MArcomage

Free multiplayer on-line fantasy card game

Please log in

DPsycho on 19:07, 11. Dec, 2015
Collision of worlds, Rare 65g
Destruction
All players suffer:
Facilities: -3
Tower := 1
Wall: -100
Stock := 0


This card is far too inexpensive for something that the player can (and will) only play when the opponent either has no 0-cost attack cards or the player has sufficient wall to survive and ensure a win on the following turn.

Something to bear in mind is that this turn will end with the opponent having 0/0/0 and the player of this card having 1/1/1 (or more if any facilities were 5+) due to production. I won't go through and count the Common cards that have Attack or Tower- with a cost of 1/1/1 or less, but it won't be an unlikely scenario.

All that aside, what's worse is the possibility of playing this card when it doesn't ensure a win right afterward, potentially as a stalling tactic. Typically, when a card "resets" some aspect of the game, it chooses one or two features. Having your wall and tower arbitrarily set or averaged can be annoying, but your stock and facilities are generally left intact. Alternately, having your resources drained and your facilities reduced can be a hindrance, but all your progress building or attacking is untouched. This concept is likely to erase the gains and losses of the entire match AND leave players with facilities set to 1, two entirely obnoxious scenarios that bleed the fun out of a match.

My proposals are to either retool this as an actual guaranteed insta-kill with a heftier cost or to scale back the effects either by making it conditional or having the player choose what elements to affect. Another option would be to have the reduction to facilities only affect the player of this card, still leaving the opponent with 0 stock but giving them the chance to recuperate if the death blow isn't dealt immediately but leaving the player of the card in dire straits outside of certain deck strategies (0-cost, self-cripple). And even then, I'm not sure I like that it hits three things: wall reduction as well as arbitrarily setting stock and tower.
Lord_Earthfire on 19:51, 11. Dec, 2015
Well, there are currently 14 cards that can end the game directly after this card was played.

The card was created with this cards in mind, creating a scenario of which player does at first fire an attack card (or a searing flame, i suppose). Of course it grinds down the game to a halt, but its not like bahamut and others doesn't directly end the game either(And i should compare to this card and increase the cost to 80g).

Possibly the card should leave the opponent's facilities intact, that was something i missed, thanks for pointing this out.

Edit o the card: Increased Gem cost to 80 and made the facility loss only affect yourself.
DPsycho on 05:16, 12. Dec, 2015
Much better now, in my opinion. =D
MeCho on 03:53, 14. Dec, 2015
And i think it was more viable with 65G cost.This card needs some serious conditions to win you the game where Bahamut will win you the game at 95% of the cases for 5 less cost and a less valuable resource. well maybe 65G is too little but 80G is truly too much it shouldnt cost more then 75 surely
DPsycho on 18:18, 14. Dec, 2015
If it were simply an attack card, perhaps, but the additional stock reduction has greater value as a disruption.