*Author

BiJay

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4434#msg4434
« on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

Bad suggestion. It just destroys the variety of decks. And as already said it makes the game harder to learn.

Differ

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4435#msg4435
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

Anyways.. what I meant with that comment was that MtG is 95% deck building and luck of the draw. I don't think there is that much strategy in the actual gameplay (although I could be wrong because I haven't played it that much).
Combo/control decks are all about what kind of strategy you have. You must decide what to counter, what to remove, guess what your opponent has, etc. Playing wrong could result in a trinisphere totally shutting you down or something similarly catastrophic.

Red Deck Wins, not so much. =)

jj77

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4436#msg4436
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

Short form: Introduce quantum pool caps to better limit pooling up infinite quantums during games.  I suggest a scheme of tying quantum capacity to cards in play so that, roughly, the more cards in play, the higher the caps.

Long form:

I'm enjoying Elements a lot.  But I find one weakness of the environment is a lack of quantum caps.  Many unintelligent decks can be made by simply loading up the quantum pillars and the best cards of every element.  There's no fear of not having the right quantums to play any card.  And thus there's almost no reason to play a dedicated 2 or 3 element deck, and only a few weak reasons to play a concentrated single element deck.

I suggest that a new mechanic be introduced to cap the quantum pools during play.  Such a cap can take on many forms.  One simplistic example: If, at the end of a player's turn, that player has more than 10 quantums in any one elemental pool, that pool is reduced to exactly 10 quantums.

I would prefer a more dynamic cap scheme than that, so I suggest this:
  • each individual element has a separate cap value, and the pool is displayed in a 'x/y' form, where x is the current number of quantums for that player in that element's pool, and y is the current cap value for that element's pool
  • each creature in play for a player raises that player's cap for that element's pool by the creature's quantum cost (an Otyugh in play raises the gravity cap by 3)
  • each elemental (non-quantum) pillar in play raises the cap for that element's pool by 1 (if not upgraded) or by 2 (if upgraded)
  • each elemental permanent in play raises the cap for that element's pool by 1 (if not upgraded) or by 2 (if upgraded)
  • each quantum pillar or non-element-specific permanent or creature in play, upgraded or not, protects 3 extra quantums at random from being removed at end of turn
  • the player's mark raises the cap for that element's pool by 2, and for all other elements by 1 (false gods thus get 6 and 3)
  • at end of turn, after all attacks but before quantum generation, all elemental pools over current cap levels are reduced to their cap levels, (followed by adding quantums back generated by pillars, which allows for a few extra quantums over the cap to carry forward to the next turn).
This scheme hypothetically encourages players to concentrate their elements more, to consider tactics focusing more on quantum efficiency, while still allowing some flexibility to play off-element cards.  It also hypothetically encourages new value for playing smaller cost, less-gamebreaking cards (to raise caps towards having capacity to play the bigger cards).  I have hopes that this scheme might be enough to help spread out the kinds of decks that can work and that can take on top 50 and level 6 decks, without hamstringing the ai too much.  However, obviously this is all just speculation at this point.

The cardbase would probably have to be rebalanced for a scheme such as this as well.  Possibly, many cards might have to be reduced in cost by 1 in order to make them more viable for off-element play.

One major weakness of this kind of scheme is that there's a bit of a harsh curve for players to learn it.  One of Elements' strengths is it's very simple play mechanics, and a scheme like this undermines that.

Anyway, just a suggestion...

Scaredgirl

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4437#msg4437
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

One major weakness of this kind of scheme is that there's a bit of a harsh curve for players to learn it.  One of Elements' strengths is it's very simple play mechanics, and a scheme like this undermines that.

What he said.

I like simple things and while your suggestion is an interesting one, I wouldn't want anything like that in Elements.

A lot of people hate Quantum Towers but they are not to blame. The problem is those cheap overpowered cards. Without those cards rainbow wouldn't be nearly as effective as it is.

Solution is simple: just increase the cost of some of the overpowered cards like Otyugh, Steal, Rain of Fire, etc. Problem solved.

As for Quantum Towers.. if it ain't broken, don't fix it.

Scaredgirl

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4438#msg4438
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

I like simple things
Off topic: Didn't you say you didn't like MtG because it wasn't complicated enough? :P
I believe I used the word "complex". I sometimes use creative English but I believe "complicated" and "complex" are a different things? Isn't “complex” like "deep", and “complicated” like "messy"?

Anyways.. what I meant with that comment was that MtG is 95% deck building and luck of the draw. I don't think there is that much strategy in the actual gameplay (although I could be wrong because I haven't played it that much).

CCG's like Doomtown, Netrunner, 7th Sea or The Spoils (aka MtG2) have a more complex gameplay, so I find them much more interesting.

Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4439#msg4439
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

Good idea, but it probably won't happen. Spells like Ice Bolt, Fire Bolt, Drain Life, and the weapon Fahrenheit all rely on having large ammounts of Quantum, and are otherwise MOSTLY useless if there is a cap.

Also, with mono-element decks, the pillars would raise the caps enough that it wouldn't matter if they played small creatures. They could just spam larger once since they will always have the quantum for them.

Sure, this would limit rainbow decks, but only a little bit.

Many unintelligent decks can be made by simply loading up the quantum pillars and the best cards of every element.
This is simply not true. Many rainbow decks have been built, tested, rebuilt, tested some more, rebuilt again, tested even more, until they finally have a working balance of cards that can net wins more often. They aren't just hap-hazardly thrown together. Rainbow decks like that take a lot of time and practice to become as strong as they are now.

Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4440#msg4440
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:52 pm »

I like simple things
Off topic: Didn't you say you didn't like MtG because it wasn't complicated enough? :P

Uzra

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg4713#msg4713
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:53 pm »

Combo/control decks are all about what kind of strategy you have. You must decide what to counter, what to remove, guess what your opponent has, etc. Playing wrong could result in a trinisphere totally shutting you down or something similarly catastrophic.

Red Deck Wins, not so much. =)
This would kill red burn decks which sucks..

And lol, there's not trinisphere equivalent in elements yet..

Forfeit

  • Guest
Game mechanic suggestion: quantum caps https://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=485.msg5201#msg5201
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2009, 10:09:55 pm »

so, i've tried a no creature deck that works quiet well, but only because of the stratigy used, i guess that really wouldn't be possable seeing as how spells don't raise caps for quanta in your idea.

 

blarg: