Balance Discussion: Furion Terror and Paladin of Unaxio

[Helio]

What we need is a representative of the DT to tell us what is the intention of PoU changes...

Right now my imagination is running wild (and not in a good way )

DT lead: team we need a meeting to discuss PoU and FT per the forums. Since the OP has played hundreds of games and we are too busy to play... we should listen.

DT members: what do we need to test? (Ugh we are sick of testing this game)

DT lead: nothing! OP did it all. We just need to buff PoU.

DT members: OK! Do we need to worry about side effects. We don't want another meeting next week to undo what we did.

DT lead: Nope. OP didn't list any negatives! This is an open and shut case!

DT members: Great Done.

So again... would be nice for DT to chime in!

And just in case... this is meant to be funny not insulting.

[BDK16]

Have you considered that an indirect nerf to mages was what the DT was intending?

Ah, did not consider that.

[JeetKuneDo]

What we need is a representative of the DT to tell us what is the intention of PoU changes...

Right now my imagination is running wild (and not in a good way )

DT lead: team we need a meeting to discuss PoU and FT per the forums. Since the OP has played hundreds of games and we are too busy to play... we should listen.

DT members: what do we need to test? (Ugh we are sick of testing this game)

DT lead: nothing! OP did it all. We just need to buff PoU.

DT members: OK! Do we need to worry about side effects. We don't want another meeting next week to undo what we did.

DT lead: Nope. OP didn't list any negatives! This is an open and shut case!

DT members: Great Done.

So again... would be nice for DT to chime in!

And just in case... this is meant to be funny not insulting.

I can't imagine why this would be necessary. Are you asserting that the DT is unaware of the effect this change would have on mages? Its obvious that they know how it will effect the game, and its intentional. To imply in any way that the DT inadvertently nerfed mages with this change is pretty ridiculous. You and others also need to stop with these claims that DT is making these changes solely because of this thread and not looking into things on their own.

Most forms of control got substantial counters in DP, what with attachment destruction, steadfast, un-incapacitatable legendaries, negative effect removal, etc, so I think its fitting that mages get one too.

[roustabout]

What we need is a representative of the DT to tell us what is the intention of PoU changes...

Right now my imagination is running wild (and not in a good way )

DT lead: team we need a meeting to discuss PoU and FT per the forums. Since the OP has played hundreds of games and we are too busy to play... we should listen.

DT members: what do we need to test? (Ugh we are sick of testing this game)

DT lead: nothing! OP did it all. We just need to buff PoU.

DT members: OK! Do we need to worry about side effects. We don't want another meeting next week to undo what we did.

DT lead: Nope. OP didn't list any negatives! This is an open and shut case!

DT members: Great Done.

So again... would be nice for DT to chime in!

And just in case... this is meant to be funny not insulting.

I'm flattered at the suggestion that I am so convincing! Lol.

[ahmet476]

Yeah, because mages were totally unstoppable since the CotC and after DP release...

[JeetKuneDo]

Yeah, because mages were totally unstoppable since the CotC and after DP release...

No one said that. I was they were strong, easy to play, and a counter to direct damage would be good for the game.

Address the points people are ACTUALLY making, if you'd like to be taken seriously in a discussion.

[ahmet476]

I didn't need to address it. The target was hit nevertheless.

[Badyuyu]

I didn't need to address it. The target was hit nevertheless.

Wait I'm just reading this and letting this discussion go it's way but you are saying that your answer does not have to actual concern itself with the content of what the other guy said?It'S just you saying your oppinion then?

[ahmet476]

Well, I was being sarcastic if you couldn't tell. Let's not dwell on that though. Otherwise, I might be offtopic greatly. I said what I have to in here. We'll see what the actual changes will be.

[roustabout]

Folks, can we please restrict our comments to the topic. I don't think there is any need to demolish the credibility of those we disagree with in addition (or as a means) to defeating their points. Let's stick to the arguments; if someone fails to make an argument, you can point that out without calling that individual names. I'm really unhappy with how this discussion has degenerated in this regard.