[Official] Fate Egg | Fate Egg

[AvusXIV]

Me and doctor CaptainScibra have discussed in chat about the fate egg question, this are the things we have found out:
The average cost of a non-upgraded creature is about 5.5.
The cost of fate egg is 3+1+1turn(to just not be a 0/3 stick).
We could say that 3+1+1 turn is in fact about  5.5 since 1 turn is worth more then 1 quanta on a rough estimate.
So we can say that fate egg is kinda balanced but the problem itself is that is not well distribuited:
We thought that a good solution might be to make it 2(summoning)2 ability+1 turn ofc.
This might help to don't overpay for a 0/3 stick and so to have a better quanta/turns/result ratio, plus almost evryone who plays fate eggs also plays a monotime and this might help to be able to put it in some non-time decks.
EDIT:After having consulted Zblader we found that the a comparison with graboid(due to the hatch mechanic) should have to be done and so we have:
The main problem is (regarding the fact that graboid uses a second element to hatch) that fate egg doesn't worth its price on summoning while it's okay after 1 turn, but giving the fact that an egg(wich is what it lacks of for being counted as worthy of its price), with an atk value is not fitting thematics, we thought that a good solution may be making it costs 2+2 but with skills ready to use(see fenghuang for clarifications).

I think the creature's cost can be reduced to 2 without any other change.

The cost-formula is crock to a certain degree and nobody seems to realize it or care. Let's see:

Upped Abyss Crawler. 6|6. No ability. That's the cost of...8 or 9, right?
Armagio. 1|25. Ability. That's the cost of...12, right?
Horned Frog. 3|3. No ability. That's the cost of...4, right?

And so on. For the pros: I don't wanna start a formula discussion here, I read the topic about it, know about high-HP-creatures and bla. I didn't use the exact formula to calculate, so keep your correction efforts at bay...The point is: People should use their experience and knowledge, not some synthetical toy detached from the entire game. I mentioned that because my position shall be clear. The approach with cost calculation is of no use in my point of view.

Sorry for necroing this thread, but i thought: wouldn't be cool if creatures hatched from Fate Egg inherit a passive ability "Hatched" that causes them to revert back into a Fate Egg if rewinded?
This would be a simple buff for two reasons:
the "partial" immunity to rewind would give the creature spawned a plus among other creatures.
the possibility to retry another hatch without wasting an egg (but you're wasting a turn and a rewind).

Soffy if this has been proposed before! But the thread was 11 pages long and i didn't want to search through them!

A very good example why no formula is required. I like this idea a lot and think the card can be changed in this way. It would fit, it would make as much sense as there can be and make another card *RT-resistant*.
If two creatures are spawned by using SoR, there would be one RT-egg but still the 2nd creature on the field. How nice


Final words: As far as I'm concerned, there are no adjustments necessary to this card. To make it *perfect in any regard* - yes, but it's at least viable now. If there were changes, I'd favor Manuz' idea.

[TheAccuso]

A basic formula or at least a rough standard setting for the values is needed and that's because it's the base where to build a game structure on, or one could make a 15|6 dragon that costs 6 water quanta and that's why a rough calculation was made before of talking about changes;
and as you've saw we have arrived to the concusion that the costs for fate egg are fine with 4  quanta.
But we haven't made a discourse merely based on the correct cost based on the formula to apply at fate egg, we also saw a confrontation problem, wich as you know, is one of the main factor that defines if a card is UP or OP, this because if another card in the game have a similar mechanic but is better then the one compared with, then a change is required.
That's why we compared it to the other hatching creature of the game and so the one with the most similar mechanic, wich happens to have similar costs too and it resulted in a big disadvantage for fate egg in many aspects, with the only pro in favour of fate egg that it can be played in a mono while graboid needs at least a different mark.
As for the manunz suggestion is a very good one and also fit thematics(wich is something to don't undervalue),but doesn't solve the UPness problem this card suffers from graboid.
And that's why a combination of the two can be made, one that redistributes values and in part mechanic to settle the gap and one nice additional mechanic.
But since adjusting something that already exists is primarly that add something without fixing the previous problems we brought the discussion on that level.
Hope to have been clear enought.

[AvusXIV]

A basic formula or at least a rough standard setting for the values is needed and that's because it's the base where to build a game structure on, or one could make a 15|6 dragon that costs 6 water quanta and that's why a rough calculation was made before of talking about changes;
and as you've saw we have arrived to the concusion that the costs for fate egg are fine with 4  quanta.
But we haven't made a discourse merely based on the correct cost based on the formula to apply at fate egg, we also saw a confrontation problem, wich as you know, is one of the main factor that defines if a card is UP or OP, this because if another card in the game have a similar mechanic but is better then the one compared with, then a change is required.

1st) That was not what I was talking about. Of course the cards need balance, but there is no formula required as it is in use in this forum. Especially not the way it is practiced - also by you. Discussing about one single quanta, or even a half one, for checking if the price is fair That's just ridiculous. Check out that for clarification. Cost issue: Fair?

2nd) That's obviously wrong, your whole cost calculation and the arguments/thoughts around it is based on the formula as I quoted you and Captain in my last post. I try to put it in different words: The existing creatures widely vary from the costs the formula would give - because they are related to the strenghts and uses of cards. Maybe I am wrong and zanz did use one when creating the game and setting the cards costs, but I doubt that till I know better.

3rd) You can't just count the avg stats of a creature hatched by the egg or something to come to a conclusion. Nor compare it to a creature with a similar mechanic - because there isn't really any imo and it would not necessarily give any useful information. The questions are: In which decks is the egg used, how strong is it in fact and how reliable to be used as a basic card of a deck. This is answered by experience with that card - then you can think about it further.


Lots of people argue about it without even mentioning a little tiny bit of the card used in the game itself.
To me it's like I would check the results of a physical health and sports exame of 20 soccer players and then decide on which position and for how long I let them play:

The one fellow's oxygen level is still good after 30 minutes of continuous strain. On the other hand, his time over 100m is just 11,23 seconds. We got 5 other players with a time below 11 seconds. And on the *hit the bar*-precision test, he just hit 12 out of 30 times. Most of the other players hit at least 15 times

[TheAccuso]

In the point one you say that the formula is needed but to discuss about it in minor details it's ridicoulous(that makes no sense because one simply doesn't improve things a bit, he does until he can), while instead i think that ridicolous is the fact that you're spamming this section with off topic notes just to proove you're the absolute right, wich, pardon me. but it's plain stupid.
"The existing creatures widely vary from the costs the formula would give - because they are related to the strenghts and uses of cards."
Quotes from you*
First of all, it makes no sense because the strenght and the uses(wich is terribly generic and can means ability, atk/hp stats, or simply if it is a weapon or a creature if not a permanent), of a card, is directly linked with its cost(E.G Do you find stronger a 10/10 creature that costs 12 light or a 6/1 creature that costs 2 quanta?...) and that's why there is a rough formula to determine what the cost of a specific card should be and + you may want to know that there are some confirmed bonus that elements gets in comparison with others.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This game is no exact science and that's why from time to time people find themselves discussing about it or instead we could take the game as it is and say:_Yeah, there are no rules or idealistic values at all so it's ok to have any kind of costs in the new patch because it is right._
The second point makes clear that you know very little of what you're talking about, or at least you express yourself in a very confusional way.
Third point. Some quotes from you " You can't just count the avg stats of a creature hatched by the egg or something to come to a conclusion." Yes i can that's logic, you can make a rough estimate of how much the egg should worth. E.G.: fate egg will spawn just dragons. Would that be a clear signal that a 3+1 cost is no right? Think about it... "Nor compare it to a creature with a similar mechanic - because there isn't really any imo and it would not necessarily give any useful information."Now i couldn't link to you because i don't find it, but it's in the friggin' forum tips and guide lines of etgcommunity that the comparation with similar cards is one of the base to define if a card is UP or OP. That's about being logic after all E.G. understandable by anyone: I don't live alone and so i can't define how much imbalanced or balanced i am until i don't compare myself with the most similar being i found and gradually go over it. Simple enough i think.
I you have anything more to say to me contact me in a PM please, even if i don't know if i will evr respond to those messages.

[AvusXIV]

Spoiler for Hidden:

In the point one you say that the formula is needed but to discuss about it in minor details it's ridicoulous(that makes no sense because one simply doesn't improve things a bit, he does until he can), while instead i think that ridicolous is the fact that you're spamming this section with off topic notes just to proove you're the absolute right, wich, pardon me. but it's plain stupid.
"The existing creatures widely vary from the costs the formula would give - because they are related to the strenghts and uses of cards."
Quotes from you*
First of all, it makes no sense because the strenght and the uses(wich is terribly generic and can means ability, atk/hp stats, or simply if it is a weapon or a creature if not a permanent), of a card, is directly linked with its cost(E.G Do you find stronger a 10/10 creature that costs 12 light or a 6/1 creature that costs 2 quanta?...) and that's why there is a rough formula to determine what the cost of a specific card should be and + you may want to know that there are some confirmed bonus that elements gets in comparison with others.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This game is no exact science and that's why from time to time people find themselves discussing about it or instead we could take the game as it is and say:_Yeah, there are no rules or idealistic values at all so it's ok to have any kind of costs in the new patch because it is right._
The second point makes clear that you know very little of what you're talking about, or at least you express yourself in a very confusional way.
Third point. Some quotes from you " You can't just count the avg stats of a creature hatched by the egg or something to come to a conclusion." Yes i can that's logic, you can make a rough estimate of how much the egg should worth. E.G.: fate egg will spawn just dragons. Would that be a clear signal that a 3+1 cost is no right? Think about it... "Nor compare it to a creature with a similar mechanic - because there isn't really any imo and it would not necessarily give any useful information."Now i couldn't link to you because i don't find it, but it's in the friggin' forum tips and guide lines of etgcommunity that the comparation with similar cards is one of the base to define if a card is UP or OP. That's about being logic after all E.G. understandable by anyone: I don't live alone and so i can't define how much imbalanced or balanced i am until i don't compare myself with the most similar being i found and gradually go over it. Simple enough i think.
I you have anything more to say to me contact me in a PM please, even if i don't know if i will evr respond to those messages.

Just lol. Take it easy

[TheAccuso]

I take things seriously when is about things i do trying to be helpful. Selfish reasonings are not in my being.

[AvusXIV]

I take things seriously when is about things i do trying to be helpful. Selfish reasonings are not in my being.

Agree, same here

@ Topic: Manuz' RT-feature is still a thing that should really be considered ^^

[OldTrees]

@TheAccuso
I agree with
The approach used
The conclusion reached
The additional problem of the base card not being worth the base price (unlike graboid)

However I think you could refine this step

The average cost of a non-upgraded creature is about 5.5.

The average cost is a good rough estimate of the average value but both are usually determined by the normal usage. A dragon is worth the same in the normal deck as it is in the fate egg deck. However many other creatures are valued under the premise they are supported by additional copies (pest) or by certain other cards (scorpions and attack buffs). So a way to refine this step would be to calculate the average value the new creature provides in a Fate Egg deck.

The cost-formula is crock to a certain degree and nobody seems to realize it or care. Let's see:

Upped Abyss Crawler. 6|6. No ability. That's the cost of...8 or 9, right?
Armagio. 1|25. Ability. That's the cost of...12, right?
Horned Frog. 3|3. No ability. That's the cost of...4, right?

You might want to understand what you critique before critiquing.
6|6 upgraded = 6 (attack) + 1 (hp) - 1to2 (upgrade) = 5 = 4 + 1 card (not 8to9)
1|25 = 1 (attack) + 3 (hp) = 4 = 3 + 1 card
1|25 + Ability that uses hp = 1 (attack) + X (value of entangled hp and ability) = X+1 = X + 1 card (where X > 3) (could be 12 but very unlikely. 4to6 is more likely)
3|3 unupped = 3 (attack) + 0 (hp) = 3 = 2 + 1 card (not 4)

The formula is useful as a rough estimate from which playtesting can refine (see your obsidian Dragon example). It is like the educated guess and check method IF you refined your educated guess method based on your results. However proper use of the formula requires playtesting to check your estimate. I am sorry that you encountered many misuses of the formula.

Not going to continue this discussion here. Merely pointing out that you might want to understand before you critique and that I agree that it is sometimes misused.

[bombzero]

How about giving it a Passive skill called Incubation: the longer it incubates the better chance for a more powerful creature. Incubation could also make it untargetable.

^this is a good idea

[ohnodavido]

fate egg as it is is way to random to spend quanta on and way to weak.  It needs something to make it that little more special!

[serprex]

Photon is 1|1. Costs 0. Why not make a 0|1 Fate Egg cost 0, instead putting all the cost in hatch? If all the cost is in the ability, then CC on the eggs only makes it a wasted draw

[CuCN]

Making it cost 0 with the cost in the ability would be too abusable with SoR.