Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game

Elements the Game => Card Ideas and Art => Topic started by: stewie on October 15, 2011, 07:18:30 am

Title: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: stewie on October 15, 2011, 07:18:30 am
Here is the idea of a defense card against  :death an  :darkness, similar as Nightfall but for light and air creatures.
The idea is that on sunrise (unupgraded) the light afects directly to  :death an  :darkness harming his vision so they probability attack is reduced. And  :light :air creatures are charged with sun energy so they attack is +1 in the sunrise.
Otherwise, in midday sun (upgraded)  :darkness and :death creatures are not so dammaged for light, and they probability attacks i reduced but not so much as in the sunrise. But  :airand :light have more effects in midday sun, they attack is still +1 but his life is +1 too because of the energy of the sun.

What you think? People would have to thing if uppgrade or not, but, just works against  :darkness and  :death!
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: Filly678 on October 15, 2011, 07:56:27 pm
Really, air?
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: mildlyfrightenedboy on October 15, 2011, 08:58:01 pm
A few notes:

You might want to change the name of the thread to "Sunrise | Midday sun" to match your card.
All creature stats are in the format of "# | #", but stat changes are in the format of "+#/+#" (see Blessing).  (The 'plus' signs may be substituted for 'minus' signs.)  (Direct) stat changes are always positive, so a stat reduction would read "gains -#/-#".  However, I see you are dealing with percentages, so I am not sure how it would work.  I am also not sure what you mean by "damage probability", so here are a few examples of how I believe the card text should read for the unupgraded version.
If you mean to say that :darkness and :death creatures lose 80% of their ATK power, the card would read:
"All :darkness and :death creatures' ATK is reduced by 80%.  All :light and :air creatures gain +1/+0."
If you mean to say that :darkness and :death creatures have an 80% chance of missing their attacks, the card would read:
"The attacks of all :darkness and :death creatures have an 80% chance to miss.  All :light and :air creatures gain +1/+0."

Although I have little to no idea what the card is supposed to do, it is rather clear that the card is overpowered.
You also need to follow the format for a card idea found here:
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5039.0.html
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: ZephyrPhantom on October 15, 2011, 09:09:10 pm
Please use the proper format. (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5039.0.html)

This card (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,8807.0.html) is similar but has done it better, IMHO.

Cards that specifically work against one element are pretty situational for the most part - the 80% miss rate for 5 quantum is overpowered even for just two elements - at most you can have 50% for a 6 quantum cost (Dusk Mantle), so the miss rate should probably be lowered to 40% if you intend to keep the effects.
 
I don't like this card very much as it's essentially a combination of Dusk Mantle and Eclipse for :light, and thus very unoriginal.  IMHO, you should find a more unique effect for this card.

Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: stewie on October 15, 2011, 09:35:41 pm
A few notes:

You might want to change the name of the thread to "Sunrise | Midday sun" to match your card.
All creature stats are in the format of "# | #", but stat changes are in the format of "+#/+#" (see Blessing).  (The 'plus' signs may be substituted for 'minus' signs.)  (Direct) stat changes are always positive, so a stat reduction would read "gains -#/-#".  However, I see you are dealing with percentages, so I am not sure how it would work.  I am also not sure what you mean by "damage probability", so here are a few examples of how I believe the card text should read for the unupgraded version.
If you mean to say that :darkness and :death creatures lose 80% of their ATK power, the card would read:
"All :darkness and :death creatures' ATK is reduced by 80%.  All :light and :air creatures gain +1/+0."
If you mean to say that :darkness and :death creatures have an 80% chance of missing their attacks, the card would read:
"The attacks of all :darkness and :death creatures have an 80% chance to miss.  All :light and :air creatures gain +1/+0."

Although I have little to no idea what the card is supposed to do, it is rather clear that the card is overpowered.
You also need to follow the format for a card idea found here:
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5039.0.html
Yes I mean "The attacks of all :darkness and :death creatures have an 80% chance to miss.  All :light and :air creatures gain +1/+0."
Sorry, I'm bad in english...
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: Nepycros on October 15, 2011, 09:48:38 pm
I don't really like something that for only 4 quanta causes an 80% chance to miss, when Dusk only does 50% for 4 :darkness.

OP!
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: mildlyfrightenedboy on October 15, 2011, 10:26:59 pm
I don't really like something that for only 4 quanta causes an 80% chance to miss, when Dusk only does 50% for 4 :darkness.

OP!
Well, the 80% miss rate only applies to :death and :darkness creatures, so it might be balanced, just ridiculously situational.  How are you going to win with this?  A Skydive deck against a death-effect deck, or some other strange :darkness / :death deck?  It wouldn't even work against a Pestal deck. 
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: nerd1 on October 15, 2011, 11:40:54 pm
you might want to format this better, here is a link to a card formatter:
http://xenocidius.webs.com/postgenerator/creatorbeta.htm (http://xenocidius.webs.com/postgenerator/creatorbeta.htm)
also, in a war match, this plus protect weapon/artifact would be much to OP, so I would reccoment giving it a passive ability that prevents it from becoming immaterial, like saying "This card is Tangible."
Title: Re: Sunset | Midday sun
Post by: stewie on October 16, 2011, 06:16:50 am
Hm, yes this card is little stupid maybe haha. Just forget it, i have post 2 others that I think are more plausible.
blarg: