This is more of an opinion question and thus I don’t know if it belongs here, however I’m in the late stages of making a card game and need some design help as I didn’t fully flesh these parts out prior to this point and cant find a good solution:
-
The main objective is to destroy the enemy’s main building with your troops, similar to MTG:EDH, there are going to be many other buildings you can create alongside your main building. For the context of this question I’ll use TC3 (The Conquerors 3, an RTS strategy), whereas the Command Center is normally your starting building, however you can make other buildings like the Fort, Barracks, ect. all with their own abilities to produce units. My game’s buildings function alot more like MTG’s Artifacts if that helps. So in a similar vein: Should I have dedicated buildings to be main buildings (Command Centers) OR allow normal buildings to be main buildings with appropriate health values (Forts Barracks ect.)
-
Other Win Conditions. Magic uses life total, Pokemon uses 6 cards tied to your pokemon being knocked out, I honestly have no idea what Yu-Gh-Oh or other card games use, however I feel as if destroying buildings can get stale over time, should I introduce other win conditions, such as using a unit as a main objective, allowing for more aggression but a squishier target for your opponent. This question will be further elaborated under.
My main goal with this game is to prevent power creep and both of these I feel can be heavy subjects to power creep and thus I’m extremely hesitant to put them in with the fear of something becoming too broken when in a place its not designed for, on the other hand, some of the greatest Magic and Pokemon decks come from cards interacting in ways they aren’t supposed to, alongside a major factor in self expression is lost if I do not implement these. I will inevitably take the risk and implement both for the Alpha Tests, however I’d also like community input, what should I do with these ideas?