Please fix Predatory Dive already

+
Then we might as well just remove tactical advantage as well, because it serves no purpose against decks that can use predatory dive to scorch any card played first by the opponent, for 5 provisions, twice.

OR, maybe don't TA the first card you play when faced with a deck the is likely to play Dive.

Play around the problem, don't play into it.

Better still, don't routinely TA on turn one against ANY deck. It's often not the correct line of play.
 
... Play around the problem, don't play into it...
 
OR, maybe don't TA the first card you play when faced with a deck the is likely to play Dive.

Play around the problem, don't play into it.

Better still, don't routinely TA on turn one against ANY deck. It's often not the correct line of play.

Who said I did that? I use TA at different times in the game. This has nothing to do with Predatory Dive being defect and not acting as it should or is described.
 
The whole point of the tactical advantage is to protect your first card against a "cheap" (bronze card) attack.

Is your opinion or an official statement?
For me tactical advantage is +5 bonus points. Is not firts turn inmunity.


Only if you think the original intent of the card is destructive. Look at the description, that's how it is suppose to work, not to take out the first card the enemy plays (even twice). It is suppose to destroy 1 unit on each side.

That is your supposition. Is a card (like others) that if you d´ont play weel in the appropiate moment, is directly harmful for you.




Nah, it works just fine with deathwish. I've seen it be used correctly with deathwish, both early in the round and mid round. At 5 provisions, the card should come with tight conditions. But despite that I've seen it used quite well mid round with deathwish decks.

For deathwish you can destroy a unit whit a simple bomb, but you lose the value points of the unit. It's more normal to consume or activate.
If you whant activate deathwish whit a bronze especial card, you can use the neverplayed raven card for only 4 resources (more cheap), and your units are safe.
 
Not sure why you insist that the only purpose of tactical advantage is to buff your first unit, if that was the sole purpose, it would buff it the moment you play the first unit. Tactical advantage can be played several ways, you can use it to protect your first unit, or you can wait for some damaged unit so it does not buffs it over 7, or you can use it to gain (or deny) dominance, or to protect a later engine after you baited their tall removal...
 
Not sure why you insist that the only purpose of tactical advantage is to buff your first unit, if that was the sole purpose, it would buff it the moment you play the first unit. Tactical advantage can be played several ways, you can use it to protect your first unit, or you can wait for some damaged unit so it does not buffs it over 7, or you can use it to gain (or deny) dominance, or to protect a later engine after you baited their tall removal...

Who said it was?

I sure didn't. But if you use it on the first unit, on any decent unit it will protect that unit from any bronze card or any cheap card, except predatory dive. if someone wants to take out my tactical advantage unit with an expensive gold card, that's fair enough. But predatory is a cheap bronze card.

I don't know how anyone can disagree with this, unless they use predatory dive themselves and want to "protect" the card from being defect.

The card says: "each player destroys their lowest unit". That's cheasy enough with a deathwish card. A 5 point bronze card does not to go way out over it's own scope. Predatory dive has been problematic for a long time, and it was highly noticeable just how defect that card is during the time people played "no-units" decks. That problem has not gone away.

I would still not be fine with the card saying "each player destroys their lowest unit, if you have no unit, scorch the enemy unit". That's just not reasonable for a 5 provision card. I also think the card does not need more scorch style (destroy) cards. There are plenty already, and I certainly don't think a bronze card should be able to work as one. I think the game would be better off if it made epidemic into a gold card (it's already high provision), and removed the "new scorch" card "curse of corruption" or changed it into something not scorch related. But that's way outside the scope of this discussion.

Predatory dive is defect according to it's own description, and it's anti-tactical advantage and undoubtedly way out of scope from it's original intention. Ooh, and did I mention that is is a 5 provision bronze?
 
Who said it was?

I sure didn't.
Then we might as well just remove tactical advantage as well, because it serves no purpose against decks that can use predatory dive to scorch any card played first by the opponent, for 5 provisions, twice.

There you said that tactical advantages severs no purpose if the enemy can scorch your first card... you have pretty bad memory
 
There you said that tactical advantages severs no purpose if the enemy can scorch your first card...

That's ofcourse true if it can be done with a 5 provision bronze card. A 5p bronze card being able to scorch a 9 power card is unreasonable.
 
You have to understand that the power of card is very situational, and you can play around it, now if you want to play always the same, and don't like cards that make you play different, then it's your problem, not the card problem.
 
I met a sad revival of the "no-unit" tactic today. What enabled the guy to play like that was Predatory Dive.
 
Why do you have such a problem with this card? It can brick really hard and even be worth 0 points. How many cards can be worth 0 points?
 
As far as I remember I've never had the card played against me (and nor do I use it since it's Monsters), but I do agree it should not work the way it does now. While the wording is, technically, correct, I don't like that it can kill any card.

I agree that it should only work if its player has a unit to destroy, and that allied unit should be destroyed first. Similar to how Pavetta and Milva used to work ([do x] to your card, then to opponent's card].
 
I think sometimes is something obsession with the descriptions of the cards.
The card is balanced and played less, d´ont need changes. No tier 1, 2 or 3 decks whit this card because sometimes it goes well (if opponent fails) but most go wrong.

Maybe is possible to change the description for make all people happy: :)

"Destroy the enemy unit whit the lowest value. Then, destroy your lowest value unit".
 
The card is balanced and played less, d´ont need changes. No tier 1, 2 or 3 decks whit this card because sometimes it goes well (if opponent fails) but most go wrong.

It's not balanced, it's a 5 provision card which is anti-tactical-advantage in nature, encourages anti-gameplay and does not work according to it's original intent (deathwish) or description.

But sure, if CDPR decide to change the description of the card and have it work like now (each player destroy their lowest card, if you have no card, only destroy the lowest enemy unit), I will accept that. At least it will be a decision. I wount agree with it, but I will accept it.
 
Last edited:
"Destroy the enemy unit whit the lowest value. Then, destroy your lowest value unit".
Just think about it. It's a 5p cheap Monster card, clearly designed for Consume or Deathwish. It's simply not balanced if it can act as a "Destroy" card if there is only one enemy (no matter its strength or status) on the board. So your proposal makes a lot of sense if you turn the sentence around: Destroy your lowest unit, then destroy the enemy's lowest unit. And with the archetypes PD was clearly designed for (Consume, Deathwish), you can get a nice amount of points for 5p if you play it right.
 
PD was clearly designed for (Consume, Deathwish), you can get a nice amount of points for 5p if you play it right.

Exactly. I've seen good and legit PD usage with deathwish, and I really like that, happy to see it actually. I can't help but like those players for using PD as intended.

7p or 8p rotfiend is a good example, taking out a Northern Realm 2 card bronze engine and resetting the board. (but you either keep tactical advantage or 1 unit with tactical advantage).
 
Last edited:
Just think about it. It's a 5p cheap Monster card, clearly designed for Consume or Deathwish.
For activate Deathwish you have this card (more cheap, no needed to sacrifice your troops, and you can choose your Deathwish unit):
ojodecuervo.jpg


If you destroy your unit, you can not consume the unit. I do not understand the reference of Consume.
In the case of your suggestion, the only profitable decks is Gernichora, but Gernichora is an added monster leader, not of the original 4. For that reasons is clearly not designed for that.


If you think it is an unbalanced card, please prove it! Make a deck with two predatory dive and win many games.
 
For activate Deathwish you have this card (more cheap, no needed to sacrifice your troops, and you can choose your Deathwish unit):

It's not about deathwish or other cards. I don't understand why people are so eager to defend a defect card like Predatory Dive. Probably because they use it the wrong way.
 
It's not about deathwish or other cards. I don't understand why people are so eager to defend a defect card like Predatory Dive. Probably because they use it the wrong way.
I don't understand why people are so eager to attack a no defects card like Predatory Dive. Probably because they do not use it. :shrug:
 
Top Bottom