Event Cards (removed from the event)

[TheonlyrealBeef]

The other thread was locked because of the unacceptable amount of drama and internets grandstanding. Please don't make me do the same with this thread (and please don't shop arguments across threads once they are locked - topics are locked for a reason). Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but let's keep the discussion sensible and mature otherwise it will have to end.

Perhaps a more productive direction for this thread is Amilir's suggestion of discussing what Event Cards, if any, could be used for the next War based on our experiences with these.

In that light I would like to add suggestions how to balance these cards out.

A lot of discussion about Age of <element> was about only those having <element> cards would benifit from them and the rest would suffer. Here's my idea to balance it out for future use: for every one or two (or even three, whatever's more balanced) cards upgraded these way, the opponent can salvage an extra card if they win. That way if they have less upgrades the odds might be against them, but when they win, they win spectacular. This will make teams consider which cards are truly worth upgrading, rather than just upgrading it all since there's no downside.

Edit: I would like to add that two decks with a lot of upgrades facing eachother should not benifit from extra salvaging, so maybe let the amount of cards you can salvage be (opponents amount of cards upgraded through event card - your cards upgraded through event card) in which total amount salvaged cannot be negative.

[Jangoo]

A lot of discussion about Age of <element> was about only those having <element> cards would benifit from them and the rest would suffer. Here's my idea to balance it out for future use: for every one or two (or even three, whatever's more balanced) cards upgraded these way, the opponent can salvage an extra card if they win. That way if they have less upgrades the odds might be against them, but when they win, they win spectacular. This will make teams consider which cards are truly worth upgrading, rather than just upgrading it all since there's no downside.

Edit: I would like to add that two decks with a lot of upgrades facing eachother should not benifit from extra salvaging, so maybe let the amount of cards you can salvage be (opponents amount of cards upgraded through event card - your cards upgraded through event card) in which total amount salvaged cannot be negative.

Good ideas.

Most "Ages of ..." historically ended because whoevers Age it was got a bit over the top and
couldn't maintain the status-quo in the long run. You know, recruiting armies larger than your population and expecting them to pay for themselves, having to delegate power more and more and then getting overrun by insurgency, in short: Conquering half the world and actually
expecting the empire to last, that kind of thing.

So how about cards upped through an "Age" event (or something similar) backfire by having to
discard more when you lose?

That would mirror desertion-waves of soldiers who just couldn't stand the fact that their so called
superior force was just a marketing gag ... "Wasn't really fighting for my cause anyways so ..."

An "Age of ...", and the upped decks that come with it, hence becomes a very double edged blade: How far can you push it until the whole empire-thing collapses right under your watch?

[Hyroen]

SOS: Event Cards (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,14959.0.html)

Help try and save them.

[Sir Valimont]

The first and most relevant thing you're going to need to do is figure out who is going to run the next War at all; only then will a discussion of the mechanics of that War really matter. And in general this whole discussion won't really be useful until the current War is over anyway.

[TimerClock14]

The first and most relevant thing you're going to need to do is figure out who is going to run the next War at all; only then will a discussion of the mechanics of that War really matter. And in general this whole discussion won't really be useful until the current War is over anyway.

ummm you do realize that after the auctions closed SG put up a 'suggestions for the next war' topic? You don't need to know who's running it so long as you know if it's going to happen, War 3 will most definitely happen. Unless something catastrophic happens, like the entire forums being deleted (but that probably won't happen anyway).

[Sir Valimont]

ummm you do realize that after the auctions closed SG put up a 'suggestions for the next war' topic?

I was unaware. Can you provide a link? I can't find the thread you're talking about.

[TimerClock14]

here it is I messed up the name a bit but the idea is the same  Suggestions and Feedback (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,13708.0.html)

EDIT: the first post says it's war 2 suggestions but I'm pretty sure it used to be for war 3

[Sir Valimont]

here it is I messed up the name a bit but the idea is the same  Suggestions and Feedback (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,13708.0.html)

Oh yes I know that one ... I thought you were talking about a thread that specifically came about after this event card thing. Definitely if someone has commentary about how to use event cards in the next war that would be the correct thread to put those comments in.

[TimerClock14]

ummm you do realize that after the auctions closed SG put up a 'suggestions for the next war' topic?

[Essence]

Removing them entirely was a bit much.

I don't think so. If I hadn't done it, here's what we would have had to do:
 <snip>

That's absurd, and you know full well that you're overdramatizing.  All you ever had to do was

1) Pay attention to the suggestions given (because I know that at least one person SPECIFICALLY said 'no event cards that dramatically favor one element over another'.)

and

2) Publish the list of possible Event cards (but not what order they'd come out in) a few days before Round 1, and ask for feedback.


In fact, given the level of feedback given, you could very easily have done 2) yesterday and the results would have been something that we could all enjoy.  I feel sorry for you -- I've had really big projects that took a lot of hard work get absolutely sh!tty results in the past, and it sucks. It really, truly sucks.  But getting all melodramatic about it isn't helping anyone, least of all yourself.

[Sir Valimont]

That's absurd, and you know full well that you're overdramatizing.  All you ever had to do was

1) Pay attention to the suggestions given (because I know that at least one person SPECIFICALLY said 'no event cards that dramatically favor one element over another'.)

and

2) Publish the list of possible Event cards (but not what order they'd come out in) a few days before Round 1, and ask for feedback.

It is shocking that you think that as a participant in a free online game community that you are entitled to make statements like this about an event you did not set up or run. Shocking.

ScaredGirl did not ever have to get the approval of you or anyone else, and if she got your feedback at any point it was as a courtesy to you and to help her in her design process. It absolutely was not because she was bound by any contract, literal or implied, to make you happy.

The community does not have, never had, and never will have the right to screen the content that they are going to participate in unless they are running the show themselves. That is such a basic principle of the relationship between the organizers of events and the participants in events that it is perplexing how to explain it to you any clearer.

The comments you make are, in light of these facts, just downright inflammatory. The best tack would be to back off, adopt an apologetic tone, and completely remove any misguided desire you have to "correct" ScaredGirl's actions.

[Essence]

ScaredGirl did not ever have to get the approval of you or anyone else, and if she got your feedback at any point it was as a courtesy to you and to help her in her design process. It absolutely was not because she was bound by any contract, literal or implied, to make you happy.

And yet, that's what she does.  All of the many hours of work and dedication that she gives to these forums, it's all for the sole purpose of allowing us to have FUN and enjoy this amazing game in a unique and different way.  It totally sucks ass that sometimes, her efforts fail.  Trust me, I've been there, and it sucks.

But that said, when it happens (and it will always happen), you have an essential bit of cognitive dissonance that you have to deal with: you have to accept that either

a) That work you did that wasn't accepted by the community wasn't right for the community, and you effectively failed at something that you tried your best at.
OR
b) That the community that you work hard to please is WRONG, which means perhaps it's a waste of your time and effort to try to serve them -- in which case, why are you trying so hard in the first place?


Either way you look at it, it sucks to be you, because you either failed in the short term with the particular element (no pun intended) that the community rejected, or you ARE FAILING in the long term by bothering to try to serve the community in the first place.  Nobody wants to acknowledge failure, but in this case, it's unavoidable.  You can try to talk over it all you want, but at the heart of things, either the entire community is wrong, or ScaredGirl is wrong -- and either way, it leads to ScaredGirl being wrong in some essential way.

That sucks.  It's a horrible Catch-22, and it's depressing, and it's lame and it's crappy and it sucks.

But.

Assuming that ScaredGirl gets enough validation out of serving the community that she elects to continue doing so, getting caught up in this bass-ackwards melodrama when it's clear that there was -- and STILL IS -- a simple solution to the whole mess that doesn't invalidate everything she's done...is dumb.   And there's no point in compounding one crappy situation by making it crappier -- not for us, but crappier for herself.

ScaredGirl has no need of our 'approval' -- that's absolutely true.  She could totally just ban anyone who objects to anything, lose half the community, and keep going with what remains.  That's apparently what you would do, in her shoes.

I'm glad it's her, and not you, that's in control.  SG has proven to be able to stand up to a lot of abuse with incredible equanimity (if you think me pointing out what could have been -- and still could be -- done better is "shocking", you should see the brawls she and I have gotten into in the past!), and that's a huge part of what makes her such an amazing asset to Elements.

She wants everything to work out well -- we all do.  The fact that she occasionally sees that something she's worked on isn't going to be taken well and decides to listen to the community is to her credit, but absolutely not to the community's blame.  Everyone naturally has an opinion about the events around them, and vocalizes their opinions when something impacts them enough to...


You know what?  This isn't worth explaining.  Instead, I'm going to treat you exactly like you believe SG should be treating the community.

You have no actual authority here, and thus your opinion is irrelevant to me and I will summarily ignore it.  Have a nice day.