MArcomage

It should be uncommon in my opinion: there are no other commons that can lower enemy tower by 10, and it is really cheap. it's very nasty in both mode (hidden non hidden)

Just be glad it doesn't give -15 tower like it did when it was first released :P

I agree though. I think this card is still a little bit too good.

I agree as well, it should be an uncommon, although it must be said that it gives a certain strategic advantage in non-hidden mode, where players won't play or discard cards opposite of this one as they are afraid of the counterattack, and will only play such a card if they are desperate or if the loss of 10 tower will be compensated. So I agree with the Uncommon change (or a cost change), but we shouldn't change its effect.

Leave it at common but lower the damage: -1 if not triggered, 5 if triggered. You could even change the cost to 1 to make it more appealing.

I think it would be too weak. Note that two conditions needs to be satisfied to get the major effect.

It's somewhere in between c/u

c:
Slightly 2 powerful (so nerf it)

u:
Reversed (so boost it)

As for the 2 condition thingy: one of the conditions is automatically met the next turn. And how would you respond? You want to actively discard a common? You can still play the current card in the matching slot that 1 turn (if you can pay it) But after that it's pretty much a wasted slot. Don't underestimate the paralysing effect of this card.

I've been using this card a lot lately, and I agree that its damage potential is high in comparison to other Commons. Even so, I wouldn't change it much, and I don't think moving it to the Uncommon pool is the right choice. My suggestions would be to leave the cost, conditions, and -3 tower as they are, and to change the optimal tower damage to 8 or 7. This way, it would interact more cohesively with Javeliner and not be as potent a setup for Rescue and resistance as it is now.

As far as using it in Hidden matches goes, I've found that a good way to avoid it if you're afraid your opponent might have it in deck is to, if it's a viable option, try and play cards that are across from the slot(s) where he just played. As long as the New tag is there, you're safe, or better yet you may cause him to play it without thinking.

Sort of off your current topic, but I think the card could do with a re-phrasal:
Current:
If matching card is New and not New
Proposed:
If not New and matching card is New

This eliminates ambiguity in the sentence and stops it sounding non-sensical ("How can the matching card be New and not New?")

As for balance, I'm content with the current -3 tower always, - 5more conditionally.

It should be noted that when we were discussing this card previously, it did far more damage than it does now. The numbers I was suggesting, for example, were decreases. =)