Guest posts by Memorystick

37

League Archive / Re: Beginners League 1/2011

« on: January 13, 2011, 03:41:37 am »

Updated.
Once more, I am going to have to ask that you all make sure you have your opponent's exact forum username- I found several instances where improper capitalization was used or the name itself was misspelled.

I would like to remind everyone that the names have to be identical to forum names. If they are not, it's going to screw up the database. And by identical, I mean identical. Not almost identical, but 100% identical.
If reporting results with incorrect names starts to happen daily, we will use a hardcore method of not including those results at all. Otherwise organizers have to waste time hunting down the real name because they person who posted the results didn't use a capital letter. It's the responsibility of the winner to make sure that forum names, and names on the results post, match.

Take note of this, please.
Several issues in the standings have been fixed, and I would like to request that winners put the characters "-" or ":" after their names- spaces are picked up by double-clicking and that makes it more difficult for the LOs (this is also the reason why tikotribe was in the standings twice)
Thank you.

38

League Archive / Re: Beginners League 1/2011

« on: January 12, 2011, 12:26:29 pm »

Updated.
Silent- it's not a problem (yet), it's just an opportunity to remind everyone and to show that I'm serious about the rules. Also... it's jippy99 (not capitalized)
Everyone- Please be sure you have your opponent's forum name correct before you post. Thank you.

39

Trial Battle Archive / Re: xdude 3 - 0 Kael Hate

« on: January 12, 2011, 11:19:54 am »

I'm surprised kael didn't use cloaks. If I was banning light dragons in his place and leaving HL avaliable, I'd have brought cloaks and gargoyles (that way they can petrify )

40

League Archive / Re: Beginners League 1/2011

« on: January 12, 2011, 10:45:18 am »

Updated.
I'd like to remind you all that the name must be exactly the same as the forum name. This includes capitals. I have seen this error twice today, one being from the person in question. Just to remind you:

I would like to remind everyone that the names have to be identical to forum names. If they are not, it's going to screw up the database. And by identical, I mean identical. Not almost identical, but 100% identical.
If reporting results with incorrect names starts to happen daily, we will use a hardcore method of not including those results at all. Otherwise organizers have to waste time hunting down the real name because they person who posted the results didn't use a capital letter. It's the responsibility of the winner to make sure that forum names, and names on the results post, match.

9270984- I've looked at it, and it shows that you're entered properly, so there must be an issue with Google Docs. I brought it up in chat and it should be fixed soon.

41

Trial Archive / Re: General Discussion

« on: January 12, 2011, 10:19:47 am »

Amazing how I called the winner's bracket perfectly (up to this point), but failed with the loser's (namely, blonde's match)

42

League Archive / Re: Beginners League 1/2011

« on: January 11, 2011, 12:40:37 pm »

Updated

43

PvP League / Re: Elements PvP League - Suggestions and Feedback

« on: January 11, 2011, 10:08:21 am »

I suggest the league starts as soon as possible 

Congrats. You got your wish

44

Crucible Archive / Re: Slow | Delay

« on: January 11, 2011, 07:44:22 am »

Personally, I don't think that it should affect generated creatures- you're slowing creatures that come from your opponent, not his/her minions (although this would allow boneyard to function normally as well) Also, it seems to me that Sundial is worth 3|2 with a cost reduction of -1 due to duo-skill (due to the analysis of creature costs) and -1 due to limited duration, giving 1 from drawing and 2 from one-time full-field delay. I would compare this and Sundial to Pandemonium- except that stopping your own creatures from attacking can be advantageous (for example, stopping them from running into an offensive shield or allowing yourself time to heal up to full to achieve an Elemental Mastery) Therefore, I would place the unupped cost at 2 (limited one-turn delay) + 1 (lasting effect) = 3 , with the upped being 2 (which is what you have)
I would also like to mention that this has a lot of synergy with Rewind and Eternity- in fact, an Eternity can slow down two creatures with this, or completely lock down one, as well as the opponent's draw- this would be more effective with flown Eternities, but far more expensive and more vulnerable. Finally, this would give the minor disadvantage of ensuring that the opponent's creatures won't be affected by the offensive shields (including time's Procrastination) on the turn they come out, though it's likely that other shields will be used anyway.

45

Crucible Archive / Re: Time Vacuum | Time Warp

« on: January 11, 2011, 05:36:41 am »

Interesting card... I assume that it'll continue to show cards as you play them, instead of as their effects occur? If so, that's a bit like a limited version of precognition (no draw, only see the cards your opponent wants to play) combined with a one-turn advantage (you would play all your cards before playing this) for the unupped version. It would also hurt Fractal (would take an extra turn to get the copies) and, to an extent, any creatures or permanents that have a skill, like growth or hasten, that gives an advantage per use (independent of the opponent's field) Silence is 3|2 , and Precognition is 2|1 with an extra effect (continuous version would be Golden Nymph for 8|8 and 2:time upkeep + 6/7 attack), so I would value it at 3 (one-turn advantage) + 1 (continuous effect) + 1 /turn upkeep (to keep it consistent with Golden Nymph) -1 for upkeep 1 (I think this is accurate... Flooding is 3|2 with 3 upkeep, and freeze + shockwave is instakill for 1 and 2|1 - giving 4 (mono-instakill) + 2 (continuous instakill effect) - 3 (upkeep 3) for 4+2-3=3 for unupped) giving 3 casting cost and 1 upkeep.
The upgraded form, though, may be too strong, especially against the AI. With one of these, a player with an Anubis, a lot of Quintessences, or burrow-able creatures (the unupped version also, to an extent) could stop an AI from using targeted CC spells on any creature, due to the predictable nature of the AI, by immortalizing the highest priority creature. Taking the unupped formula and adding Pandemonium, which is 3|5 (giving a +3 value to desirable limiting of a one-time effect), we get 3 + 1 + 6 (desirable limiting to repeatable effect) + 2 upkeep (desirable limiting of repeated effect) -2 (upkeep 2) - 1 (upgraded card) for 7 casting cost with upkeep of 2 .
I really do think that an upkeep would be needed to balance this, due to the advantage it could give, strategically. I might have also underestimated the strength of the unupped version, but the upped one is much stronger, because it doesn't subject the owner to the same issues.

46

Card Ideas and Art / Re: Interruption | Distraction

« on: January 10, 2011, 04:55:47 am »

First thing's first- the table says the upped version is "Other", while the card background suggests it's "Time"- it looks to me like you changed the card to Time, but didn't change the table (especially considering kuro's comment)
As for the price... Deflagration is 2|1 for 1 destroyed permanent, Steal is 4|3 for 1 destroyed permanent and 1 generated permanent, and Earthquake is 3|2 for up to 3 destroyed pillars. Now we need to know... what's the average stack size that this would be used on? I can see it being used on weapons and shields a lot, but it can also provide a huge advantage by stopping a large stack of pillars from producing quanta. Assuming the average number of pillars in a stack is 6 (estimate from chat), that would place the cost at 6|5 or 6|4 (based off Earthquake)... but since it'll also be used on non-stackable permanents (like shields), and that it only lasts one turn, I think that shaving 2 off the cost would suffice... giving 4|3 or 4|2... and since 3 generic quanta is equivalent to 1 elemental quanta, the upped would be 6-9 quanta (with 6 being more reasonable), giving 4 | 6 generic... which you have! Nice work with balancing it, I'd love to see this in the game (especially with how few PC options we have currently...)

47

Card Ideas and Art / Re: Timeball | Rewindball

« on: January 09, 2011, 08:47:23 am »

I must agree that, as-is, this is rather overpowered. If you really want a splash-type spell, I would go with rewinding target and up to two adjacent creatures, delaying target creature for X turns and up to Y adjacent creatures for (X-1) turns, or delaying target and up to Y adjacent creatures for X turns (please note that X and Y are stand-ins for a determined number, not part of a formula) Alternatively, you could also have it rewind 3 random creatures, or delay several random creatures for X turns. (The reason I chose 3 for rewinding is that's approximately the quanta cost you'd pay for 3 rewinds, being a little cheaper for the unupped but more expensive for the upped)

Rewind 3 (targeted): 3 reverse times = 6 + 1 or 2 for card advantage = 7-8 unupped, 5-6 upped (-2 upped bonus)Delay Y (splash less effective, targeted): Y Basilisk Blood= 2Y for +0|+20 and 6 delay for Y creatures, since this would be less effective and less versatile (can't buff creatures like armagio or voodoo) I'd place it at around 2Y-2 unupped and 2Y-4 upped*Delay Y (splash same effect, targeted): same thought process as above, except 2Y -1 unupped and 2Y-3 upped (due to being slightly more effective*)Rewind 3 (random): 3 reverse time = 6 + 1 or 2 for card advantage - 1 for randomness = 6-7 unupped, 4-5 uppedDelay Y (random): Y Basilisk Blood =2Y for +0|+20 and 6 delay for Y creatures, 2Y - 2 (see delay Y (splash less effective, targeted) - 1 (for randomness), giving 2Y-3 unupped and 2Y-5 upped*

*Assuming Y is at least 3 and delay is less than 6

48

Card Ideas and Art / Re: Sphinx | Greater Sphinx

« on: January 09, 2011, 04:31:08 am »

I'm not sure comparing this to Mummy is such a good idea. I think Mummy is pretty much a way for newbies to access Pharaoh, even though it requires a duo and two cards to do so (or a trio to use devour), although it does work well in a death rush. In addition to that, it seems to me that mass-quint, even if temporary (which I assume it is) should warrant more than a +1 cost compared to Mummy. If anything, it reminds me of Cloak, with the condition that only Time-element creatures can be affected (although unupped affects both sides, like Pandemonium) Cloak is 4 -> 3 for two-turn mass-PA/quint that can be disabled by any form of mass-CC or PC, while Pandemonium is 3 -> 5 for limiting a mass effect to the desired side of the field. Sphinx can be removed by most forms of CC (presumably including lobotomization), but only affect Time-element creatures, and so is both weaker than Cloak (due to lesser coverage) and stronger than the same (due to lower variety of counters- PC can get rid of Cloak but not Sphinx) Therefore, I would value the mass-protection at +2, and the limiting of said effect to the desirable side of the field at +3 (judging from pandemonium, accounting for -1 value from upgrading), and so would give the unupped a quanta cost of 5 (from attack) + 2 (from protection) for 7 , or 6 if you want it to be similar to Mummy, and the upped a cost of 5 (5 attack) +2 (from protection) +3 (from desirable limiting) -2 (from upgrading) for a cost of 8 (or 7 , for comparison to Mummy)

Thing is, though. If the opponent has any non-AoE creature control your sphinx will die in an instant, and the immortality will disappear. It's just like forcing the opponent to use their first CC on this card, instead of having a choice. I don't think it warrants that high of a cost.

Not all- Ice Bolt (with less than 10 ), Drain Life (less than 10 ), infection, Thunderstorm, and most forms of soft-CC (Freeze, Antimatter, Basilisk Blood, Procrastination's delay, and Gravity Pull with no un-momentumed creatures) won't kill the unupped version* (at least, not immediately)- and I did note that it was vulnerable to most forms of CC, as shown in yellow. Also, while you think 7|8 is too expensive, I think that 5|5 is too cheap (plus I was trying to balance it with regard to other cards, though I'm not as good at that as OldTrees)
*Fire Bolt (less than 10 fire quanta) and Rain of Fire can be added to that list for the upped version, and unupped oty could be added for both, as long as it's not buffed