Classic Card Game - Page 7

Pelikano · #**241** 05-05-2009, 09:26 PM

France > Mexico

What? it has hotter girls ;(

to the topic, does anyone still play Cards? I couldn't find any opponents

Nataxo · #**242** 05-05-2009, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pelikano

France > Mexico

What? it has hotter girls ;(

to the topic, does anyone still play Cards? I couldn't find any opponents

I DO!!!me

Cetellic · #**243** 05-06-2009, 03:17 AM

It wont lemme post the quote, so here's my response to Gladi...

When you start the game they're 100% of your deck, you will have level 0 decks for a LONG TIME and most people do level 0 matches cause they didnt want to autolose to someone with higher level cards. I had higher level cards and it didnt feel right to pwn people with em. so ya.

I can pretty much see the strategic elements of higher level card usage, but we're not getting there, unless there's a drastic change that allows quicker access to a mass amount of cards, and as you said before we CANT do that because there's only around 100 cards (I'd do it anyway but oh wells).

From what you say the game is poorly designed, cause it's impossible to smartly build decks with only lv0s, yet while things may be "smarter" at higher level play, you'll eventually run into the same problems where decks are not strategically built, you just put in good cards - then lv0s so you dont run out of mana, and bingo was his name-o!

MysticX2X · #**244** 05-06-2009, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cetellic

Then make the 10 point pack cost 5 points (original suggestion) and we'll be on our way =) THERE'S JUST NO REASON NOT TO DO IT!!!

Edit:It wont let me post my response to Gladi, oh well

It's just stupid. That's the reason.

Cetellic · #**245** 05-06-2009, 03:24 AM

Mystic is out of valid points! Mystic whited out!

MysticX2X · #**246** 05-06-2009, 03:33 AM

Other then the fact it's pointless to have an all level 0 booster pack?. You more than likely will get 0's in the 10 point pack and everyone is aiming for level cards.

BlackSolider · #**247** 05-06-2009, 03:38 AM

Yeah, starter decks are all lvl 0s, which I was not expecting nor am not a fan of, although there is good reasoning behind it.

IMO we need to get "there", as you said, where people have to think strategically about their moves concerning MP usage. How exactly we get to that point, is the problem. I never said we can't have quicker access to higher level cards; I clearly said we can't hand out cards left and right because we have a small number right now.

The game isn't poorly designed imo; the release was. Decks at higher levels will have to be strategically built, otherwise people will get owned by MP and well built decks. The problem with trying to "strategically build" a level 0 deck is that you're very, very limited because all your numbers are so low and they all cost 0 MP. When I had a bunch of cards to choose from (talking over 70 cards including copies,) I had to balance several aspects: total number of cards, number from each level, which direction, how many of each card, etc. Lvl 0 decks don't have to worry about all of these things, and even those that they do, its very limited since all of the numbers are 1s, 2s, 3s, and 4s. There's only so many things you can do with a bunch of corner cards (3 2 1 1), mp cards (2 2 2 1), and directional cards (4 1 1 1). One of the biggest differences I found with the lvl 0 deck is that an enemy counter attack can usually only do up to 3 damage. That hurts obviously, but it's nothing compared to the damage a Gilgamesh card (6 5 4 1) can do. With lvl 0s, you can leave yourself open with risky moves and still live to tell the tail. If you try to do that with the better decks, you are going to get crushed.

All in all, there are so many different aspects to the "higher level" decks that strategic building will always be necessary if you want to win. We need to get to that point, so trying to cheapen the boosters for the current format is a waste of time, IMO. I'd rather see things move towards higher lvl decks, rather than keeping things in the lvl 0 range, because thats where the strategic and funner aspects of the game are. Adding a 5 point booster just keeps us in the...how shall I say this....dull part of the game.

Cetellic · #**248** 05-06-2009, 06:55 PM

*I dont care if you expected it or agree with it, it's what the game is...

*quicker access to mass amounts of cards = handing out cards left and right (you misquoted me congrats)

*Lv0 took strategy at first for me, but now it's all obvious since I know what I'm doing, same would go for higher level play when everyone figures it out, the gameplay will boil down to something.

*All I was saying is if the game is going to be in Lv0 land then adapt to it.

*5 point booster doubles the rate of which you get normal boosters, lower the others by five points aswell so you can get bigger boosters quicker, problems solved.

BlackSolider · #**249** 05-06-2009, 07:01 PM

*sigh*

I'll try to sum this up quickly.

Game shouldn't be at lvl 0 level because it ignores most of the aspects of the game. I don't have the exact numbers, but for example: if 30/100 cards were lvl 0 and a 5 point booster was added, we'd just help circulate the same 30 cards over and over and over. As much as I love bushes and big city bandits, I'd like to use some thor cards and king tristams because they add so much to the game.

I know the game is what it is, but if the game was changed to better suit its aspects, a 5 point booster wouldn't likely be needed. As it is it might help out, but it just pushes us further from what the card game should be, IMO.

Cetellic · #**250** 05-06-2009, 07:57 PM

Regardless of what you plan, a 5 point booster will speed things up, and things need to be sped up. This is whether if I intend to play at Lv0 forever, or actually get some good cards and play to win.

How is 5 point booster not needed when the main problem (it takes too long to get to the interesting side of the game) is countered by it?

BlackSolider · #**251** 05-06-2009, 08:05 PM

If we changed the format of how the game starts (to where it wasn't all lvl 0) a 5 point booster wouldn't be needed.....

Cetellic · #**252** 05-06-2009, 08:16 PM

Hmm, apparently you don't remember the original argument for a 5 point booster O.o

Even with a change in the game's startup 10 points is too long before an adequate change in gameplay (or a user's deck), that's ten wins, not counting losses/unranked matches, where I have to use the starter deck unless someone wants to trade cards... that's ill in design and keeps the "Lord Squirt has a deck better than the starters so kneel before him for a long time" situation.

BlackSolider · #**253** 05-06-2009, 09:58 PM

Perhaps you haven't heard about the deck rating system we've been discussing.

There is no formula for it yet, but it basically sums up as: decks will only be able to play other decks with similar strength.

If this system was implemented, there wouldn't be any laming by powerful decks. Thus there wouldn't be a need to rush cards into player's hands; people could expand their collections at the current rate and still play against people with similar deck power.

Cetellic · #**254** 05-08-2009, 03:42 AM

You strayed to the Lord Squirt side of things, which was a little add on to the bulk of my argument, try again pls

BlackSolider · #**255** 05-08-2009, 04:04 AM

There is no argument to be made. The card game needs to start in such a way where it uses all aspects of the game and not turn it into a card level race and/or monopoly.

Cetellic · #**256** 05-08-2009, 04:15 AM

Guess I can agree to that

BlackSolider · #**257** 05-08-2009, 04:22 AM

A 5 point booster might still be needed once the game is changed(would need to test it first,) but we certainly don't need an all lvl 0 booster at 5 points.

Cetellic · #**258** 05-08-2009, 04:24 AM

I know, but people were like 10 point booster is FINE DONT CHANGE IT OMG!!! well, add a 5 point at lv0 (so it'd be worse then the 10), and call it a night, it'd be better then no 5 point at all. Making the 10 point into 5 points saves the day though.

BlackSolider · #**259** 05-08-2009, 04:28 AM

Wouldn't we have to drop the price of the 25 point if we changed the 5 to 10...

Cetellic · #**260** 05-08-2009, 07:32 AM

5 to 10? You must've meant 10 to 5. While I'd suggest lowering the others aswell just cause you change the price to one doesn't mean you have to do anything with the others.

TheDae · #**261** 05-08-2009, 08:13 AM

Why dont yov change the system so that if you want to buy a booster you must have a certain amount of gralats,tickets and points?

Luda · #**262** 05-08-2009, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDae

Why dont yov change the system so that if you want to buy a booster you must have a certain amount of gralats,tickets and points?

Night doesn't want it related to GC stuff

BlackSolider · #**263** 05-08-2009, 02:51 PM

@ clel.

Yeah ment 10 to 5, my bad. Well the gap between 5 and 25 is huge, so the plan of 'getting more cards into peoples hands quicker' would only work with the **** cards since all the others are still far away.

If we did bring it down to 5, we'd probably have to drop the 25 to 15 and the 40 to 30, or something along those lines, if the plan was to try to give players access to cards faster.

Cetellic · #**264** 05-09-2009, 10:52 AM

Ya it'd make more sense to do that which is why I suggested it...

BlackSolider · #**265** 05-09-2009, 02:41 PM

Cheaper boosters = maybe.

Cheaper 1st booster w/ all level 0s = no.

Cetellic · #**266** 05-09-2009, 10:08 PM

I dont care either way, if you guys dont see the point or logic then it would make sense not to do it, however a level 0 pack would be stupid compared to just a cheaper version of the 10 point pack. It's DC's project though not mine.

acaremon02 · #**267** 05-10-2009, 06:19 AM

Best solution imo is to have a single booster with 4 commons, 1 uncommon, 1 rare..
That way, EVERY player is given a chance.

Maybe add another, expensive booster with 3 commons, 2 uncommon, 1 rare for the advance players with more points. That way, we don't have to reset the card points already given out.

It's proven to work by every card game ever made. Why ditch a fail-safe method?

BlackSolider · #**268** 05-10-2009, 07:05 AM

I suggested that a while back, though I don't recall what DC or night thought about it.

Cetellic · #**269** 05-10-2009, 08:45 AM

Ya, I was under the impression that they couldnt force a random rare card into the booster for whatever reason. But that is a very obvious way to go.

Shadow87 · #**270** 05-10-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acaremon02

Best solution imo is to have a single booster with 4 commons, 1 uncommon, 1 rare..
That way, EVERY player is given a chance.

Maybe add another, expensive booster with 3 commons, 2 uncommon, 1 rare for the advance players with more points. That way, we don't have to reset the card points already given out.

It's proven to work by every card game ever made. Why ditch a fail-safe method?

Thats what it should have been, thats what all trading card games do usually. DC and Night were stubborn though and didn't want to do this i think i recall hearing. Either that or they had absolutely no idea how a trading card game of any sort works, because it kinda shows.

MysticX2X · #**271** 05-10-2009, 03:09 PM

How come people never get that THERE IS ONLY 100-103 CARDS? Giving "one rare" in every booster would make rares now an uncommon.. They really shouldn't guarantee you cards until they have a substantial amount already made.

Shadow87 · #**272** 05-10-2009, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MysticX2X

How come people never get that THERE IS ONLY 100-103 CARDS? Giving "one rare" in every booster would make rares now an uncommon.. They really shouldn't guarantee you cards until they have a substantial amount already made.

Something to be thought about BEFORE THE RELEASE.

Do video game companies release an unfinished game?
Does a rapper release an unfinished album? (It leaks instead)
Does a TV network release an unfinished season of a show?

They should have put out a demo of the game instead.

Its all very very unprofessional, there is no argument to say that the card game is not a flop. Back into production should be what DC is saying, game shouldn't even be playable still.

Rufus · #**273** 05-10-2009, 05:15 PM

Who tested the card game before its release?

BlackSolider · #**274** 05-10-2009, 05:15 PM

@ mystic

The idea of a rare being in every booster isn't realistic. They definately would be in the most expensive booster, and perhaps in the middle one, but we'd have to reformat everything and take a look how it all plays out.

@ rufus

Mystic, DC, night, and myself all tested the gameplay. As far as I know, very little testing of how the game would look after a week of its release went on. I could be wrong though, but I was blindsided by the "lvl 0 deck".

Shadow87 · #**275** 05-10-2009, 05:24 PM

And you are going to ignore my very true statement about why it was not done professionally or seemingly without any thought at all gladius?

And no it is not realistic to put a rare in every booster pack, because in most cases you will get a rare card in a booster pack in real life. Every time when i played the pokemon card game i got atleast one rare, or a nice amount of uncommons in a boosterpack. Usually it was the commons that weren't packed fully into one booster.

Unpredlctable · #**276** 05-10-2009, 05:48 PM

since when has anything on graal been of professional quality

Rufus · #**277** 05-10-2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSolider

Mystic, DC, night, and myself all tested the gameplay. As far as I know, very little testing of how the game would look after a week of its release went on. I could be wrong though, but I was blindsided by the "lvl 0 deck".

Oh, okay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unpredlctable

since when has anything on graal been of professional quality

That's what I was wondering. We don't have professional quality developers here and never will have, because there is no money involved from anyone. There's a difference between something being "good" or "innovative" on Graal than there is "professional" quality.

Shadow87 · #**278** 05-10-2009, 06:42 PM

And its that kind of thinking that makes the server suck so much now.

Back in the day it used to be that staff had to present themselves with an actual professional quality.
The work was looked at for its quality, and to have quality you have to have some sort of professionalism. If you are going to half ass **** then whats the point of doing it at all? If you are going to put work into something and take so much pride in it as DC and Night have, then why not be professional about it and make it 100%?

Rufus, you and Dalton are like the dream team poster boys for Retards i swear. Always got something stupid to respond with. Even when it comes to actually trying to conduct classic as some sort of quality to it, you two have something dumb to say. And the both of you must not have ever played before 2003 because back then the staff , all divisions, wanted nothing but professionalism from their workers, money or not, there were standards.
Now, you look at the staff of classic and they do nothing but mass dumb **** trying to talk back to me and my **** talking or something, Ranger, jade, most of the dev team, GCs, they all do it, it seems that's all they do.

So don't tell me there never was a time for that or there never will be. Its up to the manager to set that standard, sadly, storm is unable to set that.

Unpredlctable · #**279** 05-10-2009, 06:50 PM

dude shut the **** up, no one cares about what you say

BlackSolider · #**280** 05-10-2009, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow87

And you are going to ignore my very true statement about why it was not done professionally or seemingly without any thought at all gladius?

What do you want me to say? I was left out of the decision making, I just tested the gameplay. Although I wouldn't have done it the same way, I'm sure they had a reason for everything. I was told that it was all lvl 0s in the starter deck so, if the starter decks had higher lvl cards, people couldn't log onto multiple accounts, get multiple starter decks, and transfer all the good cards to one account. Beyond that I haven't asked about.