Korathi Heatwave has too low provision costs?

+
My fellow Gwent players what I try to learn in this thread is if Korathi Heatwave is a balanced card.
So please read carefully before you comment that Heatwave is fine because of the existence of scenario's.
In between I'm also asking some questions on how you think about something.
Lets start with the card's ability:



What this cards basically does it can remove anything that is played on the board (a unit, scenario or trap) without condition.
Lets take this in mind and compare it to similar 10 provision cost neutrals:











What all the above cards have in common is that they have a condition to get their value but they can only interact with units.
In favor they have a body so you can put points on the board if you can't interact with your opponents battlefield at the penalty your deploy ability doesn't do anything.
So my question here is:

Do these cards have too high provision costs or is Heatwave simply better?

And a question to the devs:

When you make balance changes to the game do you also compare cards based on their provision costs?

The next subject I'd like to adress is the trading value of Korathi Heatwave compared to scenario's:













So these are all scenario's in the game what I want to illustrate here is the loss of value when they get heatwaved in a matchup.
There are 2 losses when this happens lets start with loss no. 1 provision costs trade vs Heatwave:

Masqurade ball: -5 Provisions
Siege: -4 Provisions
Haunt: -4 Provisions
Feign death: -4 Provisions
Passiflora: -4 Provisions
Gedyneith: -3 Provisions


From above comparison we can see when your scenario gets Heatwaved you always trade down provision wise.
But in favour of that the unit, typically a engine, that spawns will survive.

Loss no.2 takes place in the deckbuilder.
If I want to play a scenario I have to pay for it meaning I'm forced to put weaker cards in my deck in return of big Scenario value.
Typically this means I have to put more bronzes and less golds/weaker golds in my deck.
When my scenario gets heatweaved I'm losing lots of points.

Do you think this is fair?

And a question to the devs:

How do you compare scenario value to Heatwaved value?
 
Back when Scenarios were still upcoming cards, not yet released, the devs described them as high risk, high reward cards. I do not think there's anything wrong with a card capable of getting rid of them.

As for whether Heatwave is too cheap... I don't really know. It, unlike the comparison 10P Neutrals you included, does not have a body and therefore I think it having a stronger ability is fair.

That being said, I don't like the card because I think it's dumb, and I dislike that it can answer anything except Immunity with the single condition of non-Devotion.
(But I would dislike it even if it cost 100 Provisions, so the number in the bottom right corner of the card is irrelevant to me.)

Edit: Banishing is way stronger than destroying, so I could see a justification for a higher cost actually.
 
Last edited:

DRK3

Forum veteran
Very interesting thread, even more so for me, who had been thinking of creating a similar one, approaching related topics, so i'll do it here now.

I beliieve the heatwave-scenario interaction is not balanced at all. I am not a fan of scenarios and want to punish the opponents i faced who used them and it took me far too long to realize i was packing heatwave for their scenario and i still lost, which didnt feel fair at all, specially when im changing my deck to counter these type of decks and it still wasnt enough.

Basically the heatwave-scenario is a trade-even or trade-down, never a trade-up as it should be, when they removed all artefact removal except Heatwave (and circunstancial Shupe).

My realization is that despite the powercreep of each expansion, the impact of the Merchants of Ofir (scenarios) and to a lesser extent, the Iron Judgement (defenders) are still what defines the game, even 1 year and half after, while the last 2 expansions (Master Mirror and Way of the Witcher) brought powerful cards but they werent game-defining by concept, so they were easier to adjust and werent as damaging to the game balance as scenarios still are.

Heatwave is doing currently exactly the opposite of what it should be - its a general counter to pratically everything, so its too good in most situations due to its versatility (oh look, a tall unit - heatwave, a defender? heatwave, a dangerous engine? heatwave), but its not good enough vs scenarios when its the only reasonable counter to it!
 
Last edited:
Well honestly a card like Yirden for example should be 17 provisions if we were to be fair. Since in some cases it can play for like 50 points (AND IT REQUIRES ABSOLUTELY ZERO PLANNING OR BRAIN POWER TO USE EFFICIENTLY! and by this I mean any life form more complex then a single-cell microorganism could utilize this card to good effect).
But in case you somehow failed to notice... Devs don't give a rat's behind about being consistent with the value/provisions or effort/value ratios lol.
Heatwave is really not that much of a problem since it can remove just 1 card for 10 provisions.
Viy can play for 100 points but those 100 points will be distributed among 6-7 or so consumes, not into one single entity so look at it that way. Yirden is just a no-brain whooosh of anywhere between 0 and 60 points.
An expensive engine card can over the course of 7 turns for example generate 30 points but then if it's locked instantly then a simple 4 provision NG lock can be worth 30-40 points (since that's how much points it denied to the opponent). It all depends on a context.

Yirden has been in the game for months on end an devs never thought (at least publically) of changing it, meanwhile a person with average mental capacity could take like 10 seconds to come up with a way to make Yirden balanced lol, but the problem is that they don't even consider it wrong.

I mean I've used Igni to gain like a 40 point swing lol, but at least I had to set up the cards with some damage pings in order it make it work.
 
Last edited:
Do you think this is fair?

Not sure if it's fair, but as you see from other posts, people can mention other cards that don't seem to be fair.

My example is Yennefer's Invocation. A 9 provision points card, that is able to unconditionally remove almost any unit from the board and letting you play that unit yourself later on. For example playing Invocation on Old Speartip instantly removes 12 points from your opponent and gives those 12p to you in the same or next round. Old Speartip is 12 provision points, meaning your deck building logic with provision points distribution shifting towards weaker bronze cards also applies here. Is this fair? Again, I don't know, but for sure it's despicable. And this card has also been in the game for ages and played in practically every Nilfgard deck. And it most likely will stay as is, because as someone implied, the developers seem to either not care for some cards being absurd, or don't see the problem and won't listen to anyone claiming otherwise.
So overall, I don't think you will see any change on any of the mentioned cards any soon.
 
................
Heatwave is doing currently exactly the opposite of what it should be - its a general counter to pratically everything, so its too good in most situations due to its versatility (oh look, a tall unit - heatwave, a defender? heatwave, a dangerous engine? heatwave), but its not good enough vs scenarios when its the only reasonable counter to it!

With your first point I agree but the 2nd not because I think Heatwave is better than a scenario because it's cheaper.
The scenario player has to spend 3-5 provisions more which forces them to add more weaker cards in the deck.
It doesn't seem much but on average you can play 2 more golds if you play heatwave instead of scenario.

Well honestly a card like Yirden for example should be 17 provisions if we were to be fair. Since in some cases it can play for like 50 points (AND IT REQUIRES ABSOLUTELY ZERO PLANNING OR BRAIN POWER TO USE EFFICIENTLY! and by this I mean any life form more complex then a single-cell microorganism could utilize this card to good effect).
But in case you somehow failed to notice... Devs don't give a rat's behind about being consistent with the value/provisions or effort/value ratios lol.
Heatwave is really not that much of a problem since it can remove just 1 card for 10 provisions.
Viy can play for 100 points but those 100 points will be distributed among 6-7 or so consumes, not into one single entity so look at it that way. Yirden is just a no-brain whooosh of anywhere between 0 and 60 points.
An expensive engine card can over the course of 7 turns for example generate 30 points but then if it's locked instantly then a simple 4 provision NG lock can be worth 30-40 points (since that's how much points it denied to the opponent). It all depends on a context.

Yirden has been in the game for months on end an devs never thought (at least publically) of changing it, meanwhile a person with average mental capacity could take like 10 seconds to come up with a way to make Yirden balanced lol, but the problem is that they don't even consider it wrong.

I mean I've used Igni to gain like a 40 point swing lol, but at least I had to set up the cards with some damage pings in order it make it work.

Yrden is a bit of a borderline card it's garbage against something like SK but devastating against something like NR or MO.
The only reason why Yrden is meta now is because of the Arachas swarm/Yennefer combo.
In the past it also was meta when MO thrive was tier 0 perhaps then the card should've been changed already.

In the end it all turns out to the below question the devs should ask themselves regarding balancing the game:

When you make balance changes to the game do you also compare cards based on their provision costs?

It would be nice if the devs would react to this because when I look at the deckbuilder I'm almost sure they don't.
From the last dev video about patch 8.4 I understood they look at match-up data and they wanted to collect more to balance the new leader cards from 8.3.
In my opinion I think match-up data isn't a good way to balance a game it only tells which cards see much play + their winrate.
The provision system is the best vantage point to start because it enables to compare cards that cost the same.
From there you need to zoom in on some particular cards that are giving problems all they have to do is judge their ceiling and cut/nerf/change it.
Yrden for example has such a gigantic ceiling because it effects an entire row there is just no way to balance such an ability with provisions alone.
Same with Eist & Blaze of Glory, Lined pockets (Philippa/Tunneldrill/those tall boosty dwarves), Eldain etc.

In a lot of situations it's far more simple to balance the game than some people might think.
Post automatically merged:

Not sure if it's fair, but as you see from other posts, people can mention other cards that don't seem to be fair.

My example is Yennefer's Invocation. A 9 provision points card, that is able to unconditionally remove almost any unit from the board and letting you play that unit yourself later on. For example playing Invocation on Old Speartip instantly removes 12 points from your opponent and gives those 12p to you in the same or next round. Old Speartip is 12 provision points, meaning your deck building logic with provision points distribution shifting towards weaker bronze cards also applies here. Is this fair? Again, I don't know, but for sure it's despicable. And this card has also been in the game for ages and played in practically every Nilfgard deck. And it most likely will stay as is, because as someone implied, the developers seem to either not care for some cards being absurd, or don't see the problem and won't listen to anyone claiming otherwise.
So overall, I don't think you will see any change on any of the mentioned cards any soon.
Invocation has always been my no.1 complaint since the card was changed to add a card in to your own deck.
This card is just a big middle finger to the provision system the same can be said about Gorthur Gavaed - Cantarella combo.
For the players that are not aware with this combo with Gorthur Gavaed you can put a card from your opponents graveyard on the top of their deck and play it with Cantarella.
Translate this to your Speartip example: play a 7 provision card for a 12 provision card.
 
Last edited:
As long as there are answer-or-lose cards in the game, a versatile and reasonably costed card like Heatwave needs to exist. For example, how likely is it to lose a game when facing an engine-heavy deck in a long r3 and your opponent sets up a defender, which you can't remove - if you're not yourself playing some pointslam deck, a loss is highly likely, I'd imagine.
Purify answers defenders nicely, but purify cards are not really flexible, and you need to draw that one tech card at the right time. Now, if you're also running Heatwave, it would be that much more likely you'd be able to disrupt your opponent's plan.
And regarding scenarios - to me and to at least a few other folks, 14 or 15 prov cards shouldn't exist, as such cards cannot really be balanced.
 
Last edited:
Yrden is a bit of a borderline card it's garbage against something like SK but devastating against something like NR or MO.

The way I see it, Yrden is also pretty bonkers against ST (both symbiosis and harmony themes can gather pretty tall units) and now SY (with all the intimidate engines) if Yrden is meant to be played to guarantee Round 1 (not arguing the decision is a good one, just mentioning that the card has benefits in this situation). When a card alone defeats a whole archetype, I believe there's room to discussion without completely ruining it. For instance, in my opinion Yrden should keep the effect until some adrenaline level is reached (maybe 2 or 3), where it becomes limited to a number of units, like three of them. Even cooler, the idea of a variable adrenaline could be nice on this card, like "Adrenaline X: Reset X units on any specific row", which could add a sense of strategy to the player using this card (always a good thing in a card game).

To stay on topic, Heatwave does not bother me at 10 provisions, as the price to break devotion is higher (in my opinion). Sometimes it finds awesome targets (like scenarios and 30+ power units), sometimes it doesn't. The point is that it answers one card, hence the Yrden insertion above.
 
At this point, the state of Gwent unfortunately necessitates a card like Yrden. There are simply too many engines that are too hard to stop and multiple tall punishers become increasingly likely to brick. Since nerfing a hundred OP engines is rather out of the question, a mass reset like Yrden is required to keep pure greed in check,

Heatwave is an entirely different matter. It is too all-purpose, offering removal of anything you can target and banishment as well. I would like to see banish effects limited to lower damage units (like northern wind) and artifact removal (especially for lower provision artifacts) available to more cards. In an ideal world, garbage like scenarios would not exist and heatwave would be further limited.
 
At this point, the state of Gwent unfortunately necessitates a card like Yrden. There are simply too many engines that are too hard to stop and multiple tall punishers become increasingly likely to brick. Since nerfing a hundred OP engines is rather out of the question, a mass reset like Yrden is required to keep pure greed in check,

Heatwave is an entirely different matter. It is too all-purpose, offering removal of anything you can target and banishment as well. I would like to see banish effects limited to lower damage units (like northern wind) and artifact removal (especially for lower provision artifacts) available to more cards. In an ideal world, garbage like scenarios would not exist and heatwave would be further limited.
But you can play super greed yourself and then on top of that pop a Yirden. :]
Yirden requires no synergy on your part (but you can add some movement to make it's already OP effect even more absolute).
 
At this point, the state of Gwent unfortunately necessitates a card like Yrden. There are simply too many engines that are too hard to stop and multiple tall punishers become increasingly likely to brick. Since nerfing a hundred OP engines is rather out of the question, a mass reset like Yrden is required to keep pure greed in check,

Heatwave is an entirely different matter. It is too all-purpose, offering removal of anything you can target and banishment as well. I would like to see banish effects limited to lower damage units (like northern wind) and artifact removal (especially for lower provision artifacts) available to more cards. In an ideal world, garbage like scenarios would not exist and heatwave would be further limited.
Yrden is necessary, heatwave is necessary, tons of removal is necessary....and we only play the cards that are worth the most points for their provisions rather than focusing on archetypes & synergies in general.
The engine deck player typically sees their first 2 or 3 plays wiped of the board, if you play scenario it gets heatwaved, if you don't play heatwave you'll face massive point tempo in 1 or 2 turns.
These are just frustrations that aim to frustrate eachother which make the game not very fun, toxic even, to play facing such cards every single match.
Cards that should've been addressed years ago never get dealt with or far too late all of this tells me the game doesn't get balanced in the right way.
Which makes it really dumb is that there is an provision system that can easily deal with this but it simply doesn't get fully utilized in balance changes.
In my starting post I added some stupid cards on purpose just to showcase this, I mean that Dandelion card hasn't been touched since the arrival of HC.
For 10 provision costs thats just hilarious I wouldn't even play it if it were 6 provisions you can make a huge list with cards that suffer the same treatment.
Is it so difficult to balance the game on provision level? And is it impossible to address cards that have an to high ceiling, a totally useless ability or wreck an entire faction with a single card?
I can tell you this matchup data & winrates won't tell you sh** about this
 
Maybe if they made yrden do different things during different rounds? So like it only reset the whole row on round 3. and did other stuff round 1 and 2?

That might make the card not only more interesting but more interactable.
 
Yrden is necessary, heatwave is necessary, tons of removal is necessary....and we only play the cards that are worth the most points for their provisions rather than focusing on archetypes & synergies in general.
Just 2 simple examples on how to deal with something described in the last sentence.



We all know this card right? It's the auto-include card in every MO deck no matter which archetype they play.
It's a 13 for 10 and functions as Ozzrel carryover later on and on top of it it has thrive synergy.
The only condition is it's deploy ability if you play it early it gets heatwaved and if you play it late it gets exposed.
Jokes aside these are just very plain simple points you're almost forced to play them because well there are no other cards with this value for their provision costs.
Now what if the deploy ability would change to something like:

Deploy: gain armor for the amount of Insectoids in hand. When played next to an insectoid gain 2 armor for each adjacent unit.
Or Gain armor for the amount of insectoids on a row

Would a thrive, vampire or WH list still play this? Probably not because they don't synergize with their deck anymore.
But what about Endrega Larva's? Just play this card and keep Yghern for last turn and your problem is solved.
Lets move on to that card shall we.



Larva's, another MO auto-include since it's introduction for a simple reason huge engine value.
In a full thrive list these bronzes easily hit 20 points which is pretty awesome for 5 provisions in a strategy that involves a lot of tall units and not much thinking.
For all the people out there who like thrive lists I'm sorry to say this is dumb I mean not Dandelion dumb but boringly dumb.
All you have to do, in a nutshell, each round is start with small units and play units that 1 are point bigger each turn.
If you play multiple units in 1 turn with for example Oberon ***shabam*** you gain big points!
But what if thrive would change to something like this:

Thrive: boost this unit by 1 or the specified amount whenever you play a unit of the same category

You can't and don't have to play solitair anymore and the card will only work in an insectoid themed deck.
So no more thrive stacking 20 point bronze nonsense just cards which have been given a ceiling based on their provision costs and supporting an actual archetype.
More importantly think of the potential this will create with Koshchey and Kikimore Queen :)

Wouldn't this approach make more sense than djamming the best cards in your deck to reach a certain amount of provisions?
 
Last edited:
Just 2 simple examples on how to deal with something described in the last sentence.



We all know this card right? It's the auto-include card in every MO deck no matter which archetype they play.
It's a 13 for 10 and functions as Ozzrel carryover later on and on top of it it has thrive synergy.
The only condition is it's deploy ability if you play it early it gets heatwaved and if you play it late it gets exposed.
Jokes aside these are just very plain simple points you're almost forced to play them because well there are no other cards with this value for their provision costs.
Now what if the deploy ability would change to something like:

Deploy: gain armor for the amount of Insectoids in hand. When played next to an insectoid gain 2 armor for each adjacent unit.
Or Gain armor for the amount of insectoids on a row

Would a thrive, vampire or WH list still play this? Probably not because they don't synergize with their deck anymore.
But what about Endrega Larva's? Just play this card and keep Yghern for last turn and your problem is solved.
Lets move on to that card shall we.



Larva's, another MO auto-include since it's introduction for a simple reason huge engine value.
In a full thrive list these bronzes easily hit 20 points which is pretty awesome for 5 provisions in a strategy that involves a lot of tall units and not much thinking.
For all the people out there who like thrive lists I'm sorry to say this is dumb I mean not Dandelion dumb but boringly dumb.
All you have to do, in a nutshell, each round is start with small units and play units that 1 are point bigger each turn.
If you play multiple units in 1 turn with for example Oberon ***shabam*** you gain big points!
But what if thrive would change to something like this:

Thrive: boost this unit by 1 or the specified amount whenever you play a unit of the same category

You can't and don't have to play solitair anymore and the card will only work in an insectoid themed deck.
So no more thrive stacking 20 point bronze nonsense just cards which have been given a ceiling based on their provision costs and supporting an actual archetype.
More importantly think of the potential this will create with Koshchey and Kikimore Queen :)

Wouldn't this approach make more sense than djamming the best cards in your deck to reach a certain amount of provisions?
First of all you made a topic talking aboout heatwave and now you go to a diferent direction.

In fact this is a topic "lets talk about the cards that 1990BW doenst like".

About heatwave, i agree with you maayybe it can cost more provision, but not for the same reason. I mean, banish a scenario its the best thing korathi can do, and for that, its absolute fine cost less provision.

You said yourself when heatwave hits the scenario the scenario stay with that first unit, so its absolute fine heatwave cost less provision than the scenario. Heatwave cost 10 provision and the scenarios costs 13-15 provision, but scenarios gives to you a unit with 3-4 points and engine.

What i dont like in korathi its because sometimes the player does a setup wich cost much more provision and the heatwave banish it (example, put a gold hight provision cost and buf it with a special card).

So, in fact, i think korathi at 10 provision to banish scenarios its absolute fine, but maybe, for units, it can be changed for something like..
."banish a card
adrenaline 3 - if the card its a unit does x damage instead"
Post automatically merged:

Very interesting thread, even more so for me, who had been thinking of creating a similar one, approaching related topics, so i'll do it here now.

I beliieve the heatwave-scenario interaction is not balanced at all. I am not a fan of scenarios and want to punish the opponents i faced who used them and it took me far too long to realize i was packing heatwave for their scenario and i still lost, which didnt feel fair at all, specially when im changing my deck to counter these type of decks and it still wasnt enough.

Basically the heatwave-scenario is a trade-even or trade-down, never a trade-up as it should be, when they removed all artefact removal except Heatwave (and circunstancial Shupe).

My realization is that despite the powercreep of each expansion, the impact of the Merchants of Ofir (scenarios) and to a lesser extent, the Iron Judgement (defenders) are still what defines the game, even 1 year and half after, while the last 2 expansions (Master Mirror and Way of the Witcher) brought powerful cards but they werent game-defining by concept, so they were easier to adjust and werent as damaging to the game balance as scenarios still are.

Heatwave is doing currently exactly the opposite of what it should be - its a general counter to pratically everything, so its too good in most situations due to its versatility (oh look, a tall unit - heatwave, a defender? heatwave, a dangerous engine? heatwave), but its not good enough vs scenarios when its the only reasonable counter to it!
I didnt read you entire post, but i agree in everything with you. My post above have the same conclusion
 
Last edited:
First of all you made a topic talking aboout heatwave and now you go to a diferent direction.

In fact this is a topic "lets talk about the cards that 1990BW doenst like".

About heatwave, i agree with you maayybe it can cost more provision, but not for the same reason. I mean, banish a scenario its the best thing korathi can do, and for that, its absolute fine cost less provision.

You said yourself when heatwave hits the scenario the scenario stay with that first unit, so its absolute fine heatwave cost less provision than the scenario. Heatwave cost 10 provision and the scenarios costs 13-15 provision, but scenarios gives to you a unit with 3-4 points and engine.

What i dont like in korathi its because sometimes the player does a setup wich cost much more provision and the heatwave banish it (example, put a gold hight provision cost and buf it with a special card).

So, in fact, i think korathi at 10 provision to banish scenarios its absolute fine, but maybe, for units, it can be changed for something like..
."banish a card
adrenaline 3 - if the card its a unit does x damage instead"
Post automatically merged:
Fair enough I understand one might think thank that.
The discussion has drifted a bit more in to the direction whether the provision system has failed or not.
The cards discussed here are just a few examples of it.
 
I think some "Kill me or lose!" cards like Arnaghad justify Korathi more then enough. Vs some decks it's just autowin if no instant answer.
 
I also think it´s ok to have heatwave as an unconditional banisher. Nevertheless I also think that it´s to cheap. The only downside of heatwave is that it´s possible that it does not find valuable targets.
So I would suggest the following nerf:
If the provision cost of the banished card is above 10 deal 1 random damage to each allied unit for each excess provision cost.
If the power of the banished card is above 20, create and summon a Lamp Djinn in a random opponent row.
 
You know what I find interesting? Lots of people seem to think the provision system is busted (I among them) But, they use the provision system to create examples of why a particular card is too powerful/not powerful enough rather than the effect of the card versus the effect of the card it is countering. It seems that the argument of adjusting provisions is only valid if we can all agree that the provision system works as intended, and it doesn't seem we can... Kinda putting the cart before the horse. I don't see an easy solution to this (save getting rid of provisions but I don't see that happening) I just don't want to put to much focus on provisions provisions provisions rather than does the cards ability and potential payoff make it worth it to you to put it in your deck, knowing everything else that is out there. Yes I understand provisions are how we build decks and it is a half hearted attempt to balance cards that we all have to pay attention to, but I think there are better ways to look at it.

As for heatwave, having said all that, I think it is fine and I wish there were more ways to get rid of scenarios, traps, and artifacts. Cost means nothing as far as I'm concerned (beyond deck building limitations) I would hate to go around nerfing everything, then what's the point? Eventually you arrive at a place where every card produces exactly the same value as every other card that costs the same in every situation. Which turns gwent into poker, effectively.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there HAS to be cards that produce more value than they are 'worth' otherwise it doesn't matter. Ideally, EVERY card should be capable of producing more value than it costs.
 
Last edited:
Korathi is bad in the sense there's no strategy involved whatsoever, it's a fire-and-forget solve-all card that almost never fails to at least break even. Which could be okay in a world where this was true for all cards, but we're never gonna get there.

Worse yet, it's a free "disrupt enemy strategy" tool that easily negates a lot of effort put into combos, and now that even defenders (barring Javed, who is irritating) are total pushovers, it's not okay at all, because it renders a lot of cards unusable. When was the last time you've seen Artis/Belohun/Whispess/Vattier/Syanna/Aglais etc. outside of memes? And they're cool cards that totally should see play.

This is just a part of a bigger problem, of course, namely that Gwent went ham with removal, thus incentivising all-deploy decks. "Slow" engines and on-orders are barely playable - not even defender can save them now, unless you absolutely overload your deck with them (which, realistically, only a few archetypes can even do). Syndicate has it a bit easier due to being able to distribute value on-demand (and having a defender that can actually fulfill its function), but it's a total disaster for everyone else.

Shortly put, Korathi's main issue isn't even Korathi itself. It's the fact it's much easier to disrupt your opponent than to actually play out a "positive points" strategy these days, and this is an extremely backwards state of things, and Korathi is a major contributor. Disruption definitely come at a higher price than construction, ESPECIALLY if it's unconditional. Besides...

There're so many cool control cards/mechanics in the game - resets, purifies, locks, conditional kills like Black Blood or Igni or Blizzard, Fringilla's Muzzle, but they are made obsolete by easier unconditional options.

Why not introduce more of those, instead of surefire "kill and forget" no-brain cards? It would be much more cool and satisfying.

For starters, though, ANYTHING with the ability to remove a standard 5-power unit outright and unconditionally should become more expensive to include provisions-wise, so that you think really hard what to spend your limited control on. Rebukes, Skjordal, Whoreson, all this stuff. This could potentially lead to certain issues with greedy archetypes, but can be mitigated by new, more conditional control tools.


edit: Also, poison as a mechanic was a mistake. At the very least, it shouldn't be attached to anything cheaper than 6, outside of self-poison cards.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom