Guest posts by Beo

1

Card Ideas and Art / Re: Quantum Focus

« on: March 18, 2010, 03:33:25 am »

Nice quickie card! 

yeah, can't say I know much about coding, and especially not about Elements coding.  Thought it might have some particular difficulties, but thought I would throw it out there for brainstorming.  And, yes, I think I mean that the quanta production would change to the elements in your hand, say divided as close as possible evenly among them.

Did not mean that it would switch everything like discord.  I guess I thought if that were how it worked, that might almost be too powerful, but I guess that all depends on how many quanta you have in your possession at the time you play the card.

If it is easier to code, then the idea about focusing on one particular element is about the same thing.  It would at least allow you to almost guarantee that you could get a card out in a particular element in the next round, which is nice.

Anyway, hope the idea gets a bit of juices flowing for other better ideas . . .

2

Card Ideas and Art / Quantum Focus

« on: March 18, 2010, 02:36:37 am »

How about a spell card or maybe a psuedo-permanent card like sundial that has a limited life span, that when played will focus all your quanta into only those marks that you have showing in your hand on that round.

alternatively, it would focus all quanta into those marks that you have in your whole deck, whether showing or not.

This, of course would be useful to anyone who is using the Quantum Pillars to generate quanta, so perhaps this card would best fit into that set of cards.

Probably should have a limited life, say 2-5 rounds.

3

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Upgrade cards in deck

« on: February 19, 2010, 05:57:40 am »

The suggestion is a good one, but especially for pillars, I just keep one un-upgraded one in my card stash, upgrade that one when needed, then go to manage deck, take out the card I wanted to upgrade and add the newly upgraded one from the stash.  Seems about the same in time, only requires that I have a card in my stash matching the one I want to upgrade in my deck.  But for pillars, this is a cost of 6 electrum, so it's almost nothing.

4

General Discussion / just adding 2 cents on card draw

« on: February 19, 2010, 05:52:03 am »

I have a fairly good deck, win most of the time.  However, this game would be a much bigger part of my entertainment if the AI (if that's what it's called) was not so lame from time to time.

Just lost a game where I ran through 28 cards of a 60 card deck and only got 2 pillars.  That happens way too much to be random.  And I suggest that is not AI - it's just deemed by the game at some time that I need to lose, so the deck gets stacked to ensure it.  To call that AI is an offense to all true AI everywhere. 

I am not a huge detail analyzer to craft the perfect deck, I just like to play from time to time (lately more than usual it seems).  this is a good game, but this ridiculous deck stacking really destroys enjoyment and makes me think I can use my game time better elsewhere.  That's not a threat, just giving feedback that I think many would echo. 

Would be much better if I had the same loss ratio but it was based on a more fair (and closer to random) distribution of pillars and other cards.  Saw the post listing the the most requested changes which included the "mulligan".  sounds like a good idea to me, but I suggest also that the deck stacking code be struck from the system.

[edit: Ahh, I guess I don't really know any of this.  If the code really is trying to be random, I think it needs to be tested because it sure does not seem random.  I've only played about 1500 games and I bet I have had several dozen games at least where either I have all creatures or all pillars stacked on top of the deck, so I can do nothing while the opponent decimates me.  Such a shuffle would be extreme on a normal curve and even 3% rate would be far on the edge of the curve that it would happen maybe 1 in 500 games or so.]

5

Card Ideas and Art / A few card suggestions

« on: February 19, 2010, 05:27:19 am »

How about a "co-opt" or "turn enemy" card that allows you to take one of the opponent's cards from their field and bring over to your own.

Similarly, how about a power drain spell that can temporarily eliminate or reduce the quantums generated by a pillar stack, or maybe can draw those quantums over to your side during the operation of the spell.

How about a mortality spell that removes immortality for 1 to 3 turns.

Not a only card suggestion, but what about different kinds of damage, like heat, cold, electricity, acid, etc:  Certain elements would be immune (fire is immune to heat, water to cold, etc.) but additional cards could grant creatures or the player permanent/temporary immunities.  Is this too complex to track / play?  I suppose it's a fairly major revision of gameplay.

6

General Discussion / wondering about randomness

« on: January 13, 2010, 12:58:21 am »

Is the deck truly shuffled with a random algorithm?  Seems to be too often one deck or the other is just stacked one way or the other.  my 42 card deck has 6 creatures, 6 spells, 3 shields, 1 weapon, and 6 other cards.  Finally lost when after going through about 30 of those cards, I only had gotten 1 creature, 1 weapon, and 3 shields.  This seems to happen about every 10 games or so (though this recent game was the most extreme case of stacked deck).  I haven't played so many games that a normal distribution curve would likely get me out on the extreme edges of probability, seems to me.  Just wanted a bit of comment on the randomness/lack thereof.  It's very off-putting and discouraging to see such extreme cases and really makes one wonder whether to continue playing in the worst cases.  Thanks for your thoughts.

7

Other / Re: New Card: Malignant Cell

« on: January 11, 2010, 02:50:31 am »

Was playing a Top 50 (I think, probably must have been) with a Time mono deck.  Dev. Dragons are my only attack creature and was getting fairly beat (Dont remember the element I was fighting).  It mutated a dragon or 2 into a malig. cell and after I got a gratitude card out, was able to hold on long enough for the cells to multiply on my side and ultimately won the fight.  Was not able to get the quanta to get another creature up on the board.  I had a completely full board of malignant cells.  This card helped me win.  So, yeah, might be a bit over powered.

8

Game Suggestions and Feedback / A few suggestions

« on: January 03, 2010, 02:07:45 am »

I don't think I know the game and element functions well enough to comment, however I do have a few statistical ideas that might make things interesting.

I would like to see the stats on what elements I have beaten (or have beaten me) in addition to total won/lost.  Would be great to see this also for each level separately.

I would like to see a table with the probability of winning any particular card in the spinner for each level.  This may be a fairly complex function since the true probability depends on the number of decks and the cards in each deck.  But the program knows at any given moment what is in every deck that exists.

I would like to see the spinner give 2 electrum for matching the first 2 spins, and 1 electrum for other matches (1 and 3 / 2 and 3)

I would like to see a summary of the number of decks made for each element and an indication of how active that deck is (column showing last date of last game played), with the deck's total won/lost record.  I am a "casual" player myself so don't see how this might give any inappropriate advantage to me - mostly just interested in what elements seem to be getting the most play and how successful the decks are.

I would like to see another way in level 3 to obtain the special weapons of each element.  Perhaps this is a game breaker but it seems some of the weapons are virtually impossible to win in the spinner (For example, my time deck has never seen the eternity weapon in the spinner or in a game against the lvl 3 time deck - I presume that deck does not have it and so I can't win it.)

Great game overall, thanks for an excellent diversion -