The Baral Nerf.

THEMAGICkMAN

So wait, lots of people are shouting out for a nerf to baral, then it's announced he's getting nerfed and you go and cry about it? Really? The devs aren't idiots, they know people will ask for refunds - they fixed a rather large problem in the metagame though by making the desicion to nerf baral. He was too powerful to play with, he was to boring and annoying to play against. The nerf is a GOOD THING.

shteev

THEMAGICkMAN wrote:

So wait, lots of people are shouting out for a nerf to baral, then it's announced he's getting nerfed and you go and cry about it? Really? The devs aren't idiots, they know people will ask for refunds - they fixed a rather large problem in the metagame though by making the desicion to nerf baral. He was too powerful to play with, he was to boring and annoying to play against. The nerf is a GOOD THING.

Of course it's good for the game! It's a step towards dealing with rampant power creep (although, Tezz2 and Rishkar's Ex are still 2 pressing issues to be addressed).

That doesn't mean we weren't sold something under false pretenses. Of course, then, we shall also be demanding refunds!

toastie

I bought Baral because we was stupid good. If the product gets changed, and I don't feel this version is worth the money, I will request a refund.

If I got him out of a pack, I would have absolutely no qualms with the change (but you know, not possible at the moment).

THEMAGICkMAN

Of course your gonna request a refund! The developers know that! And they still chose to change baral, which was the correct decision you lose nothing, and gain a more stable metagame, the developers chose to lose money to change baral - I think that's a very good choice. I have a bit more respect for the devs now.

All I'm saying is that there's nothing bad about the baral nerf. (Unless you want an unstable heavily weighted metagame)

Phase

Still holding my breath a bit until the patch notes but until then I am optimistic. It's a little better than I expected because instead of a flat power level decrease they have actually buffed his synergy with spells that cost more than 3 mana. He can at least be dealt with by proper removal now instead of him just killing you immediately.

I still won't like completely free moon prisons so like I said I'll see what's coming in the patch notes. Good job so far d3 for at least making the right decision here.

morgue427

not diagreeing with the choice to nerf him but i did pay money for him if he gets the nerf hammer then refund will be requested from me too, and as far as they will lose money nerfing him, i think they have lost far more money with the last update than they ever got from baral, but what do i know? If the fix is as horrible as the update then well more people will leave me among them, which while not a lot of money is still money lost. as a whole i think they need to tread carefully because the ice is thin after the last few missteps they have made. this is just my 2 cents worth and honestly not even sure it is worth the 2 cents, take it as you will.

shteev

THEMAGICkMAN wrote:

Of course your gonna request a refund! The developers know that! And they still chose to change baral, which was the correct decision you lose nothing, and gain a more stable metagame, the developers chose to lose money to change baral - I think that's a very good choice. I have a bit more respect for the devs now.

Chose to lose money? I doubt it. They will fight the refund tooth and claw.

Matthew

Everyone should keep in mind the caveat Brigby made to his post about this. It's in the link below, but for those of you who'd rather not investigate for yourselves, I'll also include it here:

Per Brigby: (Disclaimer: Until the official Release Notes are unveiled, the following information may be subject to change.)
Having said that though, the last time I spoke with the development team, they were looking into changing Baral's spell mana-gain to the beginning of the turn, as opposed to when the spell is drawn.

Sauce: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=60320&p=662532&hilit=disclaimer#p662532

Please, for the sake of everyone's sanity, do not talk about this statement as if it is gospel until we have actually seen the final decision get pushed out.

wereotter

toastie said:

I bought Baral because we was stupid good. If the product gets changed, and I don't feel this version is worth the money, I will request a refund.

If I got him out of a pack, I would have absolutely no qualms with the change (but you know, not possible at the moment).

Yeah.... good luck with that.

"Any amounts paid for the Game or virtual items or virtual currency are non-refundable, except as expressly set forth in this EULA. You understand that all purchases and charges made by you are final. You are not entitled to any refund or return for products sold for any reason. Any election to honor a refund or return shall be made at our sole discretion."

This is from the user agreement that you implicitly accept by virtue of playing the game. Basically they can change anything they want that you paid for and not issue a refund, and you agreed to it by opening the app.

Also, this:

"We can manage, regulate, control, modify or eliminate virtual currency and/or virtual goods, including the price thereof, at our discretion, and will have no liability to you or any third party for any of such actions."

hawkyh1

there's also the chance to play element to argue.
can those who bought tez2 ask for a refund as
soon as he is available for crystals in the vault?

HH

losdamianos

hawkyh1 said:

there's also the chance to play element to argue.
can those who bought tez2 ask for a refund as
soon as he is available for crystals in the vault?

HH

Dont really understand your argument, you are paying for the 650 "saved" crystals and 2 weeks of limited exclusivity

hawkyh1

should those who bought tez2 for money have
a case to get a refund because now he's going
to be in the vault for crystals?(what they have
paid for has changed) some similarities with
asking for a refund with baral?

HH

Steeme

Now that the release notes have been published, we can see their planned modification to Baral.

Is it actually a nerf?  I would argue against that sweeping judgement:

1. At the beginning of your turn, gain 4 mana for each spell in hand

2. Draw a card for each spell cast

You call this a nerf?  Sure, you can't win a match on turn 2 after cycling through your deck for 15 minutes, but think about how powerful this card actually is.  Assuming you're running a spell-heavy deck, Baral gives you a massive momentum advantage AND card draw advantage at the same time.  Not only that, but you are no longer restricted to cheap 3-cost spells.  You can actually use things like Disperse and Devil's Playground by placing them at the bottom of your hand while you fill mana on a support or creature.

THEMAGICkMAN

It's a nerf because the card is worse now. Not much is better than winning on turn 2 with decent consistency. The card is different but worse compared to it's original version. 

madwren

Steeme said:

Now that the release notes have been published, we can see their planned modification to Baral.

Is it actually a nerf?  I would argue against that sweeping judgement:

1. At the beginning of your turn, gain 4 mana for each spell in hand

2. Draw a card for each spell cast

You call this a nerf?  Sure, you can't win a match on turn 2 after cycling through your deck for 15 minutes, but think about how powerful this card actually is.  Assuming you're running a spell-heavy deck, Baral gives you a massive momentum advantage AND card draw advantage at the same time.  Not only that, but you are no longer restricted to cheap 3-cost spells.  You can actually use things like Disperse and Devil's Playground by placing them at the bottom of your hand while you fill mana on a support or creature.

Not to mention the free mana for Crush/Engulf/Exert/BTB/Deploy/Seasons Past/Renewal/etc

Steeme

THEMAGICkMAN said:

It's a nerf because the card is worse now. Not much is better than winning on turn 2 with decent consistency. The card is different but worse compared to it's original version. 

I disagree.  It may be different, but it's not a worse card.

Regardless.  I'm going to keep bringing up this example.  Both Ajani and Kiora were nerfed post-purchase.  Players, like myself, purchased those planeswalkers for cash.  They were both modified to be strictly "worse" than they were sold as.  I doubt many people requested refunds, because they are still incredibly strong.

Ohboy

Steeme said:

THEMAGICkMAN said:

It's a nerf because the card is worse now. Not much is better than winning on turn 2 with decent consistency. The card is different but worse compared to it's original version. 

I disagree.  It may be different, but it's not a worse card.

Regardless.  I'm going to keep bringing up this example.  Both Ajani and Kiora were nerfed post-purchase.  Players, like myself, purchased those planeswalkers for cash.  They were both modified to be strictly "worse" than they were sold as.  I doubt many people requested refunds, because they are still incredibly strong.

Ah you missed bken leading the charge to get refunds on kioras bought months ago. 

It definitely happened back then too. 

GamerX

I don't post here.  This nerf has upset me enough to post.  Here is why:

Baral was purchased because he was good enough to warrant the purchase by many players.  He was a key tool in a tool box for people who don't have Season's Past, GAH, or other combo pieces necessary to accomplish some of the harder secondary requirements like on Exquisite Archangel in RAtC.  I had gone from never being able to get the 7 turns or less objective to gettting it 50% of the time because of Baral.

The card wasn't unbeatable, and there were lots of ways around it. Even people who purchased the card had to play against the card, and there are numerous answers available to break the chain.  I play in platinum and saw it often enough and didn't care.

My main gripe with the change is in the very same patch they are implementing a system which would solve the main issue have with the design of the card, and that is PVP battles.  With them implementing an event deck requirement list, this gives them the opportunity to BAN Baral from being playable in PVP events.   I don't think anybody who purchased Baral would have had an issue with that, most use him like I do and that is to conquer certain PVE and/or story mode objectives.

If people lament they want a refund, it should be given.  I would not have purchased him as he will be changed.  Many others would not have as well.   I think this would have been sound logic to fix the problem the less skilled players, or the free to play players, or the players who just couldn't afford to purchase or chose to purchase the card had with the card.  Was it powerful?  Yes, it should be to get my $30.  But I would still buy Dynavolt Tower, I would have bought Deploy the Gatewatch, and many other cards I don't have yet which would improve my decks. I honestly think Deploy should be nerfed, (yes, I have pulled 3 copies).   But when you nerf something in the same patch you create the solution...it is frustrating.

So if Brigby, Hiberium or anybody else reasonable who can see this, maybe they can look at PVP bannings in the future with the new deck registration for event system instead of violent nerfing.   Even in paper MTG sets and cards are designed with different play styles and types of magic games in mind, there is no reason to think we will see formats where older players will be forced to use newer cards for events and not crush openents souls with their "old school" cards new players haven't had the chance to aquire yet.    If I was going to make a PVP ban list it would start: Baral, Season's Past, GaH, Deploy, etc....   I think it would create better balance in the game for everybody and still allow players to use the cards in PVE and have fun with them.

---Gamer X (Lord of the UndeadHeads)

Steeme

Ohboy said:

Steeme said:

THEMAGICkMAN said:

It's a nerf because the card is worse now. Not much is better than winning on turn 2 with decent consistency. The card is different but worse compared to it's original version. 

I disagree.  It may be different, but it's not a worse card.

Regardless.  I'm going to keep bringing up this example.  Both Ajani and Kiora were nerfed post-purchase.  Players, like myself, purchased those planeswalkers for cash.  They were both modified to be strictly "worse" than they were sold as.  I doubt many people requested refunds, because they are still incredibly strong.

Ah you missed bken leading the charge to get refunds on kioras bought months ago. 

It definitely happened back then too. 

Nope, I didn't miss it.  Are you sure you're not referring to the initial overnerf of Kiora?  Because they dialed back all but the nerf to the first ability.  The initial outrage was because of the nerf to the second and third abilities.  After they reverted those changes, the storm quieted down.

GamerX said:

I don't post here.  This nerf has upset me enough to post.  Here is why:

Baral was purchased because he was good enough to warrant the purchase by many players.  He was a key tool in a tool box for people who don't have Season's Past, GAH, or other combo pieces necessary to accomplish some of the harder secondary requirements like on Exquisite Archangel in RAtC.  I had gone from never being able to get the 7 turns or less objective to gettting it 50% of the time because of Baral.

The card wasn't unbeatable, and there were lots of ways around it. Even people who purchased the card had to play against the card, and there are numerous answers available to break the chain.  I play in platinum and saw it often enough and didn't care.

My main gripe with the change is in the very same patch they are implementing a system which would solve the main issue have with the design of the card, and that is PVP battles.  With them implementing an event deck requirement list, this gives them the opportunity to BAN Baral from being playable in PVP events.   I don't think anybody who purchased Baral would have had an issue with that, most use him like I do and that is to conquer certain PVE and/or story mode objectives.

If people lament they want a refund, it should be given.  I would not have purchased him as he will be changed.  Many others would not have as well.   I think this would have been sound logic to fix the problem the less skilled players, or the free to play players, or the players who just couldn't afford to purchase or chose to purchase the card had with the card.  Was it powerful?  Yes, it should be to get my $30.  But I would still buy Dynavolt Tower, I would have bought Deploy the Gatewatch, and many other cards I don't have yet which would improve my decks. I honestly think Deploy should be nerfed, (yes, I have pulled 3 copies).   But when you nerf something in the same patch you create the solution...it is frustrating.

So if Brigby, Hiberium or anybody else reasonable who can see this, maybe they can look at PVP bannings in the future with the new deck registration for event system instead of violent nerfing.   Even in paper MTG sets and cards are designed with different play styles and types of magic games in mind, there is no reason to think we will see formats where older players will be forced to use newer cards for events and not crush openents souls with their "old school" cards new players haven't had the chance to aquire yet.    If I was going to make a PVP ban list it would start: Baral, Season's Past, GaH, Deploy, etc....   I think it would create better balance in the game for everybody and still allow players to use the cards in PVE and have fun with them.

---Gamer X (Lord of the UndeadHeads)

Sorry, your argument doesn't hold.  You mention not using it in PVP events, but you want to use it in the RATC event which clearly has a coalition leaderboard.  The only reason you would be attempting to maximize your score would be to out-score your opponents.  You have clearly demonstrated that your only intent for buying Baral was to game the system to artificially boost your score and thus your prize winnings.  I have no sympathy for your apparent "loss" of 30 dollars, which in fact is not a loss at all.

Whatever.  Apply for a refund with Google/Apple.  In the future, don't make any purchases.  Then you will never require a refund.

khurram

The change to baral actually makes him much more flexible to use and therefore better, in my opinion. I dont want to just sit there and cast boring 3 mana spells all day. I'd take the new baral over the current version gladly. And he will see more play, at least in my decks.

hawkyh1

'With them implementing an event deck requirement list, this gives them the opportunity to BAN Baral from being playable in PVP events.'

I have just sold you a card. now I'm banning it's use.
(that's going to go down well)

HH