Game: Card Football: Premiere Edition

Thread: 1st Down Cards

korangar — 2008-09-01T19:37:26+00:00

Just had a question about cards like the Queen of Diamonds that say: "Offense - 1st down RB run." I'm assuming this means that you would advance the ball as many yards as necessary to get the first down? In other words, if it was 3rd and 20 you would advance the ball 20 yds. for a first down and if it was 3rd and 1, you would advance the ball just 1 yd. to pick up the first down. Is this the correct interpreation? Thanks.

Thread: Re: Husband 9 Wife 7

sdiberar — 2008-07-27T15:39:45+00:00

Mike,

Penalty cards can be turned to your advantage by playing them against an anticipated strong play by your opponent -- this works only for the penalties that must be enforced, of course, since they negate the result of the play.

Otherwise, penalty cards are a burden and the trick is figuring out the least painful way to get rid of them. This is a feature, not a bug

Thread: Husband 9 Wife 7

miker42 — 2008-07-27T05:00:36+00:00

We finally got this one out last night. It was little slow going at first checking the rules for reference and all to make sure we were playing right. I thought my wife would give up after one quarter but since I had scored a late TD (missed the extra point by errantly rolling the FG die) but she kept at it once she learned how to build power hands.

I managed another 3 points by by kicking a 43 yard FG in the second quarter.

In the 3rd quarter it was a series of punts and turnovers until the wife threw down a royal flush for an automatic TD. And I had just wasted a Ace 30 yard pass to boot.

The fourth quarter went scoreless and the game ended as the wife was inside the 10 yard line and Intercepted the last pass. Lucky me.

The only thing we really questioned was the penalty cards. The rules state that the player playing the card takes the penalty. Why would you want to penalize yourself? We played it as if a penalty card was thrown the card was used to the thrower's advantage. Don't know if that was right but it makes sense to us. Still need a bit of clarification though.

Thread: Got My Copy from CCG Armory - Broken Ref?

CPaladino — 2008-05-29T06:23:41+00:00

I just got the game today, played a quick game w/ the wife - I loved it, and she was indifferent (mostly due to her being tired.) She quickly picked up the fact that it's easily described as "advanced war".

The reason I'm posting is because my referee was broken - the orange flag was broken off of his hand, and he's only got 1 foot glued to the base.

While I know it's not the most important piece in the world, is there any way to get a replacement ref?

Thread: Re: Card Football vs. the Upcoming NCAA Hand-Off

dcgogo — 2008-05-01T17:15:10+00:00

I noticed from the pictures of the new NCAA version that there is no nice plastic scoreboard, instead a pad of paper boo.. That motivated me to go out and get the older version....

Thread: Card Football vs. the Upcoming NCAA Hand-Off

CPaladino — 2008-04-27T05:40:13+00:00

So is the upcoming (summer '08) NCAA Hand-Off game basically a "revision 2.0" version of Card Football?

I've been looking around for Card Football to no avail, and if the mechanics are similar (and enchanced/honed) it may behoove me to just wait until NCAA comes to retail.

Thread: UFL Kickoff: New Jersey v. Las Vegas

FezAZ — 2008-03-02T21:21:36+00:00

Led by Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, the UFL is slated to begin in 2008. We played our first game of Card Football with our version of that league's kick off.

Game 1 featured the Las Vegas Outlaws at the New Jersey Generals.

Though we were familar with the rules, but sides played conservatively and traded missed Field Goal attempts to finish the first quarter scoreless. In the 2nd quarter the Outlaws used some timely plays to take a 7-0 lead on a long pass to the end zone. The Outlaws' lead was short-lived as the Generals roared down field inside the 2 minute warning to tie the game 7-7. The Outlaws responded with an impressive drive in the final seconds to get into FG range. Sadly, they missed the FG again despite being in range. Halftime: 7 to 7.

The 3rd quarter was full of tough hits and nasty play as both sides suffered injuries and many near-fumbles (Not one fumble in the game despite about a dozen rolls of the fumble die). At the end of the 3rd Quarter, New Jersey had the lead 10-7. By the fourth quarter both teams had figured out how to exploit power hands and turnovers were mounting. Just as Las Vegas was about to score, a timely power hand gave New Jersey the ball with good field position. Just before the 2 minute warning New Jersey scored again to take a 17-7 lead.

With time running out, NJ went for the "killing blow" by playing a nasty flush power hand. Luckily for LV, it responded with a power hand of its own (a full house) which enabled the Outlaws to turn an almost certain turnover into a 50 yard gain. With just seconds to go, LV scored on a short pass to make it 17-14. LV used its timeouts to improve its hand and went for the onside kick. LV manged to convert the kick by winning three straight hands without replenishing cards. The Generals couldn't believe the game was slipping away, but unfortunately the Outlaws were out of time outs and didnt have enough decent cards to get into Field Goal range for the tie before the game ended. A great game won by New Jersey 17-14.

If all games are this fun and tense, the UFL should do well...

Image

jsper — 2008-02-09T12:53:31+00:00

Cover of rulebook

Thread: Re: Timing of extra card plays (pair and higher)

sdiberar — 2008-01-09T14:55:39+00:00

Rick,
Your position is persuasive, and I can probably twist Glaze's arm to try it that way next time.

Thread: Re: Timing of extra card plays (pair and higher)

rdjanssen — 2008-01-08T22:52:24+00:00

This is interesting because we play it differently. The rules say something about playing one card first so as not to "tip off the other player." It doesn't say you do this so you can alternate adding cards if you're behind. To me this implies that if you intend to play a pair you can't change your mind if you see you are beating your opponent with a single card.

The way we play is simply calling, "One, two, three...hut!" and dropping whatever card or group of cards you want to play. You just have to have them grouped in your hand properly and it seems to work very well. It definitely makes you think about playing those kings as a pair or splitting them up as singles (which can be beaten by a lowly pair of 3s).

One aspect that makes me think this is more the intent of the game is the dreaded deuce card (penalties). Penalties always "win" and go into effect. Who would use penalty cards if you get to play one card at a time? If my opponent drops a deuce I'm not about to drop my power hand and lose it! By requiring both players to commit and play their intended cards all at once adds much more of a psychological aspect to the game. One of my fondest memories of this game so far is when my opponent on 3rd and 10 dropped a flush while I dropped a deuce, which he couldn't decline. His 50 yard gain (and first down) turned into a five yard gain (automatic first down, though)!

Any thoughts?

Thread: Re: Blocks

rdjanssen — 2008-01-08T22:32:34+00:00

Yeah, this rule screwed me once. After my opponent scored a touchdown and we drew up to five cards I had a straight in my hand! But I had to play a card to block his stupid extra point, thus ruining my power hand.

Image

jsper — 2008-01-03T15:11:41+00:00

Side of the box

Image

jsper — 2008-01-03T14:54:10+00:00

Back of the box

Image

jsper — 2008-01-03T14:51:52+00:00

Cover high resolution scan

Thread: Re: Blocks

P H Lewis — 2007-12-13T07:27:26+00:00

According to the two page rules summary in the game, you must play a card. See the second side of the sheet under the heading Special Teams (Kicking and Returns.)

Thread: Re: Wow! What a surprise...

Domino Man — 2007-11-28T02:28:59+00:00

Icebreaker is much faster paced and has less strategy. Sometimes you feel like you're along for the ride. We enjoy it, but it definitely is a different beast from card football.

We were also surprised by this game. I don't know if I'll ever tackle the advanced game because the basic rules bring it right to the depth I like this. If I want more serious football I'll play bowl bound or pizza box football......

Thread: Re: Wow! What a surprise...

stormseeker75 — 2007-11-27T21:21:09+00:00

If you like this game, check out their NHL Ice Breaker game which is a very similar game engine but in a hockey setting.

Thread: Wow! What a surprise...

tpelletier — 2007-11-27T20:09:02+00:00

First, some disclaimers: 1) I love football 2) I love any game I can get my wife to play 3) My wife likes, but does not love football.

I decided to pick up Card Football because of disclaimer #1. That being said, I assumed, like many other games, I would struggle to find someone to play with. I was also a little unsure at the concept of a poker oriented game crossed with football. Well, what a great surprise I found! Not only does this game capture a lot of the strategy and the excitement of football, but it is also a game my wife loves to play!

Card Football is built on the foundational rule of high card wins. Each card has the potential to be used for Offense, Defense, or Special Teams. So, when you are on offense, if you play a 6 of hearts and the defense plays a 4 of spades, you get to go 6 yards. Conversely, if you play the 4 and the defense plays the 6, you will be stopped for no yards. This is obviously a simple example and the game has the potential for long bombs, fumbles, interceptions, field goals, safeties, blitzes, etc., but it is all based on this simple concept. All that being said, this game requires a lot of strategy. Managing your high quality cards requires a lot of thought. Should you use them to cause a turnover on defense but then have no power for offense? Should you try for big plays on offense but then leave yourself open when it comes time to play defense?

The game comes with very high quality components and almost anything that happens in football is simulated in the game (up to and even including injuries). If you love football (or, even if you are like my wife and only "like" football) I can not recommend this game enough. Great fun!!

Thread: Blocks

Ronaldo — 2007-11-05T03:31:10+00:00

Do you HAVE to try to block: punts, FGs, EPs? Or, is it optional - and you could refrain from playing any cards at all?

Thank you.

Thread: Re: Card Football: Best new football game in years!

Sphere — 2007-09-21T07:08:36+00:00

This thread seems a bit incoherent now that Ray's post has been removed. His disappointment lay in the fact that he was looking for something that felt a bit more like football. I share that sentiment.

This game has a football theme pasted on, but plays like a card game, not like football. That will work for some, but those who want to think about formations, blocking schemes and pass patterns rather than poker hands will do better elsewhere.

Thread: Re: Card Football: Best new football game in years!

Tygo — 2007-09-21T06:04:14+00:00

I had the same niggling questions about penalty cards but we stumbled onto the real use for them.

Play them when your opponent plays a monster hand. The play is whistled down and their monster hand is wasted.

I happened to play a 2 while holding 4 of 5 of a royal flush and he played a pair of aces. The play was whistled dead, his aces were pitched and he gained 5 yards.

Up until then we had the same issues with the penalties, and realized they were anti-monster hand cards. You just have to try to pick your spot. (Or call a timeout)

Thread: Re: More Questions?

Kalidor — 2007-07-01T23:09:08+00:00

regarding the feild goal question....
What you asked means that your current line of scrimmage must be within the yardage stated. In your example, 43 yard line or inwards...

Image

Gwyran — 2007-06-20T11:56:36+00:00

In action at "El Laberinto" (Madrid, Spain)

Thread: Re: More Questions?

crusher100 — 2007-04-22T17:20:44+00:00

thanks.I use it this way.Just to confirm.

Thread: Re: More Questions?

diceshaker — 2007-04-22T16:27:54+00:00

Hi,

The "To Go" on the scoreboard relates to how many yards the offence requires to gain a first down e.g. "2nd Down and 6 Yards to Go". The "Ball On" refers to the line of scrimmage.

Thread: Re: More Questions?

diceshaker — 2007-04-22T16:26:54+00:00

Hi,

The "To Go" on the scoreboard relates to how many yards the offence requires to gain a first down e.g. "2nd Down and 6 Yards to Go". The "Ball On" refers to the line of scrimmage.

Thread: More Questions?

crusher100 — 2007-04-21T07:43:06+00:00

I have more questions after bought this game:

1 - What are the "To go" and "Ball on" for in the scoreboard?
2 - When in a Field goald says "within 43 yards", does this mean that you can use the card from 1 to 43 yards for a field goald?

Also I would like to say this is a great game....

Thanks.

Thread: Questions and ideas

referee — 2007-03-21T22:25:43+00:00

Hi there. I've just bought this game. Haven't played it yet.

One of the main, er, complaints I see in this pages it's how easy is to draw into a power hand, since you usually play only one card per play, which gives a high turnover rate... Maybe it could be taken down a notch? As I put on another thread, for instance:
Straight and Flush (the drawing hands) 10 yards sack/loss
Full House and Four of a Kind (the pairing hands) automatic turnover
Straight Flush or Royal Flush, automatic turnover and TD return.
Would this work?

Another idea could be maybe forcing some random discards on timeouts? My current idea would be when you call a timeout roll both dice, for each "non-standard" result (ie each result other than Good and Holds On) you can discard a random card from the opponent. This rule could be turned off after the two-minute warning. This yields 9/16 chance of 0 discards, 6/16 of 1 discard, and 1/16 of 2 discards (average 0.5 cards).

A rules question: Can jokers be paired? (A pair of jokers beating any other pair), and if so, can they make part of Two Pair? I know jokers can't be used to complete power hands, but can a three of a kind and two jokers be a full house? If you have four of a kind and a joker, do you need to play the joker in order to have your four of a kind?

Also, since joker is higher than ace, would J-Q-K-A-Joker work? (Since Joker isn't suited, this can't be a straight flush, but could it be a valid "regular" straight?

Football is not too common in my country, so I wonder if I want to play with player chips, Maybe I could make two balanced teams beforehand? How would one go to make these teams? And speaking of drafting player chips, what would be a good method? Maybe split by colors and do a 1-2-2-1 routine? Silver should be started by one player and red and blue by the other player.

Is there an expansion planned? I think more player chips, maybe? The ranks of the players suggest that. And more decks with some theme, but you start overcomplicating things...

Wacky nitpickiness: If both players play a 2, should the penalties offset? What would happen if a player decided to pair a 2? Can I play a 2 of spades after seeing the opposing card trounces me? What if I pair my card and then pair it along with a pair of 2?

This post is quite long as of now, I think (THINK!) I didn't forget anything... Thanks for your time and answers

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

referee — 2007-03-20T20:35:41+00:00

Maybe (I'm planning on buying the game, but still a tiny bit undecided) the power hands in defense should be taken a notch down? I don't know... maybe something like straight or flush = 10 yards sack, full house or four of a kind = INT (or fumbled snap recovered? can a power hand INT be gotten on a running play?), straight flush or royal flush = INT return TD. Do you think this would work?

Or maybe a way to combat the power hand building would be forcing some discards somehow? I had thought maybe tied with the timeouts, so you could call a timeout if you suspected your opponent is building a power hand, but I don't know, it seems a good signal that this could be the case is the opponing playing poor plays, and that isn't really a time where a team would call a timeout...

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

franklincobb — 2007-02-24T00:34:04+00:00

I wasn't actually waiting until that point before dropping my power hand...it just so happened that by the time he got to the 20, I finished one. If I finished one sooner than that, of course I'd use it rather than break it up.

For instance...at one point I had four clubs, one of them a King. Instead of burning the King for a big stop, I just kept tossing the fifth chaffe card (regardless of result) until I hit the flush.

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

Beery — 2007-02-23T22:41:40+00:00

franklincobb wrote:
...My strategy was to play lower numbers while my opponent was on his side of the field, building towards a strong hand, using TOs as necessary.

By the time he hit near my 20, I had a flush or straight, boom--instant turnover...

Hmm. The thing is, if your strategy is to always play low cards until he gets close to your red zone it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that your opponent will breeze through the midfield and all the turnovers will occur in or near your red zone. It's not that the game is tending to make you play that way - your basic philosophy is to play the game that way. What you're doing is fielding a team with a strong last ditch defense. It's a dangerous strategy because it means waiting until the last moment to play your power cards. If you fail (i.e. if he's doing the opposite and building his power play offensively or if by chance he's built an unbeatable hand when he's on offense in the midfield), he's pretty much guaranteed a touchdown.

It seems to me that your best course of action would be to start building a strong hand whenever you see the possibility, and not just at specific points to avoid what is, in your mind, the worst case eventuality (seeing your opponent in your red zone). After all, if you could get your power play turnover in at the 50 yard line or at his 30 the result is the same, and it's far better to gain possession further up the field. If you turn the ball over as soon as possible you're more likely to get a touchdown than if you wait until you have 80 yards to run. Plus, the game has its own limits set on plays in the red zone, making it harder to score when inside that zone. You may find that your power hands are better spent elsewhere.

In short, it seems to me that your philosophy prevents your opponent getting into your endzone (a good idea on the face of it), but it also HELPS your opponent get close to your endzone (dangerous), and it reduces your own chances of scoring big (because you often get the ball with 80 yards to go until you can get near the opponent's goal line).

By the way, I don't get the impression you're negative about the game. As far as I can see you're just discussing potential weaknesses and examining the way the game plays. As a person who loves to investigate the way games work I find such discussions a lot of fun.

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

franklincobb — 2007-02-23T21:47:42+00:00

Yeah, I suppose the "potential" fumble idea works. It's really easy to imagine them scrambling for a loose ball 6-8 times in a game, which seems high...these could just be an attempt to strip the ball that fails.

With power hands, we're seeing maybe 6 a game, I guess? My strategy was to play lower numbers while my opponent was on his side of the field, building towards a strong hand, using TOs as necessary.

By the time he hit near my 20, I had a flush or straight, boom--instant turnover.

Like I said, take all this with a grain of salt, we've only logged 2.5 plays of the game. I do like it, and for $20 a football fan can't go wrong. I'll give it several more plays before I decide exactly how I feel about the game overall.

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

Beery — 2007-02-23T21:35:36+00:00

Ah I see. Well the fumble die has a turnover rate of only 1 in every 6 rolls (1 in 12 for the automatic turnover and on average 1 in every two fumble rolls, which also works out to 1 in 12), so you are going to be tossing it six times for every loss. To me this die roll would seem to add a bit of tension, which is good, but for me it would be frustrating if the ball was constantly being lost to fumbles.

If it's the overall number of fumbles that's bothering you, there are a couple of options - you can either remove some or all the aces/jokers from the pack, or you can just assume that the fumbles aren't really fumbles but rather only 'potential' fumbles.

On the power hand issue, I guess the opponent is always going to try to build a power hand when he's on defense in his own half. The question is, is this happening too much, or does it only seem to be happening too much because it's so frustrating when it happens?

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

franklincobb — 2007-02-23T21:02:46+00:00

Ian--

Good suggestions. I think I should be more clear--there are so many fumbles during a game, but not fumbles LOST during a game. It seems like you're reaching for the fumble die quite a bit, but rarely is a fumble lost (in the above game, only one fumble was actually lost, though there were multiple rolls for it).

Really, the most problematic thing is the Power Hand = Interception. It is much, much easier than I thought to put together power hands, and often you'll work hard to get near the red zone only to be picked off by a power hand. This seems to happen a lot.

I was quite pleased in this session to score two TDs the "old-fashioned way" (by regular card play, not power hands), so it's possible I'm just catching on to the rythym of the game. My brother is still getting the hang of it--his only TD came on the Pick Six when I was pinned fairly deeply.

It's a fun game, though. It's amazing what you get components-wise for the $20.

Thread: Re: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

Beery — 2007-02-23T20:35:58+00:00

I'm not too conversant with the rules yet - I just got the game and haven't had chance to play yet, but if you feel the scoring rate is low and the turnover rate too high, couldn't you just replace the blue d12 die with a regular d6 die and have 1 be a turnover or fumble, and then if it is, another die roll determines which it is (1-2 = turnover, 3-6 = fumble)? That would reduce the odds of a fumble from 1 in 6 to 1 in 9 and the odds of a turnover would go from 1 in 12 to 1 in 18. By simply using a different die and rolling one more time the score will go up and there will be only 2/3rds as many fumbles or turnovers.

Alternatively if you buy a 20 sided die (the sort they use in some role playing games) you could write 'fumble' on two of the sides and 'turnover' on another side. This would reduce the odds of a fumble or turnover a tiny bit more (to 1 in 10 and 1 in 20 respectively) but it might work well, since it's all done with one roll (as opposed to two with the d6 method). With such a system you might expect game scores to increase significantly since fewer turnovers will mean you get touchdowns more often.

Thread: Re: [Review] (#500!) Card Football

Beery — 2007-02-23T19:48:01+00:00

But in reality the average yardage gained by a rush is only four yards. In other words it is often going to be the case in real life that runs alone cannot complete a ten yard drive - many times the players are going to have to pass the ball on at least one play, and that's how many drives work out - there's either a passing play made or the ball ends up being punted. Passing plays, when successfully made, have an average yardage gain of 12 yards, but the risk of either no yardage gain at all or an interception is much greater.

Thread: Re: [Review] (#500!) Card Football

gatchaman — 2007-02-23T19:27:51+00:00

I appreciate this review because it takes the game for what it is -- accurately described as a card game with a football theme. It is not a simulation of football, and doesn't try to be.

There's a larger point to be made here, about how sports games somehow get held to a different standard than other German-style games. It's too bad, because I would love to see more sports-themed games that are fun to play. But the sports games are always expected to be an accurate simulation of the sport, instead of just a fun theme on a game. Whereas most German-style games have thin, vague themes that we don't know as much about, so we don't expect them to simulate the theme exactly.

Anyways, about the idea of the more-likely-to-win cards having the lower results. I don't think that would work, because it would be impossible to sustain a drive with 5-yard runs. If the high cards, the ones that are sure to win, were the "sure plays" in football, you would run out of high cards before you got near the end zone.

Thread: Philly defeats Nashville 21-10

franklincobb — 2007-02-19T21:16:56+00:00

My brother and I took out Card Football today at lunch, trying to see if our previous session was actually representative of how Card Football plays out. (Our previous game is detailed in another session report, where Indy defeated Chicago, 7-5).

Jeremy chose Nashville and I selected Philly. This time, instead of trying to "pre-determine" a realistic makeup for each team, we just did a normal draft for player chips. Essentially, the quality of players goes down in each color, so the gray were drafted first, then moving downward.

Jeremy took the high-rated QB, and I took the best RB. Other highlights included him taking the kicker and I taking the best TE.

He won the coin-toss and deferred the kick-off. Unlike our previous game, I managed a sustained drive, moving all the way downfield...until of course the dreaded INTERCEPTION~! showed up again.

Luckily for me, I had been working on a power hand (straight), and drew into the last component I needed. Just as easily as I had turned the ball over, I got it back, drove back into the red zone, and this time was able to put it in from the 5. Touchdown! Man, that felt great.

These two drives had managed to deplete the draw deck pretty quickly (Jeremy and I had played several pairs during the quarter), so we moved on to the 2nd quarter, 7-0.

I wanted to try a new strategy with the penalty cards...instead of burning timeouts to get rid of them, I tried to play them when I felt a big gainer was coming. Sure enough, I managed to hit the Joker with the black 2 "prior to the snap" penalty...gladly giving up 5 yards to avoid the monster gain.

At any rate, Jeremy was still driving, crossing midfield again before hitting the red zone. However...another power hand was waiting for him, as I finished a Flush to take the ball back.

That didn't last, as when I crossed midfield, I was hit with a Joker for the turnover...ouch!

Jeremy was driving, but the clock wasn't on his side as the half was winding down. He did manage to get inside the 15, but wasn't confident in his remaining cards to put it in the endzone. He opted for the field goal, and since he had chosen the kicker it was automatic. The score was now 7-3 with a few ticks left on the clock, but I "took the knee" to close out the half.

I was forced to kickoff to him to begin the second half, and again he was able to put together a decent drive, often hitting low pairs to overcome my Jacks and Queens at just the right time. However, a Time Out during a crucial point in his drive let me complete the straight, and I hit my THIRD power hand for the game, taking the ball over and also getting a great return in the process.

That next series was a see-saw affair--he'd hit me with a huge blitz loss, then I'd complete a first down play. Back and forth, but the forth was overcoming the backs almost every time. I drew into a Joker near the 25, and just like that I was up 14-3.

I kicked off, and again Jeremy was driving. Unlike our last game where each drive felt like an exercise in futility, it seemed like real progress was being made on every exchange.

Yet...

AGAIN he got nailed with a turnover deep in my red zone (this time on a Fumble card that he rolled "Turned over" on...bad luck!) I was at the 12, and I wanted to play conservatively, planning on punting, and for two downs this worked fine.

However, on third down, unbeknownst to me he had completed his Straight power hand, and before I knew it I had just thrown a "Pick Six", as he intercepted the ball and easily ran it back into the end zone. The third quarter drew to a close, with the score 14-10.

Lucklily for me, I had been slowly building up some decent cards and at one point had all cards of Jack or higher in my hand. This meant that my next drive was a good one....first downs were plentiful, and better than that with all these cardplays winning hands, the clock was movin'. However, again I got Joker picked at a bad moment, and turned the ball over. Jeremy was able to put together a NICE drive to follow that, as I had burned several good cards in an attempt to score. His drive stalled near my red zone though, and he went for it on 4th down from the 18 and came up short...turnover on downs!

I got the ball back and was VERY mindful about playing black (pass) cards if I could help it. I got stung a couple of times with potential fumbles but held on, and I was able to sustain a very nice, long drive. Once I got into the redzone, a pair of Aces sealed the deal...touchdown! 21-10.

There were a few cards left in the deck at this point, but Jeremy decided to call the game, not feeling confident that he could put together two scoring drives (plus, our lunch hour was up). So we finished the game, final score Philly 21, Nashville 10.

THOUGHTS: I like this game--it's fun. One thing I don't like, and something that football fans will just have to overcome if they are to enjoy this game, is that the turnover rate (or at least the turnover potential rate) is very, very high.

It's not uncommon to see 4-6 picks in a game, and it seems that the Fumble die is also tossed at least 2-3 times per game.

Also, because of the dominance of power hands, you should be building towards one at all times. This means tossing out nickel and dime gainers when it doesn't count. I used this strategy this time, playing a 2 Penalty twice to save me timeouts (to see more cards from the deck) and several times choosing to play obviously inferior cards just to get them out of the way of my power hands. This really worked for me, with three power hands completed in the game (and at one point I had three Aces, looking for a full house, before the game state reached a point where it made sense just to play them as a pair).

So it looks like yes, you CAN score in this game, as this one had quite a lot of action. And while power hands were influential in two of the touchdowns, two of my touchdowns came from old-fashioned card playing, no power hands at all.

If we ever get a chance to play with a little more than a lunch hour to try it with, I'm going to take stats next time just to see how closely they model football. A lot of the times it "feels" right, but the turnover ratio seems quite high (and that can be rather frustrating when you're the one turning over the ball).

I'm going to get one more game of this in before I do a proper review, though honestly I feel the "6"-ish rating this floats at currently is probably spot on.

Thread: Re: The Lowest Rated Superbowl in History: Colts win, 7-5

franklincobb — 2007-02-15T02:39:48+00:00

There are times when you're building toward a "bigger" hand and are forced to choose between playing a big card or break up your potential power hand, but it does seem pretty easy to keep enough in reserve to shut down the offense. Still, the inverse would have to be true--you'd have enough to also break through on offense. Perhaps we are playing too conservatively, who knows?

As for Pizza Box's run game...I'm actually surprised to hear you say that--I've found the Run is often a guaranteed yardage gainer. I remember busting out 10+ yard runs at least twice in the last game we played of it. But, as you know, dice can be fickle, fickle things sometimes!

Thread: Re: The Lowest Rated Superbowl in History: Colts win, 7-5

rlfix — 2007-02-14T22:44:31+00:00

While I think Card Football is OK, I do not think it is the really good "card management" game some others think. Since you refill your hand every play, you always seem to be able to save that one card, especially on defense, that can keep from getting yourself burned. I like Card Hockey much better, not so much because it is a better game, probably because there are not as many hockey games out there and you do not re-fill your hand every time you play a card.

I also agree about Pizza Box Football, but my main complaint there is that it seems to me that the running game generates less yardage than one would expect. The 3 times I played it I think we had 5 runs total over 8 yards. Maybe we were picking run defenses too well, but the running game seemed too dry there.

Thread: The Lowest Rated Superbowl in History: Colts win, 7-5

franklincobb — 2007-02-14T14:21:05+00:00

We recently acquired Card Football and I was eager to give it a try. The "light sports game" is something of a holy grail for me--I've tried them all, from the excellent (Sportsclix) to the so-so (MLB Showdown) to the absolutely terrible (NBA Showdown...the less said, the better).

I've tried Pizza Box Football and while I think it's fun, the lack of defensive interaction and the length are somewhat killers for me. So when I heard about Card Football, with its 40-minute or less playing time, I knew I'd have to give it a shot.

I'll save my overall thoughts for a review that I'll write after I've played a few more games of this, so let's get on with our Superbowl report. With all the influx of Pizza Box Football Superbowl reports (thanks to the great guys who make Pizza Box sending out the free teams for everyone to use), we thought it would be fun to try out the system with a Chicago/Indianapolis match.

I tried to custom-make the teams that would matchup to their relative strengths--for example, the Colts got the QB 100 chip to represent Peyton, the Bears got the strongest LB token to represent Urlacher, the Colts got the strong Safety chip for Bob Sanders, etc.

We kicked off, and little did we know that apparently it was a rainy, blustery day at our Super Bowl too...

Jeremy had chosen to defer the opening kickoff, and bad fortune was with the Colts right from the gate--he pinned me at the one yard line. Then, to add insult to injury, he played a pair that caused me to lose 4 yards on my next play--Safety! Just like that, the crushing Bears defense had come up with a big stuff. The score was now 0-2, and the Colts kicked off.

I shouldn't have worried...we were talking about Rex "Chokeman" here. After a pretty good drive, the Bears neared the Red Zone...but then I busted out a red 10 to his black 10. Seeing the opportunity, I paired up the other black 10...Interception! I might add that during this drive, there was already one Fumble that was recovered by the Bears...already things were looking pretty sloppy.

The Colts were now driving, but couldn't put much together--most of my good plays were negated by small pairs, and I had to punt.

The Bears were driving again, and AGAIN we had a fumble situation. Still, he held on. However, there was nothing doing on this drive, and he was forced to punt.

We were in the second quarter now, and honestly very little was happening offensively for either of us. But then on my next drive, I made it inside the 50...and busted out a HUGE flush for the 50 yard gain and the TD drive. The Colts were now up 7-2.

Neither of us could do much after that, and went into halftime with the score still 7-2. Oddly enough Prince didn't show up to play his greatest hits, so we just went straight into the third quarter.

More comedy ensued during the third quarter as we both had fumbles, but this time I recovered one of his. Still, I was getting nowhere--I'd play a Queen or Ace only to have them trumped by a small pair for the stop. The fourth quarter came up with the score still 7-2 after some rather boring play, all told. The defense was suffocating on both sides!

Rex suddenly came alive with a huge drive, and was knocking on the red zone door. My brother then played his team card--an automatic gain...unless your opponent has a power hand. Little did he know I had just drawn into a straight, and that resulted in an automatic turnover. More overpowering defense had stopped the Bears again, and by now it was getting frustrating (for both of us, really).

I was able to hold on to the ball for awhile, but eventually had to punt again. Time was running out as we hit the two-minute warning, and this was Rex's last chance to make a play. He was able to get to the red zone but ran out of steam once he got there...so my brother took the face-saving field goal to make the final score 7-5.

Needless to say, if this had been the Super Bowl on television, I think we'd have put the general populace to sleep.

We're going to play some more to see if we can't get better results. This time I'll make sure to check the team cards for the teams we choose and make sure that we draft chips accordingly. The player chips did seem to make a few differences here and there--like for Indy, their team card provided me with a free first down thanks to Peyton's additional yardage, and there was a stuff or two where the defensive chips added on to the loss.

Right now, though--seems very difficult to score. Hopefully this was a freak playing and our next game will see more lively offense (as I've read other session reports with 17-10 scoring, I'm hopeful).

Thread: Re: [Review] (#500!) Card Football

Beery — 2007-02-03T14:40:33+00:00

TomVasel wrote:
I'm not sure that I like that the higher numbered cards are also the higher yardage plays (I think it would be neat to see it the other way around), but the game still works.

Could a couple of house rules make it work the other way round? I'm concerned about this too. I'm actually designing a football card game myself that has 'lower card wins' as a basis of the game, as I figured that would work best with football. But I was thinking that it might be worth scrapping my design and just playing Card Football instead. However, after reading your review it seems like Card Football is not a very realistic portrayal of the sport and the game seemingly lacks the 'feel' of playing football (which is a major goal of the game I'm designing).

Thread: Re: Solitaire Version questions

p-dogger — 2007-01-30T20:49:34+00:00

Hi Jeff,

Great questions. Hope this helps.

Paolo

diceshaker wrote:
First occurs when the "system" player wants to attempt a FG. How do I make sure that the kick would be long enough? Do I just flip the top card over on the pile and hope that it is suitable, or is there another way?

In single-player mode, you would simply flip the top card and hope that it is suitable, followed by a roll of the dice for accuracy. However, we will note in our FAQ that "system" field goal attempts should only be attempted at or within the 28 yard line. This should make things a little more equitable.

diceshaker wrote:
The second was a situation where the system fumbled the ball on the last play of a quarter. I recovered the ball and wanted to return the ball but I couldn't as I had ran out of cards and the rulebook says I cannot refill my hand of cards until the play is over. What is the ruling?

Since the play isn't over yet and you have simply run out of cards, you are permitted to take a card off the top of the draw pile for the return. If all the cards have already been played through, shuffle all the discards and take the top-card for the return. Once that play is completed, the quarter is over and the entire deck should again be shuffled to start the next quarter.

So, it is true that you cannot refill your hand until the play is over, but you are permitted to take a card off the draw pile and complete the play if you run out of cards before the play is over.

diceshaker wrote:
One last question concerns the team chips. Why are there team chips for some cities in the NFL such as Chicago and Indianapolis and not for others such as Buffalo? I can understand rights issues with the NFL regarding use of team names and insignia etc. but not for using a cities' name surely?

Our selection of team chips was based on many of the strong pro football cities that currently have franchises (in the US and Canada), as well as a few others that could or should (like Los Angeles and Las Vegas). We certainly did not want to misrepresent our game and mimic all the cities in the National Football League, as it could potentially hurt our chances of someday doing a licensed version. Also, our feeling was that the New York chip could represent New York State as a whole.

Thanks again for the feedback. It is most appreciated.

PD

Thread: Solitaire Version questions

diceshaker — 2007-01-28T14:00:23+00:00

Hi, I received Card Football for Christmas and really enjoy playing. However, I have reached situations in the solitaire version that I would like clarification on.

First occurs when the "system" player wants to attempt a FG. How do I make sure that the kick would be long enough? Do I just flip the top card over on the pile and hope that it is suitable, or is there another way?

The second was a situation where the system fumbled the ball on the last play of a quarter. I recovered the ball and wanted to return the ball but I couldn't as I had ran out of cards and the rulebook says I cannot refill my hand of cards until the play is over. What is the ruling?

One last question concerns the team chips. Why are there team chips for some cities in the NFL such as Chicago and Indianapolis and not for others such as Buffalo? I can understand rights issues with the NFL regarding use of team names and insignia etc. but not for using a cities' name surely?

Any help would be appreciated.

Many thanks for a great game (I also enjoy the Card Hockey).

Thread: Session Report

tharkad — 2006-12-25T08:04:56+00:00

Card Football Session Report

I played my first game of Card Football on 12/22/2006. The game arrived the day before and I was very eager to try it out. I played with John Metzger, my Mostly Mariners podcast partner. I had read the rules that morning and while setting up I handed him the handy 12 rule cards to read over. That took a few minutes and he was ready to play. I decided to play without the player chips for our first time through. They don't complicate the game very much but I didn't think we had enough time over lunch to deal with the draft. John chose to be Boston while I was Seattle.

Early on we were getting used to things and taking time to read the cards carefully. Most plays were single cards. As things progressed we started to play more pairs which made the game very interesting. After going up 3-0 John was driving again when I found myself with four cards to the flush. I called time out and discarded twice to finish it off - what a great feeling. John was on my three yard line when he played a high card for what he thought would be the touchdown. I dropped the flush power hand for an automatic turnover and added a nice 20 yard return. I proceed to drive down and score a touchdown and the half ended 7-3 Seattle. We both realized while setting up for the second half that we forgot to look for the team cards.

In the second half John was looking more for power hands and finally got one to score a touchdown. I scored again as well and added a field goal to make it 17-10. John was driving again when I made another flush. This time he played his team card and was quite dismayed when I played the flush. After consulting the rule book John conceded the turn over and that about ended the game.

We had a great time playing and will certainly play again. The play mechanic got to be quite tense as I would play a high card for a long run only to see John make a low pair to stop it. We've already come up with a few house rules that we're going to try and we'll play with the player chips next time. Card Football was a light fun game and I recommend it.

Thread: Re: Player Chips (and errata)

edralla — 2006-09-29T05:23:50+00:00

I have uploaded a .doc file with a weighted ranking for each player chip. The ranking is based on two factors:
1. number of opportunities to influence the outcome of a card on one pass through the deck
2. average outcome (in yards gained/lost) per opportunity

I weighted the number of opportunities higher than the outcome, as the overall results are cumulative.

In the case of the kicker, the weight was based on the number of the relative scoring opportunities of that chip compared to the rest assuming you are already in the Red Zone. The math in this case was a little more "fuzzy", but based on numerous sessions, I think it's pretty close.

I'd appreciate your comments!

Thread: Re: Hand Management

dr glaze et al — 2006-09-27T12:06:45+00:00

Great article!

Thread: Re: Interception

alextrov — 2006-09-27T08:39:47+00:00

Thread: Hand Management

edralla — 2006-09-27T04:26:25+00:00

While there are elements of football strategy in this game, at its heart it is still a card game based on classic card game strategies. As such, one of the keys to successful "play calling" is effective hand management.

Our group has found that playing weak cards for two or three turns in order to build a Power Hand can be a very effective strategy. If the defense is "4 to a flush" for example, and deep in his opponent's end of the field, it can be very effective to allow the opponent a couple of first downs while you slough off cards to get your flush and force the turnover!

For pairs, pay attention to field position and desired outcomes. The order in which you play them can make a big difference. For example, holding a pair of queens on offense, you will normally play a red one before a black. Red earns you an automatic first down, but black is a gain of 15 yards! Of course, if you are further than 15 yards from the 1st down marker, you would reverse this.

Also, with pairs and three of a kind, take advantage of the "first play one card at the same time as your opponent" rule. If you are behind, play the additional card(s) necessary to win. But, if your single card is higher, and the opponent doesn't pair his card, you've already won that down ... you may want to hold the extra card in reserve!

On the other hand, if you were playing to a Power Hand, you will generally play it even if you've won the hand already, since the results are often so much better than with a single card. This may also hold true for a pair if your second card can force an injury or a possible turnover.

Timeouts can be a very effective hand management tool. Going back to the first example, if you've sloughed 3 times and still haven't hit the Power Hand, you may want to use a timeout. Even if all three of your opponent's cards were in your suit, the statistical odds are that you will hit the flush about 1 in 4 times if you draw two cards. The odds are nearly even if you take two timeouts. And, even if you don't hit the flush, you have about a 50% chance of pairing at least one of your cards.

Although the value of various cards and hands resembles poker, the most effective hand management techniques are more closely related to rummy. Paying attention to what cards have already been played, and how many cards are left in the deck can make a big difference. Looking at the number of "outs" you have when drawing can influence which cards you hold and which you play right away.

While this may disillusion some of the more die-hard football fans who want to maintain the illusion, it can be a very effective strategy to win the game.

Thread: Player Chips (and errata)

edralla — 2006-09-27T03:45:05+00:00

Errata: First, we found what we believe is a misprint. The silver DE chip (rank 94) is the highest DE available, but the Queen of Hearts required a DE rank 95+. Therefore, we have been playing that the silver DE is a rank 95 so the Queen's bonus can be used.

Also, we determined the relative value of each player chip based on the number of cards that each chip can affect. Initially, we didn't see the value of having 4 QBs, 3 RBs, 3 WRs, or 3 TEs, since each player can only use one of each at any given time.

However, if a player is able to draft the top 2 of any of these positions, this can have a devastating affect on an opponent. The #1 ranked RB, for example, can use 21 cards in the deck. The #2 RB can use 12. But the number three RB can only use 9 cards! Drafting both the #1 and #2 RBs gives one player a better than 2-to-1 advantage at that position, and cuts the second players options by 25%!

While the spread is less dramatic at other positions, there are a few more that are worth noting. The #1 and #2 LBs can use 6 and 5 cards, respectively, while the #3 LB can only use 1. For WRs, the number of cards available are 8, 3, and 1!

Half of the 30 player chips can only affect 1 or 2 cards, so loading up on the big spread positions can significantly affect how often in the course of the game your opponent can take advantage of the chips you leave him. Drafting the top two QBs, RBs, WRs, and LBs (as if anyone would let you) would give you only 5 usable chips to your opponent's 9. However, you would have 49 opportunities to use card bonuses leaving him with a best case of only 29 opportunities.

Plus, if you are unfortunate enough to have your 21-card RB get injured, a 12-card backup can sure be nice to have!

Don't rule out the kicker chip. It can be a real value, but not always. The majority of cards allow a kick from inside your opponent's Red Zone, and there's only a 1-in-4 chance of missing once you're there. However, a "sure thing" on a key 4th down can swing a game. A kicker is generally better as one of your three silvers chips than the silver TE, DE, T, DT, or S chips.

All in all, the player chips add a real strategic element to the game, and it all hinges on how effectively you manage your draft!

Finally, we have toyed around with a variety of draft formats, to try to keep things relatively fair, or at least interesting. One format we really like is this. Player A picks, Player B picks, then randomly remove one silver chip. Reverse the order, pick, then remove a blue chip. Reverse, remove a red. Reverse, silver again. And so on.

Thread: Re: Card Football: Best new football game in years!

Sphere — 2006-09-26T04:05:57+00:00

I'd have to agree with Ray. In fact, maybe I can follow in his footsteps and trade my copy, now that his is gone.

Thread: Re: Card Football: Best new football game in years!

edralla — 2006-09-26T03:11:40+00:00

Ray,

I think you missed the point ... in fact, I think you missed all of them.

First, this game is not a football simulation. It's a card game with a football theme. Look at the description. It says "Card Football game play combines elements of classic card games including War, Poker and Texas Hold 'Em." It goes on to say players must decide how best to play their cards, deciding whether to play a strong card immediately, or hold it back in hopes of using it to put together a Power Hand. Nope ... "football simulation" isn't in there.

Second, the premium isn't really on high cards ... oh, sure they have their value. But, anyone who has ever played rummy or poker knows the value of putting together a great combination. Even a lowly pair of threes can counter the strongest single card in the deck! If you manage your hand right, you can cripple an opponents 80-yard drive by playing a Power Hand at just the right moment to get an interception!

You're wrong on several other points as well. Time outs during regulation in real football aren't used to save time ... they are used to regroup when the opponent shows a formation you weren't expecting. After the two-minute warning, a time-out can help you draw that critical card that gets you into field goal range ... a lot like real football!

Your field goal example is flawed as well. First, a 60-yarder isn't even possible. But, for the sake of argument, let's assume you meant 40 yards. In that case, your odds are only 14 percent (10/54 cards x 9/12 on the die). On the other hand, your odds of a 20-yarder are 64 percent (48/54 cards x 9/12 on the die).

When playing pairs or better, play calling does matter. If you have a pair of Jacks or Queens on offense, for example, leading with Red and following with Black will usually result more yardage than the other way around. Also, when using the player chips, you might pick your cards based on what players you have on the field.

As for your most basic criticism ... that there is no play-calling, even that is flawed. Play calling in football is based on a number of factors. In the end, you look at your current situation and make the best call you can in that situation at that moment. In this game, your situation is dictated by the cards you've seen played already, the cards you have in your hand at the moment, and the odds that you can improve your hand on your next draw.

If it is less than a perfect football simulation, it's still a fairly strategic, highly entertaining, and well-designed game with enough thematic elements to maintain the illusion. Sorry, but I simply can't see how you missed all of that.

Thread: Re: Card Football: Best new football game in years!

Abacab — 2006-09-12T20:48:12+00:00

Just recieved mine from Boards and Bits, as they indeed have it back in stock.

Thread: Re: Interception

Ronaldo — 2006-08-30T00:02:42+00:00

Thread: Re: Interception

Ronaldo — 2006-08-30T00:01:59+00:00

Thank you for all the input and for keeping this discussion civilized. I think the third post puts it very nicely and is likely to be the right way to play. Thanks again.

Image

p-dogger — 2006-08-15T21:28:25+00:00

Card Football - new box art (Available September 2006)

Image

Dhunam — 2006-08-08T17:28:49+00:00

Image

Dhunam — 2006-08-08T17:06:38+00:00

Image

Dhunam — 2006-08-08T17:03:35+00:00

Image

Dhunam — 2006-08-08T17:03:24+00:00