PDA

View Full Version : BS2 - Rebalancing list



Aza404
03-10-2014, 04:03 PM
Dear Champions,

With the Base Set 2 coming up very soon, here is the latest list of rebalancing changes that will be implemented in the Base Set 2 card pool.

Enjoy,
Aza

[Edit] - Notes from the designers :

With Base Set 2, we decided it was time to revisit some cards that has a set of requirement that doesn't fit our guideline anymore. When we started, requirements were set to fit with the cost of a card, but that's not the best way to design a card. So we went through all the creatures we have so far and changed those we think are not compliant to our current guidelines. These are not to be considered as buffs or nerfs but as a recalibration that just happens to change the power level of a card.

Please note that we also have some nerfs/buffs that are going to be adressed in another thread.

Academy

Glyph-Carved Golem
Req. 4/4/0
Now Req: 3/4/0


Haven

Imperial Guard
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req: 4/0/0

Eleonore
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0

Blazing Glory
Req. 6/1/0
Now Req: 5/2/0

Tithe Collector
Req. 1/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/1

Vestal
Req. 4/1/0
Now Req: 3/2/0

Sister
Req. 2/1/0
Now Req. 1/2/0

Griffin Battle Priest
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req. 2/2/0


Inferno

Chaos Imp
Req. 4/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/3

Breeder
Req. 2/1/0
Now Req: 1/1/0
Now called Gravid breeder

Chaos Sorceress
Req. 6/1/0
Now Req. 5/2/0

Breeder Mother
Req. 4/1/0
Now Req: 3/1/0

Hell Hound
Req.1/0/0
Now Req: 0/0/0

Void Arbiter
Req. 3/2/0
Now Req: 2/2/2


Necropolis

Atropos
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1

Namtaru Channeler
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req: 2/2/0

Banshee
Req. 6/3/0
Now Req. 4/4/0

Moonsilk Spinner now a melee shooter

Decay Spitter now a melee shooter


Sanctuary

Naga Tactician
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/1
Is now a melee Shooter

Kensei
Req. 6/0/0
Now Req: 5/0/0

Shanriya Priestess
Req. 4/1/0
Now req. 3/2/0

Okane no Okane
Req. 3/0/0
Now Req: 2/0/1

Stream Singer
Req. 2/1/1
Now Req: 1/1/1

Sayama Spy
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2

Sayama Champion
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


Neutral

Dark Assassin
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0

Wandering Bard / Raider / Magic Peddler / Soothsayer
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req: 1/0/2

Helexian Librarian
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/2

Moonsilk Spider
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req:0/3/0
Now a melee shooter

Pao Hunter
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/0

Blind Brother
Req. 3/0/2
Now Req: 1/0/3
Now a melee shooter

Void Wraith
Req. 3/1/0
Now Req: 2/1/2

Void Keeper
Req. 4/1/1
Now Req: 3/1/2

Pao Deathseeker
COST 3
NOW COSTS 4

Greater Water Elemental now a melee-shooter

tyzc69
03-10-2014, 04:21 PM
Excuse my silly question, but does this mean that all the creatures of this list will be part of the Base Set 2?

Kimundi
03-10-2014, 04:31 PM
No, we are also rebalancing creatures that will be played only in the Open format ;)

Revalon
03-10-2014, 04:34 PM
Banshee with even more magic :(
Really hope that there will be some great cards for Necro Fortune in the future.


All those spiders (like Decay Spitter) being melee-shooters is nice. No more not being able to put a Spitter because back row is full :)
Also, a Decay Spitter affected by MoN might be something to fear.


Tutors cost changed to 1/0/2 (from 2/0/1)
don't know. Could make me put a Peddlar in my Shaar Kitten OTK, but with the uniques change I don't know if I'd really need it...


Pao Hunter at cost 1
Take this gabusan! ;)

Also don't know. Definitely not bad, but might be better if it was in BS2, as it's just a card that newbies will use instead of their factions 2-drops (now 1-drops) cause they don't have them.
Also another card that Crag can play at 0 cost.


Dark Assassin now 3/0/0
Ok, no more Crag turn one two DAs. Don't know what to think about it but won't complain now.


Pao Deathseeker at cost 4
Should I be happy about it? Maybe, maybe not. It has been requested some time ago, but those voices have been silent for a while. Will mostly weaken rush decks I think (and make the Bridge double Pao much more expensive).


I'm really looking forward to see some opinions on this, and then how it will change things.

szpeniu
03-10-2014, 04:44 PM
I have a question. You wrote about might, magic and fortune costs, but nothing about resources. Will there be any changes when it comes to resources cost ?

jkk89
03-10-2014, 04:48 PM
Banshee with even more magic :(
Really hope that there will be some great cards for Necro Fortune in the future.

Banshee got a HUGE buff (same as Atropos). Now Seria 4/4/3 is to be feared.


Tutors cost changed to 1/0/2 (from 2/0/1)
don't know. Could make me put a Peddlar in my Shaar Kitten OTK, but with the uniques change I don't know if I'd really need it...

Again, HUGE change. It will turn the whole meta upside-down. Really.


Pao Hunter at cost 1
Take this gabusan! ;)

Pao Hunter still cost 2, they only changed the might requirements...



Pao Deathseeker at cost 4
Should I be happy about it? Maybe, maybe not. It has been requested some time ago, but those voices have been silent for a while. Will mostly weaken rush decks I think (and make the Bridge double Pao much more expensive).


I'm really looking forward to see some opinions on this, and then how it will change things.

Pao will be still played as it is necessery weapon against controles. Ignatius got a huge buff considering that he can play 3-4 Chaos Imps now.

Hantziie
03-10-2014, 04:50 PM
hmmm... so... where is Stronghold nerfs?

dobwen60
03-10-2014, 04:56 PM
I really like seeing some 0 might creatures which helps address the main reason Invokers always seemed at a disadvantage. Also, its nice to see the list being rebalanced isn't just BS2 cards, and that Open format is going to not become an abandoned "anything-goes" format. Combined with the Atropos change, I love the Banshee change. The biggest drawback to playing Banshees in general was you had to go to 6 might, and most necro decks only went to 5 might for Atropos only. Those cards are definitely finding themselves a spot in my BS2 Seria deck. I don't think the change to Paos will effect them too much, they're too good not to use for decks that use them, even at 4 cost. DA's having a 3 might requirement might change up more than a few rush decks as you're not gauranteed have 3 might by the time you have 2 resources unless using specific heroes.

RedEmperor30
03-10-2014, 05:09 PM
Dear Champions,

With the Base Set 2 coming up very soon, here is the latest list of rebalancing changes that will be implemented in the Base Set 2 card pool.

Enjoy,
Aza





Haven

Eleonore [super health boost!!!!]
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0

Tithe Collector [push into fortune haven - interesting!!]
Req. 1/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/1


Inferno

Hell Hound
Req.1/0/0
Now Req: 0/0/0

Void Arbiter [nerf!! but i like]
Req. 3/2/0
Now Req: 2/2/2


[B]Necropolis

Atropos [huge]
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1

Banshee [huge]
Req. 6/3/0
Now Req. 4/4/0

Moonsilk Spinner now a melee shooter

Decay Spitter now a melee shooter [huge]

Necro in BS2 format is just getting huge buff's - wow and thank you from a necro player!!

Sanctuary [haven't played enough sanc to comment]

Naga Tactician
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/1
Is now a melee Shooter

Kensei
Req. 6/0/0
Now Req: 5/0/0

Shanriya Priestess
Req. 4/1/0
Now req. 3/2/0

Okane no Okane
Req. 3/0/0
Now Req: 2/0/1

Stream Singer
Req. 2/1/1
Now Req: 1/1/1

Sayama Spy
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2

Sayama Champion
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


Neutral

Dark Assassin [llololololololol]
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0

Wandering Bard / Raider / Magic Peddler / Soothsayer [a good change, more of a spread build involved]
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req: 1/0/2

Helexian Librarian
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/2

Moonsilk Spider [evil laughter comes from the necro corner]
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req:0/3/0
Now a melee shooter

Void Wraith [good change]
Req. 3/1/0
Now Req: 2/1/2

Pao Deathseeker [not in bs2 and now legs chopped off, still playable but gstyle diff]
COST 3
NOW COSTS 4
(this one is a straight up nerf)

Greater Water Elemental now a melee-shooter

Some really interesting changes, i like having a spread build to use "specialised" creatures - this in itself is a good way to balance these cards out. it almost seems the dev's are preparing us for the next coming cards and how these new cards will boost each faction, overall - some good brave decisions.

Revalon
03-10-2014, 05:24 PM
Banshee got a HUGE buff (same as Atropos). Now Seria 4/4/3 is to be feared.

Sure, the 2 might less is huge, especially as I like playing Seria (which now goes from 5/4/3(4) to 4/4/3(4) and can include Banshee - yay) I'm happy about it. And I think decks without magic (Fleshbane) won't care if it's 3 or 4, it's too much anyways.




Again, HUGE change. It will turn the whole meta upside-down. Really.

k, I'm not really in the competitive side of the game, just playing ladder mainly, and not very active lately. Never really used Tutors.

At least I think to see it slow Kelthor a bit, as he needs to increase destiny to tutor his FF. Also, it makes the use easier for no-might-decks.



Pao Hunter still cost 2, they only changed the might requirements...

Strange. Somehow was sure it was the cost that was decreased... *head->wall*

Atban06
03-10-2014, 05:29 PM
Sanctuary is nerfed... Nerf stronghold too :(

jkk89
03-10-2014, 06:03 PM
k, I'm not really in the competitive side of the game, just playing ladder mainly, and not very active lately. Never really used Tutors.

At least I think to see it slow Kelthor a bit, as he needs to increase destiny to tutor his FF. Also, it makes the use easier for no-might-decks.

I dont think the tempo decks such as Kelthor can afford to rise destiny in order to tutor. I will expect to see high decrease of the tutors in the game, now they are staples in 90% of the decks. There is very little "no might decks" on the competitive scene. I feel like the change is good cause it had no sense for tutors to have 2 might requirement instead of the destiny, nevertheless the impact on meta will be enormous. Pretty much all the competitive decks now rely on the tutors. And yes, I can agree that Kelthor is probably the biggest victim of the change.

luorax
03-10-2014, 06:28 PM
Lovely changes. Aside from the Chaos Imp one I like all of them (that garbage is so costly to get rid of, and I hate when someone is trying to f**k with my hand, that's just mean). Especially the tutor changes and the Banshee/Atropos/necro buff.

I honestly can't wait for the BS2 patch to come out, it's so fin exciting! It's nice to see Ubi heading in the right direction.

Allinim
03-10-2014, 06:33 PM
Sayama Spy
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2

Sayama Champion
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


A nerf that i don't really understand, in one hand you're trying to help invokers, and in an other hand you up sayama champion's might and sayama spy's fortune, 2 cards that are really needed in kaiko for exemple. Anybody got some explanations ?

jkk89
03-10-2014, 06:37 PM
A nerf that i don't really understand, in one hand you're trying to help invokers, and in an other hand you up sayama champion's might and sayama spy's fortune, 2 cards that are really needed in kaiko for exemple. Anybody got some explanations ?

Sayama Spy's nerf is fine, that way they are making sure to Ishuma not be overpowerd at the same time making room for some Takana action. The Sayama Champions nerf I really dont understand. What was the problem with the creature, exactly? I am no Sanctuary player, but it is sad to see how they nerf the faction even more, since the faction is highly underplayed right now.

ZergRusher
03-10-2014, 06:38 PM
My thoughts (i have no thoughts on most changes - some things have to be played out):

I played haven most so i'll focus on it:

Imperial Guard
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req: 4/0/0

Interesting but in general such cards aren't good.

Eleonore
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0
Interesting

Blazing Glory
Req. 6/1/0
Now Req: 5/2/0
Fatties in this game are in general weak. Won't change anything


Tithe Collector
Req. 1/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/1
nerf to Kieran - that's all

Vestal
Req. 4/1/0
Now Req: 3/2/0
Vestal is still too weak - nothing

Sister
Req. 2/1/0
Now Req. 1/2/0
again bad card is bad

Griffin Battle Priest
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req. 2/2/0
Very good change. I support it but in BS2 w/o Week of Training this card is simply too weak. It's still 1/2/4 for 3 resources. I'll definitely include them in Sandalphon aggro now.


Inferno

Void Arbiter
Req. 3/2/0
Now Req: 2/2/2
hmmm, that's a nerf of the creature and Dhamiria. Not sure about it



Necropolis

Atropos
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1
Against - Atropos is already OP no need to buff it even more. Just because it's a uniques it doesn't mean it has to be bonkers. Would much prefer to have it 5/0/1. But you all know that i hate those OP uniques and would nerfed them all starting with Raya.
Nerf to Ariana. General boost

Banshee
Req. 6/3/0
Now Req. 4/4/0
oh wow! i kinda like it but i'm kinda scared at the same time. I just see Seria deck being really strong.

Decay Spitter now a melee shooter
i understand but this s already the best 4-drop creature in BS2


Sanctuary

Sayama Spy
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2
Against This creature performed a very specific role in non-fortune Sanctuary decks - to gather cards vs control decks. Now it's almost unplayable in Ishuma. I rly liked Sayama Spy and i'd prefer if it'd to available to all Sanctuary heroes.


Neutral

Dark Assassin
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0
tbh i think Crag Hack was badly designed and should be deleted. He prevents neutral creatures from being good.

Wandering Bard / Raider / Magic Peddler / Soothsayer
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req: 1/0/2
TOTALLY AGAINST - TERRIBLE CHANGE out of everything this is the one i hate the most. Tutors are the best part of this game that make it less random and your combo and strategies more predictable. Do not nerf them - they are so crucial!

Pao Hunter
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/0
:) crap is crap lol


Pao Deathseeker
COST 3
NOW COSTS 4
not sure about it - it's a huge nerf to rushes.



anyway i'm rly glad that you're balancing cards. Even though i might not agree with everything i do believe that constant patching and balancing cards and the game is the way to improve the game. Hope to see more changes coming more often than it used to be.

Alamand
03-10-2014, 06:51 PM
Really don't like the banshee change, necro is already set to dominate BS2 and this change just males that domination even less interesting. Before it was at least a choice if you wanted to build BS2 Ariana as 6/4/0 or 4(5)/6/0, now there's no question and 4/6/0 got even more ridiculously powerful than it already was.

As far as the tutor change I'm in favor of it even though it will hurt Zardoc which is my favorite deck. 2 might never made any sense since tutoring was always a fortune effect and every other card that did it required at least 2 fortune.

jkk89
03-10-2014, 06:59 PM
As far as the tutor change I'm in favor of it even though it will hurt Zardoc which is my favorite deck. 2 might never made any sense since tutoring was always a fortune effect and every other card that did it required at least 2 fortune.

Exactly. I agree. It is a good change that will still allow You to include some tutoring into deck but with the higher drawback. Tempo decks being tempo decks will have to live w/o it. Dhamiria/Zardoc can still use a peddler or 2.

Uraxor
03-10-2014, 07:09 PM
what's missing in the main post?

reason behind all this.

just read the topic's name again.

reads rebalancing, not buffs and nerfs.

These changes are taking place (Pao an exception - that's why it's written there :P) to go with the game balance. Primarily.

Please be reasonable guys, you know DoC devs have trouble communicating things - they're trying so be understanding :P

jkk89
03-10-2014, 07:10 PM
Atropos
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1
Against - Atropos is already OP no need to buff it even more. Just because it's a uniques it doesn't mean it has to be bonkers.
Nerf to Ariana. General boost

I understand it is a nerf in terms of BS2, but it isnt a nerf in terms of open play. In open Ariana is going 5 might to Atropos and 1 destiny to Ruins. Now she has 1 less stat to levelup, same as any other hero. So to me it is a straightforward buff for Necro. I like it, to me Atropos is same power level as Raya or Anael, so he can be at 4 might too, he is a unique so he can enter the board only once. The real problem is that all necro decks have 0 incecitive to go higher than 4 might now. All the 5 might and 6 might Necro creatures are weak, so it is now same problem as with Haven. As a matter of fact only Inferno has a good 5 might and 6 might drop.

jkk89
03-10-2014, 07:12 PM
what's missing in the main post?

reason behind all this.

just read the topic's name again.

reads rebalancing, not buffs and nerfs.

These changes are taking place (Pao an exception - that's why it's written there :P) to go with the game balance. Primarily.

Please be reasonable guys, you know DoC devs have trouble communicating things - they're trying so be understanding :P

Stop it. U know that Necro got a huge buff, no matter what U want to call it.

Uraxor
03-10-2014, 07:20 PM
Stop it. U know that Necro got a huge buff, no matter what U want to call it.

You stop it. Trying to pick out one thing to discredit the whole statement? C'mon that's so low, politician like ;)

Yes, necro happened to get buffed along the way, however these changes were made with design in mind, not buffs - nerfs.
So your whole logic is invalid.
(If nothing else, then this proves how much has the game evolved since B01 - and admitting the cards printed back then weren't what they should be is the cherry on the top...)

QQing about Peddler 'nerf' (or any other) is also out of the place (and for the record - I was against that one myself, pointing out how many decks it will hurt).

I trust it's not too much to grasp?

Fingers crossed we will get an official statement from devs @this matter, trying to push it much as I can. Until then - well you'll have to take my word for it or bark up the wrong tree, which, given your position in the community, will result in overall devaluation of the huge effort that went into this simply because you were too limited to actually think about it. :mad:

Alamand
03-10-2014, 07:32 PM
It's hard to believe these changes have anything to do with "balance" instead of random changes the devs are making for ****s and giggles. Before I was looking forward to BS2 somewhat, now standard will be nothing but necro decks and open will be an Ignatius dominated nightmare.

That's not to say I don't agree with most of the changes, but the bad ones are really really bad.

Infernal_Wisdom
03-10-2014, 07:34 PM
I think many of these changes are great and I will not judge these changes are wrong or right because it is a start to me,
first time in my mmdoc carrier I felt we, as players, are not ignored

these kind of balance changes were needed so much and I wish developers continue this kind of changes

be brave!! do not fear because you mess the balance, noone can know what is OP and what is NOT OP before playing and testing it, change the cards more often, in the end you will reach the balance somehow and apply needed changes more often and gain respect of all players!!!

I really appreciate these changes at heart, I was thinking mmdoc is a great game, but I was giving up hope because of developers, but I felt they shamed me by doing these great changes, really thanks

instead of 3000 seals alternate arts, all the real players, who I talk, want to see these kind of changes more


gz devs and thanks again!!! :)

SoAmazinglyBad
03-10-2014, 07:36 PM
I will take about my opinion interesting changes :))


Dear Champions, blabla

Haven

Eleonore <---- I LOVE That change, i was always curious why the hell 5 might is her requirement, when she isnt strong creature in fight and i got answer that it was a mistake!
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0

Griffin Battle Priest <--- thats really small buff which will really help that unit :), i liked that creature in some decks with 1 attack and now it can be played earlier!
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req. 2/2/0


Inferno

Chaos Imp <--- same as Elanor it was really strange that it was 4 might.... and 0 in destinity :) I like it a lot and ignatius will be really happy to see it
Req. 4/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/3

Void Arbiter <--- Really strong creature which would be harder to play @ dhamiria or garant gate (that 1 magic / fortune more u need) <-- u have to commit 1 more turn!
Req. 3/2/0
Now Req: 2/2/2


Necropolis

Atropos <--- nice buff :)
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1

Banshee <--- Nice buff to Seria as jkkk said, but i really hate that banshee is playable only @ spell deck and u cant really utilize it in fortune decks :( (maybe weird seria 4 4 4 build as jkkk suggested)
Req. 6/3/0
Now Req. 4/4/0

Decay Spitter now a melee shooter <--- that creature will be even better (and it was like the strongest necro unit


Sanctuary

Sayama Spy <--- that card will be less played... and right now i see no reason to play it in sanctuary decks (even if ability is really strong <--- Shalan could play it but it is harder early when u want to play it)
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2

Sayama Champion <--- thats slight nerf will hurt akane not ishuma / takana / noboru imo
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


Neutral

Dark Assassin <--- deserved!
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0

Wandering Bard / Raider / Magic Peddler / Soothsayer <--- thats really nice change (commiting 1 fortune in most decks to play it :) I LIKE IT)
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req: 1/0/2

Pao Deathseeker <--- deserved!
COST 3
NOW COSTS 4



Imo its still not enough :) Like where is nerf hammer on ORCS!

ManlyMantonio
03-10-2014, 07:43 PM
You had me at Pao for 4 cost!

Daefon
03-10-2014, 07:44 PM
Overall, I really like the changes and the idea behind them.

Some comments on specifics:
- I would have liked to see the changes take it 1 step further and reduce the might cost of BS1 creatures by 1 as well, as those are basically statted to be 1 cost less. It would even give those cards, which are really weak right now, some use. That way they would be playable in decks that don't want to raise might as high.

- Atropos: worth considering making the destiny cost 2, as his effect is very powerful - a fortune bringing back 2 target creatures would likely cost at least 3 destiny.

- I really like that Namturu Channeler and Griffin Battle Priest have gotten their magic cost reduced. This will make them way more playable in invoker decks

- The banshee makes a lot of sense since it now has same magic cost as Soulreaver. It is certainly a buff, especially in tandem with Atropos also requiring 4 might. Necro might be a little too dominant in bs2 because of it (more work for the VIP testers)

- Another card worth looking at is Titan, The card is currently unplayable due to it's 4/4/0 requirements. Changing it to 4/3/0 would still make the card risky, but far more playable.

Uraxor
03-10-2014, 07:45 PM
Ok, one more time.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT BALANCING THE GAMEPLAY.

It's about design recalibration to maintain consistency of released cards in terms of attribute requirements.


And yes, I'm flaming devs now for not making that clear and confusing everyone. :nonchalance:

BS2 & S05 are here to balance the gameplay (or at least shake it up)

Buffs/Nerfs introduced with these changes are actually just a side effect... :rolleyes:

SoAmazinglyBad
03-10-2014, 07:48 PM
I would like to see some rebalancing on orcs sth like lowering some stats of some creatures (Tainted Orc, War Oliphant, 2 2 5 enrager, Vultures, goblin scouts, centaurs etc) They have really nice stats (attack / ret / hp ratios) in comparison with other races ... (like zombie 2 1 5 and infect 1 to War Oliphant 2 2 7.... <--- Infect / Regenerate is really crappy for it "value" in stats points...), Right now orcs are dominating cause of really good stats (good attack with good hp and some buff tents / lighting strikes / 2 dmg from shredders etc making some lanes just impossible to handle without a hard removal (tainted orc with tent + vulture / centaur behind )). I would like to see additon of some passives and lowering the raw stats :)

I really hate my posts lately when i dont have time to build post as long as i should have xD

SoAmazinglyBad
03-10-2014, 07:50 PM
Ok, one more time.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT BALANCING THE GAMEPLAY.

It's about design recalibration to maintain consistency of released cards in terms of attribute requirements.


And yes, I'm flaming devs now for not making that clear and confusing everyone. :nonchalance:

BS2 & S05 are here to balance the gameplay (or at least shake it up)

We all know that but open will be sometimes played and i think it should be balanced from time to time too

On the other hand:(FREAKING CAPTCHA SH*T) xD

Uraxor
03-10-2014, 07:54 PM
Overall, I really like the changes and the idea behind them.

Some comments on specifics:
- I would have liked to see the changes take it 1 step further and reduce the might cost of BS1 creatures by 1 as well, as those are basically statted to be 1 cost less. It would even give those cards, which are really weak right now, some use. That way they would be playable in decks that don't want to raise might as high.

- Atropos: worth considering making the destiny cost 2, as his effect is very powerful - a fortune bringing back 2 target creatures would likely cost at least 3 destiny.

- The banshee makes a lot of sense since it now has same magic cost as Soulreaver. It is certainly a buff, especially in tandem with Atropos also requiring 4 might. Necro might be a little too dominant in bs2 because of it (more work for the VIP testers)



These are actually first comments in here reflecting on what's the thread's purpose ...

npavcec
03-10-2014, 07:59 PM
Nice to see that the actual cards are going to be changed and balanced. I approve this aproach much better than tries to "fix" the metagame by adding new cards which are not thoroughly tested.

I like PaoDeathseeker finally getting cost increase. This card was such an clear OP that I would never consider building about ANY deck without 4 pieces of them. Now, at 4 cost, things will get interesting. I imagine it will still be very useful for the rush and OTK decks.


- The banshee makes a lot of sense since it now has same magic cost as Soulreaver. It is certainly a buff, especially in tandem with Atropos also requiring 4 might. Necro might be a little too dominant in bs2 because of it (more work for the VIP testers)

I don't think that Necro will be that dominant in BS2. Firstly, without FateSealers, necro decks will become very draw dependent (no more extra cards when a creature dies), and also, Atropos is not that big of a deal now, since it gets banished after it dies due to being unique. Basically, non-fortune necro deck will have only 2 sure creature gravedigs, which may or even may not happen (imagine Atropos at the bottom of the library). Hassle with WanderingBards and a relatively big cost of Atrpos will cost em huge tempo, IMHO.

jkk89
03-10-2014, 08:07 PM
Ok, one more time.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT BALANCING THE GAMEPLAY.

It's about design recalibration to maintain consistency of released cards in terms of attribute requirements.

It is perfectly clear to me. But U cannot seperate the 2 aspects of the game. The game has to make sense (tutoring req 2 destiny makes sense and tutoring req 2 might makes no sense) AND game has to be balanced.

I agree with the requirements changes on the most parts, I've just highlighted the other aspect of it: how it will affect the actual meta? That is what is interesting to me, so that is why I am looking at that aspect of the incoming changes.

Uraxor
03-10-2014, 08:11 PM
The main purpose of the 'recalibration' is to unify the attribute requirements of individual cards.
IF the formulae for that is correct then you have nothing to fear in terms of balance (and yes I admit the IF there, notice?)
That in comparison to a previous version of a card you may speak of a nerf /buff, that's just a side effect.



edit@ jkkk's post;
your previous posts sound nothing like that. They're purely flaming nerf & bans.
I'm trying to make you understand that yes, while the changes' impact on meta was not ignored while drafting these changes, they were done - and had to be done - for a different reason and therefore judging them by their impact on meta is a wrong thing to do - which you focused at exclusively in your initial posts. It's like saying a nice sports car sucks because it won't take you through a muddy forest, like Humvee..

Sylviugh
03-10-2014, 08:16 PM
What about idiot Keltor do something about him in 10 games 5 are keltor and 3 ishuma

Takeiteasy...
03-10-2014, 08:23 PM
What about idiot Keltor do something about him in 10 games 5 are keltor and 3 ishuma

Maybe becouse its kinda cheap to have effective Keltor or Ishuma? and they work great in Swisses..........
Its boring ofc to play all time against them but its good that new players have quite cheap way to have effective deck to compete with old players?

z0k1x2
03-10-2014, 08:35 PM
Nice step for game, keep tempo mixing the pot :)

Kimundi
03-10-2014, 08:38 PM
I understand we did not explain why we did those changes, that's a mistake on our part. I want to thank Uraxor, who is one of our VIP, to be able to answer you on this point.

Moreover, I take the opportunity to quote Simon Villeneuve, our Game Designer, the one in charge of those kind of balancing.


The changes weren't meant as a nerf or buff per se, but a recalibration of the cards. Most of them were created under an old design mindset and feel obsolete. So we changed them to make them fit our new design mindset.

Also, as some of you stated, the designers wanted for the cards to be "logical". Fetching is a Fortune effect, thus the destiny requirement. Banshee is a spell effet, so magic requirement...

I'm sure Simon V. will come through as he often does and may answer better than I do :)

SpaceElephant
03-10-2014, 08:47 PM
Hi guys, I edited Aza's post with a short note from our designers, clarifying their intention with those changes :

With Base Set 2, we decided it was time to revisit some cards that has a set of requirement that doesn't fit our guideline anymore. When we started, requirements were set to fit with the cost of a card, but that's not the best way to design a card. So we went through all the creatures we have so far and changed those we think are not compliant to our current guidelines. These are not to be considered as buffs or nerfs but as a recalibration that just happens to change the power level of a card.
Please note that we also have some nerfs/buffs that are going to be adressed in another thread.

raca28
03-10-2014, 08:50 PM
Any type of change to the meta is good since it keeps the game interesting and fresh, I think this should happen more often. I don't really care what deck will be "OP" there will be always some decks that are the better then others.

Though I have a concern about the bugs that will pop up, I mean quite some time has passed since the unique rule change patch and silent death is still not fixed,... I don't really care about that card but if some more important card become unusable that could be quite a problem.

jkk89
03-10-2014, 09:14 PM
The main purpose of the 'recalibration' is to unify the attribute requirements of individual cards.
IF the formulae for that is correct then you have nothing to fear in terms of balance (and yes I admit the IF there, notice?)
That in comparison to a previous version of a card you may speak of a nerf /buff, that's just a side effect.



edit@ jkkk's post;
your previous posts sound nothing like that. They're purely flaming nerf & bans.
I'm trying to make you understand that yes, while the changes' impact on meta was not ignored while drafting these changes, they were done - and had to be done - for a different reason and therefore judging them by their impact on meta is a wrong thing to do - which you focused at exclusively in your initial posts. It's like saying a nice sports car sucks because it won't take you through a muddy forest, like Humvee..

Uraxor, I am really happy about the changes, that they are looking at the old cards and recalibrating them. Same as ZergRusher I hope they will do that more often. And I completely understand why the changes were made. I am just no good in showing my appreciation, so I just decided to focus on the pragmatic aspect of the changes -> the gameplay. And while I've said that Necro got a buff, I didn't say that it is wrong -> I like the concept of buffing Necro in this "recalibration" process. And I like how most of this changes will affect the gameplay (I actually think Eleonore will be broadly played).

And one more thing. I would like if they could make the perfect formula for both "logic" and powerlevel, but it is not possible I'm affraid. They (we) will have to always look at both of this aspects.

zolosatiy
03-10-2014, 10:10 PM
I understand that this is a requirements balancing change and that actual buffs/nerfs are another matter altogether.


HOWEVER, the fact that sanctuary got the middle finger (no good news whatsoever) and that ishuma will go from T2 to the recycle bin (nerfs to DA, pao, sayama champ, sayama spy) makes me a sad panda... As it stands now sanctuary will all but disappear from play on Open. Hope the actual buffs/nerfs that are incoming have taken that into consideration.


PS. Sayama champion requiring 3 might is indeed a BIG nerf, as now it cannot be played when going second, on your first round with Gold Pile, which was the best way to even the ground vs other rushes

trupiciel
03-10-2014, 11:16 PM
some words

Overall I like those bufs and nerfs. ;)

Bazaltovy
03-10-2014, 11:20 PM
Overall I like those bufs and nerfs. ;)

Well, trupi, my thoughts exactly. Nailed 'em. ;)

cucu99
03-10-2014, 11:45 PM
Imperial Guard
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req: 4/0/0

Eleonore
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0

<3 <3

npavcec
03-10-2014, 11:55 PM
Eleonore
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0
<3 <3

Exactly. Probably the most powerful Unique for skilled players just got bargain cheap (in terms of requirements), and the first 20 post or so were buaaagh.. Atropossss.. necro this.. necro that.. :) Hillarious. :D

MT...
03-11-2014, 12:22 AM
Now as a Necro player, and more importantly a Fleshbane player, I cannot tell you how disappointed I am in the change to Banshees.

Not only have we (as in players who use Fleshbane) lost the Fate sealer card, but now in order to use another incorporeal unit we need to go to four magic. And yes I'm well aware that we no longer need to play to six might, but considering Fleshbane is limited to one school of magic and zero starting points for magic, It will be still a grind. Besides this will only benefit Necro players who enjoy playing Magic and not give any incentive for any Necro player to play a fortune style deck.

So why not make the Banshee a character with a requirement of 414. This will opening up many more strategies and give back a strong unit that favor fortune players when BS2 is finally running.

Now as for the other Necro units, Decay spider & Moonsilk Skelton, while changing these units to melee/shooters will certainly open up more tactics. It will come at a greater cost when playing on the open formats vs. Haven and to a smaller extent BS2.

And as for the last two units, these will not have any effect on how people play Necro.

Long live the Fate Sealer!!!

Kincadian
03-11-2014, 12:28 AM
After spending over $100 on this game only to find almost all the cards I bought with wildcards wont be part of base set 2 I was very upset and played the game less and less.
Seeing how horribly you guys manage this game, communicate and seem to go out of your way to slap your paying customers in the face. Ive started playing Shadow Era and while maybe its 10% less fun then mmdoc the devs are 100% better and dont go out of their way to screw with the people who support their game.
I kept hearing that if you were a pissed off angry customer like me you had nothing to complain about, that base set 1 would be unaffected. Then you go and completely destroy my favorite deck the only one I had time to play and learn and tell me to like it.
I am deleting mmdoc today and never giving ubisoft another dollar in my life. GG

Gadjemil
03-11-2014, 12:59 AM
As I'm no expert deckbuilder, I'll leave the specialists out there discuss the individual changes but I really like the global philosophy behind those modifications. Now, the devs show they can balance their game and are not afraid of (sometimes radical) changes.

That's the kind of things I like, instead of the mere addition of new cards and new expansions. A real work behind the scenes. The devs are definitely not lazy. :-)

Keep up the good work, guys!

PolleyPocket
03-11-2014, 01:02 AM
Any type of change to the meta is good since it keeps the game interesting and fresh, I think this should happen more often. I don't really care what deck will be "OP" there will be always some decks that are the better then others.

Though I have a concern about the bugs that will pop up, I mean quite some time has passed since the unique rule change patch and silent death is still not fixed,... I don't really care about that card but if some more important card become unusable that could be quite a problem.

There is going to be a maintenance tonight for the silent death fix, according to their twitter ... "Tue Mar 11th at 2h30pm (Paris), we'll host a maintenance of 2hours to fix the Silent Death issues"

AmineM2
03-11-2014, 01:02 AM
Dear Champions,

[Edit] - Notes from the designers :

(...)These are not to be considered as buffs or nerfs but as a recalibration that just happens to change the power level of a card.




Maybe I'm just a bear of very little brain but for me it is very simple: when you make a card more useful or powerful it's a buff. When you make a card less useful or powerful it's a nerf.

Why exactly should I not consider a nerf as a nerf?

***

I'm ok with most of the changes you are going to make but I have one question:

Have you tested how the changes will influence the Open meta?

At first glance it looks like the Dark Assassin and Pao nerfs will give huge boost for all stall decks as the rush decks will suffer a lot. Is it intended?

hectoring
03-11-2014, 03:11 AM
Gotta love this forum. For months people have been saying, X is OP, why won't devs balance cards and make patches often like in HS, DotA, etc -> QQ.

Now they are making some recalibrations, people say, OMG the cards I collected aren't going to work the same way -> QQ.

malkorion
03-11-2014, 06:22 AM
Gotta love this forum. For months people have been saying, X is OP, why won't devs balance cards and make patches often like in HS, DotA, etc -> QQ.

Now they are making some recalibrations, people say, OMG the cards I collected aren't going to work the same way -> QQ.

Exactly.

To me, it looks like they want to slow the meta down. The expansion should shake things up.

By the way, could you please talk a little about the creature type addition? For example, The Banshee could be: Dark Spirit. (after MtG's Banshees)

Off topic but: why do people keep using the word 'season' referring to DoC patches?

Bazaltovy
03-11-2014, 07:44 AM
Banshee will actually be referred as Dark Ghost. It was shown on one of the streams. :)

malkorion
03-11-2014, 08:06 AM
Banshee will actually be referred as Dark Ghost. It was shown on one of the streams. :)

:) Fleshbane Ghost tribal deck

Uraxor
03-11-2014, 09:40 AM
Maybe I'm just a bear of very little brain but for me it is very simple: when you make a card more useful or powerful it's a buff. When you make a card less useful or powerful it's a nerf.

Why exactly should I not consider a nerf as a nerf?

***

I'm ok with most of the changes you are going to make but I have one question:

Have you tested how the changes will influence the Open meta?

At first glance it looks like the Dark Assassin and Pao nerfs will give huge boost for all stall decks as the rush decks will suffer a lot. Is it intended?

Nerfs and buffs to individual cards are only a byproduct of the recalibration - they were not the initial (driving) purpose of these changes.
The reason was that eg Eleonore's ability is linked to Magic rather than Might - so 5/2 requirements did not fit with the card. Now 3/3 fits much better to what the card does.
(So yes, there were some nerfs & buffs, but not for the sake of making cards stronger/weaker; to make them fall in line with other, newer cards attribute distribution wise. So judging these changes purely by good/bad buffs/nerfs is very inaccurate.)

And yes, recalibration - as well as still upcoming nerfs & bans (read the edit to see that those are yet to come) are under intensive testing for Standard and Open.

AmineM2
03-11-2014, 10:43 AM
Nerfs and buffs to individual cards are only a byproduct of the recalibration - they were not the initial (driving) purpose of these changes.

Why the purpose of a change should affect the meaning of words 'nerf' and 'buff'?

Look, my English is far from perfectness so please correct me if I'm wrong but for me word 'nerf' has just one meaning:

"a nerf is a change to a game that reduces the desirability or effectiveness of a particular game element. The term is also used as a verb for the act of making such a change." (as in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf_%28video_gaming%29

The intention of the change is irrelevant.



And yes, recalibration - as well as still upcoming nerfs & bans (read the edit to see that those are yet to come) are under intensive testing for Standard and Open.

Good.

Now the second question: is the stall decks buffing intended?

Daefon
03-11-2014, 11:48 AM
Am I correct to assume a card is assigned 0 might if it has 0 attack and retalation? This seems to be the trend with librarian, moonsilk spider and tax collector (also kitten warrior)

If so, wouldn't it be more logical to keep hell hound on 1 might and to make blind brother require 0 might?

CookLooksClan
03-11-2014, 12:57 PM
Academy

Glyph-Carved Golem
Req. 4/4/0
Now Req: 3/4/0


I like this one, magic creatures, especially for academy should be relying on bigger magic level than might level. Also it helps to play Glyph-Carved Golem quicker, since bringing him on turn 4 is usually a challenge.



Haven

Imperial Guard
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req: 4/0/0


Good one, but I don't think that will be a drastic change, since I can see this creature only in Morgan, and his ability takes effect when reaching 5 might and 3 destiny. Even then I think lowering defensive creatures might requirment is good idea (Let's look at Dark Wood Treant, or 2 drop blockers for each faction).



Eleonore
Req. 5/2/0
Now Req: 3/3/0


I really like this one, again Eleonore is more of a defensive creature so lower might makes sense (Stats were similar to banshee). Now I can try some Alia heal decks with her. ^ ^



Blazing Glory
Req. 6/1/0
Now Req: 5/2/0


While soulreavers, bridges, town portals are hanging around, this creature is hard to play. So even lower requiments won't bring this creature back into decks. But still, I agree with 5 might requiment, Since 6 drop with 6 might requiment is quite rough to play.



Tithe Collector
Req. 1/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/1


Interesting one, creature without any might requiment. I guess only one who will be effected by this change (looking at current heros, of course is Kieran since he starts without Destiny level.
.


Vestal
Req. 4/1/0
Now Req: 3/2/0


Again, nice change, such a defensive creature shouldn't have same requiments as Zefiria for example. But, Heal is quite weak in this game (ability to have 2 creatures in line means that you can defeat any creature in your turn, and healing happens at the start of your turn, so after playing healing creature opponent has enough time to respond), so even with this requiments it is hard to play this creature.



Sister
Req. 2/1/0
Now Req. 1/2/0


Similar to Vestal, same reasoning ;)



Griffin Battle Priest
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req. 2/2/0


One of the best healing creatures, I played this guy in my Sandalphon deck, And I must say that changing it too 2/2/0 helps a lot. Usually, you want to reach 3might first (glories, wolf captains, etc), then 2magic, and then you need to choose 4might or 3magic depending on cards you have, or looking at current board state. So having ability to play this creature while having 4/2/0 is really nice.



Inferno

Chaos Imp
Req. 4/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/3


Really huge buff, amazing creature for Ignatius, I think fortune based decks will have some serious trouble with this guy since there is no simple way to remove him (and playing against Ignatius you usually do not have all lines filled (bridges,throne, austerity)). Easier ways to remove him : Fire magic, Sanctuary OM ability. I fear that it might be too good of a buff.



Breeder
Req. 2/1/0
Now Req: 1/1/0
Now called Gravid breeder


Once, again really nice stats rebalancing, but the problem stays with the actuall creature, there is no real reason to play this guy in most of the decks (for example Academy needs magic channels for such a creatures like Spirit Bound Djinn, Unstable Djinn and many more), I can only image this creature being played in some sort of control deck, so in order to get earlier armageddon, you play Gravid Breeder, and then armageddon. But even then it is waste of the card. By the way, can you explain how wizard tutor (1/0/5) is equal to Breeder (1/0/2)?



Chaos Sorceress
Req. 6/1/0
Now Req. 5/2/0


Nice one, similar to Blazing Glory, 6drop with 6 might requiment is really hard to play.



Breeder Mother
Req. 4/1/0
Now Req: 3/1/0


I really like that you changed older cards that had higher requiments that they should (such as healing creatures from the first base set, etc). But I can't see this creature being played.



Hell Hound
Req.1/0/0
Now Req: 0/0/0


0/0/0 is really interesting, I guess Kal-Azaar is mostly effeted by this change, even though I still wouldn't include Hell Hound in Control Kal-Azaar deck. But I don't know what are you bringing in with next expansions, so indeed 0/0/0 is quite interesting.



Void Arbiter
Req. 3/2/0
Now Req: 2/2/2


Stats are spread, so It will be harder to play him, I don't really know is this bad or good thing. It might help for some Hybrid-Control decks, if someone would play them ;)



Necropolis

Atropos
Req. 5/0/0
Now Req. 4/0/1


Really strong buff, I guess there is no 6/4/1 Ariana (considering Banshee too) in BS2 then, so 4/6/1 is the way to go, or 4/4/1 (but then i might prefer Seria).



Namtaru Channeler
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req: 2/2/0


Hard to say, we might see some Namtaru Channeler Troll decks more often. I definetly try something with it ;)



Banshee
Req. 6/3/0
Now Req. 4/4/0


Strong buff, Necro in BS2 is even more stronger, but Banshee will have certain creature type so that she won't work against Dark Ward, so I guess it is balanced change, we might see some anti-necro decks with light spell school.



Moonsilk Spinner now a melee shooter

Decay Spitter now a melee shooter


More fexibility, but I totaly agree. after melee shooter category appearence in 5T expansion, this perfect place for them to be in.



Sanctuary

Naga Tactician
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/1
Is now a melee Shooter

Sweet, I always liked this card. Now it gets more flexibilty which is really nice.



Kensei
Req. 6/0/0
Now Req: 5/0/0


Makes sense comparing it to Kenshi or Naga Warrior. But this creature is just to weak to be played (only for some crazy surprise damage, but who wants to pay 7 resources for that).



Shanriya Priestess
Req. 4/1/0
Now req. 3/2/0


I like this slight change, but It won't change much. I saw some Ishumas playing Shanriya Priestress, but I wouldn't consider this card as must include in Ishuma anyways.



Okane no Okane
Req. 3/0/0
Now Req: 2/0/1


Resource gain/denial was usually achieved with fortunes (also with creatures that have income ability and require destiny level, such as Collector or Treasurer). So adding destiny level requiment is accurate change.



Stream Singer
Req. 2/1/1
Now Req: 1/1/1


Doesn't change gameplay (you usually will have 2might when you will need to play singer), but stats are more accurate looking at what the card does. I like it.



Sayama Spy
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req. 2/0/2


Huge nerf for Ishuma, looking at DA, Champion, Spy changes there is no reason to play gold pile, I wouldn't be surprised if we would see some Spellshumas (maybe only with sunburst or with/and geysars)



Sayama Champion
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


Looking at current decks, it hurts Ishuma mostly, but Champion still can be easily played. And of course Akane and Takana almost don't care. No 2/6/0 Noboru control hurts me :(



Neutral

Dark Assassin
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 3/0/0


Hurts Crag and Ishuma, Champions ( heros with 2/0/1 stats), can still play this guy with goldpile. I would totaly agree with this change.



Wandering Bard / Raider / Magic Peddler / Soothsayer
Req. 2/0/1
Now Req: 1/0/2


I really dislike this one. My suggestion - Wandering Bard -2/0/1, Magic Pedller - 1/2/0, Soothsater - 1/0/2. Raider 1/1/1 or something similar. Creature + Spell decks will suffer quite a lot :(



Helexian Librarian
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req. 0/0/2


I would agree, card draws are usually achieved with fortunes, and 2 might is quite weird for 0/0/1.



Moonsilk Spider
Req. 2/3/0
Now Req:0/3/0
Now a melee shooter


Nice buff, I really like this guy ^ ^. Now some control (especially with dark magic) decks might include it.



Pao Hunter
Req. 2/0/0
Now Req: 1/0/0


Doesn't change much, and it is still a horrible card to play ;)



Blind Brother
Req. 3/0/2
Now Req: 1/0/3
Now a melee shooter


I agree, really accurate stats requirment. I am not sure will it help to make him playable.



Void Wraith
Req. 3/1/0
Now Req: 2/1/2

Harder to play in mass rage decks. Dhamiria massrage is still ok.



Void Keeper
Req. 4/1/1
Now Req: 3/1/2


I like idea that cards having some connection with Void requires destiny level. ^ ^ Still this creature is not worth to play.



Pao Deathseeker
COST 3
NOW COSTS 4


Needed change, I think now we will see creature based decks running 1-3 of those just for the finisher.



Greater Water Elemental now a melee-shooter


I am not sure why since lesser elemental is shooter anyways, but who cares about Water Elementals ;)

So this is my first impression. I really like to see that there is some changes happening to make this game even better. Nice job guys ;)

svilleneuve
03-11-2014, 01:38 PM
Am I correct to assume a card is assigned 0 might if it has 0 attack and retalation? This seems to be the trend with librarian, moonsilk spider and tax collector (also kitten warrior)

If so, wouldn't it be more logical to keep hell hound on 1 might and to make blind brother require 0 might?

Generally speaking, a creature with 0 ATK and 0 RET should have a really low Might requirement. It depends also on its HP and its abilities. Hell Hound for example, is an Inferno creature, 1/0/2 with Sweep Attack. Normally, this would mean 1 Might, but Inferno has a lot of other creatures that are cheap in Might requirement. We wanted to clearly identify this as an Inferno trait. Outside of Inferno, Hell Hound would require 1 Might.

Blind Brother has 4HP. You could say that Might represents how well a creature fights, or how well it can defend itself. BB isn't a threat by any means, but 4 HP usually means 2 small strikes before it dies, hence the 1 Might.

WarlordThuran
03-11-2014, 03:03 PM
Speaking as a sanctuary player, i can get behind most of these changes, especially considering base set 2 coming up.

However, the nerf to DA and Pao is HUGE for ishuma and may be enough to kick a deck that is already borderline tier 2, entirely out of the open meta. The nerf to sayama champion is understandable as it remains in BS2 and can no longer be cast on turn 2 by any deck (if you go 2nd, you could potentially power it out on turn 1 with a single gold pile), and means that in the mirror it will be the 1st player that gets the champion out first. However outside the mirror it does make sanctuary worse and makes ishuma even weaker in open. I am not expecting to see sanctuary make any impact in that format, at all, the way things are now.

Now, regarding sayama spy. it pushes it out of the takana strategies, but does allow for it to be used in yukiko, fortune-based decks, or yukiko aggro, which is probably the reasoning behind the change, as yukiko was nigh-pointless before this change. However it does seem like the aggro decks need the card more than fortune-based decks. Ultimately, i do not think it will make much of a difference; sayama spy is already barely played in ishuma, and the fortune-based decks wont care a whole lot.

Bazaltovy
03-11-2014, 03:40 PM
Changes are great in most cases. However, DA's recalibration will hurt my new all-time favorite, Sanctuary Akane. :(

GeishaGoner
03-11-2014, 04:15 PM
Leave Pao cost as it is, just make him die after he attack so he woldn't back to hand by bridge,portal etc. If Banshee and Atropos get might requirment reduction than cut requirments for other fatties too. Let's all those who have 6 might req will have 5 now, just keep their resource cost high as it is and recalibrate a bit those with 5 might requirement.

Revalon
03-11-2014, 09:20 PM
Leave Pao cost as it is, just make him die after he attack so he woldn't back to hand by bridge,portal etc. If Banshee and Atropos get might requirment reduction than cut requirments for other fatties too. Let's all those who have 6 might req will have 5 now, just keep their resource cost high as it is and recalibrate a bit those with 5 might requirement.


Making Pao die after attack wouldn't be good. Right now, you need a way to get rid of your own Pao if you have two or more on hand but only one open lane. Would he die, you could theoretically push 12 damage through one lane just with Paos and no other cards. And I think it's more about the rush decks, which wouldn't care or even love this.

As for the fatties. As was already said, the main intention in the changes (besides Pao) is not to nerf/buff cards, but to adjust them, to make them how they would be if they were created now. The Banshee already was changed to have a magic requirement. The reduced might requirement for Atropos and Banshee is because they have weak bodies. When on the field, they are not as strong as a 5 or 6 might creature should be.

Bazaltovy
03-11-2014, 10:25 PM
I wouldn't really call Atropos' body weak, but I see your point and I agree with that at some degree.

GeishaGoner
03-11-2014, 10:27 PM
Maybe, but imo fatties with 5 might it's not bad idea, it would make them more popular with 6 most of them (probably expect inferno) will never find the place in any deck as it is right now.

Revalon
03-12-2014, 12:03 AM
I wouldn't really call Atropos' body weak, but I see your point and I agree with that at some degree.

True, but for 5 might, I don't think he's overly strong. (For 4 he's very strong indeed)

zapp626
03-12-2014, 09:14 AM
Well I think rebalancing this type of game from time to time is really necessary. But to say "this are no buffs/nerfs", that is just senseless. I mean if a creature is stronger after a change it's a buff, if it's weaker it's a nerf. No need to sugarcoat it.

Only thing I don't like, it's so extremely hard for a casual player to get a good deck in this game. So if you invested into a certain deck and then you are hit with some "rebalancing" (which is said to be no nerf, but might render your deck useless anyway), that really sucks. Hopefully this will change a little with BS2.

Uraxor
03-12-2014, 09:43 AM
Well I think rebalancing this type of game from time to time is really necessary. But to say "this are no buffs/nerfs", that is just senseless. I mean if a creature is stronger after a change it's a buff, if it's weaker it's a nerf. No need to sugarcoat it.

Only thing I don't like, it's so extremely hard for a casual player to get a good deck in this game. So if you invested into a certain deck and then you are hit with some "rebalancing" (which is said to be no nerf, but might render your deck useless anyway), that really sucks. Hopefully this will change a little with BS2.

It's not supposed not to be labelled nerf/buff - it isn't supposed to be judged purely as a nerf/buff as nerfing or buffing cards wasn't its goal.
Isn't word side effect clear enough? :/

Valmarth
03-12-2014, 01:02 PM
Hello !

Just to add my feeling in this thread and thanks the dev for these crucial choices and decisions.

It hurts some decks, buff others, but never mind : it is so logical regarding the strategy and the concept of the cards (might, magic, fortune) that it just feels right.

And with these changes, my trust on the dev to be able to make changes on cards that need to be modified is back, and it feels great !

so Thank you !
please keep listening to us and make the changes most needed when necessary. it will keep the game interesting and remove some frustration

and now I leave to cry about my assassins :D and PAO
but it is perfectly fine ! it should have been the case a long time ago. I dont even know why you waited so long.

Nice to see the change in Necro as well, make so much sense.

But the real important point for me is :
hearing you talking about the philosophy of the games and his future show that you have a better idea of where you are going. very good !
you start by correcting what you think was mistakes of the past! great !


thank you for that

Bazaltovy
03-12-2014, 05:44 PM
But the real important point for me is :
hearing you talking about the philosophy of the games and his future show that you have a better idea of where you are going. very good !
you start by correcting what you think was mistakes of the past!

Needless to say. *wipes a tear*

Revalon
03-12-2014, 05:51 PM
I just noticed that I then will be able to get some good creature back with Pao -> Rite of Necromantic Transfer :)

Drummle
03-13-2014, 04:45 AM
The repeated thing being said in this thread is this should not be considered a nerf/buff but just bringing cards inline with design principles. For example searching is a Fortune effect so tutors have higher Destiny requirements. This makes sense on the surface and seems like a pretty good justification for the changes. But where I am confused, where I believe this reasoning falls apart, where I stop believing the devs' assurances is the Tithe Collector change. Or more specifically what the Tithe Collector change shows in regard to the conspicuous lack of a change to the Crusader Treasurer. Resource acceleration is a Fortune effect, there is no question, and therefore the Tithe Collector changing to 0/0/1 makes sense. But why isn't this logic applied to the Crusader Treasurer? A 2/2/6 melee body is barely worth 3 might let alone 4. Without Income Treasurer compares unfavorably with Lamasu, Undead Mino, and Oliphant. If Income is a "Fortune mechanic" then why isn't Crusader Treasurer being changed to 3/0/2 or 3/0/3? I am forced to conclude that the devs believe that Income 1 is worth 1 Destiny while increasing to Income 2 means increasing Might by 1. But Might has nothing to do with resource acceleration so not changing Treasurer seems to fly in the face of the justifications for these changes in this thread.

Of course all this all makes sense when you realize this was a balance decision, not just "reorganization along design principles" like some are claiming. Treasurer was consciously excluded from the same treatment that cards like Banshee, Collector, and the tutors received. Treasurer was nerfed before and they really don't want to un-nerf it...even more than they want to "standardize" creatures with Fortune effects. If you think this was anything other than a balance decision then please try to convince me.


I just noticed that I then will be able to get some good creature back with Pao -> Rite of Necromantic Transfer :)

Also good news for fortune, A Life for a Life on a Pao can kill just about every creature used now.

Uraxor
03-13-2014, 10:56 AM
The repeated thing being said in this thread is this should not be considered a nerf/buff but just bringing cards inline with design principles. For example searching is a Fortune effect so tutors have higher Destiny requirements. This makes sense on the surface and seems like a pretty good justification for the changes. But where I am confused, where I believe this reasoning falls apart, where I stop believing the devs' assurances is the Tithe Collector change. Or more specifically what the Tithe Collector change shows in regard to the conspicuous lack of a change to the Crusader Treasurer. Resource acceleration is a Fortune effect, there is no question, and therefore the Tithe Collector changing to 0/0/1 makes sense. But why isn't this logic applied to the Crusader Treasurer? A 2/2/6 melee body is barely worth 3 might let alone 4. Without Income Treasurer compares unfavorably with Lamasu, Undead Mino, and Oliphant. If Income is a "Fortune mechanic" then why isn't Crusader Treasurer being changed to 3/0/2 or 3/0/3? I am forced to conclude that the devs believe that Income 1 is worth 1 Destiny while increasing to Income 2 means increasing Might by 1. But Might has nothing to do with resource acceleration so not changing Treasurer seems to fly in the face of the justifications for these changes in this thread.

Of course all this all makes sense when you realize this was a balance decision, not just "reorganization along design principles" like some are claiming. Treasurer was consciously excluded from the same treatment that cards like Banshee, Collector, and the tutors received. Treasurer was nerfed before and they really don't want to un-nerf it...even more than they want to "standardize" creatures with Fortune effects. If you think this was anything other than a balance decision then please try to convince me.



Also good news for fortune, A Life for a Life on a Pao can kill just about every creature used now.

Oh, new member of the Team! How else could you know all the factors taken into account when creating cards?
Glad to see Team growing, however I'm not sure about picking someone like this to work with you, Simon et al :s

Bazaltovy
03-13-2014, 03:43 PM
I believe Treasurer's nerf was meant to weaken Cassandra. Upping his Destiny requirement would do nothing in that aspect, since Cassie goes to 3/1/3 immediately.

Alamand
03-13-2014, 06:48 PM
I believe Treasurer's nerf was meant to weaken Cassandra. Upping his Destiny requirement would do nothing in that aspect, since Cassie goes to 3/1/3 immediately.

That was their entire point, looking at treasurers body and ability it should have 3/0/2 or maybe 3/0/3 requirements but the dev team won't do that because it would undo the nerf. Their entire point was the devs weren't completely ignoring balance when they made these changes as they're trying to say they did, which I don't mind at all.

I'm looking forward to what kind of nerfs they have planned for Ignatius to stop the Chaos imp buff from completely ruining open format.

Edit: also hurray for no more captcha! it's like BS2 came early.

LORD-LYNXxx
03-14-2014, 12:16 AM
Is rebalace include only changes in requirements (and cost of pao) or will be more changes in costs of play?

Drummle
03-14-2014, 06:02 AM
Oh, new member of the Team! How else could you know all the factors taken into account when creating cards?
Glad to see Team growing, however I'm not sure about picking someone like this to work with you, Simon et al :s

I am assuming that this is meant to be some kind of insult. I am SO glad you resorted to an ad hominem attack instead of responding to anything I said. It means I would be free to call you a smug and arrogant fanboy that seems more interested in insulting and dismissing the people you disagree with rather than having a productive discussion. But don't worry I would never do that, I would never stoop to your level.

The fact is despite you putting your fingers in your ears and shouting it turns out both Bazaltovy and Alamand are right. The devs were making deliberate balance decisions when making these changes. Crusader Treasurer is evidence of this. It should have been changed to require more Destiny because Income 2 is a powerful Fortune effect. It was not changed because the resulting buff to Cassandra would be undesirable. I do not understand why it is so hard to accept (or why the suggestion needs to be defended against) that the devs were strongly influenced by balance concerns when they made these changes. They would be terrible at game design if they didn't!

Uraxor
03-14-2014, 09:27 AM
I am assuming that this is meant to be some kind of insult. I am SO glad you resorted to an ad hominem attack instead of responding to anything I said. It means I would be free to call you a smug and arrogant fanboy that seems more interested in insulting and dismissing the people you disagree with rather than having a productive discussion. But don't worry I would never do that, I would never stoop to your level.

The fact is despite you putting your fingers in your ears and shouting it turns out both Bazaltovy and Alamand are right. The devs were making deliberate balance decisions when making these changes. Crusader Treasurer is evidence of this. It should have been changed to require more Destiny because Income 2 is a powerful Fortune effect. It was not changed because the resulting buff to Cassandra would be undesirable. I do not understand why it is so hard to accept (or why the suggestion needs to be defended against) that the devs were strongly influenced by balance concerns when they made these changes. They would be terrible at game design if they didn't!

Obviously, I cannot speak for the devs, so .. but - it's surprising, you're able to use latin phrases (or is it Google) and cannot use common logic at the same time.
Because to me, it makes perfect sense, that while these changes do 'Fix' different aspect of the game, than n/b, they obviously cannot afford to ignore those and therefore if some 'Fix' (using it as a term here) would disrupt the game balance too much, it won't happen. Oala, your "riddle" solved.

Treasurer's change was a nerf, with the purpose of nerfing Cassandra and it did well in that regard. What sense would it make, to change him back now?
Your Truth and chance to 'Bash the Devs' (I know it's kinda like a sport and actually more fun than playing their game...) > common logic. Well done.

Razyda
03-14-2014, 03:47 PM
Dont really mind changes, however Stream Singer remains as broken as it was, actually may be considered slightly buffed.

MamuzShah
03-14-2014, 04:18 PM
The treasurer has a body for 3/0/2 requirement (note that 4 mights for a 2/2/6 body is not absolutly insane).
But, having a 3/0/2 prerequirement for him breaks the balance of the game because it can be casted T2 with Cassandra : it's really too strong !

In fact the problem is Cassandra and all the 1/1/2 heroes. They shouldn't exist anymore with the new design option for pre-requirement.
This 4th statistic point affects too much the design space and leads to have design incoherence, especially if the purpose is to unsynchronize the might prerequirement and ressources cost.
The base heroes should be something like a 1/1/1 Cassandra with a basic faction oriented ability (something like Jezziel ability for Haven) and heroes shouldn't have more points than 3 : from 1/1/1 to 3/0/0.

sp1n-
03-15-2014, 03:07 PM
I dont have time to read all posts but why are you talking about treasurers..i cant see him in the list..

Cainium
03-15-2014, 04:29 PM
I dont have time to read all posts but why are you talking about treasurers..i cant see him in the list..

That's the point. The list is about "adjusting requirements to the creatures body". Treasurer is 2/2/6, these stats belong to 3 might creatures, not 4 might.

The problem here is that Cassandra could play this guy at the second turn which is to strong because of the income 2 ability, so he cant be a 3/0/2 guy. 3/0/3 could be an option, but as you alrady seen it: he isn't in the list and remains unchanged a 4/0/2 creature which doesn't fit.

Allyofjustice86
03-15-2014, 10:17 PM
I dont like the changes..

95% are senseless

Revalon
03-15-2014, 10:22 PM
That's the point. The list is about "adjusting requirements to the creatures body". Treasurer is 2/2/6, these stats belong to 3 might creatures, not 4 might.

The problem here is that Cassandra could play this guy at the second turn which is to strong because of the income 2 ability, so he cant be a 3/0/2 guy. 3/0/3 could be an option, but as you alrady seen it: he isn't in the list and remains unchanged a 4/0/2 creature which doesn't fit.


As it was already said:
Those changes are to make the cards' requirements how they would be if they were created now. They are not made to nerf/buff a card, though it might be a side-effect, but also don't ignore the balance.

So your whole argument just doesn't fit.

Alamand
03-16-2014, 02:37 AM
We'll have to wait until they post the other list of balance changes to really tell if they paid any attention to balance with these changes. If there's no nerf to standard format necro or open format Ignatius then they might as well have made treasurer a 3/0/2 because balance will be screwed anyway.

tententai
03-16-2014, 10:34 AM
Many bad creatures (e.g. most of the haven ones on the list) got their requirements lowered. I don't think it will help, since their problem is their efficiency/cost ratio, even at 0/0/0 I wouldn't play these.

What I like is upping some requirements for creatures that came out too early with gold pile or Crag Hack, it lowers a bit the randomness.

Ariana 4/6 or Seria 4/4/3 are now more playbale, that's nice.

The tutors at 2 fortune, I'm not sure how good that is for the game. On one hand, considering the power of uniques, restricting easy access to them makes sense (e.g. Kelthor takes quite a hit there, basically it's one more turn before fetching and playing FF). On the other hand I love tutors and want to play them everywhere :-D

Pao at 4 cost, I'm not sure. It's wasn't that efficient anyways, the fact that it was played eveywhere was because it was doing something very few cards could do.Maybe here going to 4 might might have been the right choice (hitting a bit control decks using it as a finisher while leaving it intact to aggro decks that really need it against control)..

Cainium
03-17-2014, 02:25 PM
As it was already said:
Those changes are to make the cards' requirements how they would be if they were created now. They are not made to nerf/buff a card, though it might be a side-effect, but also don't ignore the balance.


I'm aware of this as i stated in my first sentence. And it's wasn't an argument but rather an explanation for the previous poster what some people see as a problem here.

As an necropolis only player i personally didnt't care much about the haven creature "adjustments".

UncleBooky
03-19-2014, 12:41 AM
If these changes are based on what the creatures ability's are than shouldn't Anael have some magic requirements since his ability is healing? I think he should be used in haven magic decks not fortune.

gabusan
03-19-2014, 03:34 AM
Suddenly my faith in developers have just been restored with these changes. Maybe they are not the lazy bums I thought they were. Maybe they actually care after the release of cards instead of just forget about them and focus on the next batch of hurriedly released cards.

This is a very good first step. The game needed these changes. When you have played this game a lot with many different decks, you start to notice that some cards are not following guidelines at all. And that is why they are not used as much as they should. If I decide to make a stupid deck based around griphin battle priest and sisters, their requeriments should NOT be making my design more difficult than it should be. Banshee costing 4 might and 4 magic is just great, I cant understand why some people is complaining about it. Who the hell would rather increase might twice to go 6 instead of magic once to go 4. You are going to magic 4 anyway when designing a necro deck because you want to use Reavers spells. But it is rather dubious you will want to go might 6. Actually, right now, you usually only go might 6 to play banshee anyway, unless you are that reckless idiot that wants to play ghost dragon so it gets stolen/shadow imaged and then used against you. When people complains that this change to banshee is a "nerf", you really get to understand that a lot of people have opinions, but that does not mean they know what they are talking about.

Now, there is only hoping more of these changes will be coming for other cards that need them badly. Cards with costs/requeriments that really make you raise your eyebrow. Dont forget about your old cards, they need your attention as much as your new ones.

But really, a very good first step. It was about time. Thanks for caring. Pao Hunter is still crap, but it now makes sense, and you wont hear me complaining about it anymore. I think I will sleep better tonight thanks to that change.

trupiciel
03-19-2014, 10:53 PM
Words, words.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/325/428/264.jpg

ulpsz
03-20-2014, 10:55 PM
Suddenly my faith in developers have just been restored with these changes. Maybe they are not the lazy bums I thought they were. Maybe they actually care after the release of cards instead of just forget about them and focus on the next batch of hurriedly released cards.

Th.

I'm starting to get the same impression here...it looks like they are finally starting to get things right...



Well I'll be damned You actully listeend to another suggestion I made!!! (about all spiders being melee shooters) ..that make TWO!!!...well I think i'll start visiting the forums more often agin..looks like something pays off aftter all....


Funniest thing is that in all my threads Simon Vilneuve said clearley that YOU DON"T CHNAGE CARDS!!!!...and now I see this huge changelist....don't get me wrong I'm all for it...but you are funny people indeed

I like most of these changes ...excep these:

Eleonore is still as useless as before... she needs to heal all creatures also WHEN SHE IS SUMMONED..

Breeders and breeder mothers are ok now cost /stat wise but still useless due to the fact that there are far more better creatures for their roles...they should also reduce one of opponents magic level (while they are ingame) - with the appropriate stat cost ballance of course


banshee requirements are kind of weird..she's kind of better than she was before and more fitting for bs2 enviroment but in the other enviroment you can't play her in fortune revival decks anymore (at least it looks like that to me now) -well well wait and see - you changed her TWICE allready ..wouldn't be surprised to see a third change along the way

sayama champ was crap before (most of the time you have more creatures on the board than your opponent)..only good in decks where you did not need to raise your might over 2..like certain noboru version which was also slow and you wee allways numerically inferior

if you make him require 3 at least give him SWEEP ATATCK. and life 5. (he's not immune to retaliation so he would die most of the times he hits 3 creatures)
and his 3 str is way too contextual..

magic pedler was there to bring spells in MAGIC oriented decks ..raising your fortune to 2 kind of compromises that don't you think...phrias and akane come to mind who can't use him at all anymore...
I think peddler should have stayed as he was..


assassin requirement is kind of dumb...someone cleared me up the he is now still useable with 2might heroes if you go second...but otherwise he's just neutered...
it's kind of dumb to limit a neutral card (on top of that an EPIC ONE) in that fashion - this card should be good in ALL decks - high risk high reward gamechanger..that's what it was meant to be right? and especially since not all strong creatures have been dumbed down..(if that was the case the change would have been allright) for ex: you left tha stupid olifant and tainted orc just the way they are....


olifant should be in this list with it's cost and req upped to 4/4
and tainted orc upped to 5/5
and wywern upped to 6/6

why did you not touch the Jaguar/Panther warriors...these are iconic stronghold creatures from HOMM..and should be playable not useless...

panther should be cost 5, 5 might and the jaguar should have str 2

pao change is kind of unnecessary..but it does not make him total crap..this way he is indeed in line with the most neutrals in terms of stat /req proportion..

credit given where it is due - good call on the other changes ...PAO HUNTER IS NOW USEFULL yaaaayy!!!

keep the good stuff up and you might have a ballanced game in the future

Revalon
03-20-2014, 11:28 PM
ulpsz, sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think that changes you suggested are done because you suggested them.
Just like when they put new heroes in an upcoming expansion it won't be because I suggest it. ;)

ulpsz
03-20-2014, 11:38 PM
ulpsz, sorry to disappoint you, but I don't think that changes you suggested are done because you suggested them.
Just like when they put new heroes in an upcoming expansion it won't be because I suggest it. ;)

;) I was just being deliberatley childish..but the point is that finally me and the devs saw eye to eye on something so ...at least i was not talking to walls

PS hope they don't add any more new heroes..they would be just cramming abilities and spellschool combinations that are more viable flavourwise for other factions, that are not still ingame ,

EG zardoc (light /earth= sylvan) dhamiria (fire /earth = dwarfs) etc.

Bazaltovy
03-25-2014, 07:50 AM
Dhamiria's spell schools were logical lore-wise. She spent a lot of time in the forest as a spy IIRC.

ulpsz
03-25-2014, 09:59 AM
Dhamiria's spell schools were logical lore-wise. She spent a lot of time in the forest as a spy IIRC.

more logical than Zardoc's at least



and hyku was a demon who was sent to a shaolin monastery:p

Shambell
03-25-2014, 10:50 AM
more logical than Zardoc's at least

Due to his background, Zardoc's Spell Schools make sense lore-wise.
Hell, Earth is even a stapple of Stronghold.

light /earth= sylvan but also stronghold, haven, fortress, academy, sanctuary... just more or less common.

Now, if you find me a Stronghold Hero with Prime...

ulpsz
03-25-2014, 11:01 AM
Due to his background, Zardoc's Spell Schools make sense lore-wise.
Hell, Earth is even a stapple of Stronghold.

light /earth= sylvan but also stronghold, haven, fortress, academy, sanctuary... just more or less common.

Now, if you find me a Stronghold Hero with Prime...


don't got anything against earth...I meant the COMBINATION which fits sylvan concept perfectly - a lot better than stronghold - imo zardoc should have fire/earth (heavent read about his background tho...)

it's light that bothers me..as orcs lorewise don't have any deity they logically bow only to the elements..(.well that would also include water .which would be pretty awkward in stronghold)

but light and darkness are profound philosophical concepts which should be pretty far off from primitive stronghold

Shambell
03-25-2014, 12:05 PM
I meant the COMBINATION which fits sylvan concept perfectly

Yes, you're right.
But they don't have the monopoly of this combination.


it's light that bothers me..as orcs lorewise don't have any deity they logically bow only to the elements..(.well that would also include water .which would be pretty awkward in stronghold)

No, they don't bow to the elements (aka the Elemental Dragons, true deities) but have ancestral spirits linking them to Elements. The most proeminent being Mother Earth and Father Sky.
Just to quote what's the difference in resume:


It's not a mistake; the orcs just interpret magic differently and pray to different Gods, that are in the end a mix of all 6 base Dragons.

And Orcs can into Water pretty well.
It's not because there is no Orc Hero with water now that there will never be one.


but light and darkness are profound philosophical concepts which should be pretty far off from primitive stronghold

Light and Darkness are elements like the 4 others and so the orcs can use them.
The difference is Elrath and Malassa are really at each other (and are the Elders and perhaps the strongest).
An Element is the element himself (Darkness for example) and the concepts tied to it (Secret, Knowledge, Memory, Illusion, Relativism, Crippling, Sleep, Death...).
The same could be said for the other elements...
Air for example is Freedom of Body and Spirit, Mobility, Lightness, Knowledge (yes also, but not exactly the same), Acuity and Perceptivity, Anarchy (just jocking for this one but it's not far from true).
Stronghold has no problem with this.
If you want something really abstract, look at Prime.;)

Edit: Oh, and the background for Zardoc is not public.
But trust me that light makes sense with him.

Marbran
03-25-2014, 11:14 PM
Actually, I think Sylvan Seeker'd be Earth/Water.

ulpsz
03-27-2014, 12:29 AM
Yes, you're right.
But they don't have the monopoly of this combination.



No, they don't bow to the elements (aka the Elemental Dragons, true deities) but have ancestral spirits linking them to Elements. The most proeminent being Mother Earth and Father Sky.
Just to quote what's the difference in resume:



And Orcs can into Water pretty well.
It's not because there is no Orc Hero with water now that there will never be one.



Light and Darkness are elements like the 4 others and so the orcs can use them.
The difference is Elrath and Malassa are really at each other (and are the Elders and perhaps the strongest).
An Element is the element himself (Darkness for example) and the concepts tied to it (Secret, Knowledge, Memory, Illusion, Relativism, Crippling, Sleep, Death...).
The same could be said for the other elements...
Air for example is Freedom of Body and Spirit, Mobility, Lightness, Knowledge (yes also, but not exactly the same), Acuity and Perceptivity, Anarchy (just jocking for this one but it's not far from true).
Stronghold has no problem with this.
If you want something really abstract, look at Prime.;)

Edit: Oh, and the background for Zardoc is not public.
But trust me that light makes sense with him.



agree with everything you say....now you can indeed associate alot of cocepts with a primortdial element/idea...

some philosophies associate darkness with enlightenment and they make perfect sense ...a state of perfect undiluted rage can lead to a moement of pure perfect serenity..(blood for the bood god:cool:)

philosophy is complicated and most of the time you end up realising that every point of view is right even if there is a conflict....


but this being a videogame ..I expect things to be more narrow..if the lore becomes to philosophical (cant find a more suiting word) than it becomes like RL whre anybody can do anything as long as they can afford it, and it kind of loses it's charm (imo at least)

ArcaneAzmadi
03-29-2014, 08:32 AM
Wow, a sweeping, across-the-board mass rebalance of cards to bring them up to date with modern design principles (like the concept that a creature doesn't HAVE to have a might requirement equal to its resource cost)! I never thought I'd see the day! I always thought the devs were just too damn lazy to bother revisting old cards!

I like most of the nerfs too, except The Banshee. Now Fortune Necro has it worse than ever, while Mage Necro decks are just as unaffected as always. Hell, if anything it was a huge BUFF for Mage Necro decks, who almost never wanted to go to 6 might anyway! The devs just don't get that card, I swear...

Amity45
03-30-2014, 12:36 AM
Seeing the change to Pao and Dark Assassin makes me wish these were physical cards so I could wipe my butt with them after the patch.

I hope they are modified in some way so their power is increased to correspond with the new cost. Otherwise, why have them at all? Just more junk rares.

Bazaltovy
03-30-2014, 01:14 AM
Seeing the change to Pao and Dark Assassin makes me wish these were physical cards so I could wipe my butt with them after the patch.

I hope they are modified in some way so their power is increased to correspond with the new cost. Otherwise, why have them at all? Just more junk rares.

The game is fed up with them, I'd say it's good they won't be seen that often.
My apologies, if your Crag Hack pride was offended. If not, carry on. :D

ulpsz
04-01-2014, 12:21 PM
Please note that we also have some nerfs/buffs that are going to be adressed in another thread.[/I]



have any of those been mentioned yet?

ulpsz
04-01-2014, 12:24 PM
The game is fed up with them, I'd say it's good they won't be seen that often.
My apologies, if your Crag Hack pride was offended. If not, carry on. :D

so that is your logic?? anything that's seen too often should be nerfed or made unplayable?

funny thing is that before wild cards people complained that crag hack is unplayable and requested a buff...well he did not get any buff..but people figured out that he was actually playable..so than the other extreme strated whee they wanted him nerfed...

typical dow comunity