〔❖v0.54 Piece Blitz❖〕 [Finished]

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 1 is based off of the CEO Lab!

The Challenge: Create a piece with an ability or passive that doesn't exist in the game yet.

The Bonus Challenge: Create a challenge or scenario only piece like ChaosPortal.

$0.16

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 1 voting has ended! Here are the results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gwbbUyzJMw0PgIqxqIYSf6lYnLJBAHDCSNlRPC_a_kI/edit?usp=sharing

qwertyuiopazs wins with their Warlord!

Round 3 is based off of New Null!

The Challenge: Create a piece that does not block movement, or create a 0 cost piece.

The Bonus Challenge: Create a piece capable of making other units not block movement, or create a piece capable of reducing another unit's value.

Round 2 Voting has started! Here is the voting form: https://forms.gle/N8z34yhMPckubLHU9

$0.15

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 2 is based off of the Sorceress!

The Challenge: Create a piece with an ability with a Pay.

The Bonus Challenge: Create a piece with a debuff that renders a piece more vulnerable to capture, or more vulnerable to being targeted.

Round 1 Voting has started! Here is the voting form: https://forms.gle/JPRrviT7yV9Gjt828

$0.14

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

Please make future rounds in a different thread, it will get really confusing

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

I edit the thread title and post a new comment each round. Sorting comments by Age really helps read the thread properly (though more recent comments are sorted first), and the voting form assumes you are sorting comments by Age.

I don't feel like changing this to a new thread each round especially when it is Round 3 out of 5 right now.

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 1 challenges (4 units):
Edit: all the Mephits are supposed to be Rare, not Common...

Round 1 bonus submission (4th challenge unit):

Just to clarify: each Trigger has its own cost of 2 Value, so all 4 summons upon moving to the Ability Target will cost 8.

It has to be said, though, that this piece would require some additional AI so that it could purposefully use its Triggers...

$0.14

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

PieceMaker-Entertainer (2).png
Edit link

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

Challenge Submission:
Get rid of rangers with this fun-loving piece

$0.14

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Entertainer
Weaponizing the Knight's Game is an interesting concept (though I don't know that it would be that useful in most cases). It also looks like some care was taken to make the move set somewhat different, though the piece's mobility remains static through all tiers -- which is especially harsh since it doesn't start with much.

I don't see how the ability fits the unit's name. I would expect an entertainer to increase morale, mesmerize a unit or draw them closer, perhaps.

Unless I'm mistaken, this unit is colour-bound at all tiers (which, in and of itself, is not a problem, but it is very restricted (it moves far but doesn't have a lot of options, and half of those few locations are likely to be in enemy influence), which makes the colour binding much worse). It has a low cost, but the weakness of the ability (which apparently affects both sides) plus the very restricted movement makes me wonder why anyone would give up a Champion slot to use it.

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago

Round 2 (challenge + bonus):

$0.13

5 votes

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

PieceMaker-WarlordWarlord (1).png
Edit link

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

Bonus Challenge Submission:
Fire rains down on the battlefield as the warlord steps up. Paralyzing fear is inspired by his presence. He leads his army in a terrifying charge.

$0.13

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Warlord
The Firebomb Trigger doesn't specify when it occurs, or on what condition. I'm going to assume start of your turn, but it should be in the description.
The [Pay 5] thing is an active ability and not a Trigger, correct? If it is supposed to be a Trigger, it needs to say that, and on what condition the Trigger activates.
Passive stuns allies as well as enemies. Is that intentional?

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

Firebomb should be start of the turn. The other 2 are correct as written (first is not a trigger, and the second stuns allies too)

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago

round 2 challenge and bonus

Did you take your sanity as granted?

$0.13

5 votes

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

This is a bit awkard. I was only reading through round 3 submissions, and making my own, since I have not had time in earlier rounds. Now that I'm reading through older submissions, I see this one is similar to my own in changing teams, and swap / teleport moveset. There are some significant differences in how the units would be used, so I hope you don't mind.
Now to your piece. How / when (timings, turns) would the swapping occur ? It's not obvious to me mechanically, and therefore I am not sure how would I use it in intended / favorable way.

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago (edited)

8 days later...( no notif from steem)
lets pretend you're playing as white . There are 3 black pawn in front of you and 3 white pawn behind you (on ability targets).
-On your turn you pay 2 gems to send all 6 pawns into mental disorder- the 3 pawns in front of you become white and the 3 behind you become black. end of your turn.
-enemie turn. he/she/it dont like its ally pawn suddenly turning around and targeting the back line so Opponent decide to ignore that and move his (your previously owned) pawn to atak your back line ,taking lets say.. a bi-chop (pawn then become bishop and new unit so no longer affected by madness cause logic).
-your turn. madnes still in effect cause it end at the end of your turn. You still control the 3 pawns in front of you so you kill king (cause i conveniently decided he was there) in the backline end of your turn-/-mad pawns swap baack to original team.
-your nemesis turn. does not like that at all so he tries to kill the GateOfMadness with his pawn now in front of it but he realise in despair that 15 turns has passed and he cant kill it cause its his unit now.
I hope this cleared this up :) i will go back and check all the things i posted cause steemit hate me.

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago

round 1.
for the bonus challenge here is another gate.

$0.12

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 1 PM submission - doodlebob2's Thunder Adept

$0.11

ezvote (1) · 4 years ago

17.00% | From: @alphacore!

Looking for a new project/investment?

$0.00

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago

Round 3 (challenge + bonus)

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Base tier reaper feels a bit overpriced, because it can only use its path if there is a unit part way there, and since it's so short range you'd either have to put the reaper or another piece in danger in order to do that. Also overall the piece feels like it costs a bit too much with how limited its range is since it requires other pieces to be in its crosshair to attack. I also don't really feel like its moveset nor its ability really fit the name reaper. To me reaper sounds more like the grim reaper or death in which case it wouldn't make units see through, nor would it a unit next to it to kill.

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago

I'm absolutely uncertain as to how much utility can be had by making your or the opponent's jumped piece "transparent" -- you could definitely be correct, but I suspect that you could get some nasty forks set up by using it.

I also don't really feel like its moveset nor its ability really fit the name reaper. To me reaper sounds more like the grim reaper or death in which case it wouldn't make units see through, nor would it a unit next to it to kill.

Oh, so you think you know how the Grim Reaper operates, do you?!?

No, just kidding. I agree.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

It could be though of as getting rid of their physical form, and leaving only their ghost / soul in place :) .

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

But only for a limited time just like real death

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago

Well, if you really want my convoluted explanation, it was based on the idea that the Reaper's lantern kind of "sucks everything in" to the spirit world while its light shines on it.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

If I understand it correctly, if Reaper ever wants to use it's path attack, it needs units / enablers for it, that were already not blocking movement. If they did block it, he can NOT pass through them himself. That makes the path attack very situational, and not really worth the cost.

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

No, using the path Attack requires it to move through 1 piece, and the only way it can move through a piece is if it is on the path (which includes the nearest Move or Attack spaces). It's kind of like a modified XiangQi Cannon.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

Those 2 things I think I understand same way as you say. I'm not familiar with XiangQi Cannon. But the sentence "Units the Reaper moves through do not block movement for 5 turns" is maybe the problem. I understand they become "ghostly" from Reaper only after Reaper moves through them. But for Reaper to be able to move through them, something must have made them (or they already are themselves) "ghostly" before. In other words, Reaper does not prepare them for himself before the move to move through. If he could jump over for the path attack (e.g. like frog) than he would not need them "ghostly" for himself, and he will just make them ghostly after he jumps over.

$0.00

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I originally had "can move through units" as a passive, but then thought that should be unnecessary: The ability says that in order to use the Path Attacks, it has to move through 1 unit, which implies that using that ability allows it to do that, since it would be unusable otherwise.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

My piece for Round 3:

Also, am I allowed to upload multiple pieces.

Revised version of Shadow:

PieceMaker-Shadow (1).png

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

You may submit an unlimited number of pieces for this contest.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

I really like that death condition! Windmage and firemage become even more fun. Physical immune isn't great, I have armies that only use physical attacks

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I think shadow could definitely be an interesting piece for adding complexity to the game, but yeah the physical immunity does it make it a bit OP at higher tiers. At the same time though I think the death condition helps to balance that a little since you can't stray too far from your main section of units.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

I think I need to be more blunt. I would cost shadow+ at 35 minimum (and never use the magic ability). Against some armies, it's can't be killed at all, so it can destroy formation and take tons of pieces for free. Yes, there are some pieces that will be able to push it away or something, but physical-immune is WAY too strong to be on a unit with any unpenalized even mildly offensive moves. The death condition is very avoidable (especially with that movement) and does not change the fact that it can just eat into your army

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Only way to get rid of it is killing / transforming magic, OR pushing, but still only magic, which is the bad part. Many pieces have push that is ranged, I think it will thematically be better to allow those to counterplay Shadow.
Also, I think Shadow3 is OP, I wouldn't convert enemy piece to it in most games / situations (~95%).
While I find the death condition nice, it is too (mobile * immune), so it can effectively avoid it while winning the game by itself.
Rather than complexity, it would add "requirement" to have effective counter present in each army, therefore more limiting your setup and tactic.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Perhaps it would be better if I changed the death condition to it must be near a ally piece or increased the cost quite a bit to balance it out at higher tiers, but at the same time it doesn't have a lot of mobility considering that it has to have a piece on one of the four attack squares next to it at all times. Such as if there is a knight forking it and a swordsman attacking it and that's it it would at best only be able to take the swordsman but it would still die from having no piece directly adjacent. Also do you think it would work better if I maybe had the first tier convert enemies to shadow++ instead and decreased the price for later tiers? Perhaps I should also add displacement immune to eliminate that strat you're suggesting of teleporting it into the enemy base. What do you think of these suggestions?

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

"Must be near ally" would certainly limit the 1-man-win . It has quite a good mobility on tier 3 at least. Also I noticed now that not all tiers convert enemies to tier3 as I think I read originally. That changes things considerably, balance-wise. Displacement-immune also removes the counter-play to push it into free space to die, so I don't think it works very well. I'll think about this new version before voting.

$0.00

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

It can still be pushed or destroyed with magic, the reason I put displacement immune on it, is because most of the teleporting things seem to keep it relatively near units yet give it more movement which I figured was too OP. I made it displacement immune as a sort of nerf to remove nexus and beacon strats with shadow. I also tried to make the abilities more clear using more colors to make it more obvious what each tier does. Overall I still feel like my tier 1 is a bit UP and my tier 4 is a bit OP, but I tried to balance it out a lot more.

$0.00

disr (46) · 4 years ago

round 2 votes

gateofmadness 3|3|2 || 1

nice idea, but could abuse death effects of some minions. here's army idea: use 3 lifestone+++, teleport base form, use madness, use vampire+++ to kill and drain morale from useless lifestones. although i guess if this was scenario only, this wouldnt work.

polarizer 3|3|1 || 2

i feel like i got unusually confused by the description. maybe "with a move or attack ability" should be placed earlier like "if an opposing unit with a move or attack ability..." because i thought it would be strange for the magnetized unit to have the ability and then be attacked. cool idea.

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I was trying to figure out the best way to (succinctly) write that the destination space for the unit moving next to the Magnetized unit must be capable of attacking in order for it to work -- so if a Dryad moves next to a Magnetized unit, for example, it will not take the Magnetized unit, because it is not capable of attacking. Likewise, a Warrior+++ moving to one of its Move-Only spaces next to the Magnetized unit also will not attack, even though it does have Move-or-Attack abilities.

I originally had it as an ability that could target allies or enemies, but then I thought that that might be too strong for defence.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

2 more pieces for round 3:

Revised Gnat:

PieceMaker-Gnat (1).png

Revised Swarm:

PieceMaker-Swarm (1).png

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

Gnat is just insanely weak (also gnat+ is strictly better than gnat) . Maybe if the moral drain was a trigger.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I purposefully made gnat weak, as it is a gnat, but I probably should've had the morale limit reversed so that it wouldn't cause for a higher tier to be strictly better but at the same time I didn't want to completely degrade the value of having a higher tier. Also higher tiers typically take at least a little longer to get, so it does balance itself a little bit, but I'm also constrained by the contest rules as I can't make it higher than 0 cost without making it some kinda ghost.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

For Gnat, once you have higher tiers, there is no reason to use lower, this is strictly bad design imo. Farming difficulty / cost shouldn't make lower tiers completely obsolete.
Tiers of Swarm don't seem to be well balanced on their strength as standalone champion for army building, I would mostly use Swarm3. Balancing them only for the Gnat tiers, when Gnat tiers themselves are useless, isn't great either.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

As far as gnat tiers go, I appreciate that you notified me of it, but please read the other comments first because someone already went into much more detail on that and I don't wanna clutter even if it does let me farm weird cryptocurrency. Also as far as swarm tiers being unbalanced, could you elucidate what you mean? Telling me only that you would use Swarm+++ and only for gnat tiers doesn't exactly help me improve the piece in anyway.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I read previous comments. I wanted to further specify it's not only gnat1 > gnat0, but g3 > g2 > g1 > g0, all tiers. For Swarm, I meant that the strength increase for S3 is more significant (ability range 1 -> 2)than cost increase (6 -> 8), so value of S3 for 8 seems better to me than S2. Similarly, I find all higher tiers of Swarm better value for inclusion than lower tiers, although they could have reasons to be used (unlike Gnat).
In my understanding, what earns you cc is other people upvoting, and it doesn't cost them anything. So don't be afraid to upvote others yourself :) .

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Okay, thank you. I think that comment is a lot more helpful as it's more specific as to what can improve. Also I'm going through and upvoting everything now.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

Round 3 submission:
PieceMaker-Identity Thief(1).png

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Identity thief seems like a pretty cost effective nullmage, but because of its lack of attack features I feel it'd be too limited in times when it got to use its power. Especially since Nullmage is already pretty limited in usefulness due to leaving you vulnerable to attacks when you remove a units morale value. What I mean is because it can only swap with enemies, it steals one enemy's value but now it has a higher morale value and can't do its trick again, at least not nearly as well. I think it'd be more useful if it acted kinda like a siphon and could swap morale value with your own units as well.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

If it swapped value with own units, you could siphon your moonfoxes with other things, nope. I think it is quite strong, because it has quite strong mobility to apply its ability effectively at least once, and that's all I need from it for the cost. Occasionally, pieces that have penalties on low morale (mf, elementals, lifestone) would suffer even more from the ability. I think I would use this minion quite often, at least as one-of in my setups.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Granted it was my mistake to overlook the compatibility with moonfox or lifestone, but at the same time that's a very niche category of the army builder and it's not like that's going to change the entire way the game is played, especially if it's a low level siphon. Also the vast majority of players probably aren't using Morale dependent units like moonfox, elementals, or lifestones. Granted I understand that there are quite a few GMs who use those units, but that's too niche of a category for it to be helpful in an army. That's like putting a unit in your army that says it can kill a SK but doesn't do anything else. Like if your enemy doesn't use that particular unit it becomes virtually useless which is a terrible strat to rely upon especially as CEO grows and the unit count keeps going up.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I use moonfoxes quite often, lately setup with 2 corner mf3. I will siphon in first 2 turns Phoenix3 value of 24 into it through IdentityTheft. I now have mf3 with 3 lives, that's at least 3 kills, but usually more, since it can revenge itself on previous attacker. Also, I thunder my own Phoenix3 so that it revives into 24 value again. Either I return with surviving mf3 later, or use the 2nd mf3, to siphon again. This could possibly repeat mutliple times. You're saying it's ok, because only few GMs can afford / own those units ? :)

Edit: Your example was specific situational counter, this works in my favor all the time, not depending on what enemy has.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago (edited)

I agree that having ally swaps is a great idea, and this was the original intent, but I decided against it because it combos far to well with some units. It would be absolutely gamebreaking when used with phoenix, while we could just target minion/champions it seems liable to breaking stuff elsewhere (moonfox/fireelemental) so I decided against it. It is true that it's ability becomes weak after the first use, that's just how it is. You can use to to try and displace some foes/as a blocker, but really it's just a moral bank you need to hide (if you want that moral boost to stay)

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 3 submission----

Thanks to all the input from amazing peoples i have changed a few things for the beter i hope

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago

original one(recreation) before feedback

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

Thank you :) .

$0.00

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago

Replace ". Teleported units" with ", and". It should shrink it by 1 line, at least. Also, the "s" on "Champions" is unnecessary (and incorrect when paired with "is").

Does "can't target anything" include empty locations?

Weird observation: You seem to gave at least 3 different "create spacial hole" abilities, even though they function exactly the same (one has a capital "C", one has a space before "create", and the others don't)...

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

What happens if two units go through the spacial hole or if there is already a unit on the other side of the spacial hole?

kinuriel (46) · 4 years ago

i expected this question. The hole, placed on an empty SpacE, is like a bone pile, or a sapling but immune to physical damage. Meaning that once 1 unit go trough the gate, the hole become that unit, that place is thence on no longer empty.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

The ability is quite strong, its basically much shorter timer on something similar in purpose as butterfly. You can multiply threats for 3 turns later, AND place them in advance to convenient position. While the cost is not low, it still might be quite moderate for the (range * strength) of the ability + built-in bishop1.5 . I am not completely against the ability, I'll just prefer it with short range ( != full board !), and maybe a piece that has it as main strength, not a bishop added to it. Similar to e.g. FrostMage, EarthElemental.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

I'd prefer seeing both versions, original suggestion and adjusted one after feedback, so the commments below make sense, and we see how it was changed.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 3 submission, SOUL CALLER

Ability text:
"When targeted by anything, instead of the attack / ability taking place, Soul Caller summons Ghost for its owner, on free adjacent square nearest to attacker, and changes sides.
Does not block movement."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

Only gets killed by things not targeting the piece, e.g. Thundermage.
There are possible start of game shenanigans to create more than 1 ghost for yourself, depending on if opponent lets you do it without you summoning Ghost for him, and rather takes tempo advantage against you. This would make decisions at start of game more time consuming, and both players would likely be deciding on what tactic they want to use going forward (for at least couple turns).
You start with advantage of 1st ghost, but opponent can have more dangerous foward position for the next ghost, so choose wisely.
If the tempo / other threats are more important, you can leave it waiting for the right time to come back to it, but so can your opponent.
Can block some squares on board quite effectively, but not paths through them.
Possible synergies on summoning for enemy, with soulkeeper, behemoth, morale drains / feeding, ability promotions (gnome, sylph / AE).

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

What happens if a unit right next to it attacks? Does it summon on the left or right of that unit? Or is there no summon?
Because it only summons Base ghost at all tiers, I would argue there's very little point if any to getting a higher tier since base tier ghost summoning on both sides isn't worth anywhere near 7 cost no matter how well the original piece can move around, because the opponent can capture it and use it like an apprentice and then they gain a 7 value unit whereas all you get is a 3 value ghost.
Since the unit is so hard to kill as it can only be killed by either thundermage or firemage or like butterfly I guess, most often there probably won't be any unit on the board that can kill it meaning it forces games to last a lot longer due to the morale boost. Granted killing king can cut a game short, but if you just protect your king well and surround it with those guys then it makes the game take way more turns then it should
Why does it change sides? That doesn't make sense meta wise and meta of the piece is a part of the voting. Like mercenary makes sense to change sides cause it got hired by the other side, but meta wise why would a soul caller swap sides?

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

From adjacent squares, those that are free are considered, only if no adjacent square (to Soul Caller) is free, nothing is summoned (side change still happens, regardless). From free squares, one closest to attacker / caster is selected. If more free squares have same distance, it can be in determined order (clockwise, or a1.. a8 b1 ..., similar how samurai triggers work).
You can still use it as good swapper and blocker / defender of chosen square. As you say, it's hard to remove, so the cost of freeing the square (for opponent) might be giving you ghost, or he might not have effective way of removing it. Also, the better swaps it has, it becomes more risky / difficult to prepare for all possible tricks for both sides, and since you had the advantage of creating setup for exploiting such possible tricks, I thought increased cost might be needed. Maybe it could be considered to not increase cost with higher tiers, but it's not obvious to me yet that it wouldn't be always better to include higher tier (and therefore being what I didn't like about your suggestion of Gnat).
It's true that most games might lack specific unit to kill it. If I understand correctly, you mean it might be abused by prolonged turtling in such case. It might be possible. However, SC becomes additional target, or new way to generate threats, possibly speeding endgame up, so it depends on position + ability of players to find ways / advantage from it. Whoever has it close to himself, must be carefull of enemy using it for either new ghost spaming, or swapping other threat in. Also, 2 SC cannot cycle themselves, they can't target themselves as enemies. Certainly can prolong as you say, but when morale drain is on (turn 50+), it might give more options for initiative, than it usually is otherwise - who can prolong / avoid loss until he can kill first enemy for win.
That is completely based on round 3 theme - new Nullmage. New, better, improved, more unique, in what ways, how would one do that ? It was considered as not doing much before 0.54, and now we test / wait to see, if this changes. Because setting target to 0 value, and have very little attack did not bring enough options / combinations. Or, said from opposite POV - it was good very situationally, and that situation depended more on your opponent's setup than your own, even when you built it for having Nullmage in, e.g. if your opponent had elementals, which Nullmage counters well.
Therefore, I was trying to make caster/supporter type of unit, which had even less attack (= none), while not being that situational (= not needing to counter something specific witch chance), and could have positive synergies if you built your setup for it. Current Nullmage makes things ghost-like, so this one makes ghosts directly :) . Soul Keeper already can do that, but only from targets, therefore Soul Caller can be better (because it has no attacks) and only needs targeting (not sure what yet, was thinking empty squares so far). Here came the problem - if one side can spawn ghosts just for itself, it's variation on Lich. I would like other variants of Lich personally, but I didn't think that would seem as interesting suggestion for others. So, spawn for both sides, that gives the double-edge, risk / reward potential to it, and I like that. How would it spawn for both sides, when does enemy get the option ? He would need to take control of the unit, or make some interaction with it to trigger the spawning. Another problem is, if it is no-attack support, how does it not overspam for original owner (if cost / tradeoff off for spawning is too good), before enemy can use it ? These few things together were imo solved all elegantly by changing side after each use. Now, why would original owner not just use it and kill it then ? Because it wouldn't be that easy ! Here came the replacement for death - ignore it, SC can do all signature things (spawn ghost, change side) when any other unit tries to do anything with him, and this trigger becomes another singature thing on top of it. Flavor / uniqueness all over.
When I had this thought out and liked it, then I chose the moveset that seemed to complement the ideas / intentions, and here it is, your new target for 5/5/5/2 vote in competition :) . Cherry on top - does not block movement, because then it would become a bit like Wisp in terms of square blocking, and I want more unique / different. And I get to spice it up with more round 3 requirements, tasty.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

It's like a cheap wizard that can't attack. The ability to move around your army makes this unit a bit too strong, but it's still fair. The ghost summon feels unnatural, though (which square?).

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Sorry, I somehow missed your question, but explained the logic when answering to godoftomatoes.

$0.00

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Bonus Challenger:
PieceMaker-Nullifier (1).png

Quantum Shadow.png
"Invocation" is the ranged version of "Unstoppable".

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

I assume these are suggestions still for round 3.

Reaper - There isn't much to judge on creativity / flavor from my point, at best discussion of balancing the cost for combination of clear / straightforward moveset + passive. I think it is costed too low, that's about all I can think of saying about it.

Eucalyptus - Did you forget to set the costs ? Then again, the 0 cost is the only thing about it that meets the round theme, so maybe it is on purpose. As was already pointed out in other previous suggestions, this is just straight powercreep on upgrading, no point running lower tiers (= bad design). As for ability - static curer, no movement on lower tiers, maybe can be used sometimes instead of having to invest into alchemist. However, the cost increase is just slapped to it with / for what purpose ?

Nullifier -I find tier 3 cheaper and better not just compared to Nullmage, but many other minions / pieces, needs to be more expensive. Otherwise, just a simple lower "tiers" of nullmage, in a minion, nothing special for me.

Quantum Shadow - Technicalities - fusionate = fuse ? :) Also, don't use variables in description, make each description specific for each tier, e.g. "When the target reaches 3 value or lower, it is transfered into ally Quantum Shadow+". Costs should be higher for tiers above base imo. The ability itself seems interesting, giving variable time, and not really worth on lower costed targets (exceptions for position specific purposes, greed, egg, ...). Safety / immunity for King against QS is +. I'm not sure how good / used QS would be, but I find it interesting and applying the theme in meaningful way.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Eucaliptus
"As was already pointed out in other previous suggestions, this is just straight powercreep on upgrading, no point running lower tiers (= bad design)."
At low levels, the death penalty is lower.

Nullifier
"I find tier 3 cheaper and better not just compared to Nullmage [...]" do you mean ++ or +++? Remember that Nullifier can't use its ability at range on any level (Nullmage can use its ability at range starting at base tier).

Quantum Shadow
I used a variable to not create 4 different abilities but that is only a matter of taste.
Yes, the cost of the +, ++ and ++ should be higher but I did so to no empower its fusionate ability. However, if the ability were a fixed number instead of using the unit's value that could help with it.
Do you think that fuse is better than fusionate? English isn't my mine language.

I know that the round ended but just commenting.

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Eucalyptus
Overlooking / forgetting the death morale - you are right, my bad. With that in mind, I'd still probably only include either tier 2 or 3 (full coverage).

Nullifier
I consider the yellow attacks on tier 3 much better then axtra ability squares on base Nullmage.

Quantum Shadow
Fusionate I didn't even find in google translator, I don't know that it is a word :) .
The increased value - e.g. tier 3, even if it didn't have the ability, all 8 move-attack squares are worth more than 5, and the ability should have cost too, it's good. That's why I think from tier 1 the cost might be higher, tier 0 basically only has the ability for 2, so tiers above could have [moveset cost + 2]. This can threaten specific targets (e.g. Greed, special ability units) from quite effective range, while still being good defender (tier 3).

I haven't noticed the comment before, the ordering isn't intuitive to me even by Age.

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 submission, UNDERDOG (bonus):

Augment: "(Trigger) On Death: If you were killed by higher value attacker, revive into this empty location with value increased by 5, and assimilate the attack square that killed you."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

I like MoonFox specifically for the revive mechanic, so I used it.
Turned it on its head - dying increases value (+ round theme) and improves moveset (+ round bonus).
Keep turning - higher tiers decrease cost - although I do not particularly like Greed, it makes sense here for opposite reasons - you want Underdog to die (to some enemies), and you expose him to big dangerous enemy pieces.
Assimilating works on the square from the attackers point of view - e.g. if it was Queen that killed him with diagonal attack from distance 4, he gets diagonal attack at distance 4, on the same side (side chosen again from Queen POV).
Low value attackers are best counters, but as Underdog revives, more enemies become deadly to him.
It is a try to complicate often used and applied tactics - "trade as many own cheap units with enemies as possible, and save big guns to win late game / initiative contest". If you're saving Underdog, trading away minions and cheap champions is risky for opponent.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I really like this piece. It fits well with the underdog theme, and since it starts with a decently high value it's unlikely it'll be abused by getting respawned too many times. I do think it might be a little weak tho as it only assimilates the move that killed it.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

I added the assimilation, because it was nice fit for the bonus theme, and the piece itself (theme and tactic it tries to counter). However, even if it didn't assimilate at all, revival means, it can just take revenge on its killer that had higher value, and therefore get favorable trade (value wise).
The opposite case - if it was just killed without the revival, wouldn't be affected by how much the potential assimilation did not add :) .

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 submission, SAND KING (bonus):

Augment - "After using petrify, changes to Burrow form.", which is:

Augment - "After attacking, changes back to previous SandKing form."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

In usual exchange, SK still defends adjacent diagonals, and takes 1 turn for the kill (1 for petrify, trigger for attack).
Usual order / target can be changed by both players, to their advantage.
Opponent can - (1) give other target for trigger, saving better piece with sacrifice, (2) have immunity or cure for petrify, (3) enchant or displace vs / before attack trigger.
Owner can - (1) get into position with more possible trigger targets, (2) kill and run in the same turn, basically investing the petrify turn beforehand, so he takes target and avoids its defenders.

Since altering movesets are not used very often in actual pieces in game yet, and I find it very interesting and full of possibilities, more suggestions are coming.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I don't really get how this fits the challenge for round 4. Also the piece could end up being a little bit OP since the trigger is in all directions so it could hit multiple units at a time. Maybe change it to where it can only hit 1 target with the burrow mode. Other than that it looks like a really cool piece.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

It does hit only 1, because even if there would be 8 targets around, one must be first (by any priority) and only that trigger attack is executed.

Also, it's altering between 2 completely different movesets, that's the bonus theme.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Okay, thanks for clearing that up.

celticdragon (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 (challenge + bonus):

A not-altogether-serious submission, this was actually something I was toying around with as a "boss"-type unit that I thought of when reading this thread. I think it's probably too weak for a boss unit, actually, without some serious backup.

Now, the artwork for Tarkus never suggested that it could transform, but the music always made me think of a very adaptable battle unit that was constantly changing to take advantage of the weaknesses of its foes and minimize its own vs the strengths of its enemies.

Stage 2 should probably cost a bit more for its "missiles" (which would be "reloaded" by killing units while in stage 4, so the cost would be adjusted there, too, accordingly).

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

Indeed, not very serious. Too good, too cheap, too many transforms for 1 tier, and no other tiers specified :) .

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 2 voting has ended! Here are the results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kC0UwyLubbnsLVM-CyLejRWZ5knMT6_wDfWcVMiKMZ4/edit?usp=sharing

davcash with their GateOfMadness and dragon_of_celts with their Polarizer tie! They both win 20 RP!

Round 4 is based off of Gluttony!

The Challenge: Create a piece capable of gaining value.

The Bonus Challenge: Create a piece capable of altering its moveset.

Round 3 Voting has started! Here is the voting form: https://forms.gle/AmaWytNtVUBsthib9

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Am I the only one that finds it weird, that we count votes for own suggestion ? Not even from competition / reward perspective, but since you created it, you had to like it, or make it in way you thought was very fitting to the theme + good at the judged categories, so the suggestion itself is reflection of your vote in a way.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

No-one truly thinks their piece is perfect, and there were several parts of my own pieces that I gave a relatively low score on. Just be honest on how you truly feel about the piece and it'll work fine. Judge the piece as though it was someone else's.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 Pieces:

PieceMaker-Robin Hood.png

Revised Thief:

PieceMaker-Thief (1).png

Revised Robin Hood:

PieceMaker-Robin Hood (1).png

Revised CopyCat:

PieceMaker-CopyCat (1).png

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Thief - It's unusual combination - "can't attack champions" + assimilate. Minion that mostly preys on other minions, or said from opposite said, for which every enemy champion is enhanced Behemoth :) . Gets weaker by eating weak minions, maybe doesn't even need that high cost at tier 2 / 3. I would certainly try it, and expect others would too, good.

Robin Hood - range 3 on magic/ranged I generally think is too good, see VM 2/3 in last patch, PM 3 in past :) . This one cannot feed on minions, so that cuts the abuse of that range to extent. All adjacent squares are blindspot, but the L swap helps it run and harass quite nice, so it still has power to annoy. I have to say it can be abused a bit. The siphon of energy you can use in setup for upgrading your own Lifestones right from start without having to do anything (use turns). The theme of RH taking from rich, giving to poor is quite nice touch on top of the morale drain :) . Maybe get rid of the "abuse" - can only siphon extra morale above own cost, after getting some from enemy champions (kills), and give only to own minions, that is good for both balance and theme.
Upgrading from t2 to t3, you get from 1 forward threat to 3, for just 1 cost, that's too good. I think RH would see play. Although longer or same ranged version of ranger with better mobility were suggested quite often :) , novelty is in the name + theme of the drains, good as well.

Copycat - First, a little technicality. Unlike Gluttony with augment, this one has assimilation on squares, which get changed by the same asimilation mechanic, so I think the last sentence "Any move will replace this one" isn't needed. But that's only detail. As a piece, I'd compare it to Envy. Cons - no melee at all, harder / shorter copy range, pros - better mobility, upside of keeping that mobility for weaker copy targets. Those are combined so that it feels it has its own and different enough purpose / goal from Envy. And also from Gluttony, since you can copy a good target once and keep it that way during other kills. I like this one too.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Thief- Thank you, I'm glad that you liked this piece. I figured it'd be an interesting twist on the whole behemoth strat of a new unit specifically designed to hunt down minions. Also I'll make sure to lower the cost before voting starts. Do you have an ideal cost in mind?
Robin Hood- Hmm, I can reduce the range, I figured it would balance out to some degree since nothing can be in its line of sight, but on the other hand that might also just make it UP in some situations too. Also I completely forgot about lifestones, so yeah I'm gonna have to change the trigger to only gained moral can be siphoned. The reason why he can siphon morale even into opponent minions is because RH doesn't care about factions or sides he just hates the rich, but I do understand that this might make him a bit too weak afterall people don't really want to be feeding the enemy. And as for the the final upgrade from ++ to +++ the reason it costs so little extra is due to him giving up his morale to minions so it comes into the danger of him dying quickly if you don't move him soon. Although if I change it to only extra morale is siphoned then I'll obviously have to change the cost for that tier so it's not OP.
Copycat- Okay, I'll make sure to remove that sentence. I wasn't sure if it was immediately obvious to others which is why that was there. Also I'm glad that you enjoyed it. I wanted to make it so that it would be different enough that it's its own piece being that it requires a separate strategy but still incorporates the idea behind those pieces so you have more pieces that can grow from enemy units.

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 3 voting has ended! Here are the results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VSMlS-X0N9Vyk8SkSdnozXHmFAnV9hKdW2QqK-IPp_s/edit?usp=sharing

davcash wins with their GateOfSpace!

Round 5 is based off of Chain Leap!

The Challenge: Create a piece with a melee ability that isn't Move, Teleport, Attack, or Swap.

The Bonus Challenge: Create a piece that can capture more than 1 unit per turn. Units with triggers like Samurai count.

Round 4 Voting has started! Here is the voting form: https://forms.gle/LGu4d99jCgXgMTH66

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Can I have previous suggestion (Sand King) stay in competition for another round, if it already has the (bonus) theme ?

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

No, even then I don't recommend it as it would probably score 0 on Creativity

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Not letting it stay, ok, your tournament, your rules.

0 Creativity - just because I created it with compliance of new theme before new theme was announced, doesn't mean it's not creative. If anything, it's more creative, having themes of multiple rounds combined, without knowing it at the time of suggesting it.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Bro, there's no reason to get angry you can just create a new piece. The reason that rule's in place is because if one piece was super good and was able to win each round it would lead to a stagnation of new creative ideas.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 5 submission, ENRAGED BEAST (bonus):

New square type: "(Trigger) Enemy Unit, Unchanged Position: At the start of your next turn, leap to this square. If enemy is still there, leap attack him. If neither action can be done, cancel this trigger now."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

Triggered Leap is where it's at :) , combining both mechanics for the round theme.
In one turn, you can trigger-attack and (chain-)kill, followed by manual attack and (chain-)kill.
Unchanged position means for itself, from previous turn.
But the possibility for leap attack to not be doable for the trigger, opens up new combinations.
EB can be "provoked" / pulled out of position by opponent, with delay (of the trigger). Lust and Siren are thematically "nice" ways to do it, and are mechanically more straightforward. This one is little more dirty, and risky for both sides.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 5 submission, EQUESTRIAN (bonus):

Comments / ideas for the piece:

A bit simpler this time, some might find this clearer than other overcomplicated suggestions.
Equestrian is a Knight, with a high skill / competitive in show jumping.
Leap attacks are thematically nice / fitting to consider show jumps.
They're only forward, as a way to signify he only does it for showing / competition.

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 5 PM submission - dawurpymurpydurp's Black Hole

PieceMaker-Black Hole.png

Idea is that its an immobile champion that relies on other units like portal to reliably draw in enemy units, potentially opening up an attack line or wiping out a Hoplite rush at higher tiers.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

Now some feedback on the suggestion itself:

Things that cover so much of the board, with so dangerous abilities, hardly ever seem balanced. Even if you cost it deservingly high, any setup with it becomes one-trick pony, and the matchup a coin flip on "go counter or go home". This one isn't costed that high yet, but only because it isn't costed adequately imo :) .

First trigger - same as on Lust, so far ok. But the range 3 (definitely), and slightly for range 2 in L shape - they're stronger, because you can more often be safe the previous round against those targets (during move-in). Compensated here by fact that BH doesn't move itself, yes, but it has potential to be strong. At range 4, and so many targets, it is definitely too much. Siren can pull from further, but only 1 target at a time, needs to spend own turn doing it, and enemy gets to react 1st on / after the repositioning of the piece. Not having own mobility isn't drawback enough for such strong / wide pull coverage.

Second trigger - destroy - doesn't specify when, but I assume that is on own turn. If so, its really strong in both cases - start / end of turn. This trigger has advantage (compared to Samurai, or leap attacks) that all 8 of them can activate at once.

And the last but not least issue - these 2 triggers synergise greatly with each other. I'd say they even mutliply their strengths together, again, with such wide coverage.

If BH3 gets parked safely on row 3, many armies, or players, wouldn't be able to do anything.
For lower tiers, still too good - have enchantress behind, couple nexuses, and just repeat [enchant - port forward - recall]. Triggers will kill all the poor targets in between the (manual) turns.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

First, some non-piece feedback, for [urp], GodOfTomatoes, James (this seems nice place for it, James posting for [urp]):

[urp] - glad to see you're taking interest in piece-making as starting player, but no, I will not be leaving either the discord channel or this forum / competitions :)
GOT (not the series) - hopefully, I take care of you thinking I spam to win :P
James - if I win anything, please pass my reward to next piece / creator in score, thank you

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I don't think you spam to win. That would be absurd afterall no matter how many pieces you make you can only reach so much max score; You can't combine the scores of all your pieces you submit.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 submission, PATIENT SQUIRE (bonus):

Augments: "(Trigger, start of your turn): If nothing died for last 2 turns, increase own value by 1, up to (X + 3 / +6). When you reach (X + 3) value, upgrade all your moveset squares to unblockable attack. [At X+6 add swap.]"
Where X is original value (6, 8, 10, 12). Tiers 0 and 2 get only to +3 (6 + 3 = 9, 10 + 3 = 13), and only upgrade to unblockable attack (green, e.g. as Knight), and tiers 1 and 3 get to + 6 (8 + 6 = 14, 12 + 6 = 18), at +3 (11, 15) upgrade to unblockable attack (green), at + 6 (14, 18) upgrade to unblockable attack or swap (yellow, e.g. Ghast).

Comments / ideas for the piece:

Wanted to do thematically similar move-altering version of pieces, that already do change their moveset, but not technically through changed squares or promotions.
This one is altering based on Patience, and to the moveset of Knight.
The wording of "last 2 turns" was meant last / previous move of your opponent and your last / previous turn. So if nothing is dying, it gains 1 value each new turn, and can fully upgrade as soon as 3 or 6 turns pass.
When your opponent sees you have this, he can attack / trade to delay PS "promoting", which also makes it more dangerous to you with PS not participating in defense, similar as Patience. However, the "wait" for PS is not that long, can be affected by both players and what they do, and also the resulting moveset is smaller on coverage.
Buildup of value from bonus theme seemed to fit nicely with Squire promoting to Knight (in skill = moveset), although I only chose 2 Knight-like movesets, because the other variation between tiers is done through different level of upgrading the moveset (to green or to yellow).

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I really like this piece. It's not exactly OP because of how many turns it takes of no attacks, but it's also not UP because of how strong it can get for such a low price. I feel like it'd be one of the perfect defenders for a rush set up or one of the perfect attackers for a long-term setup because if you put it in a rush set up you're forcing the enemy to constantly be offensive, rather than try to hide. And if you're in a long-term setup that goes over round 30 or so it's bound to be unleashed at some point, especially when the number of pieces on the board decreases so that you gain a powerful unit at the end like with patience. I also like that it has quite a bit of trading power and dodging power making it not so weak it'd die right away with no benefit.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

Like many other pieces in the tournament, it's a bit complicated. In particular I think the passive should be the same at all levels (besides number changes)
I feel that it's too easy to get to +6 with this unit, nothing dying for 2 turns happens quite frequently and it's unlikely to change the strategy in the mid game with people trying to kill each other. A more interesting variant IMO would be to increase the value by 1 each turn nothing dies, but reset the value when any unit dies.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Big Slime.png

Note: Siphon's ability doesn't make units become unable to move.

Skeleton Dragon.png

Note: Viking++ and Viking+++ have some similarity with Militia and Militia+, but consider than militia's strength is that its cost always is 1 so you can invest more on other units (and is common). Viking has a great passive ( and can move backwards), but it doesn't promote and have a far more expensive value cost for the army formation.

Bonus Challenger:
Time Mage.png
Note: Each time it moves (or is moved), its moveset increases because of its augmented.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Big Slime:

I personally feel like the idea behind summoning slimes is 1. Not original enough as it's just a combo of lich's power and giant slimes power. And 2. It doesn't really fit the idea of a big slime; Why would a big slime be more powerful than a giant slime and for that point why does a big slime even have magic power? Maybe if it was an itermediary between slime and giant slime I'd like it more: Such as if it promoted to giant slime and enhanced the slime life cycle, but even still that wouldn't really feel like a new piece just a useless add-on.

Siphon:

This looks like a viable and interesting piece. I'd have to think about it more as for how to improve it so I probably won't be getting back to you on this one before voting starts.

Skeletal Dragon:

I like the idea of a weaker skeletal dragon existing, but it doesn't really fit theme wise; Why does it gain value from death happening? Why can't it move until a certain number of units have died? Also I'd like to say with how much death needs to happen before it can even move it's a very UP unit. Ex: The last tier requires 9 deaths. With no special summoning units in a game that's more than a quarter of the units in game. Yea you can speed it up by making weak summons and killing them, but I feel pieces should be able to stand on their own to some degree rather than completely relying on the rest of the army or RNG. I also think it'd be better if it somehow connected to the dragon piece or if it had some more skeletal like powers (skeletons for instance can grow from reaching the promotion line or being upgraded by necro and they have longer range than most other minions).

Viking:

Feels like a miniature pride. I don't really get why they give morale to their king tho, doesn't really seem to fit the theme for me.

Time Mage:

Wasn't there a piece called time mage put in the discord channel just yesterday with a very similar ability? Granted this one is different, but still it feels like you grabbed the idea from him and just changed it around a bit. Anyways, can its ability not work if there is unit already in the target's starting square? I feel like this could be useful for setting traps, but also it's a bit OP that it can teleport anywhere its been has the ability to move other units across the board and all of that for such a low cost. With that you could not only stop an enemy's plans you could unravel them entirely which seems a bit OP for a cost of 5, especially when you consider that once it moves around a bit it basically gains global board control.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Big Slime:
I created it because I thought that it would be nice to be able to split a slime without killing it, like with gemmation.

Skeletal Dragon:
I wanted a Skeletal Dragon (like in Wesnoth with EoHS) that powers by the death creatures (like some kind of dark ritual). Bone Pile (Necromancer's ability) also gains value on death, but Skeletal Dragon only on enemy death to avoid using summing magic. The value thing makes that a Nullmage can dispel the Skeletal Dragon magic that sustains it.

"skeletons for instance can grow from reaching the promotion line or being upgraded by necro and they have longer range than most other minions" Being able to by upgraded by Necromancer would require to modify Necromancer, and before v0.54 Skeletons didn't grow on promotion line...

Viking:
I created my Viking on Tuesday 10 of January of 2017 (before Pride I think). Originally, the value was tranfere on death to nowhere (just to your morale count) representing that the Viking goes to Valhalla and so none of your army "becomes sad" (lose morale) by the lost. But Both Vampire and Pride transfer morale to ally king so I decided to change that before publishing.

Time Mage:
The coincidence has already been explained in another comment.

Of course, If there is a unit already in the target's starting square you can't use the ability.
The ability itself is not too much powerful (FE simply kills the target), maybe the cost could be increased as you said. What do you think about 7/9/11/12 or 7/10/13/14?
Remember that this unit has only kingmoves, so if you want to expand as much as possible your passive you would need the help of other units.

Sidenote: did you know that the ability can be used to teleport allies as well? Yes... the price is too low, I have to increase it.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Omg, you play battle for Wesnoth too?!? I love that game, I used to play almost everyday. Have you beaten all the maps yet?

$0.00

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

I have never played the campaign. I always played multiplayer with my brother and friends.

$0.00

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Btw, I want to make it clear, I am not saying that you stole the idea, I am just curious as to how you came up with the idea because you posted this right after him and so from an outside perspective it looks very sus. If you choose to ignore this comment I can guarantee you that I will take off several points for creativity on your time mage as I will have no way to know whether it was your own idea or not. If you however respond then depending on your response will depend on whether I deem it an original and separate idea or not.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

I can't know how it was for Enderlook, I just want to add how it often is for me.
I don't follow all discord history, just read / participate at times, while I have it open. Also, the old suggestion thread had huge amount of suggestions, plus there were many contests in past. I could have made repeats of my own ideas, of ideas I have seen other people come up with first, without even remembering / realising, how it came to my mind at current moment.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

That's why I want him to reply to the comment, because if it was honestly just a coincidence I don't wanna lower the score I give him.

$0.00

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

I haven't open CEO discord since I created the steemit account.
My Timemage's creation remotes to Friday ‎16 of august of ‎2019 (I know that because of the txt metadata). At that time, my Timemage was called Timelord and had two abilities. One to freeze a creature on time and one to revert a creature back on time.
Then I thought it was too complicated and I decided to change it (about 24 of October of 2019 I think, I'm not sure). When I decided to changed it, I was moving through a time when I was creating units using existing abilities on the piece maker, so I decided to use that ability that allows you to rewind someone to starting position.
The last modification I did was just before publishing, I increased its starting value by 1, modify the Timemage+++ and added the passive. Why the passive? I didn't have a unit already created between my more than 200 units that I have never published until a few days ago (you might have seen my Zodiac suggestion) that accomplish with the bonus challenger, so I thought on creating a piece called Checkpoint that had that passive. The problem was that I didn't know how to make its moveset that didn't seem similar to existent units (some problems with Antimage and Warrior) so I remembered about my Timemage and decided to add the passive to it).

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

Are we allowed to change our units based on feedback before the voting starts? Also when does the voting for round 3 start?

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

If you are changing a unit make sure you are specifying you are changing a unit and not just submitting a new one.

Round 3 Voting starts when Round 3 ends, which is on the 26th.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

Round 5 submission, ARENA MASTER (bonus, although on ally as well):

New ability square: "All squares of this type form arena. If there are enemy and ally in opposite corners of it, and your target has (inside arena) free adjacent square, you can make them fight. The non-target is teleported to that free square, and then they both use abilities / attacks vs each other, on their respective positions (if they have any)."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

If more pieces have to die, maybe they shouldn't be always from same side.
Wide coverage, but that doesn't mean it's easy to use, both "corners" need to have fighter.
AM can make allied close fight specialists cut the distance if it's advantageous.
Or, find non-threatening enemies, to be ported away from safety of their own / back ranks. Porting dangerous enemy that survives the fight gives him the next turn to make you pay.
AM himself isn't great vs long range threats, so he "carries" the risk for allies, finding positions and battles for them.
Order of free space for teleport would be - (1) closest to AM (2) if two have same distance to AM, one of those closer to center of the board.
Target attacks first. Both fighters apply the attack / ability, even if one / first kills the other, similar how Wisp takes revenge despite dying from the attack that preceded Wisps's.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Black Cat.png

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Wose and Hunter (and Trap) meet neither challenge.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

"Create a piece with a melee ability that isn't Move, Teleport, Attack, or Swap."
Both units have on melee range an ability with isn't a move, teleport attack or swap... How black cat does?

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Melee ability, and adjacent range aren't necesarily same things.

However, I can understand how there isn't clear distinction, other than creator of the suggestion not putting "ranged" / "magic" on descriptions of same kind of mechanics, basically making his own rules. I also wasn't sure, how would it be decided (for round theme) if ability is or isn't melee. At first, Grappling Robot I was working on was supposed to have his grapple as non-magic pull, as it should feel thematically as melee (he hooks physical object to you, and then pulls you with physical force). But it could be argued, that shooting it at range first is non-melee part of the ability, so I changed the piece to include the bonus theme.

I'll wait with commeting on your suggestions Enderluck, in case you decide to modify them. In the meantime, what does Wose mean ? Google didn't help me there.

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Wow, I google it and didn't found anything too, I thought that it was a common term accepted by games and mythology of living trees that can move out of the ground and speak. At least Wose is the name of those trees on Wesnoth.

Here is a new list of units:

Consider that the plague effect takes place at the end of the opponent turn (so the enemy can kill this unit or other before transforming).

Gigant Zombie.png

If the enemy has 0 value, the trigger doesn't activate (you don't lose 1 morale each turn for being adjacent to a creature with 0 value).
If the enemy has 2 or 1 value, you only gain 2 or 1 value (respectively).

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Black Cat meets the bonus challenge as its triggered thunder can multicapture. That means Black Cat is eligible for both regular and bonus points.

None of your units meet the regular challenge. Melee basically means your piece has to move when using the ability, and is notated with the movetypes Normal (notated as nothing) and Unblockable (and Unstoppable, Vampire's Fly-transform counts for the normal challenge).

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Ops, I have misunderstood it completely.

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

Round 5

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

While I was working on Arena Master, you also thought of "If more pieces have to die, maybe they shouldn't be always from same side." :)
As @GodOfTomatoes said, death condition resembles Bomber, although only when attacking. On being killed, no revenge is taken.
The unblockable attack on multiple targets 2 rows ahead, and low cost, make me want to enchant and push it from my 3rd row. Easy forks on enemy back line (champions).

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

This just seems like bomber with more steps

$0.00

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 5 Pieces:

PieceMaker-Ceryneian Hind.png

PieceMaker-Nemean Lion.png

Revised Ceryneian Hind:

PieceMaker-Ceryneian Hide (1).png

Revised Nemean Lion:

PieceMaker-Nemean Lion (1).png

The pieces are based on the twelve labors of Heracles

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Your revised Ceryneian Hind fails to meet either challenge.

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Omg, lmao it's supposed to say kill not freeze; Thanks for catching that though

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

thanks for fixing it, though you misspelled it as Ceryneian Hide

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I wanna cry, but anyways I don't really care to fix that because it doesn't really affect the piece. When you list it in the voting tho can you spell it as Ceryneian Hind?

$0.00

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

sure

$0.00

wolfblue (50) · 4 years ago

I like the Hind a lot, though I don't get the theme, and it's very underpowered (since it doesn't have any attack squares, it's just a bad wisp/hostage)
Lion is just way too strong, it has 8 kill triggers...

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 5 submission, GRAPPLING ROBOT (bonus):

New square types:

2 range F / B / L / R "Pull Enemy 1 space closer, or
(Trigger) End of Turn, Enemy Unit: If there is Bomber between you and target, pull it, it attacks the Bomber."
1 range F / B / L / R "Square must be empty, and own value must be above X - Pay 2 own value, spawn Bomber. ", X for tiers is 3/3/5/5

Comments / ideas for the piece:

Combines Lich-like minion spawning (Bombers), and possibly double kill with attack and then pull-trigger.
Compared to Lich, you pay the price for spawns ahead, in army value, and there is limited amount of them (3/4/4/5).
Pulling into Bombers synergises with / enhances them in new way - they're now possibly a threat even from side or behind.
GR keeps the grappling ability, but without Bombers, it is not on trigger, and some other allies must do the killing (pulls to own blindspot).

Sidenote: Since I have hit limit on steemit actions, I will not be commenting / discussing things here as much anymore, those count towards the action limit too. I want to be able to post more submissions (not sure how many comments I would be allowed and when).
Edit: And thanks to some generous magic from Grand and alphacore, I can now comment even more, not sure if that makes others as glad as me, but ... :) .

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago (edited)

Why would you use + rather than base? I get that it costs more so you can summon more bombers but overall it doesn't really seem to be worth it.

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I was thinking just for that extra bomber (both base to +, and ++ to +++). Even if enemy has "free" (kill not by melee, without your piece dying with it) way to take Bombers out - the more you have, the wider area they can cover / defend. And so does GR to take advantage from them (move in and pull instantly). You can maybe place 1 as sacrifice, other on side for GR to follow with revenge. Also, vs setups that do not have way of disposing Bombers for free (you could almost say, they lack any EOD specialised unit :) , more Bombers are real pain, since any melee attacker dies with them. Tiers + and +++ allow you to have same GR, but more bodies for the body count contest / trade-off. And the more you have to trade with (above opponents minion count), the fewer enemy champions should remain standing when you're done with it :) .

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

Round 4 voting has ended! Here are the results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XfhwvIXZRp9ufzqXpOSVJgXn_wCdEWrgzr7cN_yQ_BM/edit?usp=sharing

KerdonMike wins with their PatientSquire!

As KerdonMike said "James - if I win anything, please pass my reward to next piece / creator in score, thank you", GodOfTomatoes and Enderlook both win 20 RP!

Round 5 Voting has started! Here is the voting form: https://forms.gle/nkim21bzHKgFXk7m6

Piecemaking rounds have officially concluded!

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago

I have to say, looking at scores in voting, we differ as much in piece creation, as we do in evaluating and appreciating things / categories in suggestions from others :) .

I think / hope all 3 winners are happy with the results (I am).

enderluck (41) · 4 years ago

Can someone that have posted units vote?

temporalbeast (52) · 4 years ago

yes

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 submission, SLOTH (bonus):

Augment: "Whenever ally uses action square, copy it. It has 1 charge / use, after which it will be cleared / removed again. Max X active squares."
X is 3, 4, 5, 6 across tiers.

Comments / ideas for the piece:

Another spin on do-it-youself (own actions, own pieces) moveset altering / assimilation.
The trick / downside to avoid OP this time, it is not so easy to do what you want, and you have limited amount of built-up squares.
Why not use such nice theme that presents itself, and make it also a suggestion for Sloth, the last of sins, already awaited. We (and / or Grand) are just too lazy to come up with worthy idea for it. I mean, just look at this suggestion's moveset :) .

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I don't want to edit after the round ended, thats why I comment now.
After checking things that I thought this could abuse:

Can't be second cheaper Comet, the square Comet uses to freeze only works on it thanks to augment.
Sloth reviving into Butterfly of equal rank wouldn't really be something scary / beneficial.
Might be used as extra Lifestone without the additional on death penalty from lifestone, but the value of revived piece would be in line with own value, and it would include some clumsiness in use, not really that great.
However, this would be probably the easiest Gemini Split repeater ever. It would have to be either worded in a way that prevents it, or limit the set of squares copied, e.g. melee attacks and moves / teleports.

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

Round 4 submission, POSSESIVE SPIRIT (bonus):

Augment: "The first time you use swap on ally, posses it instead: Take its place, assimilate its moveset, and it's value becomes your new value."

Comments / ideas for the piece:

The primary theme for assimilation mechanic, in general, is to merge and combine movesets into strong / unique / fun combinations. Of course, if it was repeatable, on will, and on own pieces, it would be crazy balance-wise. So Gluttony came with the limitations / differences from that basic idea, in how it works.
But the phantasy / appeal is really universal, so someone has to try it with at least "once and done" approach, although OP cases might still exist.
I tried using 2 moveset shapes / patterns, that I thought would be most likely desirable, and have minimum squares for most common symmetry - 1 in 4 directions. Minimum, because on such assimilation, their cost must be much higher, and the higher the cost of PS goes, the less usable / affordable it would be to include in army value limit. The move types (swap, unblockable attack / swap) are chosen as compromise between later usability, and initial possesion - able to target allies. That way, I don't have to "clutter" the moveset with something that isn't beneficial after possesion.

$0.00

godoftomatoes (52) · 4 years ago

I personally feel like ++ is a downgrade from +, and I would argue it's also a downgrade from base tier as it's harder to map out L moves to exactly where you want. Granted I understand that it allows for more complexity, but the majority of players would probably have a piece that's easier to control.

$0.00

kerdonmike (48) · 4 years ago (edited)

I understand that from + to ++, for some pieces it would be less desirable, if they're not looking for mobility, but more threat. But downgrade from base to ++, I do not understand, maybe not worth the cost ? To me, L reach (for most types of squares) is much better than just adjacent diagonals, and its also 8 squares vs 4, so you get double the squares for double the cost (10 vs 5), but the improvement on squares (adjacent -> L) seems like a good deal. I would want L added to ranger, moonfox, haunted armor, ... I mean almost anything that is worth improving this way. Exception on pieces, that have L already better than swap, and could use improved adjacent diagonal, e.g. demon, fortress.

$0.00