MATTHEWAC95'S PROFILE

So I have a question.

Fundamentally, my battle system is strategic in nature. It's comprised of a few simple rules that rewards tactical thinking, and when applied I believe it's going to make a great strategy game.

What bugs me, though, is that I'm not sure if it will sell as a tactical, strategic system solely with its fundamental principles, since those principles are exceedingly simple. Part of the strategy that results from the principles revolves around getting skills, and the strategy changes depending on what skills both you and your enemy gets.

My question, then, is this: how much weight will my skill design have on judging? What I was planning on doing is just making a few very, very simple skills to just showcase how the system works; however, this technically means that the skills I design in the game might not hold enough strategic value to warrant making real decisions with since I'm not planning on giving them much depth. I'm focusing almost entirely on the "how it works" part, rather than the "what it can do" part, since the latter is something with a much bigger scope than what I can cover in this contest.

If I need to design a more intricate, small network of skills for the purpose of the contest, I will, but I'd like to know before I put in all the extra work.

I think kentona means is it possible to make a skill that always targets everyone on usage, or a skill that will target a completely random battler (friend or foe) on usage.