*Author

Iblis

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46854#msg46854
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2010, 08:03:45 pm »
Sorry, could have sworn I answered that :P

Yes, I would imagine the Elder Tree dying. I know an upgraded card killing itself seems a little strange, but it can easily be kept alive by various means and at least it won't eventually heal your opponent.

miniwally

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46861#msg46861
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2010, 08:08:33 pm »
Sorry, could have sworn I answered that :P

Yes, I would imagine the Elder Tree dying. I know an upgraded card killing itself seems a little strange, but it can easily be kept alive by various means and at least it won't eventually heal your opponent.
It's not that wierd considering ball lightning kills itself on the first turn.

sniperbob613

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46868#msg46868
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2010, 08:23:14 pm »
it's a good idea, just needs some serious balancing. I like the idea of the unupped losing attack per turn and the old tree gaining attack per turn... perhaps young tree could be 5/1 and cost 2 to give unupped life rush a chance, but still making it ridiculously squishy, and i think the elder tree should maybe start 5/5 so you don't have to wait as long for it to pan out.

miniwally

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46872#msg46872
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2010, 08:28:55 pm »
it's a good idea, just needs some serious balancing. I like the idea of the unupped losing attack per turn and the old tree gaining attack per turn... perhaps young tree could be 5/1 and cost 2 to give unupped life rush a chance, but still making it ridiculously squishy, and i think the elder tree should maybe start 5/5 so you don't have to wait as long for it to pan out.
Doesn't that make the elder tree do overall less damage thoug but I think it's only 10 extra damage but could still be decisive. I'm still not sure where I stand on this card I definitely like the idea I'm just not so sure on how it's applied I think you'd just need to address some of the isues with the card.

I'd also like to ask if the artwork is yours (no offence) but I don't think it is seeing as you haven't marked it so this paired with some awesome artwork could make a nice addition to the game.

sniperbob613

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46880#msg46880
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2010, 08:38:39 pm »
yeah, it makes it do 10 less damage overall, but most life mono decks are rush decks and i don't really see this becoming big in other decks... The best combination it has going for it is this + rage potion and then lobo w/ 1 hp left, so if we make it cost a bit more than the cockatrice but do more damage over the course of a game (which with life rush shouldn't be too long) then that's a good thing. I wonder what these would do with adrenaline though...

Iblis

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46899#msg46899
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2010, 09:49:08 pm »
I'm still not sure where I stand on this card I definitely like the idea I'm just not so sure on how it's applied I think you'd just need to address some of the isues with the card.
Which is exactly why I asked for everyone's thoughts, I agree that the idea definitely needs some work, I'm just not quite sure how to rework it.

Personally, I think Sapling should be left as it is (or perhaps with a higher cost, probably 8 :life) so that it bridges that gap between cockatrice and dragons, but makes them that little bit worse than dragons due to it losing attack.

But certainly, the Elder Tree needs work. I do like sniperbob613's idea to give the Elder Tree more attack though, but that only gives it 5 turns to live - perhaps 5|7 for 9 :life?

I'd also like to ask if the artwork is yours (no offence) but I don't think it is seeing as you haven't marked it so this paired with some awesome artwork could make a nice addition to the game.
You're right, the artwork isn't mine. I just got the images from google. The Sapling is a stock photo and the Elder Tree isn't credited

sniperbob613

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg46945#msg46945
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2010, 10:55:34 pm »
yeah something like 5/7, but i think 9's a bit too steep. make it 5 (2 more than an upgraded cockatrice) because it's a very situational card that will only sometimes be better than the cockatrice.

Iblis

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg47181#msg47181
« Reply #19 on: April 02, 2010, 01:25:05 pm »
Updated cards.

I think 5 is a bit too little, so I left it at 6 for the Elder Tree

Zarovich

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg47255#msg47255
« Reply #20 on: April 02, 2010, 03:53:19 pm »
I'm almost positive that the skills on these cards are passive because it doesn't say they cost any quanta

Iblis

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg47277#msg47277
« Reply #21 on: April 02, 2010, 05:13:25 pm »
You're right Zarovich, they are meant as passive skills

cthulhu

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg47289#msg47289
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2010, 05:29:31 pm »
If they are passive, then wouldn't the sapling eventually get negative power and be useless?

miniwally

  • Guest
Re: Sapling | Elder Tree https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=4750.msg47371#msg47371
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2010, 07:50:01 pm »
If they are passive, then wouldn't the sapling eventually get negative power and be useless?
Yes we've already discussed this that's the point you've got to make sure that you don't use them too early I can't remember where we finished on the subject of whether it stopped at one but personally I think it should stop at 0.

 

anything
blarg: