Star Realms: almost a good game. (+some ideas to make it better)

[LucusLoC]

This is a really cool concept for a game, but there are a few things that kill it. As it is implemented now this is nothing more than a draw-luck game. Your hand draw and your trade row draw have a far bigger impact on your game than anything you as a player do. It is easy to get completely screwed over, or conversely completely screw over your opponent. Most games are steamrolls by one side or another. Hard fought and close games are a true rarity. I often know well before the end of the game which side is going to win, and that is mostly simply by looking what is available in the trade row.

There are a few things this game needs to take if from "meh" to "wow":
1. The ability to hold onto cards from one hand to the next.
2. Some form of trap or counter mechanic (and obviously a counter trap/counter mechanic).
3. Better ways to control the trade row, the handful of cards that let you scrap a trade row card are a good start, but the mechanic really needs to be expanded.
4. Some way to sabotage your opponents deck (e.g. give them cards, scrap cards in their discard pile, destroy cards in play [see point 2])

"Scrolls" by Mojang had a lot of the same pitfalls this game has, and suffered because of it. Now that game is dead, and it didn't have to be that way. I understand that a lot of these smaller card games are trying to distinguish themselves from more generic card games, but throwing out good mechanics like "keep cards you want to play later" and "let the other player react to a killer combo" are not good things to change. The make the game distinctly not fun.

If you really need to swap things up, evolve the generic mechanics instead of eliminate them. Here are a few examples:

Instead of being forced to play every card have a "parking orbit" that lets you hold onto key cards. Start with one parking orbit and let players buy more with trade. Parking orbit cards are face up "in play" but do not activate until selected. They can stay in parking orbit for only a given number of turns before automatically activating. This activation can be further delayed by spending trade.

"Trap" cards could be played face down into a "reserves slot". This could be as simple as a card that halves incoming damage to something that "kills" a card before it activates. The key is these cards should not be automatic, but should only trigger at player command. This gives a sense of accomplishment if used to survive another round, for example, instead of automatically triggering on some pitiful 2 damage point attack. It also brings some suspense to the active players turn, because if there are one or more trap cards down you have to wonder if your awesome combo is going to fully fire. Maybe it would be best to hold it one more turn so you can have an anti-trap card in your hand before you play. . . It adds depth to the player strategy and choices. Having a wide variety of trap cards would significantly increase suspense. You could even have things like a hidden "vault" that lets you surreptitiously bank unspent trade. Is that trap card on the table a counter attack card? Or has your opponent been surreptitiously banking all that "unspent" trade so they can buy that super expensive card that has been sitting in the trade row for 3 turns? Are you willing to wait to find out? Counter trap cards could be as simple as cards that kill trap cards to "reverse effect" cards to cards that let you steal in play trap cards.

The trade row issue can be expanded by having a "bought options" slot. This would be a slot that lets you pay half card price to reserve a card for future purchase (for full price of course). It lets you keep a card away from your opponent even if you cannot pay for all of it right now, at the cost of the card costing you more in the end. In addition to this mechanic there should be more cards that let you do more to control the trade row. The ability to dedicate a slot to one color, the ability to manipulate the price of a card on offer, the ability to expand or contract the trade row (especially if it lets you do this only for yourself or your opponent). Many of these mechanics should not only require a card to trigger, but should cost trade or combat as well (e.g. play this card for 2 trade, additionally pay 10 trade to dedicate a trade row slot to the color of your choice, or 12 trade to alter the color of an already dedicated slot).

The final set of ideas could be as simple as poison cards that you buy for your opponent, to scrap cards that work on your opponents discard pile to capping their deck at some min or max size. Some way to screw with them if t hey are getting too good a deck.

______________________________

As it stands right now I will not be purchasing this game, nor recommend it to others. I bought Scrolls and that proved to be a mistake, and this game is displaying a similar trend. The Scrolls dev team resisted all efforts to make the game better, citing a small contingent of dedicated players that liked the game the way it was. Unfortunately this small contingent was not enough to keep the game alive, and the rest of the player base that did have a problem with the design left for better games. Until this game makes some much needed mechanics changes I fear it will suffer the same fate. Please realize I would buy this game in a heartbeat if even some of the suggested changes were made, because I fell that would take the game from a pure luck based game to something with a deeper strategy and a bit more player determination. I love the concept, but this trend of trying to be "a different kind of card game" needs to stop. The old mechanics are staples for a reason. They work, and even if you want to try something new the functions need to be preserved. As it stands this game has little more depth than the child's game of WAR, where you flip the top card over at random and see whose is bigger. In the end we all out grow such simple mechanics and seek something with more depth. I want that to be this game, but until it is all I can say is "Star Realms; not worth the time".

[kostya]

You vastly underestimate the skill level of this game. There is a very active tournament scene on Board Game Geek, this season we have 250 players and growing. There is an equally active scene on Facebook.

Having played many of the top players at conventions with money on the line, the game is not as luck based as you think. The better player will win the majority of best-of-three matches and has a very large advantage in best-of-one.


As for the changes that you are suggesting, it is possible that they will add them in a future expansion, but they will not change the base game. This is a digital version of a very successful card game, the 84 highest board game on Board Game Geek.

The game is not likely to lose popularity any time soon. Last year, the publisher went back to Kickstarter to finance an even larger base set for the game and raised over a million dollars. Even if people stop buying the game, that money should cover staff and server costs for a year or two.

[Jin Mack]

play without the expnsions, the base core game had much more impact regarding player skill. But with all the expansions on, especially the gambit cards, its just a coin flip most the time. No player, no matter how skilled, can counter a lucky guy getting a +2 trade and +2 draw card gambits, who uses it on his first turn to score an ARK CARD. While your stuck with a pathetic planetary shield, and the +1 att stupid fighter card. Anything that makes it possible to get a 8 star card on the first turn, is just plain stupid imo. I wish the expansion cards were more balanced, for the price we pay for them, they should be more thought out. Or at least get rid of the dumb cards like planet shield which cant even compare to some of the good ones.