The Fortunes of War deck (formally Delta)

Ps. Another advantage to using a standard deck of 52 with the three options (R&D, Combat, or Income) is that the National R&D assignments for a given card could be ignored in a game which did not include that nation. So there is a way you could have the same deck work in multiple games. So for example, the “face” cards in the deck would be best for the Major nations. Germany, Russia, Japan, UK,  USA, whereas the lower value cards might carry R&D or similar bonuses for the smaller nations like Italy, Anzac/Commonwealth,  France and China.

What I in vision is essentially a “master list” that anyone could print out and combine with any standard deck on any board. A one page list that is like a code key for the way the 52 cards work.

I would suggest a name like “Enigma” or “Navajo” as a working title for this list.  :-D

Here is an example of what I mean by National R&D attached to specific cards. We could do more than this, but for an example, let’s say you wanted to give the 6 major powers four R&D advances each…

Germany: Ace, King, Queen, 10 of Spades
USA: Ace, King, Queen, 10 of Hearts
Japan: Ace, King, Queen, 10 of Clubs
UK: Ace, King, Queen, 10 of Diamonds

Russia: Red Jacks and Nines
Italy: Black Jacks and Nines

If you want limited R&D advances for the smaller powers you could say something like…

Commonwealth: Red 8s (crazy 8s!)
France: Red 7s
China: Red 6s

The color and suit, face and number would serve as mnemonic devices for each Nation, so they will know what to watch for on the draw. The Soviets will be on hunt for Red Jacks or Nines, the Italians will be on the hunt for the Black ones. The other major nations will all be looking for Aces, Kings, Queens and Tens in their suit. Likewise the smaller nations, only have to worry about drawing their designated number in the right color. Depending on how many advances you wanted to support, you could create a mnemonic system for each so that its easy to recall, and smooth for the game flow.

Basically you could divide up the deck in whichever way seems the most apt by Nation/Side and then record those R&D values for the cards in the master list. Each card already has an assigned Income bonus. Combat and R&D bonuses however could be limited if desired to just certain cards. Or in certain suits. See what I mean? Ideally there would be a rough division by side, in terms of the the potential advances or bonuses on the table. To keep things more or less even on the draw.

Also, even if you wanted to preserve the current tech system instead of trying new R&D designations, you could just assign a certain number of “free dice” to that tech advance for a given card/nation. So in that case, you wouldn’t have to adopt the new G40 tech system necessarily, since a set number of free tech rolls for a given face card. Say 6 free rolls. That option could easily be handled on the list. But I am still interested in a progressive system, and the idea of cards on a random draw seems interesting.

pps. Finally, and this is the last thought I’ll bring up for the 52 card idea, at least for tonight  :-D but…
A 52 cards standard deck, with a hidden draw!

That’s very important. No cards should be revealed until they are turned in. They stay on the table face down, until used. Or at least only a fellow ally may share information with you about what card they have. This way we introduce the one element that has been rather missing from A&A…

Secrecy!  :-D

The cards give us a way to make the war unpredictable, so you can’t just plan everything based on the pieces and money in plain sight on the board. Right now all strategy is transparent. Everyone knows what everyone else has at their disposal, and where everything is at all times. Not so if we give our players cards! Here you always have to keep in the back of your mind “what if the enemy has an ace up his sleeve?!” haha

And so finally, at last, A&A would have a fog of war or secrecy of war component, that has been sorely lacking up until now.

Cards can give us all that. But they need to be accessible I think. A standard deck of 52 would be the ideal to work with as it is internationally available anywhere that card games are played. Again, this would still allow us to print a deck with custom art or rules, so long as it also included on it the standard Suits, Faces, Numbers etc. Any extraneous information there could just be used or ignored, depending on what kind of game you want. But at least with a master list we’d have an option to do it all.

Again I do like the name Navajo or Anasazi when the allies are drawing, and Enigma when the axis draw haha. I think it could be fun. The card income bump works and I can already attest to the entertainment value it produces, but combined with a Combat or R&D option, I think the role of cards would be improved immeasurably! It would be a complete new way to play on the standard boards, bringing back the element of Secrecy into the war plans.

Hey YG - I like a lot of your ideas - here’s where I’d adjust:

@Young:

Germany may launch a rocket attack from each operational airbase under German control, towards an enemy facility up to 4 spaces away. Germany rolls 1 die per rocket causing that amount of damage to the targeted facility +1, provided it can survive all SBR defences (interceptors and built in AA guns).

4 sounds like way too far of a range for V-1s - I’d say 3 max.

@Young:

Trans-Siberian Railway (void with loss of capital city)
Any number of Russian infantry units, artillery units, and/or AA artillery units may now move from Russia to Novosibirsk, Timguska, Yenisey, or Yakut S.S.R within a single non-combat movement, provided the line to their destination is not broken, the destination is under Russian control, and the movement originated from Moscow.

This railway was only a single track, so equipment could only go one direction or the other. It was not that effective. In my rules the RR can carry up to 2 transport loads worth per turn, but loads cannot crisscross each other.

@Young:

Uncle Sam Campaign (void with loss of capital city)
America now receives 3 free infantry units every turn during their place new units phase.

This sounds more like something for Russia or China with their bottomless infantry reserves.

@Young:

Around the Clock Bombing
All British strategic bombers departing from an operational airbase may now conduct SBRs on America’s turn as well as their own. Also all American strategic bombers departing from an operational airbase may now conduct SBRs on Britain’s turn as well as their own.

This messes with the timeline of the game - don’t care for it.

@Young:

Russian Winter
Russia rolls 2 dice, and Germany must remove from original Russian territories that many infantry units +1. .

Here Russia magically controls the weather - I would like to see some kind of weather in the game but Russia should not be able to just call in a storm.

I like all of your other ideas - good work!

@Der:

@Young:

Trans-Siberian Railway (void with loss of capital city)
Any number of Russian infantry units, artillery units, and/or AA artillery units may now move from Russia to Novosibirsk, Timguska, Yenisey, or Yakut S.S.R within a single non-combat movement, provided the line to their destination is not broken, the destination is under Russian control, and the movement originated from Moscow.

This railway was only a single track, so equipment could only go one direction or the other. It was not that effective. In my rules the RR can carry up to 2 transport loads worth per turn, but loads cannot crisscross each other.

Railways aren’t a subject I know a lot about, but I was under the impression that many of the world’s railroads have single-track sections.  Having trains travel in both directions doesn’t always require 100% dual tracks for the whole length; it suffices to have an adequate number of parallel-track sidings at various points along the line where one train can wait temporarily to let a train from the opposite direction pass it.  Obviously this wouldn’t work well on lines with a high volume of traffic, and it also requires good timetable coordination, but across a vast territory with a low population density (as in the case of the TSR) it’s a cost-efficient layout.

Incidentally, I once read an interesting item about the way in which the USSR used its railroads during the frantic days of 1941 when it was trying to relocate its factories to the Urals area.  To get the most possible cargo carrying work out of its railroads in the shortest amount of time, the trains didn’t always travel all the way from west to east.  Instead, they’d travel part of the way – far enough to be temporarily safe from the advancing Germans – then dump their shipments (for pickup at a later date) into the fields next to the tracks and head back westward for another load.

Well I haven’t commented on the individual fortunes or advances, mainly because I like the ones already proposed, and because I can see how those could be open to adjustment or refinement. For me the main concern is implementation, how the deck actually works.

The entire advantage of creating a deck of cards system would be to have a secret draw, e.g. cards face down, with only the one player aware of what card he possesses (rather than everyone). Otherwise you’re only getting half the mileage out of the card system, and no real secrecy component if the draw is visible to everyone.

Under the current formulation the “progressive” advantages don’t seem to benefit much from being printed on an actual playing card. Since the draw on that isn’t random, and the progressive aspect takes place in the open, and the focus there is on dice rather than cards. The way it reads right now, a progressive advantage card is just a shrunk down page from the rule book, written on a card for easy reference, but without actually offering the unique gameplay potential of a card in a deck. The way its worded these are still attached to dice rolls, rather than card draws, in terms of how they play. So I think these should be separated out from the rest of the discussion, or at least put aside while you figure out how to work the normal R&D.

I’d think the priority would be getting the total number of advantages figured out first. Right now you have 16 National advances listed, and 5 more for “All eligible nations”, that’s only 21 cards in a draw, which is not really a sufficient level of randomization.

Just focusing on the National advances for the moment, the distribution by side is somewhat uneven. Some nations have 4 cards, some have 1, some Nations aren’t included at all. I would suggest 4 or 5 for each “major player nation” at a minimum, so the spread would be roughly doable on a draw. There are 7 major player nations (if you exclude France and China) so at 4 potential advances each that’d be 28 cards, at 5 potential advances 35 cards. That’s a little closer to a full deck on the draw. You could still have generic advantage cards, like the ones you have in the “all eligible nations” section.

I would still suggest finding a way to do this with 52 cards, otherwise I think you will be hard pressed to find people willing to try it, if they have to first purchase new game materials to get it working.

The wording and values of the individual advances could be updated or altered fairly easily, for historical significance or gameplay balance, but I guess the question I would have is…
Does the 52 card idea seem workable to you YG?

If not I’ll stop hijacking your thread :)

But here is the issue as I see it. The original Delta you created doesn’t actually require cards to function, a player might just as easily print out the Delta advantages on a sheet of paper and use them without the actual cards. But if there is a random draw component then this is no longer the case, as actual cards are required for that to work.

Then the question is, do you want to make the purchase of game materials a requirement for the system to work? Because I think if you did it matching a 52 card deck, then players wouldn’t have to purchase seperate materials to use or test the system, which would increase the likelihood of players trying it out. You could still print a custom deck of 52 for sale, but by creating a “card key” based on a standard deck of 52 you give players the option to try it immediately. All they’d have to do is print out the key, rather than an entire separate deck of cards. Does that make sense?

@Black_Elk:

Then the question is, do you want to make the purchase of game materials a requirement for the system to work? Because I think if you did it matching a 52 card deck, then players wouldn’t have to purchase seperate materials to use or test the system, which would increase the likelihood of players trying it out. You could still print a custom deck of 52 for sale, but by creating a “card key” based on a standard deck of 52 you give players the option to try it immediately. All they’d have to do is print out the key, rather than an entire separate deck of cards. Does that make sense?

Unless I’m misunderstanding something, it doesn’t have to be an either/or situation.  If people want to purchase YG’s custom-made cards, they can do so.  If people want to use your standard playing card idea, they can take YG’s list of concepts from this post and create a conversation-key table that equates each concept with a card from a standard deck.  One system doesn’t preclude the other.

Exactly, but it would be significantly easier to create the latter system if the former had a similar structure/design from the outset. By that I mean a relatively simple way to translate the custom deck into something you could play with a standard deck.

I suppose the point I was hoping to make is that it depends on the extent to which the draw mechanic itself works in the custom deck. So for example, I think it’s possible to structure things in such a way that they port with a standard deck fairly simply, and another way to structure things that would make such a porting more difficult.

I’m basing some assumptions here off the first edition Delta deck that I’m holding in my hands right now. My guess is that YG has plans to update this, and has also expressed a desire to make a master deck with all g40 NOs. Now a G40 deck like that is necessarily limited in the way it can be used (eg only for g40), there what you have is basically rules on cards for easy reference, but just going with Delta first ed deck for right now and the idea about attaching a draw to it…

In that first ed Delta deck, there are three colors for the card backings, red green and blue. So the way I read the first post in this thread, the idea would basically be to take one of those 3 color sets and give it a random draw aspect . Basically if you draw the card and it matches your nation you are awarded the R&D advance (while retaining seperate “face up” cards for the progressives with an associated roll mechanic.) There’s nothing wrong with that  approach at all, but it might make for a more narrow draw in terms of a playable deck, since there would really only be one way it could be used, one way to play with it.

Right now it is conceivable that you could take any card in the Delta first ed deck, just say it equals something in a standard deck, and then remove any extraneous cards from the standard deck (basically playing with an incomplete standard deck), but that process is a bit involved.

The only reason I brought any of this up, was that idea YG mentioned to do a random draw at the top of the post. The random draw is a new idea introduced here for the first time and not present in the first draft of Delta. Before that, the deck itself was basically an aesthetic thing, an enhanced gameplay aid, but not necessarily required for the rules to work. But once you put in a draw, then the actual cards (and not just the rules printed on them) become significant to the system.

My logic would be, if you want a random draw for this stuff, why not take it all the way, and just make a full system for cards? Because I think cards are cool,  but the thing that makes cards cool and unique, is the hidden aspect.  The backs of the cards in a standard deck reveal nothing about what’s on the face, so this would be a way to get a kind of “fog of war” albeit highly abstract into the core game.

But you’re right, the one definitely doesn’t preclude the other.

@Black_Elk:

Exactly, but it would be significantly easier to create the latter system if the former had a similar structure/design from the outset. By that I mean a relatively simple way to translate the custom deck into something you could play with a standard deck.

I think I now understand what you’re driving at.  I thought at first that you wanted YG to produce an “official” adaptation of his Fortunes of War card system that allowed his various national advantages to be used with a standard playing card deck rather than with his custom cards.  It now actually looks like you’re talking about something quite different.  You’re not proposing that a playing card deck be adapted (via a coding sheet) to fit YG’s existing Fortunes of War system; what you’re actually proposing is the reverse: that YG adapt his Fortunes of War system to fit the existing format of a standard playing card deck.  That’s a pretty fundamental change, and the fact that YG hasn’t commented on your proposal since you posted it a week ago seems to suggest (to me at least) that he has reservations about it.  To expand on my earlier suggestion that you create your own coding sheet, perhaps you might also want to go one step further and create your own customized Fortunes system which fits your preferences better than seems to be the case with YG’s system. There’s nothing to prevent you from doing that.

You’re correct CWO marc, that was more or less exactly what I was suggesting.  :-D But its just a suggestion.

I find that a collaborative approach is generally stronger, than trying to strike off and develop a bunch of independent competing systems that are trying to achieve similar goals. House rules likewise are more fun when you get a couple houses trying the same thing to see how it plays out.  Forums communication is slow sometimes, since we have lives outside of A&A, but I’d trust YG to pull in the reigns, or excise the extraneous, if I’ve gone too far left field.

The main reason I think it’s cool to try and attach values to the standard deck, is that it’s very easy to tweak and test the advantages this way. So from a development standpoint, it is possible to test things right away before we plug in values and set the deck. Rather than drafting rules first and sending it out to the printers in China, only to find a week or two later, that it would be awesome to add something or tweak some aspect of it.

@Young:

Sorry for my absence here, I’m working on many different things at once.

My plan is to create a deck with 54 cards…

• 2 of each nation specific strategic advantage cards = 32
• 3 of each community specific strategic advantage cards = 15
• 1 of each nation specific progressive advantage cards = 7

If all this can be easily translated into a generic playing card deck, than all is good… However, my custom cards look much better than a regular deck.

Thanks for all the comments and interest in this idea, I will address all your post’s in detail soon.

Cheers.

Oh cool there’s the man! So with a 54 card deck planned that matches exactly a full deck including jokers! I expect also that the printers print with those numbers in mind for their boxing. This is a strong start because it means you’d have the same number of total fortunes cards as you have in a normal deck.

So picture this, to achieve a specific 1:1 card to card ratio, all you’d have to do is flag the joker… (You mark it with a felt pen on the face side.) Now you have 54 distinct cards, and you could match every card in your fortunes deck to a card in the flagged standard deck (both jokers in play.)

Now consider that all you would need at that point, to make the fortunes deck a standard deck (a deck that could function just like a real deck as well as a fortunes deck), is to include one small graphic in just one corner of the card!

It could be very small, and doesn’t need to be mirrored (not on two sides,  head and foot, just at one or the other.) Tiny as you like.

Envision a small K inside a Heart, or an A inside a spade, a 10 inside a diamond,  or a 2 inside a club. All small and tucked off to the lower right hand corner of the card.

These symbols would look badass anyway, like tiny war code designations!  :-D The sort of thing one might paint on the side of a bomber, or draft up in a patch. It could look cool and unassuming, but provide addition functionality, while retaining the overall aesthetic cohesiveness of a WW2 era Fortunes Deck. It could even provide a shorthand reference for the individual cards.

Manhattan Project = Suicide King, K inside the Diamond
Or things of that sort. For each card

You know like code hehe

It wouldn’t dominate the card aesthetically, it only needs to be large enough that it can be read by the player holding the card. This doesn’t seem like too tall an order, considering that this one minor addition of suit/number info, would expand the potential use of the deck considerably.

Think of all the things you could do with a standard deck of cards, one that had cool art and cool R&D bonus rules. It just seems fairly easy, so I thought I would make the case. Not only could you use it for R&D, but you could do R&D and anything else you can create with a full deck of playing cards. It just seems like an easy win on all counts.

And it would make testing the fortunes pretty easy.

There are only two conditions you need to meet for this to hold up in translation.

First: Uniform backs
If the backs of the cards in the fortune deck are not uniform,  then the fortunes deck could not function as a normal deck (even if they all have suits/numbers). However, a normal deck could still have the fortunes values translated onto it in that case. Going one direction fortunes translates to standard (but not the other way round unless the backs are uniform.)

Second: Each card is distinct.
No two cards in the fortunes deck are exactly alike. (Unless you want just 2, in which case you could use unflagged jokers.) This would make translation pretty simple. We could start playing with it tonight if wanted :)
Again you could translate one direction, but not the other unless all cards are distinct.

Anyhow, these are just suggestions, but I think it could be cool. I like the first edition Delta deck a lot. I’d play black jack with it or crazy 8s or poker, if I could!