RedRook | 2015-09-21 14:54:09 |
Hello, all, RedRook here! I've been out of class creation for some time now, but I thought I'd give it a try again. I'm a bit out of practice so I'll need all the assistance I can get on this one! I encourage you to leave any feedback, advice, suggestions, or comments below. Thank you! I've always been intrigued by Steampunk art & accessories & so I thought I'd create a Steampunk class. So here's the Tinkerer Class! It's a little similar to my old Hexist class ( http://www.spectromancer.com/forum.cgi#pageid=2973) if you remember it. Though the general strategy play, aim, & feel of the class is much different. The Tinkerer Class: ( *Tinkerbomb Cost: 0 Attack: 0 Life: 5; Each turn Tinkerbomb losses 1 Life; when Tinkerbomb dies it deals 3 damage to its owner.) --- Tinker Cost: 1 Spell; Place a Tinkerbomb* in target open opponent slot. Clockwork Spider Cost: 2 Attack: 4 Life: 11; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in the opposite slot if that slot is not occupied; when Clockwork Spider kills an opposing creature Clockwork Spider attacks again. Tripwire Cost: 3 Spell; Deals X+3 damage (X = caster's Tinker power) to all opponent creatures. Clockwork Sentry Cost: 4 Attack: 4 Life: 22; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot; when dies places a Tinkerbomb* in random open opponent slot. Clockwork Soldier Cost: 5 Attack: 4 Life: 30; Clockwork Soldier receives a +1 for each Tinkerbomb* in play. Clockwork Automaton Cost: 6 Attack: 5 Life: 29; At the end of its owner's turn Clockwork Automaton places a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot. Clockwork Queen Cost: 7 Attack: 7 Life: 32; When summoned kills all opponent Tinkerbombs* in play; while Clockwork Queen is in play all Tinkerbombs deal an additional +3 damage to the opponent. Clockwork Dragon Cost: 8 Attack: 6 Life: 49; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in all open opponent slots; Clockwork Dragon attacks in the turn it is summoned. Notes: A Tinkerbomb acts just like a creature, only it is a creature that you place on your opponent's side of the board. It takes up a slot, & deals damage to the opponent when it dies. I am a little concerned about the overall balance of the cards & class - I'm sure the cards need some work. In my thinking the cards should be a little weaker in comparison to other special cards due to that fact that they mess with the opponent's board significantly - but of just how much weaker they need to be I am uncertain. Thank you for taking the time to read & review this class. Your time & effort are very much appreciated. Thank you! Sinist | 2015-09-21 15:33:12 |
Great concept, RedRook! Atmosphere-fitting and not too similiar to mechanic. Always loved steampunk However almost all cards are very weak. And too dependent on bombs. Messing with enem,y board just is not worth it, imho. And one carefully placed acidic rain (for example) would bury all hopes of tinkerer 1. Better to avoid fire 1... Well, dealing 3 dmg to opponent for 1 special mana and turn is not feasible at all, aside from some weird combinations with earth 5 (and even it would not work well). I recommend to buff tinkerbomb. A lot. 2. So spider will block himself access to opponents body Double attack does nothing but compensate loss of tempo because of summoned bomb, and after that he will not last anyway - too little hp... 3. Now if tripwire did deal 2X damage to enemy creatures, it would be really worth its cost (or maybe even cost 4). Right now though... totally useless 4. Better than spider but still weak stats. And random element in overall non-random class wont be liked by some players 5. Too hard to reach decent attack - it would require immense investements of mana and turns in bombs (which btw prevents you from playing sweeps unless you want to make soldier even weaker) 6. See 4 7. Now thats interesting, even strong creature. But again, hard to combine with other cards to achieve good effect because 7 special mana is a lot 8. Too hot-and-cold, just like all other mass-board-filling-creatures spells and creatures. Besides, imho protection fits tinkerer better than speed. How about damage reduction to himself?
Wavelength | 2015-09-21 16:55:42 |
Step by step, heart to heart Left right left, we all fall down like toy soldiers
Well this is an interesting class. I'm probably one to undervalue direct damage a bit, so I see the value of the Tinkerbombs mostly as a way to create void slots or prevent the opponent from unleashing a full board of (real) creatures on you. Since the Tinkerbomb will last 5 turns unless you decide to kill it or your opponent uses a sweep, these kinds of uses will represent more than just an edge case - they will be a common strategic use for the bombs, which I rather like.
I like the naming conventions you used; it makes the class feel aesthetically coherent.
My general opinion on this class' balance is that most of the cards are in a good place right now without any additional changes, with 4 and 5 as the only cards that stand out as particularly weak.
Two other random notes - first of all, I'm picturing these cards as cute mechanical things that would be at home in the Game of Thrones opening sequence, which is maybe different than what you have in mind, but it endlessly amuses me. Secondly, Tinkerbomb is going to be a really interesting dynamic against a Sorcerer with Steal Essence.
1) I don't think it's going to see a lot of use, but it's probably a fair card. Its best-case scenarios would be to set up an early E5 void slot in a game where you have exceptional healing, or to seal the sixth and final slot when the board is already nearly full.
2) Well this is some neat design! It blows up the bomb it creates on its first attack, and then gets its normal attack through, for 7 damage. I didn't realize this at first, and was going to advise giving it much more life, but... yeah, with such spike potential, it's probably in a good place as it is. Very cool card.
3) I'm torn about this. In general I think that cheap, spammable, scalable spells like this aren't good for the game. But I'm trying to figure out cases where this card would be either gamebreaking or useless, and I can't really come up with anything. At 3 total mana the 6 damage is pretty weak (compare Flame Wave at cost 6 versus and effective cost of just 5.25) but it's more spammable than the basics. At 10 total mana the 13 damage is very strong but even then it doesn't feel so far beyond Divine Justice or Cursed Fog to warrant screaming and running the other way. My instinct is that it would be a "fairer" card at Cost 4 and 5 + X damage, but see what some of the others say. In any case, I disagree with Sinist's suggestion for two-times scaling.
4) Although you're eventually scoring 6 direct damage over the lifetime of this card, that's still less than Spider's quick 7 and a 4/22 creature is really weak for a Special 4. Moreover, the random nature of this card's bomb placement makes it hard to use strategically and doesn't really belong in a non-random class (as Sinist mentioned). So I'd recommend some or all of the following: increase the stats, move to Cost 3, and/or figure out a good, strategic way to target the bombs. Perhaps it will place the bombs across from your unblocked creature with the lowest life (defaulting to the leftmost slot if you have no unblocked creatures)?
5) I assume "a +1" means +1 attack. However, outside of some wacky long games where you can build up 13 mana for T8 -> T5 or T4 -> T4 -> T5, this card is going to be like... a 5/30 with no other special ability. Compare to Death Griffin, Keeper of Death, or Priestess of Moments as examples of "big body" cards with better stats and abilities. One route you can go is to raise its base attack by one and let it place a Tinkerbomb when summoned. Another route is to give it much more life (3/44 sounds good) and have its attack permanently increase by 1 every time a Tinkerbomb dies.
6) Looks good. I don't have as much of an issue with the random placement here as I did on Sentry, because you are consistently dropping one every turn and if you can get him to survive long enough, you are almost guaranteed to fill the opponent's board anyhow. I'm trying to estimate its average lifespan - maybe 4 turns? This makes it feel a bit expensive compared to Spectral Assassin, so maybe give it 2-3 extra HP to compensate.
7) As I saw this class coming together I was really hoping for a card that improved the bombs' damage... and here it is! Well done. The balance looks good to me.
8) I actually like the concept a lot here. However, the potential for abuse with mass destruction (even one's own mass destruction) is probably too high. Perhaps summoning Tinkerbombs into four random empty opponent slots could remove the worst of these abuse cases while preserving its general strategic use? Comparing the stats and abilities to Steam Tank, I think the balance is fair.
amorphism | 2015-09-21 22:39:22 |
Hello RedRook! I really like the aspect of limiting the board control of your opponent with this class, so concept wise you got a great idea. It will be interesting to see how it'll play out with a class like Sorcerer that doesn't play with creatures. It will surely give a board-reliant class like Forest/Golem (or even Goblin) a pain in the ass. A good tinkerer will likely be able to semi-control where a golem or rabbit will be placed and use it to his/her benefit. Theme-wise I see a big problem, and I actually in a disagreement with Wavelength about the naming convention, in my opinion it makes for very boring names and reduce the flavor substantially. Secondly, I just don't see where's the "punk" in the steampunk here - steampunk deals with much more than clockworks machinery, it has post-apocalyptic streak, airships (aka zeppelins) and blends with retro-futuristic motifs, so using Clockwork in almost every name is lackluster. Just compare it with any other class and you'll see how much variety in names they pull off. So my review is going to be focused on flavor as much as on of application. 1) Tinker - pretty straight forward, but for something that takes a turn and a mana it's just too weak like Sinist said. I think it needs a boost. Maybe - "Deal 1 damage to all bombs in play, then place a Tinkerbomb* in target open opponent slot". At least now it advances the destruction of bombs and gives more dynamic with other class cards. 2) Clockwork Spider - great card, didn't notice the nice interaction with the bomb that WL pointed out. Good design. 3) Tripwire - The name doesn't fit with what it does currently. Tripwire works when there's movement, like an attack (wiki - a passive triggering mechanism). So I have an issue with the name, also it's so ordinary, just a "deal X" damage spell - we have a lot of those already. I would completely replace this card, but I currently don't have an idea for it. 4) Clockwork Sentry - Like I've said, I'm going to focus on flavor. What's the "Sentry" in this card? Isn't a sentry like a defensive structure/creature? Since I don't see how it fits thematically I'll just drop my alternative idea, which is something I think can make your entire class more adaptable, interesting and steampunk-y: Bomb upgrades! Why not make the bombs themselves a source for strategy and power? Bomb Designer - 5/25: When summoned/dies replaces the bomb with the most life (if there's none, it creates one, left to right) with "Smart Bomb"* Smart Bomb (cost 0) - 0/7: Each turn deals 5 damage to adjacent creatures and loses 1 life. When it dies deals 5 damage to owner. 5) Clockwork Soldier- I think it's safe to lose the "Clockwork" by this point. I'm going to suggest the "punk" theme here, going with post-apocalypse future "Steambiker" / "Apocalyptic Raider" / "Scraps Hunter" (I'm imagining Mad Max now). In terms of playability it's kinda weak and that small interaction with bombs isn't enough to make it playable. How about enhancing the interaction with exploding bombs? Example: "Scraps Hunter" - 4/34: Whenever a bomb dies, Scrap Hunter gets +1 to attack permanently and attacks immediately. 6) Clockwork Automaton - The name is redundant, I think Automaton already suggests it's a (clockwork) machine. Stats too low for 6 special mana investment. Effect is just okay, doesn't shine. I'll bump it to 32 HP and lower it attack by 1 (because a creature generator doesn't seem like an offensive creature to me). 7) Clockwork Queen - again, not a name that fits thematically with steampunk. Since it's upgrading your bombs, I would suggest a name like "Architect". " Bomb Architect" or " Architect of Explosives" maybe? I like the effect and the upgrade mechanic.
8) Clockwork Dragon - I don't think it's too hot or cold, as Sinist suggested, in an average game it will drops 3 useless cards on the opposite board that are going to limit your opponent options creature-wise and guarantee ~9 damage. However, I'm not sure it's an influential enough card for 8 class mana and I do agree with Sinist about speed not fitting here. I'll stick with my suggestion of making bombs more potent and provide an alternative: Clockwork Dragon - Attack: 7 Life: 50; When summoned places 3 Tinkerbomb* in random open opponent slots; all bombs* also deals 5 damage to owner creatures when they explode. (note: smart bombs too)
This review is for the version below.
(*Tinkerbomb Cost: 0 Attack: 0 Life: 5; Each turn Tinkerbomb losses 1 Life; when Tinkerbomb dies it deals 3 damage to its owner.)
---
Tinker Cost: 1 Spell; Place a Tinkerbomb* in target open opponent slot.
Clockwork Spider
Cost: 2 Attack: 4 Life: 11; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in the
opposite slot if that slot is not occupied; when Clockwork Spider kills
an opposing creature Clockwork Spider attacks again.
Tripwire Cost: 3 Spell; Deals X+3 damage (X = caster's Tinker power) to all opponent creatures.
Clockwork Sentry Cost:
4 Attack: 4 Life: 22; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in a random
open opponent slot; when dies places a Tinkerbomb* in random open
opponent slot.
Clockwork Soldier Cost: 5 Attack: 4 Life: 30; Clockwork Soldier receives a +1 for each Tinkerbomb* in play.
Clockwork Automaton
Cost: 6 Attack: 5 Life: 29; At the end of its owner's turn Clockwork
Automaton places a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot.
Clockwork Queen
Cost: 7 Attack: 7 Life: 32; When summoned kills all opponent
Tinkerbombs* in play; while Clockwork Queen is in play all Tinkerbombs
deal an additional +3 damage to the opponent.
Clockwork Dragon
Cost: 8 Attack: 6 Life: 49; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in all
open opponent slots; Clockwork Dragon attacks in the turn it is
summoned.
Sinist | 2015-09-21 22:48:09 |
Also, I would compare clockwork spider with time 2 which adds direct damage as well. From this PoV spider looks really weak...
Modified by Sinist on 2015-09-21 22:49:46 RedRook | 2015-09-23 14:52:08 |
Thank you all very much for your time & reviews! It seems there is a good amount of differing opinions, I will have a lot to think about before posting an updated version. Sinist: I'm really glad you like the concept! It seems I may have overestimated the usefulness of of the Tinkerbomb, by making the creatures too weak in compensation. A general buff may be in order to balance out the class overall, judging by your review. I quite like my little Clockwork Spider! But just for you, I might add a few hit points to the little guy. & according you, Time 2 is the strongest slot 2 card, so everything will seem weaker compared to it I'm glad you like Clockwork Queen though, it is my favourite card in this set. Nice picture by the way!
Wavelength: "Wont you come out and play with me" Haha! Now that's a blast from the past! I haven't heard that song in ages! I'm pleased that you appreciate the class design & theme. I am of the same mind as you by assessing that the main benefit of the Tinkerbomb is to deny the opponent the opportunity to use those slots in which the bomb resides - they can't summon a creature! You can use this to your great advantage by blocking out certain plays the opponent might have in mind. You can also create semi-void slots with bombs as well.
amorphism: Thank you for your review - not only of the class, but of the names as well. I guess I should have said: "inspired by steampunk" rather than stating that this is a steampunk class. I don't think a Mad Max class could thematically fit well in Spectromancer, so I chose a more lighthearted approach. It's a Tinkerer not a wasteland warrior! But I do see your point. I will consider changing a few of the names to make the class a little more flashy. I think your Bomb Upgrades idea is pretty cool. That is not the direction I was going, but it is a feasible concept; I would encourage you to design your own class around this theme, I'd like to see what you come up with.
Again, thank you all for taking the time to review this class, I greatly appreciate it! I will take all of your advice & do my best to develop an updated class within the next few days. Thank you!
Wavelength | 2015-09-24 17:00:36 |
Just a couple thoughts on amorphism's suggested reworks:
I like the idea of "Smart Bombs" a lot. I'm not sure that "Bomb Designer" and its very inflexible way of choosing which bomb to upgrade is great, and the 5 damage to adjacent creatures every turn for up to 7 turns is way too much. But I think the Smart Bomb idea has a lot of potential, perhaps to be integrated into another card in the class, or to an improved Clockwork Sentry.
Scraps Hunter is pretty cool and is kind of like the next logical evolution to the second idea I had for improving Clockwork Soldier. Whether you want the long-term big body that comes with a higher life total, or the short-term rush pressure that comes with the ability to immediately attack every time its attack grows, is a thematic choice for you to make. They are both worthwhile effects, I think.
The suggested rework to Clockwork Dragon is somewhat interesting but it will be way too powerful.
BTW, the differing opinions on "Tinker" really reflect where everyone feels the value and balance points of the class lie. Where amorphism suggested having Tinker deal damage to all bombs currently in play as a possible buff, I feel this would be a nerf! It will trigger the direct damage quicker, but will also ease the void slot problem that Tinkerbombs present to the opponent. These contradictory opinions simply refect a difference in game philosophy and without seeing the class in action it's difficult to say who's right, or whether the damage/logjam effects are equal enough that we are both right.
amorphism | 2015-09-25 22:47:02 |
Thank you Wavelength. All the numeric data in my suggestions (as in stats, damage dealt and so forth) were mostly for the sake of example. It can be tweaked easily to prevent overpowering while maintaining the original idea which I'm glad to know you liked. (For example - with the Clockwork Dragon, making the bomb explosion less damaging for creature, like 3 or 4 per bomb, will keep the bombs potent but it won't go overboard). Since this class belongs to RedRook and she doesn't see it as fitting in how she envisioned the class (I guess I was too reliant on her steampunk description ) I can only make my own class, which might be too similar (i.e. maintaining the bomb idea is a key element) so I'm not sure I have the motivation, but we'll see. I like the idea of "Smart Bombs" a lot. I'm not sure that "Bomb Designer" and its very inflexible way of choosing which bomb to upgrade is great, and the 5 damage to adjacent creatures every turn for up to 7 turns is way too much. But I think the Smart Bomb idea has a lot of potential, perhaps to be integrated into another card in the class, or to an improved Clockwork Sentry.
The idea to upgrade the highest HP bomb has a reason behind it: a tinkerer will generally desire to get his/her bombs explode (even more so if you use my other suggested cards) so targeting a low hp will hinder that effect, it will also make the effect less random which I prefer (like Sinist), so it deepens the strategic impact of the class. In my view r andomness should be used when there's a strong flavor behind it (Chaos, Goblins) to limit the power of an effect or to reduce number of clicks for elegance sake. As for the 5 damage per turn - see my comment above (it can be changed to 4 dmg = 28 total, or make the bomb with 6 hp = 24 total and so forth). BTW, the differing opinions on "Tinker" really reflect where everyone feels the value and balance points of the class lie. Where amorphism suggested having Tinker deal damage to all bombs currently in play as a possible buff, I feel this would be a nerf! It will trigger the direct damage quicker, but will also ease the void slot problem that Tinkerbombs present to the opponent. These contradictory opinions simply refect a difference in game philosophy and without seeing the class in action it's difficult to say who's right, or whether the damage/logjam effects are equal enough that we are both right. Sure, it's a nerf with the current iteration of the class. My suggested reworks (Bomb Designer, Scraps Hunter and Clockwork Dragon) make the dynamic mostly a buff. You'll still get void slots but less. If the class would be tweaked sufficiently you might end up with a great balance of limiting board control (void slots) AND bomb potency that the tinkerer can push for depending on the situation - so it doesn't have to be contradictory, but a strength! :) ---- In my previous post I suggested a complete redesign of Tripwire, so here's my suggestion, keeping it a spell but again using the bombs as anchors for mischief. Pyrotechnics - cost 3, spell: Summon a Flash Bomb in target slot, then stun all creatures adjacent to it. Flash Bomb - 0/5, each turn stuns 1 of its adjacent creatures (random if there are 2), and loses 1 health. When dies stuns creatures adjacent to it. I'm making conscious decision to add diversity to the bomb arsenal with the addition of these bombs, just dealing damage is boring, now there's a rush counter tool. With this spell you will always have either a smart or a flash bomb along with your regular bombs. It might be more potent with this addition - "each turn stuns 1 of its adjacent creatures with the highest attack" - but maybe it's too OP. Modified by amorphism on 2015-09-25 22:48:27 RedRook | 2015-09-26 00:43:18 |
Since this class belongs to RedRook and she doesn't see it as fitting in how she envisioned the class (I guess I was too reliant on her steampunk description ) I can only make my own class, which might be too similar (i.e. maintaining the bomb idea is a key element) so I'm not sure I have the motivation, but we'll see.
I would really like to see you build your own class around the Bombs as you envision it - you have some really solid ideas that could make for a very interesting class. I see nothing wrong with your Bomb Upgrades, they are just more complex than I had in mind - but they do add flavour & variety to the class that it perhaps lacks at present. I thank you for your respect. If you decide to create your own class on the Bomb theme, you have my blessing
Modified by RedRook on 2015-09-26 00:46:58 RedRook | 2015-09-29 19:12:52 |
After much consideration, I have developed the second draft of the Tinkerer class. Again, thank you all for your advice & time! It is greatly appreciated. Please feel free to leave your comments on this draft of the class below. Thank you. Tinkerer Class; Draft II: Tinkerbomb* Cost: 0 Attack: 0 Life: 5; Each turn Tinkerbomb losses 1 Life; when Tinkerbomb dies it deals 3 damage to its owner.) --- Tinker Cost: 1 Spell; Place a Tinkerbimb* in target open opponent slot. Clockwork Spider Cost: 2 Attack: 4 Life: 13; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in the opposite slot if that slot is not occupied; when Clockwork Spider kills an opposing creature Clockwork Spider attacks again. Clockwork Falcon Cost: 3 Attack: 5 Life: 13; When summoned Clockwork Falcon places a Tinkerbomb* in the rightmost open opponent slot; when dies places a Tinkerbomb* in the leftmost open opponent slot. Scatterbomb Cost: 4 Spell; Deals 8 damage to all opponent creatures; for each creature that dies from this spell, place a Tinkerbomb* in the sot that that creature occupied. Steam Soldier Cost: 5 Attack: 3 Life: 37; Each time an opponent Tinkerbomb* dies, Steam Soldier's attack in increased by +1 permanently. Automaton Cost: 6 Attack: 5 Life: 35; At the end of its owner's turn Automaton places a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot. Clockwork Queen Cost: 7 Attack: 7 Life: 32; When summoned kills all opponent Tinkerbombs* in play; while Clockwork Queen is in play all Tinkerbombs deal an additional +3 damage to the opponent. Steam Dragon Cost: 8 Attack: 7 Life: 40; Attacks when summoned; when summoned places a TInkerbomb* in three random open opponent slots; each time Steam Dragon kills an opposing creature Steam Dragon increases its owner's Tinker Power by 1. -- I've made a few rather big changes to the class in my mind. Please let me know how the class is looking now. Better or worse? Thank you. Modified by RedRook on 2015-10-01 14:41:26
Wavelength | 2015-09-29 21:30:08 |
Feedback on the new cards:
T-Bomb: No changes, which I'm glad about.
1) No changes. I think it was fine before, still fine.
2) It was fine at 4/11; it's probably still balanced okay at 4/13. Note that it can now survive a sweep plus an attack from a mana gainer.
3) This guy needs more life, maybe 5/17. Compare to Vindictive Raccoon, which in an average scenario will be able to put out about the same amount of direct damage (6) and provides nearly as much creature value as a 4/14... now consider that Forest mana is only worth 1.00x regular mana. :-)
4) I love the new effect; it could set up some really cool scenarios. It's balanced well for general use. I wonder whether it might be broken in conjunction with 6 or 8, since you can use the sweep to kill Tinkerbombs thus replacing them with more Tinkerbombs. I love that this mechanic exists and I wouldn't want it to be removed completely, I just wonder whether it might be too powerful in those edge cases.
5) I obviously like the new design/effect, but I think the stats for this card should be 3/44.
6) My instinct is that it will be slightly overpowered at 35 life. I also see you got rid of "clockwork" from this one. :-)
7) No changes. As this was one of the best cards in the first draft, that's good.
8) I like the new mechanics and how they all work together. I'm having a tough time marking the balance. In direct comparison, it seems like it's more powerful than Time Dragon (it would normally take more than a turn to get 3 T-bombs down), but less powerful and reliable than Ancient Lich. These both might be true in a vacuum, but the interactions with the rest of the class can make a card more or less powerful than you'd assume. So my instinct is that this card is a bit too powerful, but I'm not at all confident in my assessment.
Overall, I think the class is looking very good right now!
RedRook | 2015-10-01 14:40:43 |
Feedback on the new cards:
T-Bomb: No changes, which I'm glad about.
1) No changes. I think it was fine before, still fine.
2) It was fine at 4/11; it's probably still balanced okay at 4/13. Note that it can now survive a sweep plus an attack from a mana gainer.
3) This guy needs more life, maybe 5/17. Compare to Vindictive Raccoon, which in an average scenario will be able to put out about the same amount of direct damage (6) and provides nearly as much creature value as a 4/14... now consider that Forest mana is only worth 1.00x regular mana. :-)
4) I love the new effect; it could set up some really cool scenarios. It's balanced well for general use. I wonder whether it might be broken in conjunction with 6 or 8, since you can use the sweep to kill Tinkerbombs thus replacing them with more Tinkerbombs. I love that this mechanic exists and I wouldn't want it to be removed completely, I just wonder whether it might be too powerful in those edge cases.
5) I obviously like the new design/effect, but I think the stats for this card should be 3/44.
6) My instinct is that it will be slightly overpowered at 35 life. I also see you got rid of "clockwork" from this one. :-)
7) No changes. As this was one of the best cards in the first draft, that's good.
8) I like the new mechanics and how they all work together. I'm having a tough time marking the balance. In direct comparison, it seems like it's more powerful than Time Dragon (it would normally take more than a turn to get 3 T-bombs down), but less powerful and reliable than Ancient Lich. These both might be true in a vacuum, but the interactions with the rest of the class can make a card more or less powerful than you'd assume. So my instinct is that this card is a bit too powerful, but I'm not at all confident in my assessment.
Overall, I think the class is looking very good right now! Thank you very much for your feedback on the new class draft, Wavelength! I appreciate it very much. 1. I believe this card is an essential keystone to the class, even though it may not see a great amount of use. 2. My first in instinct was to set it at 12 life for this draft, for the reason of sweep+mana gen. But, since the Spider places a bomb opposite itself when summoned, I didn't think too much about a mana generator being used to block it. 3. I thought the same thing - the life was too low. But I was uncertain how much life was appropriate since it is a low-cost creature with 5 attack. Higher life is easily done! 4. Really glad you like the new spell effect! It has more flavour than the older (simpler) effect. I think it adds a nice unique spell to the class & gives it some flash. I was concerned about your very thought about killing bombs & thus replacing bomb with fresh ones. As odd as it might sound, I found myself looking to Chaotic Wave for a balancing reference. I think it might be ok where it is now, since to pull off such a combo as with 6 or 8 would require a good amount of mana & preparation. But I'm not 100% confident in it myself. 5. I was concerned about such a high amount of life in conjunction with this new draft, thinking of just how often you will have bombs out & how often they will die, bolstering Soldier's attack. But since it is a cost 5... perhaps it does need to be higher life. 6. Perhaps I did give it a little too much life. The name was redundant :) 7.
8. That may be true - it could be a tad too powerful when examined alongside the rest of the class. I'm glad that you like the new mechanics - I was uncertain as to whether the mana booting would really fit into the class or not. I was also worried that it might have too much going on: three effects rolled into one. I considered dropping the "attacks when summoned" aspect of the card. What do you think?
Wavelength | 2015-10-02 04:45:24 |
Thank you very much for your feedback on the new class draft, Wavelength! I appreciate it very much.
4. Really glad you like the new spell effect! It has more flavour than the older (simpler) effect. I think it adds a nice unique spell to the class & gives it some flash. I was concerned about your very thought about killing bombs & thus replacing bomb with fresh ones. As odd as it might sound, I found myself looking to Chaotic Wave for a balancing reference. I think it might be ok where it is now, since to pull off such a combo as with 6 or 8 would require a good amount of mana & preparation. But I'm not 100% confident in it myself.
5. I was concerned about such a high amount of life in conjunction with this new draft, thinking of just how often you will have bombs out & how often they will die, bolstering Soldier's attack. But since it is a cost 5... perhaps it does need to be higher life.
8. That may be true - it could be a tad too powerful when examined alongside the rest of the class. I'm glad that you like the new mechanics - I was uncertain as to whether the mana booting would really fit into the class or not. I was also worried that it might have too much going on: three effects rolled into one. I considered dropping the "attacks when summoned" aspect of the card. What do you think?
You're very welcome! 4) Thinking about it some more, I guess if you're blowing up several bombs, you probably aren't doing too much creature damage to the opponent's "real" creatures. Yeah, it's probably okay. 5) I do think it needs higher life. The best direct comparison you can make to a "pure board presence" card would be Death Falcon - a 7/45 Cost 5. I can't see Steam Soldier's average attack over its lifetime being greater than 7 in too many circumstances, so I think a boost to similar life as DF is safe. 8) Like I said I'm having a hard time getting a good read on this card's balance. "Attacks when summoned" is probably the effect I'd drop if something needs to be dropped... but I'm really not confident in saying that's necessary. See what other feedback you get about this version of the card.
RedRook | 2015-10-17 22:06:34 |
After some thought, here is the third draft of the Tinkerer Class. Thank you all for your assistance, advice, & time. I'm sure there is still some work to be done on this class, if you have any additional advice on this draft, any suggestions, please leave them below - I would be happy to read any comments. Thank you. Tinkerer Class; Draft III:
Tinkerbomb* Cost: 0
Attack: 0 Life: 5; Each turn Tinkerbomb losses 1 Life; when
Tinkerbomb dies it deals 3 damage to its owner.)
---
Tinker
Cost: 1 Spell; Place a Tinkerbimb* in target open opponent
slot.
Clockwork Spider Cost: 2 Attack: 4 Life:
13; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in the opposite slot if that
slot is not occupied; when Clockwork Spider kills an opposing
creature Clockwork Spider attacks again.
Clockwork
Falcon Cost: 3 Attack: 5 Life: 17; When summoned Clockwork
Falcon places a Tinkerbomb* in the rightmost open opponent slot; when
dies places a Tinkerbomb* in the leftmost open opponent
slot.
Scatterbomb Cost: 4 Spell; Deals 8 damage
to all opponent creatures; for each creature that dies from this
spell, place a Tinkerbomb* in the sot that that creature
occupied.
Steam Soldier Cost: 5 Attack: 3
Life: 44; Each time an opponent Tinkerbomb* dies, Steam Soldier's
attack in increased by +1 permanently.
Automaton
Cost: 6 Attack: 5 Life: 31; At the end of its owner's turn Automaton
places a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot.
Clockwork
Queen Cost: 7 Attack: 7 Life: 32; When summoned kills all
opponent Tinkerbombs* in play; while Clockwork Queen is in play all
Tinkerbombs deal an additional +3 damage to the opponent.
Steam
Dragon Cost: 8 Attack: 7 Life: 40; Attacks when summoned;
when summoned places a TInkerbomb* in three random open opponent
slots; each time Steam Dragon kills an opposing creature Steam Dragon
increases its owner's Tinker Power by 1.
Modified by RedRook on 2015-10-17 22:07:00 CyberneticPony | 2015-10-23 10:50:47 |
After some thought, here is the third draft of the Tinkerer Class. Thank you all for your assistance, advice, & time. I'm sure there is still some work to be done on this class, if you have any additional advice on this draft, any suggestions, please leave them below - I would be happy to read any comments. Thank you.
Tinkerer Class; Draft III:
Tinkerbomb* Cost: 0Attack: 0 Life: 5; Each turn Tinkerbomb losses 1 Life; whenTinkerbomb dies it deals 3 damage to its owner.)
---
TinkerCost: 1 Spell; Place a Tinkerbimb* in target open opponentslot.
Clockwork Spider Cost: 2 Attack: 4 Life:13; When summoned places a Tinkerbomb* in the opposite slot if thatslot is not occupied; when Clockwork Spider kills an opposingcreature Clockwork Spider attacks again.
ClockworkFalcon Cost: 3 Attack: 5 Life: 17; When summoned ClockworkFalcon places a Tinkerbomb* in the rightmost open opponent slot; whendies places a Tinkerbomb* in the leftmost open opponentslot.
Scatterbomb Cost: 4 Spell; Deals 8 damageto all opponent creatures; for each creature that dies from thisspell, place a Tinkerbomb* in the sot that that creatureoccupied.
Steam Soldier Cost: 5 Attack: 3Life: 44; Each time an opponent Tinkerbomb* dies, Steam Soldier'sattack in increased by +1 permanently.
AutomatonCost: 6 Attack: 5 Life: 31; At the end of its owner's turn Automatonplaces a Tinkerbomb* in a random open opponent slot.
ClockworkQueen Cost: 7 Attack: 7 Life: 32; When summoned kills allopponent Tinkerbombs* in play; while Clockwork Queen is in play allTinkerbombs deal an additional +3 damage to the opponent.
SteamDragon Cost: 8 Attack: 7 Life: 40; Attacks when summoned;when summoned places a TInkerbomb* in three random open opponentslots; each time Steam Dragon kills an opposing creature Steam Dragonincreases its owner's Tinker Power by 1.
I really like the class concept and I'll be more focused on balance since the flavour is spot on! Tinkerbomb - Does it lose the life at the start or end of the opponent's turn. You need to specify this, it's pretty important. Tinker - 1 special mana and a turn for 3 effective damage? It can block a slot but it's not going to do so for long! I figure this card is fine but it should cost 0 so that it's more playable.
Clockwork Spider - This card is fine but ironically placing the tinkerbomb makes it weaker on its initial attack, and it mostly seems to operate well on synergy; but synergy won't be created easily off a card that costs 2 mana and requires specific timing. I think it needs a slight increase in attack (to 5) to compensate for its self-blocking.
Clockwork Falcon - I like this card, it's pretty aggressive!
Scatterbomb - I'd tone it up 1 to make it inline with other sweeps; the difference between 8 and 9 is actually very significant.
Steam Soldier - Too reliant on other tinkerer cards because it does not provide a tinkerbomb for its own effect, meaning it's essentially hard to justify it for 5 on such a low base attack. I'd tone the attack up to 4, because the difference between 3 and 4 attack is also pretty significant. If possible I'd also maybe do a reordering and put this somewhere lower down with weaker stats. Maybe Falcon should come up here with stronger stats? Hard to tell, but this card I think needs the most work.
Automaton - Bread-and-butter and a really good card. I'd tone up the attack by 1 to bring it in line with other 6 costs; especially because of the random chance of the self-blocking principle.
Clockwork Queen - Love it! Does the 2nd effect only proc AFTER the initial killing? If so, I think that's a good safety mechanism.
Steam Dragon - Also love this card; I think it's a blowout on an open board and that is a great mechanic for an 8 cost! RedRook | 2015-10-28 20:38:25 |
I really like the class concept and I'll be more focused on balance since the flavour is spot on!
Tinkerbomb - Does it lose the life at the start or end of the opponent's turn. You need to specify this, it's pretty important.
Tinker - 1 special mana and a turn for 3 effective damage? It can block a slot but it's not going to do so for long! I figure this card is fine but it should cost 0 so that it's more playable.
Clockwork Spider - This card is fine but ironically placing the tinkerbomb makes it weaker on its initial attack, and it mostly seems to operate well on synergy; but synergy won't be created easily off a card that costs 2 mana and requires specific timing. I think it needs a slight increase in attack (to 5) to compensate for its self-blocking.
Clockwork Falcon - I like this card, it's pretty aggressive!
Scatterbomb - I'd tone it up 1 to make it inline with other sweeps; the difference between 8 and 9 is actually very significant.
Steam Soldier - Too reliant on other tinkerer cards because it does not provide a tinkerbomb for its own effect, meaning it's essentially hard to justify it for 5 on such a low base attack. I'd tone the attack up to 4, because the difference between 3 and 4 attack is also pretty significant. If possible I'd also maybe do a reordering and put this somewhere lower down with weaker stats. Maybe Falcon should come up here with stronger stats? Hard to tell, but this card I think needs the most work.
Automaton - Bread-and-butter and a really good card. I'd tone up the attack by 1 to bring it in line with other 6 costs; especially because of the random chance of the self-blocking principle.
Clockwork Queen - Love it! Does the 2nd effect only proc AFTER the initial killing? If so, I think that's a good safety mechanism.
Steam Dragon - Also love this card; I think it's a blowout on an open board and that is a great mechanic for an 8 cost!
Thank you very much for your critique, Pony. Tinkerbomb: That is a very important factor that slipped my mind altogether! The timing of the TInkerbomb's death makes all the difference. I will have to consider this fact... I would think that it should happen at the begging of the player's turn - the player with the bomb on their side, that is. The life loss would happen at the start of their turn, in left-to-right fashion along with other passive creature effects like Sea Sprite & Troll. Good catch, Pony! 1. It is rather puny in comparison to other cost 1's across the board, but I am under the impression that it is necessary at cost 1, for at cost 0 it is too easy to cast. Many of the Tinker creatures rely in some way or another on the Bombs, so it is essential for the class, but I think cost 0 is too low... Can we set at cost 0.5?
2. I'm not certain by what you mean by Clockwork Spider being weaker in its initial attack by it blocking itself. Could you please clerify a little more what you mean? The Spider will block himself but will get an "auto-kill" against its own Bomb (save scenarios with cards like Holy Guard or Master Healer), & then attack again, dealing 3 + 4 = 7 damage total on its first attack. Though Sinist also criticized the card (in the orignal draft) by saying it "does nothing but compensate for loss of tempo."
3. Thank you!
4. I'm still pretty comfortable where the damage is now - Wavelength actually thought it might be slightly overpowered, in certain instances. But I will consider your opinion.
5. You make a good point. Perhaps I could swap it with 4 & make some adjustments. It might not make a huge difference, but it might be enough to bring the class into a more balanced orientation.
6. Perhaps, but it is not supposed to be as directly powerful as other cards, what with the Bomb mechanics of the class. If the attack were raised, the life may need to be lowered slightly to compensate, & the job of the card is to live for a time, not act as a beefy attacker.
7. The abilities stand together - she kills them & increases the damage, so right out of the gate the Bombs she kills initially deal extra damage. I'm glad you like this card, it is a favourite of the set.
8. Thanks again!
I appreciate your taking the time to critique this class. Thanks!
RedRook | 2015-10-30 01:20:04 |
ClockworkFalcon Cost: 3 Attack: 5 Life: 17; When summoned Clockwork Falcon places a Tinkerbomb* in the rightmost open opponent slot; when dies places a Tinkerbomb* in the leftmost open opponentslot.
Thinking of this card a little more, I'm wondering if the placements should be switched - summons a Tinkerbomb in the leftmost slot when summoned & rightmost when dies. In most scenarios I come up with in my head, it would be more advantageous most often to place the initial Bomb in the leftmost slot rather than the right. Most of the more-important cards, like Master Healer, Lightning Cloud, or other position-sensitive cards, favour the left, so to best "throw off the opponent" with Tinkerbombs, it is best to summon them to the left, to prevent the opponent from getting the most out of their slot positions line-up. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? Perhaps I'm just obsessed with positioning & have gone mad!
Modified by RedRook on 2015-10-30 01:21:24 |