Elements "metagame" transforming in the future?

[Scaredgirl]

So out of curiosity, are you guys saying that reactionary spells could be good for Elements, if we wished to see some sort of metagame shift?

Reactionary spells would be the worst possible choice because they would kill the high pace of Elements. Also it would be pretty much impossible to implement with the current "non-real time" fighting system.

[Arondight]

Instead of reactionary spells, why not just add some spells or permanents that make things cost more or trigger counter measures automatically? There was a thread about "trap cards" before, my suggestion there was to require a price (Like 3 random quanta) to to place any card face down (To add on to the surprise factor, minus the mark and pillars you're using) and then having to pay another price (whenever possible) for the effect to activate automatically when your opponent meets the trap card's requirements?

[guolin]

I think there isn't enough space on the cards, lol. Unless, of course, an official Elements dictionary comes out, and terms like "Burrow", "Immaterial", and "Lycanthropy", just to name a few, were all defined to save space on the cards. Currently, you can't have a truly multifunctional card because of the space required.

[jmizzle7]

@guolin - A definition list of all skills and such would most definitely reduce clutter on some cards. Wizards of the Coast did this a few years into M:tG, and you can tell the difference between the old versions of cards and the new versions. I think streamlining is a good idea that we may see eventually, but not necessarily in the near future.

Example:

I kind of like the reactionary card idea, because it would create wrinkles in gameplay that Elements has yet to see. I would also like to see limiting effects like, "No more than one spell can be played every turn."

[BluePriest]

I kind of like the reactionary card idea, because it would create wrinkles in gameplay that Elements has yet to see. I would also like to see limiting effects like, "No more than one spell can be played every turn."

I second this. my favorite strategy in yu-gi-oh *holds up giant flame shield because he knows yugioh is a horrible example* was to completely shut down all my opponents spaces so that he couldnt play anything.

[coinich]

I kind of like the reactionary card idea, because it would create wrinkles in gameplay that Elements has yet to see. I would also like to see limiting effects like, "No more than one spell can be played every turn."

I second this. my favorite strategy in yu-gi-oh *holds up giant flame shield because he knows yugioh is a horrible example* was to completely shut down all my opponents spaces so that he couldnt play anything.

You mean, like Aflatoxin?

[Hodari]

So out of curiosity, are you guys saying that reactionary spells could be good for Elements, if we wished to see some sort of metagame shift?

No, in fact as I said in my previous post, I think it would be difficult if not impossible to have spells like that in Elements(at least at anything close to the level that M:tG had) due to it being an online game.  Consider the example I gave before for an M:tG turn and imagine what it would be like having to pause after each one of those spells for at least 30 seconds or so(to allow for lag etc.) and see if the opponent wanted to respond in some way.  Or worse yet:  Your opponent is attempting to cast Fractal:  Cancel/Allow?

[BluePriest]

I kind of like the reactionary card idea, because it would create wrinkles in gameplay that Elements has yet to see. I would also like to see limiting effects like, "No more than one spell can be played every turn."

I second this. my favorite strategy in yu-gi-oh *holds up giant flame shield because he knows yugioh is a horrible example* was to completely shut down all my opponents spaces so that he couldnt play anything.

You mean, like Aflatoxin?

sort of, but more effective

[finkel]

Yup. My two favorite strategies were lots of small creatures with cards like gravity shield and wave motion cannon, and others like the one that is destroyed when a magic card is destroyed (with wave motion) and ones that let you sacrifice low-star cards, etc., and playing a deck that focused on destroying all the cards on the field (destroy everything on the field, destroy both player's hands, etc. etc.) and then bringing cards back in play from the graveyard, etc. (like sinister serpent, petit clown, etc.)

[Riojah foeth Giugh]

Instead of reactionary spells, why not just add some spells or permanents that make things cost more or trigger counter measures automatically? There was a thread about "trap cards"

I think this is a great idea. Traps (or whatever they would be called):

-Would activate immediately when an opponent attacks
-Would be a separate type (not a spell, creature, etc.) so face-down explanation text would not be necessary.
-Would have simple effects like "do 1 damage to all of the attacking creatures"
-Maybe some could be colorless to add to the surprise? Maybe they would use quanta when activated?

There are very few defensive cards besides the shields, which in my opinion makes them a little too strong. They could be weakened, and traps would help on defense. It would move the game away from a bunch of creatures running into shields, racing to kill an opponent, and become slightly more reactionary.

* funky name you got there. maybe it is somewhat common in your area but not where i live (SEA)

It's an anagram for Jhoira of the Ghitu

[DrunkDestroyer]

Back to the idea of 'control is not a viable strategy in Elements', you are giving examples of only spell control. There are many ways to control the opponent with creatures.

One artic squid, (with 3 water pillars) can effectively take 3 creature out of the game (attack and any skills). therefore two of them, and 6 water pillars can take out 6 creatures. One flooding added to this combination (another 3 water pillars) and the opponent is screwed. (Assuming it is a rush, without creature/permanent control)

An elite otyugh with momentum can insta kill all creatures with 5 health or less. Gravity shield blocks all creatures with more than 5 health.

Two flying eternities will completely dominate your opponents hand ( at the cost of 6 time pillars)

An auburn nymph can effectively take 6 creatures out of the game (attacks and skills). The only drawback of this strategy is that they will be all but immune to any damage/health based creature control. But if you have a gravity shield in play, then you can remove one creature per turn (Unless the opponent has gravity pull/reverse time-but then you get rid of these limited cards, when you have unlimited use of auburn nymph) Even better, auburn nymph is not affected by shields

Aflatoxin can completely fill up the opponent's creature area, and with a jade shield, hope, PAd (block 1) shield you can completely stop them using any creatures whatsoever.

Just a couple of strategies to show that control still works in elements 

[kobisjeruk]

It's an anagram for Jhoira of the Ghitu

i'm not good with anagram but i do know Jhoira. man shes awesome as a general in EDH