a small rework of nekkers(to reduce RNG)

[nemirni]

a small rework of nekkers(to reduce RNG)

I don't really play consume much, but i have noticed one thing regarding nekkers that I think should be changed. No nerf or anything, because i think they are fine as they are, but a small change to make them less RNG.
In short, i think its death wish should be changed from "pull a copy from your deck" to "pull a top copy from your deck". This way you and your opponent could both know what strength the nekker coming out will be because they will come out in order of creation(first the originals, then those created by first nekker warrior, then the second and so on..).
It wouldn't really be a boost or nerf to them, but it would make the whole thing more strategic and less random...

 

[4RM3D]

If you are bleeding the opponent's Nekkers, this suggestion will result in a nerf.
If the opponent is bleeding you with his Nekkers, this suggestion will result in a buff.

Because of the ambiguity of the result, I am not sure if this should be implemented. Reducing RNG is not always a good thing.

 

[nemirni]

If you are bleeding Nekkers, this suggestion will result in a nerf. If the opponent is bleeding you, this suggestion will result in a buff.

Not really, what this will result in is reliability. I don't see how it can be beneficial to either side not knowing if the next round card is going to be 16, 11 or 4...

If you for example play your Elder as a finisher and you have no idea if your finisher will be 15 or 25 point total i would say it is an issue and something you would want to know, right?
On the other hand if i am killing nekkers in r2 i would also like to be able to know how much value will carry over... the only thing i am doing is taking out the RNG, i wouldn't say its favoring one side over the other...

 

[4RM3D]

When both the opponent and you know the order in which the Nekkers will appear, then this information can either be used to your advantage, if you can control your opponent, or disadvantage, if the opponent can control you. This means that removing the RNG actually creates a bigger extreme in a lot of cases. Besides, all it takes is one card with a reshuffling effect to negate the suggestion.

 

[altaybek]

Don't agree. RNG is an advantage most of the times and off-setting them is a skill too no matter how many of them you possess. You can either have 9 of them at the same power or you can stagger them with Vrans. Instead of playing one Nekker Warrior one after another, waiting 1-2 consumes apart is the optimal play and cannot be countered %90 of the time.

I know that because I've been helpless against it even with two Scorches and a reset in R3 many times. There is no way to shut down 2-3 Nekkers with different powers, a Ghoul and Nekker-Consumed-Ekimmara at the same time unless your opponent is unlucky to set them straight unintentionally (not calculating nekker power after consume etc...)

 

[Guest 4226291]

Not really, what this will result in is reliability. I don't see how it can be beneficial to either side not knowing if the next round card is going to be 16, 11 or 4...

If you for example play your Elder as a finisher and you have no idea if your finisher will be 15 or 25 point total i would say it is an issue and something you would want to know, right?
On the other hand if i am killing nekkers in r2 i would also like to be able to know how much value will carry over... the only thing i am doing is taking out the RNG, i wouldn't say its favoring one side over the other...

Yes really. If the top one is played that means the strongest Necker in the deck is played. If the player is trying to bleed his opponent of his strongest Neckers then it’s a nerf, as the Nekker player loses his most powerful carryover and the weaker Nekkers are left in the deck. If the Nekker player is trying to use up his most powerful Nekkers in order to make his opponent play more cards, then it’s a buff, as he will most likely will gain card advantage since the other play player has to play so many cards to overcome the strongest Nekkers.

In this example RNG isn’t a bad thing. As neither player knows what Nekker will be played, neither gain really gain a tactical advantage based off what’s coming out, making it more fair to both players rather than your suggestion.

 

[partci]

I think this mechanic is better suited for the Harpies.

 

[nemirni]

I must admit i haven't look at it from this perspective. So what you are saying is that basically lack of RNG would dominantly benefit winner of round 1? I suppose it makes sense.
I usually try to go 2:0 against consume if anyhow possible so i never really perceived the bleeding part from higher to lower as a benefit, rather a negative but just more countable thing.