Forum activity

[The_Mormegil]

- Constant updates to keep people interested.

Everything I've seen has pointed to zanz being unwilling to add developers...

^This

People are starting to get bored with seeing the same cards/decks over and over again. When veterans start to fade away, and the influx of new players are sticking around as long (and in as great of numbers), the community starts to die.

To counter this, WE NEED GAMEPLAY THAT CHANGES more often than once every 8-11 months.

Why hasn't zanz ever had other people help? Has he ever given us an answer to that?

---

What should be done: (just one solution)

Select 2-6 veteran players from the community to serve as 'beta' testers. Setup up a beta website of the game (different from the one he uses now) that can only be accessed, through password, by the testers and zanz.

Make it so card ideas can be implemented, by one of the testers or by zanz himself, and tested. The testers select a bunch of cards from the Card Ideas & Art section and test them for playability/fun/balance, then submit a set of cards to zanz for approval.

zanz adds the cards.

- Rinse and Repeat -

Any structual games changes can still come through zanz, but the majority of the cards would come from the community (as they have more recently).

This would be very very beneficial to the game, but I don't see that happening, realistically. Zanz has said IIRC that he wants to keep EtG as his own project. However...

Actually, this could work if Zanz is ok with it. The cards being tested will come from CIA section of the boards, which counts as community feedback. Zanz has implemented cards from CIA before, so I think he'd be ok with adding more of them - it doesn't take away from his resume as he is still the only developer, both coding and implementation of cards are up to him. The testers wouldn't need to be coders themselves, they would just need to play with new cards and solicit improvement on the CIA boards. Coding a card shouldn't be difficult (in fact, it's probably a matter of minutes). I didn't see the code (and don't know much about Flash either) but I suspect cards are simply objects which have a text variable, an image variable, a name variable, an element variable, a cost variable, an atk/hp variable, a "play" method and maybe something extra depending on card. That's how I'd do it at least, and it would mean that implementing a new card takes ~10 minutes (unless the card has peculiar mechanisms). Actually, if this goes through, I can definitely see a tool translating the CIA format into code snippets.
If Zanzarino did this, and devoted ~1 hour every two weeks to implement, say, 5 cards for the testers, he would have access to a database of high-quality cards to implement at a reasonable rate in the game. This would likely improve the game quality, but it would also revitalize the forums a good deal. CIA boards would probably explode (in a good way), and competitive PvPers would likely double their efforts in order to enter the testers. The chance to actually contribute to the game by doing something would ramp activity up.

I... hope it happens. Or something similar to this. Because it would definitely be awesome, and I don't think it would take away anything from Zanz, surely not as much as adding a new coder would.

[ARTHANASIOS]

^ You're right in what you say, dear Mathematistic, but veteran players should know the following:
1) If you spent countless hours in grinding for obtaining all the non-pillar cards at least 6 times in each version (upped, unupped) only to quit the game after completing your collection, then you should farm with a slower pace.
2) Even if you're a general who has all the cards 50 times, you can still participate at War, Trials, Weekly Tournies, Duels and all short of challenges. There are pretty of things to keep you active.
3) The reason AI4 doesn't change is in order to have randomness in this game and to satisfy a greater number of different personalities. So, we already have AI4 to satisfy these people.

 Personally, I think that a newby will stay if he/she answer 'yes' to the following:
a) Are you a fan of Trading Card games?
b) Are you tired of the unfairness in rarity and balance of Yu-Gi-Oh and MTG?
c) Would you like to play a free TCG on the internet with less cards than Yu-Gi-Oh and MTG, but with more colors/elements and much more balance?
 If yes, then Elements is the game of your dreams, even if it had much less activities than it already has.
 If no, then you probably won't bother you too much, even if we put 10,000 new features.

 The only things wew have to do IMO in order to keep players is to reduce the power of most of Shards (balancing) and to promote forum activities, like Weekly Tournaments, War, Trials, Duels (very underestimated, I am seriously thinking in participating there), card arts and ideas. Well, that's all... 

[ZephyrPhantom]

The only things wew have to do IMO in order to keep players is to reduce the power of most of Shards (balancing) and to promote forum activities, like Weekly Tournaments, War, Trials, Duels (very underestimated, I am seriously thinking in participating there), card arts and ideas. Well, that's all... 

They're all good 'features', but IMHO there comes a point where you have to draw the line between what the fans think up and what actually gets put in the game. As stated several times in the thread, you can only come up with so many new takes on the same meta before it gets old.

^I personally think this idea is a very good one and would be worth implementing, especially since it will definitely result in an decent increase of the rate of addition of new [balanced] cards (and thus new strategies and decks) to the game compared to what we have now.

[Mathematistic]

^ You're right in what you say, dear Mathematistic, but veteran players should know the following:
1) If you spent countless hours in grinding for obtaining all the non-pillar cards at least 6 times in each version (upped, unupped) only to quit the game after completing your collection, then you should farm with a slower pace.
2) Even if you're a general who has all the cards 50 times, you can still participate at War, Trials, Weekly Tournies, Duels and all short of challenges. There are pretty of things to keep you active.
3) The reason AI4 doesn't change is in order to have randomness in this game and to satisfy a greater number of different personalities. So, we already have AI4 to satisfy these people.

 Personally, I think that a newby will stay if he/she answer 'yes' to the following:
a) Are you a fan of Trading Card games?
b) Are you tired of the unfairness in rarity and balance of Yu-Gi-Oh and MTG?
c) Would you like to play a free TCG on the internet with less cards than Yu-Gi-Oh and MTG, but with more colors/elements and much more balance?
 If yes, then Elements is the game of your dreams, even if it had much less activities than it already has.
 If no, then you probably won't bother you too much, even if we put 10,000 new features.

 The only things wew have to do IMO in order to keep players is to reduce the power of most of Shards (balancing) and to promote forum activities, like Weekly Tournaments, War, Trials, Duels (very underestimated, I am seriously thinking in participating there), card arts and ideas. Well, that's all... 

IMO the game should be less dependent on the forums. All the fun activities you have mentioned originates from the forums, which all uses the "pvp duel" button in the main game. So, does elements need to live up on that one function? Also, AI4 is really not enough randomness and cannot give a "party mode" feel even when I'm using an unorthodox SoSe random deck. Is that one function the only way to derive fun?

And no, people don't need to be a tcg fan to play elements. A re-feature on kong is enough to draw in a large number of new players, and part of them will get hooked. On a side note, all $$-requiring card games have some sort of imbalance in the cards. But does elements live up on the "card balance utopia" title while providing sufficient fun to different players with different tastes?

P.S. No need to call me dear. I have a certain fear towards formal letters.

[ARTHANASIOS]

P.S. No need to call me dear. I have a certain fear towards formal letters.

Lol, many people have problem with the "dear" thing of mine, however that "dear" thing is just my talking style. I used it in other internet communities in order to show I am not agressive and I am not shouting or making fun of anyone (I was easily misundrstood back then), so I used the "dear" thing in order to be more polite, and now it is just difficult to stop it.

[Mathematistic]

P.S. No need to call me dear. I have a certain fear towards formal letters.

Lol, many people have problem with the "dear" thing of mine, however that "dear" thing is just my talking style. I used it in other internet communities in order to show I am not agressive and I am not shouting or making fun of anyone (I was easily misundrstood back then), so I used the "dear" thing in order to be more polite, and now it is just difficult to stop it.

I have a problem with people either too polite or too rude. Both swear words and formal formats get my nerves

[Xenocidius]

Actually, this could work if Zanz is ok with it. The cards being tested will come from CIA section of the boards, which counts as community feedback. Zanz has implemented cards from CIA before, so I think he'd be ok with adding more of them - it doesn't take away from his resume as he is still the only developer, both coding and implementation of cards are up to him. The testers wouldn't need to be coders themselves, they would just need to play with new cards and solicit improvement on the CIA boards. Coding a card shouldn't be difficult (in fact, it's probably a matter of minutes). I didn't see the code (and don't know much about Flash either) but I suspect cards are simply objects which have a text variable, an image variable, a name variable, an element variable, a cost variable, an atk/hp variable, a "play" method and maybe something extra depending on card. That's how I'd do it at least, and it would mean that implementing a new card takes ~10 minutes (unless the card has peculiar mechanisms). Actually, if this goes through, I can definitely see a tool translating the CIA format into code snippets.
If Zanzarino did this, and devoted ~1 hour every two weeks to implement, say, 5 cards for the testers, he would have access to a database of high-quality cards to implement at a reasonable rate in the game. This would likely improve the game quality, but it would also revitalize the forums a good deal. CIA boards would probably explode (in a good way), and competitive PvPers would likely double their efforts in order to enter the testers. The chance to actually contribute to the game by doing something would ramp activity up.

I... hope it happens. Or something similar to this. Because it would definitely be awesome, and I don't think it would take away anything from Zanz, surely not as much as adding a new coder would.

You're not too far off on your coding theories, except they're not -really- objects and they don't have any convenient methods. Unless the card is vanilla, code for any other mechanisms it has need to go all over the place. Zanz could do a total code rework to make this plausible (and also speed up development and execution times), but I don't really see him being too eager to do this, do you?

That said, having a full sandbox mode where testers manually apply card effects (similar to the current system of card idea testing, except that already in-game cards are automatic) might be plausible. Playing in the sandbox would be like playing in the actual game, except that both players can manually add or remove quanta or HP from either player, add/remove status effects, add/remove skills, etc. Testers could design 'blank' cards with art, text, ATK/HP, etc, but they have to manually apply their additional effects.

[The_Mormegil]

Actually, this could work if Zanz is ok with it. The cards being tested will come from CIA section of the boards, which counts as community feedback. Zanz has implemented cards from CIA before, so I think he'd be ok with adding more of them - it doesn't take away from his resume as he is still the only developer, both coding and implementation of cards are up to him. The testers wouldn't need to be coders themselves, they would just need to play with new cards and solicit improvement on the CIA boards. Coding a card shouldn't be difficult (in fact, it's probably a matter of minutes). I didn't see the code (and don't know much about Flash either) but I suspect cards are simply objects which have a text variable, an image variable, a name variable, an element variable, a cost variable, an atk/hp variable, a "play" method and maybe something extra depending on card. That's how I'd do it at least, and it would mean that implementing a new card takes ~10 minutes (unless the card has peculiar mechanisms). Actually, if this goes through, I can definitely see a tool translating the CIA format into code snippets.
If Zanzarino did this, and devoted ~1 hour every two weeks to implement, say, 5 cards for the testers, he would have access to a database of high-quality cards to implement at a reasonable rate in the game. This would likely improve the game quality, but it would also revitalize the forums a good deal. CIA boards would probably explode (in a good way), and competitive PvPers would likely double their efforts in order to enter the testers. The chance to actually contribute to the game by doing something would ramp activity up.

I... hope it happens. Or something similar to this. Because it would definitely be awesome, and I don't think it would take away anything from Zanz, surely not as much as adding a new coder would.

You're not too far off on your coding theories, except they're not -really- objects and they don't have any convenient methods. Unless the card is vanilla, code for any other mechanisms it has need to go all over the place. Zanz could do a total code rework to make this plausible (and also speed up development and execution times), but I don't really see him being too eager to do this, do you?

That said, having a full sandbox mode where testers manually apply card effects (similar to the current system of card idea testing, except that already in-game cards are automatic) might be plausible. Playing in the sandbox would be like playing in the actual game, except that both players can manually add or remove quanta or HP from either player, add/remove status effects, add/remove skills, etc. Testers could design 'blank' cards with art, text, ATK/HP, etc, but they have to manually apply their additional effects.

Ouch. Revamping the code would be a pain, but...

What if instead of revamping it you just add a method "play" to the base class object? I know you said they're not quite objects, but I really am ignorant on Flash programming, so going with what I'd do again. If you leave the cards we have now "manually coded", and just add a "play" method on the base Card object, add a line where you call the method every time you play a card, then add the new code for new cards in the method instead of all around the program? No need to change old cards (their code would be the same, only one more method call for an empty function whenever you play one - not the best for execution time, but I don't think it'd be really that heavy), but you can still use it to add new cards in a more easy and development friendly way...

[Naesala]

In regards to the chat, I would like to say that I, personally, have never really felt welcome there which is part of the reason I never go there. For me, the chat has always been either very quiet or somewhat offensive to me. I have gotten on three times to share my excitement over something, and have either gotten a very weak "that's nice" response or being told outright that my excitement is over something actively disliked. This may just be due to when I get on, but my experiences make me not want to return there and rather stick to the forums.

[Jenkar]

In regards to the chat, I would like to say that I, personally, have never really felt welcome there which is part of the reason I never go there. For me, the chat has always been either very quiet or somewhat offensive to me. I have gotten on three times to share my excitement over something, and have either gotten a very weak "that's nice" response or being told outright that my excitement is over something actively disliked. This may just be due to when I get on, but my experiences make me not want to return there and rather stick to the forums.

Funny enough, i like each time you pop in chat. Adds something more than the usual wtf of chat.

[juan_de_diablo]

Spoiler for Hidden:

I grabbed this halfway through the conversation... This might be an example of why the community is declining:

Spoiler for Hidden:

Pineapple: ‹@ddevans96› the reason for our decline is that i've been cloning myself
[03:50:18] Pineapple: they want bread? let them eat pineapple!
[03:50:40] juan_de_diablo: ‹@ddevans96› well, I'd expect some other members to step up like adults and call him on telling people theyre idiots for offering their open opinions
[03:50:53] juan_de_diablo: ‹@ddevans96› but maybe that's just me
[03:51:21] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› we're not ganging up on you, we just happen to agree that your opinions are not founded on proper facts. and i'm flaming you.
[03:51:40] YawnChainHow: ‹@juan_de_diablo› calling people idiots for offering the opinion (that dimshield is ok) is almost precisely what you have been doing
[03:51:48] juan_de_diablo: ‹@Pineapple› I nvr attacked, or degraded, anyone for using dim shield, I simply praised someone for not doing so and got called an idiot for my opinion>
[03:52:11] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› no, i called you an idiot for what you said after that
[03:53:09] Xenocidius: Play with fire and you'll get burned. Tread carefully, my dears.
[03:53:24] Pineapple: ‹@Xenocidius› like...mod burned?
[03:57:16] juan_de_diablo: Well, frankly, I suppose I would just expect more out of members who have been here longer. You've seen my recent activity. In no way have I ever tried to stir trouble...
[03:57:19] Joostdegrote: Better then regular pillars?
[03:57:21] wasilias: ‹@Joostdegrote› it is your pet for today. after using oracle u have 1 pet for 2 games or 3
[03:57:40] Pineapple: ‹@Joostdegrote› same as regular pillars
[03:58:02] Joostdegrote: But more costly regardless? =P
[03:58:11] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› Yeah, I just vehemently disagree with you. And we're in chat. c:
[03:58:14] juan_de_diablo: ‹@ddevans96› But you can defend his blatant rudeness. shows me that I have probably wasted time in trying to become a part of this community
[03:58:48] xasor: ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh the scary milk man stole my chicken
[03:58:54] ddevans96: I wouldn't defend it, but you also said something you really should not have. in fact, there's times of the day where you'd be outright banned for it
[03:59:19] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› If I have in any way hurt you for hating on dimshields, then I am sorry.
[03:59:21] juan_de_diablo: ‹@ddevans96› what did I say that was banable?
[03:59:31] Pineapple: He's right, the trick is in knowing those times c:
[03:59:35] ddevans96: the sexist comment. you know which one
[04:00:01] juan_de_diablo: ‹@ddevans96› remind me
[04:00:11] Pineapple: Objectification is beautiful.
[04:00:13] wasilias: ‹@Joostdegrote› pendulums dont work like regular pillars, 1 turn u get the same quanta as the pillar and next turn u get the same quanta as your mark
[04:00:17] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› boning
[04:00:47] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› If you were a guest and Higs were online you'd get a polite 24hour ban
[04:00:59] juan_de_diablo: ‹@Pineapple› lol, I was pointing out how his context of objectification didn't make sense to me
[04:01:34] juan_de_diablo: and i will apologize now like an adult if I offended anyone with that
[04:02:00] xasor: je suis un herbivore mal
[04:02:07] Pineapple: ‹@juan_de_diablo› I'm sure that you wouldn't try to use that analogy in, say, the court of law ^^;
[04:02:40] Pineapple: ‹@xasor› en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men ?
[04:02:46] wasilias: ‹@xasor› γιατι μιλας γαλλικα
[04:03:11] Pineapple: Yo, guys, this is an English chat.
[04:03:17] Xenocidius: English only, plx. kthx
[04:03:32] xasor: ‹@Pineapple› no it means i am an evil herbivore
[04:03:33] Pineapple: (Personal messages are international waters, though.)
[04:03:46] Pineapple: ‹@xasor› An evil herbivore man?
[04:03:51] xasor: screw that i will speak any language i choose
[04:03:54] juan_de_diablo: I am going to bow out of this graciously. This is a nvr ending cycle. I've been on the internet before. Just disappointing to feel so alienated by prominent members of the community. I apologize for any offensive thing I may have said

Maybe this a prime example as to why forum newbies, like myself, are in decline. Frankly, I've enjoyed myself discussing ideas and jokes, but, seeing how prominent members behave in chat leaves me wondering if this is after all a waste of time. And I may have used "objectification" in an insensitive context in order to highlight the improper use of the word by a member prior. Regardless, I apologized then, and I'll go as far as to apologize now to anyone I might have offended. I won't, however, sit back and let this go unnoticed while a discussion about WHY this community is declining is active. Is it the lack of updates not pleasing everyone, or is it rampant flaming seen both in the forum and the chat? Is the community elitist? I'm new here, and my opinion is that: my opinion. All I can offer is my limited experience, and those experiences have left me wondering if this community is worth devoting any time towards.... and all I did was praise a person's non dim shield, aether deck. As a rusher, I haaaate dim shields. This is my opinion. I certainly have not, and won't ever, devote any amount of serious forum time complaining or whining about dim shield. I may make funny posts about my frustration in the humor section, but this is light hearted. I guess, what I hope, is that this sheds some light on some possible reasons as to the decline. At this point, I'm not convinced this will be taken seriously by any members since I'm not tenured. Also, I feel this post will likely make me some enemies in the community, which is also something I do not want to do. But, I'm posting this anyways. Read it, or don't. Comment on it, or don't. It's just one new member's recent experience, for what it's worth.

This happened to me too, I was sort of flamed in chat while I was less known. I just gave up on chat, and tried harder in the forums, where flaming is less tolerated by all members. (And then my parents found out what some people talk about on chat and banned me from it. Nice.)
However, I believe they were just joking, and I know that if you stick at it, you can get somewhere in it. ( <---- look at shiny badge).
Says this a thirteen year old girl who joined this April.


Anyways I agree that this might be the reason the community is declining, newbies are judged, and first impressions stick.

In regards to the chat, I would like to say that I, personally, have never really felt welcome there which is part of the reason I never go there. For me, the chat has always been either very quiet or somewhat offensive to me. I have gotten on three times to share my excitement over something, and have either gotten a very weak "that's nice" response or being told outright that my excitement is over something actively disliked. This may just be due to when I get on, but my experiences make me not want to return there and rather stick to the forums.

Chat is a much more dynamic area than the forums. Hearing other members who have had similar issues as myself is definitely an encouragement to stay with the forum crowd. However, the possibility must be considered that countless potentially mature and contributing members have been turned off by first trying the chat and judging the entire community henceforth (or in my case, trying the forums first, then being put off by activities in the chat).

On a side note, during my time on kong, I never ever encountered such unwelcoming and blatantly disrespectful chatters as I did in ETG chat. Seeing as how kong chat would have a much more widespread membership, it seems easy how new comers could judge the ETG community as a whole by the goings-on in the chat...

[ddevans96]

A lot of what juan says (and unfortunately, had to experience) is true. Most people simply do not realize that even passing comments can leave a bad impression on newer players, let alone people acting like Pine was.

As I told another fairly respected member after one such comment a day later, which was out of context, these people could be the next young and eager staff member, like I once was. Or the next game artist (which did happen recently), or respected card designer, etc.

Being hostile towards the people who actually act mature from the start gets us nowhere. Those could be our future.

I'd also like to apologize to juan directly for not doing enough to stem the argument in chat, and inadvertently making it worse in the end. But as I was the only other person involved in that conflict, it seems the implication is that you now have a very negative opinion of me as well, which is something I would like to fix. PM me if you want to talk about it.

As for kong chat has improved recently, but it has been very bad at times. For much of our history, kong's negative reputation has sustained, because many of their respected players migrate over here eventually. At this point, though, we're just as bad.