All times are UTC + 1 hour


It is currently March 22nd, 2019, 11:25



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 11th, 2015, 00:41 
Newcomer
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015
Posts: 5
In-game name: QuickNFatal
siRisacc wrote:
My argument is based on how interraction in scrolls occur and the wording used in game. Other games examples are not in question here. I would however, like to see the cards you speak of and how they are worded.


If such a scroll was designed in Scrolls I would think it would contain wording similar to this:

"Before a spell played by your opponent resolves, do X."

This would allow interaction between the spell effect and the casting of a spell as you have mentioned. But as of now, no such wording exists in Scrolls.


Magic:
1-Intert any creature spell
2-http://magiccards.info/query?q=%21Counterspell
3-http://magiccards.info/query?q=%21Counterspell

Note that creature cards still count as spells.. since the game is called magic and all. : P

Since there's no instances or trap cards or stuff like that in scrolls there's less reason to have things trigger depending on play-order, but in what order things trigger should be consistent across the board and it should be easy to access information.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 11th, 2015, 09:35 
Skirmisher
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012
Posts: 86
Location: Canada!
In-game name: Cradstache
TheLordCrimson wrote:
Generally in CCG's things played or activated the last will be the first to resolve, which for scrolls would mean that arby would trigger before tempo theft.

The reason for this would be to let counter spells(magic) or traps(yu-gi-oh) react to whatever is played.


Sorry, going to have to stop you here; YugiohForums owner here.

In Yugioh, there's a distinction between Activation and Resolution of an effect. Cards that activate when another card resolves, such as Resonance, would occur in a separate chain after the current effect/chain fully resolves.

There's also the potential for missing opportunity if the effect is optional, but lets not get into that.

---

Now that we have that cleared up.

I'm going to note that Echomaton and Metal Wonder DO NOT have Resonance, and note that I do think it is more intuitive afterwards in all cases.

That said, I honestly don't mind it functioning either way.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 12th, 2015, 03:34 
Scholar
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013
Posts: 330
In-game name: siRisacc
Crad wrote:
I'm going to note that Echomaton and Metal Wonder DO NOT have Resonance, and note that I do think it is more intuitive afterwards in all cases.

That said, I honestly don't mind it functioning either way.


Exactly this! They really need their wording changed or revert them to how they were previously. Because right now they are worded as 'anti-resonance'.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 12th, 2015, 10:23 
General
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013
Posts: 910
In-game name: Squiddy
Something to note is that they have the exact same wording:

Echomaton: "When an opponent plays a spell..."
Metal wonder: "When your opponent plays a spell or enchantment..."
Snargl: *Resonance: Snargl's Countdown is increased by 1. Resonance - "Resonance effects are triggered when you play a spell."

When implies simultaneously, but since there is no such thing as simultaneously they have to activate either before the spell is resolved or after the spell is resolved - and I think that going either way is fine, just so long as they're consistent.

Ultimately, scrolls is a board game and has units that already exist before the spells/enchantments are played, and going by what little vague understanding we have of the game mechanics, things should trigger in the order they are played - and a unit will always have been played before a spell/enchantment, which is why it makes sense for their ability to trigger first.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 14th, 2015, 06:21 
Vanguard
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013
Posts: 114
In-game name: clamlol
Be sure to check out my personal balance thread too!
Squiddy wrote:

:decay Decay :decay



Primarily buffs, because damn son.

[list][*]Damning Curse - I like it as is because it can be played early on. For a faction which doesn't exactly excel at gaining resources, every resource counte in the beginning.
[*]Baleful Witch - Yes.
[*]Atrophy - I making it an enchantment that permanently gives -1 Attack with an additional -4 on the turn it's played would be better.
[*]Arthritis - Yes.

[*]Bitter Root - Yes.

[*]Infected Gravelock - Yes, but make it 2/2/2. Otherwise it would be the clear frontrunner in the competition of 2/2/3 creatures.
[*]Slithering Form -Not a huge fan of your proposal, but the scroll is almost useless ATM so it's worth a try

[*]Mire Curse - Keep it as is. Mire Curse isn't the problem, Miasma Well is.

[*]Grisly Graft - 2 Decay. Sure, why not.

[*]Monstrosity - 3/2/4 The scroll does need a change, but not this. It'd be a little too strong, not to mention Monstrous Brood would have to be removed. Personally I like the idea of a 3/2/3 which wan deal damage and give opponent creatures -2 Move for 1 turn. If my Decay DC submission doesn't get accepted, I'd like to see this change.

[*]Pillar of Disease - Yes.

[*]Puppet Soldier - Ehh, might work...?

[*]Void Gate (AKA WORST STRUCTURE IN THE GAME) - Just give it Armor 1.

[*]Corpus Collector Sure. Although to be fair, the scroll is perfectly balanced against non-Energy factions already.

[*]Pest Dissimulator - Sure.
Poison & Stuff

I don't actually think there's a need to change poison in any way with the above changes, other than just increasing consistency in how Poison stuff works. All poison scrolls should be visually distinct at a glance, and all work in the same way mechanically - by relying on the Poison-effect, for synergy with the Miasma Well.

The changes:

[list][*]Ranger's Bane - Ya pretty sure this is a bug.

[*]Mire Curse See above comments.

[*]Blightbearer Fine as is.

:growth Growth :growth



Primarily nerfs, because damn son.

[list][*]Binding Root - Sure, why not.

[*]Bunny - Why even bother tinkering with this scroll? It's just a joke :/

[*]Earthbond - Yes.

[*]Eye of Eagle - Sure add a couple words :P

[*]Kinfolk Brave - Eh, maybe.

[*]Owl - 2/1/1. Sure.

[*]Vengeful Vaettr - No.

[*]Crone - Yes.

[*]Earthborn Mystic - I think just having her ability increase her Countdown by 3 would be better. (She wouldn't be the only scroll to reset it by a hard value– Tool Initiate is still around.)

[*]Fierce Tactics - Yes.

:order Order :order



Nerfs & Buffs

[list][*]Callback - Just give it Replenish. It's not something Order really needs, but it's a slight buff which would help multiresource-wise.

[*]Royal Infantryman - Dear god no. Not more armor for Decay to run up against. But the scroll does need a buff– maybe Magic Armor 1?

[*]Summons - Sure.

[*]Crown of Strength - Sure.

[*]Royal Banner I say keep it as is but make it increase the CD of all opponent units by 1.

[*]Ruse - I like it as is. Maybe Linger 6 tho.

[*]Metempsychosis - To be fair, SilverNightmare suggested this change on my thread first. But yes.

[*]Mystic Altar - Funny you brought this up, I tried to make a Mystic Altar Beetle Stone Machine Divinator Vengeance Veil Searing Shackles double Resonant Helm deck today to try to get some use out of the scroll... and it failed. So yes, I like this change.

[*]Righteous Partisan - "Fewer," not "less"!!! >:L And it should only give +1 Health- no 3-cost Sisters of the Bear.

[*]Reloras - 3/2/4. Eh sure.

[*]Gallant Defender - Sure, but "fewer"!!!!!

[*]Wings Charger - Fine as is.

[*]Arby - Yes, and give him CD 6.

[*]Imperial Resources - Yes.

:energyEnergy :energy



Not many changes to Energy actually.

[list]
[*]Golem Skin - An improvement, but I still like my idea (Cost 1 Surge: +X Health and +1 Attack) better.

[*]Grave Gruel - Keep it as is, but maybe change to Cost 1.

[*]Concentrate Fire - Yes.

[*]Ember Bonds - An improvement, but I still like my idea (if destroyed by magic damage, draw 1 scroll) and SilverNIghtmare's (also gives moving damage like Searing Shackles) better.

[*]Hired marksman - 3/2/3. Yes.

[*]Cannon Automaton - 5/2/5. Yes.

Subtype changes



I've already sent these off to Mohjang, but I figured it wouldn't hurt to get your feedback on it:

[list]
[*]Effigy of the Queen I think Totem is more fitting.

[*]Nog Nest - Yus the idea is gaining support :D

[*]Charge Coil - No, Atrillery is for projectiles.

[*]Fulmination Conduit - Sure.

[*]Snargl Omelette - Sure.

[*]Anima Conduit - See Nog Nest

[*]Ether Pump - See Charge Coil

I know that you might be reluctant to apply the "Forge" subtype to structures other than Automata Forge, which is why I suggest that "Forge" is renamed to "Spawner".
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 14th, 2015, 22:37 
General
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013
Posts: 910
In-game name: Squiddy
Thanks for the spelling corrections :P

Added High Guard, tweaked Pillar, and tweaked the Stump.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 16th, 2015, 12:05 
Infantryman
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013
Posts: 13
In-game name: Volafortis
Not a fan of the Royal Infantryman change, just because I don't think being able to grant mass armor leads to good gameplay. If you manage to protect a row or two with these at the back, it'll be very hard to slog your way through that row in combat, and mass removal damage is incredibly expensive. If you spend spot removal on this, you'll likely find yourself just dying to the Reloras or Skirmisher you wanted to kill instead.

It's a particularly rough change for growth if you combine it with the suggested changes to Kinfolk Brave, since Owl, even with 2 Attack is easily Kabonk'd by Order. Ragged Wolf and Kinfolk Brave would suddenly both be dead cards, completely shut down by this change.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 16th, 2015, 13:07 
Vanguard
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013
Posts: 193
Yeah I admit order already is pretty hard to deal with because of armor. But of course, if other factions get buffs to their damage potential, order needs to get buffs or options to deal with that in return. Since order's units are both it's idol damagers as well as it's only way for removal, there must be ways to counteract new shenanigans.

But as it is now, giving order even more armor options will make it pretty OP vs growth.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 19th, 2015, 13:08 
General
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013
Posts: 910
In-game name: Squiddy
Changed Bitter Root to now do a melee attack and poison stuff when it deals damage to them.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 19th, 2015, 13:25 
Vanguard
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013
Posts: 193
Squiddy wrote:
Changed Bitter Root to now do a melee attack and poison stuff when it deals damage to them.


Melee structures for the win. Waiting for the chuck noris memorial.

"Chuck Norris Memorial"
Cost: 1 Order
Structure: Memorial
0/-/4
Description: At the beginning of controlling player's turn, Chuck Norris memorial destroys the foremost opponent unit on the same lane if health is less than 4. If a unit is destroyed this way, increase current wild by 3.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 19th, 2015, 20:35 
Scholar
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013
Posts: 430
In-game name: Cantor
Machine priest cost to 2. I was extremely surprised when I was reminded recently that they increased its cost when they changed its ability.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 20th, 2015, 13:25 
General
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013
Posts: 910
In-game name: Squiddy
Machine Priest added, Rigged added, and Feedback Jolt changed.
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 20th, 2015, 21:23 
General
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013
Posts: 558
In-game name: Paralykeet
Most of these are entirely unnecessary- and while I like the Damning Curse and Feedback Jolt suggestions, condensing tweaks, and promoting buffs more than nerfs is probably the better place to be right now.

My suggestion for IR, however is...

"Draw 2 scrolls
Increase your current Order by 3"

instead of the grotesque mess of a Scroll we currently have (making it a digging tool, instead of a late-game-in-a-can)

_________________
Spoiler: [show]

Check out my Community of Heroes project :D
Erratakeet Strikes!
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 26th, 2015, 19:59 
Spearman
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015
Posts: 27
In-game name: Scroller49er
These seem pretty balanced
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [Balance] Nerfs, buffs, and lateral tweaks post-release
PostPosted: January 26th, 2015, 21:01 
Scholar
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2013
Posts: 430
In-game name: Cantor
That seems pretty poor actually. it's a draw 2 spell for 4 order, already kind of poor. (Royal inspiration and heritage would like a word with you.) but it has the advantage of not having a condition like those two do, so fair enough, BUT WAIT it does have a condition, you can't cast it until you've ramped to 7? yeah. no good. If Imperial is still considered too strong (I'm not convinced it is, often when IR is played the order player just dies because they aren't developing their board) Then just removing the unit healing may be enough. would reduce some of its utility, most notably the poison removal
Top
  Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC + 1 hour


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron