Blue Moon Fans

Allgemeiner Deckbau - Crystal cards in single games
Dearlove - Do 03 Mai, 2007 00:09
Titel: Crystal cards in single games
As the English forum is pretty empty, I thought I'd post here.

Crystal cards are intended for campaigns (multi-game sequences up to 5 crystals) but as all they do is modify winning margins, they aren't any use in a single game. Now for some people, who for one reason or another play single games, that makes them useless, and, worse, two of the four emissaries devalued.

Now is there anything we can do about this? Of course we are stepping outside the rules (and at this point I should stress this is just me) but in this case I'm prepared to consider doing so. I have three questions:

- Has anyone made any suggestions in this area before?
- Do you have any comments on the two suggestions below?
- If you try anything out, how did it work for you?

Now my view is that we want a minimal change, and that means treating crystal cards exactly as designed right up to the end of the game, at which point they act to modify the game score, but instead of adjusting the crystal score, to possibly change the winner. Here are two variants of that adjustment. One's mine, one's someone else's. I won't say which is which, and I'm coming round to thinking that the one that isn't mine is better. The key point of each is that in usual play a crystal card is sometimes worth a dragon, sometimes not. So in the single game variant, it must be worth less than one dragon. After all it is only 2 moons.

Version A

Short version: a crystal card is worth half a dragon.

Interpretation (where each line adds to those before it)

1 crystal card converts a 0 dragon loss (on cards) to a win.
2 crystal cards convert a 1 dragon loss to a 0 dragon win/loss (on cards)
3 crystal cards convert a 1 dragon loss to a win.

Version B

Short version: a crystal card is worth a dragon, but it can only attract dragons to the centre, not to you.

Interpretation (where each line adds to those before it)

1 crystal card converts a 1 dragon loss to a 0 dragon win/loss (on cards)
2 crystal cards convert a 2 dragon loss to a 0 dragon win/loss (on cards)
3 crystal cards convert a 3 dragon loss to a 0 dragon win/loss (on cards)

OK, over to you.

[Corrected error pointed out by Ladoik.]
Ladoik - Do 03 Mai, 2007 07:33
Titel:
As i know, ther were no suggestions in this Forum to Use the Crystallcards in other ways as it is Written in the Rules.

Both of the suggestions you made are intresting.
Crystallcards may perhaps be used in this way. Now there are useless to most of us.
First, is the third line in Version be correct? Ore should it be "3 crystal cards convert a 3 dragon loss o a 0 dragon win/loss (on cards)"

I don't know witch of this suggestion i like better.
Both Versions are quite usefull if you have the right Deck for it.
Version A maybe usefull in more diffrent Decks as Version B so i think Version A maybe the better way.
But Version B sounds easier to use... ahhhh, I don't know wich to prefer.
kilrah - Do 03 Mai, 2007 10:15
Titel:
I'd clearly prefer option a)

For b) one can only fore a draw which still isn't much of an incentive to play crystals IMHO.

I'd actually almost go for a) but with a value of a full dragon. Crystal cards aren't that easy to play even if they are somewhat cheap. Plus they can be gotten rid of fairly easily.
Lachwurzn - Do 03 Mai, 2007 11:04
Titel:
I might be totally wrong, but when looking at a number of recent tournament statistics which were based on simple "single-games" the most common results apparently are 4:0 and 1:0.

Based on this, Version A might be more attractive as nobody will include a heap of Crystal cards. But converting a "small loss" into a win certainly would be an incentive to think about slightly crystallizing professional decks...

And I bet a beer that Dearlove's idea was Version B. Wink



________________________
Jake was dying. His wife sat at the bedside.
He looked up and said weakly: "I have something I must confess."
"There's no need to," his wife replied.
"No," he insisted, "I want to die in peace. I slept with your sister, your best friend, her best friend, and your mother!"
"I know," she replied, "now just rest and let the poison work."
Primus Magicus - Do 03 Mai, 2007 11:12
Titel:
I dont like both versions:) Like the situation as it is now, dont want a shift in deckbuilding;)
Melty - Do 03 Mai, 2007 12:54
Titel:
right primus, i see no reason why to change the original crystal rules. even in a singe game we always counted the crystal result. so you can have a big win with 4:0 or just a small win, caused by crystal cards with 2:0 or less.
in addition every single game can (like the crystal games) be incudet in the elo-list, so in this case a crystal card also makes sense.

to face facts:
-1 dragon is worth exact 1 crystal
-1 dragon-buy-leadership costs 4 moons
-1 crystal card costs 2 moons
-a crystal card has the replace-icon and doesn't block your hand, the dragon-buy-leadership does

to conlude this: a crystal card is strong enough as it is.

about the 2 versions:
Version A:
in this version, instead of a swiftfist(donnerfaust)-buy-deck, where i spend 8 moons for 2 dragon-buy-leaderships, i can spend just 6 moons for 3 crystals and 2 moons for "who do you think you are"(für wen haltet ihr euch). for 0 moons chosed of affinity(auserwählte der jugend).
i could win the game like this, no matter how much dragons my opponent achieved.

VersionB:
this is the same rule as the official crystal-rule, if you play a single game with crystals
1 crystal card converts a 1 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
2 crystal cards convert a 2 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
3 crystal cards convert a 2 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
-but the winner always scores one crystal for winning the game and the loser never scores crystals.
Geirröd - Do 03 Mai, 2007 19:46
Titel:
Zitat:
And I bet a beer that Dearlove's idea was Version B

Be honest: You just read this on BGG! Razz

Anyway, i like Dearlove's idea better, for the reasons Lachwurzn described. That and the fact, that it's not just an simple dragon win, which is a constant advantage, but an advantage which scales dependent on how quick your deck is depleted and therefore making it a more interesting decision if to put crystals in a specific deck or not.

Greetings Geirröd
Dearlove - Do 03 Mai, 2007 20:36
Titel:
Just to make it clear, I don't see any point in changing the rules as such (and even if I did, I couldn't) and for those people who score even their single games in crystals, for whatever reason, no point at all.

But there are some people who just want a single game, and just win/loss. And for them crystal cards aren't useful. But they probably aren't playing constructed - but they may play with emissaries, and in that case get exactly nothing (OK, not quite nothing, a REPLACEable card - but I wouldn't pay even half a moon for that) for their nominal two moons. (No, the emissaries aren't exactly balanced by moons, but the basic idea is there.) I was interested in whether a nonstandard variant "you may want to try that" might be of interest in that case.

I see neither A nor B has achieved a clear preference. Carry on commenting please!
Dearlove - Do 03 Mai, 2007 20:46
Titel:
Melty hat folgendes geschrieben:
Version A:
in this version, instead of a swiftfist(donnerfaust)-buy-deck, where i spend 8 moons for 2 dragon-buy-leaderships, i can spend just 6 moons for 3 crystals and 2 moons for "who do you think you are"(für wen haltet ihr euch). for 0 moons chosed of affinity(auserwählte der jugend).
i could win the game like this, no matter how much dragons my opponent achieved.


No you can't. If I get 2 dragons, I've won even if you get all 3 crystal cards in play.

Zitat:
VersionB:
this is the same rule as the official crystal-rule, if you play a single game with crystals
1 crystal card converts a 1 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
2 crystal cards convert a 2 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
3 crystal cards convert a 2 crystal loss to a 0 crystal loss (on cards)
-but the winner always scores one crystal for winning the game and the loser never scores crystals.


But the key point of variant B is it converts these to results which are decided on who ran out of cards first. Quite different.

As people have guessed, yes, variant B was mine. But that doesn't mean I necessarily like it best - and I'm open to a variant C. My concern with variant B is that with 3 crystal cards and Administer Water of Immortality I'm set up well for a win if I can get all three crystal cards in play. Of course that isn't trivial, and unless I'm the Aqua I've already spent 10 moons.

Of course even supposing there was a sudden unanimity that variant X was a really, really good idea (as a variant) I'm not sure what I'd do with it. But let's not worry about that right now.
Dearlove - Do 03 Mai, 2007 20:52
Titel:
kilrah hat folgendes geschrieben:
For b) one can only fore a draw which still isn't much of an incentive to play crystals


I've obviously not made it clear. To spell it out, the variant B idea is

I have 1 crystal card in play.
You have 1 dragon.
You run out of cards.
Game over AND I WIN.
Had I ran out of cards, you would have won.

(What my winning score is, isn't relevant. If you are scoring wins there's no point in this idea.)

In this case with variant A you would still have won. But there are cases I'd win with variant A but not variant B. One is

I have 1 crystal card in play.
All dragons are in the centre.
I run out of cards.
Ladoik - Fr 04 Mai, 2007 07:12
Titel:
Zitat:
But there are some people who just want a single game, and just win/loss. And for them crystal cards aren't useful. But they probably aren't playing constructed - but they may play with emissaries, and in that case get exactly nothing (OK, not quite nothing, a REPLACEable card - but I wouldn't pay even half a moon for that) for their nominal two moons.

Then it should be Version A, because it is more Flexible.
Version B, as Geirröd pointed out, is depending on how fast is your Deck.
Lachwurzn - Fr 04 Mai, 2007 09:55
Titel:
Dearlove hat folgendes geschrieben:
(What my winning score is, isn't relevant. If you are scoring wins there's no point in this idea.)

In this case with variant A you would still have won. But there are cases I'd win with variant A but not variant B.


This is exactly the point. Winning score is totally unrelevant for single games (and even within our usual tournaments, the crystal ratio is less important than the win/loss ratio).
Therefore, whatever raises my chances to win a game will raise my interest in using crystal cards. If variant A gives me a better mathematical chance to win, then I'd go for it.

As deck builders, we're all mathematicians. We don't build decks based on emotional aspects. Ok, I personally hate Khind and Mimix, but... Wink



________________________________
Die Frau ist die Rätselecke in Gottes großer Weltzeitung.
kilrah - Fr 04 Mai, 2007 10:10
Titel:
Dearlove hat folgendes geschrieben:
kilrah hat folgendes geschrieben:
For b) one can only fore a draw which still isn't much of an incentive to play crystals

I've obviously not made it clear. To spell it out, the variant B idea is


No, it was perfectly clear. My brain just ignored the possibility of the enemy running out of cards first, as it never happenes to me. Wink
Still its a quite unlikely event IMHO.
Alle Zeiten sind GMT + 1 Stunde
Powered by phpBB2 Plus and Kostenloses Forum based on phpBB