Relentless savagery is op

[Fristar]

Its a matter of opinion. I think bloodthirsty is better to be honest, because of the draw.

[mindy]

savagery is basicly mindless ferocity times infinity. how is it hard not to see that? yes there is a restriction to claw attack but thats not saying much considering there are many good claw attack allies with more to come with future sets. i wouldnt mind seeing a small nerf.

[bobwei]

This card is equivalent to drawing ONE card "perpetually", which is far more than drawing one card.
e.g. The present value of getting 1 dollar every day for one year and the present value of getting 1 dollar every day forever are different, thus should be priced differently.

[Xander Spitfire]

This card is equivalent to drawing ONE card "perpetually", which is far more than drawing one card.
e.g. The present value of getting 1 dollar every day for one year and the present value of getting 1 dollar every day forever are different, thus should be priced differently.

Good point. Then again i'm not sure if its a matter of cost. Godonrian has a good point about subset allies. Now where do subset cards fit here? They should be better then neutral cards of course and probably better then faction cards. How about class cards? Class card can only be used by 3 to 8 heroes max. Subset cards have build in limitation (here claws attack) but can be used by a higher number of heroes. Savagery is limited to 16 shadow heroes while Spontaneous Growth is available to all 32 heroes. Subset cards have a better chance to find a few heroes that work well with it then a class card that is limited to a few heroes.

So we have in order strenght ;

5.Neutral cards
4.Faction cards
3.Neutral Subset cards
2.Faction Subset cards
1.Class cards

So cards like Savagery should be strictly limited to claw allies imo.

[Delay of Game]

e.g. The present value of getting 1 dollar every day for one year and the present value of getting 1 dollar every day forever are different, thus should be priced differently.

...But I don't need a dollar forever, because I won't live forever.

I just want to buy the $1 dollar value meal at McDonalds....to kill myself faster. Yummy!!

[jacqui]

i wanted to add this, how can a card be OP if, to make any kind of use out of it, you have to build the deck around it? i mean, you dont put this card in any deck, you have to build the deck with at least 75% claw attack allies, which isnt that hard, there are a fair number of claw attack allies and some are really good. but you can really use other attack types, which is a rather large amount of allies with a lot of useful abilities.

you dont want to get caught with a sword ally and a fire ally, with a savagery in hand... that if one of them was claw attack, would great help your position.

to add this card into your deck, you have to give up something else, most likely an ally control card. that can hurt you as much as savagery helps, maybe even hurt you more. (i really do not like it when people do not count card slots in a deck as a cost of the card because it is, deck space is a premium especially now with the assortment of cards we have that are usable)

so really this card is on par with other cards like mindless ferocity. it ONLY has the +2 attack and goes back to your hand if it was put on a claw attack ally. any other ally it is +1 and doesnt. how many claw attack allies are there 25%? 30%? of shadow allies? maye more, i never really counted them... but how many are good, decent allies we use? and how often have we used 75% or more of them. less han 5% of the time?

On the contrary, building decks around cards is an argument supporting the fact that it's OP, not the other way around. If it wasn't OP, you wouldn't build a deck around it. See: Garina Road pre-nerf.
You are right that it is better to have claw ally than other type of ally. However, you are discounting just how many good claw allies exist in the game. It's also still not bad to throw in a couple allies of other types if that suits a need. That would still be on par with For Unaxio! (1cc +1 damage for 1 attack vs 2cc +1 damage forever).
Card slots in a deck is a poor argument. Applies to all cards and therefore not relevant. You either think a card is worth using or you don't.
It could be on par with mindless ferocity if mindless ferocity gave you infinite drawing ability too. But it doesn't. So it's not.

[jacqui]

Awesome detailed... I was thinking read detailed the post until i see "better than"... then i knew was a subjective opinion.
And is ok, but isn't necesary "the true". Is your oppinion, and mine is different.
But Gondo already posted why they are differents... anyway loop don't is byself a OP effect, i think Hunter's Gambit is more "power" that his card. 2 Draws come on... a loop is nothing vs that.

And about rarity... ofc metters, or u think that Wulven Traitor vs Pack Wolf are in the same League? the conditional differences in rare cards i think do the balance... and even if not, this card don't break the meta, so the nerf request should be by... undercosted. But you really see a Relentless savagery with 3cc like a good idea? O_o cuz for me looks like HYPERcosted...

The slightly difference about gondo did mention, when the ally is KILLED vs when the attachment is destroyed do a big difference too...
But if im agree in something is in the "potential" power on this card when wulven cards be released. Will take time for this so makes drama now i think is a bad idea, but... do u have some constructive feedback idea for changes in the card? without kill it?

Comparing to hunter's gambit. Gambit gives you "2 draws" but you expend 1 card to get those 2. So net effect is +1 card and +1 damage for 2cc.
Comparatively, Relentless expends 0 cards to give you 2 damage indefinitely (until it is dealt with). If COF is attached (like it would be in Vess) it would also give you a +1 card. So you're looking at a range between +0-1 card and +2-infinity damage vs +1 card and +1 damage for the same price. It's very easy to see the former is preferable here.

No, rarity doesn't matter. Unless you want to argue that Karlstad is better than Aldon for example. And you agree to this logic that I already wrote.
1: Card rarity does not determine balance of a card. Next time designer should make a card 0cc ally: 30/30 haste - rarity legend. 1/10000 chance to find in booster only. It's ok guys, it's legend so it's balanced.
Sure if you want to compare COTC card to LL cards - 4 sets out. Why not compare Feasterling to Dark Flayer?

[Drakkon]

Super OP. =]

[Gondorian]

Can I just make a general comment that I am enjoying this discussion. It's the kind of theoretical stuff I would like to see more of here.

Is there a really good forum post somewhere on what power curve means, with reference to Shadow Era cards, and the idea of 'strictly better'?

I think a lot of people would read and value something like that, and it could then bring in other cards too. I started writing something to help more people get value from this thread but then figured maybe either there's something already or someone wants to take a stab at it themselves.

[Umbra7]

Can I just make a general comment that I am enjoying this discussion. It's the kind of theoretical stuff I would like to see more of here.

Is there a really good forum post somewhere on what power curve means, with reference to Shadow Era cards, and the idea of 'strictly better'?

I think a lot of people would read and value something like that, and it could then bring in other cards too. I started writing something to help more people get value from this thread but then figured maybe either there's something already or someone wants to take a stab at it themselves.

You know, i had actually spent several hours back in December doing calculations and such to determine card values, and it was actually going really well! But then caged savage came along and threw a wrench in the opporation, so i gave up. But if thats something youre looking for...I'll gladly take up the project!!