Simple Piecemaking Tournament
I want to give away some RP, so I will make a piecemaking tournament. It will last 5 days, you can submit at most 2 pieces. A piece that creates/promotes into another new piece will count as 2 pieces. Scoring is based on your best piece. Edits are allowed/encouraged. The theme for this tournament is simplicity. 50 RP will be given out the person I think gave the best/most feedback, plus 45 RP for the one who wins the tournament.
Scoring:
If you have x abilities on your unit, you lose [x^1.5] points. For each custom ability on your unit, you lose [(x-1)^1.5] points, where x is the number of lines that the text for that ability uses. (with the linked piecemaker).
You will lose 0/0/5/10 points if the unit is Common/Rare/Epic/Legendary
.
You will lose up to 10 points for every part of your piece that could potentially be ambiguous or confusing, or for bad english.
You will lose the tournament if your piece is significantly over or under powered or broken, or if your piece is just a copy of an existing unit.
The goal is to get the maximum score. At this point, the best submissions will just be warrior, the lamest piece in all of CEO. Hit the following bullets to gain up to 10 points each.
My unit...
- Inspires fear from across the field (e.g. rook, comet, wisp)
- Breaks common chess intuition with a surprising move (e.g. frog, lilith, frostmage)
- Causes aggressive matches (e.g. firemage, snake, siren)
Create with https://ceopiecemaker.github.io/
Alright, the tournament is over (it was over a while ago but I was busy until yesterday when kong was down so I couldn't distribute rewards), the winner is GodOfTomatoes with his Cyclops. I think this tournament generated a lot of super fun pieces (at least for me - the categories were specifically designed to generate units that I would like though). I think that of these, Cyclops is the coolest, but there are a lot of gems in the others, too. So +45 RP to GodOfTomatoes. The best/most feedback reward goes to kerdonmike, he gave pretty detailed feedback to lots of pieces, +50 RP.
Overall I am happy with the tournament results, though I think some people are mad that I didn't put any effort into hosting it (I was really just using it as a way to give out my RP and also because I wanted to have some discussion/see some units I would like). So, in the future I will likely not be hosting any tournaments unless I really put a ton of effort into them, which I don't see myself doing unless the community gets a lot larger and I get less busy. Anyways, thanks to the participants and see you next time
What do you mean by "ability", that term is pretty vague. In my own head the two major parts of the piece are the actions (move, attack, magic, etc.) and passive. If it doesn't include the passive I'll make a piece with a very long and intricate passive. I think you lose 10 points for a rule that is ambiguous or confusing.
Damn, my 10 points ): I had written 'including passives' before but it got removed in the editing process P:
Anyways, does this mean that everyone will be submitting pieces named assassin? Theme doesn't count so why not.
My impression of this guy is pretty good, though I think it is too strong and easily leads to annoying matchups. With the mobility, it basically means that any row the foe doesn't guard can just have this unit teleport to it, and in particular this is going to lead to a lot of early mates. Id score something like:
Inspires fear from across the field - 10 (Very very scary)
Breaks common chess intuition with a surprising move - 2 (Just a normal attack, even if it can be surprising)
Causes aggressive matches - 3 (You can be aggressive, but the opponent will be forced to play very defensively and it seems likely to lead to a lot of checks, in the endgame it gives rise to unstoppable checking wars which is unfun and slow)
I would put some kind of debuff to make infinitely checking disadvantageous and perhaps make it less mobile. Category 2 is going to be hard for you without magic or custom abilities.
+5000 Points for making it Uncommon
I don't know if this can really be considered a piece, but it has my vote simply for your attack upon the unclear rules.
I would just like to mention that although the idea of losing points for making piece high rarity may appear arbitrary, the most likely intention here is that higher rarity units are more complex on average.
Rarity and complexity are not completely bound to each other, but they have correlation because a new player has a big enough learning curve in front of them already to not be bombarded with all the most complex effects at once, and yet they still should be exposed to at least a few to know they exist. So even though you can label literally anything as common in piecemaker, ideally the unit looks similar to what you might find at that rarity in the game. This also correlates to themes such as mythological creature vs peasant, but that's another topic entirely.
anyway, the actual rarities are:
Common/Rare/Epic/Legendarylol
I thought Rare, Epic, and Legendary were uncommon, by logical negation.
That was the intent, also for the meme :P Thanks for noticing.
I edited the post, it no longer says common/uncommon/rare/legendary.
I got this one put together. The costs are probably just straight up wrong but edits are encouraged.
The most usefull thing is the augment of 1 turn enchant.
Tiers 0 and 1 seem just like "free" minion grabbing, kill one turn, stay immune, run next.
Tiers 2 and 3 become considerably more dangerous, for preparing 2 simultaneous threats vs champions / king.
I agree it inspires fear, and causes aggresive matches (by the owner), but the problem with these categories is it either isn't full score on them or the score is just voided by unit being too OP :) .
Other than the categories of this contest, as general suggestion, I think the mechanic of free grabs is very (too ?) good, I don't know how to balance it. Personally I prefer other functional downside / drawback to it, not just higher cost.
I was thinking of two ways to fix that.
The first and, less creative was would be to just remove its ability to attack/move attack entirely. I'm not sure how this would be since the unit could never attack a champion but still allows free steals on minions.
The seconds would be making the enchant last 0.5 turns longer. The turn enchant is supposed to be so that it takes a guy and goes invincible on the opponents turn, then your turn comes around and it is still enchanted so you can't attack and therefore have no choice but to move away. I never saw that you could just leave it there and it would unenchant on your turn where you just take another guy and eventually ravage through the enemy line since it is fundamentally unkillable (this may require a 1.5 or 2 turn enchant and the 1 turn is just a wrong number). Adding 0.5 to the time would make the piece vulnerable on the opponents turn. This would make it actually able to be killed and serve the purpose of "rush in, kill, rush out" since it would need to leave in order to not be killed. This would also make it more strategic since you would need to convince the opponent that something else is in danger for them to not take their turn killing it.
What kind of functional downside did you have in mind, something like the reaper or the elementals?
I like that second suggestion, so I will pretend like that's already been incorporated when I leave my comment on the piece as it was an unintentional error to not have the enchant that way from the start.
I'm a fan on this one. Maybe it's a bit OP but the idea is cool. 1 turn Immunity means that the effective way to counter is to strike back and create another major threat. Though, maybe it shouldn't be enchanted after killing a champion? And only have range 2 minion attack? Idk but it needs some kind of debuff.... balance isn't really part of this tournament and I don't think it's broken enough to kick it out of the tournament so it doesn't affect your score, but it's borderline broken.
Inspires fear from across the field - 7 It has a lot of power...
Breaks common chess intuition with a surprising move - 4 Not that surprising, but that enchant effect can surprise you
Causes aggressive matches - 10
This Tournament:
Points as I understand them:
Across Board: +(10)
No common Chess Logic: +(10)
Aggressive: +(10)
Abilities: -(5^1.5)
Custom Lines: N/A
Total: 18.8196601125 or roughly 18.8 Points
The actual unit:
Creativity: 4/5 (New Idea)
Theme: 4/5 (It strikes an enemy and then retreats)
Execution: 2/5 (A bit OP with the range on the unblockable minion attacks, not to mention it can kill a champion and get enchanted to escape avoiding having to trade pieces. I would suggest decreasing the range, increasing the cost, removing the ability to attack non-minions, and/or making the enchant only happen on minions.)
Cyclops:
2 abilities so -(2^1.5)
3 lines on custom ability so -(2^1.5)
Rare so -(0)
am englich no confuze so -(0)
Fear across board so +(10)
Surprising Move +(10)
Aggressive matches +(10)
Total: 24.3431457505 Points or roughly 24.3 Points
Btw a cyclops is a one eyed giant famous for their weak spots on their sides.
Alright I love that trigger ability, though cost 2 seems too low, I'd maybe add 1 or 2 to all the values? Maybe not though, that trigger debuff is pretty whack. Anyways, it's balanced enough. Actually it kind of reminds me of the assassin unit with the backstab ability posted earlier but the other way around.
Fear across board (+9) Yep, it's a super cheap rook (at +++), and it's really designed for being a ranged threat all the time.
Surprising Move +(10) I gave assassin +10 already and this is the same
Aggressive matches +(10) It's aggressive and the foe will need to be aggressive to fight, full points.
I could add 1 more cost, but I'm worried about adding more cost as base rook is 12 and the trigger on cyclops even at +++ does significantly weaken it. Also part of the goal in my mind was to have another rook like unit that's very cheap morale wise similar to greed.
I like this unit a lot. The unit having a downside that isn't 'lost X morale' is quite interesting and the simplicity of your method works very well.
Indeed, downside is nice idea. However, if it can sit back and threaten so far, you choose when to come out / exchange it, so it wouldn't come into effect that often. I'd use tier 3 instead of rook > 95% of time :) .
As for clarity, if the trigger is on enemy who doesn't have attack square / capability towards Cyclops, does it still kill Cyclops ?
Yes, so if a knight is in the trigger spot for example it will still automatically kill cyclops. I figure this downside makes it harder to use as even if you rush with it you're giving the enemy an advantage in tempo. However just like with samurai you could attempt to turn this against the player by putting cyclops in a position that forces king to attack it and be out in the open.
GORGON:
The only action square is: "(Ranged, Start of Turn Trigger) Petrify enemy unit for 1 turn."
Tiers from 0 to 3 have range from 3 to 6, gradually.
Comments / ideas:
Wouldn't it be "(Ranged, Trigger) Enemy Unit:"
Btw, this is a comment to help you get more points by simplifying it and it's the format the game already uses
I appreciate it. But the 3 pieces that have trigger activated just by turns passing are - Alchemist, Lust, Samurai. And they all have the start / end of turn later in the description, with more space filled in sentence, than just 3 words before trigger :) .
This piece is I think broken OP, just push it a square forward and you have an insane amount of control over a column. I would say it's ok if you bump up the costs a lot ((x+2)*1.5 is appropriate IMO) or nerf it with displacement-immune but for now it's a lose. Supposing that's fixed, it's a pretty interesting/powerful magic ability.
Inspires fear from across the field - 5 (Big range at higher tiers, so sure)
Breaks common chess intuition with a surprising move- 7 (magic and triggers are always weird)
Causes aggressive matches - 3 (It feels a lot like voidmage)
Compared to Voidmage, Gorgon:
So it's slower twice (get in, kill), and requires ally (allies) to do anything with / during the effect.
Insane amount of control ? Insane range, that's about it. Control that doesn't kill, doesn't last, and isn't flexible to point / relocate elsewhere is quite a liable control. The same column you cannot place your units on for it to keep stunning (except DNBM). Opponent can counterplay by:
The best case scenario for Gorgon - when opposing turtling setup, with limited range, slow advance, lack of pressure / number of threats. And 2 of 3 goals we were supposed to aim for are to discourage exactly that kind of opposing tactic / setup. In my view, Gorgon is better for being this way, not worse. The cost imo is fair for what it can do and what it is susceptible to.
And lastly - if Gorgon had displacement-immune - I wouldn't put tiers 0 .. 2 in my setup ever, and would hesitate and think twice to include tier 3, even if all tiers costed 0.
If you consider it OP enough to leave it out of competition, it's better it stays out. Because that feedback I'm not going to agree with or reflect in any way. At least GodOfTomatoes, me, and possibly others later don't have to waste more time commenting on this piece - in this competition, to be precise.
Your comment seems to forget that the ability is a trigger? It doesn't just stun for 1 turn, it stuns indefinitely. I compared it to voidmage because the ways to defend are similar - You either place a low-value piece in front and still have it get hit with the effect, or kill the Gorgon. I'm not sure what you mean by the last point in counterplaying, pushing elsewhere doesn't stop the trigger effect. In that way Gorgon is stronger than voidmage, which takes a turn to do it's magic. Also pieces can move after being exposed to void magic which helps a little at least. Of course, the fact that it can only target 1 unit is a weakness, but poison/thunder will be pretty effective at ignoring this. With range 7, I would prefer gorgon+++ over voidmage+++ in most setups, even if they were costed the same. (others may disagree)
You misunderstand point 3. The objective is not to benefit the opponent with an offensive setup, but to force offensive play regardless of the setups, or perhaps to force your own army into being more aggressive.
I agree that displacement immune is weak for the first few tiers, I meant that it could be part of a solution, not the whole solution. For example, displacement immune with a starting teleport. In my opinion, displacement immune T3 is still very strong.
Also, scores aren't final until the tournament is over. So you aren't really disqualified unless you don't edit your unit.
I'm not sure if it is possible to see the same thing so differently, or change anything about it if it is possible. Last effort:
I do not misunderstand point 3, or anything else for that matter. But I have a feeling you misunderstand something more profound.
"objective is not to benefit the opponent with an offensive setup, but to force offensive play regardless of the setups" ?!?!
This is same thing said in 2 ways, 2 sides of same coin, cause and effect.
If I require / encourage something considered offensive, then of course setups that are better offensively will be better at doing the required offense, and therefore benefit (or are punished less, again, different wording for same thing) than non- or less-aggressive setups.
If I make competition in which I require participants to run fast, and hare and snail enter it, how am I going to require them to run fast without benefiting the faster one (hare), in your view ?
The difference in the bolded text is that one involves changes that can be controlled within the course of the match (moving pieces), and the other involves changes that cannot be controlled within the course of the match (army setup). It is not the same thing said twice.
I'd leave something more helpful, but it seems like this piece got disqualified
Monolith:
Number of abilities: -(1^1.5)
Custom lines: -(3^1.5)
Epic: -(5)
Engliezh: -(0)
Fear across field: +(10)
Surprising move: +(10)
Aggresive: +(10)
Total: 18.8038475773 Points or roughly 18.8 Points
Btw a Monolith is a large stone often used as a monument. This serves as the anti lifestone, and inspiration was drawn from killer bunnies, in which the monolith is a card that kills all things.
Revised Monolith:
The flipped mechanic of Lifestone I like. Trying to think of when will I use it (current form):
If you read (or already have) a recent Lifestone thread, you see for what reasons people find LS worth including. These reasons are flipped for Monolith, so we know why we wouldn't want it. I think you aren't looking for this to be flipped on M vs LS too :) . Imo Monolith still needs to add some upside.
Hmm, I might buff it but as you already discovered the idea behind it is that even though it's a higher cost unit you can use it to get rid of low cost units with high penalties (such as greed, princess, or milita), you can use it to guard king to a degree, and you can use it to guard the promotion line to avoid the enemy turning around the battle last second. Part of what I was worried about with buffing is making it a unit that people just use to kill everything so they can win. Although I did add the bit about gaining morale on its death which discourages the opponent taking it, but I might upgrade the amount.
Holy cow you actually made an Epic rarity unit, that's daring. I appreciate you not making a big square and instead using the range augmented even though it wastes characters. I think this is pretty balanced overall, it basically allows you to make 1 mistake, or allows your rush on one side to become super strong. I also like that it buffs nullmage. I think it's balanced - maybe even a bit strong, it's hard to tell. You lose a champion slot but gain instant local positional advantage at some point in the game. Though, Base and maybe + should have better range, they are pretty useless. I think it might even work if it was range 5 at all tiers.
Fear across field: +10 (Instant kill with big range, yeah it's scary)
Surprising move: +10 (It's similar to comet, even scarier)
Aggressive: +5 (It lets you make mistakes which helps aggression, but it mostly affects your side of the field so I view it as more defensive. Moreso, the foe is penalized for being aggressive. It could be used to push hard in some situations, though.)
Hmm, yeah based on the other comment I think I'll up the range to 5 on all tiers that way it's not UP on lower tiers without making the +++ stronger since it can already kill some lower tier champions which is huge in board control and tempo.
This post has received a 40.9 % upvote from @boomerang.
It's been more than 5 days.