I'm Very Tired of Storm the Vault

Furks

It would still be very powerful at 1x instead of 2x. 

The fact that it blows up the board isn't really a problem as long as you have enough draw in your deck. It's even a positive because it blows up enemy supports 

kayd_mon

Brakkis said:

Again with this?

I'll admit that it could use some tweaking. Change the flip side to only convert based on non-land supports just like the front side requires in order to flip. Also reduce the flip sides shields to 3 like the other flip lands.

I certainly don't include StV in every blue deck. Azor's Gateway works better in a U/W deck while Azcanta would fit better in a U/G deck if I had it. I only find myself using it on Bolas or Saheeli these days.

In my defense, this is my first time posting here. So, at least it's my first time. 

FindingHeart8

kayd_mon said:

Brakkis said:

Again with this?

I'll admit that it could use some tweaking. Change the flip side to only convert based on non-land supports just like the front side requires in order to flip. Also reduce the flip sides shields to 3 like the other flip lands.

I certainly don't include StV in every blue deck. Azor's Gateway works better in a U/W deck while Azcanta would fit better in a U/G deck if I had it. I only find myself using it on Bolas or Saheeli these days.

In my defense, this is my first time posting here. So, at least it's my first time. 

welcome Kayd_mon!

Kinesia

x1 instead of x2 is a small tweak that might be enough and worth experimenting with to start with.

River's Rebuke annoys me more than this though this _facilitates_ RR. RR should be "non-token" so it has _some_ drawback it's currently still too powerful as a complete one-sided board wipe and no cost change can ever balance it. Make it cost 40 and it doesn't change the current situation at all.

IM_CARLOS

RR is fine at the moment. The problem in my opinion is StV. I like to play cards like this, but if nerfed there are other options. Sooner or later stv went legacy and there are more powerful options. 

wereotter

FindingHeart8 said:

wereotter said:

FindingHeart8 said:

MTG_Mage said:

hmm, the paper card only gets mana from artifacts, but the mtgpq card converts for any support. Why did they not specify the support sub-type artifact? They have specified sub-types in all cards since they came out, but didnt with this one. It itself has sub-types enchantment/land so it shouldnt even get its own bonus.
This card really does need adjusting and everyone knows it.

If you play paper mtg, you know that artifacts are insanely easier to cast there than in mtgpq.  You also don't run the risk in paper mtg of StV accidentally destroying your other artifacts, which is a problem you can frequently encounter in mtgpq.

The developers took a different route on StV that still managed to meet the same outcome that it should in paper mtg.

Before the update where treasures/clues would be targeted with support destruction before an actual support-card itself I'd wholeheartedly agree with you.  But since that update it's easier to destroy StV, the card has already been "adjusted."

Now when I lose to StV, I don't blame the card, I blame the fact that I didn't put support destruction in my deck.

Also.... I could be wrong here, but I don't think they introduced the artifact subtype to the cards until Dominaria so that it could line up with cards that care about being historic. Hence Storm the Vault couldn't look for artifacts. This, however, could easily be adjusted where it has to look for how many artifacts, specifically, you control in order to flip, and it only converts gems to blue based on how many artifacts.

OR another possible adjustment could be rather than converting gems to blue, it raises your blue mana bonus by +x, equal to the number of artifacts you control.

You are correct in the artifact subtype being after Rivals.

Those are some interesting ideas, however all would significantly reduce the power of StV.  Most artifact supports are too easy to destroy and too costly to replace, and blue mana bonus is useless if you can't make a blue match.

Octagon has openly shown they're trying to use paper mtg as a model for mtgpq cards.  As properly utilized in paper mtg, StV land ability is supposed to be overpowered and broken as tinykitty.  Nerfing it would actually be straying away from the design of the actual card.  If players have issue with it, blame WotC for bringing back Tolarian Academy mechanics, not mtgpq.

The card is powerful, I agree.  But I'll take it in it's current form over a gutted version like what they did with Solemnity.

The card doesn't have to specifically consider artifact supports, though, now that artifacts exist as a card type. It could still look at your artifact creatures for references of what counts. And while being reliant on a blue match to get that massive boost of mana is definitely a hard part, I doubt anyone would mind if making that match, even in a mono-red planeswalker, as it still has the ability to be a massive burst of mana, and wouldn't destroy your token supports in the process.

Only thing I would say would need to be addressed is adding the artifact subtype to treasures, clues, and servos which currently don't have that as part of their coding.

IM_CARLOS

In my opinion MTGPQ is very slow at balancing things like baral or cycling or now stv.

Paper version was really fast, compared to this. Academy or Skull Clamp went in a month and the game survived. 

At least the dev team should run some betatesting, before releasing cards, or more selling for real cash. I would do the testing, if I can keep the cards.  

HarryMason

I honestly think part of the problem is that the card is over valued , thus overplayed. I don't use the card in my current kiora build, because it plays more like a green deck. I think it's in the rest of my blue decks .

Where I think it goes wrong is the number of red decks that it's just stuffed into. I see it in samut , which is weird. I see it in koth, which is even weirder. 

I do still feel it could use a bit of a toning down. I like the idea of lowering the flipped shield count and it only counting non land supports. Maybe converting 2 per rather than 3 per . It would still be powerful, but not quite the auto dump that it currently is. The card is super powerful and has warped the format . It checks the boxes for a nerf , but I don't know that I actually want it nerfed. I don't think I've ever lost because of it . It just makes some matches more intense. I think I'm fine either way . If it gets nerfed, I definitely think it earned it .

madwren

My first thought was that there was no way they'd nerf it, but seeing some of the minor adjustments they've made to cards, I realize it's quite possible. I'm not sure if it's necessary to nerf it, but come on, the card's ridiculous.

It's easy to flip and proceeds to let you dump your hand turn after turn. That isn't normal. Now, I feel like we should clap our hands for emphasis here.  PLAY SUPPORT DESTRUCTION is not the solution to every broken support, guys. It isn't. That's as bad as the "dies to removal" argument. It's a glib answer that neglects the fact that 1) support destruction is like trying to kill a fly with a hammer, and 2) by design, Vault decks feature a lot of decoy supports.

Kills your supports? Who cares, just recast them the next turn. A support dying is a minor inconvenience when you're gaining so much mana you don't know what to do with it. 

Anyway, Alpine Moon is my preferred option to handle it, and I highly recommend it to everyone if you haven't seen how solid the card is.  Keep in mind it takes up to 5 turns to kill Vault--if it doesn't explode your 2-shield Moon in the process--during which time the opponent's usually acquired a ridiculous mana advantage.

It's downright peculiar that right now, blue has superior mana ramp to green now that HoP has rotated out. At least green spells occur once, though admittedly often in bulk. Vault is a HoP every turn without needing to pay for it a second time.

DumasAG

I think I have to respectfully disagree with you. In my experience, playing in the same environment as you (I assume), I have found that playing multiple sources of support removal (here, i’ll clap my hands for emphasis) does deal with the problem. In this thread alone, there are multiple players who feel like StV does not pose a significant problem. I find in just about every game, I can remove the vault before it leads to an unwinnable situation. I should stress, this is my personal experience. It may be reflective of the cards I play (repeatable removal like Zacama, Bombardment, and Blood sun), or maybe i’m just lucky. But suggesting using the tools provided to deal with the problem, which has worked in our experience, is not a “glib response” to what I personally see as a non-issue.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Matthew

MarvinFine said:

Oddly enough, I very rarely face it. I almost always run it, tho. It wins a lot of games. I find it odd that so much of this thread revolves around dealing with your opponent playing with it, rather than how I, and players like me, use it to perform far, far, better in Events than players without it.

If I was a cynical man I would say that this focus on how to deal with it is a deliberate attempt to shift the argument away from how ridiculous and unbalancing a card it is for a player to own.

If it's so important to have cards like this in the environment in order to create some games of higher difficulty when you play against it, then, why not just make this card something that cannot be owned by players, and is instead a node effect in some of the higher difficulty levels in Events?

I came here to say basically this, but it looks like I was beaten to the punch.

Szamsziel

For card in { ghalta, etali, gaea revenge, Olivia, pig, baral, Blue Sun zenit, stv, Rivers rebuke, (random often played card) }
If {player}.own{card} and rnd(0,1)<0.9
then post: {card} is not broken
else if {player}.own{card}=false and rnd(0,1)<0.9 then post: {card} is broken
Else post randomly

Stormbringer0

I don't mind playing against it (I mind playing against Bolas every second match), but when I include StV even in some of my red PW decks, because the mana gains at the beginning of my turn from that card are worth it, then it should be nerfed.

Gideon

 STV is fun and it makes the matches go quicker. Two things that the game needs. It’s a good card keep it as is.

boopers

Frankly, Octagon has been doing a fantastic job at card balancing and limiting the use of certain card functions that have broken the game in past sets.  There is clearly QC on "broken" combos before sets are released, while still maintaining combos that are powerful, but not game ending.  A few have slipped through, and quickly get balanced.

Folks, the game needs interesting and powerful cards to be fun.  We can't have everything be bland and mediocre, who wants to play a game like that?

FindingHeart8

wereotter said:

FindingHeart8 said:

wereotter said:

FindingHeart8 said:

MTG_Mage said:

hmm, the paper card only gets mana from artifacts, but the mtgpq card converts for any support. Why did they not specify the support sub-type artifact? They have specified sub-types in all cards since they came out, but didnt with this one. It itself has sub-types enchantment/land so it shouldnt even get its own bonus.
This card really does need adjusting and everyone knows it.

If you play paper mtg, you know that artifacts are insanely easier to cast there than in mtgpq.  You also don't run the risk in paper mtg of StV accidentally destroying your other artifacts, which is a problem you can frequently encounter in mtgpq.

The developers took a different route on StV that still managed to meet the same outcome that it should in paper mtg.

Before the update where treasures/clues would be targeted with support destruction before an actual support-card itself I'd wholeheartedly agree with you.  But since that update it's easier to destroy StV, the card has already been "adjusted."

Now when I lose to StV, I don't blame the card, I blame the fact that I didn't put support destruction in my deck.

Also.... I could be wrong here, but I don't think they introduced the artifact subtype to the cards until Dominaria so that it could line up with cards that care about being historic. Hence Storm the Vault couldn't look for artifacts. This, however, could easily be adjusted where it has to look for how many artifacts, specifically, you control in order to flip, and it only converts gems to blue based on how many artifacts.

OR another possible adjustment could be rather than converting gems to blue, it raises your blue mana bonus by +x, equal to the number of artifacts you control.

You are correct in the artifact subtype being after Rivals.

Those are some interesting ideas, however all would significantly reduce the power of StV.  Most artifact supports are too easy to destroy and too costly to replace, and blue mana bonus is useless if you can't make a blue match.

Octagon has openly shown they're trying to use paper mtg as a model for mtgpq cards.  As properly utilized in paper mtg, StV land ability is supposed to be overpowered and broken as tinykitty.  Nerfing it would actually be straying away from the design of the actual card.  If players have issue with it, blame WotC for bringing back Tolarian Academy mechanics, not mtgpq.

The card is powerful, I agree.  But I'll take it in it's current form over a gutted version like what they did with Solemnity.

The card doesn't have to specifically consider artifact supports, though, now that artifacts exist as a card type. It could still look at your artifact creatures for references of what counts. And while being reliant on a blue match to get that massive boost of mana is definitely a hard part, I doubt anyone would mind if making that match, even in a mono-red planeswalker, as it still has the ability to be a massive burst of mana, and wouldn't destroy your token supports in the process.

Only thing I would say would need to be addressed is adding the artifact subtype to treasures, clues, and servos which currently don't have that as part of their coding.

yeah it can count artifact creatures, but still falls short of paper mtg because (apart from the 3 creatures on the battlefield limitation) it also doesn't count reinforcements.

Right, I'm not arguing that it would be beneficial to even a monored deck to make a blue match.  I'm saying that if all it does is ramp the blue mana gain, but there's no blue matches to be made on the board...it's essentially a dead card until a blue match can be made.

I do not enjoy facing Storm the Vault, and have lost my fair share of battles to it.  However, the card functions as WotC intended it to, and it can be dealt with.

Nerfing should only be for cards that are indisputably overpowered in every format, with little-to-no opportunity to react.  The card has already been made more vulnerable, and it's still considerably less powerful than Omniscience (which was never nerfed).

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Furks

Agree with @MarvinFine the two games are (vastly) different and need to be balanced accordingly. Cards only need to reflect paper magic in spirit and art. 

FindingHeart8

MarvinFine said:

FindingHeart8 said:

If you play paper mtg, you know that artifacts are insanely easier to cast there than in mtgpq.

This is not true.

Yes.  Yes it is true.  Affinity. Tinker, Chief Engineer, Golbin Welder. Arcum Dagson. Grim Monolith. Master Transmuter, Metal Worker. I can go on...

Honestly you just cannot equate paper mtg and mtgpq in the way you are doing here. To attempt to do so shows a poor understanding of both games, and of game design in general.

First off, Octagon has openly declared they are trying to design cards to model paper mtg.  Secondly, it's been discussed by many players throughout threads in these forums.  Lastly, I hope in your future responses, you can disagree with me without resorting to an ad hominem; regardless of your opinion, I do have a thorough understanding of both games.

The Tolarian Academy effect on paper StV is hidden on the flip side of the card, and will not be active until the late game. At that point, in a paper game, the effect is powerful, but not what you'd describe as broken. Tolarian Academy is broken when you can drop it on turn 1 or 2 and play a bunch of artifacts that cost roughly 0 mana.

It is CONSIDERABLY harder to flip StV in paper than it is in mtgpq. Not just because (as you fail to mention) paper StV only produces one treasure a turn instead of two, but also (as you fail to mention) for the fundamental reason that creatures can block in paper. Your opponent has far, far more options to stop your creatures dealing combat damage to him.

ln paper magic, I can generally flip StV by turn 3 or 4.  That isn't late game by any player's standpoint..

MarvinFine said:

Furthermore: It is nothing short of ludicrous to suggest that Oktagon's hands were tied by the WOTCs design of the card, and were forced to make an overpowered, broken card because StV in paper looks a little like Tolarian Academy. Of course Oktagon have the ability to make cards which are balanced within their own game. Exactly what is it about the paper version of StV which means that an mtgpq version MUST convert 2 gems to blue for each nonland support you have in play?

I never said their hands were tied in card design.  As Octagon has stated, they have aimed to make cards in mtgpq more similar to mtg.

I pull about 30 mana from StV per turn in paper mtg, that generally exceeds what I get in mtgpq.