Mage Wars v1.5.0 for OCTGN is ready for play

[sIKE]

As always you can find more information here. Please let us know if you have any problems!

[abyssalstalker]

Great work, sIKE!

Thank you everyone for your continued work on making OCTGN an incredible platform to play Mage Wars on!

[gw]

Everything seems to work fine. Excellent job ! Thank you 

[IndyPendant]

Love all the work you've been doing with Mage Wars on OCTGN, thanks sIKE!

One question/request though: a while back the card list changed, so that it no longer displayed one line per card.  Now, most cards take up multiple lines on the list, so that there are large 'gaps' between cards.  (Example: The Warlord card takes up four lines, due apparently to the MageAbilities section, which has been broken up into four segments.)  --This is in the card search section of course, not the deck list on the left.

This is actually a significant step backward for me, in terms of usefulness.  I don't read the text on the card lists -at all-; I just d-click them to put them into decks.  If I need to know what a card does, I click on it and read the card image, not the lines of text.  Before this change, I could see a list of around fifty+ cards on one screen, now I can only see 12 - 20 most of the time.  Is there a way to 'condense' the card listing, so that they are displayed again with one line = one card?  And if not, could we have a way to toggle that option (assuming it's reasonably easy to implement)?

Thanks again!

[Zuberi]

I really appreciate that they have added so much of this information to the database. I also don't read the text on the card list, but that text is necessary for the search functions.

I do have a request of my own to make though. Could we perhaps change it so that a Mage's Abilities are tied to their Stat Card instead of their Art Card? Since the official word is that you can use any art card regardless of which type of mage you've chosen, it would be nice if we could do this in OCTGN as well. It's purely an aesthetics issue, but one I imagine is easy to resolve. I'm not a programmer, but I believe it would just be copying and pasting to resolve.

Currently if I try to use the Priest Art Card with the Warlock Stat Card, for example, the game believes my spellbook to be illegal.

[sIKE]

@indyPendant
The change in formatting was done to support card proxies. If I removed that formatting, the card proxies wouldn't lay out at all. This really is a live by the XML formatting die by the XML formatting situation

@Zuberi
If I moved the mage stats to the mage card stats card, all of the automation and such would land on that card instead. I have made this exact suggestion, and when I took over the maintence of the cards database right before CoK, when I set built that set I did exactly as you wanted, but Cosworth moved it back to the Mage card and explained above to me. I will talk to lettucemode but I am not sure if this is even feasible without a complete re-write of that large section of the code.

I am glad that a lot of people enjoy playing the game on the OCTGN. I really am looking forward to the new game modes Arcanus (whose cloak of invisibility came off this week!) talked about in the Creative Corner this week.

[Zuberi]

Ah, okay. Don't fret about it then. I didn't realize it would cause so much trouble and it is only a cosmetic concern.

[IndyPendant]

Ah, fair enough then.  I thought I would check, in case there were some option to toggle the display back to the way it was before (or to easily add it in).  Thanks again!

[lettucemode]

Love all the work you've been doing with Mage Wars on OCTGN, thanks sIKE!

One question/request though: a while back the card list changed, so that it no longer displayed one line per card.  Now, most cards take up multiple lines on the list, so that there are large 'gaps' between cards.  (Example: The Warlord card takes up four lines, due apparently to the MageAbilities section, which has been broken up into four segments.)  --This is in the card search section of course, not the deck list on the left.

This is actually a significant step backward for me, in terms of usefulness.  I don't read the text on the card lists -at all-; I just d-click them to put them into decks.  If I need to know what a card does, I click on it and read the card image, not the lines of text.  Before this change, I could see a list of around fifty+ cards on one screen, now I can only see 12 - 20 most of the time.  Is there a way to 'condense' the card listing, so that they are displayed again with one line = one card?  And if not, could we have a way to toggle that option (assuming it's reasonably easy to implement)?

Thanks again!

The behavior you are describing is a part of OCTGN's Deck Editor, which we have no control over. We provide the card definitions and data, and the Editor parses and presents them to you so you can build your spellbook (this is because the Editor has to work with all games on OCTGN). If you would like to be able to customize how the card listing is presented (which I agree would be a useful feature), I would suggest making an issue on OCTGN's GitHub page, found here: https://github.com/kellyelton/OCTGN

I really appreciate that they have added so much of this information to the database. I also don't read the text on the card list, but that text is necessary for the search functions.

I do have a request of my own to make though. Could we perhaps change it so that a Mage's Abilities are tied to their Stat Card instead of their Art Card? Since the official word is that you can use any art card regardless of which type of mage you've chosen, it would be nice if we could do this in OCTGN as well. It's purely an aesthetics issue, but one I imagine is easy to resolve. I'm not a programmer, but I believe it would just be copying and pasting to resolve.

Currently if I try to use the Priest Art Card with the Warlock Stat Card, for example, the game believes my spellbook to be illegal.

I am willing to do this, however as sIKE said it will take a decent chunk of work on both our parts to shift the relevant data and code. I will put it on the list if you're okay with a bit of a wait 

[Zuberi]

I am willing to do this, however as sIKE said it will take a decent chunk of work on both our parts to shift the relevant data and code. I will put it on the list if you're okay with a bit of a wait 

I am certainly willing to wait. I did not realize it would require a lot of work, and definitely don't feel it should be a high priority. If you guys do approach it, I think that'd be awesome, but if it is going to be a lot of work it may not be worth doing. I don't know how many other people would actually make use of it after all.