MArcomage

I think this card should be a little more attractive.
Maybe give less wall to the enemy (80?) or some recruits production.

I think the secret to this card - at least in normal mode - is that 90% of the time, the only reason to play it is to play Crugg on the next turn and destroy your opponent's tower (Crugg with 8 barbarians is -48 tower). In that case, the wall is irrelevant.

or you can play devastator and get the enemy wall down to -80 and then 40 attack and then keep playing other Barbarians, provided you have 100-200 recruits

dindon wrote:
I think the secret to this card - at least in normal mode - is that 90% of the time, the only reason to play it is to play Crugg on the next turn and destroy your opponent's tower (Crugg with 8 barbarians is -48 tower). In that case, the wall is irrelevant.

Yes, if you're lucky enough and your opponent has tower <= 48 and you have enough recruits to play Crugg, at the time you play this card.

Lord wrote:
or you can play devastator and get the enemy wall down to -80 and then 40 attack and then keep playing other Barbarians, provided you have 100-200 recruits

Devastator is of no real use. First of all you count that your opponent will have 0 wall, which is not always the case. Moreover, as you said you need a lot of recruits to play Devastator effectively and in a Barbarian deck it's not easy to gather all that recruits because you actually spending them during the course of the game. Maybe this card is only useful in decks that doesn't spend too much recruits.

Exactly, you are not gonna use a Barbarian deck to have this card. It's a more suitable addition for Alliance and other resource accumulation decks (or recruits accumulating decks).

I have this in my Legend/Mage deck and it works very well.
I also summoned it in an Alliance/Illusion deck and the one time I used it so far it was very useful.

really, Crugg the destroyer is totally wrong in this card.

All you need is 26 recruits and your opponent to have 48 or less tower. In almost all my games the second is true and i can easily gather the recruits, so i think it's a good rare to have.

Now this card (although not used against me recently) is in the rank of Dark Horde and General's Hand. It gives you 100 recruits, with which you can play Devastator (120 attack right there) followed by Warchief (46 attack based on recruits cost of Devastator) and still have 40 recruits to play miscellaneous other Barbarians.

All this with the cost of 1 Recruit. Since it can be compared to General's Hand and Dark Horde, let's make its cost similar. Perhaps 30R sounds more reasonable and remove Warchief from the summoned cards and reduce the wall gain to 80 from 120.

I agree that this card is overpowered. I've used it for a lot of cheap early (and late) wins.

However, it can be hard countered by a common, Purifying Fire (I learned this the hard way).

true, but it's kind of a very narrow situation to counter it like that. I don't think it's a bad card, just that its cost is very low

What if its cost was 30R and instead of recruits =100 it was recruits +100?
I think that would be better

I agree

I suggest making it like I've already proposed in its concept: http://arcomage.netvor.sk/?location=Concepts_details&current_concept=1175

Otherwise, leave it as it is (1 R cost, same cards) but don't give any recruits bonus, or very few (+10 for example).

Please...do something with that card. It kills simply the game.

Pyfty wrote:
Please...do something with that card. It kills simply the game.

the funny thing is that you won the game in wich I've played it.
anyway I agree, I hope that in the next update (easter?) it will be nerfed.

Lord wrote:
Otherwise, leave it as it is (1 R cost, same cards) but don't give any recruits bonus, or very few (+10 for example).

To me this sounds like the best solution, i wold also reduce cost of Atlantis to 1 gem becouse it is week comperd to other cards of the similar efect.

The main "problem" is, that it is now very useful in EVERY deck in EVERY time...
I suggest, to change it: R +40 instead of :=100. So you can play devestator normally "at once" and afterwards only the "better hand" remains.
When I get the card I even play expensive green cards in advance (to cripple the opponent before), when R<10 Reunion is played...
In the changed way you had to gather some more R first, before playing it... this also makes it more worthy in a "dungeon-power-deck"... or, where it should be: In a barbarian deck.

Another idea would be, to include "If barbarian-tokens are set".
...or even: If selected card is barbarian... this would make it a "barbarian-deck-only"-card... but dunno, if this is wished...
You could also let devestator only appear, if barb-tokens set or if selected was barb.

Another idea, making it "more barbarian-like":
instead of R:=100
Recruits: +N
N=total summoning cost of barbarians in hand.
another option (eg. if too hard to implement):
rec.-prod. x 10N (N number of barbs in hand)

This way, non-barb-decks would get (normally) no recruits (or even no rec.-prod), whilst in a real barbarian deck, the effect could be almost the same.

PLEASE! Change this card for the easter update, if possible... it unbalances the game so often, even in a situation, where you have a "crappy" hand.

I can say with certainty that this is one of the cards being improved for the imminent update.