Lanidrak > seems you are just trying to state the truth, and not to flame, so, i'll put away the sarcasm and answer seriously. The fact you've obviously not read the thread is still... embarassing.
Darkness = Vampires, life-steal, blood?
I quite answered similar statements to Demagog. Please refer to those answers.
What is your reasoning for an entire new element? 12 is quite enough. Another well known playing card game which I won't mention has only 5 'elements' and it is highly successful.
..? And what is your reasoning here? 5 is ok, 12 is ok, why not more? Why not less? The proof is here: any number of elements is okay, the number doesn't make a game cool or shitty just by itself. It's not about the number of elements here.
The reasoning, if you need one, is that my ideas were a whole set of cards made to be used together (for other ideas, i've included them in currently existing elements, and see the appropriate topic). So the solution to put all these cards together was obvious : a new element. However, this topic totally supports the idea of a 14 or 16 elements game, not a 13 one at all.
As much of an idea as this is, it will never really see implementation. To create a whole new element, you would need to test all the possibilities and so-called 'synergies' with all the other elements in the game right now... That's what...
True. And? What's your point? I should have not created this thread? You're missing the title of that sub-forum. By the way, wasn't the work you're talking about a necessary one to create the 12 elements "Elements" game we play today? So, consider the totally hypothetic following case : "Zanzarino likes my idea and the Machine element idea." Such a work would not stop him if he really wanted to, especially with the bunch of testers he has right on this forum.
12 different Duo-Decks which can exploit every single imbalance in your new creation.
I'm not even going to bother doing the math regarding how many Trio-Deck exploits there will be.
Testing for the win.
And finally: You said earlier that adding a new element would somehow, I paraphrase here, 'be a threat to rainbow decks'. How so? By including a new element you give a rainbow deck more things to play with.
As mentionned in the topic, i do not support the idea of a 13 elements game. So, "i" would either add 2 or 4 elements, and then the quantum pillars would produce still 3 quanta of random elements... but more elements, less quanta. And more elements => more rainbow towers needed so your deck can really work.
By the way, if you played a rainbow deck, you must have noticed that today, a card costing 7+ quanta of an element cannot be relied on. Because it takes too much time to apply it, you just cannot build a rainbow deck with only 7+ quanta cost cards (<= i feel that sentence is really badly spelled, feel free to correct me). You need something to survive or win earlier.
I hope you see now how +2 or +4 elements would really weaken rainbow decks.
I'm afraid you missed, too, the very last sentence of my first post.
