Card Armies: Battle For Wesnoth

[kos]

Announcing Card Armies: Battle For Wesnoth, a strategy card game set in the world of Wesnoth.

I've been working on this project for quite some time and playtesting locally, but it is at a stage where the rules are sufficiently stable and I'm looking for feedback from a wider variety of people.

The factions, units, etc will of course be familiar to Wesnoth players. Although it uses cards, the gameplay is more like a wargame than a CCG. It aims to provide a simple-yet-deep strategy game that lets people experience the fun of Wesnoth over the table with friends.

(This game is not affiliated with WTactics. The work done by WTactics looks awesome, but the Card Armies game is a completely different style so it is not intended to be in competition with WTactics.)

What can you do?
- Read through the rules and provide feedback. Are they clear? Easy to understand?
- Print a copy through TheGameCrafter and play it. Is it fun? Are the units balanced?

The links to the source files are on TheGameCrafter pages.

Regards,
kos

[Velensk]

EDIT2: I figured out a few things since I wrote this first section however I am going to leave them in here for you to see since I might not be the only one to make the mistake.

A couple notes, I might edit this post if I see anything else but while you describe combat resolution you never define the term 'successes' nor state what kind of die is rolled (I'd presume six sided). Is a success simply the sum of the dice, every die above a specific roll, or terrain specific? Either way, you might want to edit your rules to explain that better. I am also finding the gameplay example confusing. I thought you said that both the attacker and the defender use the defenders terrain modifier, so why do both the fighters and the elvish archer get their bonus when attacking from a forest (where the fighters get +1) into a plains (where the archer would get +1). Of course, if only one of them applies that would make your math actually work out (you forgot the extra fighter added which puts the stack over stacking limit[so that is 3x elvish fighters(3)+1 for forest(4)+2 for archer(6)+1 for archer skirmish (7)+1 for open(8)]) Also, if there was a different type of unit than a fighter that got the same forest defense as a fighter, and both of them as a group attacked some forest would you apply the forest bonus twice or would it not apply anymore?

(As a side note, why does a forest protect you from chargeing rather than skirmishing? It is much harder to snipe and manuver without risk when there are a bunch of trees in the way than it is to just run past the trees to engage in melee. I suppose it makes sense that hills would give you some cover from charging (and flanking for that matter), but the terrain is only half rough.)

EDIT: Some other things you might want to clarify. I assume by 'touching an enemy' you mean that they are in the same territory as the enemy. This confused me initally because I'm used to touching referring to being 'in or adjacent to the hex'. Also, a number of details on the attacks confuse me.
-I assume that for both charges and skirmishes you may only include units that are in the same territory in you attack but what about flanks? As near as I can tell flanks are (somehow) done from an adjacent territory. Can you include the units that are already in the territory in your flank or units from multiple territories that are adjacent in the flank?
-On the move action it specifically says that you can move units into the territory and choose to engage in a skirmish. Is this refering to the idea that you can use the move action to start a skirmish or simply that you may not charge or flank the territory that you just moved into (if so, then it is a kind of pathetic charge that takes two turns to happen, maybe better to call it 'engage'.
-If in charges/skirmishes you must be in the defenders territory to attack them, then there is only one terrain involved and so how would those elvish fighters even have a ghost of reason to claim forest bonus?

EDIT2: What I figured out was that the loyalist player was in an open/forest terrain. This is not obvious from the writing/picture (though perhaps simply because it was too small) it seemed to me that the loyalist parked seensibly in the open was somehow suffering from the terrain bonus's of the terrain the elves came from.

As a side note, why did the rebel player not bring in the last fighter? It would put him over stacking limit but as I understand it after combat he can move units back for free and so why not take advantage of the extra ranged power at no cost?

[kos]

EDIT2: I figured out a few things since I wrote this first section however I am going to leave them in here for you to see since I might not be the only one to make the mistake.

Thank you for your detailed response. This is exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for: What things might be confusing or not explained clearly.

A couple notes, I might edit this post if I see anything else but while you describe combat resolution you never define the term 'successes' nor state what kind of die is rolled (I'd presume six sided). Is a success simply the sum of the dice, every die above a specific roll, or terrain specific? Either way, you might want to edit your rules to explain that better.

A success is 4+ on 1d6.

I am also finding the gameplay example confusing. I thought you said that both the attacker and the defender use the defenders terrain modifier, so why do both the fighters and the elvish archer get their bonus when attacking from a forest (where the fighters get +1) into a plains (where the archer would get +1). Of course, if only one of them applies that would make your math actually work out (you forgot the extra fighter added which puts the stack over stacking limit[so that is 3x elvish fighters(3)+1 for forest(4)+2 for archer(6)+1 for archer skirmish (7)+1 for open(8)]) Also, if there was a different type of unit than a fighter that got the same forest defense as a fighter, and both of them as a group attacked some forest would you apply the forest bonus twice or would it not apply anymore?

I'll see if I can reword these sections to explain better.

(As a side note, why does a forest protect you from chargeing rather than skirmishing? It is much harder to snipe and manuver without risk when there are a bunch of trees in the way than it is to just run past the trees to engage in melee. I suppose it makes sense that hills would give you some cover from charging (and flanking for that matter), but the terrain is only half rough.)

You are correct. In fact, I have already updated the location cards to simplify them including removing such rules. I forgot to update that picture in the rules to the new card.

I assume by 'touching an enemy' you mean that they are in the same territory as the enemy.

Yes, this is correct. It is in there, but perhaps it bears repeating to make it more obvious.

-I assume that for both charges and skirmishes you may only include units that are in the same territory in you attack but what about flanks? As near as I can tell flanks are (somehow) done from an adjacent territory. Can you include the units that are already in the territory in your flank or units from multiple territories that are adjacent in the flank?

Clearly I need to include a more extensive example that shows a flanking attack. That would resolve each of your questions above.

-On the move action it specifically says that you can move units into the territory and choose to engage in a skirmish. Is this refering to the idea that you can use the move action to start a skirmish or simply that you may not charge or flank the territory that you just moved into (if so, then it is a kind of pathetic charge that takes two turns to happen, maybe better to call it 'engage'.

You are correct; you can move and then initiate ranged combat in the same turn (representing the exchange of arrows as the forces close). On subsequent turns, you can choose to continue fighting with ranged weapons (skirmish) or you can get in close and personal (charge).

-If in charges/skirmishes you must be in the defenders territory to attack them, then there is only one terrain involved and so how would those elvish fighters even have a ghost of reason to claim forest bonus?

EDIT2: What I figured out was that the loyalist player was in an open/forest terrain. This is not obvious from the writing/picture (though perhaps simply because it was too small) it seemed to me that the loyalist parked seensibly in the open was somehow suffering from the terrain bonus's of the terrain the elves came from.

Your Edit2 is correct, but it reveals that I should choose locations for the example which avoid the confusion.

As a side note, why did the rebel player not bring in the last fighter? It would put him over stacking limit but as I understand it after combat he can move units back for free and so why not take advantage of the extra ranged power at no cost?

If you had more than 3 units in a group, you can still only use 3 of them in the combat. This is stated in the rules, but again it probably bears repeating so that it doesn't get lost in the fine print.

Thanks again for your feedback; you've helped to show me areas in the rules which I need to clarify or highlight to remove confusion.

Regards,
kos

[kos]

I have updated the rules document to clarify the points raised by Valensk above, and to give a more extended example.
Regards,
kos