openEtG

[iancudorinmarian]

Code: [Select]

//-snip-
        }else if (r > .5){
                Actives.blackhole(c.owner.foe);
//-snip-

At the if (r>5) part: Is the singularity intended to BH the opponent's owner, or is this just a mistake? If it's intended, what's the logic behind it?

Note that the blackhole function takes in the parameters of a card (the card producing BH) and a target (which isn't used in the function). According to the BH function, the ability affects the enemy of the card owner. Thus, by passing the parameter c.owner.foe (likely because players count as cards), you're asking BH to affect the foe's enemy, i.e. the singularity BHs its owner.

Oh, right...thanks for pointing that out. It just seemed strange and I thought it was a mistake.

Also, in the readme.txt, serprex said something about downloading node.js and tortoisegit. Ummm, I may be just tired, but where do I find these? Or do I have to download everything? (there is a button in the right side "Download ZIP".

[Fippe94]

They are seperate programs, just google them.

[serprex]

I should probably post about when I've pushed large changes

Users have been added. Authentication hasn't. Which means I had to invest into AI, so AI now targets. It still doesn't prioritize anything, so it's still really bad (I was hoping someone else would do AI, but "Someone else will do that" isn't something to rely on)

Anyways, I sometimes see these "PS I did stuff" bumps (looking at you, anti). The poor execution of this one should demonstrate why I'ven't done that myself

edit To note: ~500 lines were added today. So new bugs are likely. Console output appreciated

[Essence]

I recognize that I'm coming into this very late, but I have some balance issues. Are they worth my time to bring up, or are the changes as made pretty much set in stone by now?

Also: Opera?  Or do I have to use Chrome?

[serprex]

Any changes I've made I'll be even quicker to revert given an argument against

Only tested on Firefox, Chrome, & IE (though no promises wrt IE)

[Chapuz]

Annoincing that I will start taking a deep look at the GUI and see if I can make it more lovely, if I find the source code

[serprex]

ui.main.js needs to be split up. It currently has the GUI & more. To note: vrt mentioned working on some UI graphics

[Essence]

My Thoughts on Balance:


Random quanta is proportional

This seems like it could be really problematic for rainbow decks. Freak happenstance nets you 2 : and 1 everything else, and you suddenly end up practically guaranteed to have a : glut. Furthermore, it means that rainbow decks practically have to load up significantly more on cards of their mark.

If anything, I would be inclined to make random quanta inversely proportional -- but keeping it genuinely random is probably the best scenario of all. Let the Law of Large Numbers work the randomness angle on it's own.


Several shards have effects that no longer regard mark...others maintain relevance
This is bad because it favors the elements whose shards still improve their effects when marks are active. I see three solutions. 1) All shards regard mark. 2) No shards regard mark. 3) Those shards that still regard mark have generic quanta costs.

Personally, I prefer option 1.


Flooding doesn't start at killing creatures past 7

What does this mean?



Singularity can be lobotomized

I'm mildly concerned about Supernova/Nova's balance if this is the case. But only mildly.


Micro Abomination's hp increased by 2

Seriously? A 2|6 creature for 1 quantum? It was already the most powerful 1cc creature in the game in terms of p|t?



Mitosis grants +0/+2

Mitosis was already on the upper edge of the power scale as it is; why make it even better?



Drainlife & Ice Bolt scale per 5, not per 10

I hope they only add 1 damage per 5, then. Either that or they massively outclass Fire Bolt, and that's bad.



Phoenix's conversion to ash is a transformation

As opposed to summoning a fresh creature? So a phoenix that is Quinted and dies to a Fire Shield creates a Quinted Ash?  A Phoenix with Adrenaline keeps it as an Ash and then keeps it through the Phoenix transformation as well?  And this is listed as a debuff?



That's it for now; I'll go through the newly-added cards soonish.

[ColorlessGreen]

Random quanta is proportional

This seems like it could be really problematic for rainbow decks. Freak happenstance nets you 2 : and 1 everything else, and you suddenly end up practically guaranteed to have a : glut. Furthermore, it means that rainbow decks practically have to load up significantly more on cards of their mark.

If anything, I would be inclined to make random quanta inversely proportional -- but keeping it genuinely random is probably the best scenario of all. Let the Law of Large Numbers work the randomness angle on it's own.

"Random Quanta is Proportional" means when random quanta is selected from your current quanta pool (as in, when you play an "other" card or a pest pests you), if you have 3 dark quanta and ten death quanta, you have a 3/13 chance of having a dark selected and a 10/13 chance of having a death selected. It does not, to my knowledge, have anything to do with QTs generating quanta.

[Essence]

Oh, it's only when quanta is drained? That's OK, then.  If it were during generation, that would be really messed up.

[serprex]

I should probably quote, but I'll see how this goes
Random quanta being proportional: this is for spending colorless quanta. Quantum Pillars still grant quanta exactly the same. My main concern here is that Discord would benefit too much from this. In that case scramble can be nerfed to compensate (ie scramble less quanta) & you posted

I thoroughly removed all mark relevance with shards (#2). Perhaps I missed listing some? In this case we disagree on which solution is best (1 vs 2) though I think you raised this issue because you didn't realize I'd gone with #2. I lean away from mark dependence because it promotes splash deck (eg mono air + SoBr) rather than allowing a fire deck to splash another element while making full use of SoBr. Some of the confusion might be in how I went about removing mark reliance (SoV always reduces maxhp by 3 (buff), SoBr always draws only 2 cards (nerf), SoG always heals 4 (buff to non Life mark, nerf to Life mark))

Flooding: when one uses flooding, the first round the two most horizontal creatures remain alive. The next round they are killed. I was lazy and implemented Flooding to immediately kill the most horizontal creatures (note that positional language is confusing since I haven't made creature layout the same)

BE/Singularity might be dangerous. But it's still a negative attack creature. Most lobo effects aren't seen in speedbows, so it shouldn't be an issue (Singularity balance may be more impacted by different probabilities on events occuring, so there's subtler things at play). Speedbows in general are hurt by nova cost 1 , so on that front there's larger issues at play too

2|6 micro abom: Elements current balance has 2cc exceeding 1cc in general. Given the choice between nerfing 2cc (Frog, guard, minor phoenix) and buffing 1cc (Ash Eater, Micro Abomination) I chose the latter. If a 1cc rush can be shown to be faster than a 2cc oriented deck (Fractix/Frogtal) or more control resistent than mono Air with SoFr then I'll admit I went too far

Mitosis: +0/+2 may've been excessive, & I'll reduce that to +0/+1. I made the +0/+2 change before increasing the cost of Fractal, & you're right in that it'd be better to nerf Fractal to be at the level of Mitosis than buff Mitosis to be at the level of Fractal

Bolts: your hopes are true. I'd hate to live in a world of double damage bolts

Phoenix transformation: you may be right. To note: adrenaline/poison ash dies. Frozen phoenix isn't unfrozen. I'm very open to reverting this

[Chapuz]

what does the bolt line mean?