PDA

View Full Version : HEX Update - Do You Copy?



Shaqattaq
08-28-2015, 12:22 PM
Hi HEXers! It's VIP weekend and the format is Constructed. Good luck in your battles! This week, R&D covers the difference between copies and replicas with some great examples for those who want to be prepared for popular cards like Periwinkle. Plus, we have a free Constructed stress test tournament on September 5th.

https://www.hextcg.com/hex-update-do-you-copy/

Erukk
08-28-2015, 12:36 PM
I guess we'll be seeing just how much of an impact TM is going to have in the meta with the upcoming tourneys.

Thoom
08-28-2015, 12:43 PM
Just to make sure I understand Copy correctly, suppose you have the following scenario:

I have a Headless Executioner (5/5 for 5), Periwinkle, and a Valiant Escort in play. I swing with the Headless Executioner, and my opponent blocks with his Eternal Sage. I play Crushing Blow to make the Headless Executioner a 7/7 Crush. Combat resolves and my Executioner is now a 7/2 until end of turn (or is it a 7/7 with 5 invisible damage counters on it?).

I then use Valiant Escort to bounce the Headless Executioner back to my hand and re-play it, causing Periwinkle to make a copy. Is the copy:

a) A 7/7 crush?
b) A 5/5?
c) A 7/2 crush until the end of turn, and then a 5/5?
d) A 7/2 crush until end of turn, and then a 7/7 crush from then on?

Based on the rules outlined, I would guess either a) or d), because rule #2 should keep the crushing blow as a permanent effect, but I'm not 100% clear how copy interacts with damage.

ziggarius
08-28-2015, 12:45 PM
Um replicas have never worked like the article says. I've mimicd hundreds of cards that had been transformed and never got the base troop.

I do admit the only replica effect I've played with since set3 release is slaughtergears replicators which is currently creating copies instead.

malloc31
08-28-2015, 12:53 PM
I thought I had undertood copies and replicas pretty well before reading this. Now I don't understand at all.

Mike411
08-28-2015, 12:55 PM
Like the last stress tournament, I don't think it makes sense for the rewards to be so top-heavy. But not gonna stop me from jumping in anyhow.

Magician
08-28-2015, 12:55 PM
Just to make sure I understand Copy correctly, suppose you have the following scenario:

I have a Headless Executioner (5/5 for 5), Periwinkle, and a Valiant Escort in play. I swing with the Headless Executioner, and my opponent blocks with his Eternal Sage. I play Crushing Blow to make the Headless Executioner a 7/7 Crush. Combat resolves and my Executioner is now a 7/2 until end of turn (or is it a 7/7 with 5 invisible damage counters on it?).

I then use Valiant Escort to bounce the Headless Executioner back to my hand and re-play it, causing Periwinkle to make a copy. Is the copy:

a) A 7/7 crush?
b) A 5/5?
c) A 7/2 crush until the end of turn, and then a 5/5?
d) A 7/2 crush until end of turn, and then a 7/7 crush from then on?

Based on the rules outlined, I would guess either a) or d), because rule #2 should keep the crushing blow as a permanent effect, but I'm not 100% clear how copy interacts with damage.

Hey Thoom,

This works like you described above in option A.

Your Headless Executioner is still a 7[ATK]/7[DEF] Troop, it just happens to have 5 damage. The copy, does not copy damage. Therefore, the copy you make will be a 7[ATK]/7[DEF] Headless Executioner with Crush!

Thoom
08-28-2015, 01:16 PM
Hey Thoom,

This works like you described above in option A.

Your Headless Executioner is still a 7[ATK]/7[DEF] Troop, it just happens to have 5 damage. The copy, does not copy damage. Therefore, the copy you make will be a 7[ATK]/7[DEF] Headless Executioner with Crush!

Thanks! I think I understand the rules now.

Salverus
08-28-2015, 01:23 PM
256+ in tournament is 0 or 1 pack?
also is our collection copied or do we have to open a few hundred packs and build a deck first?

McCloud68
08-28-2015, 01:23 PM
The part about the Stress event fails to mention what server it will be on. This has historically happened on the Test Server. Will it be on the live server this time?

loopholist3
08-28-2015, 01:26 PM
It seems strange to me (from a design perspective) to allow copies to have both the stat changes from a static ability and the static ability (Example 4).

Reeplay
08-28-2015, 01:27 PM
Interesting read on the replica vs copy but makes sense when you think about it. Didn't know replica's were a story based thing with dwarves that's kinda cool :).
So is this stress test on the live server or is the test server getting some action?. Also those prizes are very top heavy like the last one? With something like a stress test where bugs are likely to happen this seems more like a test of luck for the rewards. I feel like a per round prize is better with a small bonus for winning. That being said those prizes are huge and i'm sure will make people join to make test even more stressy :)

Aradon
08-28-2015, 01:27 PM
I don't understand the first Heart of the Wrathwood example. You are copying a creature with base stats of 0, then acting like it has a modifier on it, which it doesn't. It has a static ability. The static ability is copied, but then you also copy the 'modifier' of +6/+6 again, as if it were a separate entity from its static ability. Getting double modifiers like this is extremely unintuitive to me.
I don't think that 'has' should be considered a modifier, since that single distinction causes odd examples to double dip.

But I guess this explains the situation where Duplicitous Duke creating copies of those minor gem troops gives them an extra +1/+1.

Saeijou
08-28-2015, 02:00 PM
Most of these rules are fairly straightforward, but I want to give an example to help explain the last two rules which are easily the most complicated of the bunch. You’re playing a game of HEX, and you have a Nori socketed with the Minor Wild Orb of Conservation (Spellshield). Princess Cory uses Cosmic Transmogrifier to transform your Nori into a Shadowblade Lurker. On your turn, you use Mimic to make a replica of the Shadowblade Lurker. What you actually get is not a Shadowblade Lurker at all, instead you get a Nori who is no longer a Blood Shin’hare, but an artifact Robot Replica Shin’hare that’s also not unique! He’s socketed with the same Minor Wild Orb of Conservation (Spellshield) and has no memory of becoming a Shadowblade Lurker, He’s his own card ready to take down the Princess!

But this is not how it works Oo

if you play mimic on a transformed skarn, it is the transformed skarn... not the base version

Shaqattaq
08-28-2015, 02:18 PM
The part about the Stress event fails to mention what server it will be on. This has historically happened on the Test Server. Will it be on the live server this time?

Yup. It'll be on the live server.

Audens
08-28-2015, 02:22 PM
If you copy something does it keep its existing modifiers? For example, if the Wolsy Wabbit first used its other power on the Heart of the Wrathwood, would it become an 18/18 when you used the copy ability?

kaiizza
08-28-2015, 02:34 PM
The part about the Stress event fails to mention what server it will be on. This has historically happened on the Test Server. Will it be on the live server this time?

They used to happen on the live server before the test server. There have been many more tests done on the live than the test server.

PentaChills
08-28-2015, 02:36 PM
So what happens with an Eternal Drifter who has 10 counters? Does his copy enter play with the 10 counters, and then gain 10 more like the original would? Or does the copy get created with 0 counters?

OP_Kyle
08-28-2015, 02:59 PM
Hey guys,

I completely dropped the ball here on the last replica rules and the example involving the Replicated Shadowblade Lurker that was made from the transformed Nori. This is on me, and this should read the following:

​The replica does not copy any modifiers on the card (this includes transformations.)

Most of these rules are fairly straightforward, but I want to give an example to help explain the last two rules which are easily the most complicated of the bunch. You’re playing a game of HEX, and you have a Nori socketed with the Minor Wild Orb of Conservation (Spellshield). Princess Cory uses Cosmic Transmogrifier to transform your Nori into a Shadowblade Lurker. On your turn, you use Mimic to make a replica of the Shadowblade Lurker. What you get is a Robot Replica Shadowblade Lurker that never remembers being a Nori. This Robot has no recollection of what it was modeled after. Therefore, if reverted, the replica Shadowblade Lurker will not become a Nori because of rule #6, but will instead remain a Shadowblade Lurker.

I know this confused a number of players here in the forums, I apologize about this. These are confusing and complicated concepts in HEX with rule sets that are easy to mix up (Heck, I even mixed them up here). Hopefully this edit will suffice to make things easier to understand, sorry for the confusion. If I can clear up any questions, please post them here, I'll be around throughout the afternoon to clear these up.

~Corey

the_artic_one
08-28-2015, 03:02 PM
So what happens with an Eternal Drifter who has 10 counters? Does his copy enter play with the 10 counters, and then gain 10 more like the original would? Or does the copy get created with 0 counters?

To add to this, assuming it enters with 20 counters. Does reverting the copy leave it with 10 counters?

On another related note: going back to the crushing blow on the headless executioner, does reverting the 7/7 crush copy turn it into a 5/5? Or does it stay a 7/7 crush?

Saeijou
08-28-2015, 03:21 PM
To add to this, assuming it enters with 20 counters. Does reverting the copy leave it with 10 counters?

On another related note: going back to the crushing blow on the headless executioner, does reverting the 7/7 crush copy turn it into a 5/5? Or does it stay a 7/7 crush?

no, it shouldnt have 20... it should have the 10 and that's it. since it just was created, it wasnt there to get counters!

if your reese creates an eternal drifter, he has 0 counters as well. that's correct if you ask me!


Hey guys,

I completely dropped the ball here on the last replica rules and the example involving the Replicated Shadowblade Lurker that was made from the transformed Nori. This is on me, and this should read the following:

​The replica does not copy any modifiers on the card (this includes transformations.)

Most of these rules are fairly straightforward, but I want to give an example to help explain the last two rules which are easily the most complicated of the bunch. You’re playing a game of HEX, and you have a Nori socketed with the Minor Wild Orb of Conservation (Spellshield). Princess Cory uses Cosmic Transmogrifier to transform your Nori into a Shadowblade Lurker. On your turn, you use Mimic to make a replica of the Shadowblade Lurker. What you get is a Robot Replica Shadowblade Lurker that never remembers being a Nori. This Robot has no recollection of what it was modeled after. Therefore, if reverted, the replica Shadowblade Lurker will not become a Nori because of rule #6, but will instead remain a Shadowblade Lurker.

I know this confused a number of players here in the forums, I apologize about this. These are confusing and complicated concepts in HEX with rule sets that are easy to mix up (Heck, I even mixed them up here). Hopefully this edit will suffice to make things easier to understand, sorry for the confusion. If I can clear up any questions, please post them here, I'll be around throughout the afternoon to clear these up.

~Corey

thanks for clarification

Yoss
08-28-2015, 03:26 PM
Great article, but I think it's not long enough to deal with all the corner cases.

the_artic_one
08-28-2015, 03:27 PM
no, it shouldnt have 20... it should have the 10 and that's it. since it just was created, it wasnt there to get counters!

if your reese creates an eternal drifter, he has 0 counters as well. that's correct if you ask me!
This is assuming the copy gets to enter play for example:
Play drifter
drifter gets 10 counters
drifter gets bounced (with 10 counters still on it)
play periwinkle
replay drifter

Does the copy have 10 counters or 20 counters?

Saeijou
08-28-2015, 03:27 PM
Great article, but I think it's not long enough to deal with all the corner cases.

well, it's still partially bugged... that makes it even worse :/

Magician
08-28-2015, 04:23 PM
To add to this, assuming it enters with 20 counters. Does reverting the copy leave it with 10 counters?

On another related note: going back to the crushing blow on the headless executioner, does reverting the 7/7 crush copy turn it into a 5/5? Or does it stay a 7/7 crush?

To these two questions:

If the Eternal Drifter has 10 Counters, and then you create/transform a copy of the Eternal Drifter. The copy should also have those 10 counters, as counters are a modifier just as say +3ATK/+3DEF is from Wild Growth. In this case, the Eternal Drifter would be created (or transformed) with 10 counters, and then gain some amount of counters from it's enters play power.

In this event, reverting the copy should work like Reverting any other copy. All modifiers are removed from the copy. Thus, the Eternal Drifter would revert back to a 6ATK/6DEF Drifter with 0 counters. However, if the Eternal Drifter was transformed, it would revert back into the thing it began the game as (which in most cases a transformed copy is a Wolsy Wabbit)!

This, looks like it's a bug, and I'm having our same rules engineer look into this as he's correcting the Periwinkle bug!

In the case of the Crushing Blow on the Headless Executioner Example:

They follow rule #2 as was described in the article for our first question. "Copies get all modifiers that the copied card had, except all of these modifiers are kept with a permanent duration."

Rule #2 however doesn't address your question here the_artic_one. In this example, while the duration of all of the copied modifiers are treated as permanent (Like say Wild Aura giving +2ATK/+2DEF and Crush) they're still revertible. Thus, if you play Reversion on this copied Headless Executioner, it should go back to being the ol' 5ATK/5DEF troop without Crush.

Both of these are great questions that I should have addressed in the article. As Yoss said, this was probably not enough to address all of the corner cases of the two concepts!

the_artic_one
08-28-2015, 05:32 PM
Thanks Magician that's what I needed! Rule 2 technically does cover it but it wasn't clear from my first reading.

So essentially copy takes all temporary, permanent, and continuous modifiers and applies them as a permanent modifier. Maybe not the most intuitive but it makes sense.

Chark
08-28-2015, 05:40 PM
I think Magician wins in terms of best HEX names.

mudgee01
08-28-2015, 05:50 PM
Starting at 4am every time for me makes me a sad panda. Australia FTL

Skoglar
08-28-2015, 06:10 PM
Now that the replica example is corrected, example 1 under copies is confusing; "...Thus, you ended up with a replica Nori.". No you didn't.

Shaqattaq
08-28-2015, 11:32 PM
Now that the replica example is corrected, example 1 under copies is confusing; "...Thus, you ended up with a replica Nori.". No you didn't.

You're right. That part has been removed. Thanks for helping us with this very complicated card interaction, and thank you to everyone helping us identify the questions that players will have in order to eventually provide this as a static resource in helping players understand replicas vs. copies.

Saeijou
08-28-2015, 11:35 PM
"The replica does not copy any modifiers on the card (this includes transformations)."

this still needs to be changed. it doesn't inlcude transformations, as clarified :)

Gwaer
08-28-2015, 11:45 PM
Dammit. I had a huge thing about how has buffs shouldn't be treated the same as gets in this case and lost it all. Talk about that more people.

Omfg. I typed out a bunch more and lost that too! Stupid cellphone is killing me.

I give up for tonight. But this is an un intuitive interaction you shouldn't make a copy of a card and literally nothing change about those two cards and you end up with different cards.

zalzakoss
08-29-2015, 02:35 AM
If you copy something does it keep its existing modifiers? For example, if the Wolsy Wabbit first used its other power on the Heart of the Wrathwood, would it become an 18/18 when you used the copy ability?
He transform, not copy. And transformed troops keep modifiers.

Salverus
08-29-2015, 04:44 AM
wolsy rabbit is at the moment the only card where you can make a copy of another card while it has spells on it?
Because things like duplicitious duke makes a copy at the start of the turn, before you can play actions. And periwinkle makes copies upon entering play, before you can play actions on it.

Xenavire
08-29-2015, 05:34 AM
wolsy rabbit is at the moment the only card where you can make a copy of another card while it has spells on it?
Because things like duplicitious duke makes a copy at the start of the turn, before you can play actions. And periwinkle makes copies upon entering play, before you can play actions on it.

Duke copies directly before combat.

firedancer27
08-29-2015, 05:37 AM
I think what this article really displays is the need for a comprehensive rulebook.

Icepick
08-29-2015, 06:30 AM
Mimic supposedly creates replicas but they aren't working as described in the (presumably updated) article - the replica card I get is just the same as the original. It hasn't been changed into a shardless artifact robot version of the troop, it's just the same as the type and threshold as the original.

yoyogod
08-29-2015, 07:54 AM
Mimic supposedly creates replicas but they aren't working as described in the (presumably updated) article - the replica card I get is just the same as the original. It hasn't been changed into a shardless artifact robot version of the troop, it's just the same as the type and threshold as the original.

I assume you're using it in PVE, because as far as I know, that's a known bug that only happens when mimic's equipment is used.

Icepick
08-29-2015, 07:59 AM
I assume you're using it in PVE, because as far as I know, that's a known bug that only happens when mimic's equipment is used.

Ooooh right, yeah that would explain it - I am indeed using it with equipment in the arena.

Magician
08-29-2015, 04:51 PM
"The replica does not copy any modifiers on the card (this includes transformations)."

this still needs to be changed. it doesn't inlcude transformations, as clarified :)

Hey Saeijou, I'm getting some help changing this now. That line is very ambiguous, but it is meant to mean the following:

"(This includes transformations)"

This is meant to say it forgets transformation history. Therefore, if you revert the replica it will not return to the base card of the replicated card. This is similar to the line in copies stating the two cards are independent of one another!

Hopefully this clears that up, and I'll get this edited so the language isn't going to be interpreted in that way. Thanks!

Kilo24
08-29-2015, 06:11 PM
I give up for tonight. But this is an un intuitive interaction you shouldn't make a copy of a card and literally nothing change about those two cards and you end up with different cards.

I have to agree with this. Seems like it's an obtuse niche interaction that brings nothing but rules confusion to the game. Even if it's due to technical issues, I think that handling it right now is going to prevent other technical issues down the line when you need to make every potential buff conform to these precise rules instead of simpler ones.

poizonous
08-29-2015, 08:08 PM
Am I still the only person who thinks the amount of packs being handed out to first place in this stress test is too much??? I said it before and I will say it again, until these things can run smooth from start to finish for EVERY player, there is no reason why one person should be rewarded with 300 bucks in packs.

Once these tournaments fire successfully from start to finish I am fine with whatever prizes given away but until such time maybe giving out over 1000 packs (Didnt do the math just eyeballing it) is a bit extreme

Aradon
08-29-2015, 09:34 PM
No, I agree. 150 to first place is a little crazy given the nature of the test. It's a very top-heavy tournament.

Xenavire
08-30-2015, 05:23 AM
Am I still the only person who thinks the amount of packs being handed out to first place in this stress test is too much??? I said it before and I will say it again, until these things can run smooth from start to finish for EVERY player, there is no reason why one person should be rewarded with 300 bucks in packs.

Once these tournaments fire successfully from start to finish I am fine with whatever prizes given away but until such time maybe giving out over 1000 packs (Didnt do the math just eyeballing it) is a bit extreme

The more prizes offered, the more people that will enter. Given the potential length of the event, plus the current constructed format being heavily disliked by a fair few people, I could see this tournament having a fairly low turnout overall even compared to the sealed we had last time, so the obvious answer is to make the prizes absolutely mouthwatering.

I do think they would have more luck by giving a pack per round you complete, and decent prizes to the top 16 (rather than the insane prizes for top 8.)

But it is what it is, and we will see if it turns out to be successful.

Salverus
08-30-2015, 05:52 AM
The more prizes offered, the more people that will enter.

not really. E.g. for me personally i know i will not end in top256, so reward would be 0 packs. So I most likely will not join. Because last time on the test server i spend 6+ hours doing the tournament, met many AFK players, very long queue times until next match, several crashes, unable to look at rankings during the tournament and played until something like 3 AM, only to end up outside the top256 with 4 wins.

Xenavire
08-30-2015, 07:47 AM
not really. E.g. for me personally i know i will not end in top256, so reward would be 0 packs. So I most likely will not join. Because last time on the test server i spend 6+ hours doing the tournament, met many AFK players, very long queue times until next match, several crashes, unable to look at rankings during the tournament and played until something like 3 AM, only to end up outside the top256 with 4 wins.

Bugs can go both ways though, and people know that - you could end up in the top 256 without even playing a game, if you got lucky with bugs. Anyone who is willing to put up with the time commitment will have a reasonable chance to place high if bugs end up killing a bunch of matches.

Not to mention just entering gives you a chance to get something if the whole thing goes belly up.

As I said, they would likely get more people joining with a more spread payout, but obviously a set payout is less risky for them, as it can't be abused. And we just have to see what happens.

hitchslap88
08-30-2015, 09:23 AM
I like the rules for copies. I had to read the HotW + Wolsey interaction a few times, but once you figure it out it makes sense, and makes the copy mechanic more dynamic. Perhaps I'd put it this way: "When a card is copied, ie via Wolsey Wabbit's transform ability, it first treats any buffs whatsoever on the original as its baseline. With 6 permanent resources, HotW gives itself a +6/+6 buff. A copy begins by solidifying that buff, becoming a baseline 6/6 troop. The copy then applies its own HotW self-buff, becoming a 12/12 troop."

So, copying Goremaster could be a thing...

Gwaer
08-30-2015, 10:44 AM
hotw doesn't give itself a +6/+6 buff. hotw has x/x= to resources played. because of its card text. if you create a new card give it that same text, it doesn't make any sense for it to be different than the original. The card still literally says the same thing. if it was gets when enters play, sure. you copying it, it has entered play twice at that point it makes sense, but it still only has x/x on the card one time, and is instead doubled. moreover, that number originally can't be reverted off, because the card is basically just a normal 6/6 in all respects, except when copied.

hitchslap88
08-30-2015, 11:20 AM
hotw doesn't give itself a +6/+6 buff. hotw has x/x= to resources played.

Unless the hex browser version is different, the text says "+1/+1 for each permanent resource." That's not the same as =x/x. =x/x would cause the copy and the original to have the same value, as you say. But the '+'s make it additive for the copy.

Gwaer
08-30-2015, 12:39 PM
The pluses are the only way they have to template X= as well. The difference is the wording, Has or gets. That's what makes it un-revertable, and makes it update constantly rather than only once.

You can see where they made that change during alpha, by changing the wording on ozawa, it used to be gets +1/+1 and they changed it to has +1/+1

hitchslap88
08-30-2015, 01:26 PM
"2. Copies get all modifiers that the copied card had, except all of these modifiers are kept with a permanent duration."

I think this means that 'has' turns into 'gets' when then copy is played. Then the copy applies any 'has' effects. So, for example, if Emberleaf Duelist attacks and is copied during the attack, the copy should have Swiftstrike even while defending. Then, when it attacks, it 'has' a redundant Swiftstrike.

So in the case of Heart of the Wrathwood, when the copy is cast, the 'has' +6/+6 effect of the original card turns into a 'gets' +6/+6 effect for the copy, then the 'has' effect kicks in, making it a +12/+12.

Another way of explaining this is that the game doesn't care where effects are coming from. In the example confirmed earlier where a Headless Executioner is copied after Crushing Blow is cast, resulting in a 7/7 with Crush, the game doesn't care where all of the stats came from. It just freezes the current condition of the card.

Gwaer
08-30-2015, 01:34 PM
But that is the problem. Has shouldn't turn into gets, it isn't treated the same in any way EXCEPT for this copy effect. It doesn't make sense, there's no way to track it from a card standpoint, it's two identical cards one of which has a redundant addition that it shouldn't have.

I understand perfectly the mistake that makes people think this is okay, and can be explained away. But it is a mistake. I'm not confused about why it's happening, it is a choice they have made, 'for simplicity' but it isn't actually more simple than the alternative.

hitchslap88
08-30-2015, 04:43 PM
I think it's just a difference of opinion at this point. They made a decision to make copying a dynamic way of freezing temporary effects that can result in extremely potent combinations. Tracking the effects becomes irrelevant in a digital tcg, especially when all you need to do is look at the original card at the moment the copy is played. Perhaps the mistake is in thinking that the copy is an identical card. People need to start thinking of 'copy' as a powerful effect that can interact with digital cards in fun and complex ways.

Gwaer
08-30-2015, 07:36 PM
I think it's just a difference of opinion at this point. They made a decision to make copying a dynamic way of freezing temporary effects that can result in extremely potent combinations. Tracking the effects becomes irrelevant in a digital tcg, especially when all you need to do is look at the original card at the moment the copy is played. Perhaps the mistake is in thinking that the copy is an identical card. People need to start thinking of 'copy' as a powerful effect that can interact with digital cards in fun and complex ways.

I totally agree with all of this, however, Something having set stats based on another thing, be it health or number of resources played isn't a temporary buff, or even a buff at all. Setting the base stats of temp buffs and making them permanent is awesome, it's great, no problem with that at all. Treating an effect that is categorically *not* a buff as one is the issue I have.

Saeijou
08-30-2015, 08:01 PM
Hey Saeijou, I'm getting some help changing this now. That line is very ambiguous, but it is meant to mean the following:

"(This includes transformations)"

This is meant to say it forgets transformation history. Therefore, if you revert the replica it will not return to the base card of the replicated card. This is similar to the line in copies stating the two cards are independent of one another!

Hopefully this clears that up, and I'll get this edited so the language isn't going to be interpreted in that way. Thanks!

it does, thank you :)

Yoss
08-30-2015, 10:01 PM
I agree with Gwaer. But I can live with the weird way they're doing "copy".

Kilo24
08-30-2015, 11:49 PM
The biggest issue that I have is that the word "copy" implies, well, a copy. You can and do expect it to be identical to the original card, not to usually be identical but have some weird interactions with a small fraction of card. A "replica" carries no such assumption, nor would a word like "imitation" or "mimicry". Now, there are obviously some cases where copies can't be exactly the same as the original (like because pets don't pluralize master, the indication is that both a card and its copy can't both be a master to the same pet) - but that's a result of one rule coming into conflict with another rule where one of them has to bend, not a case of the Hex term "copy" deviating from the dictionary term "copy" without other rules coming into conflict.

But beyond that, the only potential gain I see to this design choice is avoiding a possible short-term technical issue. It's sufficiently niche to not have a serious effect on the game's balance, it sure as hell isn't intuitive, and I'm willing to guess that by redefining a weird bug to be the desired behavior will result in more technical issues in the long run than just dealing with this one right now. There's strong benefits to having a clear and intuitive ruleset when implementing it in a computer game - even after you remove the player experience from the equation.

malloc31
08-31-2015, 05:57 AM
I also fall into the camp of not liking the fact that copies change any temporary buffs to permanent.

It definitely seems like they could not get the code to work as intended and then just decided to announce that this is the rule. I can see no reason they would intentionally do this. (The fact that the copy mechanic already feels too powerful in Majesty decks makes me feel I really doubt they would think it needs an added buff) And letting a bug dictate rules decisions seems like a very poor path to travel.

If there is actually some design based reason for having it work this way I would love to hear it from a game designer.

DocX
08-31-2015, 06:38 AM
I think Magician wins in terms of best HEX names.

I was about to ask if Tim Robbins will play him when the Hex movie is made, then remembered Robbins' callsign was 'Merlin', not 'Magician'.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 06:57 AM
I totally agree with all of this, however, Something having set stats based on another thing, be it health or number of resources played isn't a temporary buff, or even a buff at all. Setting the base stats of temp buffs and making them permanent is awesome, it's great, no problem with that at all. Treating an effect that is categorically *not* a buff as one is the issue I have.

The 'has +1/+1' is a better way of bestowing the effect, imo. If the card read, 'this troop's attack and defense equals the number of permanent resources..." then there'd be a problem when you try to buff it with, say, crushing blow. Wouldn't the card always be checking its stats due to the 'has', and decrease its 'base' stats in order to compensate for the +2/+2? It could never have an attack or defense that wasn't equal to your p. resources, which means you couldn't debuff it either. Bestowing the +1/+1 in the same nature as a buff allows you to manipulate it further. That's why Wolsey double dips. It all makes sense once you think of HotW as a card that buffs itself. It's a 0/0 card that buffs itself. The same effect would happen with Fiendish Cabalist. We just have to be on the lookout for this type of thing now.

And to be fair to the developers, they did mention that copying sometimes produces complex interactions, then jumped straight to probably the most complex example in the game. 99% of copying will look like the 7/7 Crush Headless Executioner example.

Aradon
08-31-2015, 07:55 AM
I think the strange thing to me is that anything that endures a Reversion should not be considered a modifier. Since Heart of the Wrathwood doesn't die when it is reverted, we know that it's power/toughness ability isn't a revertable characteristic, so I wouldn't expect it to be copied over. The new troop would get its own ability doing the same, of course.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 08:47 AM
I think the strange thing to me is that anything that endures a Reversion should not be considered a modifier. Since Heart of the Wrathwood doesn't die when it is reverted, we know that it's power/toughness ability isn't a revertable characteristic, so I wouldn't expect it to be copied over. The new troop would get its own ability doing the same, of course.

HotW's ability is a modifier that always sets a floor for its attack and defense. The fact that it says "all zones" means that once you have one permanent resource, its stat floor becomes +1/+1. Reversion simply puts HotW back at its stat floor value. And it's a modifier simply because it self-modifies as you gain more resources.

Yoss
08-31-2015, 09:54 AM
The ability to explain how it works doesn't make it less silly. The clear intuitive thought is that "has" effects are inherent traits, not buffs. They should never, ever be treated as buffs.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 11:14 AM
I understand the confusion here. I was confused initially as well. But the problem here isn't the copy mechanic; it's 'has +1/+1' vs '=x/x'.

Let's look at an example with a lot going on. A HotW is inspired by Shield Trainer while its owner has 6 permanent resources in play, resolving as a 6/7. On the next turn it attacks and has both Cripple and Crushing Blow cast. It's now a 4/9 with Crush. A copy is made. It looks at the current state of the card and copies every detail. It enters play as a 4/9 with Crush. Then, its text tells it to add a number of +1/+1s for every permanent resource. It gets +6/+6 resulting in a 10/15 with Crush.

As you can see, 'copy' is working just fine. Confusion ocurrs when '+x/+x per y' is confused with '+x/+x equal to y'. 'Equal to' would cause the strange immunity to buffs/debuffs, so the way things are is likely the least confusing. The problem isn't with any of the mechanics, it's with our unfamiliarity.

Yoss
08-31-2015, 12:28 PM
The ability to explain how it works doesn't make it less silly. The clear intuitive thought is that "has" effects are inherent traits, not buffs. They should never, ever be treated as buffs.

The example in post 64 treats the HotW "has" trait as a buff. There is no confusion on my part. I understand the "how it works" part of the mechanic as they've laid it out. I do not understand the "why did we choose this as a design" part of the mechanic. I just think it seems like a very suboptimal design choice. As I said before, I understand how it works and I can live with it. I just find it very clunky, unintuitive, and overly complex. "Copy" should be copy just like the common English usage of the term. "Copy" should mean "make another one of these" not "make another one of these but..."

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 12:56 PM
The ability to explain how it works doesn't make it less silly. The clear intuitive thought is that "has" effects are inherent traits, not buffs. They should never, ever be treated as buffs.

The example in post 64 treats the HotW "has" trait as a buff. There is no confusion on my part. I understand the "how it works" part of the mechanic as they've laid it out. I do not understand the "why did we choose this as a design" part of the mechanic. I just think it seems like a very suboptimal design choice. As I said before, I understand how it works and I can live with it. I just find it very clunky, unintuitive, and overly complex. "Copy" should be copy just like the common English usage of the term. "Copy" should mean "make another one of these" not "make another one of these but..."

My guess is that they wanted to encourage copying as a way of making temporary effects permanent. I think it's an aggressive decision that makes the game more fun in the long run. Finding ways to cement powerful temporary effects via copying is going to lead to poweful and creative decks, making cards like duplicitous duke and incantation of ascendance more valuable.

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 01:03 PM
Making temporary effects permanent and treating non buff effects as buffs are two very different issues. I'm okay with making temporary effects permanent. That's a cool thing. My issue isn't that. My issue is a 10/10 Ozawa turning into a 20/20 Ozawa because an inherent trait is being doubled.

Divorce yourself from the numbers for a second and just think of it from a card text perspective. You have a card that's a vanilla 1/1 with no text. You apply a buff to the card that is +2/2. The card is now a 3/3. Copy that and you end up with a permanent 3/3. The card text all adds up though on the back end when we have double backs we can track all the hidden effects on the card

Now do that same thing with Ozawa. There is no card text increasing that number besides the 2/2. It has been increased because effectively copy is taking that inherent trait that is written on the card and instead of transferring it is locking one instance in place and making a double buffed card.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 01:13 PM
Making temporary effects permanent and treating non buff effects as buffs are two very different issues. I'm okay with making temporary effects permanent. That's a cool thing. My issue isn't that. My issue is a 10/10 Ozawa turning into a 20/20 Ozawa because an inherent trait is being doubled.

Divorce yourself from the numbers for a second and just think of it from a card text perspective. You have a card that's a vanilla 1/1 with no text. You apply a buff to the card that is +2/2. The card is now a 3/3. Copy that and you end up with a permanent 3/3. The card text all adds up though on the back end when we have double backs we can track all the hidden effects on the card

Now do that same thing with Ozawa. There is no card text increasing that number besides the 2/2. It has been increased because effectively copy is taking that inherent trait that is written on the card and instead of transferring it is locking one instance in place and making a double buffed card.

Yes, but this isn't an issue with the 'copy' mechanic. It's about how 'has +x/+x per y' works. These cards essentially buff themselves. Ozawa is a 0/0 card that applies a persistent self-buff.

So since copying cements all current buffs, then yes, you should expect to get the Ozawa buff twice. But you just get the intial boost when you copy. It doesn't get double lifedrain, or double the effect of its text going forward. The inherent effect is seemingly doubled, but in reality the self-buff from the inherent effect of the original card is being cemented and then the copy applies the same effect once it starts doing its own thing. The old effect disappears after its results have been cemented.

Aradon
08-31-2015, 01:23 PM
The point, though, is that it's very easy to remove the confusing part and treat static effects (like Bucktooth Commander, Command Tower, Ozawa, etc) as exceptions and not copy them. It'd make the whole process a lot more intuitive to at least several of us.

People know how it works, just not why it was chosen to work this way.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 01:29 PM
The point, though, is that it's very easy to remove the confusing part and treat static effects (like Bucktooth Commander, Command Tower, Ozawa, etc) as exceptions and not copy them. It'd make the whole process a lot more intuitive to at least several of us.

People know how it works, just not why it was chosen to work this way.

I think the only reason it's confusing is because it's new. Transform is a pretty confusing mechanic, but we're familiar with it now. When you think of 'copy' as, 'everything that's affecting this card now is going to become a permanent part of this copy' then when command tower contributes 1 att permanently and 1 att temporarily, it'll be less confusing.

And I'm trying to argue this on two fronts, haha. Gwaer is concerned with 'has' effects but is ok with the 'temporary becoming permanent' element. Others dislike that decision but understand the 'has' language. So my apologies to those who feel like I'm repeating myself unnecessarily.

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 01:31 PM
Just because it's new doesn't mean that it can't function logically. As is, it isn't in one place. That is a small corner case now. But may not be going forward. Addressing the issue now will save future headaches.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 01:45 PM
Gwaer, is it the reflexive aspect of 'has' cards and copies that you dislike, or would you also prefer that static effects from other cards, like Command Tower, not be intergrated into copies as well?

If you're ok with Command Tower, then I'd say that the way a copy treats the effect of Command Tower is perfectly analogous to the way it treats Ozawa's text's affect on his attack and defense value.

mrdewit
08-31-2015, 02:07 PM
Starting at 4am every time for me makes me a sad panda. Australia FTL

Although EU is in a better position, I wouldn't mind a change of starting hour every now and then either. For this kind of tournament it will just be too late for me to keep going.

Two sad panda's.

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 02:08 PM
My issue is entirely focused on the doubling of the intrinsic nature of a card. Lets say there was a card that said if your opponent has more troops than you, this has double damage.

If you copy that troop if that clause was triggered, with the current ruling on 'has' and self buffs, it would end up with double-double damage. Not only is that not intuitive, and really doesn't make sense, and it's difficult to tell that is the case in the UI. Any time the fundament of the card provides a static bonus because of an effect copy would have to cause it to double dip with its current way it is functioning, there is no safe wording for a single static effect built into the card is that likely to totally break the game? Absolutely not. But it is incredibly finicky, and it's unintuitive even for people who understand why the card is doing what it's doing. you're also requiring people to at all times keep track of which cards just have double damage, and which have double damage granted because of some board state. because those effects are no longer equivalent. The copy effect means that any conditional ability on a card is subject to duplication, even if it is conditional for good reasons. It inherently makes conditional abilities more powerful than card that just have those abilities all the time, and has the potential to make those conditional abilities even more run away powerful than the devs were possibly trying to prevent by making them conditional in the first place.


I suppose the question comes down to, how do you justify something getting rage 2 when condition X is met, becoming a rage 4 if it's copied once that condition is met. While another card which just has rage 2, is unaffected by copy in any way, and you just end up with a duplicate card.

Xenavire
08-31-2015, 02:29 PM
I have to agree with Gwaer - when I first saw it, my instinct was 'bug!'. Even worse, reverting that troop removed that 'permanent' modifier, which seems even more like a bug.

The whole thing is about as intuitive as paying for fish and getting given chicken served with tartar sauce.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 02:40 PM
But a copy wouldn't get double-double damage. It's the nature of 'has +1/+1' that's making it seem like that could happen. A copied Cerberus wouldn't get 6x damage because copies don't add text to the card like, say, inspire does. Rule 2 says that a copy changes all temporary effects into permanent ones. It doesn't duplicate permanent effects.

The '+x/+x per y' effects are temporary modifiers that fluxuate throughout the game. Rule 2 changes temporary to permanent.

With your example about conditional 2x damage, I doubt that it'd be duplicated on a copy and receive 4x damage. The copy would reproduce the text, causing it to still do 2x damage. If the copy added the text on a separate line, there'd be a problem. Actually, if that card existed, its text would probably change when it met the condition. Then, when you copied it, you'd just be copying a card that says, 'this deals double damage'.

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 03:00 PM
The problem is the fact that you, the person that has been explaining to me how it would work over and over again didn't understand the implications until it was just pointed out to you. It's an incredibly niggling interaction that has wide ranging effects on any future keyword that is granted as a conditional ability.

Take this setup, endbringer + both champs at less than 10 and a duplicitous duke.
http://i.imgur.com/XqvLCev.png

When duplicitous duke copies endbringer, you'd expect to end up with 2 8/8 end bringers.

http://i.imgur.com/TPT89it.png

instead you get an 8 and a 12

http://i.imgur.com/71MPgIj.png

That is unintuitive enough. Now imagine it were double damage? There's no convenient number there to indicate how much double damage it's actually going to end up with. Now apply this knowledge to every future keyword forever.



But a copy wouldn't get double-double damage. It's the nature of 'has +1/+1' that's making it seem like that could happen. A copied Cerberus wouldn't get 6x damage because copies don't add text to the card like, say, inspire does. Rule 2 says that a copy changes all temporary effects into permanent ones. It doesn't duplicate permanent effects.

The '+x/+x per y' effects are temporary modifiers that fluxuate throughout the game. Rule 2 changes temporary to permanent.

With your example about conditional 2x damage, I doubt that it'd be duplicated on a copy and receive 4x damage. The copy would reproduce the text, causing it to still do 2x damage. If the copy added the text on a separate line, there'd be a problem. Actually, if that card existed, its text would probably change when it met the condition. Then, when you copied it, you'd just be copying a card that says, 'this deals double damage'.

Here's the closest card to one like what I'm talking about. a copied scarcliff chimera against an opponent with more cards than I have.

http://i.imgur.com/PnWTq8w.png

why wouldn't that continue to be true with any other keyword?

Xenavire
08-31-2015, 03:08 PM
I just want to interject - doesn't it just stack? As far as I have seen, double damage just stacks up to x4, then x8, etc.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 03:21 PM
Given the fact that the first Endbringer didn't come with rage 4 stock, I'd expect the copy to cement rage 4, then apply its own text and receive a further rage 4 from the original. So rage 12 makes sense.

I was trying to remember how cards add conditional text, and your images answered that. So I'll have to contradict my much-edited previous comment and grant that the card you imagined would behave as you described. But once you buy into Hex's way of copying, it ceases to be unintuitive. A copy copies the original as-is, then continues to receive benefits from all sources, including itself.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 03:23 PM
I just want to interject - doesn't it just stack? As far as I have seen, double damage just stacks up to x4, then x8, etc.

Yeah, daring swordsman with soul of battle reads, "this deals 4x damage".

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 03:24 PM
Given the fact that the first Endbringer didn't come with rage 4 stock, I'd expect the copy to cement rage 4, then apply its own text and receive a further rage 4 from the original. So rage 12 makes sense.



It will always be unintuitive. As your oft edited comment originally stated, you wouldn't have thought that, and didn't think that with a perfectly rational and reasonable reasoning why it shouldn't work that way. So I think you've made my point for me.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 03:42 PM
It will always be unintuitive. As your oft edited comment originally stated, you wouldn't have thought that, and didn't think that with a perfectly rational and reasonable reasoning why it shouldn't work that way. So I think you've made my point for me.

My initial confusion came not from how copy works but from how satisfied conditions are represented. Since both the granted keyword/modifier -and- the conditional clause remain on the card, then you'd expect a copy to cement the keyword and then apply its own text.

Your choice of examples demonstrates that you've already begun anticipating this phenomenon. So, as I said before, it's less about the mechanic and more about familiarity.

Gwaer
08-31-2015, 04:02 PM
It's one of my responsibilities to test all of these interactions, I'm pretty good at it. I have a lot of experience with it. You're rationalizing. You're right, that is how conditional abilities should work, they should just be a static part of the card once active, including the changing ones, no double dipping from copy. hotw should be copied as a 0/0 because of the nature of the card. Same for ozawa. Have/Has should be treated differently from gets, Moving forward as they design cards they can keep that in mind when templating.

It's not the end of the world, I have no delusions of this changing now. I expect a rule update in a few years, though. Because I anticipate this will be an issue moving forward.

hitchslap88
08-31-2015, 04:24 PM
It's one of my responsibilities to test all of these interactions, I'm pretty good at it. I have a lot of experience with it. You're rationalizing. You're right, that is how conditional abilities should work, they should just be a static part of the card once active, including the changing ones, no double dipping from copy. hotw should be copied as a 0/0 because of the nature of the card. Same for ozawa. Have/Has should be treated differently from gets, Moving forward as they design cards they can keep that in mind when templating.

It's not the end of the world, I have no delusions of this changing now. I expect a rule update in a few years, though. Because I anticipate this will be an issue moving forward.

I don't entirely disagree with you. It seems like this effect contributes to the signal HXE is sending with this set that Hex is going to become a more explosive game than we're perhaps used to. One of my fears is that there's so much development space in a digital tcg that this game will wander too far too quickly and get lost. But they've shown competence so far, so I'll remain optimistic. For now, I'm excited to go home and take a hard look at duplicitous duke. :)

Showsni
09-01-2015, 06:30 PM
Whilst we're discussing copies and replicas, how about the third way of making "copies" that Hex uses? I'm talking about Scheme, and Hero of Adamanth's passive ability - "create a card with that card's name." What's the design decision behind this third, different method of making "copies"?

(I am aware that it's currently bugged and is actually just making copies.)