Project: Quantum Generators

[The_Mormegil]

Quantum Locket is about the best it can get. Nothing to improve there.

Amulet and Talisman... well, we could talk about them.

Gift is nice, but I don't know if it would really benefit the game. It's debatable.

Primal Quantum is pretty much broken however you put it... maybe increasing its cost would work, I dunno.

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...

[moomoose]

Quantum Locket is about the best it can get. Nothing to improve there.
- only thing that could be altered is changing from "target element", a mechanic which does not yet exist, to 'target card's element', which is more practical until targeting quanta symbols in the pool is permitted.

Amulet and Talisman... well, we could talk about them.
- i think changing the number of turns which they are active, the amount of quanta they produce each turn, and possibly changing/removing their cost may boost their usefulness

Gift is nice, but I don't know if it would really benefit the game. It's debatable.
- as is, it is confined as a water card, but it may be possible to change the name to remove the water theme and come up with another name which could fit all elements to cost [set element] and gain [set element] and [variable element]

Primal Quantum is pretty much broken however you put it... maybe increasing its cost would work, I dunno.
- i dont think it is as powerful as you think, after 6 turns it only produces 7 more quanta than a tower in its place, i dont feel that is terribly powerful in the short term, in the long term it gains steam, but that is fixable by potentially limited the number of copies it can make before it goes away- some other alterations could be made like making it a 6 cost spell instead of a permanent, which will produce one pillar/tower per turn over 5 turns.

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.
- i agree, something as simple as lowering the cost and/or limiting the number of uses, maybe making the ability cost be a pseudo quanta other than 'random' would make it fit better

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.
- generating 1 quantum after putting a card into play is in a way reducing the cost of all cards by 1, which im not sure is possible to balance unless it is limited to one distinct element and wouldnt always function, but considering gecko (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,14693.0.html) didnt make it out of level 1 because it confused people, i dont have much hopes for round 2.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.
- charging is an interesting concept, but it would be difficult to find a way to make it balanced and worthwhile.

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/
-i agree, these are probably the weakest generators of the bunch. magpie is fun, however, but doesnt fit our needs here.

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...
- yeah its a bit of a toughy trying to come up with a reason for your pillars to generate quantum now-now, i tried to stay away from it being a card, but the only other element that seemed to make sense was

[OldTrees]

Quantum Locket is about the best it can get. Nothing to improve there.
- only thing that could be altered is changing from "target element", a mechanic which does not yet exist, to 'target card's element', which is more practical until targeting quanta symbols in the pool is permitted.
>I think the "target element" is a beneficial hidden suggestion. The ability to target quanta pools directly would allow for more denial and acceleration cards.

Amulet and Talisman... well, we could talk about them.
- i think changing the number of turns which they are active, the amount of quanta they produce each turn, and possibly changing/removing their cost may boost their usefulness
>Theory: Cards like this should have three periods: better than a pillar, roughly equal, and inferior. The duration of these periods should relate to the magnitude.

Gift is nice, but I don't know if it would really benefit the game. It's debatable.
- as is, it is confined as a water card, but it may be possible to change the name to remove the water theme and come up with another name which could fit all elements to cost [set element] and gain [set element] and [variable element]
>Water is a good fit. Many Water cards have Duo activation costs.

Primal Quantum is pretty much broken however you put it... maybe increasing its cost would work, I dunno.
- i dont think it is as powerful as you think, after 6 turns it only produces 7 more quanta than a tower in its place, i dont feel that is terribly powerful in the short term, in the long term it gains steam, but that is fixable by potentially limited the number of copies it can make before it goes away- some other alterations could be made like making it a 6 cost spell instead of a permanent, which will produce one pillar/tower per turn over 5 turns.
>7 quanta advantage on turn 6 per 2 cards is too much for a stall card (average lifespan > 15 turns). Unupped is too unreliable. Increasing the activation cost is a minimum.

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.
- i agree, something as simple as lowering the cost and/or limiting the number of uses, maybe making the ability cost be a pseudo quanta other than 'random' would make it fit better
>0:Drain 2quanta from the highest quanta pools, generate 3quanta of target creature.

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.
- generating 1 quantum after putting a card into play is in a way reducing the cost of all cards by 1, which im not sure is possible to balance unless it is limited to one distinct element and wouldnt always function, but considering gecko (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,14693.0.html) didnt make it out of level 1 because it confused people, i dont have much hopes for round 2.
>It is easy to balance. Just make it cost more to cast. Or make it only affect playing 1 of creatures,permanents,spells.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.
- charging is an interesting concept, but it would be difficult to find a way to make it balanced and worthwhile.
>The keyword actually hides and makes the mechanic more complicated.

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/
-i agree, these are probably the weakest generators of the bunch. magpie is fun, however, but doesnt fit our needs here.
>A creature + Activation cost is worth at least 2 Pillars.

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...
- yeah its a bit of a toughy trying to come up with a reason for your pillars to generate quantum now-now, i tried to stay away from it being a card, but the only other element that seemed to make sense was
>The previous version of this effect was a Time Activated ability. (Either a Gem or a Sage IIRC)

[The_Mormegil]

Quantum Locket is about the best it can get. Nothing to improve there.
- only thing that could be altered is changing from "target element", a mechanic which does not yet exist, to 'target card's element', which is more practical until targeting quanta symbols in the pool is permitted.
>I think the "target element" is a beneficial hidden suggestion. The ability to target quanta pools directly would allow for more denial and acceleration cards.
+ I don't think "target element" is a bad idea at all, as long as we provide a nice interface to come up with it. The main problem Zanz had with such a mechanic was that it would require very small targets and be a little messy. What about haveing a pop-up window (inside the game, not outside, of course) with all 12 elements marks? It would be a special type of "Choose Your Target" window.

Amulet and Talisman... well, we could talk about them.
- i think changing the number of turns which they are active, the amount of quanta they produce each turn, and possibly changing/removing their cost may boost their usefulness
>Theory: Cards like this should have three periods: better than a pillar, roughly equal, and inferior. The duration of these periods should relate to the magnitude.
+ The point here is that having a "better than a pillar" period greatly enhances rushes. I think, however, that having 6 of these tops in a deck would limit the benefit somewhat, while also render this card less competitive. It's a rush-type generator, and as such may break the game balance even further: this game is already heavily tipped towards rushes.

Gift is nice, but I don't know if it would really benefit the game. It's debatable.
- as is, it is confined as a water card, but it may be possible to change the name to remove the water theme and come up with another name which could fit all elements to cost [set element] and gain [set element] and [variable element]
>Water is a good fit. Many Water cards have Duo activation costs.
+ I'm against extending this to all elements. That would make it broken, as well as taking away most of its pros. The problem I have is: do we need another immo/nova-like card in the game? As this is relatively less powerful than any of the above, I'd think it's not a bad idea: enhances water, creates a very good (maybe too good) water rush deck, can be used to power water cards off of mark (burning pillars only Steamy/Fahren deck?), can be used to power a duo with a heavy imbalance towards water (Flayer Lightning deck run off of mark, Winged Fishes with only Water Pillars and this). I also think it's kind of balanced now, at least if compared to Immolation and Nova.

Primal Quantum is pretty much broken however you put it... maybe increasing its cost would work, I dunno.
- i dont think it is as powerful as you think, after 6 turns it only produces 7 more quanta than a tower in its place, i dont feel that is terribly powerful in the short term, in the long term it gains steam, but that is fixable by potentially limited the number of copies it can make before it goes away- some other alterations could be made like making it a 6 cost spell instead of a permanent, which will produce one pillar/tower per turn over 5 turns.
>7 quanta advantage on turn 6 per 2 cards is too much for a stall card (average lifespan > 15 turns). Unupped is too unreliable. Increasing the activation cost is a minimum.
+ Agreed. Maybe a 3 cost activation, a higher casting cost and the unupped spawns only Quantum pillars?

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.
- i agree, something as simple as lowering the cost and/or limiting the number of uses, maybe making the ability cost be a pseudo quanta other than 'random' would make it fit better
>0:Drain 2quanta from the highest quanta pools, generate 3quanta of target creature.
+ I like the versions in the thread better... (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,27139.msg369716#msg369716)

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.
- generating 1 quantum after putting a card into play is in a way reducing the cost of all cards by 1, which im not sure is possible to balance unless it is limited to one distinct element and wouldnt always function, but considering gecko (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,14693.0.html) didnt make it out of level 1 because it confused people, i dont have much hopes for round 2.
>It is easy to balance. Just make it cost more to cast. Or make it only affect playing 1 of creatures,permanents,spells.
+ I'd like to see a better theme too. I'm also positive on making it affect only spells to prevent Fractal abuse and speedbow abuse.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.
- charging is an interesting concept, but it would be difficult to find a way to make it balanced and worthwhile.
>The keyword actually hides and makes the mechanic more complicated.
+ The keyword was part of a serie. A wording that would take it out is: "Starts charging. : Discharge - empties charging counter. Produces double that amount of ."

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/
-i agree, these are probably the weakest generators of the bunch. magpie is fun, however, but doesnt fit our needs here.
>A creature + Activation cost is worth at least 2 Pillars.
+ The problem with Jewel is that it's most useful when combined with death effects, making it a gift to death stalls more so than a new quanta producer.

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...
- yeah its a bit of a toughy trying to come up with a reason for your pillars to generate quantum now-now, i tried to stay away from it being a card, but the only other element that seemed to make sense was
>The previous version of this effect was a Time Activated ability. (Either a Gem or a Sage IIRC)
+ could justify overcharging through electricity, although it would be a bit lame. has an invigorating breeze and can have a "rising tide" or even "turning tide" effect, but both are quite underwhelming to my personal taste. Life can has Overgrowth. Light can has another Miracle-like effect (maybe Divine Intervention or something). Time of course would work, and benefit greatly from this.

[moomoose]

Quantum Locket
+ I don't think "target element" is a bad idea at all, as long as we provide a nice interface to come up with it. The main problem Zanz had with such a mechanic was that it would require very small targets and be a little messy. What about haveing a pop-up window (inside the game, not outside, of course) with all 12 elements marks? It would be a special type of "Choose Your Target" window.
- i was just suggesting we use code which exists in game as an alternative in the event that 'target element' is too complicated/not worth it for zanz to write the code for. 

Amulet and Talisman
+ The point here is that having a "better than a pillar" period greatly enhances rushes. I think, however, that having 6 of these tops in a deck would limit the benefit somewhat, while also render this card less competitive. It's a rush-type generator, and as such may break the game balance even further: this game is already heavily tipped towards rushes.
- it definitely does help rushes, but it also is a way to combat earthquakes and quanta denial in general.  one or two pests could destroy the function of one or two pillars, while these would circumvent their blockade to an extent.  not to mention hiding your quantum from black holes until you need it.

Gift
+ I'm against extending this to all elements. That would make it broken, as well as taking away most of its pros. The problem I have is: do we need another immo/nova-like card in the game? As this is relatively less powerful than any of the above, I'd think it's not a bad idea: enhances water, creates a very good (maybe too good) water rush deck, can be used to power water cards off of mark (burning pillars only Steamy/Fahren deck?), can be used to power a duo with a heavy imbalance towards water (Flayer Lightning deck run off of mark, Winged Fishes with only Water Pillars and this). I also think it's kind of balanced now, at least if compared to Immolation and Nova.
-makes sense to me, not a whole lot i can think to do with it at this point tho.

Primal Quantum
+ Agreed. Maybe a 3 cost activation, a higher casting cost and the unupped spawns only Quantum pillars?
-do the math on a turn by turn cost/benefit analysis simulation to determine how long it takes for the upgraded version to start being worth the investment.  it will probably take a while to get out of the red.

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.
+ I like the versions in the thread better... (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,27139.msg369716#msg369716)
-honestly the more i think about this card the less i like it, converts random quanta to desired quanta with a net gain.

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.
+ I'd like to see a better theme too. I'm also positive on making it affect only spells to prevent Fractal abuse and speedbow abuse.
=spells/permanents limitation may be nice, but that could lead to flying weapon focus.  limiting it to spells makes it a rather small niche, considering how seldom spells are played, and draws away from the quantum generation focus of this topic, i suggest dropping this one from the conversation string.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.
+ The keyword was part of a serie. A wording that would take it out is: "Starts charging. : Discharge - empties charging counter. Produces double that amount of ."
-could work, but this isnt any different in actuality than the thing which was submitted, i dont know how to progress this mechanic further

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/
+ The problem with Jewel is that it's most useful when combined with death effects, making it a gift to death stalls more so than a new quanta producer.
-agreed.

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...
+ could justify overcharging through electricity, although it would be a bit lame. has an invigorating breeze and can have a "rising tide" or even "turning tide" effect, but both are quite underwhelming to my personal taste. Life can has Overgrowth. Light can has another Miracle-like effect (maybe Divine Intervention or something). Time of course would work, and benefit greatly from this.
- if it only makes sense as , so be it.

[OldTrees]

Quantum Locket
+ I don't think "target element" is a bad idea at all, as long as we provide a nice interface to come up with it. The main problem Zanz had with such a mechanic was that it would require very small targets and be a little messy. What about haveing a pop-up window (inside the game, not outside, of course) with all 12 elements marks? It would be a special type of "Choose Your Target" window.
- i was just suggesting we use code which exists in game as an alternative in the event that 'target element' is too complicated/not worth it for zanz to write the code for. 

Amulet and Talisman
+ The point here is that having a "better than a pillar" period greatly enhances rushes. I think, however, that having 6 of these tops in a deck would limit the benefit somewhat, while also render this card less competitive. It's a rush-type generator, and as such may break the game balance even further: this game is already heavily tipped towards rushes.
- it definitely does help rushes, but it also is a way to combat earthquakes and quanta denial in general.  one or two pests could destroy the function of one or two pillars, while these would circumvent their blockade to an extent.  not to mention hiding your quantum from black holes until you need it.
>It definitely helps early game just as Primal Quanta or Elemental Pools help late game. Early game and late game generators should be added together.

Gift
+ I'm against extending this to all elements. That would make it broken, as well as taking away most of its pros. The problem I have is: do we need another immo/nova-like card in the game? As this is relatively less powerful than any of the above, I'd think it's not a bad idea: enhances water, creates a very good (maybe too good) water rush deck, can be used to power water cards off of mark (burning pillars only Steamy/Fahren deck?), can be used to power a duo with a heavy imbalance towards water (Flayer Lightning deck run off of mark, Winged Fishes with only Water Pillars and this). I also think it's kind of balanced now, at least if compared to Immolation and Nova.
-makes sense to me, not a whole lot i can think to do with it at this point tho.

Primal Quantum
+ Agreed. Maybe a 3 cost activation, a higher casting cost and the unupped spawns only Quantum pillars?
-do the math on a turn by turn cost/benefit analysis simulation to determine how long it takes for the upgraded version to start being worth the investment.  it will probably take a while to get out of the red.
>Math done below

Refractor, now, that's something we could definitely improve.
+ I like the versions in the thread better... (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,27139.msg369716#msg369716)
-honestly the more i think about this card the less i like it, converts random quanta to desired quanta with a net gain.

Lotus we should come up with a better theme and balance it a bit.
+ I'd like to see a better theme too. I'm also positive on making it affect only spells to prevent Fractal abuse and speedbow abuse.
-spells/permanents limitation may be nice, but that could lead to flying weapon focus.  limiting it to spells makes it a rather small niche, considering how seldom spells are played, and draws away from the quantum generation focus of this topic, i suggest dropping this one from the conversation string.
>Affecting creatures can be balanced with a higher initial cost. If it were limited to Spells then it would spawn almost spell only decks. The same is true if it were limited to permanents.

Pools and Fonts are debatably broken to the core.
+ The keyword was part of a serie. A wording that would take it out is: "Starts charging. : Discharge - empties charging counter. Produces double that amount of ."
-could work, but this isnt any different in actuality than the thing which was submitted, i dont know how to progress this mechanic further
> Pools and Fonts are not broken to the core. However they might be balanced better. What turn should they equalize with pillars? Remember the quanta is unavailable until released all at once. I actually wonder about a variation where the pool is sacrificed when activated but produces more per charge.

I don't see Jewel being in the game, really, nor Magpie. I may be mistaken, but I don't really think they're good enough. :/
+ The problem with Jewel is that it's most useful when combined with death effects, making it a gift to death stalls more so than a new quanta producer.
-agreed.

Invigorate, on the other hand, with a better theme and a good balance...
+ could justify overcharging through electricity, although it would be a bit lame. has an invigorating breeze and can have a "rising tide" or even "turning tide" effect, but both are quite underwhelming to my personal taste. Life can has Overgrowth. Light can has another Miracle-like effect (maybe Divine Intervention or something). Time of course would work, and benefit greatly from this.
- if it only makes sense as , so be it.

Entropy mark included (obviously)

CC,AC	Num of initial Towers	Eot 1 (q,p)	Eot 2	Eot3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1,3	2	4,2	5,3	7,4	10,5	14,6	19,7	25,8	32,9	40,10	49,11	59,12
n/a	3,-PQ	7	11	15	19	23	27	31	35	39	43	47
quanta	difference	-3	-6	-8	-9	-9	-8	-6	-3	1	6	12

Notes:
Remember this is with 1 Primal Quanta. Another would be played fairly early if available
Also note that the quanta comeback is quadratic. [y =0.5x² - 4.5x + 1, R² = 1]

[moomoose]

the original comparison was 1 tower and 1 pq vs 2 towers, i think if you are going to compare 3 towers and 1 pq it should be compared to 4 towers. (if im reading that chart correctly, which i very well may not be)

but either way, its a fairly rough investment for the first 10 turns in order to get a measly 6 quanta out of that, games can be over by then.

potential revamp solutions: 4 (or any other element which we can fit thematically, if we want to change it) spell add ~5 pillars/towers to target stack over ~5 turns.  i think putting a limit on it would alleviate the "wow, that will be a lot of quanta after 15 turns! ...ignoring that its quanta drain for 8 or so turns..."

[OldTrees]

the original comparison was 1 tower and 1 pq vs 2 towers, i think if you are going to compare 3 towers and 1 pq it should be compared to 4 towers. (if im reading that chart correctly, which i very well may not be)

but either way, its a fairly rough investment for the first 10 turns in order to get a measly 6 quanta out of that, games can be over by then.

potential revamp solutions: 4 (or any other element which we can fit thematically, if we want to change it) spell add ~5 pillars/towers to target stack over ~5 turns.  i think putting a limit on it would alleviate the "wow, that will be a lot of quanta after 15 turns! ...ignoring that its quanta drain for 8 or so turns..."

2 towers + 1 mark + PQ vs 3 towers + 1 mark

Please remember that the quanta difference is quadratic. It is not a measly 6 quanta. It is 6,12,... With the double checked numbers 2T+M+PQ with AC:3 doubles the net quanta production of 2T+M on turn 13 and triples it on turn 19.

(also I think I forgot to include the quanta from each grafted being played)
Fixed table below
Entropy mark included (obviously)

CC,AC	Num of initial Towers	Eot 1 (q,p)	Eot 2	Eot3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
1,3	2,+PQ	4,2	6,3	9,4	13,5	18,6	24,7	31,8	39,9	48,10	58,11	69,12
n/a	3	7	11	15	19	23	27	31	35	39	43	47
quanta	difference	-3	-5	-6	-6	-5	-3	0	4	9	15	22

Notes:
Remember this is with 1 Primal Quanta. Another would be played fairly early if available
Also note that the quanta comeback is quadratic. [y =0.5x² - 3.5x, R² = 1]

[moomoose]

like i said, limiting the number of towers produced fixes the issue of it being too powerful after 10+ turns.  at this point i think a ~1 cost card that produces ~3 pillars instantly would be easier to balance.

[OldTrees]

It might be easier to balance but also less interesting.

If the Activation Cost increased per use that would change the quadratic nature.

[The_Mormegil]

It might be easier to balance but also less interesting.

If the Activation Cost increased per use that would change the quadratic nature.

That might be difficult to code. How about "empty that quanta pool to add another pillar to your stack"? With of course little to NO cost at all. Basically increases the number of pillars after you played everything that turn. Might be intresting to consider.

[moomoose]

ok, lets think about this from a slightly different angle, mitosis on a ray of light is considered balanced.  that ray of light can produce 22 other rays of light for 0 additional quanta (although there is a loss of 1 quanta per turn due to mitosis removing the quanta generation from 1 of the rays of light), at the cost of taking up the field over 22 turns.  rays of light can also do damage (even if it is weak), while pillars cannot.  what cost would make up for pillars not using creature space, and not doing any attacks?