181
Forum Game Archive / Re: This is not an RPG
« on: June 17, 2010, 11:57:32 am »
I'M IN!
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.
182
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:56:47 am »so... how do u become 'slaves' or watever?This is just a concept for the next war.
183
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:49:09 am »
But would you mind playing for them in the war?
If yes, and if you are indeed representative of most of the Forum population, then I wholly accept Malduk's "veto" system.
If yes, and if you are indeed representative of most of the Forum population, then I wholly accept Malduk's "veto" system.
184
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:47:16 am »
You actually doubt that? I don't. I wouldn't even mind playing for 
, the element I most "dislike". There are no elements I hate, and I think there are very few of us who actually hate an element.
And if you don't veto at all, then, essentially, you have no say in what happens to you, and I don't think that's fair.
And I also disagree with this, too:
, the element I most "dislike". There are no elements I hate, and I think there are very few of us who actually hate an element.And if you don't veto at all, then, essentially, you have no say in what happens to you, and I don't think that's fair.
And I also disagree with this, too:
Quote
I'd say its more important that you are not in your "disliked" element, than it is to be in your "preferred" elementMostly because the second statement is a better subset of the first statement.
185
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:42:54 am »
It's not actually going to be called Slave Market, as SG said in Chat. And I think players should be able to participate in the decision-making, too. 12 people shouldn't dominate the entire War event.
186
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:39:52 am »
True...
But who "really dislikes" an element? That's just kinda cruel. Everyone has a favorite element, as you can see in Kuro's thread, but the "least favorite" element caused a lot of animosity and tough decisions.
But who "really dislikes" an element? That's just kinda cruel. Everyone has a favorite element, as you can see in Kuro's thread, but the "least favorite" element caused a lot of animosity and tough decisions.
187
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:32:50 am »Quote
1-2 "cards" extra would still get him sucked into an element he dislikes.Well, think about it. It's bidding, which means that votes will probably be very tight. Those 1-2 extra votes may make all the difference. And the "veto" thing doesn't seem to do much to help the player choose the element he likes best...
188
War Archive / Re: War #2 Building an Army - Slave Market
« on: June 17, 2010, 12:08:35 am »
EPIC idea. And we are totally keeping the name "Slave Market". 
To slightly fix Puppy's problem and make things a little more interact for the "slaves", why not let them have two special elements?
One Element is "Wanted": The player may choose to add 2 "cards" to target Master's bid. In the event of a tie, this element wins.
Another Element is "Preferred": The player may choose to add a "card" to target Master's bid. In the event of a tie, this element wins.
Example:
has 9 cards on this guy.
has 8.
has 2.
The player "Wants", so he adds 2 to it to make it have 10 cards. Whoopee! He also "Prefers" death, so it's 3 cards. Not that it matters.
How does that sound? Otherwise, I love this idea.
To slightly fix Puppy's problem and make things a little more interact for the "slaves", why not let them have two special elements?
One Element is "Wanted": The player may choose to add 2 "cards" to target Master's bid. In the event of a tie, this element wins.
Another Element is "Preferred": The player may choose to add a "card" to target Master's bid. In the event of a tie, this element wins.
Example:
has 9 cards on this guy. has 8. has 2.The player "Wants"
, so he adds 2 to it to make it have 10 cards. Whoopee! He also "Prefers" death, so it's 3 cards. Not that it matters.How does that sound? Otherwise, I love this idea.
189
Round 2 / Re: smokefree (Gravity) WIN melendr (forfeit)
« on: June 16, 2010, 11:45:47 pm »
Hm...
That deck definitely stands a chance! What if smokefree had an
and Antimattered his own creatures? Liquid Shadow could definitely be used to win!
That deck definitely stands a chance! What if smokefree had an
and Antimattered his own creatures? Liquid Shadow could definitely be used to win!
190
Round 2 / Re: smokefree (Gravity) WIN melendr (forfeit)
« on: June 16, 2010, 11:43:27 pm »
Can I see the famous Auto-Loss Deck? 
191
Round 2 / Re: kevkev60614 (sub for coke, Fire) 2 vs assassim (aether) 0
« on: June 16, 2010, 11:35:38 pm »
Quote from chat:
Quote
[23:34:50] Icybraker: Hey SG, when we lose, are we allowed to discard other cards besides the cards in the deck that lost?Sorry.
[23:35:07] Scaredgirl: nope
192
Duo-Decks / Re: I... am... god.
« on: June 16, 2010, 11:33:03 pm »
Meh. Too situational. 95 times out of 100, you'll rather have a set of Wings. I'd rather take a Miracle.