There's one change that's confirmed already : the addition of the 'uncommon' tier. This is where strong (Spark, Thogrom Bomber, etc) and dual color commons will go.
Then there's some ideas i have to change Legends. In short i would like to see them bound to the first player that plays a certain legend - this means that, for the remainder of a battle, that player is the only one who is allowed to play that legend.
To balance this, there's a number of things that can or must change, here's the list (as copied from the blogpost) :
- First of all, they must all sound like legends. Example : we have 'Seraphine, the enslaved', a CC hive queen with a name and a certain backstory. There is also 'Battle Queen', which is the generic term for this creature - every CC hive has a queen, this one happens to be one of the 'battle' variation, a more agressive one, but beyond that there's nothing unique about it. Under this new system, Seraphine is proper legend, but Battle queen might have to be downgraded to elite, or i could turn that card into a proper legend as well.
- These cards should be strong, but not in the way that having them on the board guarantees your victory. I rather give these cards unique abilities that would invite players to build decks around them. When it comes to overall strength, i'd place them on the same level as elites. If legends are to be 'enablers' of tactics, it would make sense that there are other cards that would help or benefit from legends. Chyriax' disciple could get a bonus every turn, as long as Chyriax is in play and allied. Seraphine's herald could do something while Seraphine is not in play, but is in it's owners hand or deck, and so on.
- There should be more legends, to lower the odds of players finding themselves unable to play their legends because their opponent already played the same card. These don't always have to be battleship sized, they could be fighters, cruisers, etc.
- In games with more than 2 players, players may set up teams. Players within a team can't attack each other, but beyond that, i haven't figured out any other benefits yet (a shared energy pool looks like something worth looking into, or even allowing allies to launch ships in any slot owned by an ally instead of just their own slots). For legends, instead of binding them to the player that launched them, they could be bound to the team that launched it instead.
- Binding of legends could be turned into a mechanic that may be subject to abilities, for instance there could be cards that can unbind a certain legend from a player, allowing other players to play that legend. It's a very niche idea at the moment, but it's worth considering and can be extended - example : your opponent has played a legend and thus it's now bound to that player. You have the same legend and want to undo the bind between that player and this legend. Instead of there being a niche action that undoes this bind, it would be interesting if you could use the legend card itself, for instance sacrificing it and paying its card cost to make that legend 'unbound' again. The next player to play this legend will see it bound to him now. This is just an example, but the main idea is that binding itself would get a counter.
Let me know what you think about this!