Jump to content

Folkvar

Members
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Folkvar

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 10/13/1975

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://petrovicnasos.wixsite.com/athanasios-petrovits
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Athens, Greece

Recent Profile Visitors

80 profile views
  1. So, essentially, what you’re saying is that before restricting Spyglass, you didn’t feel the need to restrict the Crab clan, since it was second-best (behind Phoenix, presumably) but now you do restrict the Crab clan (or so you think), even though you still don’t believe that they’re at their best but just “one of the best”? Fair enough, although that could take slightly more clarification. And on the matter of restricting, Spyglass…When you thought that the Niten Master and the Pathfinder’s Blade were an overpowering combo, you restricted both. Fair. When you thought that Forged Edict and Fate Worse Than Death were too powerful for both of them to be in the same deck (something that you should have seen in the play-testing phase of the cards, but let’s bypass that for now), you restricted both. Fair. When you thought that Isawa Tadaka was dominating the Phoenix game, you changed his text and restricted him along with Secluded Shrine. Which leads us to now, where you think that the Crab clan has seen successes revolving around the same combo of keeping major characters in the game, along with all attachments, relying in 5 Crab cards, to do that so…you restrict a Unicorn card…Do I need to spell out how much nonsensical this decision is? If you truly wanted to break the Crab old-style combo you should put in the restricted list either Iron Mine or Reprieve or both. That is how you weaken an overpowered combo. Nobody gives a **** about Spyglass. They just won’t play it and things will just continue to be the same. They will play Spoils of War instead for card draw. Whatever. It will be a minor inconvenience and the way things are going with all the attachment-hate, Crab players will probably say: "Good riddance." The game was not won on the back of Spyglass. Spyglass was the least of anyone’s worries when playing against Crab. 1st priority was to remove Reprieve along with Iron Mine and 2nd priority was to play around Watch Commander. Balancing seven clans is hard, but you’re not even trying, it seems. You just superficially check a few things and decide on the fly without proper play-testing and/or brainstorming on potential outcomes. And to the people that might come to this post with the argument: “Yeah, you’re all criticism but you don’t provide any meaningful feedback,” I will say: “My feedback for game design is paid by the hour, not given freely. People who want my advice on how to make money, they will pay me for it. Free advice is reserved for friends and family, only.” Have a nice day. Edit: I am still waiting on the solution that you come up with on how to make an attachment-heavy clan competitive, in an heavily attachment-hate meta. I really do. Also, the Daisho is crap, don't bring it up in examples like it's the next best thing that happened to the Dragon clan after Mitsu.
  2. After the results in the Birmingham Grand Kotei, I believe that the Dragon clan is still too overpowered, compared to the rest, especially the Scorpion. They need a couple more nerfs to their cards (maybe Yokuni needs to have no text at all and Mitsu should be a 1/1 with 0 glory at a cost of 6...just throwing out ideas) and they certainly need at least 3 more cards in the restricted list.
  3. So, how do developers (NOT players) feel about the state of the Dragon clan, in the current meta? Do you feel that things are "balanced" - having an attachment-based clan in an attachment-hate meta? Do you think that it is "good" game design? I'm really, honestly asking the developers (who won't answer, obviously), how they make their decisions concerning the way the meta is going to go. Honestly.
×
×
  • Create New...