MArcomage

I suggest to change it this way:
enemy tower: -N
N=enemy tower/2 (max 70)

similar change could be applyed to citadel of Myr

This card is really weakened in long mode.

50*N/MaxT = N * (50/MaxT)

In normal mode, this truncates to 50/100 = 1/2 tower every time.

In long mode, this truncates to 50/200 = 1/4 tower every time.

Showing the math on the card as it is now is unnecessarily confusing for having only the two modes. If it's to stay as it is, I say we just have the card say in simplified terms what it does: Reduces opponent's tower by half in normal mode, or by one quarter in long mode.

However, I have to agree that it's really very awful for long mode as it stands presently. It should do the full half for any value less than 101. FH's suggestion above, having it do half but capping it, solves this problem nicely. I would have suggested capping it right at 50, but capping it higher is more interesting.

I suggest changing it back to halving enemy tower

I think it should be capped (50) and maybe lower the cost to 22 recruits.

Why? I think it's fine now — it's meant to counter tower rush decks, but it's too heavy for rush/tower- decks. It fits Unliving, Titan, resource+, tower+ and maybe Mage decks — none of those are THAT dangerous for tower rush strategy, so those (up to) 25 points of tower loss when your tower is over 100 aren't a big deal.

I kind of feel that -74 tower (long mode) is way too much for an uncommon, even when you play against Tower+ decks.

As someone who plays Unliving a lot and is usually on the receiving end of this card, here's my take.

As it is now, halving the tower is an excellent deterrent. If I have 120 tower and a bunch of cards that add 8-10, I'm looking at winning in four turns. But if this appears in my opponent's hand, I'm suddenly paralyzed. I could play those cards, but once I get above 140, this is going to knock my tower down to 70. Effectively, each of those tower+ cards really only did 4-5, and I knew it would happen. So, instead, I hold on and play different cards hoping to draw an Uncommon to add +30 or that allows me to target a discard, either of which forces the opponent to play it immediately. The mere presence of the card affects play, and I love that about this. Yes, even as the victim.

Cap it at 50, and this doesn't happen. There's no reason to stop adding to the tower bit by bit. There's no reason for the opponent to keep it for a while. It becomes a boring card.

On the other hand, if this is capped, one would want to play the card as soon as their opponent gets to 101 tower, because they would not gain anything waiting beyond that. This will result in a faster style of play avoiding "wasted" turns.

This card is overpowered in long mode you will play this card primarily on 2 conditions when enemy has 60 bricks and tower at 90 or tower at 75 and gems atleast at 38 therefore this card is guaranteed to deal atleast 38 tower damage therefore its cost should be ATLEAST that of Citadel of Myr

It's OP only against construction decks, which aren't that common. Almost useless against others.
It falls on the same category as Elementalist against Unliving. There are no complains about it just beacause Unliving are on bad spot rn.

Actually it is efficient in any deck that doesnt attack and u spam that card quite often as of recently ;)

And even using offensive deck its a solid play at 50 tower

Efreet wrote:
Actually it is efficient in any deck that doesnt attack and u spam that card quite often as of recently ;)

And even using offensive deck its a solid play at 50 tower

I don't see the point using it on offensive deck, there are much better choices. Even in -tower decks.
The only scenario this card is really op is in construction mirror matchup. (I don't even count res accum into consideration cuz almost nobody plays it).