|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 1:12PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Dec 31, 2004
|
Unless i'm mistaken, the Titains are the only mythic cycle.
You are mistaken.
- Ajani Goldmane
 , Jace Beleren  , Liliana Vess  , Chandra Nalaar  , Garruk Wildspeaker  .
- Rafiq of the Many
 , Sharuum the Hegemon  , Sedris, the Traitor King  , Kresh the Bloodbraided  , Mayael the Anima  .
- Jenara, Asura of War
 , Sen Triplets  , Thraximundar  , Karrthus, Tyrant of Jund  , Uril, the Miststalker  .
- Baneslayer Angel
 , Sphinx Ambassador  , Xathrid Demon  , Bogardan Hellkite  , Protean Hydra  .
- Elspeth, Knight-Errant
 , Tezzeret the Seeker  , Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker  , Sarkhan Vol  , Ajani Vengeant  . (This one is the loosest since one card is from the next set and the Colors don't match up well, but there's one Planeswalker for each Shard here).
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 1:28PM
#22
|
|
|
Unless i'm mistaken, the Titains are the only mythic cycle.
You are mistaken.
- Ajani Goldmane , Jace Beleren , Liliana Vess , Chandra Nalaar , Garruk Wildspeaker .
- Rafiq of the Many , Sharuum the Hegemon , Sedris, the Traitor King , Kresh the Bloodbraided , Mayael the Anima .
- Jenara, Asura of War , Sen Triplets , Thraximundar , Karrthus, Tyrant of Jund , Uril, the Miststalker .
- Baneslayer Angel , Sphinx Ambassador , Xathrid Demon , Bogardan Hellkite , Protean Hydra .
- Elspeth, Knight-Errant , Tezzeret the Seeker , Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker , Sarkhan Vol , Ajani Vengeant . (This one is the loosest since one card is from the next set and the Colors don't match up well, but there's one Planeswalker for each Shard here).
Your cycles four and five are a bit questionable, but you missed the cycle of Empyrial Archangel  , Sphinx Sovereign  , Prince of Thralls  , Hellkite Overlord  , and Godsire  .
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 3:50PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Dec 22, 2010
|
They say you only have one chance to make a good first impression. For this Design Challenge I am going to give each of you the chance to create the best first impression you can.
Jeepers, that sounds like a line from these Saw movies.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 4:29PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2006
|
Sad to see Jonathan go, though I'm not sure I disagree with the Judges  I do think he got a bit shafted world-wise, though. Bringing in a creative guy seems like a great guest judge... but why do it on the one where they don't get to show off their own flavor?! EDIT: I was similarly saddened to see Ken so blantantly push the "mythic rares are for money" angle. Remember when they were supposed to be the splashy, flavorful, Legendary cards, and not a list of the top tournament rares? His point about the cycles is valid, of course, but you know why people like the Titans? Because they're disgustingly good!! Not because they're super cool or flavorful or splashy. Also I would rather have the "chained" guys than the Titans. They were pretty sick from a development standpoint.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 5:41PM
#25
|
|
|
Seeing Mr. Nagle cackle about how great expensive Mythics are is damned annoying. Yes, you can make Mythics into the best cards in the format, and people will buy Mythics. (Well, until they quit playing, which is probably where we end up eventually in this regime.) Good job. (Did you know that cost was a negative pressure on people who want to acquire Baneslayer Angels?)
Sad thing is, I thought Mr. Woodward had one of the strongest submissions this week, if not the outright best. MaRo wanted to see weaponized utopia? Versatility is the name of the game - It's ploughshares to swords, all around. Mr. Woodward delivered on that. He gives us a common cycle that is a set of tools being put to different uses, some warlike, some not. He gives us a distinct and interesting cycle of uncommons that really distinguishes the invaders from the natives, and gives them a powerful flavor push. Then, he truly gives us "Weaponized Utopia" at Rare, improving on the loose Odyssey cycle of alternate win conditions.
But hey. I guess that was too subtle for the judges to catch, and he's out. Subtle interactions and complexity are BAD. Flashy stuff that dazzles little children? GOOD.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 6:01PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2004
|
Rares sell sets. Mythic rares sell sets in a big way. Part of being a designer is making your set marketable (Which is the whole point of the loglines, which is the whole point of the competition).
Does it really? I would like to see a real study on that.
Personally, it's things like Mythic Rares that stop me from buying card games. I like the random nature of a booster pack, as it's like opening a mini present. But once I've opened a couple and realize that I have a pretty small chance of getting what I want (and enough of what I want), I give up on a set.
I've given up on other card games for reasons like that, when I was a kid and today.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 6:16PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Mar 13, 2004
|
Rares sell sets. Mythic rares sell sets in a big way. Part of being a designer is making your set marketable (Which is the whole point of the loglines, which is the whole point of the competition).
Does it really? I would like to see a real study on that.
Personally, it's things like Mythic Rares that stop me from buying card games. I like the random nature of a booster pack, as it's like opening a mini present. But once I've opened a couple and realize that I have a pretty small chance of getting what I want (and enough of what I want), I give up on a set.
I've given up on other card games for reasons like that, when I was a kid and today.
Sure it makes money. It's the industry standard. Wotc didn't decide to do Mythic rares on a whim, they saw the figures and went for it.
You have to realize that the vast majority of boosters are bought and opened by the person who's going to use it. Having mythics gives people a random surprise that keeps them comming back. It's the same principal lotteries work by, "give people rewards in unpredictable intervals and they'll repeat the action more often".
Therefore Mythics have to be extra sexy to work.
… and then, the squirrels came.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 6:22PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Nov 19, 2010
|
Wow, Jonathan Woodward got the shaft. Yes, his submission was really weak, but at least he was trying to give some direction for Utopia. Many of the other contestants were just fleshing out well received ideas. Utopia is easily the most bland world; even Devon has problems realizing his vision for the world. How do you design cards for a peaceful world in a game about combat? Whoever received Utopia was going to be at a severe disadvantage.
Loucks should've been cut this week. Epiloth seemed to be developing away from the "big creature matter" theme, evolving into a much more rounded set. However, Loucks' submission was a complete step backwards for Epiloth. Also, who designs a vanilla cycle for a contest testing your design skills? That's a slap in the face to all of those who didn't make it to the final 8.
Also, I felt like Shawn's submission was really weak. The shackled legends were a mistake. Anyone can design obviously broken legendary creatures (is stifle being reprinted in the set?). The worst thing is their flavor though. Why are there massive 6/6s and 8/8s with flying underground? If they are shackled, how do they fly? And most importantly, why the f&*$ is a giant tree in handcuffs underground? If this was a novel, it would probably be one of the worst fantasy novels ever (which is saying a lot).
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 8:33PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Sep 27, 2006
|
Loucks is still in it because MaRo sees far more potential in him than Loucks is showing. And that's perfectly fine, there's no reason why MaRo can't give him another chance if he thinks that the qualities he wants are there. But I believe that this is was the last challenge where he skates by on what MaRo thinks he "could" do, the other contestants are just getting too good now. Loucks had a chance to blow them all out of the water from the opening gate, instead he stumbled multiple times and let everyone catch up.
The judges absolutely can not fault him for his common cycle. MaRo didn't tell him to be less complex. He told him to MAKE SURE he is not the most complex entry. A cycle of vanilla creatures is the logical thing to do when the head designer (who ultimately is running the contest) tells you that.
If I were competing for an NFL quaterback position, and the coach told me to MAKE SURE that I completed more passes than the other contenders, the best choice for me is to throw the ball as least far as possible.
Also, the more I read Ken's comments, the less I like him. Each time he seems like a bigger arrogant jerk than the previous time. Nearly all of his comments this week boiled down to "this is not nearly as good as the stuff I already did." He's starting to sound like Topper from the Dilbert comic strip.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Dec 22, 2010 - 9:01PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2008
|
I really didn't know whether to root for the contestants or the worlds this round... Wow, Jonathan Woodward got the shaft. Yes, his submission was really weak, but at least he was trying to give some direction for Utopia. Many of the other contestants were just fleshing out well received ideas. Utopia is easily the most bland world; even Devon has problems realizing his vision for the world. How do you design cards for a peaceful world in a game about combat? Whoever received Utopia was going to be at a severe disadvantage.
I agree that Devon seems to be having problems realizing his vision for Utopia, but I'm not entirely convinced that designing for the world is inherently problematic. After all, isn't paradise being invaded by outsiders basically the idea behind Bant? There was even discussion about the potential similarities to Alara on Jonathan's wiki.
Sad thing is, I thought Mr. Woodward had one of the strongest submissions this week, if not the outright best. MaRo wanted to see weaponized utopia? Versatility is the name of the game - It's ploughshares to swords, all around. Mr. Woodward delivered on that. He gives us a common cycle that is a set of tools being put to different uses, some warlike, some not. He gives us a distinct and interesting cycle of uncommons that really distinguishes the invaders from the natives, and gives them a powerful flavor push. Then, he truly gives us "Weaponized Utopia" at Rare, improving on the loose Odyssey cycle of alternate win conditions.
I'm not sure that versatility represents Utopia moreso than it represents any other setting. Charms appear in quite a few sets, so there needed to be something "utopian" about them for them to make sense in this challenge. Farmer's Charm is the only part of the common cycle that seems to have any sort of obvious peacetime application, and then only because of the card's name and not because of its design. Eager Cadet  managed to accomplish that much with just its flavor text.
The invaders were kind of strange because they had mechanical identities that didn't seem to have anything to do with the setting. Why are they hybrid? Why are they using the Zubera mechanic? What's up with the funky creature type? Bant had a much easier time playing up the invasion angle since the invaders' worlds were all being designed independently. The same could be said of Mirrodin versus Phyrexia to some extent.
As for the rares, I thought using alternate win conditions would a great way to emphasize the non-combative side of each color, so I was surprised that it didn't go over well with the judges. However, their concerns--the potential to undermine expected gameplay and the oversaturation of alternate win conditions within a single set--do make sense, but on top of that, the designs weren't particularly tight, either. Brady's suggestion of creating one alternate condition and using the cycle to give each color a different way to help achieve it is interesting, but I wonder what that cycle would look like?
|
|
|
