Small Moon | Great Luna

[Kael Hate]

change the second part to: may add or remove  during each phase. This card changes phase each turn.

Acceptable.

[mafidufa]

To put in my 2 cents in the complexity thing. Lets look at this card versus Adrenaline from the perspective of a player who doesn't know what the technical details are.

Adrenaline card text:The target creature attacks multiple times per turn.  Smaller creatures gain more extra attacks.

Newbie player reading it: OK it works better with small creatures, I'll try it out in my life deck.

Newbie player plays adrenaline on a frog, notices it attacks 4 times. He tries it out on a cockatrice, notices it only attacks three times and some of the attacks are reduced. Newbie player is curious and decides to play on an emerald dragon. It only attacks twice and the second attack is vastly reduced. In, potentially, one game the broad mechanics of adrenaline have been revealed and newbie player has a good idea of how to use the card. Sure there are other subtleties like the whole on-hit abilities thing that have not been revealed but Adrenaline is now a useful card for that player and he has gained some strategic information about how to use it.

Moon Phasing text: Generates and may add or remove  during each phase. This card changes phase each turn.

Newbie player reading it: OK, I have a rainbow that uses those elements, let me try it out and see.

Newbie player plays Moon phasing. A bunch of quanta changes happen. Newbie player also has quantum pillars out so he is unsure how exactly Moon phasing is changing his quanta but it sure is doing something. The wildly fluctuating Darkness, Light, and Water are noticed but without knowing exactly when and how they are changing, he cannot take advantage of it. In all the confusion and the Quantum pillar effects, the Entropy changes go completely unnoticed. At the end of the game, Moon phasing is not a useful card for him and he has no idea how to use it. Electrum is still tight so he's not about to go lose some games to figure it out. Plus losing games isn't fun.

Long story short, my point is you don't need to know the technical details of adrenaline to use it in a semi-intelligent way. You do need to know the technical details of this card to use it in a semi-intelligent way. That means this card is too complicated.

Aside from all that, or maybe exacerbating the problem, this just wouldn't be complete without affecting lycanthropes and werewolves in some way. 

[Lanidrak]

Hehe... Well said mafidufa, I still stand by the fact that this is over-complicated.

And just to elaborate on your point about the player now understanding the basics of Adrenaline... If he was to use adrenaline on his Frog, because it has Poison and he wants to have this frog attack as much as possible before it dies - let's say his opponent has a Bone Wall. It is a lesson well learnt, that he will leave this game safe in the knowledge that Adrenaline affects more than just the creatures attack.

He might then venture onto the forums and then we have a new member of our community. But that aside, there are no 'hard lessons' to be learnt from this card, it is just downright confusing. Maybe in the trainer, or under laboratory conditions will it be possible to extract exactly what it is this card achieves for you, and why it should be in your deck. But like Mafidufa pointed out, a player can have this intimate knowledge of Adrenaline after maybe one or two rounds. To learn this card, it might require ten to twenty games.

As for a card that affects Werewolves and Lycanthropes... I was considering editing my post about creature Classification. There will be Nocturnal Creatures and then Werewolves. Nocturnals get +1/+1 when it is Night time, and Werewolves get +2/+2 when it is a Full Moon... But I'll save this post for there.

So, back to your card idea.

It is actually 4 cards in one? It transforms each turn?

Full - Doubles Wate, Gains Entropy, Doubles Light, Halves Darkness
Waxing - Halves Water, Gains Little Entropy
New - Doubles Water, Loses Entropy, Halves Light, Doubles Darkness
Waning - Halves Water, Gain Little Entropy

So when you play it, what phase is it in?

It would makes sense for the card to transform, displaying the relevant text of what it does that turn.

Ie. When it is a Full Moon - "You gain double & . You gain 1 . You only gain half "
And so on, and so forth.

And then this leaves me with one final problem to the way this card works.

So I have 2 Water Pillars, 2 Entropy Pillars, 2 Light Pillars and 2 Darkness Pillars. My Mark is Fire.

Full Moon - I get 4 Water, 3 Entropy, 4 Light and 1 Darkness.
Waxing Moon - I get 1 Water, 1 Entropy, 2 Light and 4 Darkness
New - I get 4 Water, 1 Entropy, 1 Light, and 4 Darkness.
Waning - 1 Get 1 Water, 1 Entropy, 2 Light and 2 Darkness

Can you see where I'm coming from, and why I have such complexity issues with this card? Is there a difference between Gains Entropy and Gains Little Entropy?

Sometimes it is not enough just to post your card idea in the 'official' table. I suggest you post your idea in a raw format, explaining - in detail - what the card does, what it's benefits are, what it's disadvantages are, and why you think it is needed in the game. Then, once you have some intelligible discussion about what people think about your card - you can then tabulate it and put it in the official way. I've noticed quite a few of your new suggestions in your Quantum Mechanics series have very little to no responses.

[Wisemage]

I understand the idea but it is WAY to complex to be put into an online card game.

[Lanidrak]

I understand the idea but it is WAY to complex to be put into an online card game.

That does seem to be the general consensus. I hope Kael Hate makes some changes, because these idea's are not bad, just too complex.

[Kael Hate]

I understand the idea but it is WAY to complex to be put into an online card game.

Are you serious? The digital environment lends itself to complexity because the computer can do all the calculations for you. Unlike a Cardboard version where you have to do the work, in elements and anything else digital, the working is all done for you.

Other than any mathematics that the computer can do, what is so complex about this card that would prevent it from being playable?

[Lanidrak]

The entire concept about it.

The way the card changes into different cards/causes different effects.
The way the card alters 4 different types of quanta production.
The way it gives both positive and negative effects at the same time.
The way it works as a pillar yet is a permanent (the game doesn't have any Quantum producing permanent s except Pillars)

Can you please reply to my earlier post : http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,5837.msg66479#msg66479
Specifically the section that follows where I say "so, back to your card idea"

[Kael Hate]

Hadn't realised you made a modification after the fact.

So, back to your card idea.

It is actually 4 cards in one? It transforms each turn?

Full - Doubles Wate, Gains Entropy, Doubles Light, Halves Darkness
Waxing - Halves Water, Gains Little Entropy
New - Doubles Water, Loses Entropy, Halves Light, Doubles Darkness
Waning - Halves Water, Gain Little Entropy

So when you play it, what phase is it in?

Full moon, unless 1 is already in play in which case it matches the cluster already in play.

It would makes sense for the card to transform, displaying the relevant text of what it does that turn.

Ie. When it is a Full Moon - "You gain double & . You gain 1 . You only gain half "
And so on, and so forth.

Its not that you gain double Light, it doubles your current light. Ie you have 6 , when this trggers you will gain 6 light. If we go with the 5 card option thens sure, but the 5 card option brings up issues of returning to hand and other card flows.

And then this leaves me with one final problem to the way this card works.

So I have 2 Water Pillars, 2 Entropy Pillars, 2 Light Pillars and 2 Darkness Pillars. My Mark is Fire.

Full Moon - I get 4 Water, 3 Entropy, 4 Light and 1 Darkness.
Waxing Moon - I get 1 Water, 1 Entropy, 2 Light and 4 Darkness
New - I get 4 Water, 1 Entropy, 1 Light, and 4 Darkness.
Waning - 1 Get 1 Water, 1 Entropy, 2 Light and 2 Darkness

If you have 1 Luna and 10 of each quanta when it triggers you will end up with the following.

Starting | 10 , 10 , 10 , 10 , 10 , 10 , 10
Full Moon | 11 , 11 , 11 , 20 , 13 , 20 , 5
Waxing Moon | 11 , 11 , 11 , 5 , 11 , 10 , 10
New Moon | 11 , 11 , 11 , 20 , 7 , 5 , 20
Waning Moon | 11 , 11 , 11 , 5 , 11 , 10 , 10

Pillars and quanta production do not affect the card in any way.

Can you see where I'm coming from, and why I have such complexity issues with this card? Is there a difference between Gains Entropy and Gains Little Entropy?

Sometimes it is not enough just to post your card idea in the 'official' table. I suggest you post your idea in a raw format, explaining - in detail - what the card does, what it's benefits are, what it's disadvantages are, and why you think it is needed in the game. Then, once you have some intelligible discussion about what people think about your card - you can then tabulate it and put it in the official way. I've noticed quite a few of your new suggestions in your Quantum Mechanics series have very little to no responses.

If I've answered it elsewhere I tend not to go over it again, also it may be that it is a card I haven't had time to go over the review yet.

I'm going to rework this card to comunicate it clearer because my shorthand is too confusing for most. Oddly I agree with you in regards to the table but it was decided that this was the best way to show the card idea so thats how I've got it.

[Lanidrak]

The table is the best way to show a completed, balanced and well-known idea. So when people look at it, they can remember the discussion that was held in forging the card to what it now is.

But, for a complex idea, I much rather prefer a line or two stating it's cost and what it does. To me, it's name is irrelevant and the element it belongs to is arguable. Once the cost and its ability has been stated, I'd much rather see plain text - on it's pro's/con's, specific strategies, where it would be really good, and where it would be not so good. What counters it? What does it counter? How do you feel about it? And the most important of all WHY you think it should be implemented into the game? So yeah, I'd much rather see all of that information displayed as plain text, than a Table which tries to convey all of that in a few words.

Ultimately, what you just replied to me (after 19# subsequent posters to this idea thread) would have been extremely useful in your first post (containing the Table). Sometimes, you just have to spell things out to people. Sure, the game is played in English, I'd hazard a guess and say 99% of people who play Elements have at least some knowledge of English. That is not to say it is their first language. The second thing that is useful to remember, is that not everyone who plays Elements is of the same age/maturity/education/background as yourself. So as a general rule of thumb, keep things simple and you'll get positive responses.

Now, I'm not having a go, or making an attack on you, or anything. It's just frustrating to see one thread with #19 replies that do very little to progress an idea, to balance it, to make it user-friendly. It is particularly frustrating (maybe it's just me) but when a new idea is posted in the Idea's section, it is over-taken by older topics and more often than not, new topics being posted. This results in many a good idea being buried behind a lot of shit - for want of a better word. Now I'm not saying your idea is bad, now that I understand it, I quite like it. I don't like to rack my brain and try to picture a card idea in a game-situation to see if it is valuable or not. Especially when it is late.

Anyways, I'm ranting. Thanks for simplifying the card a little bit - and I'd suggest you revert to 'plain text' instead of putting a complex idea into a 'table'.

Quick Edit:

I would much rather see this card implemented as a sort of 'Global Effect'. A card type of which there can only be one in play at any given time - a new one will over-ride what existed before. A Global Effect card, as it's name suggests should effect both players. It should also have an Upkeep Cost (like Flooding). Perhaps Global Effect cards could alter the game-board's background? Kind of killing two birds with one stone. Full Moon, Half Moon, Crescent and New Moon backdrops for the relevant Phase the Lunar Cycle card is in.

[sSethia]

I kind of like this idea of switching around quantas. Right now, some Elements players aren't satisfied with the "standard" FG Rainbow layout, and they would like some variety. I think this card would open up a lot of new strategies  that would help make elements more fun than it already is.

[Kael Hate]

Added Picture
Reworded card to try and make newguy friendly
Upgraded card is more technical and basic card less technical
Rebalanced cost to effect ratio

Hopefully its a better balance of technical and playability.

[timewaesther]

I don't understand the need for this. While I understand that the computer can do all of the calculations, there is no need. Elements has very few cards. There is a large quantity of of simple cards, just as interesting, that can be used before jumping to unnecessary complexity. A card game should take simple ideas, and make them complex through the strategies they can be used in. Even MTG, a complicated and strategic card game, has it's Grizzly Bears.