Page 1 of 2

[Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 04 Apr 2011, 20:41
by Hellfish
If you don't want New Phyrexia spoiled for you, don't read further into this thread!

New Phyrexia | Open
While I know we won't start adding NPH cards until release, as we do, I think we may want to get a head start on this issue, lest it complicates matters.
Basically, an apparently trusted source at mtgsalvation have shown leaked japanese cards with what appears to be a new type of mana cost symbol, colloquially referred to as Phy<color> or Phyrexian <color>. Translators report that the reminder text say "You may pay <color> or 2 life."

The question is: How will we handle this? The only way we could right now would be a series of AltCost's for each card with these symbols. :/

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 Apr 2011, 09:53
by Replika
New Phyrexia | Open
I don't know much about the actual code for casting spells, so forgive me if my suggestions are way off.

We already have spells that let you choose something while paying their cost - X-spells and multikicker cards. Maybe it could be done in a similar way. First you have to pay the cost you have to pay no matter what (like the UU in Mind Spring's cost). Then you get to pay the special part similar to multikicker: You pay mana until you either click "cancel" or paid all phyrexian costs. After that you're asked to pay 2 life for each p-mana you left over in the last step.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 Apr 2011, 11:10
by Chris H.
New Phyrexia | Open
I guess that it is still to early in the rumor cycle to have any idea how many cards will be impacted by this new type of cost.

AltCost might be the way to go if the total number of cards impacted were not very large.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 13 Apr 2011, 23:48
by friarsol
New Cost | Open
So it seems like the way Phyrexian Mana works is when you announce a spell/ability with it in the cost you have to decide right then how you are paying for Phyrexian Mana. So on activation we could present the User with a select box with all the possible options ranging from 2x life to x mana. And then create a temporary Cost object "adjusted" for that activation, and pass that along to the appropriate function. Hopefully none of these Spell/Abilities have an existing Life Payment to streamline things, but we might be able to work with that anyway.

As far as the AI goes, it should probably never use the alternate means of paying for Phyrexian Mana. There would need to be a damned good reason for it to just pay life, since we already have issues with that type of thing.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 01 May 2011, 22:37
by Hellfish
Guess we can stop it with the spoiler blocks now :P

Anyway, got a little something committed in r8267. Click your life total to pay life for Phyrexian mana (like Channel). Life isn't actually paid until the entire cost is "written up" so to speak.Until then, the amount of life spent is indicated in the message window.The AI treats Phyrexian mana like regular old colored mana. It definitely works with casting costs and ability costs based on the new Cost code. (Is there anything that still uses the old cost code?) Moltensteel Dragon & Porcelain Legionnaire are done.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 01 May 2011, 22:44
by friarsol
Hellfish wrote:Anyway, got a little something committed in r8267. Click your life total to pay life for Phyrexian mana (like Channel). Life isn't actually paid until the entire cost is "written up" so to speak.Until then, the amount of life spent is indicated in the message window.The AI treats Phyrexian mana like regular old colored mana. It definitely works with casting costs and ability costs based on the new Cost code. (Is there anything that still uses the old cost code?) Moltensteel Dragon & Porcelain Legionnaire are done.
Channel doesn't do that anymore since it got converted to AF_Effect.

Is paying life this way going to be clear to a user to click on their life total? It might be slightly better for Phyrexian Mana payments (than Channel), but still not consistent with how other Life payment is handled.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 01 May 2011, 23:06
by Hellfish
Oh yeah, forgot about that. I don't play with Channel *that* often. Nevertheless, I think clicking your life total to pay life is pretty intuitive already IMHO and if need be, a reminder could be shown in the message window perhaps?

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 02 May 2011, 07:48
by Sloth
Hellfish wrote:Oh yeah, forgot about that. I don't play with Channel *that* often. Nevertheless, I think clicking your life total to pay life is pretty intuitive already IMHO and if need be, a reminder could be shown in the message window perhaps?
I also favor clicking your life total, but a reminder may save us some desperate forum posts.

EDIT: I just tested Moltensteel Dragon and I don't lose life when I cast him with phyrexian mana, but I do lose life when I use his ability.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 02 May 2011, 11:57
by Hellfish
I committed some tweaks and fixes to the messages when paying phyrexian mana. See if it's any better? :)
I tried to add phy mana symbols based on this picture but my GIMP-fu is not strong enough to resize them and keep them goodlooking: :/

Also, Moltensteel Dragon correctly subtracts life here. It was probably fixed along with my message tweaks. :)

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 May 2011, 13:04
by Sloth
Hellfish wrote:I tried to add phy mana symbols based on this picture but my GIMP-fu is not strong enough to resize them and keep them goodlooking: :/
Can you just submit, what you have made, Hellfish. I will try to improve the pics (until someone with real skills will finish it).

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 May 2011, 19:47
by Hellfish
Alright, I committed some symbols. I tried using linear instead of cubic interpolation for the scaling (whatever that means, I'm no graphic designer :P ) and they might be a bit better. They just don't look very crisp to me, like the normal symbols do.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 May 2011, 20:11
by Chris H.
Hellfish wrote:Alright, I committed some symbols. I tried using linear instead of cubic interpolation for the scaling (whatever that means, I'm no graphic designer :P ) and they might be a bit better. They just don't look very crisp to me, like the normal symbols do.
`
They look good to me. :D

I loaded the WUBRG mana symbols into my simple graphics editor and made a few quick edits. This is far from perfect but it does look a wee bit sharper.

`

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 05 May 2011, 20:37
by Sloth
For me the icons from Hellfish have the right feel to it. Chris' icons look a bit too symmetrical for my taste.

EDIT: Since I'm using a notebook most of you will have higher resolutions and might see it differently.

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 06 May 2011, 12:34
by Chris H.
These mana symbols are only 13 x 13 pixels and this does not leave too much room for improvement. :)

Hellfish's scaled symbols look good to me, except that the shadowing effect is taking up valuable real-estate. My hand drawn symbols do not use as much aliasing as Hellfish's and therefore the curves in my symbols are too sharp.

So, I removed the shadowing effect from Hellfish's scaled symbols and the archive below contains my efforts. This may the best that we can do.

`

Re: [Set Spoilers]Cost discussion

PostPosted: 06 May 2011, 12:56
by Sloth
Chris H. wrote:These mana symbols are only 13 x 13 pixels and this does not leave too much room for improvement. :)

Hellfish's scaled symbols look good to me, except that the shadowing effect is taking up valuable real-estate. My hand drawn symbols do not use as much aliasing as Hellfish's and therefore the curves in my symbols are too sharp.

So, I removed the shadowing effect from Hellfish's scaled symbols and the archive below contains my efforts. This may the best that we can do.

`
They look fine to me. Good work Chris.