Hearthpwn

Fair enough. I could see that being problematic, so you measure some restrictions so people don't get an unfair advantage. I suppose remove what biases you can since you can't remove them all. I try to not vote based on presentation because even if someone isn't very good at formatting a submission, they can still have worthwhile ideas. I'd prefer a default format for everyone to fit their cards in, if I'm being honest. But I also like simple things. I am actively biased against what I consider to be over presentation, but I try to ignore than when voting. Just me liking uniformity. As an aside I hope a grand total of zero people wowwiki. Wowpedia is fine, it's actually moderated and run by people who care. Wowwiki constantly has improper information.

Quote from Shatterstar1998 >>

Quote from Wishmaster333 >>

Next time y'all do this, can people just use one of the 9 already designed hero powers if they wish. There are so many classes that would be better off with an existing copy of one of the hero powers already on show. Without serious hoops to jump through, you can only do basic stat boosts or a simple weapon. Some examples do that, and some ignore that entirely. And some class designs don't fit either of those parameters, so people create more than 2 mana hero powers or they are weirdly designed.

The battle-mage(Demonx95), for example. Would be better off if the hero power didn't move minions and it just had Fireblast as the hero power.

Having a delayed card draw attached to a minion is a little bit convoluted Cogito_ergo_sum, and yours is just one. It's not even the worst offender from all the classes, and it's not even the only class with a delayed card draw. The Magician from cL4wzHS also does this, and has the same problem. You'd both be better off if you could just have warlocks hero power and designed basic/class card(s) to fit the niche your hero powers staggered draw backs provide.

Also, stuff like the Researcher from aaro54, The Chronicler from Hurien, The pint sized Witch from Ragnador, etc. basically gets around the 2 mana restriction of hero powers by designing a token or group of tokens that costs 1 mana to use.

I get this is for fun for the people who get involved and at the end of the day that's all it's about. But, I guess I just have a serious disconnect to  part of this community. Lots of things aren't super appealing to me this go around, aesthetically or basic design wise. Personally speaking I can only back a few. I guess maybe my standards are too high, or I dunno.

The Witch(Thezzy), The Archeologist(Pircival). The Lich(Linkblade 91). Lowering my 'WOW aesthetic compliant' standards I gave The Bug(SunnoxPL) a pass, too.

I couldn't come up with anything so clearly I also couldn't do better myself. I just think of the hundreds of people who have competed in the past. Not plagiarizing while trying to carve out your own thing is hard to do, it's a rough task and this time illness, coupled with my own lack of creativity led me to avoid this competition from a competitors process.

'We want to breed new creativity with this competition.'  Lich/Necromancer, Alchemist, Bard, Tinker/Engineer. (You can probably throw battle-mage and/or some witchdoctor variant in there too.) If you really wanted to 'breed creativity' you'd stop equally common ideas. Otherwise, remove the monk, demon hunter, death knight restriction. Seems rather arbitrary to me from my perspective. I see those other classes just as often, if not more so across the hearthstone community since everyone seems to want to restrict those 3 classes. I probably should've complained about this sooner, or before the competition even started in the feedback thread, but it just didn't occur to me until now that this is a problem. I don't see a problem with people coming up with new ideas for those classes, I don't think we need that restriction for future class competitions.

Biggerbossman who just posted his submission while I was writing this. Not only is your class poorly balanced, I think it's offensive to Japanese mythos and culture, while also demeaning suicide and the victims there-of. 'There's nothing a good old shot of Seppuku can't solve.' YIKES. I'm sure it wasn't your intent, but that is not a good look there, bud.

 

 I'm not going to dispute you about the restriction (which I think if anything make it hard to come up with idea), but I do think that you judge too harshly on the quality of the classes submitted. Speaking from experience, it's hard to come up with an idea that is unique, fun as well as balance. This is my third CCC and my class is only half-way decent in concept. My first two classes are a mess.

Yeah, I know it's hard. I couldn't even manage to do it the third time around at all, and I've never even gotten past round the basic/classic set design phase. But I'm pretty specific to what I enjoy/don't enjoy. It's a problem in my day to day life but I'm neurologically wired that way. Sometimes I do get too harsh when I criticize things, but it's not out of a place of anger majority of the time, it's just I'm brutally honest to a fault. If you want to know my opinion on something you're going to get it unfiltered. Although I was in a pretty bad mood yesterday, so that didn't exactly help matters. That's on me for talking without a full, clear head. I Get frustrated easily sometimes.

Sorry if I upset anyone with what I said. I should try being more constructive with feedback in future phases. Telling people their stuff is bad isn't exactly helping them if I don't try to help them fix it, and it is just my opinion in a sea of opinions.

Quote from Wishmaster333 >>

I'd prefer a default format for everyone to fit their cards in, if I'm being honest.

 You'll be pleased to know we're implementing a standard format for entries in Phase II. It has come up before that we've been somewhat relaxed with the 'presentation' rulings, and that some people do potentially benefit from just being able to produce more visually appealing submissions.

Hopefully the template we give will still allow people to get across everything they want to, while leveling the playing field in regards to submission quality. We're also totally open to suggestions and questions in regards to the standard format, so if competitors don't like some aspect of it they can bring that up.

Looks like all of you (almost) made it. Here is the next Discussion Topic!