dcsimg
A Flash Developer Resource Site

Page 34 of 96 FirstFirst ... 243031323334353637384484 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 680 of 1913

Thread: Elements. Fantasy cards game

  1. #661
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    zanzarino - here's a thought. Since the game works very well with limited access to rares, maybe you should put a limit of 2 per rare card in a deck (Leaving the current 6 for normal cards) That way the game balance will be better preserved for rares being hard (Impossible, with that change) to load up 6 into a deck for and cases of someone dumping one into the system won't cause as much damage and deck focus onto that new, broken when stacked rare.

    Improving card balance to deal with it could also work, but it can be nice to allow rares to be slightly stronger than normal cards -- and I think that will take a lower limit to really have function well.

  2. #662
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkGate View Post
    yea thats why you're not supposed to metamorhposed unless you can really afford it hehe

    Zanzarino is there any way to get ragorak2 or w/e his name is out of the Top 50? he has all eather pillars and owls eyes in his deck so he's ruining the rarity of the owls eye. It really ruins the game when rare cards are handed out for free basically like this. Also is there any way for people who won owls eyes from him to have only those owls eys taken from him(I won 3 form him and 3 legit myself)?
    I have to second that and I just registered because of that. It totally takes the fun out of the game.

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkGate View Post
    Mr. Walrus shot up to the number 2 spot with 32K points and I never even went against him before this. I was just wondering if his score was legit because I know levethix and a couple of others were the high people with about 22K behind samura before.
    I'm around in the all time highscore since version 0.3. And as I normally submit my highscore on Monday shortly before the highscore for the week is reset it's not surprising you didn't play against me.



    I noticed that you can play spells with a target and the end your turn before you chose the target for the spell. This messes things up a bit. If you cancel you don't get the card back and sometimes you can chose the target in the opponent's turn sometimes not. And the 'Mark of Air' is called 'Mark of Ait'.

  3. #663
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    30
    I don't want everybody to have 6+ miracles. Where are you zanzarino?

    Quoting the chat:
    "KC: ************** WTF i got 3 morning star from PvP in 1 match
    Silvair: Someone said something about that earlier. Fighting him and getting three
    morning stars
    Slayd CraVen: who?
    Slayd CraVen: ragorak? =_=
    Silvair: Yeah"


    This is bull****.




    Well, I'm now with rob. The game is good but now the people in it are *******s and can't be controlled, so I'm out.
    Thanks for the game and the fun it gave for a couple of days, considering it's free.
    'Till the community isn't a pile of ****, Adieu.


    P.S.
    You might want to have somebody moderating the chat from spam because there are these ****ing retarded French Canadians (tribe and epicfail) who just spam pointless **** all day long.
    Last edited by Slayd CraVen; 06-24-2009 at 08:09 AM.

  4. #664
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    30
    i have a question.

    how do u get a website like slayd craven did for a screen shot. i want 2 post my deck but cant figure out how?

  5. #665
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    30
    K here are my 2 decks that are both pretty good.

    1. Aether
    http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/2922/elements.png
    2. Gravity/Light/Owl's Eye
    http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/9715/elemenst1.png

  6. #666
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    30
    there are 3 people so far that are ruining the rarity of an owl's eye.

    Isocarmine: the entire deck is full of owl's eyes, thunderstorms, flying weapons, and wind pillars. she has 6 owl's eyes.
    Shattari: has the same deck except the thunderstorms are switched with fireflies.
    Ragorak: also has 6 owls eyes.

    These 3 people are destroying the game. My suggestion 2 u Zanzarino is to have a limit of 2 or 3 max per legendary/rare cards. Please fix this immediately because in a weeks time evryone will have owl's eyes.

  7. #667
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8
    Hi, I've been reading the forum since I started playing about a week ago, and first thing I'll say is thank you Zanzarino, for a great and fun game. But I also have to join rob and others in voicing their concerns about the ruined game economy. I can confirm that it started with ragorak setting up his deck to give 3 rares on every win, first it was stillettos, then owl's eyes, now it's morning star, and looks like it will happen with every rate he gets. It took me a week of play to earn 5 rares, now I can get more in an hour of play, as can everybody else. It really won't be fun playing if soon everyone will run a 6 miracle 6 morning star deck. Please consider finding a way to make rares rare again, because this really takes the fun out of playing. Thanks again for the effort
    Last edited by ooThe Eternaloo; 06-24-2009 at 11:17 AM.

  8. #668
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    48

    Lightbulb Game chat

    zanzarino - on kongregate there are a few flash chatrooms (submitted as games, not the "official" chat that is on the right side of the game. Would it be possible to implemet one of these into elements, so that you can chat whilst you are playing, withount having to scroll down to enter something, scroll up, play, scroll down, etc. etc. etc.? It coud log you in as your account name, so that you know who you are talking to, and possibly different rooms within the chat panel (which could be hidden/closed off to the side when your mouse is not over it, or something). Is that possible or would it not work properly

  9. #669
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    65
    I had a chance to fight Ragorak2 5 times if I remember right 4 of them was like you are saying, mark-light, aether pillar + rare of one kind,(only one of the game he had a regular deck with air pillars to play his owls weapons...)

    I don't believe in restricting a number of cards (like MTG manner..) it only will complicate things .. (although I kinda like a "legendary" attribute of some sort...)

    I think the problem can be resolved by the spinning-process itself:

    Quote Originally Posted by zanzarino View Post
    Well I will reveal the mystery about the spinning wheel:

    The program takes the opponent deck and randomly finds 5 non pillar cards, the 5 non pillars cards are used for the spinning

    (...)

    so, putting it in a table:

    5 different cards = 4% winning chance
    4 different cards = 8.8% winning chance
    3 different cards = 23.2% winning chance
    2 different cards = 52% winning chance
    all cards are the same = 100%

    That means that from a deck with only one kind of non-pillar card you'll win for sure, BUT....

    In the new version I added something else: the program has only 50 chances to find all the 5 non-pillar cards, if it is not successfull at doing that it will start drawing pillars as well. This way, playing against a pillar only deck will give you 3 pillars. Statistic for almost all pillar decks gets quite complicated.
    now, looking at how it works, I really think that the solution of the "rare-given-crisis" is simply decreasing those 50 chances to .. say 5-10 chances... and let people get pillars if not lucky

    @Zeta711
    Isocarmine and Shattari deck's as you describe are completely legal and playable - I mean - I don't think they are setting the decks to give rares like Ragorak2 , I think they set those decks to actually play with them .. which is very different...

  10. #670
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77

    Samura, I agree, but...

    Quote Originally Posted by -Samura- View Post
    I had a chance to fight Ragorak2 5 times if I remember right 4 of them was like you are saying, mark-light, aether pillar + rare of one kind,(only one of the game he had a regular deck with air pillars to play his owls weapons...)

    I don't believe in restricting a number of cards (like MTG manner..) it only will complicate things .. (although I kinda like a "legendary" attribute of some sort...)

    I think the problem can be resolved by the spinning-process itself:



    now, looking at how it works, I really think that the solution of the "rare-given-crisis" is simply decreasing those 50 chances to .. say 5-10 chances... and let people get pillars if not lucky

    @Zeta711
    Isocarmine and Shattari deck's as you describe are completely legal and playable - I mean - I don't think they are setting the decks to give rares like Ragorak2 , I think they set those decks to actually play with them .. which is very different...
    I really believe something needs to be done now about the over-abundance of Owl's Eye... I have 5 that I acquired legitimately from lvl 3/lvl 4 decks prior to the rigged Ragorak2 decks. They are quite handy, and i played 500+ matches to get them - not 1 hour and 15 matches. Owl's Eye is one of the best Air Element cards, so it should be way harder to get. Now everyone that cheated off Ragorak2's deck can snipe the living crap out of any deck. Unfair in my opinion, and it is not the fault of the players who did not "partake" of the rare-feast earlier this week.

    To my knowledge, from chat statements I observed, and decks I faced, Ragorak2 was the only deck rigged in this rare-giving manner. Other decks have many rares, but I understand them to have been earned similar in fashion to my Owl's Eye quantity.

    Has anyone heard a peep or seen any action/response on this by zanzarino?


    Thanks and until later,

    --rob77dp

  11. #671
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    65

    random fun - INFINITE QUANTUM!!

    the goal: make infinite quantum

    the plan: set a cool mutating deck and wait for a awkward creature to appear with a woot!-cycle like :



    the clicking: click.. click .. click ..click........



    the wootness : lol






    clicking to the infinity and beyond ...



    ^^

  12. #672
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by -Samura- View Post
    I don't believe in restricting a number of cards (like MTG manner..) it only will complicate things .. (although I kinda like a "legendary" attribute of some sort...)

    I think the problem can be resolved by the spinning-process itself:
    But think about this:

    If people getting rares is letting them build decks using 6 of them that beat everyone else, no amount of fixing the spinning will prevent those decks from being broken. It will just restrict the number of people who get them -- meaning only the ones who play a ton will have the rares to make the top decks. For game balance, the cards either must be brought into balance at their current limit or the limit needs lowering. No amount of tweaking acquisition will fix the balance problems this is revealing (Which I've commented on before -- that getting 6 of certain rares was likely to be a balance problem and it only hadn't been seen yet because of how hard it was to get them)

  13. #673
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Bianary View Post
    But think about this:

    If people getting rares is letting them build decks using 6 of them that beat everyone else, no amount of fixing the spinning will prevent those decks from being broken. It will just restrict the number of people who get them -- meaning only the ones who play a ton will have the rares to make the top decks. For game balance, the cards either must be brought into balance at their current limit or the limit needs lowering. No amount of tweaking acquisition will fix the balance problems this is revealing (Which I've commented on before -- that getting 6 of certain rares was likely to be a balance problem and it only hadn't been seen yet because of how hard it was to get them)
    Thing is they were supposed to be better than normal cards because there WERE rare and very hard to get. So if someone were to legitamitely get 6 rares thats good for them. Now that they're so easy to get though they probably need to be more limited but not to 2 though, maybe more like 3 or 4. Back in Yugioh they would limit cards that became too easy to get and were too powerful so we might have to do that with the rares. Samuras idea also seems pretty good as well. One drastic idea might be to roll back the cards for everyone in the database so that rares are actually rare again. People could lose cards they legitamitely won(I won a couple of other rares legit during this time but I think I'd be willing to lose them to get he rares to how they're supposed to be). We could only roll back the cards and not the scores if possible to hopefully limit the damage thats been done. Also I think ragorak2 needs to be banned from the game and anyone in the future who tries to dilute the rares needs to be immediately banned from the game.

    Anyways where's Zanzarino at when we need him most? We need action to be taken quickly so we can stop this crisis before it spreads to anymore of the rares.

    Rant Done.

  14. #674
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkGate View Post
    Thing is they were supposed to be better than normal cards because there WERE rare and very hard to get. So if someone were to legitamitely get 6 rares thats good for them.
    In a ccg, it's not a question of "if", it's a question of "when". Do you want to play a game where the best deck is a function of time spent trading cards (Because rares are just better and there's no limitations compared to normal cards to using them in your deck) and not ability to design a good combo?

    Actually, the requested "Let me spend electrum to upgrade cards" will lead to super decks as well. If people are reacting badly to having to face strong rare-stacked decks I can just imagine the whining when someone with loads of time puts together a fully upgraded deck.

  15. #675
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77

    Not I...

    Quote Originally Posted by Bianary View Post
    Actually, the requested "Let me spend electrum to upgrade cards" will lead to super decks as well. If people are reacting badly to having to face strong rare-stacked decks I can just imagine the whining when someone with loads of time puts together a fully upgraded deck.
    I have never, and will never, be in favor of adding the ability to spend coin on upgrading cards... I'm really just hanging in it now until real PvP comes out to test out some decks I have vs. real human competition. Hopefully the PvP is sooner rather than later.


    --rob77dp

  16. #676
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by rob77dp View Post
    I have never, and will never, be in favor of adding the ability to spend coin on upgrading cards... I'm really just hanging in it now until real PvP comes out to test out some decks I have vs. real human competition. Hopefully the PvP is sooner rather than later.
    Bearing in mind that I am aware not everyone was asking for it -- what I found interesting was how upset you were about having to fight decks with owl's eyes and feeling they alone ruined the game balance, when all they did was expose a flaw in it. And it's acceptable that a game in beta would have imbalances, finished games often have even more than Elements currently has.

  17. #677
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Bianary View Post
    Bearing in mind that I am aware not everyone was asking for it -- what I found interesting was how upset you were about having to fight decks with owl's eyes and feeling they alone ruined the game balance, when all they did was expose a flaw in it. And it's acceptable that a game in beta would have imbalances, finished games often have even more than Elements currently has.
    I was upset (and am still annoyed) by the exploiting of the flaw(s) by a select few individuals - zanzarino didn't forsee this method of cheating or he would have stopped it. Also, just because a game has a flaw doesn't mean it is "ok" to just exploit it, even if the reason is "just to do it" or "because I could" or "I was just experimenting" or ragorak2's excuse in the chat of "I set it that way and fell asleep on accident". I label that inexcusable. That unsportsmanlike manner about it is what really grinds my gears. Flaws are part of life - humans make mistakes. It's the avoidable cheating that should be 'come-down-upon'...

    It is so silly (frustrating?) that I am getting this worked up over a free internet game, but apply that to the other side - how ridiculous is it to intentionally cheat/remove-the-fun-from/abuse a free internet game?


    Still playing and hoping for change (again, GREAT game overall, zanz),

    --rob77dp

  18. #678
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by rob77dp View Post
    I was upset (and am still annoyed) by the exploiting of the flaw(s) by a select few individuals - zanzarino didn't forsee this method of cheating or he would have stopped it. Also, just because a game has a flaw doesn't mean it is "ok" to just exploit it, even if the reason is "just to do it" or "because I could" or "I was just experimenting" or ragorak2's excuse in the chat of "I set it that way and fell asleep on accident". I label that inexcusable. That unsportsmanlike manner about it is what really grinds my gears. Flaws are part of life - humans make mistakes. It's the avoidable cheating that should be 'come-down-upon'...

    It is so silly (frustrating?) that I am getting this worked up over a free internet game, but apply that to the other side - how ridiculous is it to intentionally cheat/remove-the-fun-from/abuse a free internet game?


    Still playing and hoping for change (again, GREAT game overall, zanz),

    --rob77dp
    The way I see it is that zanzarino has demonstrated he wants his game balanced and fair to acquire cards in, so he'll take steps against this since it's been revealed. Thus it's not worth letting the unsportsmanlike conduct of certain players bother me, because there will always be people like that in online games. Just trust that the developers will take appropriate steps and don't threaten to leave the game over the issue unless your problem is with the actual game designers, that's just letting the griefers win.

  19. #679
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77

    Meh, I guess you're right ;-)

    I'm past it now, and hopefully zanzarino and anyone that put/will put effort into Elements did not take my statements personally as I was never meaning blame on them or pointing the finger towards them.




    C'mon real PvP!


    --rob77dp

  20. #680
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by rob77dp View Post
    I'm past it now, and hopefully zanzarino and anyone that put/will put effort into Elements did not take my statements personally as I was never meaning blame on them or pointing the finger towards them.
    I think zanzarino is hiding from us :/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center