I have some plans in the works for future cards to add to the "deck" in Incursion. Right now, as recent players know, there is a Reinforcements card and a Raid card. I'm planning a couple of others, and would like some feedback (or additional suggestions).

My concept for the General card has changed since I first thought up the game's structure. I now think a general should be deployable and redeployable like a unit, but shouldn't count as a unit, and will only die in an attack pressed to the bitter end or an unsuccessful defense. The extra die gained in this territory from having the general will be 8-sided, numbered 0-7, or possibly 1-7 with a repeated number somewhere; maybe even 1-8. However, the problem with this concept is that there's little incentive to hold onto the card; it makes sense to deploy it immediately. The only incentive I can see is that a concerned player may want to wait until they're under attack, lest they place the general too soon and leave a more valuable territory exposed. Is this good enough?

Another card I have planned is Fortifications. This will add a number of defensive fortifications (I'm thinking 3) to a territory. Wherever fortifications are present, +1 is added to every die on a defense roll (not cumulative). A fortification is lost (but only one at a time) after a roll if the defender is the only one to lose units; this seemed the most sensible approach, though there may be others. Fortifications may not be moved, and will go to the victor if a territory is conquered with its defenses still in place. It will only be playable on your own turn (but at any time during the turn). The question, though, is whether the risk of playing it too soon or in the wrong place is incentive enough to hold onto it.

To give a fair idea of how this would play out, imagine an attacker rolling 5-2-1 against a defender who rolls 3-2. This is normally one loss for each player.

Attacker has a general:

• General die is 5+: (5+)-5-2-1 vs. 3-2, attacker wins both
  
• General die is 3 or 4: 5-(3+)-2-1 vs. 3-2, attacker wins both
  
• General die is 2-: 5-2-(2-)-1 vs. 3-2, one loss each
  
  Defender has a general: (still only two dice are compared)
  
• General die is 5+: 5-2-1 vs. (5+)-3-2, defender wins both
  
• General die is 3 or 4: 5-2-1 vs. (3-4)-3-2, one loss each
  
• General die is 2+: 5-2-1 vs. either 3-(2+)-2, one loss each
  
• General die is 1-: 5-2-1 vs. either 4-2-(1-), one loss each
  
  Now look at a bit of breakdown when the defender has fortifications:
  
  Defender has fortifications:
  
• 5-2-1 vs. 3-1 (+1 modifier for 4-2), one loss each
  
• 5-2-1 vs. 4-4 (+1 modifier for 5-5), defender wins both
  
• 5-4-2 vs. 2-2 (+1 modifier for 3-3), attacker wins both; one fortification falls
  
  The die modifier for fortifications is a serious odds tilt, which is why I think 3 per card are enough.
  
  Right now the incentives and disincentives for Reinforcements and Raid are simple but pretty good. Reinforcements is best played at the beginning of your turn, when it's worth the most; after that it yields only half value. If you save the card, its value increases if someone else plays Reinforcements. However, because it can be played out of turn, there is little chance of capturing the card unless your soon-to-be-eliminated opponent happens to be a complete moron.
  Raid is sensible to hold onto unless there's a stockpile you can get to right away. With it, you can steal back resources captured by another player, or you can wait for a second Raid card (or third, or fourth) to increase your range. A player with 2 Raid cards can steal resources from beyond an enemy's border.
  
  Lummox JR