Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Two Cards and a World of Hurt Stoneskin and Fatebreaker

    Hello everyone,

    First a bit about me, I've been playing Shadow Era for nearly 18 months now off and on and when I play I almost exclusively play meltdown, I generally aim for a top 25 finish each season and average around a 65% win rate. I wanted to write this post to give some feedback on two cards that I feel are currently doing more harm than good to perhaps generate some discussion.

    They are:

    Cinderborn Fatebreaker

    and

    Stoneskin

    Let's start with Fatebreaker, I really think his passive ability should be restricted to offensive abilities. For Fatebreaker to be able to block an Ability like Blood Frenzy is kind of ridiculous and to an extent illogical. How does this monster stop a hero working himself up into a Frenzy?

    Moving onto Stoneskin I think this card provides too much for too little cost. In the context of a meltdown game an early Stoneskin can seal board control for a player in the first few turns of the game which is normally extremely difficult to do. The two elements to Stoneskin - damage reduction and invulnerability to a single ability for a cost of two resources is just too cheap. I seriously question whether Stoneskin should protect a monster from a Shadow Energy ability - e.g. Boris' insta kill. Shadow Energy takes multiple turns to build up so for a two resource ability to totally block it seems counter intuitive to me. If we compare Reinforced Armour to Stoneskin we can see that Stoneskin is superior in every way. The exact same damage reduction, the ability to survive a Shadow Energy attack or ability attack and all this at the same resource cost.

    I forgot to mention another 'interesting' aspect of Stoneskin, if Zaladar (or Banebow) targets two monsters with their Shadow Energy ability, Stoneskin is destroyed but neither monster gets hit with the ability damage. This is the desired impact as Stoneskin causes an ability to have no effect but I really question whether Stoneskin on one monster should protect another monster from getting zapped by Zaladar's lightnng bolts.

    I will be the first to say that in meltdown various cards can have exponentially larger impacts due to the nature of the game (Amber + What Big Teeth anyone?) but these two cards to me seem to be detracting from the game as they limit counter play (Stoneskin in particular).

    Does anyone else have any thoughts on how these cards operate? I'm reluctant to use the term overpowered but I do feel that these cards could use some tuning.
    Last edited by FireStormNZ; 03-19-2015 at 09:01 PM. Reason: Added section around Stoneskin and Zaladar

  2. #2
    Senior Member LucasBlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    ;o
    Posts
    1,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Nah.
    (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง the unseen phoenix donger is the deadliest (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง
    Justiciar of the Audacious
    Warrior of the Blue Pheonix
    Greatness, Reborn

    "When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in his car." -- Author Unknown
    (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง the unseen phoenix donger is the deadliest (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง

  3. #3
    Senior Member ragosonos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    on jupiter
    Posts
    921
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I agree a lil bit with breaker maybe
    IN GAME NAME : A1 Ragosonos

    A1's BRUTAL MINOTAUR


    Ultimately proud EX-member of A1 leadership


    My famous 320+ rated builds :

    rag-ajiya
    meta destruction threbin
    competitive blood fang
    zhanna control
    banebow control

  4. #4
    Senior Member LucasBlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    ;o
    Posts
    1,295
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ragosonos View Post
    I agree a lil bit with breaker maybe
    Well maybe but breaker doesn't really decide the game. I mean you don't need to tech against it and you can play around it. Just kill it.
    (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง the unseen phoenix donger is the deadliest (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง
    Justiciar of the Audacious
    Warrior of the Blue Pheonix
    Greatness, Reborn

    "When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in his car." -- Author Unknown
    (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง the unseen phoenix donger is the deadliest (ง ͠ ل͜ )ง

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    2
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by LucasBlitz View Post
    Nah.
    Astute feedback.

    In Stoneskins case look at what you get for two resources and compare that to other two resource - buff cards. Reinforced Armour, Extra Sharp you can't put Stoneskin in that same power category. It is significantly better with the same cost and much more versatile.

  6. #6
    DP Visionary raizoir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    45
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Stoneskin being able to block the damage to the other target when using Zaladar's and Banebow's ability for example, does seem to be a bit silly.

    I believe how a card performs in meltdown should not have any impact on the balancing of a card, as this format is considered to be the more "fun" one. Only how a card performs in 1v1 and to a lesser extent 2v2 when arrives should be taken in consideration.

  7. #7
    DP Visionary tman507's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    U.S.A, GMT -7
    Posts
    4,561
    Tournaments Joined
    6
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Fatebreaker can be a tad annoying, problem is that at stopping 3cc abilities he borders on being too good, when he stopped only up to 2cc abilities he wasn't that good at all. Sort of what I call the "Logan Effect" or "Logan Syndrome", where altering a number like that just by 1 can make a world of difference. (I'm referencing the fact that Logan Stonebreaker's ability cost 3SE back in the day and was insanely good then, so they upped it by 1SE to 4 and now he's one of the worst heroes.)

    As for Stoneskin, that card is meh to me. Haven't seen it enough for it to really annoy me. Comparing it to Reinforced Armor or Extra Sharp isn't really that fair though. It should be better because it is mage class only, whereas those two other cards are neutral. Same could also be said of Fatebreaker. It's mage only, so having a good effect is balanced out by the fact that only so many heroes even have access to it. If Fatebreaker was a generic shadow ally for example it would be much more annoying cause half of the games heroes could use it. But since it's mage only, only 7 heroes can.

    And killing Fatebreaker prior to playing your Blood Frenzy is always an option, just wait until T4 to drop BF and kill Fatebreaker with Bladedancer + Aldon or whatever.
    "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

  8. #8
    DP Visionary Demnchi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (GMT -4)
    Posts
    5,858
    Tournaments Joined
    8
    Tournaments Won
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by FireStormNZ View Post
    Hello everyone,

    First a bit about me, I've been playing Shadow Era for nearly 18 months now off and on and when I play I almost exclusively play meltdown, I generally aim for a top 25 finish each season and average around a 65% win rate. I wanted to write this post to give some feedback on two cards that I feel are currently doing more harm than good to perhaps generate some discussion.

    They are:

    Cinderborn Fatebreaker

    and

    Stoneskin

    Let's start with Fatebreaker, I really think his passive ability should be restricted to offensive abilities. For Fatebreaker to be able to block an Ability like Blood Frenzy is kind of ridiculous and to an extent illogical. How does this monster stop a hero working himself up into a Frenzy?

    Moving onto Stoneskin I think this card provides too much for too little cost. In the context of a meltdown game an early Stoneskin can seal board control for a player in the first few turns of the game which is normally extremely difficult to do. The two elements to Stoneskin - damage reduction and invulnerability to a single ability for a cost of two resources is just too cheap. I seriously question whether Stoneskin should protect a monster from a Shadow Energy ability - e.g. Boris' insta kill. Shadow Energy takes multiple turns to build up so for a two resource ability to totally block it seems counter intuitive to me. If we compare Reinforced Armour to Stoneskin we can see that Stoneskin is superior in every way. The exact same damage reduction, the ability to survive a Shadow Energy attack or ability attack and all this at the same resource cost.

    I forgot to mention another 'interesting' aspect of Stoneskin, if Zaladar (or Banebow) targets two monsters with their Shadow Energy ability, Stoneskin is destroyed but neither monster gets hit with the ability damage. This is the desired impact as Stoneskin causes an ability to have no effect but I really question whether Stoneskin on one monster should protect another monster from getting zapped by Zaladar's lightnng bolts.

    I will be the first to say that in meltdown various cards can have exponentially larger impacts due to the nature of the game (Amber + What Big Teeth anyone?) but these two cards to me seem to be detracting from the game as they limit counter play (Stoneskin in particular).

    Does anyone else have any thoughts on how these cards operate? I'm reluctant to use the term overpowered but I do feel that these cards could use some tuning.
    I would have to disagree and say they are just fine. I can see why they would be slightly better in meltdown as opposed to constructed. However, they do hold a very interesting facet that is the player they are against decides rather or not to trigger them. If they have stoneskin on or fatebreaker is in play, unless you really need to rid the field of them, playing bloodfrenzy or using Boris' ability on stoneskin is probably the wrong play. The ability isn't forcing you to waste your SE or powerful spells, in the end you would have to choose to play into them. If they stopped you from playing BF on T3, then play something else and try to make another opportunity to play it. I don't feel that these two cards creating those situations is a bad thing.

    But I suppose I should mention that you can play lower cost abilities to rid the field of cinderbreaker for your other abilities. You can also play cards that don't specifically target the stoneskinned ally to deal with it (supernova or tidal wave for example).

    Quote Originally Posted by raizoir View Post
    I believe how a card performs in meltdown should not have any impact on the balancing of a card, as this format is considered to be the more "fun" one. Only how a card performs in 1v1 and to a lesser extent 2v2 when arrives should be taken in consideration.
    I would have to disagree actually. While certain formats should take priority over others, ignoring the rest would be a bad idea. Even if its not the main way of play, its still another way to play the game and thus is a part of it. If a card really is causing issues in meltdown or draft, I see no reason why a change shouldn't be considered, especially if an appropriate one can be made. It really all depends on if a card really is causing a serious enough issue, definity not the case here though.
    Last edited by Demnchi; 03-20-2015 at 12:52 AM.
    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

  9. #9
    Senior Member XanteseZerylliom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,299
    Tournaments Joined
    2
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Dem,

    Isn't Meltdown just a stand-in for eventual draft? I could've sworn I saw that elsewhere. In that case, why would we balance for a format that will eventually disappear? And either way, it's impossible to balance for an unbalanced format. Every hero suddenly is Carmila with their own abilities (plus cross-faction access, even), and Carmila breaks the game so much that she's not allowed in QM or official tournament matches.

    The fun of Meltdown is that it IS broken. That's just its nature. Will there be problems in it? Probably. But it would be awfully boring otherwise.
    Proud member of Team Juggernauts | PFG member

    IGN: TJ Xantese

  10. #10
    DP Visionary Demnchi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (GMT -4)
    Posts
    5,858
    Tournaments Joined
    8
    Tournaments Won
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by XanteseZerylliom View Post
    Dem,

    Isn't Meltdown just a stand-in for eventual draft? I could've sworn I saw that elsewhere. In that case, why would we balance for a format that will eventually disappear? And either way, it's impossible to balance for an unbalanced format. Every hero suddenly is Carmila with their own abilities (plus cross-faction access, even), and Carmila breaks the game so much that she's not allowed in QM or official tournament matches.

    The fun of Meltdown is that it IS broken. That's just its nature. Will there be problems in it? Probably. But it would be awfully boring otherwise.
    Nah I don't think there will ever actually be a problem with meltdown, it is supposed to be a fun mode and I'm sure there will be imbalances and that would be alright. It's just that I disagree with the notion or concept that just because its not a part of the main game doesn't mean it should never be considered should there actually be something that is so unbalanced it destroys the intent.

    And no, Meltdown isn't a stand in, its just a different "mode" if you will. Not as much of a planned one I'm sure (In fact I'm pretty sure it was made on the day of the physical cards debut :P), but its there now and I'm sure there are people out there who do enjoy it so I don't see why it would be removed after the fact.
    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
  •