Duelyst Forums

How I would change cards and should not be on the balance team

Rae is what I call a catalyst, meaning it is the enabler of certain plays. Now, fault is the biggest payoff for this enabler, but that doesn’t mean other problems can’t arise later or that it doesn’t enable anything else.

Duelyst has other enablers. I’ll use Darkfire Sacrifice as an example. Long ago in a galaxy far far away it was the enabler for Grandmaster Variax. Variax costed 7, and DFS let it be played for 5, making the Variax decks a true terror. Variax was nerfed to 8 mana and the world rejoiced.

Later, a new card wandered in called…Wanderer. DFS would go on to enable turn 2 wanderer plays and make many a player shed tears! :sob:

We may have addressed an initial payoff card, but we didn’t address the catalyst, so it found a new payoff card. Hope this makes sense. :grinning:

4 Likes

This is one train of thought that I am generally opposed to. Why go after enablers instead of problems? Take ramp for example: If a card is so good that getting out early is a problem, that is a problem with the card not the ramp. So why nerf the ramp when you could hit the problem? (Given I supported flash not stacking, and would support the same with darkfire, as extreme highroll is also bad. But am very against other changes)

Variax of the day was way over the top…but frankly IDK if it would even be able to compete with todays meta at seven mana. But sadly that is a nostalgic sore spot, and my Abyss bias is likely showing.

Wanderer is a problem period, even outside of ramp. Its still an evil nightmare even in factions that have zero ramp.

Lets fix problems, and not enablers. Cool flashy stuff, and a strong base is great. Broken problems are not.

2 Likes

I have an analogy for this.

Say you’re uprooting some pesky weeds. You don’t just address what you see at ground level. It’s likely that the problem lies beneath the surface. If you only pluck out what you see, the weed continues to grow. But if you attack the “root” of the problem (ha-ha…I’m such a dork :sweat_smile:), that’s when the weed problem truly stops.

You may see that Wanderer or Fault can cause problems. But are they the root of the problem? Or is there another force at work beneath the surface that’s causing the real issue?

2 Likes

I like your anaolgy…however I think it actually supports my argument. The root of the problem is stuff like Wander and Kha (Not fault or rae, rae would be the visible weed in this analogy). Now I do agree that 0 mana units have been a proven problem on their own, although much less so in Vet. But I am not against adjusting Rae, I just do not find it to be the real pressing issue.

I think Fault is fair and balanced. Rae has some issues, but is not broken. Kha is the root of the problem. And while I could support rae getting hit as well, I do not want to go overkill and hit both it AND kha.

Although if teamwars is any indication with Fault banned outright and often BOA and or Sandswhirl as well, vet is still doing fine. So I would be fine with hitting both Kha/Rae as they are both problematic.

3 Likes

The difference between 4 attack and 3 attack is imo the biggest difference in the game.
For example - zendo.

I don’t tech for one removal I tech for most removals meaning if I got a unit that can Dodge every one of magmar’s removal I’m good - this one will stick and stay a threat.

On the other hand 4 attack con trade into shadowdancer/ decimus/thorn and most of the annoying units on top of the effect and stay alive.
3 attack can’t do it.

Dropping a unit that packs removal on random enemy considered nothing since you need to trigger it on an important unit.
Plus - if you ramp as vanar even this is not a problem, since 6 Mana is the other dude’s 4 or 5 Mana.

Regarding walls, I love every vanar deck (that is not faice). There is a difference between wall decks, ice age decks should not be played as embla decks.
The way I play walls single target is very important since I want to counter as much as I can until the finish.
The worst case for walls is not to be able a backline threat that might kill you the turn after.

Edit: autocorrect killed my writing.

4 Likes

Ok so let’s consider talking about which is the real root of the problem. I can consider in some factions some spells to be it because of their effects are made for being enablers. For example flash or sacrifice. Those cards could be problematic and limit design space. But a 0 cost minion that the only thing it does bad is costing 0 shouldn’t be the root by any means.

1 Like

But you don’t get a spell immediately. That’s also why Loremaster is better. You usally don’t need more than 1 copied spell anyways.

An Aphotic Drain, Loremaster, Aphotic Drain 5 mana turn is way better than a 6 mana Aphotic Drain Fugitive turn.

5 mana is just so much.

In this TW season Xor was played six times, 5 times without Fugitive. Doesn’t seem an autoinclude to an already weaker (but annoying) deck.

But like I said your nerf would turn an interesting card into a dead one. 3/5 is still terrible for a 5 drop, especially if it doesn’t do anything on the same turn. And because you have to wait a whole turn you need to play it even more defensively, so a +1 attack buff is not doing anything.

2 Likes

I like the idea of lowering Kha’s attack. What if its health was increased as well, to 4? Then it wouldn’t die when hitting, say, a silverguard knight or a bloodbound mentor, so it wouldn’t be able to wipe out an entire board the turn it gets summoned. The opponent would then have a chance to react (dispel, transform, etc).

I also think that fault should summon dervishes a maximum of once per turn. It’s ridiculous that someone can Kha, use up the dervishes, and then play like a Rae or a Bloodtear Alchemist and get another batch of dervishes all in the same turn.

1 Like

@deathsadvocate I’ve found that, to find the root of a problem, you should be able to be abused in a variety of settings. In the case of Rae, it’s abused with Fault, but it also snipes mana tiles to ramp plays.

Khanuum-Ka abuses fault, and it also helps push the power of obelisk decks. I think we agree on Ka being a concern.

As for fault, I think we agree that it’s alright on its own, and that Rae and Ka push the envelope.

2 Likes

Man this is a nice discussion.

Wonder where the hating on Magmar part will come.

4 Likes

There’s more than just Magmar removal in the game. Judging a card’s power based on its ability to play around only Magmar cards is something I don’t like. It implies stuff like Rae is garbage while Golden Justicar is practically OP.

I get where you’re going with Zendo. The thing is…it stayed at 6 mana. This new cloudcaller is one mana cheaper. And besides, Zendo is still strong. It even has inner focus synergy now. The main drawback is, once again, susceptibility to specifically plasma storm and natural selection. If Zendo was a 5-drop, that would be a different story.

Regarding cloudcaller’s stats and its ability to deal with things like Decimus and shadow dancer in one attack, isn’t that the point of the lesser waterball? Do you think your opponent will give you a trade on a Decimus or dancer on board? I’m of the mindset that they won’t. I certainly wouldn’t if I can help it.

1 Like

Even after the proposed nerf, Ka is still the perfect counter to Vaath.
Maybe Ka’s dying wish should summon an exhausted Ka and prevent chaining.

2 Likes

Also, DEET MuRGMuRR!!! I HATE THAT FACTION! MAKANTOR TOO GOOD PLEZ NERF!!!

(Did I do it?)

1 Like

Regarding Fugitive: what I want to know is how you feel about Kron and Letigress. They have a lot in common with Fugitive: 5 mana (Legendary, neutral) minion, decent stats (in particular, 5+ health), and an ability that generates some value the turn the minion is played but also produces more over time if it’s left unchecked. They see much more play than does Fugitive, and while the tokens they make are arguably less valuable than drawing an extra copy of a spell, they usually have more of an immediate impact. I understand that your issue is mostly with the play pattern of recurring certain annoying spells (Darkfire Sacrifice, Aphotic Drain, Concealing Shroud), but then I feel like your contention should be with those spells and not the minion.

1 Like

That’s why you have sister for, they will never give it to you, you take it.
Look at it as destroying 4 hp minion twice.

Again - I don’t play against magmar’s removal I play against the maximum number of removal possible.
Regarding hp caller is pretty much set to hold up against most removal.
Opening Gambit making it basically zero dispel value.
Attack based removal is where it shines.

Caller is basically a tortoise that hits everything and usually stay alive (husk, decimus, dancer, wreath, thorn, painter etc…) at 3 it will be useless as a defending body or clearing a game breaking minion.
You look at the five Mana as more easy to proc but you just left a body that can’t erase hard to deal with minion.
I’ll prefer the 6 Mana version and being able to swing well even if it means using sister and other tools.
I get you want it to be easier to proc, but hey - not everything suppose to be dummy friendly.
Some cards are just harder to play then others and it ok.

Even though caller is pretty much straight forward - kill one game breaker, use sister and swing for another.
Finish the game somehow.

One of the reasons thunderhorn still retain a the same scary level even after the Nerf.

2 Likes

You did it very well haha

2 Likes

Granted, I worded it wrong. What I mean is that you get the spell in your hand right away at the end of your turn, when there is no opportunity to stop it.

I don’t disagree with that. However, that’s a specific example in a void. There are many situations where Fugitive will be better and because of the board state or other factors you may not be able to deal with Fugitive straight away.

On the one hand it can be, but on the other it really isn’t. We are looking at the card in a void

I don’t keep up with TW, but I would assume not every person who’s played it has a lot of experience with that deck in particular. The people who play a lot of it on ladder that I’ve come across, do have Fugitive in their deck. Regardless of how good a player is, it still takes a lot of games to be able to know the deck like the back of your hand and be able to know your way around different scenarios. If those players who play it a lot on ladder think Fugitive is worth being in the deck, then it should say something to some degree.

True the stat change does very little. But changing the wording and not changing the stats, would also be pointless. However, if the stat changes are too much then it goes the other way from hardly seeing play to being played too much because of the stats. The alternative would be complete re-work of the card and how it works.

I have no problems with the current versions of Kron and LeTigress. My problem is the immediacy of getting the card and basically, getting to chose which card it is and having it placed in your hand. Fugitive (and Loremaster) both don’t have any real counter play to stopping them giving a card into the hand. While we could agree the spells are the more annoying part of my issue, it would also mean looking at changing a lot of those spells. Whereas, I would prefer introducing a chance to counter play. To be fair and honest, I made the “cards” at like 3am last night and made this topic in 10-15 mins during that time frame. If I had my way I would rather delete Fugitive and Loremaster altogether. Mainly for 2 reasons, 1 lack of counter play, and 2 I believe they limit future design space for any fun/cool spells, assuming if Duelyst ever gets an expansion. The saving grace for both Fugitive and Loremaster for them, besides the fact their both already in the game, is that there isn’t a lot of decks that are built to utilise they strengths. But like I mentioned before, even if a card doesn’t see a lot of play, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t look at the card in terms of changes.

1 Like

I feel like I’m still just not understanding something fundamental here. Yes, it’s impossible to prevent your opponent from getting the initial card with Fugitive. So what? The same is true for any other of the many cards with an end-of-turn effect or an Opening Gambit; you can’t prevent it from going off at least once. And while Fugitive is arguably an answer-or-die minion in the decks that run it, again, there are plenty of minions like that and Fugitive is among the least objectionable: at least it won’t kill you the very next turn like Decimus or Zendo, and the value it provides is parcelled out gradually (one spell a turn) instead of coming in bursts like Sunforge Lancer or Owlbeast Sage.

Based on what you’ve been saying, you seem to find spell recursion more offensive than other forms of value generation, but I have trouble seeing why. It’s a natural mechanic that has been used in plenty of other CCGs with little fuss. The main way it’s been problematic in other games is when you have spells that recur themselves, which Duelyst has been pretty conservative with.

3 Likes

I’ve got another idea for Kha.
‘Buff’ it by giving it forcefield :upside_down_face:.

4 Likes

Just give Ka 9000 health. That way, it doesn’t even die to 300 hits from a Worldcore Golem, making it virtually unplayable.

3 Likes