When should a card be rare?

[ratcharmer]

Why should one card be rare and others common?

To steal a quote from elsewhere on the forum:

Shards are meant to be OP. They're designed as gifts for the donators.

NO!!

No no no no no no no no no no no no no no no.

You can just stop right there.  Seriously, Rule #1 of balancing a game is that difficulty/cost in acquiring something only allows for so-much power to be added to it.  Arguing that a card is balanced just because it's hard to get (which shards aren't, btw) is the most asinine thing you could ever possibly say.  Seriously, go look at Magic's early history.  That game is filled with cards from the early days that are hard (if not nigh-impossible and bank-breaking to purchase), and yet that does not stop them from being grossly overpowered cards that destroy the intended balance of the game.

You can feel free to argue that the Shards aren't overpowered if you want.  Maybe they are, maybe they aren't*, but don't argue that rarity = balance.  It smacks of elitism in the worst-case scenario, and makes you look like you don't know how balancing a game works in the best-case.  Either way, it's a highly invalid point.

*Though frankly, I think they should cost more, and this is from someone who runs shards in his deck, mind you.

I agree with WhiteTigerShiro here, a card being rare does not justify it being OP. But this begs the question then, what should be different about rares?

If there's nothing special about a rare card, then in general there isn't much point in it being rare (the exception being "badge of honor" cards like mark cards--which are used more as a mark of accomplishment than for gameplay purposes).

So here's my thoughts on what makes for a good rare:
1) It should be unique. If a rare card doesn't do something that can't be done without it then there isn't much sense of accomplishment in getting one.

2) You shouldn't need 6 copies. A rare card should be one that you don't need to have multiple copies of before it can be useful. The rare weapons are a great example of this--you can only have one weapon in play at a time (usually) so it's helpful to have just one weapon in a deck sometimes.

Feel free to share your own thoughts on the matter.

[Uppercut]

A card should never be rare. Obtainability keeps the game in balance and prevents it from being a circlejerk between elitists who've played the game longer.

[OldTrees]

A card should be rare if
1) The game needs another rare card
2) It is the best of the options to make rare

The game needs another rare card.
There are a spectrum of gamers that vary from the grind lovers to the grind haters. We are lucky enough to have the trainer available for the extreme grind haters so that there is 0 effort needed to play with all the options. On the other end of the spectrum we have players that spend orders of magnitude more time on Elements than the average player. In order to satisfy as many players as possible as small set of the card pool should be rare. This is accomplished by collectors needing 12 of each rare while the average player hopefully needs 1-3 max of each rare. This rarity should be based primary on time and effort and some luck (see T500). As the card pool grows so must the rare pool.

It is the best of the options to make rare
[This is covered by the points in the OP]

[ratcharmer]

@Uppercut:
I actually agree that we need to work on making the game more newbie friendly, but a no rares approach would be a bad idea for several reasons:

1) I can't think of a quicker way to alienate veteran players.
Imagine winning a tournament and getting a nymph as your reward, then a month later they start selling nymphs in the bazzar. Would you quit? I probably would.

2) There needs to be a reason to stick around.
Rares give players a reason to keep playing after they finish upgrading their first deck. If there were no rares to strive for some people might hang around long enough to fully upgrade 1 or 2 decks, then play a tournament or two, but there'd really be very little to do after that. Adding in new rares over time allows people to keep playing longer. If it helps, think of elements as half CCG and half RPG.
Getting rid of rares might cause a temporary increase in newbie participation, but none of them would stick around, and neither would the old players.

3) If the rares are balanced then obtainability shouldn't effect game balance.
This goes back to WhiteTigerShiro's quote. If some players have cards that no one else has, that only favors those players if those cards are significantly stronger than the commonly available ones. This same principle applies for balancing between elements. If certain rares seem too strong, then card balance needs to be adjusted. Giving everyone the OP card would only make things worse.
Consider the pre-nerf sundial. It was clearly the most OP card in the game, yet it wasn't rare. Was it less destructive to game balance because it was common? No, quite the opposite actually.

[Uppercut]

1. I consider myself a veteran, sort of. I've actually stopped playing because of this very reason and the point I'll make in number 2. Not only would I not quit, this is exactly the thing I've been pushing for. The thing you win from a tournament shouldn't be something exclusive to you for winning in a tournament. Maybe alternate art for a card you can get in the bazzar, but not a different card entirely. That way you have something to show off, a sort of trophy for winning the tournament, but not something that puts you ahead of other players.

2. Elements is a card game, not an RPG. The incentive should be the community and playing a fun game. If you want to grind it out stop playing card games and go play Maple Story or something. As an older-ish (not super old but have been playing longer than a lot of people) player I actually feel like the amount of grinding for rares has actually ruined my experience. Its the majority of why I don't bother logging into the game. I want to play a strategy game and have a sense of community and head to head competition. When its impossible to build the deck(s) you want to build it takes away from the experience.

3. For a player like me where the PVP is the only appealing part of the game I actually think of it the opposite way. An OP card being available to everyone is better than an OP card being available to a special few. But I guess this is a difference of perspective and I'm assuming we enjoy the game for different reasons.

[joebob777]

i agree with uppercut on his 3rd point, if a card is op, let everyone have it, so that not just a special few are better then everyone else,

i also agree with oldtrees that the game needs new rare cards to appeal to the few grinders who like to play card games, but make it something like the nymphs, they all have abilities that are cards that arent rare

[Ajit]

I don't like the idea of rare cards.  I think it would be much nicer if rewards were like alternate art or something like that.

[OldTrees]

Alternate Art rarity would be the optimal type of rare card
1) It is not required for the metagame (see Uppercut's 3rd point)
2) It is balanced against the common cards (similar to 1)
3) It is never mechanically better to have 1 more of them instead of a common card. (This is where it beats nymphs and weapons were 1-3 are useful mechanically)
4) It does not decrease the common card pool while it does increase the rare card pool
However it does suffer in that it is not a unique card although the art is.

[ratcharmer]

i agree with uppercut on his 3rd point, if a card is op, let everyone have it, so that not just a special few are better then everyone else,

i also agree with oldtrees that the game needs new rare cards to appeal to the few grinders who like to play card games, but make it something like the nymphs, they all have abilities that are cards that arent rare

I'm not arguing that just a select few having an OP card is good. I'm saying fixing the balance in the cards is a better solution than giving everyone the OP card.

[joebob777]

well yes i agree that it would be better if all cards possible were balanced, but if 1 card is REALLY op, (fractal, although i dont want to start a debate on how much or little fractal is op) better give it to all, then to a select few

[Bloodyfrenzy]

i agree with you rareness shouldn't be used used as a reason for a card to not be overpowered as it makes the game very easy for long time players, but in saying that, slightly better cards being rare gives newbie players something to strive for adding more fun to the game. Especially early in the game when money is hard to get.

[OldTrees]

i agree with you rareness shouldn't be used used as a reason for a card to not be overpowered as it makes the game very easy for long time players, but in saying that, slightly better cards being rare gives newbie players something to strive for adding more fun to the game. Especially early in the game when money is hard to get.

However the point is we could achieve the same effect if we use rares that are not better just different/unique.