Should this article be renamed "Alternate win (cards)"? As it has to do with cards that present alternate win conditions. Someone might come across this article expecting it to talk about Milling or poison counters. --GeoMike 21:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. This, or at the beginning of the article make the link to wherever alternate win conditions are described (if there is such place). --MORT (T) 00:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
In my tenure, I always thought this was a strangely named page. I thought "winning the game" or "game loss" were okay titles but "alternate win (cards)" was simply bad but I just accepted it. I didn't really understand the parenthetical "cards" at all and, if the article had to have those three words, then I'd have "Alternate-win cards".
Why do I raise this point? Well, if I moved the page, you'd revert it the page move without giving it any thought. Now, you at least have the opportunity to think about things and perhaps do something. --Magic Mage (talk!) 10:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Yellow highlighting of cards
- Mmm... true. I think we should just delete the bottom section and add a highlight key to explain the highlights.Barinellos (talk) 05:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
I just rewrote the lede (thanks to Luigifan18 for finding the page and showing how gross it was). But I think this page needs more help. Missing Demonic Pact, and it seems like a good place to talk about Platinum Angel and Abyssal Persecutor too. And I'm sure I can find some citations to talk about from SaffronOlive's Against the Odds column. Would anyone object to renaming it "Explicit win and loss conditions" and expanding from there? --Corveroth (talk) 00:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)