Hi all.

If we get support for eight or nine players, we are going to need more cards for the main deck. Otherwise Cosmic Quakes will abound, much to the annoyance of everyone and the demise of genius. sure, they could just print a bunch of extra cards - and I'd welcome such a set - but it might be more fun if:

1. We get new kinds of cards instead of more of the same
2. The new cards fit the mechanic or theme of the expansion

New card types are cool, but we'll need encounter cards to balance the deck. Here are some ideas for brand new encounter cards that would fit a potential expansion theme:

Moons :

• Lunar Ops Attack cards.

These would be attack cards that double in value if used during a moon encounter. A lunar 5 would be considered a 10 for all purposes during a moon based encounter, etc. I think these should range from 5 - 14. Not so low to be useless, but not so strong to beat a 30 or 40. There could be a Lunar Ops Morph, too (or Lunar Ops reinforcements for that matter).

These cards have the advantage of encouraging Moon attacks, as your opponent usually wont have one.

Lucre :

• Negotiate: Bribery

This would be a Negotiate with the added clause that if you pay a certain amount of Lucre you can claim extra compensation or force your opponent to lose extra ships. I think these should not be as powerful as Crooked Deals, though (unless for a substantial fee), lest they cheapen the reward deck.

Of course it's easy to create Artifacts in theme with Lucre, Moons, Hazards, or whatever; and we'll need more of those too. But I would like to see alternate encounter cards to expand the main deck.

I do like those Lunar cards, especially since they don't require moons to be used.

Thanks!

Maybe a straight +10 would be better than doubling, that way cards as low as 1 or 2 would still be good for mon enocunters, and the morph wouldn't be as broken.

Wow! I've just been poking around The Warp - fantastic CE site!

It seems there are lots of options for altenate encounter cards - both official and homemade. I don't think we have to worry about FFG's ability to expand the deck. Here are my thoughts:

• War cards are awesome! They add a nice rock paper scissor element, but not too much as they should be sparsely distributed. I personally think the licker interactions are unnecessary - If it were up to me Kickers would have no effect with War cards (but could be bluffs), and Kickers played on Attack cards against War cards would simply multiply compensation.
• Antibodies I like a lot. I would include them only when that colour is playing - this very smoothly facilitates a bigger deck in larger games. And most importantly with split cards - they always have a single unambiguous value.
• Defend cards are cool too - good hosers. It might be simpler if they interact with war cards the same as with attack cards, though. Defend cards seem very strong yet often useless (on the offense). I like five per deck.
• Pyrrhic victory I am not so fond of, personally. A bit on the uneventful side.
• Quarks are neat. I like the idea of cards which fluctuate in value. But I tend to wonder if in practice they might be too much bother for too little effect?
• Special Challenge cards include some wonderful ideas. I wouldn't make a new card type though. I would make these a subclass of another card type - much like the crooked deal. I would make the x2 a special Morph, etc. I'm quite fond of the attack cards with values equal to colonies, ships, lucre, etc. And I like the compromise cards with alternate compensation, but if they're in the main deck I don't think they should provide more compensation than a crooked deal, so I'd oust the x2. The Lucre negotiate is much cooler than the lucre related negotiate I thought of. It should be called Negotiate - Extortion .
• Overkill are okay, but I prefer War and don't think we need both - that's overkill.

I'm very excited about what we might get if and when FFG expands the cosmic deck. I eagerly await the next expansion either way. I hope we can get two of these a year, I can hardly contain myself. I want more cards, aliens, moons, lucre, hazards, reversible planets, nine colours, and some cool stuff I haven't even thought of!

Great job with The Warp, Jack. A wonderful contribution!

I've put pretty much all of my unusual extras into my Reward deck at this point. Here, for example is the Defend card in my set:

The Warp said:

That card's gorgeous, Jack. The reward deck is a nice place for unusual extras becuase you can skip that whole deck when introducing new players. But if you want to play with more than seven players I think the cosmic deck needs more cards - specifically more encounter cards. So I'm inclined to want Defend in the main deck. I'm sure if FFG produces eight or nine player support we'll see more cosmic cards. Maybe we'll see these Defend cards in official print?

While on the topic of Defend, I'll elaborate upon my commentary:

Defend cards have a similar function to Compromise, in that they're main job is to lose vs Attack but punish the attacker. Versus an Attack, Defend cards are worse for the defensive than Negotiate (no compensation), but can be worse for the attacker to, because often they will deny the colony (but sometimes they will be easier on the offensive than a Negotiate. Versus a Negotiate, Defend are almost always better than another negotiate - winning is usually better than dealing. (Versus a Negotiate, Defend is also superior to any Attack card).

So, overall I see Defend as a cousin to Compromise, for the most part stronger. I think Defend is an elegant counterpart to War, which is the big brother of Attack. War are stronger than Attack in so far as their ability to win encounters, but that extra strength is paid for by doling out extra compensation. The Defend card is a little better than Negotiate, but pays for this by not being playable on the offense, not getting compensation vs Attack, and if I understand correctly, also not getting compensation vs War.

I still find Defend vs War very, well, odd . If the offense has four ships and plays War, they do better against a Defend with three ships than a Defend with only one ship. that's just plain bizzare to me. (This is a small thing, though).

Here's how the Defend cards in my set are implemented. The idea is that you take a "defensive posture" in which you attack only if needed . If the opponent attacks, you are ready to meet the challenge, but if he negotiates then you do the same.

These are designed such that Defend vs. Defend and Defend vs. Morph all downgrade gracefully to Negotiate vs. Negotiate.

When you play a Defend card, you don't know which way the reveal will go, but you do know that you will be neither gaining nor giving compensation (something you can't be sure of with the normal encounter cards). Defends are also quite handy to play against Pacifist (arguably one of the strongest powers in the game). My deck has five Defend cards: 09, 19, 19, 29, and 39.

Had an interesting situation about two games ago. I revealed an attack and my daughter revealed Defend 09 with a Kicker x2 and 4 ships in the encounter. She was Mirror, so her total was 184!

Of course this looks like a total Morph rip-off, but I did actually design these before the FFG version existed (and recently gave them a cosmetic facelift).

I like that card too, Bill. It is a bit like Morph. This one is a touch better because it's a 29, but a 05 would be generaly worse than Morph.

This gives me an idea for an Anti-Morph, call it a Trump:

• Becomes attack against Negotiate
• Becomes Negotiate against Attack.

I'm not sure how it should react to a War or Morph - probably both lose.

@Jack, how does your defend interact with an opposing Morph?

crimhead said:

I think Trump should become Negotiate against Attack or War, and become an Attack against Negotiate or Defend. Still not sure about Trump vs Morph...

The way I've executed Morphs is with this rule: They can only Morph into Attacks or Negotiates. A Morph is unable to morph into anything else, so when opposed by a Defend, or War, or Elementals, etc.- it simply becomes a Null. I haven't added any specific Null cards to the set (yet... heh). But a Null is essentially "Lose without benefits". You lose and get no compensation.

That's just sick. I want a devoted Null card in my main deck!

Last night's game saw the first test of a little variant I came up with called "Incentives"

There were six special cards placed on the table face up. The first six encounters, whichever main player won the encounter (in addition to any normal gains) got to choose one of the cards and add it to his or her hand. In fact, we played that you HAD to take one of the cards.

The cards were:

- Keeper Artifact (when you must draw a new hand, you may keep all of your non-encounter cards and then draw 8 more cards)
- Incarnate Artifact (discard your alien power- reveal a flare for a power not in the game and become that power for the rest of the game)
- War
- Summit (encounter card that changes both cards to negotiates- if the opposing player already played a negotiate, main players gain rewards for a successful deal)
- Null (encounter card that makes you lose the encounter)
- Wild (play the card, then reveal any card from your hand- the wild becomes that card)

Once played, Incentive cards are removed from the game.

I think Wild is cool, I'd like to see a card like that.

The incentive idea is a bit strange, mostly people won't want to win the sixth encounter of the game (and may even wish not to be a main player). Maybe that's good. It might be more fun to draw incentives at random, and maybe even have a whole deck full of odd, mostly-good-but-some-bad incentive cards, using them all game. Kind of like the reward deck.

Generally you want to win encounters anyway, unless you are pulling for compensation. So I guess the old Negotiate play would lose value when incentives are on the line. Although if incentives are drawn before compensation, that might sometimes reverse.

You guys make me want to dust off my 10-year-old Photoshop skills.