New Idea Guru

[Tiko]

I do not see the the self explanatory reasons. Care to enlighten me?

So I've guessed.

In other words: If one spends most of his time creating numerous card ideas (scattered around different levels and archives, in hope that one will 'hit the jackpot' someday - hence the phrase: manufacturer), that more-or-less implies, that:

• That person lacks the care, attention or the necessary knowledge/experience [of the game] to polish and analyze those ideas to the fullest; to let them fit into, and become a healthy addition to the game.
• Probably spends a limited time with the actual game itself, and by that, misses many features (metagame shifts, card interactions, etc.), that can only be highlighted in practical gameplay.
• It is also worth considering that this person lacks the ability to focus on a single subject entirely, and can be easily distracted by different lines of thoughts or impressions.
• And most notably, this person is highly probable to have already created its own ideal image of how the (future) game contents should be like.

I may be wrong, though.

[moomoose]

sounds like you have a bitter attitude towards those people, to me at least. 

1) i agree some people dont put time into their cards and spam them out, but i dont think such people would be good candidates for other reasons. 

2) it really only takes minimal playing to keep up with trends and interactions, just being around people who play the game and comment on cards tend to give just as much insight into the game as it would from playing.  also, new cards arent necessarily required to fit into existing interactions between cards, good card ideas can be independent of existing synergies and combinations.

3) it really is a case by case basis as far as how much focus a particular person has, completely independent of how many card ideas people have.  i see no correlation.

4) again, i dont see a correlation.

[OldTrees]

I do not see the the self explanatory reasons. Care to enlighten me?

So I've guessed.

In other words: If one spends most of his time creating numerous card ideas (scattered around different levels and archives, in hope that one will 'hit the jackpot' someday - hence the phrase: manufacturer)

Ah. I did not understand the term you were using.

I do agree that people that go too fast end up with less precise quality (broader range). While I dislike the imprecision, I am far more concerned with their accuracy when it comes to quality. If they are inaccurate then they are poor judges of balance. If they are imprecise then they are unreliable judges of balance. It is better to have an unreliably good judge give you advice than a reliably poor judge give you advice because the average advice will be higher quality despite the worst advice being equal quality.

However a reliably good judge is the ideal.

[furballdn]

Well there are probably 2 kinds of people: CIA makers, and non-CIA makers. If a CIA maker becomes idea guru there will inevitably be bias. If a non-CIA maker becomes idea guru, he or she may not have the experience/knowledge/wisdom to have correct and accurate analyses.

[OldTrees]

Well there are probably 2 kinds of people: CIA makers, and non-CIA makers. If a CIA maker becomes idea guru there will inevitably be bias. If a non-CIA maker becomes idea guru, he or she may not have the experience/knowledge/wisdom to have correct and accurate analyses.

I do not think there will necessarily be significant bias. I am biased but I make sure to compensate for the bias so that it is insignificant. Many CIA makers can do the same.

[Tiko]

I've suspected some will take my post personal: I have to stress it that there were no offense meant to anyone, and I'm surprised that you were the one. Furthermore, I don't have any special attitudes "towards those people" - I feel completely neutral about the CIA boards, which is the main reason I'm not commenting on any of the ideas. Yet I would gladly welcome a rule that would regulate the amount of ideas posted per user, true that.

The sole reason I've suggested the post before, was only because I'd expect the outmost professionalism and even more objectivity from the person holding the title 'Idea Guru' - one such as OldTrees himself; and personally, I doubt that anyone that I can think of would become a well-deserved successor of the same level of quality. But I also hope that I'll be proven wrong.

And while I disagree with most of your reaction, I see no point in such a debate; though I can't overlook your second point:

2) it really only takes minimal playing to keep up with trends and interactions, just being around people who play the game and comment on cards tend to give just as much insight into the game as it would from playing.

I think this is what is really wrong. If nothing else, I think only about how narrow-minded people are in general about the element Water, and how conspicuously this is reflected in a great portion of card ideas. But that goes for many others too, of course.

[moomoose]

simply put, playing a lot doesnt mean youll be able to help develop a good idea, and playing a little doesnt mean you wont.  there are more poor card designers than good, but as you said they have on occasion had one good idea.  these people are not prime for idea guru as OT detailed, but are the people that would be the ones likely to be posting in the ask the idea guru thread.  those who have been established as the better card designers would be more suited for the role in aiding others in providing feedback on card ideas than those who just know how to play the game.

if we use a 1-5 scale for card quality, with 1 being very bad, 2 being bad, 3 being decent, 4 being good, 5 being great, most card ideas made are 1-2's, and with water being a tricky element to design for, its going to get more than its fair share.