Feedback / Suggestions

[PalladiaMors]

Currently, when Genesis is in your graveyard, every time you get to your upkeep you're prompted to pick a target for its ability, and afterwards you are prompted about whether or not you want to activate it. I'd like to suggest inverting the order of events here: first you decide whether to use the ability, and only in case you choose "yes" you get prompted to pick the target. This would make play smoother while Genesis in in a graveyard, since you wouldn't have to waste time uselessly choosing a target when you don't want to use the ability.

[Doctor Weird]

Currently, when Genesis is in your graveyard, every time you get to your upkeep you're prompted to pick a target for its ability, and afterwards you are prompted about whether or not you want to activate it. I'd like to suggest inverting the order of events here: first you decide whether to use the ability, and only in case you choose "yes" you get prompted to pick the target. This would make play smoother while Genesis in in a graveyard, since you wouldn't have to waste time uselessly choosing a target when you don't want to use the ability.

While I agree that it's a bit of a nuisance, reverting the order as you suggest would go against the game's rules, as there are actually rules that say a player must pick a target, if there is a valid one, whether they want to or not, even in "may" abilities.

It's similar to having to pick a target every turn for Yasova Dragonclaw, or every time Alesha, Who Smiles at Death attacks, even when you have no intention to use their abilities. The difference is that in those cases I can think of multiple situations where the targeting enforcement would matter, while with Genesis I can't think of a card that would care about this targeting at all, but that is not to say that somewhere out there there isn't an interaction that would be affected by changing the way that targeting rule is enforced, or that at some point in the future a new card wouldn't come out that would conflict with this commodity change. Not to mention that the ability goes to stack whether used or not, which can matter for a lot of abilities and effects.

So yes, I agree that it's annoying, but making sure XMage enforces every rule as best as possible is probably more important, I think.

[DiMiaN]

I really love this software and I noticed on github there's fixes almost everyday.

Some older suggestion I support:

The biggest thing I miss from MTGO is a draft log output to txt file so I can post my drafts for feedback.

The host of a game should have the ability to kick people (before the game starts) this is if the host wishes to have certain people to join but another (unwanted) player joins instead.

Make private lobbies: to enter one you'd need a password.

...and some new:

Instead of /w [username], by double-clicking username will bring up private message box.

In the future, make some sort of point system with different ladder rooms based on your points.

[Alph]

First of all, Thanks for this marvelous tool

I would like to make the suggestion of having the pauper format with either the online legality (hymn to tourach or kird ape are not legal in online pauper - though you can use them in xmage) or some sort of distinction between paper pauper / online pauper legality because this can lead to some unfair games


Thanks for the attention

[DiMiaN]

Suggestion:
Make a friends list. Could be simple as /f add [nick]. /f list /f remove [nick] (like old battle.net).

[hamitasgarov]

Two things:

- When a spell reveals something (someone's hand, for instance), two windows pop up: the one you choose from and the one where you can see what has been revealed. The latter cannot be moved, so sometimes you can't see relevant information while taking the decision. Although in the attached image it's not particularly relevant, not seeing the third land that my opponent controlled could have made a difference in other situation (removing the card he can cast/can't cast, etc.). Would it be possible to make the windows movable?
- When looking for serious playtesting against tier-1 decks, it's a little messier than one would wish because the meaning of "Serious" varies wildly from player to player. I created a Facebook group for people to join it and ask for practice against particular deck archetypes. Do you think it would be feasible to advertise it so that people could join it and create a proper XMage community on Facebook?

Thank you!:)

[Morfi]

Can't wait when you'll introduce registration or any other form of user authentication.
I'm wasting hours playing against cunts that quit matches because they can't draw porno hand

[Finbez]

I'd like to see Canadian Highlander implemeted. It's 100 card singleton with a points system for busted cards.

[ABagOfFritos]

Better graveyard display. Make the graveyard display the same way as the library. Graveyard is important in every format.

[Lysk]

I posted my personal feature wishlist a while ago and decided to bump it a little now. I marked implemented items, added some new ones, and marked those about which I don't care as much anymore.

My personal feature wishlist:

• An extra-turn-display, maybe in the player-info panel, that shows +x, where x is the remeining extra turns of a player (+0 if his or her current turn is an extra turn and it's his or her last remaining extra turn. invisible in normal turns without remaining extra turns)
• A different colored border for cards with conditions that indicates if the condition has been met. For example the trap cards.
• Put some use to the collection Viewer: Let users mark cards as favourites, that then become chosen over their other versions in all decks they load to play with. Maybe expand the preferences by a bool that toggles this behaviour. Favourites could also be checked upon importing a decklist. Or provide an additional "Pimp Deck"-button in the deck editor, that swaps all matched cards in the currently open deck with their favorited versions (if there are any). The algorithm could also shuffle versions if multiple versions of the same card are selected.
• Collapsible player boards. Multiplayer Matches with a defeated player (or more than one) waste a lot of potential display space.
• Implement "always yield to this" and "always yes to this" functions to help players handle the stack more efficiently.
• (Kinda lower than low prio) While I'm on the stack, multiplayer commanders would love you (even more) if there was something like a "Yield until something affects me or all players or the last end step before my turn" function.
• A few chat improvements: Whispering to folks. Buddies. Emotes, maybe even emoticons.
• A display for experience counters.
• An optional priority-timeout.

[PalladiaMors]

Hey I wanted to say Thank You to @LevelX for changing the name of the historical standard format as requested. Also want to say thanks to you guys for making the format playable, particularly @LevelX for fixing every bug that's found in such a short time, @LoneFox, @fireshoes and @emerald000 for coding the vast majority of the older cards, and also thanks to all the other people who contribute with card coding and other improvements to Xmage, I'd like to cite everyone's name, but fortunately there are so many people helping out that this would be a pretty challenging task. Online MtG players had been waiting since the early 2000s for a program like Xmage, so I don't know if you guys realize it, but for a lot of us it's pretty much a dream come true. Wish I could contribute more than I do, but I'm an absolute failure as an amateur "programmer", but I try to contribute the way I can with a positive attitude and forum activity. You can count on me for anything you need that I am capable of doing, given my limitations. Cheers!

By the way, github still says Xmage has about 10000 cards implemented, when it's up to almost 13000 at this point.

[Blitkun]

Hi - love xMage and all, but have some feedback/complaints/suggestions to share.

Firstly, I obviously recognize xMage's potential to test decks and all. It's great to be able to build your deck without monetary restraints, as well as finding people to play with pretty much whenever you want. I believe the majority of the users out there are either testing/practicing with a Tier deck (as in - competitive/netdecking/"let me try the deck that won that GP") or users who are tweaking their builds to beat specific meta matchups. Either way, it's practice, fun and experience. It's great.

However, there is a subset of Casual players out there. People who brew some durdly list and just want to mess around with their spells far from being Twin'ed out on Turn4. Or else, they'd create Serious lobbies. Or simply join these lobbies OR even play at their LGS.

It just seems that the lobby tags (Beginner/Casual/Serious) mean little to nothing out there. It's very frustrating to create Casual lobbies and then be (in my opinion) trolled by people joining with Amulet Bloom, Griselbrand Reanimator, Tron and the like. I know there's no way to enforce a "code" that prevents competitives decks from joining (lol), but it's just a feature that makes pretty much NO difference. If it worked, I'd be able to transition from competitive matches to chillout-durdlefests whenever I wished - but it doesn't. This also ends up disrupting testing purposes - say you create a Serious lobby looking for experience against meta decks, and then here comes a durdle deck. Of course it will be an easy match, but if you're actively trying to gain experience, it just feels like a waste of time.

However, the group who loses the most (IMHO) is the Casual group - since dealing with these issues lead to serial quitting, creating new lobbies, making sure your new opponent isn't going to f*cking play a turn 1 Primeval Titan when you're just messing around with that sweet BW Warrior deck you're testing for your little cousin. It drains fun.

No, I'm not sure how to address this. But as it is now, this has just been draining my will to play xMage.

[Lysk]

Hey, so there's many people who wish to have some kind of power over who's joining their lobbies and who can't. Since we don't have a user acocunt system I think there might be another approach.

• Right click a player's name and klick "block for this session" or use a chat command like /block <username>.
• This would then make the xmage server read my IP and store it in an array.
• Upon me leaving the entry get's removed from that array.
• The key for that array is another array of IP adresses.
• Upon command execution, the server resolves the chosen username to that user's IP.
• This IP get's stored in the array that's the value to my IP-key in the global "teporary userspecific banlist array".
• Lobbies created by a user whose IP is contained in that array are not visible to users whose IP is contained in the lobby's creator's temporary banlist.

This way, remote IP addresses are not exposed to the client but the server maintains an optional list of unwanted guests per user.
With this implementation users could exclude unwanted players sessionwise and reconneting with a different name won't impede that exclusion - which is kinda what's the critical mass for an effective banlist. Still vulnerable to people who know how to get a new lease or switch proxies, but way more effective than the options we have atm (none).

Additionally, there could be ban levels if you extend that array respectively. Introduce a "skill" field, restrict people from joining your casual matches but not your serious matches or something like that. But that's for later.

Also, if this get's implemented, a clientsided memory function would be good, maybe just a plain, comma or linebreak separated list that can be maintained via a textbox in the settings dialogue and get's saved in a simple "banlist.txt" in the client root..

So that's my idea on how to approach this issue without providing user accounts.

[Blitkun]

I really like the suggestion above, but I don't think it would address the issue I presented (of course, it would address a number of other relevant issues). It has been very well explained, and surely avoiding some individuals can lead to better user experience. However, considering you would only detect a troll after he trolled you, the user would still experience the same problems as of today. It's very valid to give power to deal with the issue directly, but it wouldn't diminish the number of occurrences.
I have the feeling the solution would be to make the tags (Beginner/Casual/Serious) more relevant, but still unsure how to implement this.

[Finbez]

Do you think we could get an export option that produces a .txt file with just the list sans all the editions? As it stands if I want to upload a .dck file from xmage to mtggoldfish or tappedout or something I have to go through and delete all the edition parts of the list to fix the syntax of their uploaders. Also all the sideboard cards are determined by SB: <card> which doesn't fit the syntax of any uploader that I know of so I also have to go and remove that as well.