Nymph Metamorphosis

[killsdazombies]

an idea could be we put them on a scale, and you pay 200 electrum to move up or down,
1 
2
3
4 
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Ooh, something along these lines is perfect (though the order needs tweaking). No need to worry about more farm requests. We could even do a more dynamic approach: maybe 500 electrum for to , or 100 from :dark to .

we could order it via bazzar, but that would put some powerful nymphs very close,

[Sir Valimont]

I really hate to be a Debbie Downer but I just want to reiterate that I really think this is an absolutely TERRIBLE idea. No offense intended at all, I think it's great to talk about different ideas to improve the game. I just think that if you take the single best prize that exists in the game and suddenly make it much less special, you really REALLY hurt the game a lot. If this change happened, I think I would enjoy Elements MUCH less and that it would have MUCH less long-term play value.

[Kuross]

I really hate to be a Debbie Downer but I just want to reiterate that I really think this is an absolutely TERRIBLE idea. No offense intended at all, I think it's great to talk about different ideas to improve the game. I just think that if you take the single best prize that exists in the game and suddenly make it much less special, you really REALLY hurt the game a lot. If this change happened, I think I would enjoy Elements MUCH less and that it would have MUCH less long-term play value.

I don't understand how it would undermine the game at all. If anything, it would be a boost to deck possiblities and thus create a more dynamic metagame. Also, I think it's safe to say few, if any, have 12+ nymphs. There are players that have been playing this game for over a year and still don't have 12 nymphs or even 8-10 for that matter. This suggestion looks to make nymphs more useful instead of less. Most people thatwin nymphs don't, or can't, make use of them because the ones they have aren't either in the element they would use them for or don't have an amount to satisfy a deck's requirement. Allowing those that have stuggled to win a few nymphs be able to change them up a bit to make cool decks is nothing but an incentive to others to collect enough to make cool decks themselves.

I don't know about you, but if one averages one nymph a month from the oracle, it would take 12 years to get all the nymphs necessary to make all the decks possible with nymphs included and that's a bit longer than I would expect to play to collect them all. Maybe they're people out there willing to do that, but I am not one. I'm sure the intent was to make getting nymphs really hard, but having to wait 12 years to get them all seems a bit ridiculous. Even at 12 in a year seems just a bit overkill, but at least you know people would be dedicated enough to the game to diligently log in every day in that year's time to get the nymph's.

Long story short, be able to shift nymphs from one element to another for a cost seems completely reasonable.

[chum3]

Nymphs become far less special if you're able to change them (yes, with just as many [if not more] "much's" that Sir Valimont used). That's pretty much the main reason I'm against this idea.

[guolin]

To you people who think that this idea will make nymphs less special:

Only way I can see this happen is if you were lucky enough to get a Purple Nymph, and don't want other people to combine their, say, Death Nymph + Discord to get a Purple Nymph too. But it's not our fault that some nymphs are better than others.

This, it's why this should not be a bad idea at all, and why the only benifit should be that you can get more of the same type so that it's more viable to use them in the deck you want.
If someone says: now everyone will have purple nymphs (for example), then it's the fault of them being an unbalanced nymph.

So shortly, go Nymphosis!

I mean, seriously, saying that this idea makes Nymphs less special just sounds like a last-ditch attempt to make this idea sound bad. It makes me want to puke. Does anyone have a bag?

[chum3]

I don't mean to induce vomit, but (to me at least) I don't see it as a last-ditch reason. I agree with Sir Valimont that it'd decrease long-term play.

Although I do find it interesting that, as of now, there are currently more people who disagree with this idea than going for it. It's somewhat similar to the idea of lowering the cost of upgrading cards (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,12295.0/viewresults/poll,596.html), in that it makes something that's hard to get more obtainable. But there are more people who say they'd play Elements more if that cost was decreased, so I expect there to be more "yes's" in this poll soon enough.

[smuglapse]

To you people who think that this idea will make nymphs less special:

Only way I can see this happen is if you were lucky enough to get a Purple Nymph, and don't want other people to combine their, say, Death Nymph + Discord to get a Purple Nymph too. But it's not our fault that some nymphs are better than others.

This, it's why this should not be a bad idea at all, and why the only benifit should be that you can get more of the same type so that it's more viable to use them in the deck you want.
If someone says: now everyone will have purple nymphs (for example), then it's the fault of them being an unbalanced nymph.

So shortly, go Nymphosis!

I mean, seriously, saying that this idea makes Nymphs less special just sounds like a last-ditch attempt to make this idea sound bad. It makes me want to puke. Does anyone have a bag?

I'm not sure if you are saying that this won't make nymphs less special, or that nymphs should be less special.

Essentially with this system, once you have won 1 nymph you have won them all.  So that actually gives you a quantity of "specialness" changed--nymphs will be 12 times less special than they were before.

As far as if nymphs should be less special, that can only be decided by zanzarino, and this is one statement he has made about it before introducing the Oracle:

I had an idea tonight while overdosing on caffeine; Elements needs a way to distribute nymphs maintaining their rarity, and a way to reward players that is not based on grinding.

1 rare + $3000 + $x = grinding.

This would change the Oracle's job from determining what nymphs you get to how many nymphs you are allowed.  People who have yet to receive any nymphs would be just that more behind everyone else.

That said, I'm not sure if there is not some redeemable aspect to this idea.

[Sir Valimont]

To you people who think that this idea will make nymphs less special:

Only way I can see this happen is if you were lucky enough to get a Purple Nymph, and don't want other people to combine their, say, Death Nymph + Discord to get a Purple Nymph too. But it's not our fault that some nymphs are better than others.

This, it's why this should not be a bad idea at all, and why the only benifit should be that you can get more of the same type so that it's more viable to use them in the deck you want.
If someone says: now everyone will have purple nymphs (for example), then it's the fault of them being an unbalanced nymph.

So shortly, go Nymphosis!

I mean, seriously, saying that this idea makes Nymphs less special just sounds like a last-ditch attempt to make this idea sound bad. It makes me want to puke. Does anyone have a bag?

Hey guolin I just want to say again that I totally respect your opinion and I really didn't mean to be rude (or make you puke, haha).

Let me put it this way:

Nymphs are something that even the best players don't have total control over. They don't have 100 nymphs ... they have 10 usually, maybe sometimes 15 at most.

Because of this, a nymph or two or (rarely) three in a deck actually is a nice little bonus advantage. It's not an overwhelming advantage because nymphs are very well balanced. In fact it's much better for Elements that nymphs are not more widely distributed or the overall strength of decks would be so shifted that many current strategies would lose their edge.

It is FALSE to imagine that right now there is ANY player who is beating up on others by having lots of nymphs. Therefore it is FALSE to imagine that there is an unfair discrepancy somewhere that alters overall game strength based on luck. And it is FALSE to imagine that giving everyone better access to something more powerful would make the game more fun. It absolutely would do the opposite because the bigger the range of possible strength of cards, the more variety there is to the game.

[Sir Valimont]

One last point: I hope you believe me because it's absolutely 100% true, but my opinion would be IDENTICAL even if I had been incredibly unlucky and never got a SINGLE nymph from the Oracle.

[Amilir]

Because of this, a nymph or two or (rarely) three in a deck actually is a nice little bonus advantage. It's not an overwhelming advantage because nymphs are very well balanced. In fact it's much better for Elements that nymphs are not more widely distributed or the overall strength of decks would be so shifted that many current strategies would lose their edge.

Nymphs are well balanced.  We can agree there.  The rest of this...  What?  Either you're saying nymphs would break game balance, or you're saying shifting the current metagame would be bad?  Neither makes sense.

It is FALSE to imagine that right now there is ANY player who is beating up on others by having lots of nymphs. Therefore it is FALSE to imagine that there is an unfair discrepancy somewhere that alters overall game strength based on luck. And it is FALSE to imagine that giving everyone better access to something more powerful would make the game more fun. It absolutely would do the opposite because the bigger the range of possible strength of cards, the more variety there is to the game.

There are multiple people that have 2-3 nymphs of the same type.  That's enough to build a deck with, it doesn't matter if they can't build any other deck with nymphs.  Your last two statements seem to contradict each other.  Having rares can be good, if and only if they don't create a significant imbalance.  Having imbalanced rares is rather worse than having imbalanced commons though.

One last point: I hope you believe me because it's absolutely 100% true, but my opinion would be IDENTICAL even if I had been incredibly unlucky and never got a SINGLE nymph from the Oracle.

Have some trust in this community.  We'll believe you without disclaimers and double posts.

[Sir Valimont]

Because of this, a nymph or two or (rarely) three in a deck actually is a nice little bonus advantage. It's not an overwhelming advantage because nymphs are very well balanced. In fact it's much better for Elements that nymphs are not more widely distributed or the overall strength of decks would be so shifted that many current strategies would lose their edge.

Nymphs are well balanced.  We can agree there.  The rest of this...  What?  Either you're saying nymphs would break game balance, or you're saying shifting the current metagame would be bad?  Neither makes sense.

What I'm saying is that if we were suddenly to give most regular players the ability to have their 6 nymphs change to whatever color they'd like, then most of the decks in existence currently would be by comparison much weaker. An immediate shift like that -- as opposed to the gradual one that both occurs naturally as a game evolves and which will occur based simply on the current acquirement rate of nymphs -- is bad for game health / longevity / balance / fun.

It is FALSE to imagine that right now there is ANY player who is beating up on others by having lots of nymphs. Therefore it is FALSE to imagine that there is an unfair discrepancy somewhere that alters overall game strength based on luck. And it is FALSE to imagine that giving everyone better access to something more powerful would make the game more fun. It absolutely would do the opposite because the bigger the range of possible strength of cards, the more variety there is to the game.

There are multiple people that have 2-3 nymphs of the same type.  That's enough to build a deck with, it doesn't matter if they can't build any other deck with nymphs.  Your last two statements seem to contradict each other.  Having rares can be good, if and only if they don't create a significant imbalance.  Having imbalanced rares is rather worse than having imbalanced commons though.

Yes, there are multiple people with 2-3 nymphs of the same type. They are not of a type they chose, and either way they are theirs by luck of the draw. Everything that I said holds true however: It's not as if those few players you're referring to are somehow terrorizing others in PvP or dominating tournaments or something. It is NOT a game balance issue. As such, it is just plain WRONG to cite it as a reason nymphs should be made more usable for less lucky people. 99% of card acquirement in Elements is based on grinding. The other 1% is luck. I think people should just deal with it instead of feeling short-changed. A tiny little bit of randomness and luck (and that's all it is) makes the game more interesting.

One last point: I hope you believe me because it's absolutely 100% true, but my opinion would be IDENTICAL even if I had been incredibly unlucky and never got a SINGLE nymph from the Oracle.

Have some trust in this community.  We'll believe you without disclaimers and double posts.

What a silly and useless comment. I wanted to make a last point and posted again instead of editing my post. I apologize if somehow your sensibilities were offended. Maybe you should have that looked at. 

[Kuross]

Let's all just be clear on one point: rarity =/= power.

Nymphs are not uber. Nymphs are not game breakers. Yes they can be strong. But they are subject to CC just like any other creature. Most of the sentiment against making them more fluid is that people will make some uber deck that no one can beat if they don't the have nymphs to counter them. That is not true simply because the game is balanced enough to be able to counter any new deck theme that comes from being able to shift nymphs.

Yes, some people have multiple nypmhs of the same element. Any one here actually fear those people as a direct result of their nymphs? No. It's because those nymphs are not as powerful as many are making them out to be. I agree, nymphs have power. But are they so uber that having multiple of one in a deck makes that deck too powerful? No.

I honestly don't see what is so wrong about allowing shifting of nymphs. It would only open up the metagame and that is only going to lead to better things. There was mention of longevity for the game. By allowing more deck choices you allow for longevity as a result. Anyone with CCG experience knows that the more choices in deck construction people have the more likely those people are to stick around.

I always hear about grinding and how it sucks. The pinnacle of grinding in this game isn't Elder or False Gods. It's logging in every morning to see if you're lucky enough to merit a nymph. I promise you it is easier to grind 2,000,000 score than it is to get 20% of the nymphs.

Again, I'll say it. the nymphs are not so uber that they can't be beaten. Not once has anyone in this thread said there should be more nymphs, only that people that have actually won one should be able to change their nymphs to something they can use. Thus their rarity stays intact, but their useful increases. I see nothing wrong with this in any way shape or form and I hope people opposed to this idea, or similar, see the positive aspects this can bring to the game.