PalladiaMors wrote:I've tested that they parsed and had no bugs, but I didn't test how the AI performed with them. As usual, you know much better than I do what's worth implementing or not, so feel free to not accept the submissions whenever they are problematic.
Just one thing. Like ShawnieBoy, I'm also definitely more inclined to follow the cards' text. However, I must say that a lot of cards that were done before I was even here have small rule adaptations. A ton of cards that required revealing were implemented before revealing was supported. The planeswalkers with emblems have been implemented without the actual emblems. There are many other cards I could mention with such adaptations. With time, several of these things are being improved - for example, revealing is now possible. I don't think small rule deviations should be an absolute dogma. I think sometimes cards can be acceptable temporarily like that. And it's not like every card I've submitted was like that, I like to think I've done a couple things that were somewhat decent.
Staying true to a cards text or staying true to a cards flavour is where many have differing opinions. My personal opinion (Not saying it's the right one, or that other opinions are 'wrong') is that I always try and have a card as exact as possible to how the card functions 'in the real world', liking Magarena to a simulation.
However I can still see that having a card that functions for pretty much all situations, and still identifies as that card except in some niche scenarios, can open a window to other cards. The cards you have mentioned which are not functionally identical to real cards fall in this category.
Once a card is sumbitted and added, it can never be removed. It would have too much impact on Firemind and other decks people have created with those cards in. That always makes me err on the side of caution. However, sometimes these 'errors' can be fixed (I remember redoing the
, Pay 1 life: Add [mana] to your mana pool - as they were dealing damage instead at the time (The only close option for generating mana)) and open up for other cards as a result.
Some of the iterations of early Flashback and
Unearth are 'not by the book' - I have a growing grudge against
Varolz, the Scar-Striped and his current work-around.
The final question should always be 'Can the AI use it properly?'
Here's what I do for testing cards:
I always have a bundle of simple 40 card decks, they're never fixed, as whenever I work on new cards I replace some in the deck with relevant colour/colours. I then play a mirror match against the AI, where the aim of the game is to get the AI to cast the new cards (And cast them yourself of course) or get new creatures into combat. As I'm not often actively playing Magarena as a user, this can also allow me to check log messages and if they make sense, choices and also see the UI changes that have no doubt occurred