Elements 1.21

[Sastrugi]

It was always 10% chance to get a card, 100% if it's nymph. And I got a pulverizer in display but didn't get it today, I am pissed off indeed, it's the only rare weapon I don't own.

Really? I thought you always got the card before, but I never checked unless it was a nymph or a rare. This change makes a lot more sense now, as does my card stockpile.

[caughtjoo]

Farming level 3's is out of the question now.  Hope and Thorn Carapace make rush decks a mute point with the great creature control and healing abilities.   a 15% win percentage against T50 would yield easier money now with an un-upped rush.

[Baily18]

No, thats not true. 2/15(?) of them have Hope/Thorn Carapace shields. Overcome the deck with hope earlygame, and steal the Thorn Carapace one.

[Baily18]

Anyways, its not that hard. I got 1300 gold from selling cards and wins from AI3 in 2ish hours with an unupped deck.

[caughtjoo]

Anyways, its not that hard. I got 1300 gold from selling cards and wins from AI3 in 2ish hours with an unupped deck.

I have already switched from shrieker rush to a fire control deck.  Its slower, but it has options against the new cards.

[Xinef]

Farming AI3 is now much more rewarding than two versions before, when the reward for two first cards matching in spins was only 1 electrum.
Also with an unupped graboid rush I had no more problem defeating new AI3s than the old ones, though I don't remember ever seeing a hope played, nor a pharaoh.

[killsdazombies]

Farming AI3 is now much more rewarding than two versions before, when the reward for two first cards matching in spins was only 1 electrum.
Also with an unupped graboid rush I had no more problem defeating new AI3s than the old ones, though I don't remember ever seeing a hope played, nor a pharaoh.

there are some using mummys and AI knows to use reverse time on it (phew) but i have won a pharaoh

[Marvaddin]

I also simply didnt get the point of most balancing changes. Its obviously not related to that poll about more overpowered cards. Graboid had 5% of votes. Because of this its not nerfed (in fact I think it IS overpowered, but not because of the skill cost, I think the graboid should cost 4, maybe 5 earth)? And the lava golem, the card didnt get 1% of the votes and was nerfed. Thanks to that my pillarless deck (the one designed by plastiqe) is now much less effective, wow, great. The card is rarely used on rainbows, whats the point? Make weak a deck used to grind AI3?

I also think, like someone said, that making rainbow weak is non-sense. Just make another strategies playable. So, arent we supposed to have powerfull cards? I think all elements should have powerfull cards according to its playing style. Then I checked the card usage tool. And looks like zanz is doing this:

- if a card is very used, then (he thinks) its overpowered and it gets a nerf.
- if a card is almost not used, then it gets a buff.

No need to say I think its a terrible non-sense. Look that almost everyone is playing rainbow decks according to the pillar stats. Of course a rainbow try to maximize the use of the quanta, having most usefull cards, at low costs, from each element. So we need to punish rainbow, by nerfing the best cards of each element? And if we do so, when will the mono decks be powerfull, huh? And this is just making AI6 more and more difficult, because of all those advantages they already have above us.

Whats zanz goal? Making AI6 more difficult? Having all cards played at same amounts (like there are really no powerfull cards)? Punish rainbow deck users (if so, he could reduce quantum pillar production to 2, or increase normal pillar production to 2, and it would be much better), but again, for what (increase AI6 difficulty)? So I simply dont understand the point about nerfing cards just because they ARE BEING USED (arent they supposed to be used?). If someone does, please help me.

Ps: that said, I liked a lot the mulligan thing, new cards, etc.

[Essence]

I'm on Firefox and I haven't had any problems since the upgrade. If only the borders load, just F5 refresh and it should do the trick. Does anyone play this on Opera, or does anyone even use Opera on PCs anymore? If Firefox and IE don't work, that's the other browser I think of.

I'm an avid Opera fan, and I can say it works 100% perfectly for me in Opera 10.10 and Opera 10.5

[verbal]

I also simply didnt get the point of most balancing changes. Its obviously not related to that poll about more overpowered cards. Graboid had 5% of votes. Because of this its not nerfed (in fact I think it IS overpowered, but not because of the skill cost, I think the graboid should cost 4, maybe 5 earth)? And the lava golem, the card didnt get 1% of the votes and was nerfed. Thanks to that my pillarless deck (the one designed by plastiqe) is now much less effective, wow, great. The card is rarely used on rainbows, whats the point? Make weak a deck used to grind AI3?

I also think, like someone said, that making rainbow weak is non-sense. Just make another strategies playable. So, arent we supposed to have powerfull cards? I think all elements should have powerfull cards according to its playing style. Then I checked the card usage tool. And looks like zanz is doing this:

- if a card is very used, then (he thinks) its overpowered and it gets a nerf.
- if a card is almost not used, then it gets a buff.

No need to say I think its a terrible non-sense. Look that almost everyone is playing rainbow decks according to the pillar stats. Of course a rainbow try to maximize the use of the quanta, having most usefull cards, at low costs, from each element. So we need to punish rainbow, by nerfing the best cards of each element? And if we do so, when will the mono decks be powerfull, huh? And this is just making AI6 more and more difficult, because of all those advantages they already have above us.

Whats zanz goal? Making AI6 more difficult? Having all cards played at same amounts (like there are really no powerfull cards)? Punish rainbow deck users (if so, he could reduce quantum pillar production to 2, or increase normal pillar production to 2, and it would be much better), but again, for what (increase AI6 difficulty)? So I simply dont understand the point about nerfing cards just because they ARE BEING USED (arent they supposed to be used?). If someone does, please help me.

Ps: that said, I liked a lot the mulligan thing, new cards, etc.

What he said.

The nature of a collectable card game (or any similar beast) is that some cards will be stronger than others (or the game will suck; yay, everything is a 1 cost 1/1!)

Some cards must be better than others. The way to encourage more decks is to add more cards, not crush the good ones.

(In general, of course; if Otygh was a 1 mana 50/50 it would need nerfing. But you get the drift...)

[airframe]

I have a feeling that the game shifted slightly towards more control.

[Xinef]

Though with higher rewards from grinding AI3, higher probability to win rares (I guess eternity and lobotomizer are both easier to get now, while squids will probably have a chance to win comparable to miracle or higher)... I suppose it is now easier for new players to build a partially upgraded rainbow... though harder to win against FG, so unless either FG are nerfed, or some good non-rainbow decks become popular against FG... AI3 grinding for some time will remain necessary... probably more upgrades are necessary now to begin serious FG grinding than a few versions ago... (unless someone is good CCG player and can win even with unupped decks )