Face damage cards and why they are a problem


#1

This topic is probably useless but i want to explain my thoughts about face damage cards. With that name i mean cards that deals face damage WITHOUT interaction with other cards or with the board.
Those cards are: lucent beam, tempest, phoenix fire, spiral tecnique, bone swarm, tectonic spikes, entropic gaze, void pulse, dark seed, desolator, Faie bbs, chromatic cold, flameblood warlock, decimus( you must draw at the end of your turn).
I believe that those cards are very unhealthy for a game like duelyst that should be based around the board and cards interactions. I know that CPG will never change this cards but without them i feel the game would be way better. What do you think?


#2

decimus is the worst card ever he play only himself


#3

I think, that while the level of burst we have on display at times IS a issue, that most players are woefully ignorant to how awful their game would be without them.

I too like control only metagames since no deck can kill hard control shells like ziran, cassyva and faie fast enough by solely relying on their board.

Their seems to be a distinct lack of middle ground in these discussions.


#4

They’re fine. In moderation. There will be an eventual point when there is too much direct damage. Songhai and Abyssian are starting to get to that breaking point.

But direct damage simply existing in the game isn’t a bad thing. Direct damage existing ensures that the game will come to an end. Players need to learn to stay above certain life totals against certain matches and when it’s okay to go below them.

If you know Spiral Technique is the only way your opponent kills than don’t go bellow 9 life. Or 11 life if you can’t get out of range of the general. If they don’t play ST or otherwise drop you below that life total than don’t be scared to go down to 6 life to survive general hit and Phoenix Fire.

At the same time you need to learn when it’s okay to ignore damage thresholds. Go below 11 health against Songhai that puts in a winning position. It’s more important to play to win than it is to play to not lose.

The meaningful threat of defeat is important to a game.


#5

Out of all of these, Faie’s BBS is the only one I dislike. A built-in unconditional win con like that makes Faie the only general who can win the lategame simply by running away. I feel that face damage should always cost the use of a resource, such as health or a card from your hand. 1 mana to cast BBS each turn shouldn’t affect Faie’s mana curve in the lategame, making that cost insignificant to me.

However, I have nothing against these other options (eh maybe DeciSpikes). People can forget that going face comes at a price. And that price is the very thing people complain about…you IGNORE the board, and that can easily catch up with you if you can’t kill your opponent in time.

A perfect example is Burn Cass. It has very few ways to answer an established board. Good players take advantage of this inherent flaw of the deck, and as a result, the deck is very weak despite all of the face tools it has.

Face decks tend to be a balancing act. “Can I outpace my opponent’s board if I ignore it?” is the question to keep in mind. If your opponent’s board represents more imminent damage than your deck can push, you can’t go face without losing.

I don’t think it’s too big of a deal as of now to have these face cards. Face decks aren’t dominating the ladder right now. If they become as dominant as Arcanyst Faie was during Ancient Bonds, then we could revisit this concern.


Discussion: Analysis of the Songhai faction and the Bigger Picture
#6

Burst damage is part of the game. It sucks losing to Decimus Spike or Spiral Technique, but you know they are coming and you must play around them to succeed. Also, burst damage is one legitimate way to win: the more we have, the more strategy is needed to master the game and diversity helps in general for fun. I’m all for direct damage, as long as it does not become ridiculous (which is not at the time being)


#7

The game would become incredibly stale and unfun without any burst. If everything you do goes through the filter which is the board then you wouldn’t be able to finish games when you have the advantage, 2 or 3 bad draws later and your your behind. Matches would become top deck wars because neither side is able to just finish the game. As with pretty much everything else, a healthy amount is a good thing to have, just too much is unhealthy. And imo the amount of burst in the game has been fine since last years October Reva.


#8

The title of your thread is ‘Face damage cards and why they are a problem’ but your thread is just you listing face damage cards and saying they’re bad and unhealthy.

Why?

On the contrary, I think it’s healthy for a game to be able to support a variety of deck archetypes, including aggro.

I’ve played the ultimate control Duelyst meta, and I never want to again. I’ll take aggro over that any day


#9

Even if you hate aggro, and I do, that absolutely does not mean it shouldent exist. None of the cards you mentioned are an issue, most are aggro tools and or are linear. The only time face damage cards are an issue is when they are in excess, have unlimited and unconditional range, and are not linear.

I am the first to raise the red flag when aggro gets out of hand, and I am currently raising said flag about a couple cards in the game, but these just aren’t it.

@eurasianjay
That control meta your describing sounds like a dream, but I know it’s not fair to exist, we already had disruption faie dominance and aggro Reva dominance as perfect examples of what happens when one side gets out of hand. Both should exist and check each other. We are very different people with the exact opposite tastes but we still tend to agree on the majority of things.


#10

My definition of board based control dominance dates back to control magmar, idk about you but that was truly awful.


#11

Mmmm back then I was still fairly new and all I played was Swarm abyss so I was very mad at it. But today would be a different story. But yea, no one, especially a new player, should have to suffer a meta where one side is to dominant. Balancing that often leads to midrange metas, which while not ideal, is neutral middle ground that is better then the extremes.

But other then a couple outliers that could be and need to be fixed this is a near perfect example of a diverse and healthy meta.


#12

The only cards you listed that are actually purely face damage cards are bone swarm, tectonic spikes, entropic gaze, void pulse, dark seed, desolator, faie BBS, and flameblood.

I think you have a very poor understanding of what a face damage cards is. By your logic Elucidator is a face damage card because although you have the options to attack minions you also can go face. So oh well.

No the game would be stale and it would limit creativity alongside various play styles so no it would make the game more unhealthy. Because the only thing that would matter is who had the bigger bodies and the best removal.


#13

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.