Cycling vs. Omniscience

ILikePancakes
ILikePancakes Posts: 101 Tile Toppler
edited February 2018 in MtGPQ General Discussion
Do you think a nerfing is in order?

Cycling vs. Omniscience 46 votes

Nerf cycling
8%
adman149NinjaENalthazararevala 4 votes
Nerf Omniscience
21%
sjechuaMainloop25GrizzoMtGPQEmanon2000ertaiiGilescloneManiiNamesKrishnaHypnoticSpecterTheExaminer 10 votes
Nerf cycling and Omniscience
36%
MTG_Magekhurramironerbabar3355ZW2007-Corn_NoodlesHoudinCiotogUweTellkampfGunmix25MatthewElfNeedsFoodThuranKinesiaFirinmahlazerninjarkgogol666 17 votes
Eliminate cycling
0%
Eliminate Omniscience
0%
Eliminate cycling and Omniscience
0%
Other--Please explain
32%
TherosStormcrowFurordracoTomBTHEMAGICkMANFindingHeart8WaschechtwereotternaphomcitimthesIM_CARLOSILikePancakesEnygma6CoilboxToodles 15 votes
«13

Comments

  • ILikePancakes
    ILikePancakes Posts: 101 Tile Toppler
    edited February 2018
    Other--Please explain
    I voted other. I would like to see a new game mechanic added--cards that do not use mana at all to cast. Example:

    Sacrificial Lamb

    Interrupt  (or Instant)

    This card does not gain mana and cannot be fetched with another card.

    Exile target creature you control with power 10 or greater and destroy target support. Sacrificial Lamb is then exiled.

    "Mary had a lamb. It was big."

    Other card option can include exiling cards from your hand and losing life. 

    ETA: The other card option would be to target a spell. No card option to target creatures.

  • Matthew
    Matthew Posts: 605 Critical Contributor
    edited February 2018
    Nerf cycling and Omniscience
    Cycling is ridiculous. It makes games completely one-sided. Whether or not this could already have been said about matches prior to the arrival of cycling is a different discussion for a different thread, but that's not the point. The point is that the AI should have as much chance to interact as you do. Think about Baral 1.0 for an example of this kind of one-sided nonsense.

    "But Baral didn't let you interact! He made turns go on forever!"

    Precisely my point. As players of a game of chance, we can't expect to win every single game. Cycling gives you a way to do so, which makes competition ridiculous. It's why we see disproportionate numbers of perfect scores on events.

    As for Omniscience, I don't actually have the card so I can't speak much to how it plays in a real person's hands. But I've seen the AI drop it in a few dozen matches now, and I have only ever lost to it twice. And neither of those losses were on the same turn that it hit the board. I think that's a large enough sample size to say that Omni is not as ridiculous as people claim. However, it still poses a problem because it makes things free (and that is always unhealthy in this game; just look at HUF or Deploy, or hell, both of those cards together, if you need evidence).
  • khurram
    khurram Posts: 1,090 Chairperson of the Boards
    Nerf cycling and Omniscience
    I personally don't like the word "nerf". I think they should be reworked to be more balanced.  :)
  • Matthew
    Matthew Posts: 605 Critical Contributor
    Nerf cycling and Omniscience
    I wanted to clarify the bit where I mentioned Baral.

    Essentially, Baral 1.0 is what cycling in its current form would look like if the AI could use it. People would be up in arms about it if that were the case. And I think it's ludicrously myopic and at least a little bit selfish to not complain about something just because it doesn't affect you, especially if that topic has such a broadly-felt impact that it has affected the entire metagame.
  • Toodles
    Toodles Posts: 31 Just Dropped In
    Other--Please explain
    The problems are opposite one another. Omni is dangerous in the hands of the ai while Cycling is impotent. Why would anyone assume one solution fits both?
  • Coilbox
    Coilbox Posts: 202 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    Also, there should be an option like 'Don't nerf or eliminate any of them'

    The poll is biased.
  • ILikePancakes
    ILikePancakes Posts: 101 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    Coilbox said:
    Also, there should be an option like 'Don't nerf or eliminate any of them'  

    The poll is biased.
    Hence the "Other" option.
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Other--Please explain
    this poll is unnecessary and merely kindle for inciting the heated divides from previous threads.  Octagon has stated multiple times that their priorities are releasing new content for the game, with no mention whatsoever to card nerfing.  Let's talk about something else.
  • ILikePancakes
    ILikePancakes Posts: 101 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    FindingHeart8 said:
    this poll is unnecessary and merely kindle for inciting the heated divides from previous threads.  Octagon has stated multiple times that their priorities are releasing new content for the game, with no mention whatsoever to card nerfing.  Let's talk about something else.
    Balancing the game will always be a worthwhile topic whether Octagon mentions it or not in blog posts. 
  • Furordraco
    Furordraco Posts: 142 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    i know with my comments in past posts i made clear my point on cycling being ok and omniscence being op. However i know i can deal with both being out there, and think we might just need new content to equalize their power. Lets move on and deal with the future
  • Coilbox
    Coilbox Posts: 202 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    ILikePancakes said:
    Coilbox said:
    Also, there should be an option like 'Don't nerf or eliminate any of them'  

    The poll is biased.
    Hence the "Other" option.
    Having 6 options to vote for nerfing and/or eliminating and not even one option for voting against it, but having a 'Other' option doesnt make it biased? Come on xD
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Other--Please explain
    ILikePancakes said:
    FindingHeart8 said:
    this poll is unnecessary and merely kindle for inciting the heated divides from previous threads.  Octagon has stated multiple times that their priorities are releasing new content for the game, with no mention whatsoever to card nerfing.  Let's talk about something else.
    Balancing the game will always be a worthwhile topic whether Octagon mentions it or not in blog posts. 
    It's already been clearly established in multiple threads that this is a highly divisive topic, discussed and discussed again, with many people weighing in on both sides.

    Even if one side weighs slightly heavier than the other in this vote, it would be unlikely to shift Octagon's directions.  We're merely a sample group relative to the numbers that play this game, and this is not an accurate statistical analysis of that sample.
  • HypnoticSpecter
    HypnoticSpecter Posts: 190 Tile Toppler
    Nerf Omniscience
    Perhaps there will be fewer stale, retread discussions when we're given some new content to discuss...
  • Gunmix25
    Gunmix25 Posts: 1,442 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited February 2018
    Nerf cycling and Omniscience
    FindingHeart8 said:
    Octagon has stated multiple times that their priorities are releasing new content for the game, with no mention whatsoever to card nerfing.  
    That is not true. They have in fact mentioned looking into balancing cards just not as of late. 

    You're correct about their priorities though. 

    I've only lost to ominscience once.  And have defeated it every other time. But that one fight was convincingly enough to know it was broken. I blame the AI for the other times it failed to work correctly. 

    Cycling... has absolutely nothing to do with how the AI can't use it.  That is a Silly defense. The fact that it provide a <95% success rate for a win is problematic in events.  
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Other--Please explain
    Gunmix25 said:
    FindingHeart8 said:
    Octagon has stated multiple times that their priorities are releasing new content for the game, with no mention whatsoever to card nerfing.  
    That is not true. They have in fact mentioned looking into balancing cards just not as of late. 

    You're correct about their priorities though. 

    I've only lost to ominscience once.  And have defeated it every other time. But that one fight was convincingly enough to know it was broken. I blame the AI for the other times it failed to work correctly. 

    Cycling... has absolutely nothing to do with how the AI can't use it.  That is a Silly defense. The fact that it provide a <95% success rate for a win is problematic in events.  
    A fair point.  I had forgotten they'd lightly touched base on it in the past.  However I maintain that they've made it clear their focus is new content and other (non-nerfing) adjustments.
  • Gunmix25
    Gunmix25 Posts: 1,442 Chairperson of the Boards
    Nerf cycling and Omniscience
     FindingHeart8 said:
    A fair point.  I had forgotten they'd lightly touched base on it in the past.  However I maintain that they've made it clear their focus is new content and other (non-nerfing) adjustments.
    Oh, I agree! But, I personally find it hard to believe that a 30 page blog being devoted entirely to Ixalan though. I'm dying to find out what Oktagon has lined up for us all. 
  • ILikePancakes
    ILikePancakes Posts: 101 Tile Toppler
    Other--Please explain
    Gunmix25 said:
     FindingHeart8 said:
    A fair point.  I had forgotten they'd lightly touched base on it in the past.  However I maintain that they've made it clear their focus is new content and other (non-nerfing) adjustments.
    Oh, I agree! But, I personally find it hard to believe that a 30 page blog being devoted entirely to Ixalan though. I'm dying to find out what Oktagon has lined up for us all. 
    Same. Have nothing to do game-wise today (took a break from story mode)
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Other--Please explain
    Gunmix25 said:
     FindingHeart8 said:
    A fair point.  I had forgotten they'd lightly touched base on it in the past.  However I maintain that they've made it clear their focus is new content and other (non-nerfing) adjustments.
    Oh, I agree! But, I personally find it hard to believe that a 30 page blog being devoted entirely to Ixalan though. I'm dying to find out what Oktagon has lined up for us all. 
    Yeah I'm very interested in seeing what secrets they're going to unveil as well.  I just hope I don't have to read their novella to learn it ;)
  • TheDragonHermit
    TheDragonHermit Posts: 465 Mover and Shaker
    edited February 2018
    Coilbox said:
    Also, there should be an option like 'Don't nerf or eliminate any of them'

    The poll is biased.
    There might be some biasing wording, but the poll itself is fairly solid. There is a question posed that presents 3 binary axises; should something be done about cycling, should something be done about Omniscience, nerf or elimination. This would result in 8 possible answers usually but negative, negative, nerf and negative, negative, eliminate both amount to neither, which could be looked at as the other option, though a definitive negative answer would be appropriate. Furthermore, elimination has its own issues in game design and play with how players would react to a card disappearing from their library and others suddenly losing major functionality. This is The Dragon Hermit, yet again ranting about poll design.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories