Food for thought about Baral...

Mainloop25

I just played around with Baral in Jace 2, and it was a little more interesting as far as deck building goes. The reason is because you can only put 5 spells in his deck. You can't go as overboard with cheap spell combo chains as you can with other pw's because of deck restrictions. So it got me thinking.

What if all blue planeswalkers had 5 spells, max? Would this mess up other strategies too much? I haven't totally thought this through, so I am by no means advocating for it, I just want to hear the discussion, if there is any.

AngelForge

If Baral really is overpowered, than he should be nerfed like all the other overpowered cards (out there, unnerfed). No need to change the planeswalkers if a card is broken?

Steeme

Mainloop25 wrote:

I just played around with Baral in Jace 2, and it was a little more interesting as far as deck building goes. The reason is because you can only put 5 spells in his deck. You can't go as overboard with cheap spell combo chains as you can with other pw's because of deck restrictions. So it got me thinking.

What if all blue planeswalkers had 5 spells, max? Would this mess up other strategies too much? I haven't totally thought this through, so I am by no means advocating for it, I just want to hear the discussion, if there is any.

After trying the 8-card cycle and being bored with it in under an hour, I also decided J2 was the best home for Baral. I don't like having a single win-condition and he fills the role of just another tool in the belt that can help change gears in the match.

However, I don't think adjusting the rest of the game to suit Baral is a viable solution. I think adjusting his numbers to eliminate cycles is the best solution, but he really needs to keep a similar power level or he will just get shelved. I don't understand why players want him nerfed into mediocrity, while at the same time pounding their chests with their Deploy, Mirrorpool, Bacon, Olivia, Ulrich, Akoum, Ulvenwald, Startled, Exert, Crush, and so on.

andrewvanmarle

I don't understand why players want him nerfed into mediocrity, while at the same time pounding their chests with their Deploy, Mirrorpool, Bacon, Olivia, Ulrich, Akoum, Ulvenwald, Startled, Exert, Crush, and so on.

Thank you!

I think that once we have deckslots we'll'see more adaptive decks where you take into account a certain danger ( like baral or deploy) and use an effective counter measure. (and yes there are good counter measures)

madwren

Steeme wrote:

Mainloop25 wrote:

I just played around with Baral in Jace 2, and it was a little more interesting as far as deck building goes. The reason is because you can only put 5 spells in his deck. You can't go as overboard with cheap spell combo chains as you can with other pw's because of deck restrictions. So it got me thinking.

What if all blue planeswalkers had 5 spells, max? Would this mess up other strategies too much? I haven't totally thought this through, so I am by no means advocating for it, I just want to hear the discussion, if there is any.

After trying the 8-card cycle and being bored with it in under an hour, I also decided J2 was the best home for Baral. I don't like having a single win-condition and he fills the role of just another tool in the belt that can help change gears in the match.

However, I don't think adjusting the rest of the game to suit Baral is a viable solution. I think adjusting his numbers to eliminate cycles is the best solution, but he really needs to keep a similar power level or he will just get shelved. I don't understand why players want him nerfed into mediocrity, while at the same time pounding their chests with their Deploy, Mirrorpool, Bacon, Olivia, Ulrich, Akoum, Ulvenwald, Startled, Exert, Crush, and so on.

I'd aruge that "Solitaire cycles" are a more negative player experience than simply losing to an overpowered individual card. Losing to Olivia makes people throw their phones and come back for vengeance. Watching the opponent cycle for two minutes just makes you set the game down and find something else to do besides stare at a screen for 10 minutes. It's the same reason Harness and Seasons Past were nerfed.

Personally, I think a solid change for Baral would be that he gives each spell in your hand 3 mana at the start of your turn, instead of when they are drawn. That allows him to still function as a mana and draw battery, but stops the cycles from occuring in a single turn.

madwren

Mainloop25 wrote:

I just played around with Baral in Jace 2, and it was a little more interesting as far as deck building goes. The reason is because you can only put 5 spells in his deck. You can't go as overboard with cheap spell combo chains as you can with other pw's because of deck restrictions. So it got me thinking.

What if all blue planeswalkers had 5 spells, max? Would this mess up other strategies too much? I haven't totally thought this through, so I am by no means advocating for it, I just want to hear the discussion, if there is any.

I've used him in lower-spell decks as well, and I like his role as an augmenter, as opposed to a focus, of a deck; as you say, he's still enjoyable without trying to create an engless cycle of cheap spells.

However, if a single card is prompting the thought of changing all other blue planeswalkers, that might be a sign that the problem isn't the planeswalkers.

losdamianos

andrewvanmarle wrote:

I don't understand why players want him nerfed into mediocrity, while at the same time pounding their chests with their Deploy, Mirrorpool, Bacon, Olivia, Ulrich, Akoum, Ulvenwald, Startled, Exert, Crush, and so on.

show me other combo that will instantly kill you round one/ kill all your critters and deploy60/60 thopter with haste

olivia/pig deploy decks are beatable baral loop combo is not + you are stuck for 5+ mins on one game

morgue427

i can agree with this he is more of a support player and with say curious homocullous you get more mana for spells which mean meaner ones plus his last ability is killer on its own

babar3355

I don't totally disagree with the original post. Kiora is a fantastic planeswalker, but it is never fun to play her 8 spell, 1 creature, 1 support cycle deck. Who wants to just sit their for 20 minutes while she builds a 200 hp land elemental and a 100 hp hydra?

Nerfing her down to 5 spells would certainly break that problem. BTW, she can abuse Baral pretty well as well.

I kinda like the idea Mainloop.

Mainloop25

Yeah it's not something I'm even advocating for. I just wanted to see if there was any merit to thinking outside of the box. He would still be just as powerful but it would eliminate the need for changing the card at all. I just don't know if it screws up Zada goblin decks into unplayability with Saheeli, for example.

gruntface

It's an interesting thought, but I worry it's a case of using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Perhaps squeeze even more text onto Baral's card and explicitly state that PW has a 5 spell cap if he is in the deck. Like you mainloop, not necessarily suggesting this is what I want to see, but like the theorizing aspect of the thread.

When I proposed a players council in an earlier thread starter, it was in part to understand more about where the developers were coming from with regards to changes and re-balancing cards would be one of the items I would put near the top of the agenda. As a whole the player base can struggle to agree with what cards/PWs need work, let alone how. Hearing the developers talk about their approach (which I'm glad to see more of in the sticky threads) and hearing from a representation of the player base in return, would be powerful tools.

They need to look after the bigger spenders for sure but the life blood of the game is F2P players and you can only kick this group so long and for so hard before they walk away.

MTG_Mage

I have looked extensively into PW balancing and found that any creature/spell/support limit over 6 (so 7 to 10) is too much and allows for uncreative deck building. Creature/spell/support limits should all be between 4 to 6 but no more than one 4 and at least one 6 (currently only Nahiri has two 4s) so most PWs should have 5 or 6 in everything.

Mainloop25

You can leave Jace1 to have all the spells you want, he needs love anyway

PastrySpider

I quite like this idea. It doesn't even need to be that drastic a change. Switching to 6 spells instead of 8 would make Baral much less of an issue and make Kiora mana churn decks less potent.

span_argoman

MTG_Mage wrote:

I have looked extensively into PW balancing and found that any creature/spell/support limit over 6 (so 7 to 10) is too much and allows for uncreative deck building. Creature/spell/support limits should all be between 4 to 6 but no more than one 4 and at least one 6 (currently only Nahiri has two 4s) so most PWs should have 5 or 6 in everything.

I'm curious to know your definition of uncreative deck building. That seems like quite a blanket statement.

Nahiri Zoo by yunnn was to me a really creative deck for the thought he put into balancing the deck between the heavier creatures and the mid-sized ones as well as the selection of which ones in each class to include.

Koth is a planeswalker that some players have shifted towards a heavy creature count as a way to manage the erratic mana gain of the planeswalker. The creature-heavy builds also help greatly in QB to build up a board quickly and hence end the match quickly.

Murder Investigation or Starfield of Nyx decks can tend to use many many supports and it's a challenge (more for the former archetype) to fit in all the supports which you want to have.

I don't think going back and revising the creature/spell/support limit for all planeswalkers is a practical solution. The developers have said before that they believe deckbuilding limitations are a way of challenging players to build more creative decks. And while that applies for restricting the cap in certain decks (see Nahiri with 4 spells & supports at level 60 among others), I believe the examples above show that a high cap on one or two of the categories also allows room for creative builds.

After all, taking Nahiri once again as an example, if her creature cap is reduced to 6 as you proposed she will need exactly 6 creatures and 4 spells/supports in the deck if she wants to play with no supports/spells. I don't think that's necessarily healthier for deckbuilding.

Mainloop25

Not practical? Or just not precedented?

I'll give you this, though. If they did change planeswalker deck slots to <6 of any card type, they would have to change creature card limits for all planeswalker levels except Garruk, who only lets you have 4 creatures even at lvl60.

span_argoman

Mainloop25 wrote:

Not practical? Or just not precedented?

I'll give you this, though. If they did change planeswalker deck slots to <6 of any card type, they would have to change creature card limits for all planeswalker levels except Garruk, who only lets you have 4 creatures even at lvl60.

Not practical. The reason being that this issue comes about from the introduction of one particular card, Baral in this case. But that doesn't mean that future cards will not cause the same issue in a way that cannot be fixed by limiting planeswalker deck limits.

Rattlechains doesn't give this issue because creatures are limited by 3 slots on the board, there aren't enough good Spirits to cycle through a deck like Baral can and it doesn't draw upon summoning a Spirit.

But let's say in the future a card is released like Baral but instead of spells it's for Green cards, or for cards from that specific set. Like:
"When this creature enters the battlefield, each Green card in your hand gains 3 mana. When you draw a Green card, that card gains 3 mana. When you play a Green card, you draw 1 card."
"When this creature enters the battlefield, each Amonkhet card in your hand gains 3 mana. When you draw a Amonkhet card, that card gains 3 mana. When you play a Amonkhet card, you draw 1 card."

You could potentially end up with the same problem but with one that cannot be fixed by restricting planeswalker deck limits. When you use these alternative examples, (to me at least) it points more to the issue being with the card in question. Changing planeswalker deck limits is more of a bandage solution that to me isn't worth the disadvantages to be used to deal with Baral.

morgue427

tried jace one with baral and it worked but blue by itself just doesnt have much to really get it going and the mana gain makes it hard to get baral out before you get in trouble, granted negate on a endless cycle is fun but you can only take so much mana from the ai.

Tilwin90

I played a bit with Baral and to be honest it tends to fizzle quite quickly. It is used in my Jace deck right now and I also tried a Kiora approach but sooner or later you do end up with a hand filled with creatures. So while it takes a bit for the combo to stops, it did not impress me that much.
For Dovin I'd rather stick to Deploy the Gatewatch - it still performs better.