1
Tournament Archive / Re: Western Tournament - November 12th - Quads - Unupgraded
« on: November 12, 2011, 07:41:27 pm »
phaedrus 2
duece22 1
duece22 1
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
Tournament Archive / Re: Western Tournament - November 12th - Quads - Unupgraded
« on: November 12, 2011, 06:51:11 pm »
phaedrus 2
RootRanger 1
RootRanger 1
3
Tournament Archive / Re: Western Tournament - November 12th - Quads - Unupgraded
« on: November 12, 2011, 06:23:31 pm »
phaedrus 2
Malignant 0
Malignant 0
4
Round 4 / Re: (Death) Jippy99 3-0 Malignant (Underworld)
« on: November 07, 2011, 12:10:07 am »
Pretty underwhelmed by most of the UW decks so far...
5
War Archive / Re: War #4 - Round 3
« on: October 23, 2011, 07:03:30 pm »
Although I'm not a part of this war (too busy), as a former UW member I think my two cents maybe matter.
First of all, the inactivity of the UW tourney says quite a bit. Just because potentially they could bring solid counters and have good understanding of other team's vaults doesn't mean they are capable of making that happen. In general UW will always be less organized than other war teams because the players will lack high quality war experience. TStar being the lead UW member this war goes against this idea though and so there is maybe cause for concern IMO.
UW needs to be structured to test the motivation of the players who choose to fight for it in order to prove their worth and thus they should be at a natural mathematic disadvantage. Placing them (hypothetically/mathematically) in the middle of the pack when they enter is probably too high. That a veteran like TStar is able to be on this team (I'll admit I don't know exactly how this happened, or his motivations) and could potentially create an organized unit (though it seems this hasn't happened...) means that the attempt to be fair to UW can potentially be exploited.
Also, I don't know the details of duel selection this war, but I know the fact that we didn't know who our opponents would be in the UW entrance round meant that our ability to bring hard counters was severely minimized.
I think it will probably all work out ok this war unless TStar and co are really able to pull something out of their hats. In which case I will commend them because I know how hard it is to do and because by doing so they will perhaps expose a flaw or two in the current system.
Phaedrus.
First of all, the inactivity of the UW tourney says quite a bit. Just because potentially they could bring solid counters and have good understanding of other team's vaults doesn't mean they are capable of making that happen. In general UW will always be less organized than other war teams because the players will lack high quality war experience. TStar being the lead UW member this war goes against this idea though and so there is maybe cause for concern IMO.
UW needs to be structured to test the motivation of the players who choose to fight for it in order to prove their worth and thus they should be at a natural mathematic disadvantage. Placing them (hypothetically/mathematically) in the middle of the pack when they enter is probably too high. That a veteran like TStar is able to be on this team (I'll admit I don't know exactly how this happened, or his motivations) and could potentially create an organized unit (though it seems this hasn't happened...) means that the attempt to be fair to UW can potentially be exploited.
Also, I don't know the details of duel selection this war, but I know the fact that we didn't know who our opponents would be in the UW entrance round meant that our ability to bring hard counters was severely minimized.
I think it will probably all work out ok this war unless TStar and co are really able to pull something out of their hats. In which case I will commend them because I know how hard it is to do and because by doing so they will perhaps expose a flaw or two in the current system.
Phaedrus.
6
Tournament Archive / Re: Western Tournament - September 24th - Spellbound - Unupgraded
« on: September 24, 2011, 08:21:18 pm »
phaedrus 2, DarkArk 1
7
Tournament Archive / Re: Eastern Tournament - September 10th - Redemption - Unupgraded
« on: September 09, 2011, 12:03:04 am »
I think it might be enough just to make sure the cards aren't completely dead.
Taking out the other cards would probably weaken most of the deck options...not sure if it would have a net balancing effect or not.
Would be curious to know what the ten most popular cards are before deciding whether that is a good plan.
Taking out the other cards would probably weaken most of the deck options...not sure if it would have a net balancing effect or not.
Would be curious to know what the ten most popular cards are before deciding whether that is a good plan.
8
Tournament Archive / Re: Eastern Tournament - September 10th - Redemption - Unupgraded
« on: September 08, 2011, 04:16:47 am »
A bit concerned about cheating here. Can't really know if your opponent isn't carrying the cards or just isn't drawing them.
I sincerely hope people choose to be honorable about it, but it seems like an easy tourney to cheat in.
I sincerely hope people choose to be honorable about it, but it seems like an easy tourney to cheat in.
9
Anvil Archive / Re: Living Weapon | Biological Weapon
« on: September 01, 2011, 02:52:22 am »I see your points Xeno, and will respond with the following.Not sure I like this.1. And weapons in creature slots isn't how?
1. I would want actual creature themed weapons. Creatures in weapon slots just seems lame.
2. And making a whole host of creature themed weapons and the art for them would be a huge undertaking.
3. Also, I think it may be OP as CC. 4 life quanta could make 3 creature just disappear, with one remaining in the creature slot. Unless I'm mistaken.
4. Also a potentially OP buff-on crimson dragons for example.
2. Compare to Animate Weapon. They wouldn't be new cards, and wouldn't have new art.
3. Note that I had some doubts about making it targetable on enemy creatures. If that is deemed OP, then I'll change it.
4. Compare to Plate Armor | Heavy Armor. It's still destroyable by PC.
For a creature to be a weapon it seems like it must evolve in certain ways (towards certain strengths and away from others), and I would like it if that evolution were reflected in the art/card's nature more rather than less. When a weapon is animated it feels to me like it actually becomes a creature (that it gains X HPs helps). I just think it is harder to make that evolution feel right when making creatures into weapons, because there are so many creatures and because the evolution is actually quite different from animate weapon in my mind.
To balance it as CC, all we would have to do is make it so that you can't stack creature-weapons on top of each other. Once you've used it as CC once, you can't again unless the opponent replaces it with an actual weapon or destroys it.
The plate armor argument is valid, and on reflecting agree it isn't OP in most creature HP buff scenarios.
A weakness though is that instead of contributing to fixing the relative lack of PC options in the game, I think it may do the opposite. Creature weapons with powerful skills scream "OP unless you're carrying PC". Ya, the opponent may also be carrying this card, but it relies on your playing a weaker creature than your current creature-weapon in order to be useful.
Just not sure if it is valid.
Phaedrus.
10
Anvil Archive / Re: Living Weapon | Biological Weapon
« on: August 31, 2011, 07:59:54 am »
Not sure I like this.
I would want actual creature themed weapons. Creatures in weapon slots just seems lame.
And making a whole host of creature themed weapons and the art for them would be a huge undertaking.
Also, I think it may be OP as CC. 4 life quanta could make 3 creature just disappear, with one remaining in the creature slot. Unless I'm mistaken.
Also a potentially OP buff-on crimson dragons for example.
I would want actual creature themed weapons. Creatures in weapon slots just seems lame.
And making a whole host of creature themed weapons and the art for them would be a huge undertaking.
Also, I think it may be OP as CC. 4 life quanta could make 3 creature just disappear, with one remaining in the creature slot. Unless I'm mistaken.
Also a potentially OP buff-on crimson dragons for example.
11
Design Theory / Re: [Concept] Turn Trigger
« on: August 29, 2011, 05:35:55 am »
I really like the idea.
Slightly overpowered cards (in normal time) which can only be played at certain stages of the game (thereby nerfing them).
Lots of interesting possibilities with the idea on the whole.
Adds various elements (no pun intended) of risk to deckbuilding.
For the card above for example I could pack a lot of them but then I'm making the bet that I can survive for ten turns vs my opponent, and am dependent on the rest of my deck and the quality of my matchup prediction to make it happen. Its power would depend on the quality of player remarkably, and thus the concept has my vote. Maybe hard to balance, but maybe also easy. Instead of nerfing or buffing card stats/cost, you could just change the timeframe.
Your card is too much like noble gas for my liking, but the concept is a winner!
Phaedrus.
Slightly overpowered cards (in normal time) which can only be played at certain stages of the game (thereby nerfing them).
Lots of interesting possibilities with the idea on the whole.
Adds various elements (no pun intended) of risk to deckbuilding.
For the card above for example I could pack a lot of them but then I'm making the bet that I can survive for ten turns vs my opponent, and am dependent on the rest of my deck and the quality of my matchup prediction to make it happen. Its power would depend on the quality of player remarkably, and thus the concept has my vote. Maybe hard to balance, but maybe also easy. Instead of nerfing or buffing card stats/cost, you could just change the timeframe.
Your card is too much like noble gas for my liking, but the concept is a winner!
Phaedrus.
12
Card Ideas and Art / Re: Troll | Troll
« on: August 28, 2011, 02:43:27 am »
Imo, it should have at least 6 HP so that its out of the range of 1 hit CC and the mechanic becomes more interesting.
Also, I think making it an earth skill could be cool. Trolls are kinda earthy in my mind.
However, its basically an archangel with a skill nerf and hp/attack/unupped quality buff, I'm not sure I would like to see it in the game.
Also, I think making it an earth skill could be cool. Trolls are kinda earthy in my mind.
However, its basically an archangel with a skill nerf and hp/attack/unupped quality buff, I'm not sure I would like to see it in the game.