Does Naru Meha need a nerf?

tfg76

Yes

The current state of the game is that the "best" decks are decks that try to set up a combo or loop, then win within one turn. By best, I mean, "have the highest likelihood of winning". That trait means that most new cards that try to incrementally gain an advantage turn over turn (e.g. Vanguards) are mostly unplayable.

Naru is a particularly agregious example here, requiring only two of a multitude of cards (at least 4 if you assume they're fixing Vivien's Invocation, plus the new green Finale) to "just win". The opponent can have almost any cards in play, you'll still win since Naru will be large, hasty and have trample at that point.

I'd nerf Naru by reducing her cost to 12 or so, and have the ability read "gains half mana". This brings it in line with most new cards being printed, and we don't need the janky "can't play the same turn" fix.

andrewvanmarle

No

Mburn7 said:

andrewvanmarle said:

You know what, let's aks the devs to change all the cards to orchard spirits, if the game isn't balanced by then, well.... i don't know what.

Ah, I love a good straw man.  Nobody is saying all cards need to suck to be balanced.  All we're saying is that cards should not be able to combo infinitely with one or two other cards.  If you disagree that's fine but please use a proper argument next time.

wasn't finished editing the post. And no it isn't a true straw man because this game is iherently unbalanced. There is no possibility of truly balancing the game.  

So what we are talking about is a sliding scale of balance, where if you never stop you DO end up with only orchard spirits. So, instead of pointing fingers at this card and that, lets do something a lot harder but also a lot more productive: lets set the boundary, when is the game balanced, what are the actal parameters?

wereotter

No

tfg76 said:

Naru is a particularly agregious example here, requiring only two of a multitude of cards (at least 4 if you assume they're fixing Vivien's Invocation, plus the new green Finale) to "just win". The opponent can have almost any cards in play, you'll still win since Naru will be large, hasty and have trample at that point.

Can’t log into the game to double check what I’m about to say, but....

i don't think she can go infinite with the green finale. Pretty sure her mana cost is too high for her to be cast with the mana she will put into it. 

[Deleted User]

oh god.. you guys do what you want..

just reduce loading times and animations. make the game faster now that you guys already got the nerfs you wanted early on.

bobby_2613

No

wereotter said:

tfg76 said:

Naru is a particularly agregious example here, requiring only two of a multitude of cards (at least 4 if you assume they're fixing Vivien's Invocation, plus the new green Finale) to "just win". The opponent can have almost any cards in play, you'll still win since Naru will be large, hasty and have trample at that point.

Can’t log into the game to double check what I’m about to say, but....

i don't think she can go infinite with the green finale. Pretty sure her mana cost is too high for her to be cast with the mana she will put into it. 

You can find what you want in there:
https://mtgpq.info/cards/search?name=finale

Mburn7

Yes

bobby_2613 said:

wereotter said:

tfg76 said:

Naru is a particularly agregious example here, requiring only two of a multitude of cards (at least 4 if you assume they're fixing Vivien's Invocation, plus the new green Finale) to "just win". The opponent can have almost any cards in play, you'll still win since Naru will be large, hasty and have trample at that point.

Can’t log into the game to double check what I’m about to say, but....

i don't think she can go infinite with the green finale. Pretty sure her mana cost is too high for her to be cast with the mana she will put into it. 

You can find what you want in there:
https://mtgpq.info/cards/search?name=finale

Thanks for the link.  Looks like Green Finale will work with Naru (she costs 16, it looks for cost 16 or less when fully charged).  So now the infinite Naru loop will have infinite buffs and haste.

Still think that's ok?

wereotter

No

Mburn7 said:

bobby_2613 said:

wereotter said:

tfg76 said:

Naru is a particularly agregious example here, requiring only two of a multitude of cards (at least 4 if you assume they're fixing Vivien's Invocation, plus the new green Finale) to "just win". The opponent can have almost any cards in play, you'll still win since Naru will be large, hasty and have trample at that point.

Can’t log into the game to double check what I’m about to say, but....

i don't think she can go infinite with the green finale. Pretty sure her mana cost is too high for her to be cast with the mana she will put into it. 

You can find what you want in there:
https://mtgpq.info/cards/search?name=finale

Thanks for the link.  Looks like Green Finale will work with Naru (she costs 16, it looks for cost 16 or less when fully charged).  So now the infinite Naru loop will have infinite buffs and haste.

Still think that's ok?

Thanks. That’s what I needed. I thought she cost too much to be cast off the finale. I could suggest raising her cost so that she can’t be pulled with that or chord of calling, but I don’t think that would help. 

Stormcrow

No

bobby_2613 said:

You can find what you want in there:
https://mtgpq.info/cards/search?name=finale

Not to derail the thread but why do the Finales say "not lootable" there? I looted the blue one last night from one of the 2 PPs of the new set that I opened. Was it just a guess that they were gonna be promo cards, or is it a bug on the game's end?

bobby_2613

No

Stormcrow said:

bobby_2613 said:

You can find what you want in there:
https://mtgpq.info/cards/search?name=finale

Not to derail the thread but why do the Finales say "not lootable" there? I looted the blue one last night from one of the 2 PPs of the new set that I opened. Was it just a guess that they were gonna be promo cards, or is it a bug on the game's end?

I think "not lootable" is because it was only taken from the preview gallery. It wasn't lootable until yesterday. By the way, as stated, this is not a d3go/Oktogon site. Only someone kind enough to take of his own time to give us great tools filtering the cards.

Mark_Tedin

I do not know the need to create polls in this community. It has been confirmed in the disastrous BSZ topic poll that there is no democracy here.

The pro-nerf minority needs only to create several topics on the same subject and to lobby intensively on other topics in order to impose their opinion.

I sincerely do not participate again in polls here.

Tremayne

Yes

I think that Naru Mehu is a stellar example of horrendously bad card design that shows the current balance problem which is plaguing MTGPQ. it seems the developers are clearly struggling to get the balance right, that is how it appears to me.

Someone said it took paper MTG years to master this problem (don’t know, do not play paper) so I guess it is not a big surprise that this problem is also plaguing MTGPQ.

As I read it, the majority of the proponents of keeping NM as she is, argues that the matches will be boringly slow and make the MTGPQ a drag to play. Therefore they argue they must have even more unbalanced cards, e.g to counter unbalanced cards Octagon must make cards that are even more unbalanced. In my book that is a bad spiral to start, but I totally get they want faster matches, I just don’t agree on the method to get it.

The downside to not wanting to fix NM is that MTGPQ will (or have already?) degenerated into a game that solely rely on decks, which I will characterise as speed deck, which rely on speed and nothing but speed, in effect reducing MTGPQ to a coin toss, although a coin toss that rarely falls out in Greg’s favour (do to his poor skills at playing any deck).

This was the same situation that resulted in Cycling being nerfed (to the ground), so therefore I see not other way out than remove NM (and other cards).

However, this can not be a single change, other things must be implemented to reduce the time I takes to play a match, like animation speed, information in the user Interface, so the play experience is significantly improved across the board. 

Mark_Tedin

starfall said:

Mark_Tedin said:

The pro-nerf minority needs only to create several topics on the same subject and to lobby intensively on other topics in order to impose their opinion.

If it helps, we feel exactly the same about the anti-nerf minority.

if 51% means a minority and 39% means a majority then you are correct,

*According to the poll: https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/78167/should-they-nerf-bsz/p1

By the way, I do not see several anti-nerf topics.
But the pro-nerf lobby did quite well:

-https: //forums.d3go.com/discussion/78158/give-everyone-bsz-or-remove-it#latest
-https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/77982/should-one-turn-wins-be-a-thing#latest
-https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/78265/well-i-tried#latest
-https: //forums.d3go.com/discussion/77740/copy-card-rule-change#latest
-https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/77892/are-s3-loop-decks-all-we-have-left#latest
-https: //forums.d3go.com/discussion/77962/lets-do-some-card-balancing#latest
-https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/77777/blue-needs-a-nerf#latest

Stormcrow

No

Tremayne said:

However, this can not be a single change, other things must be implemented to reduce the time I takes to play a match, like animation speed, information in the user Interface, so the play experience is significantly improved across the board. 

I don't use Naru Meha for speed (I don't really use her for anything tbh) but I am 110% of the opinion that removing unnecessary animations and reducing loading times to shorten the overall length of matches would be waaay more important and valuable time spent by the devs than literally any change to any card or cards that they could ever possibly make.

Tremayne

Yes

@Stormcrow - speed as in you have to make a deck that wins faster than the benchmark set by a NM/quasiduplicate or similar combo. Without statistics to provide accurate numbers, let us say that NM/QD will win in 6 (don’t focus on the number or the combo) rounds on average, then you need to play with a deck that will always win faster than that benchmark, e.g. 6 rounds (or whatever).

wait to long to win and you risk being killed by some combo. Is that any clearer now?

Stormcrow

No

Ah I see, but you're talking about speed as in "number of turns" whereas I think the vast majority of people on this forum who talk about decks that "win fast" don't mean it in terms of turns, or necessarily care about the number of terms, they mean the actual minutes of playtime per match.

Tengu316

No

jimpark said:

oh god.. you guys do what you want..

just reduce loading times and animations. make the game faster now that you guys already got the nerfs you wanted early on.

AMEN! Start a poll about THIS (not even going to go into a slow meta and just plain silly MtG translations)!

Julie71

No

Tbt they already killed that one nerf combo with vi not casting if no opponent creatures are on the board.

Julie71

No

bobby_2613 said:

*Sigh* The infinite loop here is always the same people asking for cards to be nerfed... :rolling_eyes:

What he said. Enough already.