Preview of Balance Changes for 2.92

[Gondorian]

morbius, you currently have 252 posts since may 2012, have ANY of them not been a nerf cry or related to that? is there anything you do like about the game?


but i would like to know one answer from the DT. why all the nerfs to draw engines in SF these last 2 years (almost 2 years anyway, a VERY long time to wrok on a set and not have a new one). ive heard the excuse a lot that agro is more powerful than mid-range/control, but every nerf to draw hurts midrange/control more. aggro is still there. (im not even going to get into my definition of aggro and control here, im using your definition).

You're talking specifically about unilateral draw, right? I mean, we added Loom of Fate and Crystal Shards and did not change them once, as far as I can remember. Both can be good sources of cards for you.

When it comes to unilateral draw, we are looking out for situations where the game could be too luck-based and one-sided and we deal with those in the spirit of giving both players an opportunity to have their skills play a part in the game. If a unilateral engine can be played early, we want it to cost you some tempo, which gives the opponent a chance to actually do something. We really do not like games being won quickly on autopilot with a helpless opponent on the other side of the table. Hope that helps!

[morbius]

morbius, you currently have 252 posts since may 2012, have ANY of them not been a nerf cry or related to that? is there anything you do like about the game?

If I complained about cards and asked for nerfs lately it's because the game has been broken for a long time, each new patch breaking it in a different way. And since devs have indeed nerfed the cards i was complaining about, I'd say that my complains were not without merit. The point of balance is for all the heroes to be equal as much as possible, not to cyclically make some OP because it's their turn to dominate.

[Caitlyn0]

there hasnt been a single broken card since 1.26. and no broken decks since 1.28.

balance? all those nerfs... everything is basically the same as when SF came out. there is no balance. its the same few heroes at the top and everything else isnt.

if you would spend less time calling for nerfs on every card you cant find a way around... or worse, because you dont want to find a way around it, and focus on how to make the lower tier heroes better and everyone did that, maybe this game would be less stagnant.

and they werent nerfed because you thought they were OP or broken. they were nerfed because the DT believes they were too high on cost/value. they dont want power creep it would seem, eventhough some is needed.

[Caitlyn0]

and Gondorian, why make unilateral draw at all then? the whole point of it is to not give the tempo of the draw to your opponent as well as you but to gain tempo over them.

[Gondorian]

and Gondorian, why make unilateral draw at all then? the whole point of it is to not give the tempo of the draw to your opponent as well as you but to gain tempo over them.

I think we mean different things by Tempo. Which is not a surprise considering pro MTG players can't even agree on it after 20 years of that game existing.

But that's a digression! We like unilateral draw, but it needs to come for a price that includes some tempo-loss in the early game. (I use "price" to avoid confusion with resource cost.)

[morbius]

if you would spend less time calling for nerfs on every card you cant find a way around... or worse, because you dont want to find a way around it, and focus on how to make the lower tier heroes better and everyone did that, maybe this game would be less stagnant.

Apparently, your and my definitions of fun are different. I don't care for big swings that suddenly kill 95% of established decks and promote a handful of heroes to the top of the food chain, sending the rest to the gutter. I like small buffs and small nerfs, subtle nudges that boost or weaken certain strategies. If there is one thing I can't stand, it's to see a deck built on poor game design exploit. There are a lot of TCGs with those around, maybe you would be happier playing one of them.

[MOHAMOON]

Plz read this carefully and tell me ur opinion
(if u want)

Let me help in solving this plz:
Make a card or two for a hero,
for example:
Extractor is an op with zal and prax but very useful to ele(with some modifications ofcourse) so make it specificaly made for ele that way every hero shall be equal(by equal i mean no OPs to worry about and the game will be as it is with it's amazing duels) letting any one use the hero he/she prefers

Please atleast think about what i want to say

[MOHAMOON]

Apparently, your and my definitions of fun are different. I don't care for big swings that suddenly kill 95% of established decks and promote a handful of heroes to the top of the food chain, sending the rest to the gutter. I like small buffs and small nerfs, subtle nudges that boost or weaken certain strategies. If there is one thing I can't stand, it's to see a deck built on poor game design exploit. There are a lot of TCGs with those around, maybe you would be happier playing one of them.

I disagree with u,every one have the right to play with the hero they want with no biiig difference between them or OPs

[MOHAMOON]

I think we mean different things by Tempo. Which is not a surprise considering pro MTG players can't even agree on it after 20 years of that game existing.

But that's a digression! We like unilateral draw, but it needs to come for a price that includes some tempo-loss in the early game. (I use "price" to avoid confusion with resource cost.)

Plz read this carefully and tell me ur opinion
(if u want)

Let me help in solving this plz:<br />
Make a card or two for a hero,<br />
for example:<br />
Extractor is an op with zal and prax but very useful to ele(with some modifications ofcourse) so make it specificaly made for ele that way every hero shall be equal(by equal i mean no OPs to worry about and the game will be as it is with it's amazing duels) letting any one use the hero he/she prefers

Please atleast think about what i want to say

[Caitlyn0]

Apparently, your and my definitions of fun are different. I don't care for big swings that suddenly kill 95% of established decks and promote a handful of heroes to the top of the food chain, sending the rest to the gutter. I like small buffs and small nerfs, subtle nudges that boost or weaken certain strategies. If there is one thing I can't stand, it's to see a deck built on poor game design exploit. There are a lot of TCGs with those around, maybe you would be happier playing one of them.

i do not care for to have a big swing that suddenly kills 95% of established decks... not even sure where you get that and there has NEVER been that in this game, there hav been no game design exploits from card abilities, they have been too vanilla... as for promoting a small handful of decks, thats i what you are doing because thats all we have. any hero that has risen up, gets knocked back down with these nerfs. there is no hero or deck at the top, now, that wasnt there 2 years ago (after these coming nerfs take place).

and do you not understand, for a TCG to survive... there has to be some power creep. or there is no reason to play any card over the ones we have already had. thats intrinsic. to call for a nerf because something is over powered doesnt mean it is... it could be more powerful than in previous sets and thats OK. it might become a 4x staple, thats OK too. if you want to nerf that, and thats what you have been calling for, why do you even play this game yourself. we have had 4x staples since CotC. maybe solitaire is your game.

and maybe you would be happier playing one of "those" tcgs... as you would be happy calling for nerfs several times a day for different cards, instead of calling for nerfs that stagnant this game.