Brawl #4 - Round 6 - Voting Phase

[Calambar]

Non-Brawler vote Round 6 by Krzysiekxd

Boss Red Stars Meaning of Life Artist Meaning of Life Red Stars CD & DB *** *** FE *** *** OT & Writer Red Stars Ragnarok BONUS Red Stars Meaning of Life SUPER BONUS Meaning of Life Red Stars Challenge "A" *** n/a Challenge "B" *** n/a Challenge "C" *** n/a

Explanations:

Spoiler for Boss:

Red Stars - Just a very good grawing, good job.
Meaning of Life - You got my vote thanks to humour you put into it, because I find
Frostbite Borealis' pic better drawn, choice was difficult.
Ragnarok - Nah.
Sorry for Gravy Train

Spoiler for Artist:

Meaning of Life - This is just perfect! I appreciate your dedication, at last something better than andre's work
Red Stars - Still you got my vote for this, nice work as well.
Frostbite Borealis - Two works I voted are just better.
Ragnarok - I don't even get the joke :/
Sorry for Gravy Train again

Spoiler for OT and Writer:

Red Stars - It made my laugh ^^
Ragnarok - Very good piece of writing! I really liked it.
I liked Meaning of Life and Frostbite Borealis' stories as well, the choice was really difficult.
Gravy Train Co. - It also was nice, not as good as other stories, but quite moving.

Spoiler for Bonus:

I liked them most.

Spoiler for Super Bonus Task:

I was waiting for this task. I expected something new, original, thus I was disappointed with Ragnarok's and Frostbite Borealis' Newsletters which had the same layout. Of course content was ok, but it's not what I was waiting for.

Red Stars' NL was slightly better, they brought their banners, but overall, nothing really amazing.

And finally big THUMB UP for Meaning of Life, this is what I expected. New banners, new sections (Gardening 101, brilliant! XD) good job! Only disappointed with a comic, because I have a feeling I have seen this already.

When it comes to comics, of course Red Stars did a great job, also + for Frostbite. Unfortunately no comic from Ragnarok.

And really sorry for Train, but if flyingcat is really alone for all the tasks, that is understandable...

That was fantastic Brawl, pity I didn't have time to participate, but maybe it's better, I can't draw as good as andre XD
Many awesome submissions. GOOD WORK ALL BRAWLERS!

[Annele]

^You saw the comic already because I posted it in the round 1 voting phase. Definitely made by me though.

[ARTHANASIOS]

bump!

Spoiler for Hidden:

Time's up!

Standardized voting will use this table:

Spoiler for code:

Code: [Select]

[table]
[tr][td][table][tr]
[td]Team Vote[/td][td]Round 6[/td][td]by [/td]
[/tr][/table][/td][/tr][tr][td][table][tr]
[td]Boss[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Artist[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]CD & DB[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]FE[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]OT & Writer[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]BONUS[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]SUPER BONUS[/td][td]***[/td][td]***[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Challenge "A"[/td][td]***[/td][td]n/a[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Challenge "B"[/td][td]***[/td][td]n/a[/td]
[/tr][tr]
[td]Challenge "C"[/td][td]***[/td][td]n/a[/td]
[/tr][/table][/td][/tr]
[/table]


DO NOT FORGET TO OFFER A PROPER EXPLANATION FOR YOUR VOTING DECISIONS!

[Treldon]

Breaking my customary silence and revealing my votes for last round. Enjoy.

Team Vote Round 6 by Treldon, Meaning of Life

Boss Ragnarok Meaning of Life Though not technically told so, but I believe Boss task should be done by the bosses, and both Frostbite and RS looks a bit too well done for me...(though to be honest I don't have much to compare them to) Dawn certainly had no help from me Artist Meaning of Life Red Stars Clearly this two has the most effort in creating the result. CD & DB Meaning of Life Frostbite Borealis Reverse order: Gravy: seems a rather cheap solution, plus OP with . And only half done. Ragnarok: Feels OP, plus a workaround Stars: Good idea, but technically that's still only 2 quanta types used by the card. Putting it on a weapon is an interesting choice though. FE Meaning of Life Red Stars Team based tournaments are rare, so we certainly could use one. The choice for second vote was hard between Ragnarok and Stars. Ragnarok's is an interesting concept (and the icon is a nice touch), but takes too long to implement. OT & Writer Meaning of Life Ragnarok Joey's story made me feel as if I were standing on the blood stained sand of the arena myself. As for Ragnarok, they got me at 'The Luck of the Irish'. It's an inside joke in the office. I just couldn't help myself but truly lol. Spoiler for Trying to explain the inside joke: Colleague chatting with customer about gambling. Customer just lost a bunch. Colleague: ...so to help you for your next time, I will grant you The Luck of the Irish! Customer: Wow, thanks! So what does that mean? Colleague: Nothing. I just wanted to cheer you up... BONUS Gravity Train Co. Meaning of Life Of the two I would rather give my vote to the original creators of that icon. And I have certainly seen Frostbite's and Ragnarok's work before. SUPER BONUS Meaning of Life Red Stars I really would have liked to see more effort put into the NL from all teams. For one a new layout. We were the only one to change anything...just as adding new content. I so wanted to see something new  Stars get my other vote for the included artwork. (Plus Frostbite would get another - if I had one - for the arts used from this Brawl) Challenge "A" Meaning of Life n/a I am a lists and points kind of guy, so a simpler thesis is friendlier for me. Plus it's easier to understand for those with shallower knowledge of TCG theory. Challenge "B" Ragnarok n/a Though one. Frostbite's card is simpler, but the lack of explanation on the card itself (though not much necessary) and on how to use it made me choose Ragnarok Challenge "C" Meaning of Life n/a I have to assume that Nomad's second synergy would be with  and death effects, though confirmation of that would have been nice. Plus, though it's purely personal, but I don't like cards that die and then return

[AD TienzuStorm]

@Treldon

The reason there weren't any explanations was because of how they were late submissions, and so I'm assuming ARTH just posted the cards and not the explanations that came with them that were sitting in our secret section.

The synergy with Nomad was Gravity, because of Catapult, GP, and Acceleration that all benefit from the large amount of HP you can get. The other reason is because all of these cards will result in the Nomad getting killed, and since it's a time traveling nomad (Because.. reasons), it comes back, ready for a new card to use with it.

[Treldon]

@Treldon

The reason there weren't any explanations was because of how they were late submissions, and so I'm assuming ARTH just posted the cards and not the explanations that came with them that were sitting in our secret section.

The synergy with Nomad was Gravity, because of Catapult, GP, and Acceleration that all benefit from the large amount of HP you can get. The other reason is because all of these cards will result in the Nomad getting killed, and since it's a time traveling nomad (Because.. reasons), it comes back, ready for a new card to use with it.

Duly noted.

Also, you could have just called it Doctor 

[andretimpa]

I can't draw as good as andre XD

As some motivation for you remember that I drew stuff like this last Brawl

[eljoemo]

Feedback time

Team Vote Round 6 by eljoemo

Boss Red Stars Frostbite Artist Red Stars MoL CD & DB Red Stars MoL FE Red Stars Ragnarok OT & Writer Red Stars Frostbite BONUS Ragnarok Red Stars SUPER BONUS Red Stars Frostbite Challenge "A" Red Stars n/a Challenge "B" Ragnarok n/a Challenge "C" MoL n/a

Spoiler for BOSS:

MoL - I appreciate that you didn't get your artist help, but the art is sub-par. It's about as good as I could do, but not as good as the others this round.

Frostbite - A very accurate representation of the original. All nicely shaded and stuff, so yeah.

Ragnarok - A little lacking in the details, especially since its digital. Could have done more given that.

Spoiler for ARTIST:

MoL - Now that's impressive. Maybe not accurate to the details, but that's all part of the charm. Must look really cool when the light's shining on it.

Frostbite - Might be a bit weak on the definition of crafted. Its decent enough, but can't stand up to the others.

Ragnarok - Definitely pushing the limit on crafting. You could have also used a hood or a cloak or something, a hat just really doesn't fit.

Spoiler for CARD DESIGNER & DECK BUILDER:

MoL - The three elements make sense thematically. The implementation is solid, doesn't require any funky business to work. My only worry, although this is valid for any card that relies on three quanta types, is that you're pretty much limited on usage. Having to use three elements really holds a cards potential back. The effect is strong enough to make up for that though, but it would still be tricky in anything but a trio or a bow. The deck looks solid, the immos are a nice touch since you'll only need wee bit of fire quanta. Yeah, a solid submission.

Frostbite - I'm not up on my biology (zoology?) here, but don't chameleons just camouflage themselves to blend it, as opposed to physically changing? The two ability thing is the easy way out of this task, and you fell for it real good. The card just doesn't feel right, the effects feel weak and strung together and the thematics just aren't there. You also implied in the deck that the plate armour could target other creatures, which is definitely weird, it makes sense of be more of a gargoyle-esque effect to me.

Ragnarok - I'm inclined to agree with the others on this one, that this isn't a valid submission. Having a rainbow cost of 3 does not mean it will use three types of quanta. Even then, this card is essentially "If entropy was used to play this card,gain Antimatter. If death was used, gain Aflatoxin..."  for all 12 elements, so it matches 12 and not 3. Or it effects only water, so its only 1 element. Either way, it doesn't work out. At least you didn't go with another blank-omancy card.

Gravy Train - The card doesn't makes sense thematically, and it way to bland and boring to get a vote. Plus you forgot the deck, which is half the task anyway.

Spoiler for FORUM EXPERT:

MoL - Seems like a whole lot of work on the organizer, with all the playing and sending things back and fourth every round. I'm not quite sure how the teams would work either, is it voluntary or random? Only 2 teams in a large-scale PvP event might not be so great either me thinks.

Frostbite - A little vague, I'm not quite sure what's going on. Plus time limits are constricting to stuff probably, so that's a downside as well.

Ragnarok - There's already an event in the ideas board by the same name and/or style, but I'm going to say you didn't know about it, or else you wouldn't have made yours so similar. This is the best submission I think, ignoring that little hiccup, so it gets the vote.

Spoiler for OFF TOPICKER & WRITER:

MoL - It's a good story really, and I do like it. Just not enough for the vote unfortunately. Sowwy.

Frostbite - I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. I'd imagine that being an accurate representation of what it would be like overall, even it this was dramatized.

Ragnarok - I still have no idea what event this related to. Too vague, and the story telling wasn't great either to be honest.

Gravy Train - Your submission is good, just a little short. Plus is was more of a report or a recollection than a story. But still a good piece.

Spoiler for BONUS:

MoL - It's pretty good, but large pieces are hard to pull off without sufficient detail, such as this one.

Frostbite - Text is way to easy to do to be worth a decent amount of effort points.

Ragnarok - It's just a really cute face, how could you not vote for it >.>

Gravy Train - Totally not awkward at all. But bigger is better, right?

Spoiler for SUPER BONUS:

MoL - I like the new banners, the format and I love the contents bit (why don't all the newsletters have these). I was just looking for a more traditional newsletter, just focusing on Brawl. The gardening article was a nice touch, but totally irrelevant. If I wanted gardening tips, I wouldn't look in the EtG newsletter, put it that way. The deck and card articles were present, but (correct me if I'm wrong) have they just been created for the newsletter? I just don't remember seeing them anywhere recently (nor did you include links). It was a refreshing twist, I just prefer the traditional style.

Frostbite - A more traditional newsletter. A lot of good points here, doing justice to the Card and Deck sections, even if you don't know your Red Stars from your Ragnaroks. The Brawl recap with the submissions was nice too. The fake interview didn't float my boat, just like the one in the actual newsletter in December (or whenever it was). One more nitpick, in regards to mafia, how is it possible I was caught red-handed and that I got away with it? Wut? Although I will take "sneaky" as a complement in this case.

Ragnarok - I hate to compare, but this is in many ways a worse version of Frostbite's. The Card and Deck aren't Brawl related, there doesn't seem to be much that is really. Still missing an interview, which all the other teams managed (kind of). Yeah, a little weak.

Spoiler for CHALLENGE A:

I will admit, the challenge description may be a little vague and hard to interpret. That said, MoL's article didn't seem on point enough with the task description. Elk's was much more useful to read, containing both more insight and more value insight that MoL's.

Spoiler for CHALLENGE B:

Let me start by saying I dislike this challenge. Ragnarok's fit best thematically with the switching cost / pseudo-quanta mechanic. The Glistener does suit this challenge (so much so it makes me wonder if the challenge was developed to fit the card, not visa versa), where as there's no reason for Cerberus to change at all, it doesn't seem to fit in the slightest.

Spoiler for CHALLENGE C:

Apparently Frostbite's submission lost it's notes, but they would have really helped here. MoL's card has a nice thematic ability which has its uses, especially with the stated combo. The effects on the Nomad seem a little stuck together and not-connected. The Gravity combo is strong now that you mention it, but I still feel the card was poorly designed.

[rob77dp]

As eljoemo is a brawl participant publicly voting I'd like to take the opportunity to be a brawl participant publicly providing reactions and responses/comments related to my favorite team, MoL, in the votes/arguments.

Feedback time

Team Vote Round 6 by eljoemo

Boss Red Stars Frostbite Artist Red Stars MoL CD & DB Red Stars MoL FE Red Stars Ragnarok OT & Writer Red Stars Frostbite BONUS Ragnarok Red Stars SUPER BONUS Red Stars Frostbite Challenge "A" Red Stars n/a Challenge "B" Ragnarok n/a Challenge "C" MoL n/a

Spoiler for BOSS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - I appreciate that you didn't get your artist help, but the art is sub-par. It's about as good as I could do, but not as good as the others this round.
Artist input and feedback was similar here as typical for MoL through-out Brawl - comment, discuss, and give feedback with the role doing the effort(as well as rest of team, similar to comment and help on all tasks by all team members) was given but the task itself was done by the assigned role, Boss.  I do not see why that holds so little water when it comes to the vote...??!??

Spoiler for ARTIST (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - Now that's impressive. Maybe not accurate to the details, but that's all part of the charm. Must look really cool when the light's shining on it.
Impressive indeed - had I the creativity to make such a piece, I would display it somewhat prominently in my residence or place of employment.

Spoiler for CARD DESIGNER & DECK BUILDER (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - The three elements make sense thematically. The implementation is solid, doesn't require any funky business to work. My only worry, although this is valid for any card that relies on three quanta types, is that you're pretty much limited on usage. Having to use three elements really holds a cards potential back. The effect is strong enough to make up for that though, but it would still be tricky in anything but a trio or a bow. The deck looks solid, the immos are a nice touch since you'll only need wee bit of fire quanta. Yeah, a solid submission.
Truth is what you discuss here was a big focus of nelly and I working on what ended up being the MoL card and deck submission.  I (and likely nelly too) appreciate the notice of results from organized effort given to this task/submission.

Spoiler for FORUM EXPERT (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - Seems like a whole lot of work on the organizer, with all the playing and sending things back and fourth every round. I'm not quite sure how the teams would work either, is it voluntary or random? Only 2 teams in a large-scale PvP event might not be so great either me thinks.
I would not expect the amount of work here to be any higher (maybe a little?) than what was required on the Computer Simulations event (the first rounds prior to whittling down of contestants at least) yet the CS event was well received and I do not recall organizer complaints.  Can you provide a little bit of explanation about what may be not so great about 2 teams in large scale PvP event? (I am curious...)

Spoiler for OFF TOPICKER & WRITER (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - It's a good story really, and I do like it. Just not enough for the vote unfortunately. Sowwy.
Awwwww - Colosseum is a good event for writing about too!

Spoiler for BONUS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - It's pretty good, but large pieces are hard to pull off without sufficient detail, such as this one.
A 49x49 original here... "Sprout in a Storm" represents MoL's effort throughout this Brawl as a fully-active team:
Sprout, grows as a meaning of its life where members of MoL spent time together in thought, chat, and productivity towards a common goal
in a Storm, of adversity where nearly all teams were fully-active putting up a difficult challenge round-after-round - where the adversity encouraged the growth like the rain from the storm.

Spoiler for SUPER BONUS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - I like the new banners, the format and I love the contents bit (why don't all the newsletters have these). I was just looking for a more traditional newsletter, just focusing on Brawl. The gardening article was a nice touch, but totally irrelevant. If I wanted gardening tips, I wouldn't look in the EtG newsletter, put it that way. The deck and card articles were present, but (correct me if I'm wrong) have they just been created for the newsletter? I just don't remember seeing them anywhere recently (nor did you include links). It was a refreshing twist, I just prefer the traditional style.
The task nowhere emphasizes or hints at following in the same mold as previous newsletters.  Also, I'm a little confused by the statement that the submission focusing on Brawl as something to aim for on this task.  I get it - to each their own taste - but it seems odd to me that not focusing this task on Brawl was a downgrade on vote consideration.
1. Looking for traditional newsletter... OK.
2. Looking for it to focus on Brawl... which is not the traditional newsletter function/format... ?

...no love for the real life 'interview' for Tea Time with Giants or the functioning anchor links within the NL or broadening a reader's horizon with something like a gardening tip or original section heading images??  color me a sad panda

Spoiler for CHALLENGE A (spoiler adjusted by rob):

I will admit, the challenge description may be a little vague and hard to interpret. That said, MoL's article didn't seem on point enough with the task description. Elk's was much more useful to read, containing both more insight and more value insight that MoL's.
It is not hard to figure out why this is the case, but I think we both know we're very unlikely to see eye-to-eye on these.  My opinion -- the Stars' submission is not about a mechanic of the game but rather a treatise on play style(s).[/b]

Spoiler for CHALLENGE B (spoiler adjusted by rob):

Let me start by saying I dislike this challenge. Ragnarok's fit best thematically with the switching cost / pseudo-quanta mechanic. The Glistener does suit this challenge (so much so it makes me wonder if the challenge was developed to fit the card, not visa versa), where as there's no reason for Cerberus to change at all, it doesn't seem to fit in the slightest.
Agree-ish... the challenge itself confuses me or required so much knowledge on the subject of the challenge that it really seems that a team had a complex card idea/thought and decided 'hey let's make a challenge that is convoluted but we think fits great on this card we have'... :/[/b]

Spoiler for CHALLENGE C (spoiler adjusted by rob):

Apparently Frostbite's submission lost it's notes, but they would have really helped here. MoL's card has a nice thematic ability which has its uses, especially with the stated combo. The effects on the Nomad seem a little stuck together and not-connected. The Gravity combo is strong now that you mention it, but I still feel the card was poorly designed.
Flip side of the coin from Challenge A comments... for reason's that are quite obvious I agree with your take -- I do wonder where the notes went to that would almost certainly have to exist for such a submission to have been developed!?[/b]

[eljoemo]

Giving my feedback on Rob's feedback to my feedback on the tasks... so meta

Spoiler for BOSS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - I appreciate that you didn't get your artist help, but the art is sub-par. It's about as good as I could do, but not as good as the others this round.
Artist input and feedback was similar here as typical for MoL through-out Brawl - comment, discuss, and give feedback with the role doing the effort(as well as rest of team, similar to comment and help on all tasks by all team members) was given but the task itself was done by the assigned role, Boss.  I do not see why that holds so little water when it comes to the vote...??!??

I see your point here, but let me support myself with an example. Suppose there was an art competition and everyone made pieces using Photoshop or gimp or whatever, and then you entered with some art akin to the MS Paint competition entries. You could argue "My artwork is good because I only used paint and/or did it in 5 minutes". But those restrictions weren't enforced, nor were they necessary. You had the choice to use better software or dedicate a decent amount of time, but you chose not to. In this instance, the Boss had the choice to ask the Artist for help or to completely do the task, but it was a choice not to do so. I suppose this perspective might be different coming from a team who's boss is active (or at least does their tasks -.-) so I get you there.

One thing I do want to clear up. It's not that I'm punishing MoL because they didn't use their Artist to do the task. I'm just not punishing the other teams because they did.

Spoiler for FORUM EXPERT (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - Seems like a whole lot of work on the organizer, with all the playing and sending things back and fourth every round. I'm not quite sure how the teams would work either, is it voluntary or random? Only 2 teams in a large-scale PvP event might not be so great either me thinks.
I would not expect the amount of work here to be any higher (maybe a little?) than what was required on the Computer Simulations event (the first rounds prior to whittling down of contestants at least) yet the CS event was well received and I do not recall organizer complaints.  Can you provide a little bit of explanation about what may be not so great about 2 teams in large scale PvP event? (I am curious...)

Feeding deck codes into a sim =/= playing like 20(ish) bo3 matches. Seems like a lot more effort to me. In regards to teams, I just feel 2 teams consisting of half the player base each would be too much. In War, it's a team of 6 against 66 other players. In 3 man tPvP, it's 3 against a whole bunch of other teams. Even though you're on a team, its small enough compared to the competition that you feel challenged doing it, and you can really work together to get through it, as a team. Suppose 20 players, your event would be 10 against 10. There isn't enough small groups to feel like a decent competition. The everyone-against-me feel that makes PvP events so much fun can still exist in small (relatively speaking) teams, but when you're either in the wining half or the losing half, it just isn't there.

Spoiler for OFF TOPICKER & WRITER (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - It's a good story really, and I do like it. Just not enough for the vote unfortunately. Sowwy.
Awwwww - Colosseum is a good event for writing about too!

I didn't say it wasn't good, I just preferred a different one.

Spoiler for BONUS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - It's pretty good, but large pieces are hard to pull off without sufficient detail, such as this one.
A 49x49 original here... "Sprout in a Storm" represents MoL's effort throughout this Brawl as a fully-active team:
Sprout, grows as a meaning of its life where members of MoL spent time together in thought, chat, and productivity towards a common goal
in a Storm, of adversity where nearly all teams were fully-active putting up a difficult challenge round-after-round - where the adversity encouraged the growth like the rain from the storm.

Is that a question or...? In case it was misconceived, I didn't mean detail as in description/ clarification. I meant literal artistic detail. Just double checking.

Spoiler for SUPER BONUS (spoiler adjusted by rob):

MoL - I like the new banners, the format and I love the contents bit (why don't all the newsletters have these). I was just looking for a more traditional newsletter, just focusing on Brawl. The gardening article was a nice touch, but totally irrelevant. If I wanted gardening tips, I wouldn't look in the EtG newsletter, put it that way. The deck and card articles were present, but (correct me if I'm wrong) have they just been created for the newsletter? I just don't remember seeing them anywhere recently (nor did you include links). It was a refreshing twist, I just prefer the traditional style.
The task nowhere emphasizes or hints at following in the same mold as previous newsletters.  Also, I'm a little confused by the statement that the submission focusing on Brawl as something to aim for on this task.  I get it - to each their own taste - but it seems odd to me that not focusing this task on Brawl was a downgrade on vote consideration.
1. Looking for traditional newsletter... OK.
2. Looking for it to focus on Brawl... which is not the traditional newsletter function/format... ?

...no love for the real life 'interview' for Tea Time with Giants or the functioning anchor links within the NL or broadening a reader's horizon with something like a gardening tip or original section heading images??  color me a sad panda

Can't tell if genuine upset, or just trying to guilt trip me into changing my vote. The task "Create May's newsletter" was not the best idea, since we are mid April at the time of finishing. Nowhere did it say that the newsletter should emphasize Brawl, that's just what I figured it should, otherwise it would be lacking content/ repeating content from the actual newsletter. There were certainly many good points to your newsletter, and I suppose you did trim out the fat by removing the competitions/PvP events/Forum news. In regards to the interview, listening to Forum members speak makes me feel incredibly awkward and I have no idea why. I prefer text myself (personal bias again). The in-text anchors are a great idea, as stated. The gardening tips, I've said my piece on. And I did say I liked the new images.

Given a second though, I may (that's not a guarantee) consider changing my vote. Just not right now (it's like way past my bed time).

Spoiler for CHALLENGE A (spoiler adjusted by rob):

I will admit, the challenge description may be a little vague and hard to interpret. That said, MoL's article didn't seem on point enough with the task description. Elk's was much more useful to read, containing both more insight and more value insight that MoL's.
It is not hard to figure out why this is the case, but I think we both know we're very unlikely to see eye-to-eye on these.  My opinion -- the Stars' submission is not about a mechanic of the game but rather a treatise on play style(s).[/b]

I personally see "resource" gathering as a mechanic, and the burst vs longterm as a trade off regarding that mechanic. There can be arguments made otherwise, but since we are on the opposing teams, lets agree to disagree?

PS. the missing spoilers are where I silently agreed with Rob and had nothing more to add, just to save space.

[ARTHANASIOS]

voting phase was extended for a few days due to feedback

[Espithel]

Team Vote Round 6 by Frozengaia

Boss Ragnarok Red Stars Artist Ragnarok Meaning of Life CD & DB Ragnarok Red Stars FE TL; DR OT & Writer Ragnarok Red Stars BONUS Ragnarok Meaning of Life SUPER BONUS TL; DR Challenge "A" Meaning of Life n/a Challenge "B" Ragnarok n/a Challenge "C" Meaning of Life n/a

Reasoning:
Boss: Red stars is le prettiest.
Artist: ... I feel sad for everyone else here. There are some really awesome submissions this round, but alas, meaning of life takes the cake.
CD/DB: This was a pretty vague and bad round. The other submissions feel really tacked on, and whilst I personally believe that Red Stars' submission does not fit the criteria needed, I'm going to vote for it simply because it's the only card I actually like from this round. (Other than mine :P)
FE: Too long, not interested in pvp, didn't read.
Writer/OT: Humour always gets to me. The other submissions were TL;DR city.
Bonus: Meaning of Life looked lovely and pretty. FB didn't stand out easily, and dual submissions make me vomit.
Super Bonus: Zawadx, I think the bunchie newsletter would've been a better idea. D:
Challenge 1: Meaning of Life picked a more interesting topic.

Challenge 2: ENTER THE INFINITE GAIA. - Aka Frostbite disappointed me with thier submission. The point of this challenge was to create a set of rules that could only produce good cards if you made the restrictions invisible. Glistener fits so well, because its restrictions are actually there to enforce it. As for cerberus... Why the death quanta? Why not just switch it to one element, death? Just because there are restrictions to create the card, doesn't mean the card is judged by those restrictions - if you wanted to change cerberus' element, it should be a death card, not a fire/death card.

Challenge 3: Calling an ability "Sacrifice" implies the creature dies on use, but MoL's was more interesting.