Let’s Get this Party Startered

The Spider-Man vs Doc Ock Starters are just now hitting stores, so I thought it would be appropriate to tell a few design/development stories about how the latest addition to the Vs. System came to be.

First of all, I should probably mention why we decided to do a “preview” Starter Set at all. We’re always trying to increase the Vs. System’s player base, which, of course, increases sales, which lets us keep putting out new sets and lets you have more opponents (and lets me keep my job), and in case you didn’t know, there’s a certain comic book movie coming out pretty soon. Sure, Catwoman doesn’t have a whole lot to do with Spider-Man, but we thought we’d do a Spidey starter anyway.

Here’s where I should talk about why there are exactly 31 different cards in the Starter (it just worked out that way), why we chose the ones we did (because they’re cool), and why we didn’t just release the whole set (because we’re alternating between major Marvel and major DC Comics releases), but I’m not going to do that. Instead, I’m going to tell a few anecdotes about the creation process that will include some insight into design/development. At least I hope they will.


Danny Vs. Good Sense

Last week I wrote a preview of Daily Bugle. It’s a cool card with a lot of combo potential. People are already discussing just how powerful the card is in general, let alone in certain degenerate situations (like when you choose the character name “Wild Sentinel”). But what if I told you there was a time when the Bugle was far, far more powerful? What if I told you there was a developer who felt that the fact that the Bugle could effectively become turned off (when there are no more of the appropriate character in play) was such a big drawback that he wanted the player to choose a new character name each turn?! And what if I told you that developer’s name was Dave Humpherys?!

Well, for starters, I’d be lying about the developer’s name. You see, Dave’s what we refer to as “level-headed” around here. And by “level-headed,” I mean, "not like the insane crazy moron I mentioned above." The crazy guy who happens to be me. While we all wear many hats around here (design/development/templating/rules/fedora/etc.), we each have certain ones that fit better than others. For example, while Matt Hyra might not be good at building decks or playtesting or designing cards, he has excellent taste in music. And Dave Humpherys may stink at coming up with card names or writing flavor text, but I can’t stress enough just how tall he is.

As for me, one could say that as a developer, I make a great designer. There are two major problems I have as a developer. The first is simply that I want every card to be good. I realize that sounds like a no-brainer—I mean, of course I’d want every card to be good. Who wouldn’t? But it’s not that simple. “Good” is only a relative term, which means in order for some cards to be good, other cards have to be, hmm, less good? So let’s define “good” as seeing play in Constructed environments (as opposed to just in Draft or Sealed Deck). I like to imagine this amazing metagame where every single card has a home in some deck somewhere and is therefore good. To this end, I often end up trying to push the power level of cards too far into the holy-moly-ravioli-that’s-broken column. This is bad not just in the cases where a broken card sneaks into the environment, but it can also lead to power creep (where newer sets have cards that are so good the older sets become obsolete). The good news is that while I’m on one end of the spectrum, there are other developers on the other end. As an example, I give you Vs. Lead, Mike Hummel. Mike is, as I like to call him, “a big chicken” when it comes to development. Of course, everybody else calls him “smart” and “not an insane crazy moron,” for whatever that’s worth. A typical conversation between Mike and I usually goes something like this.

Danny: Hey, dude, what do you think of this card?

Mike: Uh, yeah, that’s broken.

Danny: C’mon . . .  it’s fiiiiine!

Mike: I don’t think so!

Danny: But—

Mike: You’re crazy.

Danny: (walking away) . . . grumble grumble . . . Stupid Mike Hummel . . . grumble grumble . . .

The second problem I have is similar to the first, but magnified. I get attached to cards. Just as many players have pet decks or cards that they love to play even when the metagame (or general good sense) says not to, designers, too, can fall in love with cards. Sometimes I’ll like a card so much my amore will cloud my judgment. Case in point, Daily Bugle.

Anyone who’s played with Dr. Doom understands how cool reusing a plot twist can be. So you can imagine how excited I was by a location that let you reset a plot twist virtually every turn. Late in design, Daily Bugle let you choose a new character name every turn. Don’t get me wrong, there was a catch: Similar to Destiny, you had to choose the character during the build phase. The idea was that at least your opponent would have a chance to protect that character and deny you the reset. Unfortunately, there were too problems. One, it’s pretty hard to protect a character if you don’t have the initiative, and the reward was simply too great for your opponent if you couldn’t. And two, the card was still really strong even with the name locked in. And this was when you still had to flip the card during the build phase. Yikes! So after much whining and complaining on my part, the build phase restriction was lifted, and the Bugle became the card you now see before you. But sadly, all I have left of the old version is my memories and tears. It’s kind of like when you see that supermodel who was really hot like seven years ago doing a commercial for TV dinners . . . memories and tears.

Up Vs. Down

The Vs. System is a mixture of strategy and tactics. As a quick reference point, I’m thinking of strategy as your over all game plan or goal or end, while tactics are the right now, in-your-face means you’re using to get to that end. For example, if you’re playing Turbo–Gamma Bomb, the strategy might be to stall the game out until turn 7, when you can “go off” with Beast and Latveria for support. The tactics, on the other hand, are much more specific. For example, on turn 5, should you Mystical Paralysis Sabretooth, Feral Rage or Magneto, Eric Lehnsherr?

The reason I bring all this up is that in a lot of ways, a game of Vs. is really several tactical mini-games (one each turn) where players have to decide on appropriate attacks, formations, and the best use of plot twists. As such, there is a lot of emphasis on a character’s ability to interact positively with other characters of similar costs. For example, Sabretooth, Feral Rage’s (I wonder, when we do Feral, will her version be “Sabretooth Rage”?) 11 ATK is awesome not just because it’s a boatload of endurance loss, but also because he can attack up the curve without an ATK modifier (and often two rungs up the curve). So, if Sabretooth trades with your opponent’s 5-drop, your 5-drop can then take down your opponent’s 4-drop with impunity, and you’ll gain board advantage.

One of the themes you’ll notice in the Spider-Man starter is the ability for little dudes to take on big dudes. While he’s no Sabretooth, Electro has similar board control capabilities. Yeah, it’s only during your attack step, and yeah it costs you a card, but you won’t be complaining when you zap your opponent's Spider-Man and send Rhino over to smash Black Cat. Daredevil’s not afraid to mix it up with the big boys, at least while he’s attacking. And speaking of not being afraid, there’s No Fear.

It’s a Savage Beatdown!

It’s a Nasty Surprise!

Stop, you’re both right! At least kind of. Give this card a try, and you’ll see just how fun and useful it can be.

Of course, there are some counter-examples. Madame Web can’t even trade with most characters at her same cost, and Punisher is vulnerable to some 3-drops. Keep in mind, I’m only looking at the ATK and DEF comparisons. Clearly, a character’s tactical or strategic value also takes into account its powers or interactions with other cards.


Spidey Vs. Doc Ock

Someone pointed out on the boards that the big Spider-Man and big Doc Ock can’t take each other down in combat. This was intentional. Sometimes the constraints of what goes into a Starter can influence the bigger picture. We knew the Starter had to contain a 7-drop Spidey and Doc Ock. We also knew we wanted them to bounce off each other (unlike the 7 cost characters in the X-Men Vs. Brotherhood Starter Set). As I mentioned in the previous section, turn-based tactics are huge in Vs. Consequently, we really liked the interaction (both within the Starter and without) between Spidey and Doc Ock. We felt that (unlike Wolverine and Magneto) these characters were evenly matched in the comics. (Yeah, Spidey usually wins, but that’s just 'cause his name’s on the book). Doc Ock is a deadly attacker, but Spidey is excellent at preventing characters from attacking. They go together like peas and carrots. Or is it oil and water? All in all, we’re pretty happy with this matchup, as well as the rest of the Starter. What do you think?


Okay, that’s all I got. Tune in next week for a look at where there’s no “I.” Any comments or questions can be sent to dmandel@metagame.com.