Close

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    16
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Into the Forest - Maybe make it dependent on equipment on the hero. With armor it gives stealth (camouflage) and with a weapon it gives defender (if you follow, you are in their natural environment). Still a defensive tool, but not a brainless one. Maybe make it so that it is kept attached until the end of the next turn, so it can't be re-cast every turn (they have to get out of the forest again).

  2. #12
    Senior Member Rajawali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    181
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Lay Low

    Ability changed to "Duration 1. Friendly allies have ambush and stealth." (from "Your hero and allies can't attack and are hidden (they and their attachments can't be targeted) until the end of your next turn.")
    The new Lay Low is much worse version of cover of night with only 1 duration but only one additional ambush

  3. #13
    Senior Member starval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,757
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    You almost read my mind, dude! Four of these would be simple surgical changes that should sufficiently remove the NPE-factor without radically changing them and get them off the Ban List ASAP to see the impact.

    Where we're not aligned would be AoA: I can't get behind slapping Sustain on a CotC card!
    If you don't like the word Sustain, you can just word it like Blood Frenzy - Take 1 damage at the beginning of your turn.
    IGN: TJ Starval
    TG: @Starval

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  4. #14
    DP Visionary BlanketEffect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    2,930
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Soul Reaper
    Cost (3)
    Exile all allies in a graveyard. Gain one life for each ally exiled in this way. Soul Repear is exiled.
    -Doctor of Philosophy, A1 Alliance - Evolution in theory
    Original designer of the Serena Superdraw® archetype; connoisseur of all things un-meta


    Santa Bomb ©2011, Lamb Slam & Feedbomb ©2012 - All rights reserved

    Zaladar - ZTC 3.0: The Feedbomb Dynamo <-- An iconic deck in Shadow Era history - SE v1.5


    Listen to past episodes of State of the Era: a dialogue on all things Shadow Era, brought to you by Alliance One


    We are all one mind, capable of all imagined, and all conceivable.

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    10
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Originally Posted by "NikVeles"
    ...

    In additon to this we are considering changes to Rain Delay, Full Moon, Holy Shield and Voice of Winter in a way that will keep flavor of cards and their redeeming qualities, while removing NPE aspects.
    Any news regarding whether these cards will be looked into and what is being planned?

    Not a regular here at the forums, though some may know my solo Darkclaw, Gwenneth and Nishaven decks that have achieved mediocre to good results. Perhaps I am much to be blamed for possible changes coming to some of these cards, so thought I could leave some input.

    The fundamental advantage for a solo deck is that opponent's anti-ally cards are empty draws. The heavy disadvantage, however, is that eventually the opponent will have ultimate board control. In most matches a solo deck has no other option than to rely on cards like Rain Delay. In addition there are class specific cards, for example Full Moon and Holy Shield. The mages have Voice of Vinter to slow down opponent's allies.

    I can well understand the reason for banning In to the Forest (the hidden status, making the card almost untouchable, was the problem) but do these other suggested cards have the same issue? Voice of Winter can be destroyed by item destruction cards. Rain Delay and Full Moon are openly targettable and will go away by any ability removal card. The list of such cards include:

    Change of Fortune (neutral ability)
    Shrine of Negatia (human ability)
    Sayemeht's Retribution (human ability)
    Shriek of Revulsion (shadow ability)
    Shriek of Vengeance (shadow ability)
    Focused Prayer (priest ability)

    Sorcerer of Endia (human ally)
    Twilight Ritualist (human ally)
    Eriss Fatewearer (human ally)
    Rapacious Vermin (shadow ally)
    Thriss Demolitionist (shadow ally)
    Winged Redeemer (neutral ally)

    Tar Adun (hero ability)
    Loest (hero ability)

    Quite many options really, and something available to every class (even in terms of instant abilities).

    My fear is, that if Rain Delay, Full Moon, Holy Shiled and Voice of Winter are altered heavily, then the deck diversity of Shadow Era will take a blow. Solo decks (Darkclaw, Gwenneth, Threbin, solo mages...) would no longer remain feasible and the only deck type left would be ally decks fighting over board control. Perhaps this is intentional and desired goal, but if not, please consider before making the changes.

  6. #16
    DP Visionary SET Colosal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Argentina GMT-3
    Posts
    6,551
    Tournaments Joined
    38
    Tournaments Won
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Coran View Post
    Any news regarding whether these cards will be looked into and what is being planned?

    Not a regular here at the forums, though some may know my solo Darkclaw, Gwenneth and Nishaven decks that have achieved mediocre to good results. Perhaps I am much to be blamed for possible changes coming to some of these cards, so thought I could leave some input.

    The fundamental advantage for a solo deck is that opponent's anti-ally cards are empty draws. The heavy disadvantage, however, is that eventually the opponent will have ultimate board control. In most matches a solo deck has no other option than to rely on cards like Rain Delay. In addition there are class specific cards, for example Full Moon and Holy Shield. The mages have Voice of Vinter to slow down opponent's allies.

    I can well understand the reason for banning In to the Forest (the hidden status, making the card almost untouchable, was the problem) but do these other suggested cards have the same issue? Voice of Winter can be destroyed by item destruction cards. Rain Delay and Full Moon are openly targettable and will go away by any ability removal card. The list of such cards include:

    Change of Fortune (neutral ability)
    Shrine of Negatia (human ability)
    Sayemeht's Retribution (human ability)
    Shriek of Revulsion (shadow ability)
    Shriek of Vengeance (shadow ability)
    Focused Prayer (priest ability)

    Sorcerer of Endia (human ally)
    Twilight Ritualist (human ally)
    Eriss Fatewearer (human ally)
    Rapacious Vermin (shadow ally)
    Thriss Demolitionist (shadow ally)
    Winged Redeemer (neutral ally)

    Tar Adun (hero ability)
    Loest (hero ability)

    Quite many options really, and something available to every class (even in terms of instant abilities).

    My fear is, that if Rain Delay, Full Moon, Holy Shiled and Voice of Winter are altered heavily, then the deck diversity of Shadow Era will take a blow. Solo decks (Darkclaw, Gwenneth, Threbin, solo mages...) would no longer remain feasible and the only deck type left would be ally decks fighting over board control. Perhaps this is intentional and desired goal, but if not, please consider before making the changes.
    The thing is that the game needs so desperately new players that the intention is destroying all decks that require a bit of brain to counter so noobs can go happily through rated. Once stall, mill and solo are destroyed, i bet rush Is next. This policy of nerfing everything is the real cancer.

  7. #17
    Senior Member starval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,757
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I thought Armor of Ages and Crescendo were fine as is personally - because counterplay already exists. Just destroy the item. Same goes for Full Moon, Rain Delay, Holy Shield, Voice of Winter - all of these have counterplay options. Into the Forest and Soul Reaper simply could not be countered. Soul Reaper, you could attempt to counter by removing allies in opp graveyard (which I used to try) but it did not need many allies in the graveyard to get a ton of value. Lay Low was probably fine as well.
    IGN: TJ Starval
    TG: @Starval

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  8. #18
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,049
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by SET Colosal View Post
    the intention is destroying all decks that require a bit of brain to counter so noobs can go happily through rated. Once stall, mill and solo are destroyed, i bet rush Is next. This policy of nerfing everything is the real cancer.
    It's starting to look that way, yeah. Bringing back banned cards in altered form is one thing but changes beyond that are really not needed at this point.

    The volunteer work from the DT is really appreciated for handling things that actually need doing (like finishing off design of LL and changing the banned cards so we don't need a banned list any more), but if that has to come with strings attached that let them butcher other cards, according to personal preference, at the drop of a hat, regardless of how the community might feel about it, then I think this spells real danger and risk for SE.

    Rushing forward with changes that are not necessary at this time is simply reckless and I can't support a DT taking that attitude with this game and its playerbase. I really hope they will reconsider doing changes beyond the 5 banned cards and also listen to the feedback already received about them.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Veles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    4,239
    Tournaments Joined
    29
    Tournaments Won
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by starval View Post
    I thought Armor of Ages and Crescendo were fine as is personally - because counterplay already exists. Just destroy the item. Same goes for Full Moon, Rain Delay, Holy Shield, Voice of Winter - all of these have counterplay options. Into the Forest and Soul Reaper simply could not be countered. Soul Reaper, you could attempt to counter by removing allies in opp graveyard (which I used to try) but it did not need many allies in the graveyard to get a ton of value. Lay Low was probably fine as well.

    In theory that is true. And it is in theory true for all cards in question. But in practice you can not bring enough removal to match them up. Between draw engines, armors, weapons, artifacts, attachments they run above usual numbers of, we reached enormous redundancy of tools that can be used in such strategy. Another midrange, aggro or regular control deck, can carry very limited number of removal which is usually tech to one or 2 card types. So from the start they can't cover all types without diluting their deck too much. These games often come down to pre match decision during deckbuilding: Did you put appropriate tech for the matchup? No? probably gonna auto lose. If yes, then you need to cross your fingers you draw that tech on time to use it in the right situation. So entire game is reduced in the end to one card. From that game there is always one player coming out very frustrated.

    I am a strong believer these kind of situations need to be avoided as much as possible. Compare the role and impact of having tech or not having tech option in non stall match ups. Facing Warrior you may or may not have brought attachment removal for Blood Frenzy. If you did then great, you get an advantage but the game isn't over on the spot for the opponent when you use that tech card. Vs rogue you may bring artifact removal for IGG. If you do remove it, great, you gain some advantage, but the game isn't over yet. If you did not bring tech, that is fine too. You may be in slight disadvantage but you play out your gameplan regardless and still have decent chances of winning if you have a fine deck and good knowledge of the game. This is not the case with ITF, HS, Lay Low, Full Moon, RD in stall-ish decks. Having or not having one card is way too polarizing. This is the key difference of using tech for stall and non stall matches and why players report those bad experiences and complain specifically about underpowered tech in relation to stall-ish decks. Tech should be something that gives you advantage, but should not be the sole reason to win or lose a match.

    Examples of redundancy I speak of in the first paragraph:

    Solo DC or Moonstaller can run 4x Rain Delay and 4x Full Moon and in theory can go for 8 turns switching between them to make the game completely uninteractive. Or you put support ability removal and you win on the spot after 8 repetitive turns.
    Priests could do something similar with Voice of Winter and Holy Shield. In addition to that they can run bunch of armors, Bazaar, GCoK, Book of Curses,Lily, Bad Santas and so on. Enough draw and recycle to replay any item removed. Which leaves them open for a key turn when they hide behind Holy Shield and the question is now whether opponent has attachment removal and if they drew it on time.
    Hunter, same. Chain ITF and Rain Delay and so on.
    Praxix with AoA, Soulbound Armor, Rain Delay with an inbuild mill win condition.
    Throw in hero abilities like MS and Skervox for even more redundancy.

    These changes won't kill control or beatdown decks. There are non stall control priest decks. There are non stall beatdown DC decks. Several cards have been designed specifically for these types of decks even in the last batch of LL cards.
    Last edited by Veles; 03-24-2019 at 04:12 PM.

    Design Team Leader

    Check out this thread for some awesome articles and guides.

    “Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine”
    ― Nikola Tesla




  10. #20
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    10
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Veles View Post
    In theory that is true. And it is in theory true for all cards in question. But in practice you can not bring enough removal to match them up. Between draw engines, armors, weapons, artifacts, attachments they run above usual numbers of, we reached enormous redundancy of tools that can be used in such strategy. Another midrange, aggro or regular control deck, can carry very limited number of removal which is usually tech to one or 2 card types. So from the start they can't cover all types without diluting their deck too much. These games often come down to pre match decision during deckbuilding: Did you put appropriate tech for the matchup? No? probably gonna auto lose. If yes, then you need to cross your fingers you draw that tech on time to use it in the right situation. So entire game is reduced in the end to one card. From that game there is always one player coming out very frustrated.
    All those listed 14 different ways to remove abilities are perfect counters against cards like Rain Delay and Full Moon. To me it looks a bit bizarre to instead ban / redesign cards so that players do not even have to worry about whether or not to pack their counter. Why would the counter card even need to exist then? And is it not the beauty of deck design to try to reach the best solution to deal with most threats? No deck can excel in every situation (dilutes it too much, just like you said) and choices have to be made. Remove that and part of the beauty is gone.

    Personally, after a defeat I tend to analyze whether having this or that card could have helped, and then consider if adding that card X would make my deck overall better. If not, then I stick with the current deck and just accept that this certain situation is a weakness in it. If I face the situation again, then there are only my own deck choices to blame for yet another (auto)defeat. No need to accuse game mechanics or card design there.

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
  •