Discussion in 'Cube Talk' started by anotak, Jan 29, 2014.
This is probaby not very good without tons of shuffle effects, and should just be scry.
On the other hand, you're winning. Losing is a bigger punishment anyway. Also, the whole purpose of this mechanic was that it was a catch-up mechanic, so changing it to "if you've already finished a game this round" kinda defeats the purpose?
Maybe "then put a card from your hand on the top or bottom of your library"? Doesn't seem much stronger than "draw a card, then discard a card".
Arguably weaker, with graveyards being what they are
So, looking at that card... Someone made blended frames using the old card border colors with the newest border style?
If we want it to be a comeback mechanic then it should 100 % not turn on when the score is 1-1 since then it is no longer a comeback.
I vote for the wording that includes that you have to be behind in order for it to activate.
Side Question: Help me with these
This is a case of me wanting to put different words on a card for synergy reasons, but the end result just being too much. I like the number of bodies being 3, I love that he's a green 3 that doesn't cost , and the EoT Bolster was the reason I made the card. I'm not really happy with the mana payment at end of turn, maybe there's another way to have all these words fit and it feel fair.
This card came about as "What if Hissing Iguanar came with friends", but as above I'm not quite happy with it. Again I think 3 bodies is where I want, but making them eldrazi spawn instead of scions concentrates the power where you don't want it: on blood artist. I'd also love for this one to be splashable as well, given the often 3 color nature of the deck he belongs in and the ubiquity of as a mana cost in my cube
Gah too many nobs!
Well, if you lost the first game, and you end up winning the match, you came back from 0-1 behind. If you won the game, then you just lost the previous game, so you're also coming back from behind in that sense. On the other hand, I really dislike mechanics that do nothing, and the wording you want doesn't do anything the whole match if you win the first game. That's a big strike against that wording for me. You're not beholden to my preference though, if you want to test it out with the "If you lost more games than your opponent this round" wording, go ahead!
How about this?
Quartermaster has some interesting tension now. You can create two servos, which will guarantee three triggers, but your bolstering small fry. If you put the counters on Quartermaster, you can potentially grow it to a 3/4 right away if you have another creature (without counters) hanging around, but it can't grow itself anymore.
Ulamog's Evangel is now a that puts one less power on the board, but puts it on the body you don't want to sacrifice. Maybe it can even be a 2/1? It's not exactly Blood Artist after all, because it's a) more expensive, and b) doesn't life drain, but only pings. I also cleaned up the last line according to current templating.
And if you won the first game and lost the second game, then the score is 1-1 in the match and the ‘comeback’ keyword should not be active. You’re not in a comeback situation when you are exactly even with your opponent.
But you just lost the previous game! Like I already said though, the biggest argument against only having plucky be active when you're actually behind, is that it only ever activates in the second game of a match if you lost the first game. From a design perspective, that would make plucky way too situational for me.
Ok, I'm gonna try to get math-y here. By definition, each game that has a winner also has a loser, which means that in a tournament, the average game win rate by definition is exactly 50% (ignoring games that end in a draw for convenience, these are very rare anyway). So, there's a 50% chance that a random player will lose their first game and have plucky be active for them in the second game. If we assume the second game also has a 50% win rate (don't worry about the assumption, this more or less evens out on the other end, because the percentage of matches that go to a third game when you win your first game is the opposite), then naturally 50% of these second games will result in a third game where plucky once again isn't active (using the "if you've lost more games than your opponent this round" wording). If you write everything out, you'll see that on average, plucky will be turned on for a player in a mere 20% of their games if you use this wording.
If you use the "if you lost the previous game this round" wording, on average plucky will be turned on for a player in 30% of their games.
If you use the "if you lost a game this round" wording, on average plucky will be turned on for a player in 40% of their games.
I personally think 40% on average is a fine percentage of games to have plucky active. At 20% on average it feels like it's not worth adding the ability to the game.
Super agreed! You use the same logic as I do when deciding on how to word my cards.
Maaaaybe we can compromise and word it like this:
“If you lost the first game of this match..effect”
This would lead to it being active ONLY if you are on a comeback-train. It would activate 50 % of all second games and 50 % of all third games. How ‘bout that?
That would mean plucky would be on average turned on for a player in 30% of their games. If that's the average percentage you want to run with in your games, I think I'ld prefer the "if you lost the previous game this match" wording. Dunno, but that feels the tiniest bit less complex and more fitting. If I was going to use plucky in my cube (I've been cutting back on customs though) I'ld go with the 40% option because that feels where I want it to be, but 30% might be okay too for you?
I do think this is a cool mechanic to use if I ever am going to build a full custom cube though.
I see the artist names at the bottom of the cards but I can't seem to find the actual art. Is there any way you can either link to the page where you found each of them or attach them in a file here?
I like four of your designs and I'm going to steal them
White, blue, black and red.
Not sure how I feel about the actual design of Haunted Armor but I wanted to explore this mechanic:
1. Something that is sup-par when drafted as the first 14 cards in the pack.
2. But above average if picked as the last card in the pack.
How do you guys feel about that?
100 % cons: Can only ever be good for one player, the last one. The random guy sitting as the 15'th man.
My example card:
Sweet Remind me to look up those arts for you, I really don't have the time to do that today, but I can look for you later, maybe tomorrow.
would work a lot better in digital imo
Combos with Canal Dredger.
First draft-oriented set:
Latests draft-oriented set:
Both of those have memory issues too. So does something like Coldsteel heart
The draft-counting cards like Garbage Fire literally tell you to make a note of it because of memory issues, and those are more similar to your design than the two above. Yours just counts the 15th only.
Exactly. When Wizards can, so can we. Right?
We use stickers during drafting anyways. Otherwise we wouldn’t be able to play cards like Paliano or Regicide in cubes.
Yeah, Wizards can, but it does not mean they should. Regardless, you can do whatever you'd like, just note that it does have memory issues.
That aside, I like the concept, but who gets the power up being pre-determined by cube shuffling doesn't sound appealing. Maybe something like "if there are 3 or fewer cards in the pack"? 5?
It also seems like a lot of the time you're going to get a pack with two cards in it, this and something unusable, and you hatedraft this to stop someone else getting the bonus.
This man raises a good point
Probably most of the time. Idk, how often do you hate draft your second to last pick right now?
I don't have as much incentive to do it right now.
Separate names with a comma.