MArcomage

Free multiplayer on-line fantasy card game

Please log in

dindon on 15:34, 5. Mar, 2010
jbryant3 wrote:
To be honest, I like this new mechanism. It makes cards like Danei (sp?) present and tribute much better. Really, the meat of any deck lies in the uncommons anyway with the rares just there to help (a lot) if you happen to get them. So t-up from me!

How does it make Danai Present better?
Mojko on 17:02, 5. Mar, 2010
I think he meant that opponents cannot draw rares when Danai present is used on him.
Fithz Hood on 20:35, 5. Mar, 2010
but danai present is not in the list written on the first page...
Progressor on 20:44, 5. Mar, 2010
The card sais random.
If a rarity is excluded, it's not random.
Fithz Hood on 20:46, 5. Mar, 2010
the point is that this new feature is applied only on discarding cards. Danai present is a replacing card.
dindon on 02:12, 6. Mar, 2010
Exactly, so it shouldn't be affected.
Mojko on 09:14, 7. Mar, 2010
Fithz Hood is right. Recent change effects only cards that discard cards. Cards that use "replace" specify exactly what kind of card is going to be drawn.
Mojko on 14:04, 7. Mar, 2010
After some analysis I came to conclusions that best way to improve the situation is not to add exceptions for specific cards, but to make a systematic change. I propose this:

Common cards won't be allowed to draw rares, Uncommon and Rares will be able to.

A card effect will still be able to override this rule in special situations when needed, although the only card that currently will use it is Evolution.
Fithz Hood on 13:55, 8. Mar, 2010
it's ok for me.
Progressor on 17:29, 8. Mar, 2010
I assume you mean Common special card effects cant draw you rares. Simply playing a random common like Double wall can.

For balance purposes this is probably a sound solution, but as for inuitivity(sp?)...
Ah well, rtfm.
dindon on 23:23, 8. Mar, 2010
I agree, it's still unintuitive (unless every relevant common card has the information added to its card test), and I don't feel like it's actually fixing any preexisting problem! It just serves to complicate things.

For the record though, I at least dislike this option less than the current system.