Aloyzo's Arsenal #15: You make the card! Part 4: Card Effect!

We could use a way to counter all those annoying boost/keep's on an opponent, stuff like dodge, uncanny dodge, jump back, and vengeance. Currently it is next to impossible to get rid of them (you force them to play the card; memory loss and perplexing ray are unreliable)

Something like Cry of Despair: remove 1 (or all) boost cards from target's hand before boosts trigger.

 

Sorry my post is similar

Last time I checked people can throw things, the card All Out Attack has an image of random weapons in flighty (because that have be throw) but it's rang is still one.
(For the card I would like to see) Flavour Text: Now that you have a 2% (or whatever i.e. +2 or just a bigger %) bones in accurst you are conferred that if and when you throw your weapons they well not hit a team mate.

Same difference, meant both tho i.e. it could make it got thro amour or get a buff from other cards.

I forgot that Surestrike Blessing also is unblockably

So in light of this the card I would like to see should now just add range to all attacks and be use like Force Filed

 

How about "Cry of Despair: Unblockable, target opponent discards their oldest card. If that card is a boost, opponent discards all other boosts in their hand." ?

Most basic concepts get rehashed in some way or another eventually. If anything, being similar implies it may be a good idea.
Well, I guess "Mad flinging, +1 range to your next attack, if the card type is melee, change it to projectile" would work as a concept.

Piercing means to cut into, while penetrating means to push through.
As general words, penetrating is notably more intense. In RPG games (including Card Hunter), penetrating is used to refer to armor-piercing, while piercing is a base damage type.
So not really the same thing at all.

 

Not piercing hay.....
Well at any rate I was referring to Penetrating i.e. ignore amour and Piercing as in the Attack Type because that can be buffed, Impaler

I hade http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Items/Angry_Attacker and Fours Filed in mined when thinking up the rang adding card because having a way to get Impaler (makes the attack card Piercing as in the Attack Type) also and Bruiser's buffs wily attack form a distance would be nice even if the card does not make it any essay to be blocked or going throw amour tho if it was made and did most of those things it would still be good with or with out Penetrating (even if all it did is add rang to melee attacks)

 

It's a nuance
The armor is being pierced, but the attack is penetrating [through the armor]. Armor-piercing indicates the armor is capable OF being cut (which armor isn't really supposed to be), so it amounts to the same implication.
Crossbow bolts, for example, penetrate through armor, because the force of their shots allows them to pierce the armor.
In other words, penetrating states that it's going through (to the body underneath), while armor-piercing only implies that fact by signifying that the armor itself is being cut into.
So while armor-piercing is more descriptive, penetrating is in a way more accurate (though piercing is commonly used for that sort of implication, so it's not meaningfully so).

They're certainly very closely related terms, to be sure.

I get what you meant now, though ^.^

 

Cards with Piercing attack type cannot be buffed by Impaler, only cards that have the Penetrating keyword can be buffed by Impaler.

 

Sorry most of lost my train of thought.... so to some up the card I thought up is one that adds rang to attack also making it so i.e. Impaler can buff it so if adding Penetrating (if the card does not already have that) makes that so then so be it.

Altho http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Cards/Lunging_Thrust , http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Cards/Lunging_Strike and http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Cards/Shifty_Stab get Impaler's buff so why that? mmm, or am I mistaken (See this happening in lost of matches)

 

False, Impaler does not increase the damage of those attacks.

 

"PURPLE QUALITY FOR THE WIN!!!"

Spoiler: thought process

That was a pretty good rundown of the different qualities, @DunDunDun, although one doesn't need a Handicap to bring down cost, but rather Black quality cards. For example: Weak Strike, Black quality Attack vs. Festering Guts, Purple quality Handicap. $;^ ]

That said, again, good rundown. PURPLE QUALITY FOR THE WIN!!! ... except we'd, like, never be able to really use it, probably. $F^ } Well, I'm sure it'd see use in team battles just because people do that, but competitive MP, even leagues, not to mention Campaign? Mmm. $:^ \

Silver or Gold sound better for realisticness. Of course, if Gold, Aloyzo might graft his craft into more daft and chaff. (a.k.a. cool card, meh items)

On that note, Bronze could at least open up more venues, yes -- and really, Strong Hack and War Cry are Bronze, but of course so are Arcane Spray and Hit The Deck. It could be hit-and-miss what Aloyzo would offer.

For something as beautiful as a one-of-kind (for now anyway -- first-of-its-kind for sure) virtual cardboard prototype...
...pieced together by all of us as a community, indie game studio + host of players...
...Aloyzo's brand-new bleeding-edge Helmet card that's potentially Utility or even Utility|Boost hybrid...
...it would seem a waste to let it merely be hit-and-miss.

Looking over a few Silver cards, sure there are some boring or "eh" cards, but for the vast majority, these are interesting -- and even in some cases, just straight up powerful (even if simple). Nevertheless, a Silver can easily be spread across the item level spectrum with low quality cards for tokenless and or with more silvers (including potentially itself) for and , or of course with a mix of high and low quality cards for tokenless, , or . Yes. I've decided.

I'm voting SILVER QUALITY due to the potential versatility of a middle-of-the-road card -- and its subsequent items! -- concerning both power and intrigue.

 

My reason for not going above Gold:
Quick Draw
>.>

 

Which is why I'm voting Bronze... it seems that QD often offers better cards at Paper than Bronze.

 

There's not a major difference in silver and gold in slotting [both can only be 1xed on tokenless, and 2xed on minor- silver can, however, be 3xed at major], so the real deliberation boils down to:
"Do you want the card mostly on balanced items, across every token range" or "do you want to spice up low levels with more items with good cards and downsides, and add more potency and appeal to high level items".

Honestly, given how many useless golds I get in QD, I'd say Gold trumps silver in that regard as well [as does Bronze, as Kalin noted].

So:
Bronze: (Useful, but not potent) High accessibility, low-level emphasis, minimal benefit to expanding helmet appeal at all level ranges, QD benefits
Silver: (Balanced) Balanced items at all levels, compelling to slot
Gold: (Notable effect, but less slotting access.) Potentially more compelling to slot than silver, high-level emphasis, QD benefits

If we're expecting anything along the lines of Swap or even something as passive as Everlasting Ground, we'll need to aim for Gold- looks like anything with really interesting mechanics won't have a chance of starting until at least there.
Meanwhile, CM showed us some more of the potential for lower qualities with cards like Howl (silver) and Investigate (bronze)- neither is potent persay, but offers good added deck depth and balance at low cost.

In the end, it's not a matter of "which is best", but of "what part of helmet design do you want to emphasize- accessible utility, balanced appeal, or mechanically intriguing key cards".

Another way to look at it is:
Bronze: If the card is compelling, it will emphasize the slotting of tokenless and minor token helmets, but won't necessarily help the appeal of yellow pip helmets.
Silver: If the card is compelling, it will emphasize the slotting of tokenless and minor token helmets (it's rare a silver is compelling enough to burn a yellow pip on getting 3x of), and may add strong appeal to yellow pip helmets if they have a good gold card (gold+silverx2 = level 21).
Gold: If the card is compelling, it may emphasize the slotting of tokenless for specific purposes, but otherwise will mostly emphasize the slotting of minor and yellow pip helmets [in much the same way cards such as Defender's Block encourage similar investment].

Since to my mind one of the main issues with helmets is that people don't typically want to invest pips into them [aside from on very specific helmets], I've been leaning more toward Gold, which should encourage that most.
In more generalized terms, without trying to 'fix' a perceived issue, I'd say silver is the best call, as it fleshes out helmets the most overall across all cost tiers.

 

I agreed with all your reasons except this one.

So the question is:
Do we want to try to get an effect good enough that players will be willing to give up a token somewhere else to use it?
Or do we want something weaker that can be easily added to existing builds?

Unfortunately, we have no idea what kinds of effects we'll be allowed to choose from.

 

I assume we want something that's good enough that it compares evenly with other item slots for the purposes of investing tokens- which is something that in many ways, helmets are lacking, outside of a few specific key helmets [eg, 2x warcry, 2x quickness+all-out-attack, etc].
The more key cards helmets have, the more we can mix them together to get compelling items for the slot.

Of course, a good enough silver can manage to achieve a nearly similar effect (especially if there's compulsion to slot 2x of it), with the added benefit of filling out any holes in desirability of helmets as a whole.
Though without more compelling golds floating around on helmets, there's still no draw to push toward yellow.

Bronze really'll just give more tokenless options, which while nice, doesn't really help draw helmets into being a comparable slot investment, outside of the handful of helmets we have for specific build concepts.

That's actually my point. I'd rather gamble with gold, which has a presumably higher chance of offering something compelling, than go with silver, which (while perhaps less likely to let us down) isn't really as likely to change the gearing landscape.
Really, it's all a matter of perspective- in a way, helmets need a bit of love in all regards. Though, I kinda feel that they've gotten a bit of low-investment appeal from CM already, which again furthers my inclinations toward Gold.
But, in essence, my viewpoint is that we build from the top down- certainly, one could argue for the opposite approach, starting by balancing out helmets, and *then* adding especially compelling cards to them.

It's my assumption that, much like with CM, we won't really have to worry as much about getting low-quality cards added to helmets over time, while high quality ones are likely going to continue to be quite rare.
Given that currently we only have this single chance at adding a helmet card, I'd rather go with something that changes the landscape more.

Of course, I'm not going to begrudge anyone for a different valuation of the factors- there's good justification for any of the choices [though paper and amethyst are pretty heavily stacked against].
Really, my attempted calculations on merits aside, I really think either of Gold or Silver will be a great addition, assuming Aloyzo offers us interesting enough concepts.

 

As a heads up, the fourth poll will probably open one day late. I'm busy all day tomorrow. Sorry =)

 

Given the creative demands of the last poll- by all means, you take as long as you need to encourage Aloyzo to give us the best possible options.

 

The MQP is currently experiencing a tight primary race. Because we aren't seeing much of a challenge from our main rivals, emerald and amethyst, I would encourage party members to stick to their favorite sub-emerald quality rather than switching to the one that is currently most popular (at the time of this writing, gold by one vote). Stick to your guns, folks.

 

Very well said. I agree.

 

LOL @ a tie! Lol. $¦^ b

Can't wait to see what this effects. $:^ }

EDIT: And btw, although Gold tempted me, Silver got my vote and "endorsement" because of Flak telling us more powerful -> worse itemization, and I'd prefer better itemization since that's been the air of the whole helmet discussion, eh? Still, I'm not bothered in the least by the notion itself of cool helmets with a cool new Gold card. $:^ ]

 

I'm going to break the tie between gold and silver in favor of silver, as that's what I would have voted for if I had a vote--silver is basically the most flexible quality for itemization

Aloyzo needs to test the functionality of his proposed card designs. I'll hopefully get an update to you tomorrow as promised but, as @DunDunDun suggested, Aloyzo may need a couple days in his workshop before he's ready to open the next poll. Stay tuned!!