1
General Discussion / Re: Best card art in game
« on: February 05, 2011, 03:09:20 am »Out of the Dragons, I think Ice Dragon has the best art.Elite Phase Dragon, hands down.
Guest Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by a guest. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Off-Topic Discussions / Re: Why GIMP officially sucks now....
« on: February 05, 2011, 02:27:23 am »
I feel for you, man. A very similar thing happened to me on Pixlr. In my old graphic design class, Photoshop crashed too. Never trust graphic editing programs.
Except Paint.NET. That has never crashed for me, and I prefer it to GIMP.
Except Paint.NET. That has never crashed for me, and I prefer it to GIMP.
3
Trio & Quartet / Re: The Defensive Shrieker (Is it possible?)
« on: February 04, 2011, 02:03:20 am »
Hmm... this is an interesting deck for sure, but there are several things that can make it better.
First of all, that
pillar and the Pulverizer don't work well together. This is because if you draw your Pulverizer before your pillar, you wouldn't be able to use its ability. I'd recommend taking both of them out in exchange for a single cheaper weapon- say, a Short Sword or Hammer.
Secondly, your Golden Hourglass looks out of place. You'd want to use an Hourglass early in order to draw more cards to attack faster or set up your defenses earlier. However, early on in the game you are using your
quanta for your Graboids; you wouldn't want to use it on your Hourglass then. As such, the Hourglass cannot be used in the early game and in the late game it isn't nearly as effective. I recommend simply taking it out.
Everything else looks okay. I love the "surprise defensive" twist to this deck
Good job!
First of all, that
pillar and the Pulverizer don't work well together. This is because if you draw your Pulverizer before your pillar, you wouldn't be able to use its ability. I'd recommend taking both of them out in exchange for a single cheaper weapon- say, a Short Sword or Hammer.Secondly, your Golden Hourglass looks out of place. You'd want to use an Hourglass early in order to draw more cards to attack faster or set up your defenses earlier. However, early on in the game you are using your
quanta for your Graboids; you wouldn't want to use it on your Hourglass then. As such, the Hourglass cannot be used in the early game and in the late game it isn't nearly as effective. I recommend simply taking it out.Everything else looks okay. I love the "surprise defensive" twist to this deck
Good job!
4
Forge Archive / Re: Manticore | Elite Manticore
« on: February 04, 2011, 12:17:40 am »
Wow, this card is really intruiging. I haven't seen a card like this before where your mark affects the creature's ability, but I think it's a really good idea!
The card itself is good, I think, and it does fit with the actual creature. Without playtesting, I'd initially suggesting raising both the upped and unupped costs by 1
, but again, I haven't playtested this.
Know what might happen if a player has a mark but owns a 
mark card and plays it? 
And finally: Is this art a collage job or did you actually make the background and creature art? If the latter is true, I applaud you for your skills. If the former is true, nice collaging skills.
That's all. A very interesting and well-designed card.
The card itself is good, I think, and it does fit with the actual creature. Without playtesting, I'd initially suggesting raising both the upped and unupped costs by 1
, but again, I haven't playtested this.Know what might happen if a player has a
mark but owns a mark card and plays it? And finally: Is this art a collage job or did you actually make the background and creature art? If the latter is true, I applaud you for your skills. If the former is true, nice collaging skills.
That's all. A very interesting and well-designed card.
5
Forum Game Archive / Re: The ^ < v Game by Appawesome
« on: February 03, 2011, 10:48:07 pm »
^ has posted a total of 3 times in this thread.
< got kicked in the face today.
V has less posts than I do. (probably.)
< got kicked in the face today.
V has less posts than I do. (probably.)
6
Competitions / Re: Voting: Adaptation
« on: February 03, 2011, 10:05:25 pm »EchoMaybe not, but you know what? In Greek myth, Echo used to be a beautiful nymph. But then, she got her voice taken away from her such that she could only repeat what others said.
Echo
Echo
Echo
Echo
Echo
Echo
Can your deck do that? Didn't think so.
Then she pretty much DIES.
And you know why this happened?
Because of Hera. And ZEUS.
7
General Discussion / Re: Weekly Featured Cards poll - Fire
« on: February 03, 2011, 09:59:56 pm »
Fire Buckler needs more love. I find it one of the most interesting shields in the game.
8
Game Suggestions and Feedback / Re: Devourer Card Art
« on: February 03, 2011, 08:46:35 pm »
I actually like the original background for 3 reasons.
1) Color contrasts strongly with card frame color and Devourer, causing it to pop out and be emphasized.
2) It doesn't really look pink to me; more of a light orangish-brown. And that's a very earthy color. And that's where you find Devourers, who burrow themselves.
3) Gray is such a stereotypical color for
. We already have the grey frame; do we really need more? A little variation is good.
1) Color contrasts strongly with card frame color and Devourer, causing it to pop out and be emphasized.
2) It doesn't really look pink to me; more of a light orangish-brown. And that's a very earthy color. And that's where you find Devourers, who burrow themselves.
3) Gray is such a stereotypical color for
. We already have the grey frame; do we really need more? A little variation is good.
9
Air / Re: Dragonfly | Damselfly
« on: February 03, 2011, 03:05:23 am »
Thanks for hearing us out, Zanz
This was much-needed and adds synergy to
. I'll contribute to Damselfly statistics soon enough.
This was much-needed and adds synergy to
. I'll contribute to Damselfly statistics soon enough.
10
Darkness / Re: Cloak | Cloak
« on: February 03, 2011, 03:04:16 am »
I'm new to this Cloak stuff, but it seems like a fun card. Judging from its previous state, this was a fair and relevant buff.
But yeah, I don't see it being used competitively. But is it fun? Yessir
But yeah, I don't see it being used competitively. But is it fun? Yessir
11
Gravity / Re: Another Flaming Mono Grav
« on: February 03, 2011, 02:59:44 am »
Darkfrogger, I appreciate your enthusiasm for deckmaking - who doesn't like the feeling of crafting a well-thought out, fun, and efficient deck? - but...
I would appreciate it if you would say something about the mechanics, tactics or reasoning behind the decks you post. You've posted decks without descriptions for a while now and there's nothing wrong with the decks... it just seems a little empty, you know what I'm saying?
I don't mean to be offensive, though. :-/
Actual comment on the deck:
I don't really think you need 2 Titans. Sure, you can get it out earlier but it also slows the deck down, and you don't really need the Titan out earlier. I'd swap a Titan for another Gravy Pull.
And IdioticIdiot suggests adding in Momentums, which is a good point. Momentums would help in this deck, I believe.
I would appreciate it if you would say something about the mechanics, tactics or reasoning behind the decks you post. You've posted decks without descriptions for a while now and there's nothing wrong with the decks... it just seems a little empty, you know what I'm saying?
I don't mean to be offensive, though. :-/
Actual comment on the deck:
I don't really think you need 2 Titans. Sure, you can get it out earlier but it also slows the deck down, and you don't really need the Titan out earlier. I'd swap a Titan for another Gravy Pull.
And IdioticIdiot suggests adding in Momentums, which is a good point. Momentums would help in this deck, I believe.
12
General Discussion / Re: What mark has the best art?
« on: February 03, 2011, 12:55:46 am »
That is all.
's design is unique, not overly complex, and not simple enough to be boring. It is a flawless representation of a flawless element.