Eladwen Nerf

[Airact]

Nope. You're pretty much spot-on. Like I said above, there are too many good Elad counters and rush counters out now. Seems more balanced than ever, imo.

I don't think having an almost unplayable playstyle should be considered "more balanced".

But yeah I don't see anything that's really broken or anything, especially in Elad.

[XanteseZerylliom]

I don't think having an almost unplayable playstyle should be considered "more balanced".

But yeah I don't see anything that's really broken or anything, especially in Elad.

The rush playstyle is what most people whine about with Elad. Therefore, by making rush Elad difficult to work, it does balance her back a bit. Sure, she hasn't changed, but people have had to change the way she is played, thus negating a lot of the OP comments.

While rush is difficult in this meta, it certainly isn't unplayable.

[Skurai]

DOUBLING EVERYTHING? LOL
it probably takes 2 seconds to figure out how wrong that would be... You would have to increase deck size to begin with, and with that the luck factor, not to mention how long and boring games would be...

Here's a tip: Learn the game better and familiarize with how the meta works before you go and try to 'fix it'.

[DarthRonfar]

What I've learned is don't argue with the people your arguing with cuz your just fighting an uphill battle you'll never win.

[Airact]

The rush playstyle is what most people whine about with Elad. Therefore, by making rush Elad difficult to work, it does balance her back a bit. Sure, she hasn't changed, but people have had to change the way she is played, thus negating a lot of the OP comments.

While rush is difficult in this meta, it certainly isn't unplayable.

What advantages does rushing have over not rushing?

Nothing comes to mind. Maybe Priests and some more rarely played matchups like Ter Adun and Victor but when we look at the current top decks, rush is pretty unfavored there (I'm not really an expert but that's what it seems like).

I'm all for making aggro harder to play but I think it should be more difficult to play, not worse than other decks.

[Dave163]

I was gonna respond, but I'm going to grab popcorn instead ...

AreYouNotEntertained.jpg

[Index]

AreYouNotEntertained.jpg

This is Kyle?

[LILBTHEBASEDGOD]

i think the point any game designer would bring up about eladwen rush is that playing against it can be unfun. if you're playing simply for the game experience, then twisting the game into a few questions of "do you have this card at the right time? do i myself have this card at the right time?" is unfun.

if you're playing for competition, then this is actually both a plus and something these players have grown used to. being able to steal 3-4 turns right after i exhausted all my resources into the "winning play" with cards like soul seeker, spelleater bands or enrage or even a big fat allies like kairos doombringer or that frosted urigon that you can't "eladwen freeze" is still a major downfall for the deck's archetype that basically loses you games in other matchups in order to consistently fix.

conversely, opponents not playing around direct damage spells is just as much of a free win as any of the mentioned cards. and being able to set up game states where the opponent has to ask themselves "do they have the burn spells?" and answer correctly is fun for me, and something i picked up from higher-level play in other TCG's (yes... mostly magic the gathering )

tl;dr - the card is already very easily nerfed singlehandedly by cards from CotC and has even gotten a touch weaker now that DP is out and the ally quality has gone up.

& yes i do find eladwen rush to be a fun deck. it is fairly simple, but the decisions that come up past the "golden rush" parts of the game can be complex, and reward the experienced player. i can't really say i ENJOY playing out the golden rush hands myself, but i do enjoy winning. playing the deck feels like i'm playing a magic the gathering deck favorite: Legacy RUG Delver. The creatures are miserable when you're behind, but it's not purely a creature deck, so you have some amount of control over what your opponent does.

[Airact]

Depends what we are talking about here. Canadian Threshold is a tempo deck more than it is an aggro deck. Current Legacy lacks aggro mostly because of how fast the combo decks in the format are. You either combo, have a deck that kills comboes or metagame. That's why you see blue more than any other color (Force of Will).

Legacy isn't my favorite format in MtG as it doesn't really have that diverse of a playing field. Somebody always plays a combo deck and if your deck doesn't play white or blue, good luck.

Not to mention you need to swim in money to even get started.

[LILBTHEBASEDGOD]

Depends what we are talking about here. Canadian Threshold is a tempo deck more than it is an aggro deck. Current Legacy lacks aggro mostly because of how fast the combo decks in the format are. You either combo, have a deck that kills comboes or metagame. That's why you see blue more than any other color (Force of Will).

Legacy isn't my favorite format in MtG as it doesn't really have that diverse of a playing field. Somebody always plays a combo deck and if your deck doesn't play white or blue, good luck.

Not to mention you need to swim in money to even get started.

not going to veer things off topic here, but i can say there are most definitely aggro decks (Goblins just top 8'd SCG Worcester) and the field has more decks than any other format in magic, vintage not counted. yes there's a ton of RUG decks running around, but there's at least 20 defined and playable archetypes right now.