MArcomage

Free multiplayer on-line fantasy card game

Please log in

MeCho on 19:33, 3. Jan, 2016
Nice concept but how about more brick cost and less recruit cost because now it is too strong for Unliving decks
Zaton on 19:47, 3. Jan, 2016
Which is... okay? Since unliving decks in general are a bit of a letdown, really?

Individual unliving cards such as Petrified minotaur, and Stone archer are great, not to mention Genbu, but a whole deck of them has a huge amount of counters(Titan's heart being one very good saving grace, say). And I don't mean Elementalist here, but whole deck types just kicking them in the nuts. It's like if Undead and Demonic had five kinds of Holy decks against them instead of just one. I'm just going with the theme already present in the game. They are meant to be good cards who are difficult to play together. That's how they work. Might as well put in an exception for a change of pace.
DPsycho on 15:11, 5. Jan, 2016
Petrified Treant, Uncommon 9b16r
Nature. Unliving.
Enemy Wall:-34
Attack:12
Enemy gems: +9


I play Unliving more often than any other deck type, so I feel confident in my ability to assess this card. I agree that it is too powerful as currently proposed. 46 damage for only 9 bricks (it's very easy to accumulate recruits playing Unliving) as well as being an easy trigger for the keyword effect (this would often refund 15 bricks or more) makes this superior to far more expensive Uncommon Unliving choices. I recognize that granting gems to the opponent is part of the "cost" here, but gems are generally not going to help them recover from the damage dealt. In some decks, it would enable the opponent to attack in response, but quite often the gems may be useless to them.

I propose increasing the brick cost to at least 15 and switching the recruit cost to gems to make it more difficult to play. Reducing the wall damage is probably necessary whether or not the cost is adjusted.
Zaton on 15:44, 5. Jan, 2016
Hm. Since you hoist your own petard I can only agree to a price increase and damage reduction. You may know something I don't.

I would rather keep the Recruit cost however.

And, honestly, I would have to see your Unliving deck in action one day. Thus far the only times I've seen Unliving decks win is drawing into something monstrous, and that's true for pretty much any deck who ramped their resource production right. I might have just encountered tosh and drew an unfair conclusion. Are you up to anything of the sort?
DPsycho on 18:21, 5. Jan, 2016
Certainly.
MeCho on 10:12, 6. Jan, 2016
Okay so at first it was too strong now it is still quite good for Unliving but not so much for Nature if we reduced the cost of Recruits by 5 it would make little difference to Unliving decks but it would sure help Nature and it is viable because its quite underpowered compare to Ent by resource to effectivness
DPsycho on 16:40, 6. Jan, 2016
I'll admit that the fact it's also a Nature card didn't register with me at all.
Zaton on 01:33, 7. Jan, 2016
MeCho wrote:
resource to effectivness


MeCho wrote:
resource to effectivness


MeCho wrote:
resource to effectivness


<3!

<3!

*~*!
Lord_Earthfire on 18:54, 8. Jan, 2016
We got a special problem with this card:
Nature decks are recruit/gem based, making this card a far better choice than ent (although i have to admit that i think ent is a weak card in a dedicated nature deck).


Unliving decks are brick/gem based, making it more vaible in this sort of decks. and you need to take in mind that unliving cards can greatly boost the production. Hence, every unliving card needs a higher brick cost than you would normally use for a brick-card.

And in contrast to ent, this card deals not only wall damage, but tower damage eiother. Ents weakness comes from having the possibility to waste a big bunch of attack. this justifies the cost to recource ratio of that card. This card still gives an advantage even when your opponents wall is low.
MeCho on 12:24, 10. Jan, 2016
Actually Mud elemental and Rock elemental would have a similar net benefit for the cost compared to other Brick cards at 4 Unliving cards but can have quite a bit more steam with more Unliving which is perfectly OK and i dont think that Unliving cards cost or should cost more just because of the Keyword because other keywords have powerful benefits as well.Only Siege golem,Stone golem and ofcourse the infamous Stone gargoyle are cost ineffective while Genbu and Colossus of Kran are freaking monsters