Black Infantry Arbalest vs Fire Scorpion

[TheWalkingHawking]

Black Infantry Arbalest vs Fire Scorpion

I'm sorry if this isn't the place to post this, but if this is intended, then definitely i don't get what the devs were thinking. To the point:
Black Infantry Arbalest: 5 Strength/Ranged/Loyal - Remove 3 strength from an opposing non-Gold unit. If the unit's strength is higher than base, remove 5 strength instead.
Fire Scorpion: 5 Strength/Siege/Loyal/Machine - Remove 3 strength from an opposing non-Gold unit.
Is Ranged row considered inferior than Siege by devs? Is the Machine tag supposed to make up for the reduced utility?
As stated above, if this is intended, i don't get it.

 

[GrizzledLone]

No, this is not the right forum section. That would be General Discussion - you obviously mention no technical difficulty with those cards. But even there you have to give more info. As for now I don't get what it is that's troubling you.

Two different cards, if they were, why even bother and make two different ones? One of them is not in a category the other a Machine. At the time there is no association between a Nilfgaard card and Machines - the only one is currently a Northern Realms'.

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

Both have same strength, both are bronze... one does 3 damage and the other one does 3 with the added chance of being 5. Creating 2 cards almost identical with only a real difference that's making one simply worse than the other makes zero sense to me.

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

No, this is not the right forum section. That would be General Discussion - you obviously mention no technical difficulty with those cards. But even there you have to give more info.

Even if i kinda agree with you, let the Mods decide that.

As for now I don't get what it is that's troubling you.

Both have same strength, both are bronze... one does 3 damage and the other one does 3 with the added chance of being 5. Creating 2 cards almost identical with only a real difference that's making one simply worse than the other makes zero sense to me.

 

[Riven-Twain]

It does seem a bit odd. Please, go ahead and send Support a feedback note about it. Possibly, the abilities for these units should be swapped?

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

It does seem a bit odd. Please, go ahead and send Support a feedback note about it. Possibly, the abilities for these units should be swapped?

If they were swapped we would have the same scenario. This is how i see it:
*Arbalest: 5 Str + 3-5 damage = 8-10 value
*Fire Scorpion: 5 Str + 3 damage = 8 value
So, Arbalest is a card with a small situational factor, but Scorpion can't be better than Arbalest in any situation, so there's no real choice.
As an example of how the cards should have been released, we got 2 very similar cards with a real choice in ST:
*Dwarven Skirmisher: 4(+2)Str + 3 Damage = 7-9 value
*Dol Blathanna Archer: 5 Str + 3 Damage = 8 value

Conclusion. Arbalest should be a 4 Str or do 2-4 damage.
Just sent a less detailed ticket, so i think i'm gonna send a new one.

 

[LDiCesare]

Arbalest is common and strictly superior to fire scorpion which is rare.
Unless you consider being onsiege row to be a weakness... So the OP is right, there is a problem with these cards. At the very least, the better one should be the rarer, but it would be even better if they did something different or had different values.

 

[Bonogringo]

I'd like to say that being a siege instead of ranged is a better position in this game. You become immune to aard weather combo. Wich is still real even tho he got nerfed.
So the maybe 2 points difference doesn't matter much if you can have some situational advantage too.

 

[Siergain]

Maybe in future some neuetral carts supporting machines will come into play. Ringht now 3 out of 5 factions have machines and this theme may be used for next sets of cards.

 

[leonardo_santoso]

I'd like to say that being a siege instead of ranged is a better position in this game. You become immune to aard weather combo. Wich is still real even tho he got nerfed.
So the maybe 2 points difference doesn't matter much if you can have some situational advantage too.

That is only true if they both have weather immune. Since none have them, it does not matter weather you are immune to aard or not, since weather will wreck both of you. Also, you can't really quantify a card rarity based on their combo/weakness with other card. otherwise that potion that add 4 to all instances of a card should be legendary since it can add up to 48 points in a single use.

If siege is indeed a better position then every other siege card should be slightly weaker then range or melee card. This is not the case. The Dev definitely screwed up in here, they should switch the rarity.

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

Just noticed most of you got something wrong. Rarity doesn't mean anything in terms of strength. Cards shouldn't be(and aren't) balanced taking rarity as a factor.

 

[leonardo_santoso]

Just noticed most of you got something wrong. Rarity doesn't mean anything in terms of strength. Cards shouldn't be(and aren't) balanced taking rarity as a factor.

I'm sorry but that does not make any sense at all. Rarity is always connected to strength, legendary card will always be stronger than common card. otherwise why would you pay 800 scraps for it? Why would you only get a slim chance of getting legendary compared to other card? In all card game that I've known of, higher rarity always mean that the card is better, maybe not higher in raw power but in it's overall potential and skill

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

I'm sorry but that does not make any sense at all. Rarity is always connected to strength, legendary card will always be stronger than common card.

You're wrong and there are tons of examples:
Sigrdrifa is epic, while Morkvarg is legendary.
Clan Brokvar Hunter is rare, Clan Tuirseach Axeman is common.
Hjalmar, Kambi, Lugos, all legendary, Birna Bran is epic.
Dijkstra is legendary, Shany is epic, damn, even Pavetta is legendary...
I can keep going all day long.

otherwise why would you pay 800 scraps for it?

Because deck building isn't about adding every strong card to your deck.

Why would you only get a slim chance of getting legendary compared to other card?

Collecting reasons.

In all card game that I've known of, higher rarity always mean that the card is better, maybe not higher in raw power but in it's overall potential and skill

The real factor deciding wether a card is stronger than other or not, is card color(bronze/silver/gold), that's why we got deck-building limits based on color and not on rarity. If we hadn't another category apart from color, every gold/silver card would either be too expensive to craft(making the game really unenjoyable for new players), or too cheap(making it too easy to collect all cards and making it too hard for CDPR to get any profit from the game).

 

[ThePrody]

yeah, being on the seige row is a bit better protection against elements since fog is more common , also in current meta maybe you want to overstack a row in order to clear it easily , i guess that's the reason why you might have FS over arbalest in your deck (more siege units) but in reality is kind of a dead card that nobody uses over the arbalest , either arbalest gets a minus 1 STR or the scorpion a +1STR - that will make them more different

 

[leonardo_santoso]

You're wrong and there are tons of examples:
Sigrdrifa is epic, while Morkvarg is legendary.
Clan Brokvar Hunter is rare, Clan Tuirseach Axeman is common.
Hjalmar, Kambi, Lugos, all legendary, Birna Bran is epic.
Dijkstra is legendary, Shany is epic, damn, even Pavetta is legendary...
I can keep going all day long.

Uhmmm, what are you talking about? Sigrdrifa and Morkvarg is not comparable, they don't have the same skill set. If you want to compare Sigrdrifa compared it with another ressurection unit like Priestess of Freya. Now would it make sense if we have a silver card that has the same strength and skill as priestess of freya but is legendary? if you said that make sense, then I rest my case.

Morkvarg is comparable to Olgierd, see how one of them is epic and the other is legendary?

Clan Brokvar Hunter and Tuirseach Axeman is also not comparable, infact all of the unit that you mentioned is not comparable. It's like comparing prized winning cow against cleaver.

You do not compare only the strength or raw power you also compared the skill. That's why comparing to card that has different skill is complex. But two card that has similar skill, that's logic 101.

Because deck building isn't about adding every strong card to your deck.

Hmmm yes it is, but not strong in a sense that they have the highest strength in the game but the potential to be one. You see the definition of strong depends on a lot of things in a card game. But generally speaking yes, if you have a "strong" card you win.

Collecting reasons.

Can't argue with collecting reason, since most collectors are insane IMO . But in term of gameplay this does not make any sense.

The real factor deciding wether a card is stronger than other or not, is card color(bronze/silver/gold), that's why we got deck-building limits based on color and not on rarity. If we hadn't another category apart from color, every gold/silver card would either be too expensive to craft(making the game really unenjoyable for new players), or too cheap(making it too easy to collect all cards and making it too hard for CDPR to get any profit from the game).

I don't understand, if we do not have any other category beside color how come every gold and silver card will be expensive. We have no other color so there should not be any gold/silver card.

 

[leonardo_santoso]

Is Ranged row considered inferior than Siege by devs? Is the Machine tag supposed to make up for the reduced utility? As stated above, if this is intended, i don't get it.

Also, if you think rarity is not equal to card strength what are you confused of? One card is simply stronger than the other, there's nothing to be confused about.

 

[TheWalkingHawking]

Your posts

I give up, i basically disagree on every point you made, so i won't argue anymore, there's no way we will get to an agreement

 

[Knightlon]

The rarer cards (e.g. Legendary) are not better because of their basic strength but because of their potential. Gold Gerald is epic and he is just plainly 12 strength, while Iorveth is 6 strength and deals another 6 damage, which is also 12 in the sum. Iorveth, though, can kill a unit with a running ability (like Ocvist) on the board and then he brings much more value. However, if there are no units on the board and you play Iorveth, he is only worth 6. Same goes for example for Borkh - he is definitely not good in any deck (which Geralt quite is), if you play high strength mahakam defenders, you definitely don't need to scorch them. But again, he can bring much power if used correctly. And that is the thing about rarity.

 

[leonardo_santoso]

The rarer cards (e.g. Legendary) are not better because of their basic strength but because of their potential. Gold Gerald is epic and he is just plainly 12 strength, while Iorveth is 6 strength and deals another 6 damage, which is also 12 in the sum. Iorveth, though, can kill a unit with a running ability (like Ocvist) on the board and then he brings much more value. However, if there are no units on the board and you play Iorveth, he is only worth 6. Same goes for example for Borkh - he is definitely not good in any deck (which Geralt quite is), if you play high strength mahakam defenders, you definitely don't need to scorch them. But again, he can bring much power if used correctly. And that is the thing about rarity.

Thank you, that's what I've been trying to say all along. Black infantry has way more potnetial than fire scorpion, hence the strange rarity decision.