Ask the Idea Guru

[furballdn]

Tossing an idea at you, OT:

Acorn|Acorn (Creature,  )

0 |0

0/1 | 0/1

  : Grow. Turns into Sapling. |  : Grow.  Turns into Sapling.


Sapling|Sapling

1/3 | 1/4

  : Grow.  Turns into Oak.  |  : Grow.  Turns into Ancient Oak.

Oak|Ancient Oak.

4/5 | 5/6

  Propagate.  Generates an Acorn. | 1 Propagate.  Generates an (upgraded) Acorn.

Thoughts?

2 + 3 turns for a 5|6 creature that generates acorns. This feels much worse than just casting mitosis on something. Either bump up the stats insanely high for the oak or cut out the sapling. If you'll notice the "evolving" concept of grabboid, it jumps from 2atk to 8|10 atk. 1 turn delay means quite a lot.

[memimemi]

2 + 3 turns for a 5|6 creature that generates acorns. This feels much worse than just casting mitosis on something. Either bump up the stats insanely high for the oak or cut out the sapling. If you'll notice the "evolving" concept of grabboid, it jumps from 2atk to 8|10 atk. 1 turn delay means quite a lot.

Fair enough.  I like the multiple-turn delay - would it be fair, in your opinion, to just make the growth costs 0, and bump the stats on the upped versions?  0 quanta + 1 card + 3 turns = big hitter?

[furballdn]

Let's compare graboid evolving to shrieker.
1 + 1 turns = +6atk

If we look at it this way, the 1 probably contributes a +2atk, so 1 turn should be worth 3-4 atk at least. Your acorn idea needs 3 turns to fully come out. That means if it starts with 0atk, the final form should have around 9-12atk. With the 2 you spent, probably around 11-13atk.

Then compare that to dragon.
Is 2 + 3 turns = 10 ?

[OldTrees]

Tossing an idea at you, OT:

Acorn|Acorn (Creature,  )

0 |0

0/1 | 0/1

  : Grow. Turns into Sapling. |  : Grow.  Turns into Sapling.


Sapling|Sapling

1/3 | 1/4

  : Grow.  Turns into Oak.  |  : Grow.  Turns into Ancient Oak.

Oak|Ancient Oak.

4/5 | 5/6

  Propagate.  Generates an Acorn. | 1 Propagate.  Generates an (upgraded) Acorn.

Thoughts?

It has been done before as 2 cards (rather than 3)

Graboid is too efficient. I think it is OP by at least 1 unit (+cost or -atk).

0|1 for 0 + 1 card is weaker than Photon (and even weaker than Ray of Light because there was no meaningful upgrade for the acorn)
1|3/4 for 1 + 1 turn + 1 card is still weaker than Photon (and even weaker than Ray of Light because there was no meaningful upgrade for the sapling)
4|5 + generation for 2 + 2 turns + 1 card might be balanced
5|6 + generation for 2 + 2 turns + 1 card + 1 upgrade might be balanced (Here there was a meaningful upgrade. Although changing the activation cost was insignificant since it will still cost 2 .)
Warning: These estimates assume that turns are a linear cost. The other possibility is 2 turns is more expensive than 2x 1 turn.

[memimemi]

Let's compare graboid evolving to shrieker.
1 + 1 turns = +6atk

If we look at it this way, the 1 probably contributes a +2atk, so 1 turn should be worth 3-4 atk at least. Your acorn idea needs 3 turns to fully come out. That means if it starts with 0atk, the final form should have around 9-12atk. With the 2 you spent, probably around 11-13atk.

Then compare that to dragon.
Is 2 + 3 turns = 10 ?

Oldtrees, you ninja'd this one.  Instead of me rewriting it, what do you think of these amendments?  They feel a bit better to me.

Okay, by your analysis, if 1 turn ~ 4 Atk, then:

(unupped) Acorn 0 , 0/1.   0: Grow.
(unupped) Sapling (no cost), 3/6.  0: Grow.
Oak (no cost), 6/8.  0: Propagate.


(upgraded) Acorn 0 , 0/3.  0: Grow.
(upgraded) Sapling (no cost), 4/8. 0: Grow.
Ancient Oak (no cost), 8/16.  0: Propagate.


So, unupped, 1st turn cost 1 card, 0 dmg dealt.  2nd turn [1 card] cost, 3 dmg dealt.  3rd turn [1 card] cost, (6+3=9) dmg dealt.  Average: 3 dmg/turn, as with Spark; 1 card|3 cards, 3 turns|1 turn.  Delayed, but resilient.  Is a turn worth roughly a card slot?

Upped: 1st turn cost 1 card, 0 dmg.  2nd turn [1 card] cost, 4 dmg dealt.  3rd turn [1 card] cost, 12 dmg dealt.  Average: 4 dmg/turn, less than BL, but far, far more resilient.

Does that look a little better?

[furballdn]

gogo fractal saplings. Way better than fractaling grabboids or lycans and frogs!

[OldTrees]

Let's compare graboid evolving to shrieker.
1 + 1 turns = +6atk

If we look at it this way, the 1 probably contributes a +2atk, so 1 turn should be worth 3-4 atk at least. Your acorn idea needs 3 turns to fully come out. That means if it starts with 0atk, the final form should have around 9-12atk. With the 2 you spent, probably around 11-13atk.

Then compare that to dragon.
Is 2 + 3 turns = 10 ?

Oldtrees, you ninja'd this one.  Instead of me rewriting it, what do you think of these amendments?  They feel a bit better to me.

1) It has already been done as 2 cards.
2) 1 turn < 4 atk.
3) Costs should be placed it the correct places. There should be a reason for not growing a sapling. An activation cost is the normal method.
4) Sapling was improved but overshot balance.

[furballdn]

Blarp brought up a good point on Guardian Compared to cloak, it mostly only protects 2 creatures whereas cloak protects your entire field for the same cost.



What makes rational thinking (with logic) the right way of thinking?

[OldTrees]

Blarp brought up a good point on Guardian Compared to cloak, it mostly only protects 2 creatures whereas cloak protects your entire field for the same cost.

What makes rational thinking (with logic) the right way of thinking?

Guardian has CC vulnerability, PC immunity and attack.


What makes rational thinking the right way of thinking?
Hmm. Since we are getting into philosophy I should abandon some grammatical shorthand.
1) I admit that [I think]_n->inf that I know nothing.
2) If I had a logical argument that concludes rational thinking is the right way of thinking then I would be begging the question by assuming the conclusion.
3) I have no practice thinking outside of bounded rationality.
4) If you define irrational as bounded rationality with all false premises and rational as bounded rationality with all true premises then both are valid ways of thinking because one does not choose whether one's accepted premises are true or false.
5) Finally my best response is that "right" implies "correct" or "true". Logic is a tool that connects "true" premises to and only to "true" conclusions. The question assumes its answer.

[furballdn]

How much is 1 upkeep worth? 2?

Would etg benefit from a field slot that affects the whole field like nightfall and flooding? Should there be one field slot for each player or one field slot for the whole board?

[OldTrees]

How much is 1 upkeep worth? 2?

Would etg benefit from a field slot that affects the whole field like nightfall and flooding? Should there be one field slot for each player or one field slot for the whole board?

I don't know. Flooding is the only example and it is hard to make an accurate comparison. I would assume it would be closer to 4 . However I do not have enough data to calculate how imprecise that estimate is.

[sarcasm]
  It cannot flood at night? Thank goodness!
[/sarcasm]
There is no reason why global enchantments would exclude other global enchantments. Likewise there is no reason global enchantments should not strengthen as duplicates are played.

[ZephyrPhantom]

[sarcasm]
  It cannot flood at night? Thank goodness!
[/sarcasm]

There is no reason why global enchantments would exclude other global enchantments. Likewise there is no reason global enchantments should not strengthen as duplicates are played.

Are there good exceptions such as (and besides) Sunrise | Morning Sun and Nightfall's not stacking to avoid potential balance concerns, or does this rule just apply to global enchants in general?