Suggestion: Rot Tosser should be Legendary instead of Common

[Redcoat2012]

You can't turn every silver ability into a bronze + timer. I've only compared similar cards. Using Katakan or any other silver isn't a fair comparison.

It wasn't meant to be a fair comparison, it was me showing how your add one positive to turn a bronze card silver then add a negative to take it back to bronze 'logic' was heavily flawed. You are right that you can't turn every silver card into a bronze one which is why your argument with the whole "epidemic + effect row only = silver add turn timer = bronze again" doesn't hold water.

Using 1 bronze card can still wreak havoc, like Epidemic or Tremors. Those could also have a potentially way higher power advantage than your average bronze. There are also cards like Blue Mountain Commando or Behemoth that can bring a lot of power unto the board. It's impossible to balance all cards individually and their potential combos. But that's okay. As long as their power remains within reach of counter-plays.

Whilst it is true that a single bronze card can provide amazing board value they can also provide very poor value potentially negative value if mistimed. The tosser however will almost always provide more than the 8 minimum strength to be considered a successful use of a bronze card. Also that whole "impossible to balance" line is rhetoric, balancing numbers is easily achievable. With balancing I like to think of tea and sugar, adding new game content is akin to chucking a spoonful of sugar in the tea, if you don't stir the sugar will just sit at the bottom never really being evenly integrated, you need to stir it. In game balancing terms the stirring is frequent (twice a week ideally) releases of tiny re-balancing hot fixes. That last highlighted part made zero sense whatsoever to me, please define what "remaining in reach of counter-plays" means.

Having (a lot of) units of the same (lowest/highest) strength is always a risk. There is Epidemic, Scorch and every variation thereof. This just makes it an ideal target for Rot Tosser. In ideal situations everything is strong.

Sure its a risk to have a lot of even strength high and low units but even then these tossers can bypass careful planning of unit placements as they only effect the row. Perhaps an NR player places some Poor infantry so they become a shield for epidemics plus a Red Knight to be their higher strength unit to stop scorches whilst their mid row has a reinforcement mustered set of 3 light cavs. In this hypothetical they've covered both the highs and lows to stop the 21 points worth of light cav from being a tasty epidemic or possible scorch and yet should Their nilf opponent drop a tosser it will not have mattered, they're all going to die. The only cards that would clear the mid row like this that come to mind are Geralt:igni and Borch, they are both gold and one has a huge timer to react to the other is largely considered to be too strong.

Or like I've mentioned:
- Epidemic = 1:1 exchange with NG gaining 4 strength
- Cleaver (locking) = reacting to a bronze card with a silver and getting +1 Strength at the cost of 1 silver card - I'd count that as a win for the tosser
- Henselt (promoting) = A leader ability.....
- Monsters' devourer - Ghouls can only eat from graveyard, ekkimaras are the only ones that come to mind, even then its not ideal, you use those to gain as much strength as possible to then feed the kayran, eating 1 strength units is not ideal.
- Dol Blathanna Trapper - how exactly can a disloyal ambush unit help you with these cows?
- Blue Mountain Commander - those commandos are perhaps the only actual counter to the cows, even then a lot of ST strategies revolve around reusing specific cards which this method hampers a little.

One more time, typically the worst case scenario for the rot tosser user is that the opponent might be forced to use an alzurs bolt at the cow. In that case the cards granted its user 4+7 points worth of strength in a 1 for 1 card exchange. This is not including the rare niche ST BMC interaction which can be played around by waiting out the commandos, in the monster consume deck the kayran will be a lot weaker if all your ekki's have had to eat 1 strength units.

 

[Snfonseka]

My suggestion is to set Cow Carcass's strength 3 (or 4) and kill only one unit which is less or equal to 3 (or 4). If all other units are have higher strength than Cow Carcass, it should destroy itself. Also timer should be removed.

 

[idomyownstunts]

I honestly don't think they're that bad. I play two of them in my Nilf deck and it hardly makes me omnipotent. Infact, with most of the other "meta" decks they are swatted away like flies. I just had a match against another Nilf deck it was an absolute toss off....wait what. Let me think that over and come back and rephrase it. And yes, I did enjoy it. GG whoever you were.

 

[4RM3D]

Also that whole "impossible to balance" line is rhetoric, balancing numbers is easily achievable. With balancing I like to think of tea and sugar...

Interesting analogy. However you don't just have sugar, but also milk. Also adding too much sugar means you have to add more tea. Then maybe you have too little milk, however adding too much milk might suppress the sugar. Etc. etc. I am more a fan of the Rock-Paper-Scissors analogy, as in one deck/tactic is always going to be weak against one and strong against another.

Setting aside the analogies and looking at numbers. If ever action can be translated to numbers, then you might be able to create a perfect balance. But this is never the case. The value of Epidemic is highly situational. How much strength can you attribute to such a card? You have to look at the minimum and maximum effects as well as the weighted average and then compare it with other abilities.

Epidemic = 1:1 exchange with NG gaining 4 strength

Not always. For example, the opponent could be affected by weather. But even when you only remove 1 card, the 4 strength advantage isn't that much. And such a variation is allowed for bronze cards.

Cleaver (locking) = reacting to a bronze card with a silver and getting +1 Strength at the cost of 1 silver card - I'd count that as a win for the tosser

Yes, depending on how desperate you are. But what do you think of a scenario like this: Opponent uses Ocvist (a legendary) and you snipe it with Thunder (a lowly bronze)? These kind of (unfair?) trade-offs happen. Thunder isn't even that strong.

Monsters' devourer - Ghouls can only eat from graveyard, ekkimaras are the only ones that come to mind, even then its not ideal, you use those to gain as much strength as possible to then feed the kayran, eating 1 strength units is not ideal.

You forgot about Vran Warrior. Using Ekkimara or Vran or even Kayran on Cow Carcass might be worth it to prevent losing a strong unit. BUT there is another way to use the Devourers (Kayran especially). Instead of eating the Cow Carcass, you eat the other unit(s) on the row instead.

Dol Blathanna Trapper - how exactly can a disloyal ambush unit help you with these cows?

You place the trapper on the siege row, preventing Rot Tosser from being played, until the trapper is taken care off.

 

[Struyk]

Interesting analogy. However you don't just have sugar, but also milk. Also adding too much sugar means you have to add more tea. Then maybe you have too little milk, however adding too much milk might suppress the sugar. Etc. etc. I am more a fan of the Rock-Paper-Scissors analogy, as in one deck/tactic is always going to be weak against one and strong against another.

Setting aside the analogies and looking at numbers. If ever action can be translated to numbers, then you might be able to create a perfect balance. But this is never the case. The value of Epidemic is highly situational. How much strength can you attribute to such a card? You have to look at the minimum and maximum effects as well as the weighted average and then compare it with other abilities.



Not always. For example, the opponent could be affected by weather. But even when you only remove 1 card, the 4 strength advantage isn't that much. And such a variation is allowed for bronze cards.



Yes, depending on how desperate you are. But what do you think of a scenario like this: Opponent uses Ocvist (a legendary) and you snipe it with Thunder (a lowly bronze)? These kind of (unfair?) trade-offs happen. Thunder isn't even that strong.



You forgot about Vran Warrior. Using Ekkimara or Vran or even Kayran on Cow Carcass might be worth it to prevent losing a strong unit. BUT there is another way to use the Devourers (Kayran especially). Instead of eating the Cow Carcass, you eat the other unit(s) on the row instead.



You place the trapper on the siege row, preventing Rot Tosser from being played, until the trapper is taken care off.

Yeah and imagine if you have no answer for Ocvist ( THERE AREN'T MANY )? He gets +1 card advantage and debuff all your units by -1...

 

[Redcoat2012]

Interesting analogy. However you don't just have sugar, but also milk. Also adding too much sugar means you have to add more tea. Then maybe you have too little milk, however adding too much milk might suppress the sugar. Etc. etc. I am more a fan of the Rock-Paper-Scissors analogy, as in one deck/tactic is always going to be weak against one and strong against another.

Setting aside the analogies and looking at numbers. If ever action can be translated to numbers, then you might be able to create a perfect balance. But this is never the case. The value of Epidemic is highly situational. How much strength can you attribute to such a card? You have to look at the minimum and maximum effects as well as the weighted average and then compare it with other abilities.



Not always. For example, the opponent could be affected by weather. But even when you only remove 1 card, the 4 strength advantage isn't that much. And such a variation is allowed for bronze cards.



Yes, depending on how desperate you are. But what do you think of a scenario like this: Opponent uses Ocvist (a legendary) and you snipe it with Thunder (a lowly bronze)? These kind of (unfair?) trade-offs happen. Thunder isn't even that strong.



You forgot about Vran Warrior. Using Ekkimara or Vran or even Kayran on Cow Carcass might be worth it to prevent losing a strong unit. BUT there is another way to use the Devourers (Kayran especially). Instead of eating the Cow Carcass, you eat the other unit(s) on the row instead.



You place the trapper on the siege row, preventing Rot Tosser from being played, until the trapper is taken care off.

You're repeating the same old "tis all fine" line that you've fell back on from the start whilst you choose to ignore the points I clearly state. The rock paper scissors approach is a terrible methodology for game balance. If Gwent was balanced so that deck a beats b beats c which beats a then the game is non-existant. The games outcome would be set at the start and you'd just be mashing buttons much alike a skinner box. Rock paper scissors is about as much of a game as flipping coins.

Yes the value of epidemic is situational but units like Redanian knights are not. These plain as Jane pure strength units set the baseline a bronze card needs to match. That means that Epidemics and other bronze cards that swing less than 8 damage worth of points are poorly used; one could simply play a Redanian knight and come out ahead. If you use a bronze card and exceed this figure then its a good use of the card. As for combos 2 bronze cards that when combined exceed 16 points of value would make the combo worthwhile, you can follow this trend for more complicated combos.

This is the problem with the cow tosser, for the vast majority of what you mistakenly call counters the tosser user still gets about 14 strength out of a bronze card. You said it yourself "You have to look at the minimum and maximum". In truth however you look for the mean value, not worst and best case scenarios. If you balance around the extremes then you would find that all the cards become too niche and the game would become more like rock paper scissors, this again is awful game design.

With that in mind lets look at your solutions to cow carcass.

1. Just use an epidemic whilst they have a bunch of 1 strength weather effected cards! This is a very rare occurrence and extremely specific. Not only would the deck need weather cards and epidemics but the enemy would have to make a very stupid move and play the carcass whilst having 8 of their own units at 1 strength. When you work out the chances that this will happen you run into the "solar eclipse on a clear day" levels of improbability.

2. Ocvist. First of all its a silver not a legendary. Don't kid yourself in thinking that a cards scrap cost denotes any power whatsoever. Being able to kill it with Alzur's is fine, its a 1 for 1 exchange of cards with no one coming out ahead, he has such an incredibly high reward should he not be dealt with, it is the definition of high risk high reward. It is fine that a silver card can be dealt with by a bronze one its not fine when a bronze one requires a silver to be dealt with. Such is the case with Rot Tosser the only sure and reliable way to not lose out when a tosser is used against you is to use a decoy it back and hope you don't both get involved in a toss off.

3. I didn't forget about Vran warrior at all I decided not to include it for 3 reasons. 1 if already in play its on a timer. 2 If you play the Vran to eat the cow your left with a Vran eating the rest of the row which could be worse than the original cow. 3 The Vrans are a crucial element in the current devour strategy, to just throw them wherever you want takes a lot away from the decks strength, they need to eat those spiders if they are eating the behemoths instead to stop a cow its really bad. As for eating the units around it, again, you've got one turn before it goes of. Clearing a row in one turn isn't going to be likely unless the NG player used the carcass on an undeveloped row. Using Kayran on weak units to avoid them being destroyed goes against the Kayran's strength as well.

4. The trappers are about the only card that can lock these tossers down, however they're rarely likely to be fielded as their 4 base strength makes them very underwhelming now. Taking them for this one good interaction would make the deck considerably weaker in general, that is an argument that can be accredited to pretty much any card though so I'd grant you that one. This may very well be the best cow tosser interaction and even then you're spending one card on a what if. Ironically this could result in ST players being forced into use these traps on a row that an NG player may never intend on using because of a card that the NG player doesn't even include. I thought you knew of a reactive means to deal with tossers with a trapper at first.

Again to reiterate - unless the cow is decoyed back any solution to the cow tosser aside from a very small number of faction specific units being used in a less desirable manner than their deck inclusion intended results in the NG player gaining +4 board strength in a 1 for 1 trade of cards, on top of that its value is likely to be 12 or more. If they made a 4 strength bronze unit card with the effect of removing a bronze card from the opponents hand it would be heinously overpowered. Rot Tosser is a more powerful version of this hypothetical card as it holds an even higher potential impact.

It needs to be restricted to one through being silver or heavily reworked.

 

[Struyk]

Again to reiterate - unless the cow is decoyed back any solution to the cow tosser aside from a very small number of faction specific units being used in a less desirable manner than their deck inclusion intended results in the NG player gaining +4 board strength in a 1 for 1 trade of cards, on top of that its value is likely to be 12 or more. If they made a 4 strength bronze unit card with the effect of removing a bronze card from the opponents hand it would be heinously overpowered. Rot Tosser is a more powerful version of this hypothetical card as it holds an even higher potential impact.

It needs to be restricted to one through being silver or heavily reworked.

THIS, we can close the topic!

 

[4RM3D]

You're repeating the same old "tis all fine" line that you've fell back on from the start whilst you choose to ignore the points I clearly state.

It might all be okay, but I did try to address each of your points. Anyhow, lets talk about something else...

2. Ocvist. First of all its a silver not a legendary.

Ocvist is a legendary card.

You said it yourself "You have to look at the minimum and maximum"

...as well as the weighted average and then compare it with other abilities. Don't quote only half the sentence, when that changes its meaning.

Yes the value of epidemic is situational but units like Redanian knights are not. These plain as Jane pure strength units set the baseline a bronze card needs to match. That means that Epidemics and other bronze cards that swing less than 8 damage worth of points are poorly used; one could simply play a Redanian knight and come out ahead. If you use a bronze card and exceed this figure then its a good use of the card. As for combos 2 bronze cards that when combined exceed 16 points of value would make the combo worthwhile, you can follow this trend for more complicated combos.

Lets talk balancing. The devs have stated that the baseline for bronze is 8, silver is 10 and gold is 12. This is good as a starting point. However it's impossible to enforce.

You mentioned the Redanian Knight; a pretty simple card. Lets compare it with Dun Banner Light Cavalry. It might look easy to compare, but this alone is already quite difficult. The Cavalry has 1 less strength, however it's weather immune. Is weather immunity worth losing 1 strength? With the meta heavy weather decks, definitely. So we've already lost the balance (in the strictest sense). How much strength do you have to pay for weather immunity? 2, 3? It's impossible to tell; too many variables. That one point might make all the different in the world (e.g. Iorveth not being able to snipe YenCon). Then I haven't even talked about the different between ranged (Cavalry) and melee (Knight) and situational (de)buffs on a row.

Balancing is a bitch. As someone once said: if balancing is impossible, then try to create as much chaos as possible and everything will balance out naturally at some point.

As for combos 2 bronze cards that when combined exceed 16 points of value would make the combo worthwhile, you can follow this trend for more complicated combos.

Indeed. A good combo should be rewarded with more strength (or damage). The question is: how much more?

--------------------------------

Back on the topic of Rot Tosser. A quick comparison with Epidemic again. Having Epidemic you can make sure the opponent has the weakest unit. The only thing you can't do, is target a specific row. So if you want to keep Rot Tosser bronze and good compromise would be to no longer be able to target a specific row. Instead Rot Tosser will wait 1 turn and then kills the weakest unit on the opponent's side.

 

[SigilFey]

Topic moved into General Discussions. Title edited for clarity.

And...carry on!

 

[milosh69]

In comparison to Epidemic Rot Tosser is a mere joke when playing with weather (which seems to be OP's main concerne), and it can't be countered

 

[RickMelethron]

INB4 "foglets too OP nerf please"

if you consistently lose games to rot tosser, the problem is between your chair and your monitor.

 

[Julivan]

rickmelethronn here got a point

 

[Struyk]

INB4 "foglets too OP nerf please"

if you consistently lose games to rot tosser, the problem is between your chair and your monitor.

Not everyone plays monster decks...

 

[Redcoat2012]

Ocvist is a legendary card.

The point you're responding to was "Ocvist. First of all its a silver not a legendary. Don't kid yourself in thinking that a cards scrap cost denotes any power whatsoever." You decided to selectively exclude the bit about scrap cost (legendary/epic/rare/common) being irrelevant when it comes to balancing, which is true. This is a topic regarding game balance not price points so it being legendary holds no relevance to the topic and that was the point being made. Its a silver card and should be balanced against other silvers even the blue rarity 80 scrap ones, neigh especially the 80 scrap ones.

...as well as the weighted average and then compare it with other abilities. Don't quote only half the sentence, when that changes its meaning.

It is very ironic that you would state this directly after having done it yourself, this is very hypocritical of you. It makes it look as if you are not here to rationally debate the balance of the card in question, it might appear that you are only posting here to win/end the debate regardless of how you do it or whether it makes sense. You're arguments so far has often just been buzzwords, semantics, and at times quotes that sound a lot like game dev rhetoric. I however provide very simple solid mathematics, if there is a flaw in my reasoning then it would be very easy to discredit using your own maths and reasoning. I decided to quote the aforementioned because it emphasised the central point I've been making, which was that these bronze cards provide a minimum of 14 points of strength when 'countered' with only a handful of extremely fringe exceptions, two of which include silver/gold cards.

Lets talk balancing. The devs have stated that the baseline for bronze is 8, silver is 10 and gold is 12. This is good as a starting point. However it's impossible to enforce.

Those are the correct baseline figures and the ones I have been using, as for it being impossible to enforce - that is just wrong! I'm not seeing any 9,10,11 etc strength blank bronze cards. Whilst cards with effects vary in impact based on the situation its used in (epidemic for example) they have not been making plain bronze cards that exceed this 8 point total, any below it are objectively under powered, any above this would therefore be overpowered. Bronze cards that apply more than this total often have a flaw, Kaedweni siege supports for example provide 9 board strength but 6 points of these points are spread as a buff across 2 other units making it potentially worse than just fielding the 8 pointer, the NG knights with their whopping 11 points have to reveal a random card in the hand. (they are likely op seeing as they buff the spotters among other things but this is going off on a tangent) Effect cards like epidemic have large swings, they can potentially do more harm than good, should they ever be more likely to do more than 8 points of damage more often than not they would get a nerf, Mushrooms got nerfed for this reason as they were more often than not providing 12 points of value other the course of a game.

You mentioned the Redanian Knight; a pretty simple card. Lets compare it with Dun Banner Light Cavalry. It might look easy to compare, but this alone is already quite difficult. The Cavalry has 1 less strength, however it's weather immune. Is weather immunity worth losing 1 strength? With the meta heavy weather decks, definitely. So we've already lost the balance (in the strictest sense). How much strength do you have to pay for weather immunity? 2, 3? It's impossible to tell; too many variables. That one point might make all the different in the world (e.g. Iorveth not being able to snipe YenCon). Then I haven't even talked about the different between ranged (Cavalry) and melee (Knight) and situational (de)buffs on a row.

I agree 1 strength right now is worth sacrificing for weather immunity because of the current 8 weather effect dagon meta deck, you are also correct that evaluating the strength of weather immunity is very tricky but its far from impossible, as it is weather is to damn strong but that is a different discussion entirely, balancing it would be rather easy, but it would really need to be changed before we can really evaluate the value of weather immunity, blizzard pots help somewhat, seeing as a bronze card needs to be worth at least 8 and generally speaking most decks field no more than 3 of a given unit, (with a couple exceptions) we can say that weather immunity is probably worth 3 points, that or blizzard pots are crap.

To continue with the Iorveth point - Triss isn't being fielded much any more, this is because Odrin, Dandelion, and Reaver hunters amoung other have received base strength buffs, on top of that Odrin and Dandelion are much less common now that the pesky PFI varients strat won't get you up to the 2k+ elo ranges. Yencon being 5 strength can survive Triss and shes (yen) a meta pick. With that in mind lets compare Vernon, Triss, and Iorveth, 2 can kill the yencon and Triss cannot, Roche can kill yencon whilst being higher strength than Iorveth. This might lead one to say that Vernon is the most powerful of all 3 but that is not the case, they are all equally balanced as they are simple cards its easy to see they are all meeting the 12 strength gold card base line it just happens that dealing 5 damage is better right now because of the meta. Triss though less desirable is just as strong as Vernon, if we was to then buff her so she was another Vernon it could end up with the game turning into all cards being equal relative to their colour group, the game would be too shallow, rounds would be based on what cards were drawn and when and it would become extremely boring.

There are a lot of variables however it is far from as you declare 'impossible' to balance a card properly. In the case of this card in question - the rot tosser its extremely easy. I've provided the math which quite clearly proves that the card will provide more than 8 points worth of impact even when countered correctly, if a card is being countered properly then it should provide far less strength than its baseline. With the tosser the common counters yield a 1:1 exchange of bronze cards + the 4 base strength which means that the tosser is granting free points, seeing as the cards used to kill the cow could be used against the nilf player (alzurs thunder sniping cards for example) you can add that total to its value. With this in mind evaluating the tosser becomes its base strength (4) plus the total damage the cow deals to the opponent (should it proc) + the value of any card used to counter said cow minus any damage the cow may deal to the rot tosser user in the incredibly rare one off (ST natures gift on decoy is very rare) chance its decoyed back at you.

So ~ 4 base strength plus the value of the bronze card that was used to kill the cow, [bronze cards are again baselined at 8] so the tosser = 12 strength WHEN COUNTERED!

Ironically ignoring the cow is more often the best move. Unless you're going to lose 8 points worth of strength when it pops, the cards used to stop it if used properly should net 8 or more points, alzur on an ocvist would provide more than 7 value, if you are using lacerates/manticores/epidemics and dealing less than 8 points worth of impact with them you're misusing them. Finally you can not count the cow tosser that kills a single 2 strength unit and say "its basically a 6 strength card because a single arachas spawned on the row - buff rot tosser" that would be on the rot tosser user misusing his cards.

Balancing is a bitch. As someone once said: if balancing is impossible, then try to create as much chaos as possible and everything will balance out naturally at some point.

This is an example of that game dev rhetoric I mentioned earlier, first of all its not true and it adds no substance to your counter argument. Bringing chaos to order takes a lot of effort applied with surgical precision.

Back on the topic of Rot Tosser. A quick comparison with Epidemic again. Having Epidemic you can make sure the opponent has the weakest unit. The only thing you can't do, is target a specific row. So if you want to keep Rot Tosser bronze and good compromise would be to no longer be able to target a specific row. Instead Rot Tosser will wait 1 turn and then kills the weakest unit on the opponent's side.

If you mean the weakest units not just the weakest unit, the rot tosser would just become a 4 strength bronze card with epidemic thrown on it for free and it should therefore become silver as a result, it would reduce its maximum impact as you can't target high strength isolated units but at the same time it would still be to op. If however you meant that it should kill just 1 of the weakest units picked randomly then it would be under powered more often than not killing nothing but a 2-3 strength unit, it would also stop being a fun card to use. In essence it would become nilfgaards shitty Ballista, I don't feel it needs to be gimped into a crap unit, just restricted to 1 per game.

By making it silver you retain the 'fun to use' nature of the card, this fun comes from its amazing potential damage output and fairly unique gameplay, at the same time if it were silver it would become far more acceptable to say "Just decoy/cleaver" the unit as a counter. Individually the card isn't too problematically, its that the problems compound due to being able to field 3 of them. If it were limited to 1 by being silver it would still be a very powerful choice as its very highly likely to yield 12 (gold) strength worth of value when countered whilst being a high risk but potentially astronomical reward, especially when wombo'd with weather or used against Cantarella.

 

[SaunteringLion]

Ways around Rot Tosser:

1. Alzur's Lightning. It's great in this meta. Run it. You can use it against Ocvist or other salient targets (Axemen), it's never a bad idea to have one in hand.
2. Decoy. If Rot Tosser is consistently posing a problem to you in your bracket, and it's so fundamental you're losing multiple units, toss it back.
3. Most importantly, play around it. Stagger your unit strength, which is always a good idea (to also protect out the opposite end with Scorch). Don't stack rows; if you do, you're making yourself vulnerable. Vary the units you have and where they're played. Know if you do play Wild Hunt Riders or Temerian Foot Soldiers against Nilfgaard, they will be targeted. If you do have to lay down cards with equal value on a row, make sure you have a low value target to intercept (Hawker Smugglers, Kaedweni Siege Experts, etc.).

I don't play Nilfgaard much but nerfing Rot Tosser would be crippling a faction which is already having difficulty finding its niche.

 

[4RM3D]

*snip*

When the reply no longer fits the screen (well, my screen), it's time to throw in the towel. We actually do agree on a lot of things, even though we have approached it from different sides.

As for balancing gameplay, it isn't as easy as you make it appear, even though I agree with your theory behind it. Regardless of the difficulty, it's no excuse for the devs to become lazy. Even if they cannot achieve a perfect balance, they can at least try to get as close as possible. My remark about "there is balance in chaos" is not really a good argument or one I support as such. It's just that if balancing becomes problematic, throwing in a wildcard (unpredictable element) might actually help.

Epidemic is unpredictable, yes. Also, cards like Villentretenmerth and Pavetta can go completely different ways depending on the situation. Still, one of my most favorite wild cards is Yennefer (not YenCon); (De)buffing all units with 2 strength. She had some weird power swings in certain matches. Like that one time when the opponent only had two 8 strength units on the row. They got buffed and immediately came within my Igni range.

This might lead one to say that Vernon is the most powerful of all 3 but that is not the case, they are all equally balanced as they are simple cards its easy to see they are all meeting the 12 strength gold card base line it just happens that dealing 5 damage is better right now because of the meta.

^ That remark right there, you've hit the jackpot. Even though the cards are balanced, they are not equally strong, because of the shifting meta. Triss is generally considered the weakest, because you can't kill as many cards with it. If there would be a whole new array of 4 strength gold units, then that would indirectly buff Triss also, without actually touching Triss herself. This means you are actually judging cards on two different levels: whether they are balanced and whether they are useful (for a lack of a better word) in the current meta.

--------

One final note about Rot Tosser. Regardless of whether or not he should be silver, it is one of the strongest bronze cards.

 

[Lantea]

IMO, it should be a silver card not a bronze, as it seems kind of op for a bronze cards that you can have 3x in a deck. If someone plays it several times in a row you are pretty much done no matter what counter you have, as no viable deck has enough counters to get rid of 3+ Rot tossers.

 

[nestalim]

The real problem here is how bad you are at this game and your needs to complain on a very balanced card.

 

[DMaster2]

Legendary? No. But something needs to be done because as it is now it's busted as hell. Like make it burn stuff at the end of my turn, instead of allowing my opponent to mess with my row and burning half of my stuff.

 

[TheShift]

I get the same feeling from this card. As I get when I get villentretenmerth pulled on me...which is frightening. .lol

I can, for the most part,counter rot..

[h=1][/h]