New concepts = failure

[Ajit]

i know what this is like. my friend who also plays Elements is always-pretty much- saying i'm overextending with my new ideas (not just for elements). Boo archetypes!
as for a solution, make the pictures of the cards in the crucible/forge blank, leaving only the names showing. This will require EVERYONE to at least go to the discussion page, which might make them more interested

While that's a solution, I don't know how effective it would be...  It might just make people less likely to vote.  I mean then the next thing we know, we'll have to leave the names blank and they just say "CARD 1 LINK" "CARD 2 LINK" so that the cards with the coolest names don't get the advantage.

[Ajit]

or for a different solution, get scaredgirl or some other mod to make a separate sub-category for new concept cards.
with a new sub forum place, only the people who are interested in new concepts would likely vote there,  and be willing to look at the discussion about it

This I like more.  Interesting.. But I think that separating them from the crowd is almost making one group more or less likely to be voted upwards.

[EmeraldTiger]

link requested http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,19562.0.html

[OldTrees]

I find the "There is no code to support this in the game" argument comes up a lot, which is silly considering that if Zanz were to add new cards he has to add new code anyway.

The argument when used correctly is a minor disadvantage to the card and should not stop the card's progress. Too many people misuse the argument.

as for a solution, make the pictures of the cards in the crucible/forge blank, leaving only the names showing. This will require EVERYONE to at least go to the discussion page, which might make them more interested

This could work!
Cons:
I would discourage voting [extra effort always does]

Pros:
The cards are more likely to be read

[ZephyrPhantom]

i know what this is like. my friend who also plays Elements is always-pretty much- saying i'm overextending with my new ideas (not just for elements). Boo archetypes!
as for a solution, make the pictures of the cards in the crucible/forge blank, leaving only the names showing. This will require EVERYONE to at least go to the discussion page, which might make them more interested

No offense meant, but your friend is a bit insensitive for saying that.  When making card ideas, there is no limit to creativity.

While that's a solution, I don't know how effective it would be...  It might just make people less likely to vote.  I mean then the next thing we know, we'll have to leave the names blank and they just say "CARD 1 LINK" "CARD 2 LINK" so that the cards with the coolest names don't get the advantage.

This would work... but the only question is how well will it work? If this was implemented, it'd take longer for voters to look at cards rather than briefly glancing at them, and might drive voters away.

EDIT: Oldtrees, you are a master ninja by now.

[Rutarete]

or for a different solution, get scaredgirl or some other mod to make a separate sub-category for new concept cards.
with a new sub forum place, only the people who are interested in new concepts would likely vote there,  and be willing to look at the discussion about it

This I like more.  Interesting.. But I think that separating them from the crowd is almost making one group more or less likely to be voted upwards.

well, that is up to the community, which is very large right now (i think)
perhaps it should be tried out for a few weeks, and we can see how it fares

[Rutarete]

i know what this is like. my friend who also plays Elements is always-pretty much- saying i'm overextending with my new ideas (not just for elements). Boo archetypes!
as for a solution, make the pictures of the cards in the crucible/forge blank, leaving only the names showing. This will require EVERYONE to at least go to the discussion page, which might make them more interested

No offense meant, but your friend is a bit insensitive for saying that.  When making card ideas, there is no limit to creativity.

i supposes he's a little insensitive at times, but the issue is really that i'm a much more radical thinker than he is

[QuantumT]

I'm not completely opposed to the idea of having a selected council within the CIA that voted on the cards.

For that to be any good, I suggest perhaps 7 representatives (whose method of selection could be anything from the Card Curator picking them or having the community vote).  These 7 reps would have to be experienced players.  They would have to be intelligent enough to investigate each card and give them all equal consideration.  They wouldn't be allowed to vote for their own cards.  Each rep would get 4 votes in each element's crucible (because of the large number of cards in proportion to the amount of voters).  Then they would each get 3 votes in forge.

Pros;
- less people just voting for themselves.
- the reps would in theory vote for better reasons than "Oh that bunny is so cute I'll vote for it".
- they would in theory investigate each card better than your average voter, therefore giving each equal consideration.

Cons;
- less community interaction (less sense of what the community as a whole likes)
- would have to come up with a solution for if one or more of the reps didn't vote that week.
- those 7 all of the sudden have more power individually in determining who gets through, making bribes more of a possibility.

I think this idea has some potential, but the cons you listed are worth considering. Here's some suggestions to help alleviate them somewhat.

- less community interaction (less sense of what the community as a whole likes)

The voting could be done in a 50/50 split between the community and the voters, thus still giving the community some say, but getting some of the benefits of the card voters as well.

- would have to come up with a solution for if one or more of the reps didn't vote that week

Perhaps increase the number to the point where a single person not voting wouldn't ruin it, something like 11 perhaps. It should also be noted that the voting would likely still only be occurring once a month, otherwise too many cards would go through. So this probably wouldn't be too much of an issue.

- those 7 all of the sudden have more power individually in determining who gets through, making bribes more of a possibility

I don't think that the possibility of bribery is real enough to be worth considering, however there is a potential issue that the cards that make it through will be much more a reflection of the individual tastes of the voters.

*sigh* Poor Hydra...

The least we should do is put a notifier above cards that signify they are of a two-part card series. This would encourage people to look at such cards with a bit of care.

At least this.  Very good suggestion.

Agreed, this is a good idea.

[bored_ninja777]

i also have had this issue with a couple of cards...

curse | Hex, cursed exile | hexed exile are similar mechanics but spell/creature form.. work with nightmare...
and also virus inhalation + infectious mass were made together but only 1 of them is left in crucible due to the sad voting.
i wish i had time to be a curator to go thru and be thorough with everyone's ideas because i would love to do that to help the community. really it comes down to people wanting to help the community. if only a few of us want any improvement it makes it pretty difficult. kinda like starting a resistance, it takes lots of work with very little response.

[Ajit]

I'm not completely opposed to the idea of having a selected council within the CIA that voted on the cards.

For that to be any good, I suggest perhaps 7 representatives (whose method of selection could be anything from the Card Curator picking them or having the community vote).  These 7 reps would have to be experienced players.  They would have to be intelligent enough to investigate each card and give them all equal consideration.  They wouldn't be allowed to vote for their own cards.  Each rep would get 4 votes in each element's crucible (because of the large number of cards in proportion to the amount of voters).  Then they would each get 3 votes in forge.

Pros;
- less people just voting for themselves.
- the reps would in theory vote for better reasons than "Oh that bunny is so cute I'll vote for it".
- they would in theory investigate each card better than your average voter, therefore giving each equal consideration.

Cons;
- less community interaction (less sense of what the community as a whole likes)
- would have to come up with a solution for if one or more of the reps didn't vote that week.
- those 7 all of the sudden have more power individually in determining who gets through, making bribes more of a possibility.

I think this idea has some potential, but the cons you listed are worth considering. Here's some suggestions to help alleviate them somewhat.

- less community interaction (less sense of what the community as a whole likes)

The voting could be done in a 50/50 split between the community and the voters, thus still giving the community some say, but getting some of the benefits of the card voters as well.

- would have to come up with a solution for if one or more of the reps didn't vote that week

Perhaps increase the number to the point where a single person not voting wouldn't ruin it, something like 11 perhaps. It should also be noted that the voting would likely still only be occurring once a month, otherwise too many cards would go through. So this probably wouldn't be too much of an issue.

- those 7 all of the sudden have more power individually in determining who gets through, making bribes more of a possibility

I don't think that the possibility of bribery is real enough to be worth considering, however there is a potential issue that the cards that make it through will be much more a reflection of the individual tastes of the voters.

*sigh* Poor Hydra...

The least we should do is put a notifier above cards that signify they are of a two-part card series. This would encourage people to look at such cards with a bit of care.

At least this.  Very good suggestion.

Agreed, this is a good idea.

Good enough solutions in my opinion.  As far the numbers of Reps, I think there is a lot of room to decide.  If you have say 5 reliable people, they would rarely ever miss a vote.  Now say you have 11 Reps, not all of them will always be as reliable, some might miss a vote every once in a while, but when they do it isn't a big deal.

i also have had this issue with a couple of cards...

curse | Hex, cursed exile | hexed exile are similar mechanics but spell/creature form.. work with nightmare...
and also virus inhalation + infectious mass were made together but only 1 of them is left in crucible due to the sad voting.
i wish i had time to be a curator to go thru and be thorough with everyone's ideas because i would love to do that to help the community. really it comes down to people wanting to help the community. if only a few of us want any improvement it makes it pretty difficult. kinda like starting a resistance, it takes lots of work with very little response.

That's another good point; right now cards are sometimes split up and left behind even though directly effect each other.

[ZephyrPhantom]

I honestly still dislike the whole reps thing because then we not necessarily be getting a public opinion, and some people might be put off by the fact they can no longer freely vote.

[Ajit]

I honestly still dislike the whole reps thing because then we not necessarily be getting a public opinion, and some people might be put off by the fact they can no longer freely vote.

Yeah, this, as I've said, would be a con for sure.

So we stand static; interacting cards shall continue to fail.