Close

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 85
  1. #31
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,068
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Mann View Post
    I think Holy Shield is every bit as annoying to play against as those cards on the ban list...and most decks don't have consistent ways of dealing with attachments. Most of the cards on the ban list would be fine for play if SoE and vermin had their ability being able to work on summon (like it did initially).
    You can't even target ITF, so SoE/Vermin in their original form wouldn't help either.

  2. #32
    DP Visionary Shadow Mann's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,874
    Tournaments Joined
    5
    Tournaments Won
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    You can't even target ITF, so SoE/Vermin in their original form wouldn't help either.
    but when using ITF, Rapid Fire, and a weapon...at least it can take out weapon. And I said, most are dealt with SoE/Vermin on summon, not all...just a thought.

    -by the way, I'm not complaining...just stating my thoughts/opinion. I also know that this ban list is temporary for now and cards can be added or removed to this list in the next update. I'm fine with whatever and will adjust no matter what gets banned or nerfed/buffed.
    Last edited by Shadow Mann; 03-29-2018 at 09:58 PM.
    Avenger of Valhalla
    Warriors of the Blue Phoenix
    Greatness, Reborn

  3. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Quebec, Canada (GTM-4)
    Posts
    83
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Why not just restrict to 1 in a deck?

  4. #34
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,068
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by pasdev View Post
    Why not just restrict to 1 in a deck?
    I'll add to the list of options we could pick from after getting more information from this trial ban.

  5. #35
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,068
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Mann View Post
    by the way, I'm not complaining...just stating my thoughts/opinion. I also know that this ban list is temporary for now and cards can be added or removed to this list in the next update. I'm fine with whatever and will adjust no matter what gets banned or nerfed/buffed.
    Yeah, sorry. People should be able to voice their thoughts in advance. It's what led to us trialling this ban list actually.

    But now it's happening, I will do my very best not to be drawn into discussion about it from now on, since the most valuable input will be from the games that happen in v3.60 and player experiences of it!

  6. #36
    DP Visionary tman507's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    U.S.A, GMT -7
    Posts
    4,581
    Tournaments Joined
    6
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by pasdev
    Why not just restrict to 1 in a deck?
    This would be an interesting option. It is in a way what Yugioh does with their ban lists. In that game you have 4 statuses for cards: Unlimited (can use maximum 3 copies), Semi-limited (can use 2 copies), Limited (1 copy), and Banned. Their list also changes every few months, sometimes with cards coming back from being banned after long periods, so who knows, maybe later down the line new decks will be powerful enough that allowing back in some of this older stuff won't be too strong. You never know.
    "IT'S TIME TO DUEL!!!"
    "The Magnificent."
    Account for any future SC transfers by Gondorian: BP tman507

    Member of PFG3
    Master of Hand-to-hand Combat
    Warrior of the Blue Phoenix
    Greatness, Reborn

    Official Shadow Era Wiki Moderator

  7. #37
    DP Visionary Shadow Mann's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,874
    Tournaments Joined
    5
    Tournaments Won
    1
    When attachment Jerry spams holy shield, or combos holy shield and tidal wave, it is more fair to opposing heroes than lay low? I'm not a fan of lay low or any card on the ban list, but if these cards are banned I'm not sure why holy shield isnt the list for the same reasons.

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Croatia, GMT+1
    Posts
    190
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    holy shield is annoying but it has only 1 target. lay low hides all allies AND hero..and its usually played with shrine 3 or 4 times in a row.

  9. #39
    DP Visionary Shadow Mann's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,874
    Tournaments Joined
    5
    Tournaments Won
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by cargoth View Post
    holy shield is annoying but it has only 1 target. lay low hides all allies AND hero..and its usually played with shrine 3 or 4 times in a row.
    Countering laylow with groundshift, SoV, focused prayer, winged Redeemer, or kion/vull is much easier than countering attachments for most decks...and that one ally can be buffed to kill your hero in one or two turns and be unretreatable and unkillable.
    Last edited by Shadow Mann; 03-30-2018 at 04:03 AM.
    Avenger of Valhalla
    Warriors of the Blue Phoenix
    Greatness, Reborn

  10. #40
    DP Visionary Demnchi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (GMT -4)
    Posts
    5,858
    Tournaments Joined
    8
    Tournaments Won
    1
    I've voiced my opinion on this several times and I'm going to do it again... even if its another long text block. I think its great that there is finally something happening to address the problems this game has faced for literal years. The fact that something is happening means its finally become a big enough problem for action to occur. I don't want to understate how great that is. Yet I will still say that a ban list is just not going to cut it in the end.

    I don't think these 5 cards tackle the issue for starters, which doesn't really show as much as I believe you guys hope it will. Soul Reaper and Into the Forest are the only cards on this ban list that will get some results in my opinion. Soul Reaper has always healed too much, but is mild compared to the near invincibility that Into the Forest provides. Hidden is next to broken, and even if I disagree with it's inclusion, Lay Low makes some sense. The other 2 feel like filler inclusion for the sake of it.

    Armor of Ages is a card that was created to be an armor that protects you from damage. It slows down the game, but doesn't break the game in the way a Hidden hero does. In fact, I doubt its even that much of an issue with Soul Reaper gone (which calls back to my statement about it being one of the cards that will actually show results). I'll admit it can be annoying, but so is a lot of healing/damage reduction. I'm curious if people would have even noticed it, if it wasn't in Elementals to begin with. I think Vess might use it now, but I haven't personally run into that much. Unlike the main 3, this card also has commonly run counters in addition to the counter of allies wearing it down. It's a high cost item and there are many cards that can destroy it outright (LLN, Focused Prayer, Stop Theif!, Smashing Blow, ect.). The only exception would be with Vess and Lythite Coating, but I still don't see that as too problematic in and of itself (it feels like Vess is more the culprit there).

    Crescendo is the most puzzling inclusion. It takes several turns to trigger its board wipe and has quite a unique effect. It's a pretty interesting card and is pretty much only disliked because of Moonstalker's ability to hide it away long enough for it to trigger. I don't think its a stretch to say that Moonstalker's stealth is the issue here and not Crescendo or its effect. If not for this, Crescendo wouldn't be a problem in any other deck that can run it. It's likely why you NEVER see it in any mage, Darkclaw, or Bloodfang deck. It's also a high cost armor like Armor of Ages and has the same things associated with it. Beyond that, its not like it comes out of nowhere and can be played with its effect in mind. Something players do with Tidal Wave even though that technically does come from nowhere.

    Which basically leads me to my next point that you'll have to tackle the hero abilities that cause these problems eventually too. Moonstalker in particular. Vess and Skervox are new enough (and therefore not printed in stone instead of cardboard) to make changes to make there abilities more interactive and/or balanced in this regard (balance referring to player engagement on both sides, not necessarily power level). I doubt many players would be okay with the banning of an entire hero. I'm sure there are other problematic cards as well that are slipping my mind a bit, although Evil Ascendant pops into my mind too, but again it feels more like something that adds to a deeper problem in the same way Crescendo is viewed here. My main point is that, even if this is just a test, more will have to be banned in the future for banning to work entirely.
    Was the Leader of Acolytes of A1

    A1's Dimensional Eyes in the Sky
    A1 Alliance: Evolution in Theory
    PFG3 Leader

    Was Shadow Era Community Manager

    Sota, The Switch Axe Monster Hunter

    "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
    "Humans fight to secure peace as they envision it. The trouble is, everyone's vision is different." - Ringabel

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •