Swarm | Swarm

[esran]

i agree with oldtree, but then again, oldtree is never wrong.

[ZephyrPhantom]

My General Idea is that a comparable number of uses of an Eternal Spell should cost at least as much as 7 copies (ignoring the 6 of a kind rule) of an existing similar card or theoretical card.

Hmm. Out of curiosity, is this just hypothetical or actually drawn from a comparison with an ingame card such as Fractal/Mitosis? Could you clarify this a bit? (I'm not sure if you simply mean multiplying the card's cost by x7 (which would make it 21 O.o) or if 7 copies has a different cost value.)

Not yet. Playtesting a 3 |4 version would give data.

The current playtesting system requires at least two people to be able to playtest. Would anyone be willing to volunteer? (For more info, see the 'Card Idea Playtesting' link in my signature.)

[OldTrees]

My General Idea is that a comparable number of uses of an Eternal Spell should cost at least as much as 7 copies (ignoring the 6 of a kind rule) of an existing similar card or theoretical card.

Hmm. Out of curiosity, is this just hypothetical or actually drawn from a comparison with an ingame card such as Fractal/Mitosis? Could you clarify this a bit? (I'm not sure if you simply mean multiplying the card's cost by x7 (which would make it 21 O.o) or if 7 copies has a different cost value.)

Not yet. Playtesting a 3 |4 version would give data.

The current playtesting system requires at least two people to be able to playtest. Would anyone be willing to volunteer? (For more info, see the 'Card Idea Playtesting' link in my signature.)

The 7 copy mark is an attempt to generalize niche balancing. Most cards cannot break the 6 card limit. Making Eternal inefficient at less that 7 uses helps preserves existing niches.

Process:
Create an Eternal spell [Ex: Summon Photon]
Find in game analog to compare to. (If none exist then make a theoretical card to compare to.) [Photon]
Find the cost to use that analog 7 times. (Pretend the 6 card limit does not exist. I would say multiply 7 but that is not always the same thing.) [0 quanta + 7 cards]
Find the cost to use the eternal spell 7 times. [7Z quanta + 1 card]
Set both costs equal to each other. (This should look like "X quanta + 7 cards = Y quanta + 1 card") [0 quanta + 7 cards = 7Z quanta + 1 card]
Solve for the cost of the eternal spell. [6 cards = 7Z quanta, 6 cards / 7 = Z quanta, 12 quanta / 7 ~= 2 quanta]

If you PM me on Saturday or Sunday, I might be available to playtest.
However I recommend others also try playtesting.

[dragonsdemesne]

Good idea. i don't see the usefulness of the swarm ability. it makes them just bigger, isn't it?

It's not particularly useful, but would protect against some CC if you get enough.  It would also be funny with catapult as an infinite ammo source :p  (though you can use mitosis/any phat gravity creature in that duo anyway)

[SnoWeb]

If this is airborne (as it probably should) it would be very strong combined with SoFr.

As it has been said already the healing on the upped one is thematically wrong and not needed. Devour, destroy or any gravity like ability would be also too strong partly because of the low cost and partly because of the synergy with catapult.

I would rather give the upped card a X% chance of critical hit instead (following the SoFr idea).

[OdinVanguard]

Good idea. i don't see the usefulness of the swarm ability. it makes them just bigger, isn't it?

It's not particularly useful, but would protect against some CC if you get enough.  It would also be funny with catapult as an infinite ammo source :p  (though you can use mitosis/any phat gravity creature in that duo anyway)

Swarm ability will make it very ugly if used with catapult

[esran]

with the photon example, it works until you try the same equation for ROL. 2 mana to eternally summon ROLS? i would put that in my ROL deck faster than you can say "maybe thats too cheap". you really do have to balance on a case by case basis, and any eternal card that summons an existing creature will overshadow that creature.

[OldTrees]

with the photon example, it works until you try the same equation for ROL. 2 mana to eternally summon ROLS? i would put that in my ROL deck faster than you can say "maybe thats too cheap". you really do have to balance on a case by case basis, and any eternal card that summons an existing creature will overshadow that creature.

Tip:
Ray of Light does not cost 0 quanta + 1 card. It costs 0 quanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade. Upgrades are worth ~1-2 quanta.
So upgraded would be 7x (0 quanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade) = 7Xquanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade.
Or 6/7 x (1 card + 1 upgrade) = Xquanta
6/7 x (3.5) = Xquanta
X=3
This is a guideline that needs to be double checked in the specific case. It does provide a good starting estimate.

[esran]

except the card that summons the ROLS would also be upgraded. how does that go into the equation. i guess you could count the upgrade 7 times for the ROL, and only once for the eternal card, which would put summoning a ROL somewhere around 4/3 quanta, and probably light quanta. maybe even more. if we did it like that, we probably could balance creature summoning, but i just dont like the idea of being able to summon creatures just based on quanta, without regard for card usage. i would prefer if each eternal card was only usable once a turn, but was slightly stronger.

[OldTrees]

except the card that summons the ROLS would also be upgraded. how does that go into the equation. i guess you could count the upgrade 7 times for the ROL, and only once for the eternal card, which would put summoning a ROL somewhere around 4/3 quanta, and probably light quanta. maybe even more. if we did it like that, we probably could balance creature summoning, but i just dont like the idea of being able to summon creatures just based on quanta, without regard for card usage. i would prefer if each eternal card was only usable once a turn, but was slightly stronger.

Tip:
Ray of Light does not cost 0 quanta + 1 card. It costs 0 quanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade. Upgrades are worth ~1-2 quanta.
So upgraded would be 7x (0 quanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade) = 7Xquanta + 1 card + 1 upgrade.
Or 6/7 x (1 card + 1 upgrade) = Xquanta
6/7 x (3.5) = Xquanta
X=3
This is a guideline that needs to be double checked in the specific case. It does provide a good starting estimate.

The once per turn version is called Mitosis.

It would help if you could identify and explain why you "dont like the idea of being able to summon creatures just based on quanta".

[esran]

because it allows a deck that is all eternal cards and quanta producers, that is able to fill its field with creatures incredibly fast. it makes empathatic bond decks be able to reach ridiculous amounts of healing in riciculous amounts of time. because a deck with one of each of the elements of eternal spells, and 18 quanta towers would be incredibly fast and deadly. because of a lot of reasons.

[ZephyrPhantom]

because it allows a deck that is all eternal cards and quanta producers, that is able to fill its field with creatures incredibly fast. it makes empathatic bond decks be able to reach ridiculous amounts of healing in riciculous amounts of time. because a deck with one of each of the elements of eternal spells, and 18 quanta towers would be incredibly fast and deadly. because of a lot of reasons.

That's assuming that there are at least 4-6 Eternal spells that summon creatures and work together with each other. I've only seen three Eternal Spells on the CIA total with only two having a distant synergy provided you have a Rustler and lots of status effects and one that actually summons creatures (this one.) Given that there is no carbon copy of Fractal or Mitosis in another element I'd doubt more than 2 or 3 elements would even get access to Eternal creatures in the first place.

If this is airborne (as it probably should) it would be very strong combined with SoFr.

As it has been said already the healing on the upped one is thematically wrong and not needed. Devour, destroy or any gravity like ability would be also too strong partly because of the low cost and partly because of the synergy with catapult.

I would rather give the upped card a X% chance of critical hit instead (following the SoFr idea).

Sounds plausible, though it would take a while to get a succesful OTK with critical hit. (Assuming Locust Crits 100% of the time it would do 1.5 ~= 2 damage. 23 Locusts deal 46 damage if they all crit. Skyblitz Locusts that all succesfully crit would deal 82 damage.) That'll probably also have to be playtested. (Speaking of which, are there any other volunteers? While OT and I could do this ourselves it would be greatly appreciated if someone else took the time to try a match as I'm somewhat occupied these days.)