Add "Navy" keyword or subtype to card face

[ionic tundra]

It's cumbersome to figure out which cards actually have the "Navy" subtype, especially in the deck builder, while learning the new cards. Would be nice to have something on the face of the card indicating which cards are "Navy" ... it's not always obvious.

[tawdry geyser]

It should just be on the card. It's a joke that you can't tell mid-battle without just knowing that they are navy cards

[tawdry geyser]

Also, notice how blockade pops up in the search, despite not being a navy card, since it just happens to have the word "navy" in the card

[sullen fog]

best way to look at it is if it has a ship name

!km

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 4

[sullen fog]

!hms

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 6

[sullen fog]

Ignore Talbot tho, apparently that's not navy for some reason

!ijn

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 4

[narrow arch]

!USS

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 6

[narrow arch]

Ignore first and 4th one

[sullen fog]

Does soviet have any?

[narrow arch]

Not yet

As of right now

[sullen fog]

!yorktown

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 1

[narrow arch]

!rm

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 104, refusing to show anything, please make a more precise search request.

[sullen fog]

each main nation except soviet has exactly 4 navy cards I think

[narrow arch]

!roma

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 2

[narrow arch]

Yea

[sullen fog]

Wait no

Brits have 5

!add until full 6k

[cloud coyote]

Search language: EN. No cards found...

[sullen fog]

!6k British order hms

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 1

[sullen fog]

There we go

[narrow arch]

Ummm oh okay

[sullen fog]

So in conclusion: if it has KM, HMS, USS, IJN, or RM in front of it, it's navy (excluding Talbot)

[narrow arch]

Orp for poland and Rm for Italy

France and Finland has no navy so far

[sullen fog]

right, ORP as well

!ORP poland

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 3

[narrow arch]

!Rm italy

[atomic tree]

Invalid time provided, try e.g. "tomorrow" or "3 days".

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 3

[sullen fog]

Only one Italian one

[narrow arch]

3th one only one

Yup

[sullen fog]

KM, HMS, USS, IJN, RM, ORP

Plus you can always tap on the card to see the subtype

[gray gale]

Thirth

[magic tide]

• An Icon or keyword
• A filter for subtypes (it could show the cards that target the subtype aswell but with no icon or keyword or a new icon for "target")
• a filter for the target of a card (navy in this case but anything in general)

If code size is a problem the site's deck builder can be refined and serve as the main source.
Tapping to see the subtype is not ideal.

[narrow arch]

And u boats

!u-

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 12, showing 1 - 5

[narrow arch]

3th and 4th

!enemy can't deploy

[cloud coyote]

Search language: EN. No cards found...

[narrow arch]

!enemy cannot deploy

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 2

[narrow arch]

First one

[sullen fog]

Funny how they changed a reserved card

but still valid

[ionic tundra]

still... how hard can it be to add "navy" to the card? it seems so obviously logical 😳

[narrow arch]

U-16 and u-375 and u-48 are naval but not type XXi u-boat Idk why

[warm parcel]

That's the point. It would be far easier for players in the heat of battle to KNOW. Not Remember. Know.

[warm parcel]

There's the problem.

[sturdy girder]

I say we should let Talbot be naval, and the XXI U-boat too

we should throw KM onto u-boats

[narrow arch]

I agree with last one but don't make it able to be made off of bastion or what the fuck it's called

[glacial lake]

"Heat of battle" you have one minute to click on the unit or open the history tab to read. Unless you're playing an otk you're fine. Don't be lazy

[sturdy girder]

What's wrong with more accessible clarity? While this issue certainly is not a big deal for most players, it is also an easy fix. Most importantly, it helps make newer players have an easier time creating decks and learning what's going on. These changes for clarity literally have no downside beside consuming the developers' time.

I also would be happier if my opponent took their turn quicker.

[glacial lake]

If you were to put the word "navy" on the cover of the card, where would you put it? And you'll have to do the same for the other subtypes like commando, sherman, and T-34 which I doubt needs clarity

[tawdry geyser]

Calliope has been a confusing card too for players. Its not as obvious that it's a Sherman, especially because it's the only non-tank Sherman

[glacial lake]

But people eventually learn. They will do the same with the navy card

[sullen fog]

As said, look at the prefixes and you'll be fine

plus if it has a boat on it and the card is named after that boat, assume it's navy
if there's anything that doesn't fit that theme it should be fixed but otherwise I think it's ok as is

[slate wigeon]

Actually I kinda agree with it adding the keyword naval

I actually didn't realize that KMS Bismarck being a navy card, despite it's not being released in the navy expansion

I thought only those Kards who are released in the navy expansion are naval kards

You can call me lazy or something, but ye

Unless devs said all ships are considered navy then it'll be easier to remember

[sturdy girder]

I would put a small icon at the bottom left corner of the card.

if not icons, just the subtype keyword should be fine

[glacial lake]

Icon would be a hassle cause you need to make something small and indistinguishable from each other. You can't tell the difference between a sherman icon or a t-34 icon if its super small. Oh wait, you can just look at the card portrait instead.

And we already have the subtype keyword if you click on the card. Having multiple indicators to tell the player that this card is indeed a navy card seem unnecessary

[sturdy girder]

it seems like you are really invested against any changes.

[inland dome]

"if the devs are not making it officially by themselves I'm not buying" type of mindset lol

[glacial lake]

I'm just takin a piss tbh. But I kinda also want new players to learn by the fires and doesn't get too much handholding from the game

[inland dome]

eventually they'll learn, its a strategic game after all, if they do not get a grip of mechanics/visuals they won't be able to play, no matter how "simplistic" you want to make it, because thats not really possible.

if they don't it is not suitable for them to play

[sturdy girder]

i dont think that argument applies here tho.

[sullen fog]

you realise there are multiple ways to tell if it's navy which have already been listed right? You shouldn't need more.

[inland dome]

the thing is, there are a handful of cards that are navy technically, but they do not have the subtype for some reason.

and you can't just slap "HMS, KM, RM, etc." in them to "identify" navy type orders/cards.

[narrow arch]

Like %hms tal%

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 1

[inland dome]

there are like 5 or more british cards that could (and should) be navy

not by being "ships" but rather naval related operations

similar thing happens on other nations but in a much smaller scale

but HMS TALBOT case is just horrible no matter how you see it (it still sucks anyways)

[tawdry geyser]

Yeah, literally has the HMS, which by the standards of every single other navy card means it should be a navy card, but no

[sullen fog]

HMS Talbot is an issue that should be fixed. But naval operations are not navy, only specific ships are

[sturdy girder]

Consider german u-boat cards as well. They walk a fine line as well between being navy or not navy

[rotund tree]

Maybe they can put an anchor symbol next to or under the nation icon

[ionic tundra]

or just put the word Navy under the name in the space where "Intel X" is printed for Intel cards... seems like a no-brainer... better than all of this crap about 'if it has this or is a picture of that, but not this one, except for that one which does say this and have a picture of that but isn't , then it's navy , maybe, unless it's that one with that picture but not that name or does have that name but not that picture, then it's not navy ' ...

[pseudo locust]

It's a military base not a ship or sub

Or so I have been told

[severe ruin]

Exile has the same problem. You can't tell what the other nation is without closely inspecting the card

[uncut saffron]

I think a symbol is better than a word because you can give the 'navy' type to cards that don't have it by default. Talbot doesn't count as navy because it's a countermeasure, but giving it navy would still matter to cards that care about navy cards in your deck and hand.

[pseudo locust]

Talbot doesn't count as navy since it's a military base not because it's a countermeasure

[sullen fog]

okay, well my argument completely changes then

If you can't call it navy based on the prefix then it does make sense to have another symbol

although you can still check the subtype by tapping on the card but yes, if not all cards fit the HMS, km, ijn etc theme then yes we do need other ways to tell

Actually, simple solution, rotate Talbot and then you can use the prefix, easy

[pseudo locust]

Leave my baby girl talbot alone

[sullen fog]

bro is the one Talbot lover

[tawdry geyser]

At least with exile the nation the unit exiles to only matters in deck building. For all other intent and purposes they're just Polish units

[narrow arch]

And france

[tawdry geyser]

Oh, right, I forgot about that thing lol

MS 406

[narrow arch]

Yea it's never see play

[tawdry geyser]

It did when they made one of the single most powerful cards ever with hammer home

Pre-nerf

[narrow arch]

yea

[tawdry geyser]

The funny thing about MS 406 exile is that it doesnt even follow the rules set by 1939 on how exile is assigned. It should be a Polish card with French exile, like the new 6k 3/6 polish guard unit

[narrow arch]

Yea

It been like that for years

[tawdry geyser]

And Yak-3 should be a French card with Soviet exile... Like they promised years ago

[narrow arch]

wow

[vocal gust]

yea i dont know what is navy what is not , i guess a boat inside a card count as navy and others not ..?

[pseudo locust]

Navy is essentially anything with HMS(except Talbot) , KM, IJN, USS, etc

[weary hedge]

It’s actually not hard

If named boat, then navy

[tawdry geyser]

Unless its HMS Talbot or the Uboat from German research

Because, as well all know, any good game design should have universal mechanics that don't actually work universally but instead have arbitrary niche scenarios where they don't work.

[narrow arch]

Yea I get you and for those it can fit and 7k discard thing to

[weary hedge]

Talbot is not a boat, and the reserch one is a type of u-boat, much like the m4 Sherman is a type of tank

[narrow arch]

And KRIEGSMARINE to

[weary hedge]

Kreigsmarine is not ONE boat

[narrow arch]

Yea but it's German Navy tho

Like the hold German Navy

If that's make sense

[tawdry geyser]

I think you misunderstand the point we are trying to make.

We know which cards are and aren't navy. We are aware about the naming system, and why there are some exceptions. This is not the issue.

The issue is that the naming system is poorly thought out and poorly designed. It's lazy, half-assed, and causes more confusion than it should.
The Sherman and T-34 subtypes caused a lot of confusion already, but were in small enough spaces to not be egregious. With navy being added, the subtype mechanic is now egregiously unintuitive, uninformative, and dissuading to new players.

[tawdry geyser]

I think the only thing that the subtype mechanic succeeds in is minimizing space used. Since its not listed anywhere except the help tool tip, it makes the cards look cleaner.

This design choice sacrifices being more informative to the player, especially new ones. For Shermans and T-34s, this wasn't a big deal because the subtype was fairly intuitive, except for calliope which broke the rule of the unit type and the name.

This design sacrifice was exacerbated with the navy subtype. It's not any more or less informative than before, but it is waaaay more unintuitive. This is because T-34s and Shermans were such a tight and well defined group, but the navy concept is so broad and so awkwardly carved out of pre-existing cards.
The HMS, KM, USS, IJN, ORP naming system tries to show where the navy cards are carved out of the navy concept, but it's incredibly unintuitive. As long as it stays in this design, where there are cards labeled Free French Navy or Naval Support, and there are cards with navy mechanics like "deal 3 damage when you play a navy card," you are going to cause confusion and frustration.

[weary hedge]

I would think it could get renamed, but to what?

A ship?

[tawdry geyser]

The subtype's sacrifice of information for clean look may have been worth it when the only examples of it were T-34 and Sherman. Now, the design is both uninformative and unintuitive. I believe there are two general solutions, and a few iterations on them:

General solution 1: The design of subtype should be changed to better inform the player of what cards are and aren't navy. This basically means just turn it into a keyword like alpine. If you're feeling fancy, turn it into a new symbol, or something, just make sure its actually on the card and not hidden in a tool tip.

General solution 2: Redesign the navy subtype to make it more intuitive. This could go in many directions.

1. You could expand the subtype and add any card with navy in the name. Maybe even any card with naval operations happening in the art. This option opens up several balancing issues without addressing the core of the issue, so I don't think it's great.
2. Change the name of the navy subtype. Instead of navy, make it ship, or vessel. You could also do types of ships, like capital ships, carriers, submarines, escorts, kind of like what has already been done in Blitz doctrine with light tanks and heavy tanks.
3. Add more text to the name of the subtype. Instead of "when you play a navy card," make it "when you play a navy subtype." This is the easiest solution I imagine, but also the least impactful towards the core issues of being unintuitive and uninformative. But, at least it would be something

[narrow arch]

And spitfires to

[tawdry geyser]

Lmao, I completely forgot that subtype even existsd. Same deal with the Shermans and T-34s tho

[narrow arch]

Spitfire is a dead archatype atm

[weary hedge]

There’s also commando subtype

[narrow arch]

Yea

[tawdry geyser]

Commandos at least are self-explanatory in their names, so they fit with the other subtypes

[narrow arch]

Yea and there only 2 spitfires

no wait 3

[tawdry geyser]

The special forces type in Bakers Street is where this awful confusing subtype design began to go wrong. That was just a hodgepodge of units that was only relevant to a single card.

[weary hedge]

looks at devils brigade

[narrow arch]

Yea

[weary hedge]

!spitfire

[cloud coyote]

Cards found: 11, showing 1 - 5

[narrow arch]

The us one should have exile to Uk maybe

I think spitfire can come back as a subtype maybe

There 8 gone and 3 alive pool

[tawdry geyser]

Exile is not the same as equipment being in service under a different nation. To be an exile card, the unit has to have been composed of pilots/tankers/soldiers from a nation that was not in the war at the moment (exiled) but fighting under the banner of the nation that was at war

[narrow arch]

Fair

[tawdry geyser]

I believe the history behind the USAAF spitfire was that it was US pilots flying a British aircraft in the US airforce, as opposed to the Polish Spitfire being piloted by Polish pilots in the British airforce

[narrow arch]

So I think that can be exile

[full fractal]

It is a Flotilla Base

In the Mediterranean

[ionic tundra]

then get rid of "navy" and say "if you play a boat do X" or "if the top card in your deck has a picture of a boat and starts with hms, (but isn't talbot), km, ijn, uss , etc, (most of the time), then do X"

[weary hedge]

I do agree calling it navy is a bit misleading

[ionic tundra]

calling anything navy without an explicit indication of what qualifies as navy and what doesn't is confusing ... again seems like a very easy fix... icon, keyword...etc..axial like the icon idea

[weary hedge]

I’d just say rename it to something like ship (there’s probably a better term but you get my idea)

[ionic tundra]

that's fine if they actually then EXPLICITLY identify them .. it doesn't really matter what they call it; navy, ship , boat,thrakkorzog, susan...it doesn't matter... it just needs a key word or something to identify it, and also something searchable in the deck builder

[weary hedge]

Both already exist

It’s a subtype

If you search navy then all navy cards and those with navy related effects appear

And if you click on the card it says navy right below the name

[ionic tundra]

not true .. if your search navy you only get cards that have the word "navy" in their text.

[weary hedge]

You also get cards with the navy subtype