Misunderstanding then. I was never commenting on your suggested card change.
Misunderstanding then. I was never commenting on your suggested card change.
His value range would then be between 3 and 8 for 8 provisions. This could be increased by letting him do max 6 damage, making him quite good at 12 (9 inherent) value for 8 provisions. No good in increasing his variance further. Carry-over and high damage are also worth more than simple points.
Last edited:
Ithlinne - 9 points/11 provs alone.
Ithlinne + Skaggs - 19 points/19 provs.
Add an Agitator and it's then - 25 points/23 provs.
Plus Filavandrel and it's a meaty card.
Hjalmar - 11 points/9 provs (almost guaranteed you'll get at least 8 from the graveyard)
Hjalmar + Heimdall - 23 points/18 provs
Add a Greatsword and it's then - 34 points/24 provs
Stick Eist in this to resurrect either another GS or another damage card....you get the picture.
Is the problem Skaggs? There's circumstances whereby you get 'ok' value, some where you get immense value, but it doesn't seem like unbalanced use of provisions. I think it's a problem because it's an auto-include in a deck that's over-used, and when you've been Skaggs-ed at a high level, it can feel very, very annoying - but again that's because of the lack of fairness in the deal mechanic (as usual, most things come back to that). Basically your opponent has drawn Skaggs, plus at least one Agitator, Ithlinne and that Dryad in the same hand.
I think if there were more solutions around a fair deal for both players, better mulligans, hand size and perhaps even 'guaranteeing' a few cards each round, there'd be less worry about Skaggs, more variation and - importantly - less Bran.
Ithlinne + Skaggs - 19 points/19 provs.
Add an Agitator and it's then - 25 points/23 provs.
Plus Filavandrel and it's a meaty card.
Hjalmar - 11 points/9 provs (almost guaranteed you'll get at least 8 from the graveyard)
Hjalmar + Heimdall - 23 points/18 provs
Add a Greatsword and it's then - 34 points/24 provs
Stick Eist in this to resurrect either another GS or another damage card....you get the picture.
Is the problem Skaggs? There's circumstances whereby you get 'ok' value, some where you get immense value, but it doesn't seem like unbalanced use of provisions. I think it's a problem because it's an auto-include in a deck that's over-used, and when you've been Skaggs-ed at a high level, it can feel very, very annoying - but again that's because of the lack of fairness in the deal mechanic (as usual, most things come back to that). Basically your opponent has drawn Skaggs, plus at least one Agitator, Ithlinne and that Dryad in the same hand.
I think if there were more solutions around a fair deal for both players, better mulligans, hand size and perhaps even 'guaranteeing' a few cards each round, there'd be less worry about Skaggs, more variation and - importantly - less Bran.
I'm not exactly sure I understand your opinions about this game, I find myself disagreeing with most of what you say should change or how things should be.
As it is now is definitely better than what you suggest. Some tiny tweaks might be desireable, not exactly sure. Perhaps bump his provision to 9 and/or reduce his face value to 2. But some people suggested this was his previous stats and that nobody used the card at that point.
Now that ST has become a bit stronger than they were, I'd not like to see them being reduced in any way. And I don't even play ST.
The +1 provision nerf is a laugh Sheldon is still a auto-include in every SC deck.
He's a game changer because he can remove everything or he gets max value against tall units.
9 provisions is still not balanced the solution can be found by making him 10 or 11 provisions.
Or nerf the handbuff cards so his value chain can't reach pathetic levels.
Like agitator only buffing bronze cards, change it to 5 provisions or boost by 1 and gaining strength to 3-4.
He's a game changer because he can remove everything or he gets max value against tall units.
9 provisions is still not balanced the solution can be found by making him 10 or 11 provisions.
Or nerf the handbuff cards so his value chain can't reach pathetic levels.
Like agitator only buffing bronze cards, change it to 5 provisions or boost by 1 and gaining strength to 3-4.
Or better yet is to remove the card from the game entirely. It would be one less depressing ST card to look at when deck building if it is removed from the game rather than increasing the provisions more or to restrict the cards that can boost and basically making it like every other ST card.
I think it has been extensively argued on this thread that the card often bricks, and require special support cards that give poor value. At it's very best Sheldon can be a magnificent card, at it's very worst it can be a frequent loss.
But then again, perhaps Sheldon, Gimpy, Hubert and these kind of wild cards could also be jumped to 10 provisions. I don't think it would hurt the game. Some cards obviously need reduced provisions as well, since they are almost never used, in any decks.
I feel like CDPR is going the wrong way about "fixing" it. If the card's so problematic then maybe giving it a set ability would be better than small provision changes. For example:
Power: 4
Deploy: Damage an enemy by 3. If this unit is boosted, damage an enemy by 5.
Provisions: 8
Power: 4
Deploy: Damage an enemy by 3. If this unit is boosted, damage an enemy by 5.
Provisions: 8
A perfect example of a well-balanced card, similar to other cards already in the game, like Hawker Support.
BUT...
It's also very boring, generic and safe. Not the kind of cards we need more of.
Risk/reward cards with variance is a great thing in this game. However, it seems the risk/reward is (at least was) a bit wrong with this card since so many people were using it. Adjusting provisions from 8 to 9 was one attempt to re-balance that. I think it was a good step, shows CDPR is taking things seriously.
I'm sure if further adjustment or tweaks is needed to the card, CDPR will do something about it. Let's see what happens at 9 provisions first, then discuss the card further if needed, or if you are absolutely sure 9 is wrong, then go ahead and explain why you think that.
If every card was static, that would hurt the game for sure. Variance based on what happens on the other side of the deck is great. And I say that as someone who has taken damage from Sheldon, on both Tibor Eggerbracht and Imperial Golem. The same goes for a similar card Gerwin, with blue stripe Commandoes and Kedwen Revenant. But those cases, alike to a "huge" success with Sheldon, are exceptions, not the rule. I think it's interesting to tye these discussions together. Here is gimpy:
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/ind...tion-gimpy-should-get-a-slight-nerf.11003020/
And Hubert:
https://forums.cdprojektred.com/index.php?threads/hubert-rejk-needs-to-be-nerfed.10998316/
The Hubert complaints stopped, I guess the adjustment to him worked out pretty well. But he might be more of a one trick pony than Sheldon and Gimpy.
I'm not sure, I definitely feel those kind of cards belong in the game, and that variance is a great thing. Regarding small tuning of cards, it's always difficult to strike the perfect balance.
I think it's more of a priority for now to look at all the cards that are NOT used, and adjust their provisions accordingly as well, and then have a look at Sheldon again later on.
Haha yeah it's really boring....and I feel like CDPR might eventually do it, unfortunately.
I've always wanted underused cards to get buffs but it seems that CDPR does more nerfing than buffing. I do think Sheldon is very strong but I honestly wouldn't personally want his ability changed. I hope the developers find the sweet spot with him. You made some great points as well.
Seemingly Skaggs is still auto-include in many decks, and considering Cleaver was raise to 10 provisions, it would not be unreasonable to bring up Skaggs again as well.
I think Skaggs is comparable to Cleaver in potential and brick and swing. But Skaggs is played end of round, Cleaver start of round. 11 point Skaggs is not uncommon, which then swings (maybe) 22, but "at least" 16-17. Ofcourse, Skaggs depend on other cards and their provisions as well, unlike Cleaver. But the fact that he is so "auto-include" makes one question if he should not be 10 provisons, alike to Cleaver.
Or perhaps he should do damage equal to his boost, rather than his total.
I think Skaggs is comparable to Cleaver in potential and brick and swing. But Skaggs is played end of round, Cleaver start of round. 11 point Skaggs is not uncommon, which then swings (maybe) 22, but "at least" 16-17. Ofcourse, Skaggs depend on other cards and their provisions as well, unlike Cleaver. But the fact that he is so "auto-include" makes one question if he should not be 10 provisons, alike to Cleaver.
Or perhaps he should do damage equal to his boost, rather than his total.
Just wanted to point out NR basically has its own "Skaggs", which is better.
Prince Anseis. 10 prov. He can be instant 4pts+4dmg. You can put him on ranged row for an extra 1pt and order next turn( i never use this, nor anyone else, and why Anseis replaced Seltkirk on all but Foltest decks)
Or you can use a Thunderbolt potion put earlier to boost him to 10pts+10 damage, which can duel/destroy pratically anything like Skaggs. And it only takes 2 turns, 18 provisions, while Skaggs, Ithlinne and the 2 bronze dwarves is more prov. costly, and takes more turns, with less tempo.
Prince Anseis. 10 prov. He can be instant 4pts+4dmg. You can put him on ranged row for an extra 1pt and order next turn( i never use this, nor anyone else, and why Anseis replaced Seltkirk on all but Foltest decks)
Or you can use a Thunderbolt potion put earlier to boost him to 10pts+10 damage, which can duel/destroy pratically anything like Skaggs. And it only takes 2 turns, 18 provisions, while Skaggs, Ithlinne and the 2 bronze dwarves is more prov. costly, and takes more turns, with less tempo.
In before someone says: "but NR sucks"
In before someone else says: "but ST sucks even more"
Glad we could have this conversation.
Back to the serious discussion. It's not about how strong a card is. It's not even about how strong a card appears to be. It's about how often the card gets played and how often it gives the feeling that it's unfair. ST is far more popular than NR, meaning Sheldon gets played more often, meaning players get annoyed by it more often. When NR becomes popular again, Prince Anseis is the next one to carry the nerf stick.
Well, it's not about NR or ST, it's about Sheldon Skaggs which is undoubtedly a powerful card. In my opinion it is not a less powerful card than Cleaver, probably more powerful. On the other hand it is supported with the provisions of other cards and slow tempo.
How often a card is used, is a somewhat good indicator of how good it is. Theory and actual play are two different things. If "everyone" is using it, there must be something (too) good about it.
Personally I don't know a good way to counter or play around Skaggs.
I just think if Cleaver is 10 provisions, Skaggs should perhaps be as well. I think both cards with their advantages and disadvantages are about equally good.
But, I guess it's part of the whole balancing act of the game. It's not an easy thing really. I personally wish more of the available cards in the game were used about equally often, but I guess that might just be wishful thinking. I have my "favourite" cards for any given faction that I more or less always or often want to include.
I was personally puzzled recently about imperial manticore being 5 points on 7 provisions with those abilities. Haha. Perhaps it's just about the popularity of powerful or "op" cards that make them appear worse. Anseis is actually a good example and a somewhat valid comparison with Skaggs. Anseis can also get huge value, but it needs provisions of other cards to accomplish it.
Perhaps the problem is partly with the supporting cast of Skaggs?
Or not good enough about the rest. Which leads to...
Indirectly, yes. Because for some decks, 4p cards are junk to be discarded. And having a 4p card empowering Sheldon is a nice bonus. Hypothetically, making Agitators a 3/5, removes the 4p "garbage bin", resulting in Agitators becoming less interesting and thus nerfing Sheldon indirectly because of it.
Has it ever occurred to you that he is still (kind of) auto-include (I don't add him in my all-elf-junk ST deck as he needs his own package to be useful/powerful) because there are no other alternatives for ST? Even then, Sheldon needs his own package to be brought to the deck without which he is just a Panther. Adding Sheldon already restricts your deck building and people still add him because there are no other better win-con for ST (Oak is also good, but as Sheldon, it also needs conditions to be powerful and is very costly).
But of course, this has been discussed to death in this particular thread and nothing can be added to defend Sheldon which hasn't been mentioned here already.
Do you mean Skaggs doesn't need provisions of other cards to accomplish being powerful? Or did you mean Anseis doesn't need provisions of other cards to get huge value?
Post automatically merged:
Has it ever occurred to you that he is still (kind of) auto-include (I don't add him in my all-elf-junk ST deck as he needs his own package to be useful/powerful) because there are no other alternatives for ST? Even then, Sheldon needs his own package to be brought to the deck without which he is just a Panther. Adding Sheldon already restricts your deck building and people still add him because there are no other better win-con for ST (Oak is also good, but as Sheldon, it also needs conditions to be powerful and is very costly).
But of course, this has been discussed to death in this particular thread and nothing can be added to defend Sheldon which hasn't been mentioned here already.
Do you mean Skaggs doesn't need provisions of other cards to accomplish being powerful? Or did you mean Anseis doesn't need provisions of other cards to get huge value?
Post automatically merged:
My current view of ST is that they are hardly playable without the Sheldon package.