Guest posts by MaddAddams

1

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Remove "Dagger" and "Sword" skills.

« on: February 01, 2011, 03:42:52 am »

Maybe I'm missing something, but if they didn't have useless skills, wouldn't Crusaders be able to Endow indefinitely?  Kind of a crazy-powerful Growth?

2

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Wording of Voodoo Doll

« on: January 26, 2011, 11:40:44 pm »

Summon a copy of the target creature. Apply all effects that has been done to original creature also to the copy.

Or is that bit too confusing wording when used with Mutated creature? Discuss.

"Summon a copy of the target creature.  All effects on the original creature are applied to the copy."
My English teacher would scorn the passive voice.  But it helps.  "Applied to" could also be "reapplied to" or "duplicated on".

3

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Wording of Voodoo Doll

« on: January 26, 2011, 10:14:22 am »

But it doesn't explicitly mention being dealt damage like the current one.  There's no verb, it just says 'damage'.  Perhaps I'm not clearing up all of its behavior, but I am phrasing it in a way that what it does doesn't contradict the card text.  A TU'd Doll is not really 'surviving an attack', but the new one does have 'damage'.

4

Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Wording of Voodoo Doll

« on: January 26, 2011, 09:38:52 am »

My suggestion:

"Voodoo: Damage and status effects on this creature are inflicted on the opponent, unless it is destroyed."

This hints that it's retroactive without explicitly stating it.

5

Buff This Card! / Re: Thunderstorm | Lightning Storm

« on: January 26, 2011, 04:29:35 am »

Two buff ideas:

1. It does 1 damage for every Thunderstorm that's been played that game, including itself.  First Thunderstorm works as is, but subsequent ones are more powerful.
or
2. Deal 1 damage to opponent for every creature killed by Thunderstorm.

6

Issue Archive / Re: Voodoo Doll + Grav Pull + Twin Universe [Unconfirmed]

« on: January 04, 2011, 04:49:31 pm »

The difference between this and the cards you listed is that in all of them, the text is written ambiguously.  'Larger creatures do more damage' indicates a variable amount that requires some experimentation.  Twin Universe uses the word 'exact' in its text.  Voodoo Doll explicit states an 'if..then' clause which is not being fulfilled when it is twinned.  I feel it belongs in the bug thread until we have official errata or the behavior is changed.

If 'Not A Bug' is the decision, my recommendation would be a change of text on the Voodoo Doll card to:
"Voodoo: Damage and status effects on this creature are inflicted on the opponent, unless it is destroyed."
This removes the 'if..then' clause, making it perhaps more ambiguous in wording, but more accurate as well.  There are other situations this more open text would be good for.  Another example would be when a Permafrost shield freezes it when it attacks.

7

Issue Archive / Voodoo Doll + Grav Pull + Twin Universe [Not a bug]

« on: January 04, 2011, 04:26:25 pm »

A rather controversial combo right now.  From the 'Nerf This Card' forum: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,18807.0.html

I consider this an accidental glitch right now, something overlooked while programming.  I'd like to know from the devs if possible whether this should be considered a bug or not.  It doesn't even matter if you consider this OP, like the other thread.  The cards are not performing as their text states they should.

8

Darkness / Re: Voodoo Doll

« on: January 04, 2011, 04:19:31 pm »

TU also doesn't imply it copies all previous effects that happened to a creature. If it did TUing a Phoenix would make an Otyugh grow for every time it was devoured. TU should copy of the current state of the creature without caring how it got to that state.

Voodoo implies that when something actually happens to it it triggers. Nothing happens to the new copy other than a new copy in state x, and nothing happens to the old copy other than having its current state copied.

I fail to see how any of that would hint that it would deal more damage. The reason damage is dealt is because of the internal mechanisms of the game, not because of something you could logically derive from the wording on either card.

I completely agree with this post.  I had seen the builds in my opponents t50 decks and assumed that the combo was to TU before casting gravity pull, letting one run out, and then casting grav pull on the other.  I was very shocked to visit the forums and find that you can basically glitch extra damage out of this.  I consider the behavior nothing less than an OP exploit, as it is NOT in line with what the cards read.

I haven't read through this entire thread, but consider this the voice of the upper intermediate who doesn't visit the forums often.  I did want to respond to one other quote:

Who cares if the card doesnt outright say it, the card also doesnt say that freezing/BB'ing it will freeze the weapon, or that poisoning it will poison you.

This is plain wrong.  Voodoo Doll says 'damage and status'.  Poison was the first status effect I thought of when I saw that text.  While I wasn't sure initially how freeze would resolve, freezing an opponent's weapon is also implied by the card text.

Perhaps this should move to a bug forum thread, but it does seem more of the traffic is finding its way here.

9

Issue Archive / Web + PU/Deja Vu (Unconfirmed)

« on: January 04, 2011, 03:03:50 pm »

The wording of Twin Universe is 'Summon an Exact Copy of the target creature.'  Normally, all status effects on the creature are carried over: frozen, delay, adrenaline... This is not true with the passive skill of 'airborne'.  If I web my opponent's Pegasus, and then my opponent casts Twin Universe on it, he will now have one airborne Pegasus and one on the ground.  Webbing a Deja Vu before it has used its ability works the same way.  I'm assuming this is a result of airborne being a passive ability.

I feel if this is intended behavior, and not a bug, it belongs on the not-a-bug list, because at the very least it is counter-intuitive to card text.  It doesn't seem overpowered to me.

10

Buff This Card! / Re: Nightmare | Nightmare

« on: January 04, 2011, 12:02:03 am »

It might psych a newbie a bit, but that's not my main point.  Ever heard of reverse time in a lockdown?  A player could keep reversing the played creature with Eternity to lock his opponent's draw down, unless you want to discard.  If the need for a buff is really that necessary, the card should be reduced to 1  / 1  .

I guess I'm just not sure how Nightmare particularly aids that lockdown.  If you're Nightmare-ing a creature of your own to give him to use in that loop, then it seems reasonable enough a good opponent would just save up to drop a bunch at once.  If you're already looping a creature of his, then what does the Nightmare really do beyond the single draw denial?  The net card cost is still even because you had to draw your Nightmare, and while it's a strong loop, I don't see how it's more powerful than if Nightmare hadn't been played.

In terms of using Nightmare in partnership with Neurotoxin, that's almost exclusively used to make the AI do things not in its best interest, and not a PvP tactic.

The one accessory purpose I currently use Nightmare for is when I'm playing Half-bloods, because their draw rate is related to their handsize.  I was trying to come up with a minimal buff that would be in theme, similar in line with the Purify buff.  I'm not a fan of making cards cost random quanta.  I feel it goes counter to the purpose of different elements with different sets of cards.

11

Buff This Card! / Re: Nightmare | Nightmare

« on: January 03, 2011, 10:58:53 pm »

My first instinct was to change it from even card economy to gaining a card on the opponent, by adding a draw a card option.  But then I thought letting you draw another card would be too strong.  One the one hand, crazy speedy decks that would use both this and Precogs.  On the other hand, adjusting the casting cost to prevent that, it becomes nigh unplayable for its intended purpose.

How about if it also drained random quanta equal to the creature's casting cost?  I don't think this would be a strong buff (although I could be proved wrong!), it would assist the Darkness gameplan of temporarily stalling the opponent, and would give the card a reason for existence beyond countering Fractal. 

12

Anvil Archive / Re: Quantum Flash | Quantum Flash

« on: October 20, 2010, 06:02:54 pm »

If my math is right something like this can kill 2 turns after it draws its first nova and is likely to kill 3 turns after it draws its first novas. The ability to weave your quanta is nuts, assuming you have every kind of quanta in your pool you have a 0.16% chance of it taking from either of the kinds of quanta you want. The fact that over half your deck draws cards should make it insanely consistant too.
 
5 Aether Flash
6 Fire Flash
7 Assorted flash (all 7 should be different types)
3 Ruby Dragon
2 Parallel Universe
6 Nova

Mark Fire

I'm just starting to peruse and my initial reaction to this card was 'OP: because of the draw ability'.  I saw some debate over whether elements other than time should get draw abilities, but I think that argument pales in comparison to how fast it lets you dig through your deck, as illustrated here.  Even if 'Draw a Card' were changed to 'Draw an extra card next turn' it would be huge.