MArcomage

Free multiplayer on-line fantasy card game

Please log in

jbryant3 on 12:54, 20. Apr, 2010
I know this is early since Aqua hasn't been finalized and Far Sight is on the horizon, but I'd like to see a Horde keyword. I think it should be similar to Aqua pre-changes and Frenzy.

Whenever you play a Horde card, it deals additional damage based on the following formula: Multiplier * (your Horde cards - enemy's Horde cards). The multiplier would be 1 for commons, 2 for uncommons, and 4 for rares.

Note that damage can be reduced (and maybe go negative?, helping your opponent) by having less Horde cards than your opponent.
Lord Ornlu on 14:22, 20. Apr, 2010
I think it would serve the same purpose as Beast and Barbarian, so there's no need for a third extra-damage-dealing keyword. However, I like the idea of it being of negative value sometimes, but we have to be careful in implementing this, as someone could end up doing massive amounts of damage for little resource cost, thus everyone will start playing Horde instead of anything else (just like Aqua when it was first implemented if you remember. 90% of all games for at least 3-4 weeks were played with Aqua keyword)
jbryant3 on 14:55, 20. Apr, 2010
Well then maybe it could be Horde - (Alliance + Soldier + Horde)?
Progressor on 15:01, 20. Apr, 2010
Using random other keywords in the calculations seems like a really odd thing to do.
jbryant3 on 15:06, 20. Apr, 2010
Just to nerf it a little. Or we could change the multiplier, or only count cards above a certain number, or something...
Lord Ornlu on 01:22, 21. Apr, 2010
Not a bad idea :)
lord Alex on 12:54, 21. Apr, 2010
Hmmmm... I like the Idea of negative effects. "Horde" sounds like a pure attack keyword with pure attack cards and these decks are already very strong, so they are a bit overpowered if these decks gets many strong and useful cards...
How about making the keyword effect negative, in every case?
Lord Ornlu on 13:30, 21. Apr, 2010
Then you would have to strengthen the cards and lower the cost, in order to make them attractive to a player's deck. If you see the cards currently made in the concept's section, they are not so powerful.
DPsycho on 17:32, 21. Apr, 2010
It could be that the negative effect only occurs if the cards are played immediately following one another, much like Illusion, Aqua, or Destruction. This way, the player would have to play something else or discard between plays of Horde keywords. It would be a unique play method, at least.
Fithz Hood on 19:22, 21. Apr, 2010
here is my suggestion:
make horde a token keyword.
each time you play an horde card you get 0 tokens+10 tokens for every other horde in hand (so you need more than one horde to increase tokens).
each time an horde is played you lose N random resources (N=horde tokens/10).
when tokens =100: 4 bonus attack for every other horde in hand

maybe a bit confusing...
jbryant3 on 19:29, 21. Apr, 2010
@Fithz: Just to be clear, you mean 9 resources total, not 9 stock, right?
That would be interesting...
Lord Ornlu on 19:32, 21. Apr, 2010
Nice idea, but I would suggest make N = tokens/20 (Otherwise, there will be a point in the game where each round will cost you 7-9 resources and even if they are random, it's still a -3 stock for 3 turns if distributed evenly which is quite devastating) or increase the damage dealt in the end
Fithz Hood on 13:27, 22. Apr, 2010
jbryant3 wrote:
@Fithz: Just to be clear, you mean 9 resources total, not 9 stock, right?
That would be interesting...

yep, resources, as in breeze
Spoon on 19:42, 11. May, 2010
I had an idea for a keyword where it takes into account whether or not the opponent played a card of the same keyword as well.
For example, say it was implemented unto the Horde keyword;
I play a horde card. 1 extra damage is dealt to the opponent.
The opponent plays another horde card. Since it's the second successive Horde card, I receive 2 extra damage.
I play another Horde card. 3 extra damage to the opponent.
etc.
The "1 extra damage" is just an example, I'm not certain what the keyword should actually do.
This would be an interesting concept since it would make you think twice about playing a Horde card (If it's your only one and your opponent has one too, you'll lose more than he will) and the longer the chain of Horde cards, the greater the loss of whoever breaks the chain. Obviously, I don't want to undermine any ideas already presented for the Horde Keyword, and have no problems with my idea requiring another keyword.
jbryant3 on 05:39, 2. Jun, 2010
A little tweak to my original idea: Each time an uncommon or rare Horde card is played, it deals additional damage based on the number of common Horde cards in hand.

This would encourage maintaining a lot of commons in your hand, something most decks don't do. Also, it would have great synergy with Legacy of Barbz and Pixie.
EricHerboso on 22:01, 2. Jun, 2010
Encouraging a hand of commons is an interesting idea, and would fit in with the flavor of a Horde keyword. But most keywords already encourage a lot of keyword cards to be in hand, and in most cases, those cards are necessarily common.

Even though I like the concept and flavor of encouraging a hand of commons, I don't see how Horde would necessarily play differently because of it. When I play soldiers or Alliance or almost any keyword, I generally keep commons in hand to boost token gain while playing my uncommons and rares as I draw them. This means Horde wouldn't play very differently in my hands, if we went with the handful-of-commons keyword idea.
jbryant3 on 22:19, 2. Jun, 2010
How does this sound?

Uncommons and rares do additional damage based on the number of common Horde cards in hand, but uncommons also deal half damage to you, while rares do not.
DPsycho on 00:09, 3. Jun, 2010
If Uncommons dealt damage to the player of the card as part of the effect, I figure people would evaluate the Uncommon Horde cards and simply not take some of them in their decks.

I also think that a keyword that operates differently based on both the number of the keyword in hand as well as played card rarity would become unnecessarily complex. We could expect a lot of "bug" posts from newer players every month or so questioning why certain numbers occurred in their games.
EricHerboso on 01:46, 3. Jun, 2010
I agree on the new player "bug" issue. Sure would like it if every keyword in the game had explanatory text available on a mouse hover.
jbryant3 on 19:02, 15. Jun, 2010
Another suggestion:
Token gain: 0 (base) + 20x# common Horde Cards in hand.
At flip: Pillage - enemy loses resources (not stock) and takes damage based on # common Horde cards in hand

So you could be flipping it every turn if you had at least 5 Horde commons in hand. If you had a hand full of commons, it would destroy 7 resources (not stock) and deal an additional 7 damage every turn.