CASTLE SPIRITS

A lot of CCG's went away from a generic health pool (such as 20 life in MTG or a castle with 10 defense in SpiritWars) and introduced multiple General/Commander/Structure/Castles cards to replace it with different amounts of health and sometimes special abilities or attributes.  I think this would work great for SpiritWars and would be a good way to introduce quite a few more cards to the game, which is something that will be greatly needed moving forward.  SpiritWars would have various Castles that players had to acquire either through card packs, win in campaigns or tournaments, as a reward for leveling, beating a raid boss, etc.  They should still be very basic (not overpowered), but have slight modifications/enhancements.

For example...

Starter Castle #1 - 8 health
Starter Castle #2 - 9 health
Basic Castle - 10 health (reward for reaching level X, something everyone receives relatively early into the game at an early level)
Castle #1 - 10 health + 5% extra gold for win
Castle #2 - 10 health + 5% extra xp for win
Castle #3 - 8 health + regen 1 health at the beginning of each round if health is less than 4
Castle #4 - 9 health, 3 vision (instead of 2)
Castle #5 - 12 health, 1 vision (instead of 2)
Castle #6 - 10 health, can heal 1 health to adjacent unit at start of turn (3 round cooldown after use)
Castle #7 - 10 health, takes 1 less damage from ranged attacks
Castle #8 - 6 health, armor 1 (takes 1 less damage from each melee attack)
Castle #9 (rare) - 11 health
Castle #10 (ultra rare) - 12 health
Castle #11 - 10 health, +1 health to all friendly defenders
Castle #12 - 10 health, +1 power to all friendly defenders
...

ACHIEVEMENTS
 
I think most players are familiar with achievements as well.  Achievements can reward small bonuses like gold, a special card, unlock a campaign/raid, unlock other perks, etc.  Here's some examples of possible achievements, some of which are easy to achieve and others quite difficult.  Some will have to be accomplished against the computer/campaigns to avoid sandbagging or achievement trading.  Most of the achievements would have a witty name, such as "Animal Lover".  Here's some examples...

Reach level 10/20/30/40/50/etc
Complete 10/25/50/etc campaigns
Win 1/10/25/100/500/1000/etc games
Enter 1/10/25/etc tournament(s)
Win 1/5/10/etc tournament(s)
Acquire every basic (core) spirit
Acquire every (insert expansion here) spirit
Achieve a PvP rating of 1000/1200/1400/1600/1800/2000/etc
Kill 1/5/10/etc raid boss(es)
Defeat campaign X without using a combat spirit with an attack above 1
PACIFIST - Defeat a specific campaign without killing a combat unit
A RARE FIND - Acquire a rare spirit
MEDIUM RARE - Kill a rare spirit
Acquire a diety
Kill a diety
WHERE'S MY BUBBLE GUM? - Buy a card pack
Kill unit X in campaign Y and win the game
Do X in campaign Y and win the game
Defeat campaign X without using a specific spirit/homeland/ability/attribute - for example, beat campaign X without using Black Death
ANIMAL LOVER - collect at least one of each type of animal (Rodent, Feline, Canine, Swine, Reptile, Ursine, etc)
WHEN IN ROME - collect all 19 Roman spirits
TAKE ME TO YOUR LEADER - collect 5 Leader Spirits (13 total)
TAKE ME TO YOUR LEADER 2 - collect 10 Leader Spirits (13 total)
THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY - Collect "Baldur the Good", "Armasi Assassin" and "Medusa"

OK, a lot of the names are pretty lame, but you get the drift.

Some collection/library achievements could just be a common grouping ("Animal Lover" or witty combination ("The Good, The Bad And The Ugly").  Some of them would be relatively easy to achieve and others extremely difficult.
...

TITLES

Allow players to add titles to their name for certain accomplishments.  For example, any player who defeats an extremely difficult raid boss that is a dragon could get the title "Dragonslayer" after their name, such as Psyclone the Dragonslayer.

[Psyclone]

MAPS

I think a big reason that the SpiritWars maps were all exactly the same size and shape was because of the limitations of the graphics/monitors when Randy originally built the game.   Back in 1998 when the game was released, over half of all internet users were using displays with 800x600 graphics or lower.  SpiritWars was originally designed to run optimally at 800x600 resolution, so there was definitely less room (less display area) to fit everything into the GUI than nowadays. 

As monitors (and graphics cards) evolved with the changeover from CRT monitors to LCD, display resolutions have greatly increased.  Of course, the standard aspect ratio has changed as well from 4:3 to 16:9.  As of today, over 90% of people online are running at resolutions greater than 1024x768, with the most popular resolution being 1366x768 (most common laptop resolution).  Online gamers are the most likely to run at higher resolutions as well.

With that being said, now that there's more than twice as much display area, this also opens up the possibility of different map shapes and sizes.  Before, there wasn't much room and not really any other option than the 86-hex SpiritWars maps we are all used to.  Now that there's plenty of space, so I've created some examples of new map shapes and sizes that are now possible.

I've included some examples...

Map #1 is the map we're all used to with 86 hexes.

Map #2 is the same shape map, but with 115 hexes.

[Psyclone]

MAPS CONTINUED

Map #3 - More of a square shape with 130 hexes.

I definitely don't think that all maps should be larger, I think 86 hexes was close ideal, but the larger sizes of Maps #2 and #3 opens the possibility of unique maps shapes such as...

Map #4 - Unique map shape with 71 hexes.

[Minmaxer]

Switching to a larger the map size would affect balance in several ways, mostly in favour of the second player:

Spellcasters become more powerful
Flanking becomes easier and more effective
Aggressive dungeons become less effective
Map/point control becomes more difficult
Slower dungeons, with more expensive and powerful units become more effective
Movement speed becomes more important

As someone that played first player for %80-90 of my games I'd be very concerned about any map size changes.  More varied(or random) maps of the standard size would definitely be beneficial though.  I knew the layout of most of the maps, including terrain and possible starting castle locations.  This was definitely an advantage, though perhaps not an unfair one consider how many games I played.

[Psyclone]

@Minmaxer, good to see another familiar name. 

I totally agree with what you said.  I always hovered around 110-120 rating.  I know you were usually one of the few players who was 140-200+ quite a bit along with Xerin.  I probably played about 60-65% of my games moving first, not nearly as much as you of course.  My #1 concern about balance in this game is the huge 2nd turn advantage.  I think it was a turn-off for a lot of people and it led to a lot of sandbagging (players wouldn't play their best dungeons/spirits if there was a good chance they were moving first).

I definitely wasn't trying to saying that I thought the maps should be bigger (more hexes)...

I definitely don't think that all maps should be larger, I think 86 hexes was close ideal, but the larger sizes of Maps #2 and #3 opens the possibility of unique maps shapes such as...

...what I was meaning to imply was that if the templates were larger, such as maps #2 and #3, then it opens up the variety of map shapes, such as map #4.  Once again, I think 86 hexes is close to perfect, but in the game's original version, there wasn't a lot of variety in maps because of the limitations of screen resolutions and dimensions.  Every map was 14x7 (14 hexes wide by 7 hexes tall). You could generally tell where your opponent's castle was within a couple hexes based on your own starting position and most of the gameplay was east-to-west.  The only odd shaped maps ended up having about 25+ skulls in order to change the shapes, but there wasn't much room for variety still.

What's your opinion of using a map template of Map #2 or #3, but keeping the number of hexes between 65-90, such as Map #4? 

(Don't critique the actual Map #4 though as it was just an extremely quick example of a unique shaped map that I threw together in 5 seconds without putting much thought into it.)

I played close to 6000 games, which was #3 for most games all-time.  I believe Alchemist and you might have been the two players with more games played than me.  I also knew almost every map by heart, even the near identical ones where Randy tried to fool you on which direction the opponent was.  It was a definite advantage.  I actually wouldn't mind seeing computer generated random maps (with some constraints of course, such as a higher frequency of flatlands/woodlands vs drylands/darklands; clusters of homelands/streams/deep water; castles 5-10 hexes apart for the most part; avoid pinning players in a corner; etc).

Another negative aspect of larger maps (as in more total hexes in play) would be that they would lead to longer games, which is the opposite direction the game needs to go.  I actually think @ 75 hexes might be a good number if the maps are more square or uniquely shaped.

I hope all that made sense.

[Minmaxer]

I think the most important issue is distance between castles.  I found that a distance of between 5 and 10 hexes was ideal, 3 was too small as it let a spotted leopards or barbarian raiders be beside your castle on turn 1.  Longer castle distances, or maps with too many choke points led to the longest games, especially when both players were playing undead.  Foujaad and I had a game that lasted well over 100 turns.

A taller, slimmer map with roughly the same amount of hexes may be OK.  My concern would be whether it would give the second player too much flexibility of movement.  The extra height would make it more difficult to trap enemy units against the edge of the board.  A well designed map with few Deep Water/Cursed Terrain could negate this. 

[Psyclone]

Yeah, I definitely agree with you on the distance between castles.

If they go to a business model where players acquire cards via packs, then a lot more spirits will need to be introduced to roll out expansion sets to keep the game fresh.  Most CCG's usually introduce either new factions/colors/homelands or new abilities/attributes to the current factions/colors/homelands. 

I think everyone would probably agree that 6 homelands are plenty, so if new expansion cards were introduced, are there any kinds of attributes/abilities that might help Silver (1st player) to help reduce Gold's (player 2) huge advantage?  For example, an ability like "First Strike" definitely benefits Player 1.

I know archers and getting flanked are huge issues against Silver.  Maybe abilities that protect against that?  Such as stoneskin/armor that protects against archers or additional attacks, or maybe the ability to entrench instead of attacking which could provide Armor (1/x) if you don't attack.

[Minmaxer]

I never found 2nd move to be as much of an advantage as most people, but I was both an experience chess and MTG player before I started Spiritwars.  There are a lot of things you can do with strategy and deck construction to limit the effectiveness of Gold, but they are learned skills.  Gold is easier, but they both have their strengths.  I thought at one point Randy produced some stats of the win % of each colour and they were close, but I could be mistaken.  (These results could also be skewed as better players would more commonly be playing with first move.)

There is definitely an issue in that the advantage of second move seems insurmountable to most new players.  New populations generally have far too few answers to gold archers.  I think a "first strike" skill would be too good for first player, but I think there are several ways, using existing mechanics, that balance could be increased.

More stationary units(energy/defenders) with better vision, though not as powerful as Oracle.  Some 2 def 2 vision, or 1 def 3 vision energies.  This would allow better scouting for first player, and to put enemy units in range for spells.  Very few people ever used their energies offensive/defensively though.  The flip side...more scouting energies makes it tougher for the first player to set traps for the second player.

More 2+ range first turn defend defenders.  Most defenders are useless.  A few more good defenders could buy the attacking player the extra time they need.

More removal, even if it's conditional.   Clinging Vines, Sloth, Flame Strike, Weakness, Dark Curse, spells that increase the move/maint or reduce the attack/move speed all work.  Keeping the universal removal rare is a good idea.

[Psyclone]

One thing to keep in mind was that you always had a high rating, so you KNEW that you were going to move first, which is less of a disadvantage than not knowing if you're moving first or second. The players who weren't sure if they were going first or second didn't have that luxury, so you were never 100% sure if you were moving first.  Don't get me wrong, a first move deck should still be good moving second, but you know what I mean. 

You definitely have to have the right spirits to be able to make a good first move deck.  I had some good first move decks and got as high at 180 rating before, but I also repopped every 90 days just because I loved getting a new deck no matter how good my population was.  Whenever I was able to build a good first move deck, it seemed like eventually bad luck on the migrations would catch up and my deck wouldn't be viable for first move anymore and I'd have to try some different homelands.  However, if we go to a system where players never lose their spirits, then it might not be as much of an issue.

I definitely remember Randy mentioning that 1st move VS 2nd move was close to 50/50 win ratio, which (as you mentioned) is an argument that 2nd move is a huge advantage if anything.  Obviously you'd expect the higher rated player to win a lot more than 50% of the time.

I definitely like your suggestion about the defenders.  I would think that would definitely help.

As for "First Strike", the defender still has the option of avoiding combat or moving, although when I mentioned it, I forgot, there wasn't First Strike in the game, it was First Turn Attack which I got confused after player all these other CCG's.

[Bruno]

The more experience you have in SW, the better you got with first move.  High rated players usually had solid dungeons and were used to being first move which is helpful.  When the game returns, they definitely need something built in that randomizes every map.  The fact the Minmaxer knew the maps, castle location most of the time, and had first move is not a minor advantage, it's monumental.  A thousand games should gain you a lot of strategy and experience but shouldn't give anyone that advantage of castle location.  No discredit to his dungeon building, game strategy, or game knowledge they were all excellent.  His patience to save a spell for a second move archer or other rare spirit was probably the most valuable tactic I learned from him.  I suppose that is called patience.  Most first move players would rush too much and end up in trouble.  I don't think the maps need to be changed in size but just randomized individual hexes(1/8) rather than random map 24 of 250.  This would keep vision important which I always liked. 

[Xaxyx]

The relationship between rating and turn order should be severed.  Tying turn order to rating only serves to encourage the manipulation of rating in order to affect turn order.  There were players (*raises hand unabashedly*) who would purposely go on long losing streaks using garbage card decks in order to butcher their own rating, then swap to their "real" deck and play against high rated players, guaranteed to go second every time.  (Other rating manipulation shenanigans existed as well, though we can get into those later.)

Turn order should be random.  If, as asserted, going second is a supposedly distinct advantage over going first, then alter the *game mechanics* -- not the rating system -- to accommodate this disparity and level the playing field.  It took MtG a while, but eventually they came up with skipping the first card draw for the start player for tournament play.  This seems to work well.  Perhaps we could do something similar here, or even not so similar, for the first turn of player #2.

[King Leshrac]

It all depends on your deck.  I know back in trade, my yellow deck was actually much better if it was first move,except in the close games where we were both at 3 life, and then if i was second i could use eye for an eye and win haha.  And experienced players could do some things moving first to bait second move players into a trap.

[Psyclone]

There were definitely first move decks that worked, but it was the exception and not the norm.  I really think the combat system needs to be tweaked/revamped to remove the first turn/second turn disparity. 

There really shouldn't be a difference between 1st and 2nd move.  It just creates waaaaay too many problems with balancing, fairness, exploiting, fun, etc.

[cbrooks]

These are great suggestions.