1.309 Coming Soon to Test Server

[Unruler]

razcrux, I've tested it a little and I don't have complaints about Eladwen now besides the fact than her ability is now useless against allyless decks, but this besides the point.

I asked balance wise, as for flavor you can make up anything, it doesn't affect gameplay.

Having armor against almost only mages (priests and elementals spell damage not even nearly as dangerous) is quite ridiculous and assuming that meta will be more balanced so you will meet more different types of heroes including it in your deck will be questionable decision, and it's for two classes anyway. I just don't want the game be like certain hero defeats another one. Advantage should not be obvious.

If you look at my previous posts (in other thread http://www.shadowera.com/showthread....pes-of-damage/) I provided quite a lot of arguments why armor should resist magic damage and I would like to hear you valid counterarguments why things should remain as they are now.

So my points are:
1. Mages can deal total amount of 56+ (not counting DoTs) uncounterable direct spell damage which is more that enough to overkill any type of hero regardless healing.
2. Mentioned above fact allows mages to win regardless board control and allies simply not caring of what their opponent's doing. This easy way of winning creates negative player experience because others have to struggle for board control and this is what game really was built around and ignoring this should be considered abusive tactics.
3. Also unblockable spell damage creates frustration because you cannot prevent it and in comparison of main damage output of other classes - allies - they're summoned exhausted meaning you have one turn to react to them.
4. After all it is very misleading for new players, as they are not aware of this peculiarity and it's by far not obvious.

[Gondorian]

@Unruler: If you are using Eladwen, whose ability is indeed useless against allyless decks, then you could build a deck that can capitalise on allyless opponents to make up for your unusable ability. You may not even need to do that though, since you should have enough burn and allies to direct at the opposing hero and kill them off.

As for armor, it is explained in the rules that it only reduces attack damage. The best counters to direct damage are healing, Spelleater Bands, Legion United and Protector.

[razcrux]

Armor works the way it does and it won't be changing anymore in the core set.

There are a lot of counters in the game, like Ley Line Nexus, Severed Ties, Drain Power. Armor that blocks direct damage, like Spell Eater Bands could be considered a "counter". Most decks run about 5 to 9 counters in them, depending on if they are going for shorter or longer games. Anti-direct damage cards are viable against enough enemy heroes that they are not ultra specific. If anything, Drain Power is far more specific than Spell Eater Bands.

There is also always the possibility of new cards that add some general ability damage reduction. Kurt has opened the stage for such a thing. So I don't think we have any creative limitations here. There could be attachments you add to your armor, or new armor that does indeed block both, or an item you can carry that gives you additional ability damage reduction... really endless options.

The 1.3x meta is what it is, we've put a lot of time into it to make the core set as balanced and stable as possible as a foundation for future imagination to run wild and rampant in all kinds of new direction. We hope you will find the core set as balanced and fun as we do.

Enjoy.
:-)

[Unruler]

Thanks for explanation! Hopefully we won't have that much new players complaining about mages being OP anymore.
I'm actually quite impressed by staff community interaction on this forums really nice to see this kind of attitude.

[pyrogene]

Having armor against almost only mages (priests and elementals spell damage not even nearly as dangerous) is quite ridiculous and assuming that meta will be more balanced so you will meet more different types of heroes including it in your deck will be questionable decision, and it's for two classes anyway. I just don't want the game be like certain hero defeats another one. Advantage should not be obvious.

Every Shadow hero has access to Plasma Behemoth and DMT which are very common. Direct damage isn't as uncommon as you think.

So my points are:
1. Mages can deal total amount of 56+ (not counting DoTs) uncounterable direct spell damage which is more that enough to overkill any type of hero regardless healing.
2. Mentioned above fact allows mages to win regardless board control and allies simply not caring of what their opponent's doing. This easy way of winning creates negative player experience because others have to struggle for board control and this is what game really was built around and ignoring this should be considered abusive tactics.
3. Also unblockable spell damage creates frustration because you cannot prevent it and in comparison of main damage output of other classes - allies - they're summoned exhausted meaning you have one turn to react to them.
4. After all it is very misleading for new players, as they are not aware of this peculiarity and it's by far not obvious.

1. That is assuming you draw every single card out of the deck and do not sacc any of those. And I guess you are counting Novas so the mage takes 20 dmg too. How realistic is that? With the kind of resources a mage needs to kill, any other hero is also capable of killing.
2. Burn is an extremely common playstyle in almost every TCG. Mages can no longer totally ignore board control in 1.30X. Even Eladwen in 1.29 cannot consistently win if she totally ignores board.
3. Weapons can also damage in the same turn it is played. Heroes like DC and Gwen can do 6-8 dmg with those in one turn. Allies get the benefit of attacking every turn they are on the field in return for being vulnerable. Burn goes away once used.

I'm confused as to what the real issue behind your argument against direct damage is. Is it because it is too strong (1.29 Eladwen was indeed seen as too strong and so the ability was changed)? If then it remains to be seen if in 1.30 it would be the case.
Or is it just because it is not blocked by armour? In that case then would you have objections if all the burn spells was simply nerfed?

[Unruler]

Every Shadow hero has access to Plasma Behemoth and DMT which are very common. Direct damage isn't as uncommon as you think.

Yes, but PB can be countered (in fact it has to be countered or you will lose). A bit OP but makes up for weaker lower cost shadow allies.

1. That is assuming you draw every single card out of the deck and do not sacc any of those. And I guess you are counting Novas so the mage takes 20 dmg too. How realistic is that? With the kind of resources a mage needs to kill, any other hero is also capable of killing.

It is unrealistic, but you don't need so much damage, in late game you can stock up some fereballs and supernova and finish off the hero in one turn, and it's nothing he can do about it. Any other hero relies on counterable means and as for spells we have now only couple of armors and healing which not every class has access to.

3. Weapons can also damage in the same turn it is played. Heroes like DC and Gwen can do 6-8 dmg with those in one turn. Allies get the benefit of attacking every turn they are on the field in return for being vulnerable. Burn goes away once used.

We have now neutral item destruction card and previously many classes had some sort of item removal. Needless to say weapon damage reduced by armor.

I'm confused as to what the real issue behind your argument against direct damage is. Is it because it is too strong (1.29 Eladwen was indeed seen as too strong and so the ability was changed)? If then it remains to be seen if in 1.30 it would be the case.
Or is it just because it is not blocked by armour? In that case then would you have objections if all the burn spells was simply nerfed?

Well, I think that it is too strong because it cannot be blocked by armor) In one of my early games I lost the game because didn't attacked guy on about 4 health with Eladwen when he poped Armor of Ages on. Even back then it seemed to me completely illogical. It depends on kind of nerf, allowing spells to be blocked by armor will already be a nerf. But simply reducing their damage will be too much imho, maybe like prohibit things like Lightning strike and arcane burst to target the hero? Because now you can go for both control and hero damage with them...

[razcrux]

Let's just see who actually ends up at the top of the tiers. As more cards are released, Heroes will always move up and down in the meta; it is a CCG after all, and part of the fun.

[Unruler]

Let's just see who actually ends up at the top of the tiers. As more cards are released, Heroes will always move up and down in the meta; it is a CCG after all, and part of the fun.

Place your bets, gentlemen. xD

[akratch]

Blood Frenzy will be identical to 1.29, except costing 3cc.

lol