Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[dghunter79]

My point was the Ironmonger can become nearly 100% reliable in a deck of all action cards. Also, cards that are unreliable tend to be bad. Tribute, Harvest etc. Do you like these cards? Are they strong, or fun? Have you ever based your engine off Tribute's +2Actions? My guess is most often you don't, because it has too much of a chance (most of the time) to not get what you want.

I really don't think either is that much fun, but at least Tribute can give me a crazy effect, and Harvest can give a bunch of money. It`s hard to get excited for a card that has a +buy in it. Like I said, Ruined Market has no big payoff. It's junk card. Just...just...it doesn't have any payoff. This is my last post about this if the conclusion is that Ruined Market has a big risk vs. reward payoff.

Is that the most fun use of Ironmonger?  Making it into a Village?  Is the reason that Ironmonger is OK that you can turn it into Village? 

Tribute and Harvest are not my favorite "unreliable" cards.  (Although like with all unreliable cards, it can sometimes be fun to try and control, or adapt to, their randomness.)  They're pretty different from Overseer, though, in that they are unreliable because of random card flipping.  The "unreliability" of Overseer is controlled by the gameplay.  (Although I like Knights!  And those are unreliable because you don't know what cards will be flipped.  One thing that Knights and Overseer have in common is that they provide +actions and +buy, but in limited quantities.)

Hey, there are times when you'd love to have a Ruined Market.  Even when there's other +Buy on the board -- sometimes it's Trade Route, and you got nothing left to trash.  If that offends you, I don't know what to say.

I think the criticism is that the design leaves it unable to fulfill any particular niche.  If you need +Buy, it is extremely unreliable, and I think this is still a valid criticism.  Ironmonger and Mountebank are different.  With Ironmonger, you can build you deck to make it reliable...

If you say that the point is to be unreliable... well then, the payoff doesn't really reflect that.  It's high risk, medium reward except in super niche situations.  So again, Powerman's criticism stands.

You can make Overseer incredibly reliable, also.  Any time you can draw your deck with extra actions, Overseer is clockwork.  The +buy is now very reliable.  You just can't get as much of it as you could if the +buy came from Market.  Yes, I agree, it is medium-reward.  It is also medium-risk.

I find Powerman and your criticisms of the card to be kind of shallow cuts.  You're both just pointing out things that the card wasn't designed to do.  If you start thinking about how the card would play on different boards you see that interesting game play can emerge from what you perceive as the card's weaknesses.

[markusin]

Ironmonger has an element of unreliability, allowing it to cost $4 even though it's better than lab when it hits a victory card. Tribute, meh, the effect you get can be worth $6 if it hit victory cards. Then there are cards like Count, Steward, and Band of Misfits that have effects which cost less than the cost, but this is made up for by the flexibility of those cards.

Now Overseer is hard to balance because it has both flexibility and unreliability. it's flexible when you first play it, but then options are removed as it gets played. The card has potential, I think, but I understand why people have issues with the current version. At least, you know what it will give you on your turn before you play it, unlike Tournament.

[soulnet]

Is that the most fun use of Ironmonger?  Making it into a Village?  Is the reason that Ironmonger is OK that you can turn it into Village? 

The thing is, it is a Village when you need a Village and its a Lab/Peddler/almost double-Lab before, when you still have plenty of Estates and Coppers. That's really good, because in many engines you really do not want to spend your 3s and 4s in non-Village but opening Village leads nowhere. Ironmonger gives you good quality in reaching $5 and then "turns" into a Village when your 5s and 6s are producing the money. Afterwards, when you are greening, it provides some lab/filtering when the engine will not run smoothly anyway. So I think Ironmonger is generally better than most other $4 Villages in many cases.

As for Overseer, I see that it can be fun, but it is by no means a powerful card and it seems to me that it does induce some simple tactical decisions on your turn, to decide how many you can play to have the most of it and leave it in a state bad for the opponent, but I don't see it making strategies viable that would otherwise be not viable. And it is not a power card.

[eHalcyon]

My point was the Ironmonger can become nearly 100% reliable in a deck of all action cards. Also, cards that are unreliable tend to be bad. Tribute, Harvest etc. Do you like these cards? Are they strong, or fun? Have you ever based your engine off Tribute's +2Actions? My guess is most often you don't, because it has too much of a chance (most of the time) to not get what you want.

I really don't think either is that much fun, but at least Tribute can give me a crazy effect, and Harvest can give a bunch of money. It`s hard to get excited for a card that has a +buy in it. Like I said, Ruined Market has no big payoff. It's junk card. Just...just...it doesn't have any payoff. This is my last post about this if the conclusion is that Ruined Market has a big risk vs. reward payoff.

Is that the most fun use of Ironmonger?  Making it into a Village?  Is the reason that Ironmonger is OK that you can turn it into Village? 

Tribute and Harvest are not my favorite "unreliable" cards.  (Although like with all unreliable cards, it can sometimes be fun to try and control, or adapt to, their randomness.)  They're pretty different from Overseer, though, in that they are unreliable because of random card flipping.  The "unreliability" of Overseer is controlled by the gameplay.  (Although I like Knights!  And those are unreliable because you don't know what cards will be flipped.  One thing that Knights and Overseer have in common is that they provide +actions and +buy, but in limited quantities.)

Hey, there are times when you'd love to have a Ruined Market.  Even when there's other +Buy on the board -- sometimes it's Trade Route, and you got nothing left to trash.  If that offends you, I don't know what to say.

I think the criticism is that the design leaves it unable to fulfill any particular niche.  If you need +Buy, it is extremely unreliable, and I think this is still a valid criticism.  Ironmonger and Mountebank are different.  With Ironmonger, you can build you deck to make it reliable...

If you say that the point is to be unreliable... well then, the payoff doesn't really reflect that.  It's high risk, medium reward except in super niche situations.  So again, Powerman's criticism stands.

You can make Overseer incredibly reliable, also.  Any time you can draw your deck with extra actions, Overseer is clockwork.  The +buy is now very reliable.  You just can't get as much of it as you could if the +buy came from Market.  Yes, I agree, it is medium-reward.  It is also medium-risk.

I find Powerman and your criticisms of the card to be kind of shallow cuts.  You're both just pointing out things that the card wasn't designed to do.  If you start thinking about how the card would play on different boards you see that interesting game play can emerge from what you perceive as the card's weaknesses.

Ironmonger is cool because it is always at least a cantrip which means it is safe.  It's low risk, medium-high reward.  It's always mild filtering with potentially big bonus.  It's also really nice that you can turn it into a consistent village without much trouble at all.  Overseer doesn't work the same way -- because it is terminal at least half the time, you cannot safely mass them.



"Shallow cuts"?  Seriously?  If that's what you see, then you are missing the point.  Look, I really do like the card, but that doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss valid criticism of it.

You can make Overseer reliable... really?  Three of the options are terminal, which means it's a fool's errand to rely on it as a village.  You need to play multiple terminals (itself) to guarantee that option, and then you only get the village once. 

This is actually the key thing -- you can make it reliable, but you can't get any of the bonuses en masse!  In practice, you're not going to get any of these bonuses 3 or more times in a turn, and even getting one particular bonus twice is unlikely.  The only options where it's fine to just get one instance is Woodcutter for +Buy and maybe Workshop.  Even then, you get just one extra Buy so you're probably not going to be triple-Provincing or picking up 3 engine components or what have you.

So now what you have is a card whose primary niche seems to be "providing +Buy, but you have to really really work for it".  Overall, that makes it medium-high risk for niche medium reward.  Often being terminal makes it risky, and the primary reward is the +Buy on a board with no other +Buy.

My question is still, when would you buy this?  What is the intended game play?

You can't really count on it for anything except for +Buy, and even that is very difficult to make consistent.  So it seems to me that you would throw it in to an already-working engine as "grease", except this grease is less reliable than Pawn or Steward or any of the other choices because choices get taken away as you go.

Again, I like the card, and I can think of tweaks that might help.  For example, add an extra Pawn-like space that also resets the board.  That way you can more easily secure +Buy and it also makes it easier to stack multiples in creative ways.  Or, each of the choices could be made more powerful so that you can actually use Overseer as payload consistently, regardless of which option you choose.

The criticism that has been brought up so far is definitely valid and it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.  I don't think the issues are unsolvable, but it's up to voters to decide whether the necessary tweaks can be made within the limits of the contest.

[KingZog3]

When is the next voting round going to start? And what's the cutoff vote limit?

[dghunter79]

I don't really see how the "reward" of Ironmonger is medium-high, but the reward of Overseer is only medium.  Ironmonger is a low-risk, low-reward card.  Overseer is a medium-risk, medium-reward card.  That feels like the most accurate way to put it.

It's niche is engines, and I don't think only engines with no other +buy.  But, you'd usually want it in those engines.  (And on boards like where Overseer is the only buy, engines are probably weaker.)  I think it might also be a good card to open with if you're going to build an engine.  Sometimes better than Ironmonger as an opening buy. 

It's utility will depend on how bad the bad options are for that board.  Sometimes more than one of them will be bad, and in that situation, the card is really bad, because if you play the bad options, you're freeing the card up for your opponent.

But, it's not like any of the card's options are "eat a bumblebee."  They're all usually decent-to-harmless.  And sometimes, none of the options are gonna be bad, and the good options are going to be really good.  For example, it might work as a Fool's Gold enabler.  The Workshop and Woodcutter options will be good, and the Peddler and Smithy options will be fine.  And by the middle of the game, all those values will shift.

I agree it's not a power card, but I do think it'd be middle-third at worst.  And fun.

[eHalcyon]

Ironmonger can be high reward because its possibilities are Laboratory+, Peddler+ and Village+.  The filtering bumps it up.

What role does Overseer play in engines?  What is the ideal use case?  The options are not all "decent to harmless" because most of them are terminal, and cheap terminals at that.  There will be better terminals to play.  For use in engines, you need to have outside action support and probably draw support as well.  If you have those without Overseer, why get Overseer at all?  That's why +Buy seems to me to be the only use case.

What part of Overseer makes it particularly fun?




Again, I like the general concept but I'm positive that it needs tweaks, potentially big ones.

[KingZog3]

I agree that with tweaks, and most probably changing some of the options, Overseer could be interesting.

[dghunter79]

Ironmonger can be high reward because its possibilities are Laboratory+, Peddler+ and Village+.  The filtering bumps it up.

What role does Overseer play in engines?  What is the ideal use case?  The options are not all "decent to harmless" because most of them are terminal, and cheap terminals at that.  There will be better terminals to play.  For use in engines, you need to have outside action support and probably draw support as well.  If you have those without Overseer, why get Overseer at all?  That's why +Buy seems to me to be the only use case.

What part of Overseer makes it particularly fun?

Peddler plus a fingernail-clipping.  That's pretty low-reward to me.  Which makes sense, cause it's pretty low-risk.  In other words, as you say, a "safe" card.

Overseer, even if you don't need the +buy, can be a nice opener because it helps you build an engine, by picking up engine pieces.  Not as reliably as Ironworks, but on the other hand, later on you can use it as Village, Smithy, or Peddler.  And then end game you can once again use it as Woodcutter, or Workshop.

Why is it fun?  Well, look, if you think Ironmonger is cool because it's always safe, maybe it's not fun to you.  Maybe you think safety is what's fun.  But cards that can produce variable effects, like Tournament and Black Market, are fun to me.  I mean, there are also people who hate Black Market.  But not me.  I prefer a swiss-army knife to a ball-peen hammer.  Not to knock ball-peen hammer fans.

Overseer also has this new method of player interaction and resource struggle.  I mean, you voted for the card.  You concede that there's about it you like.  So I think you must have some sense of why it would be fun.

[eHalcyon]

Laboratory+ is huge though.  Peddler+ is better than a $4 card.  That is not low reward; you're underestimating cycling and filtering.

I say again that the concept is neat, but there are certainly issues to consider.  Are you arguing that it's perfect as is?  It really sounds like it, which is why I am responding more critically than I might otherwise.  The un-fun thing about this card is how often you can get burned by it.  You buy it for some purpose, and then the opponent always manages to get it before you.  I can see that being extremely frustrating.

[dghunter79]

Laboratory+ is huge though.  Peddler+ is better than a $4 card.  That is not low reward; you're underestimating cycling and filtering.

I say again that the concept is neat, but there are certainly issues to consider.  Are you arguing that it's perfect as is?  It really sounds like it, which is why I am responding more critically than I might otherwise.  The un-fun thing about this card is how often you can get burned by it.  You buy it for some purpose, and then the opponent always manages to get it before you.  I can see that being extremely frustrating.

I wouldn't say perfect, but I think it's very playable as is, without upping its power-level.  (I think the frustration-factor is looming larger than it should.)  It's on another level than the other cards in the contest, in terms of polish, and I think it should win this round.  That's just my opinion!

[Warfreak2]

Is it your card, perchance?

[Asper]

Is it your card, perchance?

If it is, defending it so vigorously is bad form. I - as probably one or two others - think my card is the best here, but i don't walk around saying "Vote for my card."

Edit: Anyhow, i think i can say those are the cards i voted for: Dance, Acropolis, Homestead, Nouveau Riche

[markusin]

Is it your card, perchance?

If it is, defending it so vigorously is bad form. I - as probably one or two others - think my card is the best here, but i don't walk around saying "Vote for my card."

Edit: Anyhow, i think i can say those are the cards i voted for: Dance, Acropolis, Homestead, Nouveau Riche

Of course I think my card is the best!

Well okay, maybe not for every contest.

[dghunter79]

Is it your card, perchance?

Ew, gross. No.

[Powerman]

Yes, Overseer can give you +Buy, which can be huge.  But just because something can be huge, does not make it automatically worth a high cost.

I think we all can agree that Ruined Market should not be available as a kingdom card for $5, even though it could let you win the game that you bought it in!

Likewise, a theoretical card "+4 cards, +4 actions" for $2 would not be balanced even if sometimes you ran out of cards to draw.

Sure Overseer can be a Woodcutter;  Woodcutter is the worst $3 card.  How does that make Overseer a good $4 card, if it's 1/4 best usage is the worst $3 card?  Because you CANNOT build a good engine with 1 village (see Necropolis).  Or with one draw card.  Or one peddler.  Band of Misfits is good because you can choose to copy the card under $5 that you need; this lets you choose 1 that you might need, and not a second time till you use others that you probably don't.

FWIW, I think it would be MUCH more balanced at $3.  It'd still be at best middle 3rd, but it'd be playable.

[Nic]

Yeah, the conversation's been interesting, but maybe we should start talking about another card. Ironmonger is reliable because it always gives you the cantrip and the filtering (and because you can spam them until the variable bonus becomes reliable). With this guy, giving a flat +1 action on top would be lunacy, but it needs a good flat bonus that'll tempt you to put it in your deck, even as a 40% terminal. "Gain a coin token' feels right to me; if we switch from the mat to using randomizer cards, I'll vote for this in the Guilds contest.

"Setup: Lay the randomizers for Village, Smithy, Workshop, Peddler, and Woodcutter in the center of the board. These are the District cards."

I think you already know where to go from here   

This would require owning Base and Prosperity, which is probably not ok for an Intrigue-themed Treasure Chest card.

getting warmer . . . You might not own Base if you own Cornucopia. That's why Young Witch doesn't say "Setup: Add Moat to the supply". Any time you have the temptation to reference a specific card, there's a dominiony and an undominiony way to proceed.

[Asper]

Alright, let's talk about other cards:

Landlord
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +1 Action.
Worth 1 VP per empty Supply pile.

I didn't vote for this. Why? I just didn't think it did something new. I guess it plays as "get as many Landlords as you can". Hmm... Of the cards i didn't vote for, i think this is one i wouldn't mind winning.

Dance
Types: Action – Attack – Reaction
Cost: $4
Choose one: Each player (including you) puts a card from his hand on top of his deck; or each player puts his deck into his discard pile.
When another player shuffles, you may reveal and discard this from your hand. If you do, +2 Cards.

I assumed this card would be fixed by a "Each player with at least X cards in hand" clause. I think people who didn't vote for it because it can destroy turns forgot that you should also vote for cards that you think can be fixed. This is very easy to fix. I also think it should allow putting the deck in other players discards additionally to the topdecking attack. Other than that i like how subtly the attack and the reaction synergize.
I admit that when i think about it, there probably were cards who deserved my vot more than Dance, though. Maybe even one or two i didn't vote for - no accounting for taste.

Acropolis
Types: Action
Cost: $5
When you play this, +1 Card per unused action you have (Action, not Action card). +2 Actions.

I like cards that make players go for different stragies. This makes you be a Village Idiot, and i think it's a hilarious/clever idea. As the card starts as a Necropolis, it's probably pretty bad on it's own, which makes it even more interesting to me.

Prefecture
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Victory card. If you do, put it and one other revealed card into your hand. Discard the rest.
Worth 2 VP.

I think this is clever, but it just isn't good. If the first card you reveal is a Victory, it does basically nothing (yeah yeah, edge case, Harem, actions left...). Then again, it's allready almost a Duchy. I don't like how it anty-synergizes with itself and is so much against Intrigue's "deal with Victory cards" theme.

Monastery
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Gain a card costing up to $6. For each $1 over $4 it costs, each other player may choose one: he trashes a card from his hand; he gains up to 2 Coppers, putting them into his hand; he discards his hand and draws 5 cards.

It's okay, but i think it fits more into Prosperity with its non-attack interaction and ability to gain expensive cards... Also i think the downsides might be too big.

Overseer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Put a marker on an empty District of the Overseer Mat. If you put it on the…
Residential District, +1 Card and +2 Actions
Craftsmen's District, +3 Cards
Commercial District, +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$1
Industrial District, gain a card costing up to $4
Logging District, +1 Buy and +$2
If four districts of the mat have a marker, remove all the markers.

Rules Clarification: There is one communal Overseer mat, split into the five districts.

Ugh... First, it has 1st player advantage. Second, it introduces tokens and mats and still is just a iunreliable bundle of allready known effects. The card is a lot of old things, put together with new things that make the card more complex or unfair without need. I never thought "choices" should be seen as typically Intrigue, and this is the perfect example of a choice-card that has nothing to do with Intrigues other main themes - hybrids and dealing with victory cards. Let alone the mat is absolutely un-intrigue. It's probably balanced or can easily made balanced, but i think it shouldn't take a spot that could be filled with a card that actually fits Intrigue.

Shrine
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Choose one: trash a card from your hand; or +1 Card.
Worth 2 VP.

Kind of like Landlord, a Victory card that does something special. It's astounding how many votes Landlord got and how few Shrine got. I preferred this over Landlord and still didn't vote for it.

Tiller
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. The player to your left chooses a card in the Supply costing at least $2 more than the trashed card. Gain it.

I liked it, but it didn't get my vote. It's also not so intrigue-ish, but i don't mind it.

Nouveau Riche
Types: Action
Cost: $4
You may discard an Estate. If you do, +3 Cards. You may discard a Duchy. If you do, +$2. You may discard a Victory card. If you do, +1 Action.

Clarification: It should be clear from the wording here, but you don't choose between these three options. You choose whether or not to do each in order.

Encourages decks you usually don't want and really goes with Intrigue's victory theme - even has choices, hooray. Also don't see why some people didn't get the wording which is basically Hamlet's. I don't know if it's as much fun when playing as is when looking at it, but i think it's a very good fit and could come straight from Intrigue.

Secret Plot
Types: Treasure – Victory
Cost: $3
Worth $1. When you play this, each player may set aside a card face down on his Secret Plot mat. You may look at the cards on your mat at any time; reveal them and return them to your deck at the end of the game.
Worth 1 VP for each differently-named card on your mat that no other player has a copy of on his mat.

People allready wrote a lot about this, and while i'm still not sure how strong it would be, i think this gives too many points to be ignorable if you can get many of them. I don't like cards you can't usually skip (see Rebuild), and so this didn't get my vote.

Concerto
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a card from it and put it on the bottom of your deck. If it is an… Action card, +1 Action; Treasure card, +$1; Victory card, +1 Card.

Forgot to comment on this one above - i liked it. You think +2Actions or +1Action,+1$ is terrible, but as it is basically a nonterminal small Scavenger (with the risk of finding an empty pile)/Herbalist, is allready has something to speak for it. Maybe should cost 2$ and have another name, though.

[cluckyb]

Alright, let's talk about other cards:

Prefecture
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Victory card. If you do, put it and one other revealed card into your hand. Discard the rest.
Worth 2 VP.

I think this is clever, but it just isn't good. If the first card you reveal is a Victory, it does basically nothing (yeah yeah, edge case, Harem, actions left...). Then again, it's allready almost a Duchy. I don't like how it anty-synergizes with itself and is so much against Intrigue's "deal with Victory cards" theme.

I think the anti-synergy is the best part. If you can draw most of your deck with it, you have a lot of choices. Of course, "draw one card from anywhere in your deck" isn't always great -- in villageless decks its just a terminal gold and this is far worse than "draw one card from your deck"

But maybe if this got tweaked so you draw until you reveal *two* victory cards, then put one of the revealed victory cards and one other revealed card into your hand. Then you are not hosed by the one card case, and more likely to actually be better than a terminal silver. (which would be way worse than Harem, albeit at a cheaper price)

Overseer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Put a marker on an empty District of the Overseer Mat. If you put it on the…
Residential District, +1 Card and +2 Actions
Craftsmen's District, +3 Cards
Commercial District, +1 Card, +1 Action, and +$1
Industrial District, gain a card costing up to $4
Logging District, +1 Buy and +$2
If four districts of the mat have a marker, remove all the markers.

Rules Clarification: There is one communal Overseer mat, split into the five districts.

Ugh... First, it has 1st player advantage. Second, it introduces tokens and mats and still is just a iunreliable bundle of allready known effects. The card is a lot of old things, put together with new things that make the card more complex or unfair without need. I never thought "choices" should be seen as typically Intrigue, and this is the perfect example of a choice-card that has nothing to do with Intrigues other main themes - hybrids and dealing with victory cards. Let alone the mat is absolutely un-intrigue. It's probably balanced or can easily made balanced, but i think it shouldn't take a spot that could be filled with a card that actually fits Intrigue.

Balance issues aside, there are plenty of "choice" cards that don't fit "hybrids and dealing with victory cards" in Intrigue. Pawn. Steward. Torturer... especially when "choices" were called out by LastfootNote as a theme for this round I don't really get how you can dock the card there.

Shrine
Types: Action – Victory
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Choose one: trash a card from your hand; or +1 Card.
Worth 2 VP.

Kind of like Landlord, a Victory card that does something special. It's astounding how many votes Landlord got and how few Shrine got. I preferred this over Landlord and still didn't vote for it.

Because Landlord is an interesting alt-VP where as this is just a shitty action with 2 VP slapped on to make it worth more and is as such, super boring. There is no real reason for this to be a victory card, other than "oh its intrigue and I wanted a hybrid"

[ChocophileBenj]

Okay, now let's tell some truths I hold for myself too long...

I hate many of the winners of the previous contest and this one, especially Almoner, Aqua Vitae and Diviner.
But maybe it's my fault, maybe I'm just unable to understand what makes a good card.

[cluckyb]

Calm down dude

a) This round isn't even over yet. We're waiting on Lastfootnote to provide instruction on what the second round of voting is going to look like

b) I never said the card was shitty, I said the action was. The card is boring because it gains nothing from being a hybrid victory card. Nobles already fills the space of a shitty action made good by tacking on VPs to it.

c) No one knows who makes each card. No one is personally attacking anyone when they discuss the cards. They are discussing the cards themselves. If you can't take criticism of your cards / handle people not voting for your cards, you shouldn't be entering the contest.

[ChocophileBenj]

Well, in fact I didn't expect Shrine to win and I agree the VP came out with no real reason. But still... zero votes...

And I'm truly surprised of some winners of some previous cards. But I didn't tell, because... I thought people were right and I was wrong. But now I think this has gone too far... I'm no more able to hold it for me.

[KingZog3]

Well, in fact I didn't expect Shrine to win and I agree the VP came out with no real reason. But still... zero votes...

And I'm truly surprised of some winners of some previous cards. But I didn't tell, because... I thought people were right and I was wrong. But now I think this has gone too far... I'm no more able to hold it for me.

Shrine has 2 votes. You have to realize that your cards seem better to you. I think my card is great, but it's a skill to know that sometimes you didn't make the best card ever, and mine isn't super amazing. Shrine is a trasher that plays the same as any normal trasher (Identical to Forager pretty much) that deosn't hurt your deck after you don't need it anymore. Oh yeah, and with some VP under it. Take the VP out and the card looks dull. It's plain, and the VP makes it look more complex when it isn't.

Also, there are other cards with no votes. And you should know that those are the cards with major problems.

I made Wedding (Everyone bashes the name, but the name is unimportant. It can be changed. Besides I'm reading Game of Thrones, so Wedding seems like attack to me ) and it got 6 votes, but it also has a trash different amount of cards for different effects mechanic. It may not be super interesting, and there are for sure more interesting cards in the contest, but I thought at least it's something that I haven't seen done before.

[rinkworks]

Okay, now let's tell some truths I hold for myself too long...

You probably should have held onto those truths.  To my eye, this post isn't so much about constructive criticism as the venting of a poor loser.  If this was not your intent, feel free to correct me; either way, I would encourage you to reconsider the parts of your post that perhaps come off too personally or aggressively.  I'm sure we'd all like to see people being encouraged to submit their ideas here, not greeting their efforts with degrees of hatred on a scale.  In the end, different people are going to have different opinions about what works and what doesn't, what's fun and what isn't.  We have to respect that.

[jackelfrink]

.....I'm sure we'd all like to see people being encouraged to submit their ideas here.....

I told myself after the last one of these that I would stop posting here and just lurk. But since 'breaking the silence' seems to be the thing to do in this thread .....

No. No we don't.

What people here want, at its core, is debate. They want deliberation and sparing. Its like a sword fight. To challenge their skill and ability as a debater against the skill and ability of some other debater. The cards themselves are practically beside the point, used only as the field of battle upon witch the debate can be held.

Its why I had to stop posting. I could never wrap my head around the notion that bickering with people was ~fun~. I see others throwing themselves into the dispute with all the reckless abandon of guys playing paintball and not actually caring about who does or does not capture the flag as long as they get the thrill of shooting at each other.

This is also why reminders of "the card will likely go through balancing" never stick. People will easily latch on to complaining that they do not like the name of the card or that it is too strong to cost $3. That's because the core mechanic is likely fine but arguing is so fun they need to find something to argue about. Because the back and forth sparing is what they take the most joy in.

Submitting new ideas here is not what is encouraged or what people want to see encouraged. Jumping into the thick of the fray is what is encouraged and what people want to see encouraged.