Have your say on balance (of SF and LL)!

[Nijjis]

It wouldn't be as strong as you think because it's conditional upon having a location.. So if you run 4 of these and 4 locs... That's 8 cards. Gl finding space an almost any deck for that.

[Nijjis]

Roth needs a warrior card with "when a hero power with cost of 5 or greater has been activated this turn do X."

[Umbra7]

It wouldn't be as strong as you think because it's conditional upon having a location.. So if you run 4 of these and 4 locs... That's 8 cards. Gl finding space an almost any deck for that.

It wouldn't be nearly as conditional as you think.

[Nijjis]

Oh really? So decks that don't have any need for locations would totally benefit from this card? No that's not right... I think the deck would need to run locations, but also this card on top of it. So in my starting hand I draw this card and a location. I'm sacrificing both of them and probably losing the game because my deck is trash.

Let's try another angle... My opponent has 0 allies on the board and I don't yet have my location. I'm keeping this card all day everyday because its unconditionally strong?

Compare to banish. Not OP. Maybe not even P.

Yes it could provide pretty sweet value late game. But I can promise you this. It's not so strong that you would hang on to this card... For a 40 card deck this would be a X2 include AT MOST. I'll take bad Santa and retreat over this nonsense 9 times out of 10.

[Alendar]

Here is my earlier suggestions:
http://www.shadowera.com/showthread....rtleshell-Vest

Also I have a suggestion for Aramia:
4SE: Target item in your deck with cost 3 or less is put into play, as if summoned at no cost, you can use it's activated abilities at no cost untill the end of turn. Shuffle your deck.

So you can draw a card, +1/+1 all of your allies, freeze+hit on 1 some opponent's ally... etc.

Also I like Veleses suggestion "Maybe change her ability to Seek an item of 3cc or less. Next item 3cc or less you play cost 0 to summon. This way at least if you play singleton items and you draw them it hurts less..."

4SE: Seek an item. Next item you summon cost 3 less to cast.

So you can cast some enormous big weapons or armour earlier.

[Umbra7]

Oh really? So decks that don't have any need for locations would totally benefit from this card? No that's not right... I think the deck would need to run locations, but also this card on top of it. So in my starting hand I draw this card and a location. I'm sacrificing both of them and probably losing the game because my deck is trash.

Let's try another angle... My opponent has 0 allies on the board and I don't yet have my location. I'm keeping this card all day everyday because its unconditionally strong?

Compare to banish. Not OP. Maybe not even P.

Yes it could provide pretty sweet value late game. But I can promise you this. It's not so strong that you would hang on to this card... For a 40 card deck this would be a X2 include AT MOST. I'll take bad Santa and retreat over this nonsense 9 times out of 10.

Yes, compare to banish. A 4 cost card. That'll help your case

You speak as though locations are a terrible thing to add to your deck, or act like they are a hindrance. They are a very easy condition to meet, and the good ones provide plenty of benefits on their own. And would you like to know what happens in the example you gave, of not having your location yet? Then you play this card, to draw 2 more cards, and make it easier to find your location. I might ask if you've even tried rest for the weary yet in its current state? 3cc isn't a bad cost, but 2cc DOES make it stronger than retreat. That's a no no in the designers books. Now if you'd like to further argue that point, be my guest. Explain to me how this card is garbage, and how even at 2cc it will be garbage. But I suggest trying the card out before you try to make those points

[Fenelon]

Personally I would like a general buff to the Ravager tribe. They have 2 very good allies with Feasterling and Murderous Hulk but the tribe on its own is not very used with its specifity of destroy item and damage themself.

Some changes have hurted them like the 3cc Hunter's Gambit or makingRavager Zealot 2/5. I'm ok with these changes but let's help the tribe.

1) Spitfire Hound : when he uses his passive ability, draw a card.
Ravagers because they cheap item to destroy often struggle on early draw.

2) Obelisk of Echoes : delete the 1cc sustain.
That card was very strong without sustain wheb Ravager Zealot was but now I think it would be ok

3) Towering Brute : 0cc or 1cc make one damage to a friendly ravager ally
There are not many options to damage your own allies so that side of the tribe is difficult to use. In particular I think it would help the location to being use


4) A different card I would like to balance would be Ravenscrest: Valley of Secrets. I think it's non controller side is too strong. Why not making it:
-1se target support ability is destroy and you draw a card (or something similar)


5) Gambit. I think we must let him with that stats (-2HP and 2 cards). It is a strong card but I don't see problem except may be with Victor. We can find a way to make recycling of that card more difficult. For example something like:
"if Gambit is in a graveyard at the end of your turn and your heroe used his se this turn, it is exiled"
By this way, recycling will still be possible as long as you don't use him in the same time than your ability.


I'm not sure I was clear on every point, so if you need precisions jusk ask and I'll reply you.

[Nijjis]

yeah banish is 4 cost card but it doesn't require two cards to play it. Deck consistency is very important and you can't argue this is a more consistent play that's not an opinion, whether or not the card is any good that is an opinion.

All I'm saying is that I feel the card is not very good and I think the evidence will support my claim. I have yet to put this card in any deck or see any player at an level play this card in more than 200 games. Im a top 20 caliber player I probably don't need to try this card or most cards to get an idea of its potential value.

Also playing this card at 3cc with no locations IS A TERRIBLE PLAY, unless your opponent already will draw to full. You just spent 3cc for 0 net gain. You draw 2 but go -1 for playing this card and -1 for your opp drawing. This is why I bring up bad Santa and retreat. This card is like a mix of those two. Bad Santa is like this card but better, retreat is like this card but probably better.

[Nijjis]

Also sorry if I came across as argumentative.. I guess I was. Not sure why I wanted to act like a prick... There is always something about forums that brings out the troll inside me... I suppose I just like to get a response as opposed to nothing

[SEF Mango]

I'll keep the reply just this once. If it needs more, mod can make a different thread for Anmor's call.

Do you actually play Anmor's call? I hope you are not saying this only from the experience of being used. This card is much like BF, you can't really cast it on t3. Casting it costs big tempo. The reason why it looks strong now is because of other cards and slow meta. You can't prove if it's op or not when it's meta dependent.

If you were around when SF came out, you should know that this card wasn't played at all. People made decks heavily based on first 5 turns. In such meta, playing anmor's call in the first 5 turn was suicidal. It was useless.

But now Victor has so many OP support cards that casting anmors call early does not cost a game anymore. Shuriken, gambit and general's seek gurantees to take back the tempo lost from early Anmor's call. Slow meta, grindy games and fat deck trend makes it look strong even more. But it's not AC's fault. It never was.

Besides, you need strong draw to use up the resource. And you also need to make your deck more or less fat, sacrificing consistency (though this never seem to be an isssue anymore. Buff aggro for punishing this!) These are the hidden cost. BF or IGG don't need other things for others to work, but AC does.

So keep AC for now. Wait for all these nerf requests of shuriken, gambit and general to get answered.

AC is very unique and it adds different dimension to deck building and playing. It's what attracts players to hunter heroes. It's a star card for hunters just like IGG for rogues. Don't nerf fun cards.

You say it is a tempo loss but follow up with saying that now it's not so bad because of current support card and meta. You're right, on both fronts. Issue is that this card, more so Gambit, is ruling the meta and needs to be addressed.

I know you can not just mindlessly play it T3. You can not compare this card to BF simply because there is no negative effect. That is my issue with the card. Any card that grants an ongoing and unlimited effect with no draw back is an issue. BF can literally kill you. Anmors Call can not. There is no downside to playing this card other than a small tempo loss which you yourself say is not an issue any longer. That is why it is a problem. Something like that won't change as long as it works and works as well as it does.

The numbers show that a 60 card deck functions just fine. Especially when you have 8 chances to get Gambit. At this time, You don't sacrifice consistency when you go to 60 with Vic. Even your average player knows this. Maybe they don't pilot the deck well but in the hands of an experienced player, you can easily rack up the wins.

We all know an early gambit and Anmor typically means GG.

You like it being a hunter card like BF is, fine. I agree with you. It needs some type of balance though. You can't have unlimited resources for nothing more than 3CC. BF hits you 1 damage per turn, Anmor needs something as well.

Gambit is more the issue though. I agree with you that it isn't all AC fault. Together though, they have become an issue.

Meat Wagon I think I might be on board with Meat Wagon at 4CC. People act like stacking your deck with mostly allies is an issue. Have you seen the success of these decks stuck with the crippling restriction of having to stack their decks with allies? It works just fine. In fact, maybe it works too well.

Having a Feasterling with potential 4 attack on t3 is almost GG. Especially when T4 is typically followed up with Cultist + Brimstone/Reactorary. This isn't taking into account Praxix ability which functions very consistently with having all those allies in deck.i think wagon at 4CC is something that should really be looked at.

Necromancer's Shroud 3CC for a readied 3 attack ally is a bit much. Better than both Sabreen and Krygon. Just give returned Allies -1 attack and -1 Health. Makes them a 2/3 readied ally in line with Sabreen and Krygon.