Non basic Pillars

[moomoose]

the issue is really- how much better would something have to be in order for you to use it over a pillar, given that it 1) cant be played immediately and 2) is less likely to show up in your starting hand.  the idea is to have a benefit over traditional pillars, otherwise its six of one, half a dozen of the other, and whats the point?  this has 2 downsides and if its production is lower for the first three turns, and equal around the fourth, that could very well be the end of the game given the popularity of rush decks, it would be a very poor substitution to make.

[OldTrees]

Any card that generates more quanta in the long run will favor stalls. The point of equalization needs to be early enough that equalization is possible but not so early as to eliminate rush decks entirely. Spires have an advantage on Pillar stalls which would be balanced with a disadvantage towards Immolation rushes. However these advantages/disadvantages should not be sure things either. I think turn 4|3* equalization would be a good goal to balance around. However I made a mistake. That goal should be for the average hand of pillars vs the average hand of spires. How can we best estimate that statistic for your current version?

*1 turn less to make up for the lack of turn 1 enter play quanta.

[moomoose]

Well, most decks are built to be the 30 card minimum, and the number of quanta generating cards (be it pillars, pends, novas or immos) is usually around 10 in total.  I would suggest doing a simulation of draws in game 10 times (or using the game simulator).  With this card, there will be no redraw issued in the event that none of the starting cards are spires, so using 10 specific cards (such as 5 vampires and 5 pests in a deck that cant use them so they stick out) without any pillars/towers/pends, to simulate spires.

honestly though, my goal was to come up with a card that would reduce the number of quanta producers you need for an effective deck, while having the two aforementioned drawbacks to balance it.  i dont think the current card design hits the mark, as it is too slow early for it to be competitive with traditional means, in the event that it does show up in your hand early.

another possible limitation is using the 6 card max, similar to SN, which also is exempt from the mulligan rule.

[OldTrees]

5 trials each (10 quanta producers)

10 Pillars / 30 cards
5|10.2|15.8|21.4|26.8|32.6|+5.8
5|10|15|20|25|30|+5
4|08|13|18|23|29|+6
4|09|15|21|26|32|+6
6|12|18|24|30|36|+6
6|12|18|24|30|36|+6
5 Pillars 5 Spires / 30 cards
2.8|6.8|12.2|18|24.6|30.8|+7
2|6|12|18|24|31|+7
3|6|09|13|19|26|+7
3|8|15|22|29|37|+9
3|8|15|22|29|37|+9
3|6|10|15|20|25|+5
10 Spires / 30 cards
1|3|7.4|13.6|20.2|26.8|+6.6
1|3|9|20|33|46|+13
1|3|6|09|12|15|+3
1|3|6|09|12|15|+3
1|3|9|18|27|36|+9
1|3|7|12|17|22|+5
Spires need a buff. I forgot to include the unreliability and restricting the mark.
If spires generated

5 Pillars 5 Spires / 30 cards
2.8|8|16|23.4|30.2|39.6|+10
2|8|16|24|32|42|+11
3|6|09|14|22|31|+9
3|10|19|28|37|48|+12
3|10|19|28|37|48|+12
3|6|11|17|23|29|+6
10 Spires / 30 cards
1|4|11.2|20.4|29.4|38.8|+9.4
1|4|16|34|53|72|+19
1|4|08|12|16|20|+4
1|4|08|12|16|20|+4
1|4|14|27|40|53|+13
1|4|10|17|22|29|+7

[moomoose]

so the initial cost is a huge drawback and pretty much makes them worse than normal pillars

ok, back at the drawing board, how about a pillar that works like a normal pillar until you reach x total quanta (of its type) and then it gives you a burst of quanta y (of its type) and is removed?

NAME: Emerald Spire ELEMENT: Life COST: 0 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Each turn is generated. Gain 5 and remove from play once 5 is reached.	NAME: Emerald Spire ELEMENT: Life COST: 0 TYPE: Permanent ATK|HP: TEXT: Each turn is generated. Gain when played. Gain 5 and remove from play once 5 is reached.

ART: etg IDEA: moomoose NOTES: attempt 2 at being both novel and useful. a short growth period at the start of the game, promoting initial conservation of quantum.  but at the cost of long term sustainability through self sacrifice of the pillar. if it is played when 5 quanta is already in stock, it will trigger at the end of the turn. SERIES:

[OldTrees]

so the initial cost is a huge drawback and pretty much makes them worse than normal pillars

Yes the initial cost is a greater drawback than was initially expected, however I think the data supports a 1 cost Spire than generates  as being balanced relative to a Life Pillar.

ok, back at the drawing board, how about a pillar that works like a normal pillar until you reach x total quanta (of its type) and then it gives you a burst of quanta y (of its type) and is removed?

4 + 1 mark -> 21 + 1 per turn. That gives 4th turn quanta supplies at 2nd turn in exchange for not getting much more quanta. Similar to Immolation in usage.

[majofa]

There is a difference between Pillars in Elements and Lands in Magic TG. In Magic, mana is is lost if not used, thus increasing the playability of 'storing' lands/permanents. In Elements, quanta is stored up automatically, reducing the effectiveness of these types of quanta producers.

So, maybe, instead of looking for special quanta-producing Pillars that have a special effect, we should try to make inexpensive permanents with an effect, but also produce quanta.

[OldTrees]

There is a difference between Pillars in Elements and Lands in Magic TG. In Magic, mana is is lost if not used, thus increasing the playability of 'storing' lands/permanents. In Elements, quanta is stored up automatically, reducing the effectiveness of these types of quanta producers.

So, maybe, instead of looking for special quanta-producing Pillars that have a special effect, we should try to make inexpensive permanents with an effect, but also produce quanta.

Yes quanta is stored automatically from turn to turn. This is why Elements can focus on various Quanta flow curves rather than repeat variations of Dual Lands. Is variance in quanta flow across quanta producers valuable? Its value is the only reason we have both Nova and Quantum Pillars.

This is not to discount the other half of the non basic genre that can be summarized as Permanent Quanta Producers with an additional non quanta related effect (Ex: The come into play effect of monoliths).

[EmeraldTiger]

Where do quanta washers fit?

Quanta Washer- Definition: A permanent or creature that converts one type or random quanta to another type of quanta.
Example: Rustler.

[OldTrees]

Where do quanta washers fit?

Quanta Washer- Definition: A permanent or creature that converts one type or random quanta to another type of quanta.
Example: Rustler.

Quanta Washers are a subcategory of Quanta Fixers.

Non basic pillars are cheap permanents involved in quanta production.

For the most part, quanta washing in unneeded in Elements the game. Quanta fixation usually also involves quanta production in Elements the game. (Rustler, Quanta Locket)

[majofa]

These are the two that stand out the most to me:
Monolith - Enters play effect
Obelisk - Skilled

These both are easier to balance upped because it can have an 'Enters play effect' (or none for Obelisk) instead of producing 1 quanta of its type. Unupped it might be more difficult.. maybe: 'Enters play delayed' so that it doesn't get the quanta generation on the first turn. Then an Obelisk could still use it's ability on the second turn.

(CHAIN means, when it enters play.. the Chain:0 denotes that no previous conditions need to be met for the effect to trigger. Everything after Chain is an effect of putting the card in play.)
Examples:
Death Monolith
Each turn is generated.
Chain:0 (Delay:1)
Poison target creature.

(upped)
Each turn is generated.
Chain:0
Poison target creature.

Death Obelisk
Generate
Each turn is generated.
: Double poison counters on all creatures.
Chain:0 (Delay)

(upped)
Each turn is generated.
: Double poison counters on all creatures.

[ralouf]

I really like the idea of delay instead of having a cost, should suggest it in the obelisk/monolith section.