Temple Builds, Strong Combos, and Suggestions

[Tacullu64]

I would think it would be VERY detrimental to "change" cards after they are printed.  If you changed it and then reprinted the same card you would have 2 different versions of the same card floating around.

Honestly there is a way around ANY card or combo.  So once something exists that "seems" overpowered, really it isn't OP it just means it is something you have to deal with and there is almost always a way to deal with it.

For example if I see a "temple build" combo starting I usually let Hand of Bim go and when the Temple of Light hits I just toss all my resources on that for a turn (or 2 if I have to) and bam the "combo" is no longer a combo and nutrilized.  Hurl a boulder at the temple, it gets +2 vs conjurations and there are other attacks like that, or if not running that toss a couple big creatures at it.

So I would DEFINITELY not reprint/change ANY card, There is NO card that is "too good".  Just find a way around it or in the next expansion come up with a 'new' card that can be used against it.

I this my point of view on the topic, but in the end it comes down to what is best for the community.

What is best for the community is for AR to not make a knee jerk reaction to a perceived imbalance that doesn't exist at this time. We have had 2 tournaments with 2 completely different builds winning. I would be more concerned if another lord of terror build won and even then I wouldn't be concerned at all. I have seen the "build A" (or card x)  is OP thread after "build A" wins a tournament in every single card game I have played. I really hope AR doesn't go down the path of banning and/or nerfing cards, that crap (can I say crap? I really wanted to use stronger language) really ruins games for me.

It should be a law that cards can't be banned or nerfed until at least 3 tournaments have been played. Seriously folks, its way to early in the life of this game to entertain the idea of changing or banning cards. We have a fraction of the data required to make those decisions. I hope that AR never goes down that path, but if they do I would hope that it be based on way more tournament results than two.

[ringkichard]

I would think it would be VERY detrimental to "change" cards after they are printed.  If you changed it and then reprinted the same card you would have 2 different versions of the same card floating around.

I agree. This is the major problem with errata or balance adjustments in physical games. Once the game is printed, it's generally too late to make changes. It's just a limit of the medium. It's like watercolor. Once it's on the paper, you have to live with it one way or the other.

Honestly there is a way around ANY card or combo.  So once something exists that "seems" overpowered, really it isn't OP it just means it is something you have to deal with and there is almost always a way to deal with it.

For example if I see a "temple build" combo starting I usually let Hand of Bim go and when the Temple of Light hits I just toss all my resources on that for a turn (or 2 if I have to) and bam the "combo" is no longer a combo and nutrilized.  Hurl a boulder at the temple, it gets +2 vs conjurations and there are other attacks like that, or if not running that toss a couple big creatures at it.

This... this is wrong. Games are not auto-magically balanced. Game balance is difficult and always imperfect. If Temple of Light was always an automatic 3 for 1 in mana and cards it would probably be too good. You're right that there's probably always a tactical way to overcome a temple, but if all of the tactical solutions would have an exceptional strategic cost then the card may still be too powerful.

I mean, surely you agree that it would be possible to print a gamebreakingly bad card? Take the temple of light and start subtracting mana cost and adding stun range and armor and whatever else. Sooner or later the card is too good, right? Eventually?

So I would DEFINITELY not reprint/change ANY card, There is NO card that is "too good".  Just find a way around it or in the next expansion come up with a 'new' card that can be used against it.

There are three claims that can be made against nerfing Temple of Light.
1. No card can ever be too powerful. This is obviously wrong. It sounds more like dogma than argument.
2. Temple of light isn't yet shown to be too powerful. I'm happy to give this one more time. No single tournament is the metagame.
3. There are other, better, ways to adjust the metagame.

If something has to be done about Temple of Light or Hand of Bim-Shalla, I do think that there are better options than power level eratta. Tournament ban of problem cards + balanced reprint with name change+ low cost redemption of banned cards + new base set, for example.

Or, as an even better option, a metagame adjustment. Right now, the Priestess has several abilities that don't care about range or line of sight. This was probably supposed to be one of her subthemes. Unfortunately, it may be a bit too powerful. We'll see. If it is, I think this is the area that should have some hate cards printed.

[cbalian]

ANY card and ANY combo has another card or combo or strategy that can counter it or overcome it.  EVERY temple build deck I have played against has LOST, even with 4 Hands of Bim and Temple of Light etc I've found ways around it and honestly it wasn't that hard.  I considered it more of a speed bump than a detriment, sure it might have cost me a round or two to get rid of the temple but better than letting it hit me every round.  It's all about allocating resources.

So yep way to early to nerf ANYthing especially temples which are easily overcome so they can't be that OP.

[Shad0w]

I would think it would be VERY detrimental to "change" cards after they are printed.  If you changed it and then reprinted the same card you would have 2 different versions of the same card floating around.

Honestly there is a way around ANY card or combo.  So once something exists that "seems" overpowered, really it isn't OP it just means it is something you have to deal with and there is almost always a way to deal with it.

For example if I see a "temple build" combo starting I usually let Hand of Bim go and when the Temple of Light hits I just toss all my resources on that for a turn (or 2 if I have to) and bam the "combo" is no longer a combo and nutrilized.  Hurl a boulder at the temple, it gets +2 vs conjurations and there are other attacks like that, or if not running that toss a couple big creatures at it.

So I would DEFINITELY not reprint/change ANY card, There is NO card that is "too good".  Just find a way around it or in the next expansion come up with a 'new' card that can be used against it.

I this my point of view on the topic, but in the end it comes down to what is best for the community.

What is best for the community is for AR to not make a knee jerk reaction to a perceived imbalance that doesn't exist at this time. We have had 2 tournaments with 2 completely different builds winning. I would be more concerned if another lord of terror build won and even then I wouldn't be concerned at all. I have seen the "build A" (or card x)  is OP thread after "build A" wins a tournament in every single card game I have played. I really hope AR doesn't go down the path of banning and/or nerfing cards, that crap (can I say crap? I really wanted to use stronger language) really ruins games for me.

It should be a law that cards can't be banned or nerfed until at least 3 tournaments have been played. Seriously folks, its way to early in the life of this game to entertain the idea of changing or banning cards. We have a fraction of the data required to make those decisions. I hope that AR never goes down that path, but if they do I would hope that it be based on way more tournament results than two.

Very well stated I will make AW aware of this thread so they can see what the community thinks

[ringkichard]

It should be a law that cards can't be banned or nerfed until at least 3 tournaments have been played. Seriously folks, its way to early in the life of this game to entertain the idea of changing or banning cards. We have a fraction of the data required to make those decisions. I hope that AR never [has to go] down that path, but if they do I would hope that it be based on way more tournament results than two.

With the one bolded change I made, I also agree with this completely.

[Shad0w]

I think intercept will help to deal with this combo nicely.

[HeatStryke]

Here's the thing people are missing: The card is flatly overpowered. It's overefficent, overflexable and undercosted.

Note that we've had not 2 tournaments, but effectively 6. This card was played heavily accross the weekend. It's simply too damn good.

This isn't about killing combos, or disrupting decks. It's about a single overpowered card that needs to be dealt with.

Now consider the options. The simplist and easiest is obvious: Make the bloody thing Unique.

The reason why this works is two fold: It's very simple to remember and understand because its one word. If you have a player show up for a tournament you don't have to have them recalculate their whole build.

If you change the mana cost, you have to remind yourself constantly what it costs. This is problematic.

If you change the level you run into the same problem, PLUS the added issue of someone walking into a tournament and finding out their deck is illegal.

The hand's power is undeniable. The question is should it be dealt with now or wait to see if it domniates another tournament. It's not easy, nor it should be, to make a change like this.

Here's what I say. Show me an alternative. Not an alternative nerfing or not nerfing or whatever. Show me a deck that can consistantly beat the hand-centric builds.

If there is a deck that can do it, and reliably, then actions don't need to be taken. That's how metagame works. 

[baronzaltor]

Now consider the options. The simplist and easiest is obvious: Make the bloody thing Unique.

Thats been my feeling on it for a while.

[nitrodavid]

problem with intercept is it won't work once you are stunned.

the main problem with light spells in general is there is no resistance to them (sunblock enchantment). I'm sure they would eventually make resistance to light.

[Tacullu64]

Here's the thing people are missing: The card is flatly overpowered. It's overefficent, overflexable and undercosted.

Note that we've had not 2 tournaments, but effectively 6. This card was played heavily accross the weekend. It's simply too damn good.

This isn't about killing combos, or disrupting decks. It's about a single overpowered card that needs to be dealt with.

Now consider the options. The simplist and easiest is obvious: Make the bloody thing Unique.

The reason why this works is two fold: It's very simple to remember and understand because its one word. If you have a player show up for a tournament you don't have to have them recalculate their whole build.

If you change the mana cost, you have to remind yourself constantly what it costs. This is problematic.

If you change the level you run into the same problem, PLUS the added issue of someone walking into a tournament and finding out their deck is illegal.

The hand's power is undeniable. The question is should it be dealt with now or wait to see if it domniates another tournament. It's not easy, nor it should be, to make a change like this.

Here's what I say. Show me an alternative. Not an alternative nerfing or not nerfing or whatever. Show me a deck that can consistantly beat the hand-centric builds.

If there is a deck that can do it, and reliably, then actions don't need to be taken. That's how metagame works.

Are you talking about HoBM or ToL? It sounds like you're talking about HoBS.

You are correct I am totally missing how it is overpowered. Would you please spell it out for me.

Thanks in advance.

[Wiz-Pig]

Well one thing that hasn't been mentioned because maybe it's a little off topic, is that Hand of Bimshalla is a great money maker for you guys. I mean unless you have some special way of getting extra copies you need to buy a set of cards for each copy of it. So the build with 6 of them in it that won the championship probably came from 2 boxed starter sets + 4 Spell Tome 1s. While I am sure that there are people who are obsessed enough and have the disposable income to buy that many copies of the supplements anyway, it certainly doesn't hurt sales to have such a vital card that supports up to 6 multiples as a one per set card.

I don't mean to impune anything about the motives of Arcane Wonders, because frankly if a company isn't out to make money they aren't doing their job right but, I'd be curious if it directly impacted anyone here's decision to buy another copy or two of Spell Tome 1. Either way the deal you are giving us is still much better then a CCG like Magic in my opinion.

[reddawn]

Lol what am I even reading...

Big X creature builds totally poop on temple builds.  I play the Warlock all the time, and let's be real here; if the Warlock player had played Adramelech into a Slayer or two, instead of a wimpy Hellion and Imp for no real reason, it would have easily been GG. 

And to suggest that this 14 player tournament, in which many attendees were in fact new players (according to the playtesters themselves), is going to drive people to buy extra core sets JUST to get their hands on the oh-so-overpowered Hand of Bimshalla is so ridiculous it's funny.

Hand of Bim-shalla...the new goyf! Lol, c'mon. 

[HeatStryke]

HoBS is overepowered based on it's versatility alone. If I need offense I can power up my melee. If I can't reach you I can heal myself. Or if I'm simply positioning I can add armor without actually playing armor.

All this for 5 mana. Add this to the fact they power the temple of light, adding offense and control elements.

That is alot more versitility then most builds can hope that fast.

To discount the Origins tournaments as relevant data is wrong. The power of that card was evident against.both new and highly experinced players.

What I am saying is not "did you beat this" saying that you can beat it proves nothing. Tell me HOW you beat it. All I am saying is that in the hands of a competent player the card is too strong.

[nitrodavid]

you are right red, a 14 player tournament does not define the meta or op cards. I would like to see how the playing of the online simulation of mage wars will have a larger impact. currently there is no practical way for meta to spread from continents apart from people reading forums. the best way to break any card or meta is to increase the pool count and let natural evolution take place.

 it is better to fix a broken card in 6 months time then to change a possible op card now before people learn how to counter it. the larger the meta the exponentially faster you fine new op builds and counters to it. the hard part is getting the large enough meta, which right now is tiny (14 players as the largest tournament is microscopic compared to most card games)

[TricksterHat]

Isn't "the problem" with high competition play-style that it is the extremely specialised, unprepared for combination that wins? (I don't play competitively, but I like to read about it).

Extreme specialization is hard to counter, until you are prepared for it, then you can counter it effectively, though it might require dedicating some resources (assuming a more or less balanced game). The annoying thing is, that its hard (impossible?) to counter every extreme build. There is a danger of ending in a rock-paper-scissor situation where it is just a matter of luck whether your opponents fit the thesis or the anti-thesis (so to speak) to your build.

So, while I admire strong combos to a certain degree, I think over-specialization is a problem.

Currently the Priestess is my favorite, but I would hate a one-trick build. I like the way that I know I can build an unstoppable army, given enough time, but also know that I can be rushed to death and therefore have to try to change to a faster, but also more fallible playstyle. So I worry about something like: What if my enemy is a BM that casts Grizzly in the first turn, moves 2+Bitter Fox in the second, and Wolf+pet+Rouse the Beast in the third? That is 17 attack dice or 20 if Grizzly gets full attack and wolf and BM is in the same position. Having nothing, but temples at this point would be problematic I think.

I don't know how the extreme temple-build plays in detail, but I'm sure there is an answer. I hope strategy will be based on a broad selection of cards.

(and nice comment Wiz-pig, I've had that thought)