These were so much better when this was a forum post with insight and discussion. Discussing two cards per set is hardly enough. Why not spend more time on at least the latest one or two? Plus, this article format is clearly not encouraging conversation, versus the forum threads had pages of responses.
The layout here is absolutely terrible. The bordered tables with default fonts look like they're from 1998 and are unreadable at a glance. Why cram the most pertinent information onto the side of each group? Putting it above or below the table would allow for more horizontal space, which would move the data closer to the column headings and make at least that better. But the information hierarchy here is non-existent.
And why not spell out what each column is describing? "Change since last week" and "Change since launch" would be a huge improvement.
-
- Bristol
- Registered User
-
Member for 18 years, 9 months, and 4 days
Last active Wed, Sep, 27 2017 02:33:25
- 3 Followers
- 4,893 Total Posts
- 28 Thanks
Yes.
It would be awesome to have this added to the "Is:" dropdown.
That credit should have been given in the first place.
I would suggest cleaning up your lines a bit before attempting a playset. The cleanliness and precision of the Guru lands seem quite distant from what's represented on your Mesa alter. The addition of the colored boxes and color shifts seem important as well.
I would recommend using a different font entirely. The reasons why Papyrus is a terrible font have been discussed ad nauseam, but they're all true.