is it me or is foretell lacking oompfh?

andrewvanmarle

What bongo said....

There are two or three cards that help speed up breaking foretold cards, all creatures that otherwise aren't very good.

I'm missing cards like a support that removes shield when you play a card or spells with a pop a foretell side effect.

And I really don't get why we cant foretell more than 1 of the same card. Just make it non-reinforcible.
Like food tokens.... 

Gunmix25

andrewvanmarle said:

I'm not looking for it to be broken mind you (no fair JTwod), but I have a feeling that playing foretell without any gem popping abilities or felf support destroy is just counter productive.

It needs too much comboing to work.

It would be lods better if you could make multiple gems for the same card. and I think the shield count is too high to play with anything but support poppers.

I mean just try to destroy a supprt by matching. gems, it's almost impossible.....

Honestly I would like Foretell to have an additional effect that supports the concept. i.e. if 3 or more snow gems popped then it is reduced by 2 shields. I thought maybe Landfall of the PW's colors but that maybe too easy. Just to avoid having to be parasitic to korvold or a few other cards to make these work faster.

as a whole I find foretell to be just fine aside from what I mentioned above. Foretell is a strong effect so the reward is high when it does pop. 

Tremayne

@Gunmix25 - interesting idea. My immediate response is that landfall would still be a better mechanism to use. If any landfall in the colour of the support would result in a reduction in the shield value, I think that we would have a manageable situation.

The drawback would still be a situation where your could have a bad timing issue, it I be a lot better than the current mechanism.

Bil

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

HomeRn

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

andrewvanmarle

HomeRn said:

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

Also why only one support per card?

If playing aftermath (for instance) one can have as many aftermath gems as one could generate.

Avahad

andrewvanmarle said:

HomeRn said:

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

Also why only one support per card?

If playing aftermath (for instance) one can have as many aftermath gems as one could generate.

Aftermath took a bit of work to get the gems on the board.
Foretell just needs the card to be in your hand.
if there wasn’t an upper limit of sorts (I fully agree that 1 is too low) then you would just need 1 card to draw cards to hand (Song) and 9 Foretell cards and you would literally not have gain much (if any) mana for the match.

andrewvanmarle

Avahad said:

andrewvanmarle said:

HomeRn said:

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

Also why only one support per card?

If playing aftermath (for instance) one can have as many aftermath gems as one could generate.

Aftermath took a bit of work to get the gems on the board.
Foretell just needs the card to be in your hand.
if there wasn’t an upper limit of sorts (I fully agree that 1 is too low) then you would just need 1 card to draw cards to hand (Song) and 9 Foretell cards and you would literally not have gain much (if any) mana for the match.

Ah no, but that wouldnt work: you need to exile them from hand not discard.

So any card you foretell is a card you cannot play from hand.....

 (and aftermath cards would work with discrads AND playing the card itself, which was quite good with the right deck in mind)

Honestly if I try to imagine gameplay based on the foretell cards we have and  the possibility to have ultiple foretell gems (even with lower shield count or more cards to pop them)  I'd say it would still be balanced: you can only foretell as many cards as you have in hand after draw, and then you have to make the right matches to get the cards foretold. still slow going.....


And the effects arent that super powerfull either. Good, but not winning.

Avahad

andrewvanmarle said:

Avahad said:

andrewvanmarle said:

HomeRn said:

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

Also why only one support per card?

If playing aftermath (for instance) one can have as many aftermath gems as one could generate.

Aftermath took a bit of work to get the gems on the board.
Foretell just needs the card to be in your hand.
if there wasn’t an upper limit of sorts (I fully agree that 1 is too low) then you would just need 1 card to draw cards to hand (Song) and 9 Foretell cards and you would literally not have gain much (if any) mana for the match.

Ah no, but that wouldnt work: you need to exile them from hand not discard.

So any card you foretell is a card you cannot play from hand.....

 (and aftermath cards would work with discrads AND playing the card itself, which was quite good with the right deck in mind)

Honestly if I try to imagine gameplay based on the foretell cards we have and  the possibility to have ultiple foretell gems (even with lower shield count or more cards to pop them)  I'd say it would still be balanced: you can only foretell as many cards as you have in hand after draw, and then you have to make the right matches to get the cards foretold. still slow going.....


And the effects arent that super powerfull either. Good, but not winning.

Oops I see my choice of card draw card wasn’t a good one. I wasn’t referring to it discarding from hand.
when you foretell (exile) from hand- it triggers songs card draw (the support counts as ‘cast’ (wrongly). So theoretically you draw then foretell until you fill the board. Then matches would be guaranteed during your opponents turn after the board resets. You end up with a hand full of cards ready to be cast next turn. (And yes Greg gets nice mana from popping your gems on his turn).
The game would probably freeze before it got to this point anyway tho

jtwood

Avahad said:

Oops I see my choice of card draw card wasn’t a good one. I wasn’t referring to it discarding from hand.
when you foretell (exile) from hand- it triggers songs card draw (the support counts as ‘cast’ (wrongly). So theoretically you draw then foretell until you fill the board. Then matches would be guaranteed during your opponents turn after the board resets. You end up with a hand full of cards ready to be cast next turn. (And yes Greg gets nice mana from popping your gems on his turn).
The game would probably freeze before it got to this point anyway tho

Man, this is a two-for-one: Not only is this an important bug, but it's probably only exploitable by humans, since the AI still hasn't shown any indication that it can foretell from its hand

Bil

andrewvanmarle said:

HomeRn said:

Bil said:

Another pretty easy solution would be to reduce the number of Shields.
3 or 4 IS way too much, but 1 Shield for "weak" effects and 2 Shields for highest effects would be much more playable.

Agreed - 3 to 4 shields right now almost necessitates secondary cards to assist with popping them.  Which in regards to how it is supposed to work in paper format, doesn't make much sense!

Also why only one support per card?

If playing aftermath (for instance) one can have as many aftermath gems as one could generate.

That's another disapointing aspect of the mechanic in it's current form.

Tutaha

Fortell should be refactored to be something like in paper magic. To be something like a mix between cycling and buried.

In order to foretell a card: drain 2-3 mana from your hand, the card goes to your exile. You can cast it from your exile by draining the remaining mana needed from your hand minus 2-3 from foretelling it.

Asylamb

I thought Foretell would be something similar to Cycling+Adventure:
1) Exile it from hand for X mana (similar to Cycling)
2) Get the foretold card back to hand (like Creature side of Adventures) for a lower/half cost
3) The foretold card is disabled until your next turn (because in paper you can't Foretell and play the foretold card during the same turn).

Of course they wouldn't change the Foretold supports mechanic since it's already tightly connected with many cards, BUT I think replacing regular Foretold supports with countdown supports (like 2-turn Clues from Investigate mechanic) would make it more playable, especially if the Foretold support ends up in a bottom corner.

So, you Foretell "Haunting Voyage", for example, you get a 4-turn Foretold support. If you have a way to destroy it or match it, good for you. If not, you are guaranteed to get the Foretold card in 4 turns.

Asylamb

I also think that the shield count should be standardized based on the Rarity, the same way Landforming effects are the same for the same Rarity: C - 1 shield, UC - 2 shields, R - 3 shields, MR/MP - 4 shields.
It makes no sense that a Common like Doomskar Titan has 4 shields when its Foretold effect is not even permanent.

ambrosio191

Asylamb said:

I thought Foretell would be something similar to Cycling+Adventure:
1) Exile it from hand for X mana (similar to Cycling)
2) Get the foretold card back to hand (like Creature side of Adventures) for a lower/half cost
3) The foretold card is disabled until your next turn (because in paper you can't Foretell and play the foretold card during the same turn).

Of course they wouldn't change the Foretold supports mechanic since it's already tightly connected with many cards, BUT I think replacing regular Foretold supports with countdown supports (like 2-turn Clues from Investigate mechanic) would make it more playable, especially if the Foretold support ends up in a bottom corner.

So, you Foretell "Haunting Voyage", for example, you get a 4-turn Foretold support. If you have a way to destroy it or match it, good for you. If not, you are guaranteed to get the Foretold card in 4 turns.

This was my thoughts exactly. The supports need to be self destructing, or their shield counts need to come way down. As it is, I only foretell by accident when making room in my hand, and I haven't triggered one outside of the training missions. 

Avahad

jtwood said:

Avahad said:

Oops I see my choice of card draw card wasn’t a good one. I wasn’t referring to it discarding from hand.
when you foretell (exile) from hand- it triggers songs card draw (the support counts as ‘cast’ (wrongly). So theoretically you draw then foretell until you fill the board. Then matches would be guaranteed during your opponents turn after the board resets. You end up with a hand full of cards ready to be cast next turn. (And yes Greg gets nice mana from popping your gems on his turn).
The game would probably freeze before it got to this point anyway tho

Man, this is a two-for-one: Not only is this an important bug, but it's probably only exploitable by humans, since the AI still hasn't shown any indication that it can foretell from its hand

Seems they may have ‘fixed’ the song triggers in the 4.8.1.
At least I haven’t noticed it since then whilst I’ve been mastering some cards.

Tutaha

Maybe fortell tokens could lose 1 shield at the start of your turn. If it proves to be too fast, increase the number of shields in the cards by 1

andrewvanmarle

The event showed what foretell - could- be with the right enablers.

(same with snow)

@Oktagon_Support can we have an addendum set like Daxos vs kalemne to help fix the matter?