. But how serious do we have to be about this requirement, that the old one must maintain its use? I mean, ICE made some earlier cards obsolete as well, and how on earth can you virtualize something like Awaken the Earths Fire without making the old version useless? It's already useless...new huorn V
-
Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
yeah, that's true. Ah, a challenge! . But how serious do we have to be about this requirement, that the old one must maintain its use? I mean, ICE made some earlier cards obsolete as well, and how on earth can you virtualize something like Awaken the Earths Fire without making the old version useless? It's already useless...
. But how serious do we have to be about this requirement, that the old one must maintain its use? I mean, ICE made some earlier cards obsolete as well, and how on earth can you virtualize something like Awaken the Earths Fire without making the old version useless? It's already useless...Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
-
Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
Okay, you win but you know what I mean.
So AtEF is standard in you hazard portion/sideboard vs. minion? good to know.
but you know what I mean.So AtEF is standard in you hazard portion/sideboard vs. minion? good to know.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
i know what you mean, but the point is not make the original useless...
AtEF isn't standard in my hazard portion because i prefer more a creature based deck (elflords/ orc lieutenants are my favourites) vs minion than grab bag... But if i'm going to make a grab bag, i guess i can include some copies
still... try to come up with a new huorn that doesn't make the old worthless... that is very very hard... if you read through this post you will find that i have suggested SO SO many different possibilities and all of them make the original worthless... if you can do that, then i will congrat you and pay you a beer whenever we get to meet
AtEF isn't standard in my hazard portion because i prefer more a creature based deck (elflords/ orc lieutenants are my favourites) vs minion than grab bag... But if i'm going to make a grab bag, i guess i can include some copies
still... try to come up with a new huorn that doesn't make the old worthless... that is very very hard... if you read through this post you will find that i have suggested SO SO many different possibilities and all of them make the original worthless... if you can do that, then i will congrat you and pay you a beer whenever we get to meet
I think we have different understandings of the word "useless."
If we made a virtual Awaken the Earth's Fire that does a LOT of stuff, like adding 2 to the hazard limit, tapping a sage, and stealing an item, the old Awaken the Earth's Fire is still *not* useless, because it performs an entirely different function: adding prowess.
The question is NOT, will the old card version ever be used in a decent deck?
The question is, will the old card version have some ability that the new version does not keep but make better? In many cases this will be a question of numerical values like prowess, since "make better" has to be quantified to be exact.
For example, if we made a new virtual River that taps out TWO rangers, this makes the old River obsolete. If we made a new River that "taps out THREE sages or the company can do nothing during the site phase", this does NOT make the old River obsolete. It's true that most players will choose to use the new River (V). However, it's possible to imagine using the old one in rare situations (for instance in a metagame where every player has started running multiple sages but not rangers).
Thus, with the new Huorn (V) idea, I had suggested lowering his prowess by one, then giving him as many cool abilities as you like. Now the new Huorn does NOT make the old Huorn obsolete because one can imagine a player who would still use the old Huorn (someone who did not care about the new abilities but wanted a cool, thematic Ent creature that's single wilderness playable and with the best prowess he could get)
I hope this makes sense.
--Frodo
If we made a virtual Awaken the Earth's Fire that does a LOT of stuff, like adding 2 to the hazard limit, tapping a sage, and stealing an item, the old Awaken the Earth's Fire is still *not* useless, because it performs an entirely different function: adding prowess.
The question is NOT, will the old card version ever be used in a decent deck?
The question is, will the old card version have some ability that the new version does not keep but make better? In many cases this will be a question of numerical values like prowess, since "make better" has to be quantified to be exact.
For example, if we made a new virtual River that taps out TWO rangers, this makes the old River obsolete. If we made a new River that "taps out THREE sages or the company can do nothing during the site phase", this does NOT make the old River obsolete. It's true that most players will choose to use the new River (V). However, it's possible to imagine using the old one in rare situations (for instance in a metagame where every player has started running multiple sages but not rangers).
Thus, with the new Huorn (V) idea, I had suggested lowering his prowess by one, then giving him as many cool abilities as you like. Now the new Huorn does NOT make the old Huorn obsolete because one can imagine a player who would still use the old Huorn (someone who did not care about the new abilities but wanted a cool, thematic Ent creature that's single wilderness playable and with the best prowess he could get)
I hope this makes sense.
--Frodo
that makes sense, but all of the huorns porposed so far have the same keyability, the same porwess and an extra skill than the old one. There are few that are different (some can be keyed to shadow, some have a bit more prowess, some can be keyed to double wilderness, etc) but all of the suggestions, compared to the old one, are better in all ways in my opinion. Please let me know if i'm wrong
-
Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
No we do not understand 'useless' differently, we just set the bar higher/lower to which point the use of a card has any real meaning. Of course I agree that we should strive to keep all cards playable and thus always diversify, but what about cards that are virtually never played?
Besides, with Bard V, why play the normal Bard Bowman, just for the +2 against the faction? With Reforging V, why play normal reforging, just for the retrival of item? Let's be realistic.
Lowering prowess is about the only thing you can do then to make Huorn V different, or changing it's easy keyablity, which is its only strong point. But lowering prowess is moot if you correct it with an ability that improves his weak spot: low prowess. So that would mean we can't use Huorn V at all, because he would always be better than the normal one. I really think that's a pitty, because the chill douser effect has good potential.
Perhaps then we should make all ents (i.e.huorn) double wilderness creatures to balance it out?
Besides, with Bard V, why play the normal Bard Bowman, just for the +2 against the faction? With Reforging V, why play normal reforging, just for the retrival of item? Let's be realistic.
Lowering prowess is about the only thing you can do then to make Huorn V different, or changing it's easy keyablity, which is its only strong point. But lowering prowess is moot if you correct it with an ability that improves his weak spot: low prowess. So that would mean we can't use Huorn V at all, because he would always be better than the normal one. I really think that's a pitty, because the chill douser effect has good potential.
Perhaps then we should make all ents (i.e.huorn) double wilderness creatures to balance it out?
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Marcos: You're right, Huorns (V) proposed so far make the old Huorn useless.
Thorsten: Uses for weak cards always come up that are not anticipated by us. As long as a card has an ability that is not being duplicated and superceded, there is a chance that someone will us it. I have a virtual deck that uses the ORIGINAL Bard. There is no way that the new Bard (V) is a better choice. I do not have a deck that uses the original Reforging, but I can easily imagine one without too much imagination (Mithril decks, for example).
Frodo
Thorsten: Uses for weak cards always come up that are not anticipated by us. As long as a card has an ability that is not being duplicated and superceded, there is a chance that someone will us it. I have a virtual deck that uses the ORIGINAL Bard. There is no way that the new Bard (V) is a better choice. I do not have a deck that uses the original Reforging, but I can easily imagine one without too much imagination (Mithril decks, for example).
Frodo
Regards retaining uses for the original cards:
If we want to retain a use for the original Great Goblin, how do we do that?
1. Remove the virtual version's ability to be played as a creature and just make it an perm-event (still with the ability to create a Great Goblin rescue attack)?
2. Remove its ability to attack keyed to a dark-hold?
The former might be worthwhile. If this is an issue we need to correct it asap.
If we want to retain a use for the original Great Goblin, how do we do that?
1. Remove the virtual version's ability to be played as a creature and just make it an perm-event (still with the ability to create a Great Goblin rescue attack)?
2. Remove its ability to attack keyed to a dark-hold?
The former might be worthwhile. If this is an issue we need to correct it asap.
-
Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
okay, I might have a solution for Huorn then that anybody can agree with perhaps.
Huorn V: 10/-, double wilderness
awakened plant. May also be played keyed to Cardolan, Fangorn, Hart of Mirkwood, Western Mirkwood, Southern Mirkwood and Woodland Realm, and to non haven sites in these regions. If Huorns attack(s) is not cancelled, all awakened plant attacks receive +1 strike for the rest of the turn (including this attack), and one awakened plant creature may be played on this company not counting against the hazard limit.
The only way to use Huorn is to change it's keyability I guess, and there is a good trade off because the abilities are really good, and the regions mentioned are quite often travelled through, and there's always site-type changers if you feel desperate about double wilderness. I agree with the others that say keyability is not really a pressing issue. Making the other Ents keyable to singel wilderness will be too strong, since they are already keyable to double wilderness the 'any ent' clause doesn't make sense here, and we could debate if any ent should be played not counting, but I guess that's over the top. If you just dropped down a DuT booster, the plus one hazard is quite nice.
Can still opt 'attacker chooses', but I guess with 2@10 that won't be necessary.
I thought about including Cardolan, it is frequented alot, but then I thought that's okay, and we don't have to mention Old Forest as the only site specifically. I skipped Druadan Forest, because, well why is it keyable there anyway, just because it says forest? It's Anorien! Then another reason to play the old Huorn if you want to key it here
If it still puts the old Huorn in the shade too much, then I suggest lower prowess to 9, so it's 2@9.
hope this works for everybody
Huorn V: 10/-, double wilderness
awakened plant. May also be played keyed to Cardolan, Fangorn, Hart of Mirkwood, Western Mirkwood, Southern Mirkwood and Woodland Realm, and to non haven sites in these regions. If Huorns attack(s) is not cancelled, all awakened plant attacks receive +1 strike for the rest of the turn (including this attack), and one awakened plant creature may be played on this company not counting against the hazard limit.
The only way to use Huorn is to change it's keyability I guess, and there is a good trade off because the abilities are really good, and the regions mentioned are quite often travelled through, and there's always site-type changers if you feel desperate about double wilderness. I agree with the others that say keyability is not really a pressing issue. Making the other Ents keyable to singel wilderness will be too strong, since they are already keyable to double wilderness the 'any ent' clause doesn't make sense here, and we could debate if any ent should be played not counting, but I guess that's over the top. If you just dropped down a DuT booster, the plus one hazard is quite nice.
Can still opt 'attacker chooses', but I guess with 2@10 that won't be necessary.
I thought about including Cardolan, it is frequented alot, but then I thought that's okay, and we don't have to mention Old Forest as the only site specifically. I skipped Druadan Forest, because, well why is it keyable there anyway, just because it says forest? It's Anorien! Then another reason to play the old Huorn if you want to key it here
If it still puts the old Huorn in the shade too much, then I suggest lower prowess to 9, so it's 2@9.
hope this works for everybody
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
Why not remove the clause "(including this attack)" and make it 2 strikes straight, all other AP attacks receive +1 strike for the rst of the turn? Easier wording in my oppinion... I prefer it to be 2@9 so old huorn still has a chance to see a bit of play, i like it, it has my blessing. The non-counting hazard after it can be nice with the keyability improvment of any of the other cards suggested...Thorsten the Traveller wrote:Huorn V: 10/-, double wilderness
awakened plant. May also be played keyed to Cardolan, Fangorn, Hart of Mirkwood, Western Mirkwood, Southern Mirkwood and Woodland Realm, and to non haven sites in these regions. If Huorns attack(s) is not cancelled, all awakened plant attacks receive +1 strike for the rest of the turn (including this attack), and one awakened plant creature may be played on this company not counting against the hazard limit.
...If it still puts the old Huorn in the shade too much, then I suggest lower prowess to 9, so it's 2@9.
hope this works for everybody
but it will see play in set 2
-
Thorsten the Traveller
- Ex Council Chairman
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
I made it 'including this attack', because you might get discussion about this attack then, you know, is chill douser affected by itself or not? So if you make it one strike and explicitly mention it boosts itself, there is no discussion.
2@9 is fine too. But I think the single wilderness on original huorn already is quite a change, for example, I can't hit a dragonhunting company that moves from caves of ulund to irerock to dancing spire to, well virtually every other dragon site but Lonely mountain. I can't hit Lorien based Gondor decks, unless they move through Fangorn, I can't hit Minas Morgul issuing companies...
Original Huorn can do all this, but then again, what's a single huorn if you can't follow up with Old Man or Ent? true, but that's what we've got to work with.
2@9 is fine too. But I think the single wilderness on original huorn already is quite a change, for example, I can't hit a dragonhunting company that moves from caves of ulund to irerock to dancing spire to, well virtually every other dragon site but Lonely mountain. I can't hit Lorien based Gondor decks, unless they move through Fangorn, I can't hit Minas Morgul issuing companies...
Original Huorn can do all this, but then again, what's a single huorn if you can't follow up with Old Man or Ent? true, but that's what we've got to work with.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.
-
Nerdmeetsyou
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 6:30 pm
I think there is nothing wrong with making a card ONLY better in virtual...
WHO EVER of you played huorn... so why not exchange him with a new one... that's alle the point about virtual cards.... (for all that I thought at least...)
Please tell me where your concerns come from to change the old one to one that is ONLY better...
Here my two cents:
I would mainly prefer to make the Awaken plants keyable to a singel wilderness like the original... why... because there are so few hazards that are playable on a single wildaness... so this would make him some kind of special...
why just taking over everthing from the original game... like: oh we made him plus 1 strike, so he needs also +1 wilderness...
maybe we can be a little bit couragous to just make something new exiting and GOOOOOD!!!
And then in the end... if it turns out to be TOO good... change it back again.... this is the good thing about virtual cards... they can be fixed in a second!!!!
WHO EVER of you played huorn... so why not exchange him with a new one... that's alle the point about virtual cards.... (for all that I thought at least...)
Please tell me where your concerns come from to change the old one to one that is ONLY better...
Here my two cents:
I would mainly prefer to make the Awaken plants keyable to a singel wilderness like the original... why... because there are so few hazards that are playable on a single wildaness... so this would make him some kind of special...
why just taking over everthing from the original game... like: oh we made him plus 1 strike, so he needs also +1 wilderness...
maybe we can be a little bit couragous to just make something new exiting and GOOOOOD!!!
And then in the end... if it turns out to be TOO good... change it back again.... this is the good thing about virtual cards... they can be fixed in a second!!!!
because the idea behind virtual cards is not to make the original ones obsoleteBoderHamster wrote:I think there is nothing wrong with making a card ONLY better in virtual...
WHO EVER of you played huorn... so why not exchange him with a new one... that's alle the point about virtual cards.... (for all that I thought at least...)