Artifact - November 2018, I was so obsessed over Artifact I printed all the cards and brought them to school to play with a friend

---

• November 2018, I was so obsessed over Artifact I printed all the cards and brought them to school to play with a friend
• Tweet from Official account regarding Emails/Sign-ups
• Some believe Artifact to be dead, but let it be known: you're Still Alive.
• Check Spam Folder
• Anti-Mage placeholder art looks like a virgin meme
• Anger, Cymen, & Kiwi discuss the upcoming beta release, and the 2.0 announcements so far
• Playtesting PSA: How to Give Good Feedback [X-Post]
• Anyone just just click on their email to see a forward from Artifact
• Did not receive an e-mail despite playing the game since Beta
• What's the number of active players as of April 2020?
• Long time ago i set these pictures as my wallpaper (Imp is a new addition). I want to believe, 2.0 will be The Reborn we deserve.
• Question: Too late to try 1.0 with a friend?
• What is the chance that I get in to Artifact Bata 2
• Should I open all the packs and sell all cards?
• Valve, don’t forget about Preconstructed and Chaos Blitz
• [Petition] Allow Players to use the beta card art in game in Artifact 2.0

November 2018, I was so obsessed over Artifact I printed all the cards and brought them to school to play with a friend Posted: 22 May 2020 02:10 PM PDT submitted by /u/endelways [link] [comments]

Tweet from Official account regarding Emails/Sign-ups Posted: 22 May 2020 09:57 AM PDT submitted by /u/Ladnuh [link] [comments]

Some believe Artifact to be dead, but let it be known: you're Still Alive. Posted: 22 May 2020 01:57 PM PDT submitted by /u/B3HShady [link] [comments]

Check Spam Folder Posted: 22 May 2020 07:20 PM PDT Just got my sign up email, it was in my spam folder even though I get all of my Steam emails regularly. Made sure to check not spam in case it trys to send a beta code to my spam folder. submitted by /u/MollyBwa [link] [comments]

Anti-Mage placeholder art looks like a virgin meme Posted: 22 May 2020 11:00 AM PDT submitted by /u/IceLink0277 [link] [comments]

Anger, Cymen, & Kiwi discuss the upcoming beta release, and the 2.0 announcements so far Posted: 22 May 2020 08:03 AM PDT submitted by /u/megaRammy [link] [comments]

Playtesting PSA: How to Give Good Feedback [X-Post] Posted: 22 May 2020 10:09 PM PDT Was browsing r/DNDNext when I came across a great post by u/Malinhion about feedback and playtesting that I thought would be very helpful here considering some of us will be playtesting next week. Original post: https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/gojb33/playtesting_psa_how_to_give_good_feedback/ Bad Feedback I notice a lot of people read RPG mechanics and give terrible feedback like: This sucks. This is absurd. This is overpowered. This is stupid. This feedback has very little worth. It's not actionable. It communicates nothing beyond your distaste for the material. There is no way to take what you wrote and make a targeted change to the material. When you express yourself in a hostile manner, your feedback is likely to be disregarded. Why would anyone change what they made for someone who hates it? Designers work hard to make things for the people that love them. Being flippant and dismissive solicits an identical response. Good Feedback If you want to give good feedback, you need to actually explain what you think the issue is. Contextualize your reaction. For example… Example 1. You notice a missing word that makes a mechanic work differently than the designer intended. "[Feature] does not specify that [limitation] applies. You can fix this by [specifying that the spell you can swap is from your class spell list]." This is simple, useful, targeted feedback. It basically boils down to "add a word here." Example 2. You think of an exploit that the designer may not have considered. "The way [feature] interacts with [spell] allows you to [turn everything into a confetti grenade]. Consider [fix]." This lets the designer know to consider employing some specific language to work around an unintended exploit. Maybe they fell into a "bag of rats" trap, forgot a spell interaction, or some other design quirk. This is useful, targeted feedback. Example 3. You disagree with the general narrative implementation. "While I like the [mechanics] of the [squid mage], I wish I could [play that style] without [being covered in mucus]." This targeted feedback lets the designer know that their mechanics are good. They just need to expand their narrative a little bit. The player has something in mind that could be achieved by the mechanics, but the narrative is locking them out. The designer should fix that to reach the broadest audience possible. Example 4. You disagree with a specific narrative implementation. "[Feature] is cool, but it doesn't evoke the [narrative] flavor to me." This lets the designer know that the mechanic is good, but it might not be a fit for what they're doing. The designer saves those mechanics for a rainy day, or reworks them to make sure they fit the flavor of what they're designing. Example 5. You think something is overpowered. "[Feature] outshines [comparable feature/spell/etc.] based on the [strength/uses/level available/etc.]." This feedback is useful because it provides context. If you just call something overpowered, the designer has no idea whether you have a sensible grasp of balance. If you give them a baseline for balancing the feature against something in official print, you've given actionable feedback. Example 6. You don't understand a mechanic. "I don't understand [feature]. I think it could use clearer language." It's not that complicated to say you were confused. Designers should interpret confusion as a sign to rewrite the mechanic, if not rework it. Happy playtesting! Be kind to creators. They do it for you! u/bug_on_the_wall had an equally good counterpoint/add on to the conversation. Comment Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/gojb33/playtesting_psa_how_to_give_good_feedback/frgay6w/ I am happy my thoughts have started a discussion! One thing I wish I had put in my original post was a) a larger disclaimer, and b) a big fat note that says ALL FEEDBACK IS USEFUL. It doesn't matter if it's 10 words long, it doesn't matter if it's 1300 words long, it doesn't matter if it's a novella-length essay on each and every thing you would do to "fix" the content. ALL FEEDBACK IS USEFUL. This post is me just saying what I, personally, find helpful vs what I don't find helpful. I agree with most of this, except for the parts where you encourage people to propose fixes. I've been homebrewing a Destiny (video game)-themed 5e conversion for the past two years, I run a server that hosts an average of 5 games a week and has over 1,500 members (though we have approximately 30 dedicated players who consistently return to sessions, not counting campaigns/games we know community members run outside the server). I get 100+ submissions on our feedback form every month, and even more submitted mid-session by players. The BEST feedback is feedback that STOPS as soon as the player has explained why they don't like something. The short and sweet of it, when it comes to the difference between helpful and unhelpful feedback, helpful feedback focuses solely on your feelings toward whatever you are submitting feedback about. Don't offer any suggestions for what the mechanics SHOULD be, don't try to discuss whether it'll be best to increase or decrease the damage of something, or to alter the function of a feature to what you think is a better version of it. Just say things like, "I don't have fun interacting with this mechanic." "This feature is nice but it's weird that my class has to wait so long to get it." "I feel like this monster does too much damage." "I'm confused about this mechanic. With the way it's worded in this part of the rulebook, it sounds like I can combine X and Y together, but this other section of the rulebook seems to contradict that. So, which is it?" You can get specific with your feelings too, if you have specific feelings. If I took the monster damage feedback example and wanted to extrapolate on it, I might say, "I feel like this monster does too much damage. Fights always feel way more difficult when we have to fight this monster and our GM consistently has to fudge die rolls to keep things fun for us. I just don't feel like I have the resources to fight the monster fairly." That is like, a 5-star example of helpful feedback. It not only explains how someone feels, but it focuses on explaining the SOURCE of the feeling. This is FAR more useful than trying to propose a fix because of this one simple fact: You are not the designer of the content. You don't know what the best solution to a problem is. You don't know if the solution you propose is actually going to work with the intentions and goals of the designer, and your "fix" may actually interfere with other plans the designer has. In the above monster damage example, the designer might be hoping that the monster feels overwhelming with its damage output. So the solution the designer wants may not be to lower the damage, but may instead be to buff the resources of the player. Or maybe they lower the hit points of the monster, but keep the same CR. Or maybe the CR is, in fact, a typo, and the designer just needs to go fix that. You also don't know ALL of the feedback the designer is getting. You might see top 5 posts on a reddit post that say "this spell is too strong," but there might be 20 posts on a Twitter thread with people going "holy heck the role-play opportunities with this spell are amazing, and my players love using it." You, by nature of not being the designer, don't know the full story of the content. A "fix" you propose may be a lot of time and pixels wasted on an idea that completely misses the point. And sometimes—rarely, but sometimes—the solution to a problem people are having has NOTHING to do with mechanics*. It might be a choice of words which is causing a misinterpretation, or the issue is out of the designer's hands due to outside factors. But when you do your best to explain where you're coming from, the designer can do their best to change things so they can show you where they want go. ​ DISCLAIMER: This post is opinion. Game design is an art, including how feedback works for you! There isn't really a right or wrong way to do it, this is just my thoughts from my experience. Maybe it'll change in the future, idk, I'm just giving my Thoughts(TM). *One time, we fixed a problem with people being super confused about a mechanic not by changing the mechanic in any way, but by simply moving the location of the mechanic in our game's documentation, because we realized no one was reading the chapter it was originally included in. The bad feedback about the mechanic basically disappeared overnight. whaddyagunnadoaboutit? lol Mark Rosewater (Head Designer for Magic: The Gathering) also wrote a great set of articles about lessons he's learned working on MTG for 20 years. Lesson 19 regarding player feedback I found to be very interesting: LESSON #19 One of my many jobs is acting as spokesperson for the game. I interact with various sources of media, including social media. I'm active on numerous platforms (Twitter, Tumblr, Google+, and Instagram) and have over 80,000 followers. I'm most active, though, on Blogatog, my blog on Tumblr. I've been active on it for four years and in that time I've answered over 60,000 questions. That's a lot of interaction, and it led me to my next lesson: Lesson #19: Your audience is good at recognizing problems and bad at solving them My metaphor for this lesson is a doctor's appointment. What does a doctor always do first? They ask you how you're feeling. Why? Because you're the expert on you. No one else better understands how you feel. However, the doctor doesn't often ask you how to solve any problems that you might have because they're better equipped than you to do that. The same is true in game design. Your players have a better understanding of how they feel about your game than you do. They can tell easier when something is wrong and they're excellent at identifying problems, but they're not as equipped to solve the problems. They don't know the restrictions you're under or what needs you have to fulfill. They see the game from their perspective, but your job is to understand the perspective of all the players. So use your audience as a resource to help figure out what is wrong with your game, but take it with a grain of salt when they offer you solutions. Sorry for reposting this gigantic wall of text! My goal with all of this is to help us help Valve. Together, hopefully we can work our way towards a better version of Artifact! submitted by /u/nsummers02 [link] [comments]

Anyone just just click on their email to see a forward from Artifact Posted: 22 May 2020 08:11 PM PDT Kinda still feels like a dream but clicking on my mail app puts a smile on my face every time. Cheers to the long haulers we almost there :) submitted by /u/ScubaKlown [link] [comments]

Did not receive an e-mail despite playing the game since Beta Posted: 22 May 2020 02:57 AM PDT Did anyone else not get an e-mail or did get an e-mail while playing since beta and NOT having purchased Artifact directly through steam? I am wondering if perhaps beta-key holders are discounted as not having purchased the game before March 20th? I did however spent over 200 bucks on cards and have over 250h+ on the game, so I'd very much like to give the new beta a try. submitted by /u/Jyssyj [link] [comments]

What's the number of active players as of April 2020? Posted: 22 May 2020 06:12 PM PDT I would like to ask if anyone here has the numbers, or some approximation, of active players for the period of April 2020? submitted by /u/Arthas93 [link] [comments]

Long time ago i set these pictures as my wallpaper (Imp is a new addition). I want to believe, 2.0 will be The Reborn we deserve. Posted: 22 May 2020 05:30 AM PDT submitted by /u/Meychelanous [link] [comments]

Question: Too late to try 1.0 with a friend? Posted: 22 May 2020 10:28 AM PDT I know Artifact have a lot of problems, I mean, at least it had, it's been an year since the release? I can't remember when exactly, I didn't buy the game. But, I was wondering to try out something different. MTGA is still my thing, not leaving that game, but I found the design choices of Artifacts to be very interesting and cool, I still prefer MTG mechanics but I'm not here to make comparisons, the thing is despite knowing there are still flaws in the game and I know (very little, but I know) there is a 2.0 coming later, but I wanted to try Artifact casually with a friend, to play something different. One time I tried Heartstone, I actually kept coming back and leaving HS multiple times, I gave that game too many chances by now, but I never actually gave Artifact a chance. And by that I mean, play myself. I know the old gameplay, the footage, I watched videos and at the time I just decided to not play it. Today I thought I could give it a try, so I may have a couple questions, maybe more. I'm almost sure the answer to the title of the post is going to be "sure, give it a try and see what's the 2.0 is about as well!" But I think it's better to discuss here and also ask other things directly with this community rather than just assume. So, would I be able to play against a friend? How is the game overall these days? Is the 2.0 gonna be another game or a change to this one? Would be better to wait for 2.0 or is it fine to play 1.0 now casually? (I'm referring to 1.0 as the current version and 2.0 as the next version the devs are making. Not sure if this is the correct way to call them around here). I'm sure I could find many of these questions if I just searched around and scrolled through here but I like the idea to talk directly with the community, discuss a bit, have a little talk, what's so wrong with that, right? xD Anyway, hope you all are doing well today and thank you for your attention \o/ submitted by /u/4morim [link] [comments]

What is the chance that I get in to Artifact Bata 2 Posted: 22 May 2020 01:21 PM PDT As I write this there are over 700 likes one the artifact sign-up post. Assuming that likes equal to sign-ups but I am not sure on the minimum numbers of beta tester add each week. Over all I feel good about the odds. I am excited to play artifact 2 submitted by /u/Mcheng401 [link] [comments]

Should I open all the packs and sell all cards? Posted: 22 May 2020 12:54 PM PDT If all will be deleted and there will be no modern cards, should I sell them all on Steam Marketplace while I can? Or it will be compensated somehow? submitted by /u/Chernyshelly [link] [comments]

Valve, don’t forget about Preconstructed and Chaos Blitz Posted: 22 May 2020 03:39 AM PDT I understand that Hero Draft will be the main mode Valve focuses their work on - but I'm sure that limited and constructed will also see some design work. I just hope Valve don't forget about the preconstructed Call to Arms mode, which, had Artifact been F2P, could have sustained a lot of players. That mode was a lot of fun and I spent a ton of time in it. Lastly, it's a shame that no one ever really played in the automated tournaments, because Chaos Blitz (speed timer + randomized two-color decks) was absolutely fantastic and so much fun to play. I'm not saying this was the best format for Artifact (that's pauper IMHO, which was only in the automated tournament game format for a week or two), but it was a great idea and it's a shame not enough people played it. submitted by /u/Trenchman [link] [comments]

[Petition] Allow Players to use the beta card art in game in Artifact 2.0 Posted: 22 May 2020 05:07 PM PDT submitted by /u/XergBoss [link] [comments]

You are subscribed to email updates from Artifact - The Dota Card Game. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States