Elements the Game Forum - Free Online Fantasy Card Game
Elements the Game => General Discussion => Topic started by: tyranim on March 05, 2010, 03:31:53 am
-
knock yourselves out
and evil doers, answer truthfully, i know its hard for you, but just try...
voting will end when the war begins
-
IMO, I don't think it's imbalanced. Both sides have about all things needed, just the matter of more and less. For example, many argued Good has no perm control(PC). It's true that Evil has great PC, but Good has Trident (you can use any mark, right?). Moreover, only Good has most healing (Heal, Miracle, Black Hole) while Evil has little (vampires, Granite Skin, can't heal much). And, Time has an advantage over any other elements -- Hasten and Eternity. They make strategy-building much easier and don't have to worry about deck out. Good can develop a deck out strategy while Evil can't.
-
I think a simple swap is time and earth. As I've already argued (and won?) in the other topic, many of the elements seem to be neutral and could go either way.
Swapping time and earth would be much more balanced, imo. As it is, good has no way to protect permanents, and no way other than trident (and really only those in water can use that anyway) to destroy them. Evil has every other permanent control card in the game, not to mention the best creature control cards IMO (lightning, antimatter, all those fire cards). The only good creature control card good has is otyugh.
Healing will only prolong the inevitable.
That said, it wouldn't be impossible for good to win. Just very hard.
-
Against switching Earth and Time. Time > Earth IMO. Hasten and Etern rules. Moreover, Time is opposite of Aether and Earth is oppsite of Air, switch them breaks the opposition of Good and Evil now
-
It's true that Evil has great PC, but Good has Trident (you can use any mark, right?). Moreover, only Good has most healing (Heal, Miracle, Black Hole) while Evil has little (vampires, Granite Skin, can't heal much).
Not so at all. Both sides have access to the only important healing card in the game -- Shard of Gratitude -- but Evil can use it's permanent control to remove Good's SoGs, whereas Good doesn't have that ability...which means that Evil outheals Good, period.
-
I wanted to say something about PuppyChow's quote on the old thread, without clogging that one...
Just because elements are rivals doesn't mean they're on opposing sides. I'm a University of Michigan fan, and we're big rivals with Ohio State, but when it comes to bowl games I still root for OSU since we're on the same side: the Big Ten conference.
I'm from Ohio, and I can say for sure that most people around here would NEVER root for the Wolverines...but I'm wondering if many Michigan fans are like you? I personally like the Steelers, which is Cleveland's major rival, but I root for the Browns whenever they're not playing each other...however, Browns fans would never root for the Steelers, even though the Browns suck as much as they do... Just wondered if this is normal for Michigan-Ohio, just like I've noticed for Cleveland-Pittsburgh
-
BTW, good also has FFQ+Bond, Deja+Blessing, and lots of creature/ability control...It should be enough to be able to counter the damage while clearing dark's board...all in all methinks it's pretty even-matched, just matters what decks come from this. It's something that I'm sure no one has played with before this, since there's really no reason to include just these colors.
-
We won't know for sure until we try.
-
*wondering why it matters*
-
*wondering why it matters*
I totally agree.
-
this debate is totally useless!
evil is normaly the powerful side... and good always wins in the end!
stop trying to balance, please let us fight!
-
stop trying to balance, please let us fight!
^^that
-
All this could've been avoided if SG would've said it's not meant to be fair (or unfair for this matter) instead of insisting that it's fair. All in all, this thread proves that it's unfair, although most votes are for it being fair. Just look at the votes for "evil is OP" and the votes for "good is OP" and you'll see what I mean.
-
OMG, cant everyone stop whyning about everything?
-
All this could've been avoided if SG would've said it's not meant to be fair (or unfair for this matter) instead of insisting that it's fair. All in all, this thread proves that it's unfair, although most votes are for it being fair. Just look at the votes for "evil is OP" and the votes for "good is OP" and you'll see what I mean.
To say that it's all my fault is pretty ridiculous.
Put yourself in my shoes. Should I have said:
"Everyone choose a side! P.s. Evil is stronger and will win every time no matter what happens"
Or should I have divided the elements randomly so that it's "balanced"?
"Join the epic battle between..Team A vs. Team B"
Sounds fun.
And this poll proves absolutely nothing. It just says what people think. We can talk about balance issues for the rest of our lives, but that's all that is is, talk. The fact is that nobody knows the truth until we try it.
I didn't see a big problem with balance because neither side cannot build a "I-win" deck. Elements provides many different ways to win from rush damage to decking out the opponent. Also luck of the draw plays a HUGE part. I pity people who are afraid to take a challenge just because they think they have a disadvantage.
Now lets say doomsayers are right and Evil destroys Good. Then what?
Would the servers have been shut down?
Would your account have been deleted?
Would the world have ended?
No. The event would be been over, most people, win or lose, would probably have had fun, and we would have made the necessary balancing for the next War.
Now instead we didn't have the event, and we have two threads full of people arguing about game balance and event rules.
I hope everyone takes this as a learning experience. I know I did.
-
I don't say it's your fault that this is unbalanced. I just said that if you would've said it from the beginning that it's not necessarily meant to be balanced, more like an epic fight between good and evil, none of this whining would've happened. I'm sure many people would've understood that.
-
I also don't understand why you've decided to not go through with the event.
Literally, since it came out into the open that the even was never intended to be balanced, everyone has basically been cool with the idea. It needed some talking out, and it got what it needed.
I don't see any reason to not follow through at this point.
-
I also don't understand why you've decided to not go through with the event.
Literally, since it came out into the open that the even was never intended to be balanced, everyone has basically been cool with the idea. It needed some talking out, and it got what it needed.
I don't see any reason to not follow through at this point.
Same here
-
and it got what it needed.
Master's tears?
NOM.
-
Umm...what?
And for the record, SG, all you "should have said" was this:
"Hey, I've put together an event that I think will be fun! Competition is encouraged, but don't expect a level playing field -- this is about storyline, not winning. Everyone choose a side."
-
Balance is extremely important with this kind of game and it should be expected that balance discussions are going to be a part of it. As long as the discussion is rational/cival, it should not be considered whinning/complaining.
-
Balance is extremely important with this kind of game and it should be expected that balance discussions are going to be a part of it. As long as the discussion is rational/cival, it should not be considered whinning/complaining.
You've obviously never visted the chat..
As for the balance; that only matters if rewards are involved. If not, who cares?
-
I thought fun is also important...
-
If we have these in the future, I think it would probably be best to appoint two random elemental masters (probably opposites or "rivals") as team captains, then let them choose which elements they want on their side. That's about as fair as we could get on a consistent basis, and if it's in any way unfair, we'll just have the elemental master to blame for picking poorly.
In fact, there is nothing stopping anyone from picking teams now. This would be for future reference, not for the evil vs good competition if it ever happens. So if yall think it's a decent idea and worth your time (either because it's a good idea or you're just curious what kind of team you'll end up with), please contact the elemental master of your "opposing" element (found on the metamorphosis page), figure out who will pick first, and go at it. An alternative picking method of picking one element at a time, would be the person that picks first gets on pick, then the second person gets two picks, and after that you both get two picks until there is only one left, and that element automatically goes to the person who picked first.
If yall feel like doing that, just figure out a way to randomly decide who picks first, and if you can't agree on a picking method, randomly decide that as well. Oh, and post your results here if you wouldn't mind.
Edit: Oh, one other alternative picking method would be that when you pick an element to be on your team, the opposing element automatically goes to the other team. So if light and dark are the team captains, light goes first (by random chance of course) and picks fire, then dark automatically gets water. Then dark picks aether, so light gets time. This would allow for an opposites war like SG intended, but a little more "fair." Plus, the team captains have to really think about which elements they pick, and in which order, because you want to create synergies on your side without giving your opponents synergies on their side.
-
Umm...what?
And for the record, SG, all you "should have said" was this:
"Hey, I've put together an event that I think will be fun! Competition is encouraged, but don't expect a level playing field -- this is about storyline, not winning. Everyone choose a side."
If dog rabbit...SG is asking you to look at it from her point of view. Don't say what "should have been done" or said, or whatever. The best way to approach this kind of issue is by giving suggestions, just like critiquing a new deck. Offer suggestions on how to better approach this issue in the future, because, as she said, SG had no way of knowing that her words would elicit this type of response. This is not the only thing happening in her life, I'm sure, and there are more important things on her plate than making sure everyone in the Elements community is 'happy'. Yes, as an administrator it is her job to keep everyone happy and take suggestions and make sure no one is doing anything they shouldn't be doing and chime in on threads and give updates and...you get the gist, it's not an easy job. Haven't you ever said something you thought was right but was taken in the wrong way? How do you take it when someone tells you "That was wrong, you failed, this is how it's done" when you already know all of that. Suggestion is key, be nice about it people.
Also, be thankful for all she does...it's not easy I'm sure, and two threads of "EPIC SG FAIL LOL!!!111!!!1`1!~1!~~ YOu sUCk BLAH" is not something that she wants to see, EVER.
Not to be mean, but it's upsetting to me when people don't use common courtesy
-
the reason i made this thread was because the "debate" was inevitable, and was clogging the important thread. i honestly think the tournament is completely unpredictable when it comes to how "unbalanced" it is. i just made this thread so the "debaters" would stop clogging the war thread. so stop saying its pointless, when it isnt. the only way to stop the debating is to ban everyone who debates about it, and i dont see that ever happening
-
If we have these in the future, I think it would probably be best to appoint two random elemental masters (probably opposites or "rivals") as team captains, then let them choose which elements they want on their side. That's about as fair as we could get on a consistent basis, and if it's in any way unfair, we'll just have the elemental master to blame for picking poorly.
I like that. I deleted the rest of the quote there because I didn't like the rest of it. Designate two captains to pick teams, I would choose Light and Dark to be the two captains (since they are the most obvious rivalry) and then just let them pick. As for who they pick, who cares if fire and water end on the same side? I know I don't because it wouldn't be about opposites fighting it out, it would be purely about Team A versus Team B.
-
If we have these in the future, I think it would probably be best to appoint two random elemental masters (probably opposites or "rivals") as team captains, then let them choose which elements they want on their side. That's about as fair as we could get on a consistent basis, and if it's in any way unfair, we'll just have the elemental master to blame for picking poorly.
I like that. I deleted the rest of the quote there because I didn't like the rest of it. Designate two captains to pick teams, I would choose Light and Dark to be the two captains (since they are the most obvious rivalry) and then just let them pick. As for who they pick, who cares if fire and water end on the same side? I know I don't because it wouldn't be about opposites fighting it out, it would be purely about Team A versus Team B.
The methods of picking I discussed were just ways we would be able to set up future wars. I wasn't advocating one over the other. Sometimes we might do it the old fashioned way (the kind you said you like), other times we might want an "opposites" war, where no opposites are on the same team. And the picking two at a time method is just a way of taking away the "advantage" of the person that gets to pick first. With ten elements to choose from though, it's not much of an advantage.
To clarify: I was thinking of future wars, not a way to improve the current one.
-
If we have these in the future, I think it would probably be best to appoint two random elemental masters (probably opposites or "rivals") as team captains, then let them choose which elements they want on their side. That's about as fair as we could get on a consistent basis, and if it's in any way unfair, we'll just have the elemental master to blame for picking poorly.
I like that. I deleted the rest of the quote there because I didn't like the rest of it. Designate two captains to pick teams, I would choose Light and Dark to be the two captains (since they are the most obvious rivalry) and then just let them pick. As for who they pick, who cares if fire and water end on the same side? I know I don't because it wouldn't be about opposites fighting it out, it would be purely about Team A versus Team B.
The methods of picking I discussed were just ways we would be able to set up future wars. I wasn't advocating one over the other. Sometimes we might do it the old fashioned way (the kind you said you like), other times we might want an "opposites" war, where no opposites are on the same team. And the picking two at a time method is just a way of taking away the "advantage" of the person that gets to pick first. With ten elements to choose from though, it's not much of an advantage.
To clarify: I was thinking of future wars, not a way to improve the current one.
Yes, the teams should of course change. No point in having the same 6 vs. 6 every time.
*sigh* I guess I have to reveal my original plan then which was this:
- a new War would happen 6 times a year, once per every 2 months
- the forum background graphics would change depending which side won so that the losers get reminded of their failure each day
- In the first War there would be these "Good" vs "Evil" like I proposed
- in the second War there would be "Good" :air :life :light :water vs. "Neutral" :aether :time :entropy :gravity vs. "Evil" :darkness :death :earth :fire
- in the third War maybe something like "Forces of Nature" :air :earth :life :death :water :fire vs. "Higher Power" :light :darkness :time :aether :entropy :gravity
etc.
Something like that.
The idea was to have these different Wars, each with their own little storyline (for the geeks who like those :) ), that would give reason to why some of the Elements switched sides. We have some excellent writers in this community who could have written our story as we do PvP.
That kind of system gives more "epic" to the event than your average high school basketball team picking, although gameplay wise the end result would be pretty much the same as the teams change.
There's more to it but that's the basic idea.
-
its a little pathetic how sg was FORCED into revealing a confidential thing like that JUST to shut everyone up. shes the admin, if you dont like the way she is doing things, make it known ONCE with a list of GOOD reasons why what she is doing is wrong, instead of a continuous stream of complaints. if you feel like your still being ignored, dont bother with forums then. wait till there is a new admin and see how he/she does.
-
Discussion like this should not be taken personal or made personal. When people remain rational (yeah, that is hard for some), discussions like this can be fun and exciting. The problem here is people are getting all worked up over nothing. If you don't want to discuss it or read it, then ignore this thread.
-
She wasn't forced to do anything lol... and there was no need for her to hide her intentions in the first place; in fact, it likely would have prevented the events which have occurred. Also, she didn't reveal it to shut people up, or at least it doesn't seem that way...
Yes, the teams should of course change. No point in having the same 6 vs. 6 every time.
*sigh* I guess I have to reveal my original plan then which was this:
After that she merely explains her original plan. It's just a response to my post, not an attempt to stop people from complaining.
In response to your post, SG, I think that's a decent way of going about things in the future. Although I'd think we could have one every month if we wanted.
Also, was there any reason to putting five people in each element? I would think four in each would plenty.
-
Let me see if I can explain everyone's point of view. I'm aiming to understand where everyone is coming from. To show how we got in this mess. I'm trying to not assign blame, but encourage understanding. There are always two sides to any story, and most often neither side is blameless. Let me see if I got the story straight...
The thread goes up. We see a two sided war. People go "Ooh, this looks like fun" and sign up. At that moment, we don't know much of anything about the event. More importantly, because they don't know anything, they draw their own conclusions. This is important, as it's not until much later that intentions become known and misconceptions have to be corrected.
The competitive people see this as a contest. That's the way they are. Competitive people want to win. And indeed, when the words "war" and "versus" are thrown around, there's a lot to encourage this point of view and little to say otherwise. Especially with no other 'just for fun' events around. It doesn't matter that there's no prize involved, or no rules as of yet, they're in it to win it! But then they see that the sides are uneven. The preconception of "this is a contest to win" (later revealed to be faulty) leads them to "This contest is badly designed". This is exacerbated with the competitive people who chose the weaker side do to thematic or elemental preferences (i.e. "I want to be the good guys!" or "I want to be on the Gravity team!").
Meanwhile the people in it "just for fun" are wondering what the big deal is. They are more concerned about the story rather than the outcome. Their preconception of "This is an event for novelty" is later confirmed with SG "Who cares about balance? I just wanted to Good vs. Evil." clarification of the purpose of this event.
Once the original intent of "This is a fun event, not a finely tuned competition" was shown, some had trouble changing their "In it to win it (and fairly!)" mindset. A compromise is attempted where suggestions are made to try to modify the teams to be fair while still keeping (roughly) to the themes. However, "Balances is more important" clashes with "Theme is more important" and the sparks fly once again. And the people who have different opinions on the existence of imbalance in the first place get mixed in too, starting fires. These flames set off the content bystanders who cry "Quit messing with it and let's get started!"
And then the whole place explodes. The people who assumed (and demanded) "competition!" keep clashing with those who wanted "fun event!", the designer among them. And the word of the event's designer is final, and did not appear (key word: appear) to want to change the core concept or dilute the theme. And then the whole thing snowballs.
...which is how we got to where we are now. Is this more or less correct? Or am I out in left field?
-
So, at this point is anyone actually against just going ahead with the event as it is? Warts and all? I was kind of looking forward to this.
-
You're pretty much correct Phantom... although I'm not entirely sure that anyone is complaining anymore.
Someone started a poll asking that somewhere, mafidufa, but it was locked and may have been deleted... I think everyone that voted except SG still wanted the event to happen ASAP (in other words ignoring the postponement).