I would like to share my thoughts about Cleaver, which has always been problematic in my opinion, but the problem is getting worse now that 80% of the decks are using him (and they are right).
Cleaver is a very strong card. However this topic is not about the balance of the card, or the fact that this is another neutral damage dealer in a game that already has a lot. In another thread I suggested to make him faction specific but it did not reached consensus.
The problem is that Cleaver is really oppressive when you go first. Last night I felt very sorry when I encountered the same opponent three times, he was protecting his opener with tactical advantage, immediately punished with a 12 pts Cleaver. You already know what happened next: card advantage, easy win. Victory from Round 1 turn 1. Is it fair?
You will say : "oh but he should wait before using tactical advantage". Of course it is an error (and he seems to be a rather slow learner since I did the same move three times in a row) but I think that Cleaver is quite harmful to the game. Right know round 1 is limited to cautious moves to avoid the Cleaver threat.
What I want to underlines is that Cleaver, by himself, has a big influence on the game flow. The tactical advantage has been created to mitigate the penalty when going first, but right know this is not working, just because of this card. I cannot see any balance to correct this problem, apart from changing completely its ability.
Cleaver is a very strong card. However this topic is not about the balance of the card, or the fact that this is another neutral damage dealer in a game that already has a lot. In another thread I suggested to make him faction specific but it did not reached consensus.
The problem is that Cleaver is really oppressive when you go first. Last night I felt very sorry when I encountered the same opponent three times, he was protecting his opener with tactical advantage, immediately punished with a 12 pts Cleaver. You already know what happened next: card advantage, easy win. Victory from Round 1 turn 1. Is it fair?
You will say : "oh but he should wait before using tactical advantage". Of course it is an error (and he seems to be a rather slow learner since I did the same move three times in a row) but I think that Cleaver is quite harmful to the game. Right know round 1 is limited to cautious moves to avoid the Cleaver threat.
What I want to underlines is that Cleaver, by himself, has a big influence on the game flow. The tactical advantage has been created to mitigate the penalty when going first, but right know this is not working, just because of this card. I cannot see any balance to correct this problem, apart from changing completely its ability.