It's just for the game, but there is no way of getting it back during the game.. edit from my other post: Also how about some achievements for later updates? (Collect all cards, collect all cards from booster X, win a game without using allies/items/abilities, win at least one game with every hero, etc)
That's better and I agree. It's still too powerful anyway. I like the idea of a Control Magic type MTG card but I wasn't happy to see it go to the opponent's deck when I unsummoned it. That's crazy.
Mind Control itself isn't too bad, as the stolen ally becomes exhausted. But cards like Retreat! should be able to counter it so that the ally goes back to your hand. And thinking about it, I'd like to see Transference go up to at least 4. -------V another reason to make Sandra Trueblade unique 8)
Here's a little nitpick: as a Magic player it's really weird for me to see cards with proper names as something other than Legends. For instance: say you got two Sandra Trueblade on the board. So, they are twins with the same name? Clones? The way Magic handles this is that all creatures are just nameless cannon fodder, actual names are reserved for the war heros like Legends of Planewalkers. I can't be the only Magic playing Shadow Era fan that finds it a little odd.
@ProfitOfDoom I'm no dev, by the way, in case you might've thought I was. Just another player. But yeah, people splurge just to chase foils, I think they should implement that. If you're using an iPad, next update has better graphics for the iPad. If you wanted to see the full art of cards; yes, outside of the app, the card list page is a good place. Undo button for sacrifice has been suggested, hopefully they'll implemented soon. Definitely new player friendly feature. @eev PvP has synchronization issues that can cause you to see really weird things. The upcoming update fixes some sync issues so it's slowly becoming more limited to the goal of nonexistance.
Suggestion: An indicator next to the opponent's name that show what device he's playing on -- iPhone, iPad, or PC. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wonders what platform our adversaries are playing on. Should be really easy to implement. What do you think, Kyle?
Is it just here, or is it now impossible to put 4 Portals in a deck? It only lets me use 2, my other Portals don't even show up in the thing.
Since they go to your graveyard you can use them again after you cast Eternal Renewal making it a very, very good card. Though I don't think it's broken.
the description of the Darkclaw should be probably more specific, the damage is rounded down, that's important difference.
Completely agree. If it was "Legion soldier", then fine. There's tons of 'em! But naming all (human, anyway) allies with a name is bad for three reasons (1) It misses a significant opportunity to add flavor and immersion to the world (2) It makes all the cards feel much more similar than they are (3) As you said, it tests our suspension of disbelief for no apparent gain
I gotta say: I don't think the card is NEARLY as good as everybody says. Think about the math for a sec (of a fairly general case) Turn 2: Cast a 3-power creature Turn 3: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 3....total dmg: 3 Turn 4: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 6....total dmg: 9 Turn 5: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 9....total dmg: 18 Turn 6: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 12....total dmg: 30 vs Turn 2: Cast a 3-power creature Turn 3: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 3....total dmg: 3 Turn 4: Cast Portal, attack for 6....total dmg: 9 Turn 5: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 9....total dmg: 18 Turn 6: Cast a 3-power creature, attack for 12....total dmg: 30 Yes, the surprise factor is a great benefit to the Portal. But the decks that want to play it are already fast decks. By the time it drops, the game is half over, usually, and the surprise factor is diminished by the fact that burn spells are just as 'surprising'. Anyway, the card seems well-balanced to me. I stopped playing with it, though, as it increased the inconsistency of my deck and occasionally created some dead draws.
The two biggest issues with SA: Creatures can't block voluntarily. Creatures that are one-shot don't deal their damage. The result? - Going first is a HUGE advantage. - Creatures are either undamaged or dead - The more you're winning, the more likely it is you'll win That last one sounds anywhere from obvious to counter-intuitive. But it's true. You get 1-2 allies up on the opponent (especially with one high-power ally), you can just keep sniping whatever the opponent drops. While you swing with your sidekicks. I would LOVE to see a really solid, well-designed card game on iOS. And Shadow Era could be it! But it needs a change to a couple of the core rules.
I agree. It seems pretty difficult to rally back from a disadvantage. I've been on both sides of this, and I've noticed that while I'm winning, I'll always win, and when I'm losing, I almost always lose. It would be nice if the game could be more back-and-forth, if you understand what I'm saying. But these are just minor complaints. It is a great, game and I'm really glad to have it on my Ipod! Thanks Kyle!
Certainly seems true, although we could argue how to quantify HUGE. I might add one of the better aspects of MTG, despite the drawback of mana screwage, is that deck building is more of an art/science than it is with SE, since EVERY card in SE has the potential to be a resource. However, it does work. I would guess that Kyle knows if going first is an inherent advantage from game stats.
Well one advantage of magic is that when you attack you then can't block. This makes your ally usage much more important. I think this could be looked at.
Awesome! That is indeed a high honor, considering the other games on your list. I would like to thank my wife, my daughter Katie... Uh... All the team... Huy, Nam... Sang.......... Cuong... All the great card artists! Awesome work guys! Ummm... Oh! All the fans! You guys rockkk! Thank youuuuu! We really need to start a campaign to get the game mentioned on the front page of TA...
I'm not sure how I feel about the server-side changing of card traits/abilities. You essentially have people spending real money to acquire boosters, chasing specific cards. But by modifying card abilities (in an attempt to balance the game), you're likely de-valuing their purchases--and changing the product they purchased. This isn't a big deal in other game types, but I feel that it's quite problematic in a *collectible* card game. I only played Magic Online for a short while, but I never saw WoTC changing the cards after a set was released. (Partly, of course, due to the cardboard counterpart.) Instead, they would limit card use in certain formats. So I'd rather see that online games limit Portals to one-per-deck rather than changing the way the card plays. As is, I'm scared to spend actual money on cards because I don't think anything will hold value in the marketplace if the devs are constantly changing the cards I've purchased.
Agree, going first is better since the side can cast item cards which limit the choice of actions of the next player -- much like chess. Also, the side which gets to draw more cards earlier has the advantage too. More often then not the AI wipes my ally deck clean after placing attack modifiers which I cannot remove them. Every time I cast an ally only to be eliminated before it can do anything.
