Despite the suggestion could be good, the game will not change based on your needs
I would prefer if it made an Ally and an Enemy duel each other. ST has a lot of tools for controlling what's on a row so....
Pruny;n10350952 said:
Go ahead and quit, but before you complain againsts netdeckers try and think that cards like Iorveth are the only thing that are carrying non-dwarf archetypes. But what do I know, maybe the solution is to nerf Iorveth and Wardancer, I'm sure that'll resolve all problems with balance...
OG.laloquaint;n10351912 said:
Honestly, when I first saw this card introduced, I always assumed that's what it meant, that it had to be one of yours and one of theirs that duels (like a seltkirk with an extra body). When I first saw someone play it and duel two opponents I was just like "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat". I'm still in conflict with myself as to whether it's too powerful. I think forcing an ally and enemy to duel and raising his own value would be better than what he's currently at. It'd mean it'd still work well with something like dwarves who already have quite high base str, but I'm also not sure if he'd be able to get good value that way without some level of set up... Then again, there's plenty of golds out there that need some level of set up to be valuable, so it's not unreasonable to request that of meditation.
He might not be seen as quite as powerful were it not for the fact that ST in general are just in a very strong place right now.
Bondonkadonk;n10352332 said:
No that's definitely not true.
Any card that can regularly - even if it does require a degree of luck and/or set up - cause a 20+ swing is always going to be seen as very powerful. I:M can be weak in some situations, but in general he's going to be one of ST's best golds for as long as they have him as he is.
I think switching him to duel two targets on the same row is fair, because then people can at least attempt to play around it. It's a gigni-level threat, so why not force a similar playstyle to work around it?
But yes, making him cause one of yours and one of theirs to duel, with a higher body, makes an awful lot more sense to me. Or even redesign him and give him a 3 card spawn option, with various tactical options. Maybe Pit Trap, Decoy, or Marching Orders or something, representing his tactical skill more directly, again with a better body. I think he'd still see an awful lot of play.
Basically, my concern is that ST's gold suite right now is an ABSURD combination of control cards. Schirru, Ithlinne, and I:M as they are now is probably the most powerful set of control golds you can possibly field, and I don't believe it'll be healthy for ST decks and deckbuilding for all three to remain as they are. Schirru needs no attention, he's fine. Ithlinne is broken in this format but a tremors nerf will bring her back in line. I think I:M being restricted to one-line targeting will bring him in line; he'll still be less restrictive than Gigni.
I think an overall design mentality for the Gwent team is the following: If a gold is so powerful that it's unimaginable that any deck in this faction doesn't run it, it's probably too powerful. And I can't think of a ST deck you can build where you don't have to have an internal debate about including I:M on power alone. Compare him to the original Iorveth, for example, and you can pretty clearly see the difference.
Last edited:
iamthedave;n10352472 said:
Ithlinne is broken, not tremors. And it is broken because all bronze spells have to be designed with her in mind. Don't get me wrong, I use her with double thunder, which is the only other option for playing her. Tremors is a good bronze card in long rounds or against swarm decks, otherwise it has low value. Even playing Ithlinne, it can be an awful brick if it not well timed or if you play an opponent who prefer few, high value units. A lot of times double tremors Ithlinne gives you a whole total of 12 points, or even less. Of course, when it works, it hurts.
So my problem with the card is design-wise, and same with Iorveth. Iorveth shines in a meta where bronze units have too much power for starters, so it is very esay to find a pair of decent targets. It is not always awesome, but you have always guaranteed a 8-13 duel at least. Of course, there are times when it is much, much higher. But the thing is that things like dwarf chains pull value more consistently, very easily and never brick.
iamthedave you're probably right. I honestly don't get as much issue with Meditation because most of the decks I enjoy playing tend to focus on lower units. I'm aware of his capability for huge power swings, but naturally I don't see it as much with my lower str units. I do, however almost always see Ithlinne get massive power swings thanks to many of my units being 1 and 2str, so if I get a full board she hits me for 35-45str very frequently. Probably my fault for running low str, but it does feel like a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario with ST right now. If you go weak to avoid the amount of scorches and control being run rn, you get hit byt Ithlinne wiping you out. If you opt to go stronger, you get schirru and meditation and double alzurs instead.
I agree that schirru is fine as he is, but the fact he's alongside all the other heavy control units makes him seem extra strong right now. ST have always been about control, but this patch feels a little overboard. Almost as annoying as the spellatel days, but at least that was fairly easy to counter or play through.
I agree that schirru is fine as he is, but the fact he's alongside all the other heavy control units makes him seem extra strong right now. ST have always been about control, but this patch feels a little overboard. Almost as annoying as the spellatel days, but at least that was fairly easy to counter or play through.
Not seen it mentioned anywhere, also, but meditation mixed with ciri:nova is ridiculous. A 25str hit. D:
Last edited by a moderator:
OG.laloquaint;n10351912 said:
Even then, at least it would require a setup. Right now, I:M is so powerful because it requires no setup, and there just is not way to truly play around it. What are you going to do.. delay putting big units on the board and/or boosting, for the whole match? (Some people who blindly defend I:M just don't seem to get this...)
Noela;n10352052 said:
Wardancer is pretty much a bronze version of Olgierd. Yes, I know the mechanics are slightly different, but having three copies of Wardancer almost assures one will be able to gain CA.
Philologus;n10363832 said:
Yes, I know. But keep in mind that no one had any problem with wardancer before dwarf meta. I was happily playing my wardancers without a complaint. I've been saying in another posts that faction needs a rebalance. What the faction doesn't need is nerfing some cards that are vital to other, least played archetypes. I need those 3 wardancers, for example, for opening a round one in a movement deck with two wardancers+3 BCM+ Aelirenn, because of low tempo, and the difficulty of setting the other cards. The other one is for CA, or food for Francesca. Also need them on my mulligan deck, and if I can't mulligan one or two of them in mulligan phase, they can be a pain in the ass when you draw them with officers and brick.
Do you had any complaints before dorfs? (genuine question, not making fun). Maybe it was a card that didn't see much play, or maybe was played in not OP archetypes, so nobody cared.
Noela;n10364082 said:
I only started playing Summer 2017, so no, I didn't have complaints. I understand your viewpoint completely because you delineated it so well, and agree with it. Dwarves need re-balancing, for sure, though.
I have mixed feelings about this change. On the one hand, I:M is clearly overpowered right now - it's very consistent and even the fail case is usually acceptable. He's not likely to hit less than 12 points, especially after factoring his 2-point body. On the other hand making it only affect one row puts I:M in direct competition vs. Igni, and I suspect with this change it's possible to make I:M very weak a considerable amount of the time. That might exclude him from play entirely.
It's something I need to see for myself.
It's something I need to see for myself.
I think it's a good change but I:M might need a few more points base strength to be more reliable.
If it can make any units on the board duel each other, you often can't really counter it that well. If it's limited on a certain row, you can at least try to mess up the oppponents I:M value, which seems good to me.
Of course ST has several ways to move around units, so you can always try to move units to a certain row, to get good value from I:M.
If it can make any units on the board duel each other, you often can't really counter it that well. If it's limited on a certain row, you can at least try to mess up the oppponents I:M value, which seems good to me.
Of course ST has several ways to move around units, so you can always try to move units to a certain row, to get good value from I:M.
