YCE suggesetions- tactics cards

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,624
4,554
193
Norway
A place to discuss tactics cards and how or if YCE should include them.

However, we won't make any decision on tactics cards until after all the core rules. This will be a long-term discussion thread with low priority to be incorporated into YCE.

Options:
  • Deck-based:
    • Pros: Can be balanced with restriction/banned lists. Every player can maintain their own deck.
    • Cons: Same cards will be used frequently (loss of variety). A lot of work to maintain restriction/banned lists (new cards are added multiple times per year). All players must have their own cards and create their own decks according to the lists.
  • Single deck with all cards (RAW) substituting custom selection with random selection:
    • Pros: Minimal change to official rules. Only one deck is required, all players can draw from it. No maintenance required. Huge variety. Overpowered cards are rarely drawn. Players don't need to have the cards, read restrictions or create their own decks.
    • Cons: Difficult to shuffle hundreds of cards (bloat). One player must provide the big deck. If games are played in different places, one deck is required for each place.
  • Table (similar to the new house tactics tables):
    • Pros: No dependencies (no physical cards required).
    • Cons: Clunky. Either store the throw secretly so it can be revealed later. Or throw openly and hope the opponent doesn't remember what the result is. Or throw secretly and trust the opponent. Must re-read or remember the translation of the card from the table in the rules document.
  • Proxy standard 52-card deck (similar to the table option above, but instead use a standard deck of cards):
    • Pros: Minimal dependency (only requires a generic deck of cards)
    • Cons: Must re-read or remember the translation of the card from the rules document. Must trim 300+ tactics cards down to 52. Difficult to include gang specific cards in such a low number. No space to add new cards in the future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Orngog

Kiro The Avenger

Gang Hero
Apr 4, 2018
1,219
1,584
128
Bristol, UK
I see no reason why we couldn't nominally support a table and decks at the same time.
An 18 or 36 card deck can be easily rolled on a d66 table, and corresponds to two/four suits of cards if keep only the numbers (so 2-10).
This allows anyone to use the cards with whatever they want.

Deck construction is another question.
Although I'm very happy with what my group's come up with, with the tier system.
 

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
4,577
10,487
148
36
Sevres 92130 France
From a practical stand point, I would not support any system that requires shuffling a deck of more than 60-ish cards
And I will not not support a system that requires players to purchase tactics cards from GW or print dozen of proxies either.

In my opinion, we should:
  • create a brand new list of generic and gang specific tactics card. Use the official cards as inspiration only (most of them are absolute trash on every level, be it fluff, balance or wording)
  • create deck-building rules. Minimum number of cards in the deck should be somewhere between 20 and 30, duplicates should not be allowed. The deck should contain at most 50% generic cards
  • replace any fetch effect with a "draw X, keep Y" effect
  • add rules to better integrate the deck of tactics cards to gameplay (players could get the ability to draw extra cards for completing scenario objectives for instance, some effects could also let the player loot cards (discard-and-draw) or scry (look at the top X cards of the deck and put each of those card back either on the top or the bottom of the deck, in any order)
A table could work only if the cards available to each player is public information. If you want secret information, you need a deck of cards or something similar.
Btw, a single deck with all cards is not RAW. RAW, each player has their own deck with all the cards they own.
 

TopsyKretts

Hive Guilder
Tribe Council
Dec 29, 2017
4,624
4,554
193
Norway
Btw, a single deck with all cards is not RAW. RAW, each player has their own deck with all the cards they own.
In effect, how is that different? I guess one difference is no players could draw the same cards. I consider that a bonus.
 

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
4,577
10,487
148
36
Sevres 92130 France
In effect, how is that different?
Well, for starters, players are not required to own all the cards. Even dismissing "my dog ate all the bad cards" shenanigans, this creates some very weird deck building rules as a player's deck depends on which card packs/starter sets they have purchased.
Also, as I assume a card is discarded if it's specific to a house that doesn't correspond to the player's gang, it means house-specific cards have less chance to be drawn than if each player had their own deck.
Finally, as you said, each player having their own deck would allow for several of them to draw the same card.

I just don't like an house rule to be misrepresented as the RAW (even though in this case it's a huge disservice to said house rule as the RAW is pure garbage)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JawRippa

almic85

Cranky Git
Oct 30, 2014
1,852
3,149
163
Palmerston, ACT, Australia
Of the three options you have there I think tables are essential and that any cards should be optional. If you are creating what is essentially a whole new rules document the last thing you want is for people to have to buy or make cards on top of everything else.

If you go down using cards can I suggest that the total number be reduced to 13 generic cards and 13 house specific cards each so that it suits a standard deck of playing cards. It will significantly reduces the amount of tactic card bloat as well as reduce the barrier of entry for new players.

It may even be possible to have separate Zone Mortalis and Sector Mechanicus tables in the book to change between even if they share a few cards.

Personally I play with a custom deck of 30 cards with a draw 5 select 2 mechanic which works well. I have found that smaller decks are too predictable and larger decks are too unwieldy.
 

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
My two cents.

I'm quite the fan of deck construction, but then again I'm bias because I put a lot of work into it and two I own loads of cards, so want to use them, but players in my group have been fine printing off their own decks from online resources.

However I'm happy for this to stay a house rule (if my group were to switch to YCE, then I'm pretty sure we'd use this at least in some campaigns)


On some suggestions
In my opinion, we should:
  • create a brand new list of generic and gang specific tactics card. Use the official cards as inspiration only (most of them are absolute trash on every level, be it fluff, balance or wording)
  • create deck-building rules. Minimum number of cards in the deck should be somewhere between 20 and 30, duplicates should not be allowed. The deck should contain at most 50% generic cards
  • replace any fetch effect with a "draw X, keep Y" effect
  • add rules to better integrate the deck of tactics cards to gameplay (players could get the ability to draw extra cards for completing scenario objectives for instance, some effects could also let the player loot cards (discard-and-draw) or scry (look at the top X cards of the deck and put each of those card back either on the top or the bottom of the deck, in any order)

1. I'd kind of like to use existing cards where we can, but I accept some are gash or worded badly.
There are clarifications in my document on some of the worse ones, but I accept they are our interpretations.

2. Agree, I like gangs being forced to take a good number of house specific cards.

3. Yep good.

4. Like it.


On tables.

I think a table of 36 cards for each house/faction is a great thing for new players.

Yes they are generic, basically we can take the 18 results from the HoC and HoB tables, improve on those and then add 18 generic ones to it for 36 results. The 18 generic ones could be fixed for all tables or varied to suit each faction/house. Honestly if have a lot of fun making these :)
As the other house of books are released they are easy to make.

These can be mimicked by playing cards as Kiro says or by a dice roll (in secret, I tend to trust my opponents). Again players could generate X and select Y from those to give a little choice.

So summary.

1.Simple* deck creation rules for vets (and those of us who like cards etc).

2. Fixed tables for new players and vets who dont want to make decks.


* definatley simpler than my own tier system, :-D
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Let me start with the claim that tactic cards are a great concept, however it was ruined by greedy GW's approach. Tactic cards is the only thing at the moment that could allow motivating players to do missions rather than shooting each other off the table by providing battle related boosts for doing scenario objectives. For example, in a "Takeover" scenario (which is about capturing 3 points of interests) , attackers could get a random tactical card after capturing 2 points of interest, to help them make the final push. Even a humble shoot-out becomes way more interesting when loot crates (remember those?) start granting tactics when successfully opened. If one side decides to bunker up and sit it out in deployment, the other side will have tactic card advantage over them. One gang has a positional advantage, other will have tactical card advantage to smoke them out. It creates a more dynamic gaming experience.

Now with general overview of tactical cards out of the way, let me clarify my suggestion for generating tactics using D66 tables. My suggestion was targeted towards new players to jump into the game without having to print cards. Same with veteran players who gathered for a game, but forgot tactical decks - they need a solid way to "proxy" them. I do understand that rolling dice in secret in a PvP game has its problems, like players questioning whether or not tactics of their opponents were generated in a valid way. This is a solidarity problem, and ideally a game should not fully rely on that. A D66 table is a fallback plan, and actual players should still play with physical decks consisting of proxied or purchased cards.
The thing is - tables is the only solution to generate a tactical card in a pinch - if you've brought a 52 playing cards deck with yourself, then you probably could bother printing cards. Most likely all you will have on yourself are dice, miniatures and a ruler.Since we have a D66 table as a fallback plan, a number of cards in a deck should be a divisor of total outcomes of D66, so either a 36, 18 or 12 cards. I think that 36 offers a decent variety. Here is an example D66 tables that we use in our campaign. We have a generic table for every gang, as well as pool of cards for players to choose from.

Usual decks should be made out of proxies. For that purpose I think the most convenient format are MTG cards - they have a decent ammount of space for text and protectors for them are widespread. This resource by @Xiądz is a fine example of such work - clean, easy to print and fit into sleeves.

In my opinion, we should:
  • create a brand new list of generic and gang specific tactics card. Use the official cards as inspiration only (most of them are absolute trash on every level, be it fluff, balance or wording)
  • create deck-building rules. Minimum number of cards in the deck should be somewhere between 20 and 30, duplicates should not be allowed. The deck should contain at most 50% generic cards
  • replace any fetch effect with a "draw X, keep Y" effect
  • add rules to better integrate the deck of tactics cards to gameplay (players could get the ability to draw extra cards for completing scenario objectives for instance, some effects could also let the player loot cards (discard-and-draw) or scry (look at the top X cards of the deck and put each of those card back either on the top or the bottom of the deck, in any order)

  1. While I'd support a cleaner wording on a lot of cards, I think that a lot of generic cards are pretty serviceable. We could easily handpick a pool of ~50-70 generic cards out of all existing cards which are more or less on the same powerlevel, there is no need to design our own CCG. Players could choose tactics from that pool to make their own decks, if they think that the "basic" D66 table does not fit their playstyle. Also if some player actually owns tactical cards, I'd rather let him play with those that are not in a ban list, rather than telling him to throw everything into a trash bin.
  2. Yes for general rules for deck-building, no to limiting generic cards to 50%. Some gangs have an abundance of trash tactics. If anything, don't have the requirement to use gang-specific cards, otherwise you are putting such gangs at disadvantage compared to Goliaths or Van Saars who have a lot of amazing tactics.
  3. Yes. It works wonders. I think that draw X, keep X-1 is best for quicker game starts.
  4. Yes for integrating tactical cards as rewards for doing mission-related stuff, no for Discard-draw or Scry effects. We are turning into CCG at this point. Also with discard-draw mechanics one could make a deck to dig for a specific tactic, don't encourage this kind of playstyle. But! What we need is a universal way to use tactics that can't be used in a current game for whatever reason (for example you drew a "do X before the battle starts tactic" in the middle of a battle or you drew a tactic that targets enemy leader when they don't have one on the battlefield, etc). In this case, show this card to your opponent to let them know that you can't make use of it and discard it to gain some minor bonus that works for all gangs (+1 to priority roll for each card discarded this way?).
Edit:
A table could work only if the cards available to each player is public information. If you want secret information, you need a deck of cards or something similar.
Btw, a single deck with all cards is not RAW. RAW, each player has their own deck with all the cards they own.
Table can work if you trust other players. It is not a long-term solution, but rather a means to have a game with tactical cards even if you didn't print any or forgot them. Worst case scenario - dice rolls can be stashed away or be done on any online resource (rolz.org for example has a chat function, so you could check your opponent's rolls on D66 after the game). But physical deck will always beat the table, so we should have a recommendation for players to share decks rather than use tables if one of them has a tactical card deck (discarding gang specific tactics if they have different gang).
 
Last edited:

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
4,577
10,487
148
36
Sevres 92130 France
I don't understand the dichotomy you guys are making between table and deck in terms of list-building, as if a player could not build their own D66 table or the rules couldn't suggest a pre-built deck. The only difference I see is in how you randomize the elements (publicly roll on the table, potentially having to reroll duplicates vs. privately draw from the deck).

Imo, a deck of cards should be the only official way to do it. We can mention alternatives in passing (D66 table, and whatever online tools that may do the trick) and we may suggest pre-built decks that happen to use exactly 36 cards, but that's as far as I'd go.
If cards are an integral part of the game then they are an integral part of the game and we don't need to provide a way to proxy them anymore than we need to provide a way to proxy miniatures or terrain. And if they are optional, then forgetting your deck at home is not an issue either.
Also, your opponent is a terrible person to trust, the rules should never force you to do that.

Some gangs have an abundance of trash tactics.
Which is why my first point was to make a brand new list of cards (and yes, we could start with a subset of the official ones).
You should assess points 2 through 4 assuming that each gang has enough cards to choose from and that all cards are roughly balanced with one another.

And I'm sorry for people who fell to GW's marketing, but the official cards are really not good enough to use. They are physically unwieldy and pretty much all require one or several errata. Had to drop them from the YAQ because I had more questions about tactics cards than everything else combined.
 
Last edited:

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Imo, a deck of cards should be the only official way to do it. We can mention alternatives in passing (D66 table, and whatever online tools that may do the trick) and we may suggest pre-built decks that happen to use exactly 36 cards, but that's as far as I'd go.
Well, this is exactly my post above, but shorter :D
Which is why my first point was to make a brand new list of cards (and yes, we could start with a subset of the official ones).
You should assess points 2 through 4 assuming that each gang has enough cards to choose from and that all cards are roughly balanced with one another.
This is a lot of work, obviously it would be great if completed, but do we really need it when we have a huge pool of decent tactical cards to choose from? Just leave those that don't need erratas and are on similar powerlevel. As far as I see it, gang-specific cards shouldn't be a thing, if player has a sneaky gang, let them represent it by picking appropriate general tactics, instead of naming them "Cold blood shadow assasin blades - For Delaque only".
 

Thorgor

Of The YAQ
Oct 12, 2015
4,577
10,487
148
36
Sevres 92130 France
This is a lot of work, obviously it would be great if completed, but do we really need it when we have a huge pool of decent tactical cards to choose from? Just leave those that don't need erratas and are on similar powerlevel.
As I said, it can be a starting point. I doubt there is a huge pool of decent tactics cards though, and creating a bunch of cards from nothing looks like less work to me than trying to fix GW's mess.

I'm not overly attached to house-specific cards either. If we get rid of them, we'll need less cards overall (say, instead of needing 50 generic cards and 30 specific card per house, we'd need only 100 generic cards), and we won't have to try and tailor them to the fluff of a specific house, and we won't have to care about balance between house cards.
Yes, in fact I believe having generic cards only is a good idea. Less work for us, more choices for the players!
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
As I said, it can be a starting point. I doubt there is a huge pool of decent tactics cards though, and creating a bunch of cards from nothing looks like less work to me than trying to fix GW's mess.

I'm not overly attached to house-specific cards either. If we get rid of them, we'll need less cards overall (say, instead of needing 50 generic cards and 30 specific card per house, we'd need only 100 generic cards), and we won't have to try and tailor them to the fluff of a specific house, and we won't have to care about balance between house cards.
Yes, in fact I believe having generic cards only is a good idea. Less work for us, more choices for the players!
I'm okay with some cards being overall weaker than others (don't misunderstand me on this, trash-tier tactics should not be a thing) and others being "Click!". As long as decks are decently sized (15+ cards), it should not be a problem, since you won't encounter same tactic every game. Even when you start banning all extra actions cards and all cards which are direct upgrades/downgrades of others, there are still a lot of tactics left. You can easily have a pool of ~70-80, which should be sufficient for a lot of playstyles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayTee and Al_Weeks

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol

Not to blow my own trumpet, but this does cover all the cards (bar slave Ogryns), and has notes on the power of cards and some attempts at clarification where needed.

I'll get it up to date soon. But when we come to tactics cards it's a foundation to work with.

If you disagree with me goonhammer list is an alternative resource (although there is a lot of commonality as I used theres as a baseline).

I'm a fan of the gang specific cards, as the better designed ones emphasize how that gang plays.
But YMMV.

I don't think banning all extra action type cards is unessesary, there are some well designed ones that have downsides or restrict what extra actions can be performed or the order etc, but I agree there are a few that are probably too good.

I'd rather keep a few in, but like many have said keep the deck size high enought that your not guaranteed to draw them.

As for your point on decks vs tables. Yes I agree cards should be the default mechanism but there is no harm in putting a d66 chart together if we make X example.decks. it's just a list with 36 numbers next to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orngog

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
I don't think banning all extra action type cards is unessesary, there are some well designed ones that have downsides or restrict what extra actions can be performed or the order etc, but I agree there are a few that are probably too good.

I'd rather keep a few in, but like many have said keep the deck size high enought that your not guaranteed to draw them.
I don't remember any "additional action" type of card that had some significant downsides to it. The only exception is Orlock extra action card - it triggers only when you are next to injured teammate. It is cool, flavorful and situational, so I think it is neat. Everything else does not have downsides.
 

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
I don't remember any "additional action" type of card that had some significant downsides to it. The only exception is Orlock extra action card - it triggers only when you are next to injured teammate. It is cool, flavorful and situational, so I think it is neat. Everything else does not have downsides.
There is one that pins you after it (and it can only be done when you have no other activations left), there are a few that are conditional on when the additional action occurs or what it is limited to
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,069
1,380
133
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
There is one that pins you after it (and it can only be done when you have no other activations left), there are a few that are conditional on when the additional action occurs or what it is limited to
Not really a downside when you are charging and make it into base to base. I'd say it is even an upside even for shooting fighters, since it makes you untargetable after you took a shot from behind cover.
 

Al_Weeks

Gang Hero
Honored Tribesman
Dec 22, 2014
513
533
123
Bristol
Not really a downside when you are charging and make it into base to base. I'd say it is even an upside even for shooting fighters, since it makes you untargetable after you took a shot from behind cover.

Ok that's debatable, but it does have the timing restrictions. (If you kill your charge target you will be pinned though still).

I'll compile a list sometime.
 

almic85

Cranky Git
Oct 30, 2014
1,852
3,149
163
Palmerston, ACT, Australia
I must have missed something in the posts above but what is the problem with having some action cards that give an extra action or an extra activation in a round?

Is it considered too powerful next to some of the other cards or is it just that there are too many of them?

I’d also like to reiterate that creating a set of new tactic cards that can’t be translated into a standard deck of playing cards or a table is a significant issue. It’s actually something that would be a deal breaker for me to play a different ruleset.

As someone that has actually bough the majority of tactic cards as they were released I’d be extremely irrationally annoyed if I had to print out new cards and buy card sleeves for them just to play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al_Weeks