MArcomage

Can anyone tell me exact formula of damage caused playing this card?
I'm a little confused with its description, is it 5 dmg for each facility and for every 10 resources (50 dmg for 50 resources), or something else?

First of all, please use the Cards section to create a discussion about a card (so it would be linked with the card). You just go to Cards section find the specific card and then push "Start discussion".

Now to your answer:

Damage = ((Quarry + Magic + Dungeons) * 5) + ((Bricks + Gems + Recruits) / 2)

the second part (Bricks + Gems + Recruits)/2 doesn't make sense if it's 5 damage for every 10 resources, since it will do additional damage. i.e. if someone has 306 resources, then they'll deal 153 damage, but by definition, only the first 300 resources should count and they should deal only 150 damage. The other version is that the 6 extra resources would count as their own "10 resources group") and they should deal also 5 damage, i.e 155 damage.

2-3 damage difference doesn't seem a lot, but it could mean death or victory in a lot of cases.

You're right. If you look at the code though, you'll see that it's actually calculated according to the wording of the card. The damage is:

($my_fac + floor($my_res / 10)) * 5

(Floor just means rounding down)

oh yes u r right :)

This card is a terrible rare.

1. It has terrible synergy with the Destruction keyword. "Destruction" is used to reduce enemy facilities, therefore reducing Catastrophe's damage to your enemy yet leaving it the same for you.
2. It has terrible synergy with the Nature keyword. Many Nature decks rely on Ancient Sage, which typically increases your facilities, therefore increasing the damage dealt to you.

While I understand that this card can be useful in rush decks, most of the time you end up killing yourself by using the card.

Instead, this card should be modified to something like...
1. Reduce damage, have it only affect enemy, and increase cost, or
2. Downgrade to uncommon, reduce damage, and only cost 1, or
3. Change damage formula to damage based on facilities reduced below 3 (similar to Mercenaries now), or
4. Remove keywords

Thoughts?

The card's main purpose is to dissuade your opponent from increasing stock and facilities. That it affects the player as well is what separates it from heavy attack cards and puts it among cards like Order of the White Lotus which could be more useful to have on hand to intimidate the opponent into behaving differently than played as soon as possible. I wouldn't make any of the the first three changes you suggest.

It's true that it doesn't have perfect synergy with its keywords, but it doesn't have to. It has the keywords because they make sense conceptually, not strategically. It's an excellent card with or without the keywords.

And in my opinion, Nature needs a few wildcards. (I mean, "nature" isn't supposed to be perfect and predictable, right?)

One of my favourite cards in the game. I've racked up a ton of wins (and ties) with this card, including in my nature deck, where it's not terribly unwelcome. As DPsycho said, it fits thematically with Destruction/Nature - it doesn't necessarily need to have synergy. (Just like Forest Dragon doesn't have synergy with the Dragon keyword.)

I wouldn't hate it too much if the destruction or nature keyword was removed, but please don't change the card's effect! It's unique and fun, and fulfills a special niche in the game's ecosystem.

The only thing I don't like about this card is having to tediously calculate the amount of damage it'll do. Preview solves this for the person holding the card, but not for their opponent. There's probably no way around this though (unless you give some way to preview opponent's cards, which Fithz Hood suggested to me a while back as something he'd like to see).

DPsycho wrote:
The card's main purpose is to dissuade your opponent from increasing stock and facilities... It's true that it doesn't have perfect synergy with its keywords...

Agreed, but it also punishes you for increasing yours, something you can't avoid without playing your other Nature rares, or lowering your opponents, which is exactly what Destruction does. I'm not saying it needs to be perfect, but it does the complete opposite of what the other cards do. It's not synergizing at all! Ha ha.

DPsycho wrote:
And in my opinion, Nature needs a few wildcards. (I mean, "nature" isn't supposed to be perfect and predictable, right?)

The only reason Catastrophe has the Nature keyword is due to Nature's dominance a while back. Plus if you're the one "controlling" Nature by playing the cards, shouldn't you be able to wield it effectively?

jbryant3 wrote:
Plus if you're the one "controlling" Nature by playing the cards, shouldn't you be able to wield it effectively?

I wouldn't think so, no. For a force this destructive, I wouldn't expect the one who invokes to be immune. This is far from being the first case of a suicide attack, or double-edged sword if you prefer, in games such as this.

The problem as I see it is that you're only looking at this card from the perspective of someone who's playing a Nature or Destruction deck. As dindon pointed out, there are other cards that don't mesh with what would seem to be the best strategy for using the majority of cards with a given keyword, but if they all acted toward the same goal, all cards of a given keyword would be the same. We have Unliving cards that reduce the opponent's tower. We have Soldiers that increase your tower or wall. We have Alliance that don't increase resource gain. They might not be what you expected to draw, but they might turn out to be what you need, and they make the game fun and strategic rather than a series of dice rolls.

This is one of those cards that you include in decks not focusing on the keyword, and it works very well with other strategies. Occasionally, it might by summoned by its keyword, and it could be useless, or it could be that you were playing an opponent with an Alliance deck who's just about to gain a resource victory...