Lets do some card balancing!

Aeroplane

starfall said:

soultwist said:

How come Rising Tensions only costs 20 mana crystals?  It would be a bargain at 40?   (am I doing this thread right?)

Are you suggesting that the last few posts have been irrelevant? Let me make explicit why they aren't:

We've been seeing comments like this throughout this thread:

Aeroplane said:

People would spend less money not having to chase these good cards.

Theros said:

Nerfing will actually cause more harm to the community so its best to late it rotate out.

The implication is that the game will suffer as a result of nerfing, or even just from being balanced in the first place.

The history of the game is evidence that the opposite is the case.

Wow,taking it out of context are we. The main theme of my post was the lack of mana gain when 4 sets rotate out and Naru was the only card that needs tweaking for its one card combo loop.

Personally, I enjoy playing with BsZ and StV as it gets your deck rolling . After testing using only lockets and gates in the last 2 sets, the game slowed .

 I believe and its just my opinion that there are more people who don't see these cards a problem. They've been fun to build decks around and it gave more options for high level costing cards.

 Maybe I can agree is that StV should be a masterpiece.

Gilesclone

No! All the powerful cards should not be masterpieces.  Rarity doesn’t fix a broken card.

Aeroplane

Gilesclone said:

No! All the powerful cards should not be masterpieces.  Rarity doesn’t fix a broken card.

Ok, ok..Ill agree with you on that, I was just spit balling.

One thing is the broken card effects. No one states is whether its to easy to win with or to easy to lose not including legacy. The events are built around high mana gains as greg is tweaked to dispose of you pretty quick. Just nerfing these cards will create a chain reaction from events, game play and enjoyment. You can't have both, nerfing cards and getting top tier rewards. These cards give you the tools to gain the goodies at the end.
 
Sorry , but i don't see nerfing cards a priority in this game. Stability and creation of new events are way more important at the moment.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Mburn7

I've been thinking a lot about one of @starfall's comments lately.
When I started (after Zendikar, but before Oath) the most powerful cards in the game were:

*A 6/6 Reach for 12
*A 4/4 kind-of-hexproof kind-of-prevent damage Defender for 16 (Undergrowth Champion)
A 3/2 for 5 that gives all your creatures lifelink on ETB
A 6/6 for 12 that gives a creature +1/+1 every turn
Avaricious Dragon, TSN, Gaia, Drowner of Hope (ok, still really strong)
A 8/8 Flying Haste for 15 with some graveyard recursion
A 6/5 for 13 that destroys gems on ETB
A 4/4 for 10 that bounces a creature and increases its cost on ETB
A 3/3 for 10 that buffs your creatures when you cast a spell on it

The first 2 are starred because they were nerfed for being too powerful (yes, a 6/6 with no other abilities was too powerful to exist at 12 mana).

Other things that were nerfed back then:

Chandra's first ability used to cost 3.  The ping damage every turn was literally the best ability in the game.
Nissa's first used to cost 6.  A draw + some mana + some life was too strong every other turn
Jace's second used to give the fetched spell full mana.  A single free spell?  Waaaaay to strong.

And you know what, those things were super strong back then.  There was basically no removal outside of black (bounce only worked if your opponent's hand wasn't full, and there was a single colorless kill spell that cost 12.
And nobody had a life total over 100, so a 6 power creature was a pretty big threat.

Should we go back to that power level?  I don't think so, even if we could.
But it is definitely some interesting perspective to people who think that something like BSZ or HUF are reasonably designed cards.  I mean, a 5/3 hexproof prevent damage for 10 literally broke the game for a month, becoming the single most feared card of all time.  Nowadays that would be just kind of ok (and people would oppose a nerf saying "its easy to stop if you build around facing it").  Power creep has come a long way, huh.

nerdstrap

As someone who has all the cards, I don't fear Greg having any card. I do feel stifled by the OPness of some cards making a lot of cards "worthless". All I fear is stupid bugs that I have no control of freezing the game.

When Origins was the only set, I wasn't as excited by the game because I saw it as too new to be my #1 time waster/money taker. I still spent my money on Hearthstone. Once Olivia hit, and other OP cards that caused games to end in bombastic fashion, I found excitement and dopamine surges!

I do think certain cards are so poorly designed they need to be changed. BSZ is the #1 target and I welcome the change. It is one of maybe 3-5 cards that need nerfed. A majority of mythics and MPs need to be buffed greatly to make the game quicker.

Resource denial and destruction are for strategy games. I want my fast QB back and ladder climb events versus long PVP tournaments vs Bolas with 4 kill spells + his loyalty ability and a bunch of loyalty gem converters removing all the colored gems. Thats more like Magic: The Gathering and I want Puzzle Quest with Magic: The Gathering IP flavor.

My two cents

andrewvanmarle

starfall said:

Did anyone play this game at the beginning, when only Origins existed? Remember how there were no combos? Remember how you alternated turns with your opponent?

Remind me, did the game die then?

No but was really really slow, and kinda dull. It got exiting for me when I got kiora...you do the math. 

My preferred play style is to stall untill I get my pieces in play and then hit with a 1000/1000 khenra/elemental/pummeler/etc

I get a kick out of the overkill I can creatie rather thzn the win itself. 

I'd rather lose thzn play a dragged out game

Brakkis

andrewvanmarle said:

My preferred play style is to stall untill I get my pieces in play

andrewvanmarle said: 

I'd rather lose thzn play a dragged out game

....

Those two are completely opposite of one another. Doing one negates the statement of the other.

Outersider

I've played since the beginning and got addicted..... cards get nerfed due to the dev's not doing a good job at quality control (see previous rants) To me BSZ is actually one of the worst designed cards because of its power. It needs the nerf the OP suggested, it would still be a powerful card but not overwhelmingly so.

andrewvanmarle

Brakkis said:

andrewvanmarle said:

My preferred play style is to stall untill I get my pieces in play

andrewvanmarle said: 

I'd rather lose thzn play a dragged out game

....

Those two are completely opposite of one another. Doing one negates the statement of the other.

Actually no;
I really hate games where I het some thing on the board, it pings for damage, and is returned to hand/drstroyed/etc rince and repeat and 50 turns later you are half way. I'll quit such a game. 

I'd play a combo deck with maybe 1 defensive spell, take a life loss or syall enough to get my setup out in the shortest amount of turn and then go for a one or two shot kill. 

(sorry for any typo's, New phone so it still autocorrects wrong on occasion) 

Narcoticsagent

So BSZ is broke it's just a fact. For the fun of it here is an idea to balance BSZ without changing it. In paper MTG you dont have the option to just remove cards from your hand. What if the game changed to allow 7 cards in hand during your own turn but at the end of turn you had to discard down to 6 similar to paper. In addition to this change the ability to exile cards from hand voluntarily was removed. Now BSZ is much more difficult to use because you cant simply exile everything from hand to max BSZ. I think it would make deck construction more skill intensive as well since you'd have to pay more mind to curve.