[Official] Rain of Fire | Fire Storm

[Dm]

Let us not forget comparing two cards will also further require you to inspect it's Element, which was what Odii was trying to do in the first page.

6  +2 Cards = 8 cost for 4 damage
7 + 1 Card = 8 cost for 3 damage
8 cost for 4 damage =/= 8 cost for 3 damage.

Correct, correct.

But you need two cards in your hand to do that with thunderstorm.
You only need one to do it with rain of fire.

In a 30 card deck, assume that you packed 2 thunderstorms. If you get 1 thunderstorm, by the time you get the other, that +1 point of dmg to every opponent creature in the field could have decided the game already.

The "minor" card advantage that we have by only needing one card to deal said damage should be taken into account.

[Naesala]

3 + 1 Card = 4 cost 2 damage or 6  +2 Cards = 8 cost for 4 damage
7 + 1 Card = 8 cost for 3 damage
8 cost for 4 damage =/= 8 cost for 3 damage.

So Archangel (6 quanta +1 card for 7 damage) is the same cost as photon (0 quanta + 7 cards for 7 damage), and therefor they have the same power... and Antlions (8+4 for 8 damage) have the same cost as a stone dragon (10+1 for 8 damage)
So acording to your theory of this cost Antlions would be nearly as strong as stone dragons and can be used for a rush the same way...?

Please calculate with 1 card = 3 cost at least...

You're ignoring the toughness and abilities of cards, which also factors into them

Look, go through some old card threads this is the formula I have seen repeated over, and over, and over again and when everyone else used it people agreed. So I dont know if people were biased towards them, if youre biased against me, or if I'm somehow failing to properly explain.

[WexMajor]

The decks who will gain something over a cost decrease of RoF/FSt are obviously rainbow ones.
Mono fire usually pumps so much quanta in, that paying 7/5 is effortless.
A duo or trio would have little difficulty of playing them (maybe RoF is a bit hard to pull off), and rainbow (or quad quanta) suffer.

[Dm]

Most rainbows still prefer the use of Rain of Fire. The big ones, that is. Smaller ones are usually rushy and thunderstorm instead becomes Elite Wyrm.

[grimdragon64]

I wasn't really that offended by Odii's remark, but I still appreciate Naesala standing up for me.
After reading the comments here, I believe the most suitable buff is the unupped card going down to 6  .
Thanks, all of you for telling me why RoF should or should not be buffed. Now I'm just curious how this card would be compared with Plague.

[Keolino]

I wasn't really that offended by Odii's remark, but I still appreciate Naesala standing up for me.
After reading the comments here, I believe the most suitable buff is the unupped card going down to 6  .
Thanks, all of you for telling me why RoF should or should not be buffed. Now I'm just curious how this card would be compared with Plague.

When comparing with plague, you can't miss that it is in death, the element which benefits the most of any death effect. That for, you can't add a really strong Mass-CC card into death. Plague would be the result of that, not too strong, but not exactly weak either.

But the use of plague is completely different from RoF or Thunderstorm, because it doesn't kill instantly and stalling your opponents creatures becomes much more important. So in a decent stall deck, plague could become stronger than RoF, but it is more difficult to built a deck around that, so the card is cheaper.

[Captain Scibra]

Currently, 9 cost (counting 1 card used) is worth 3 damage to opponent creatures, so for 2 damage would be 6, 5 after considering Air is to be more proficient at CC I find in my theories.  Therefore 3 cost + 1 card, as it is now.  Upgrade bonuses are applied based on overall efficiency of the upgrade.  Both follow accordingly.  The fact that the 3rd damage has more potential just coincides with how each card is designed according to element's tendencies and what it excels with.

[Vangelios]

Reduce quantum cost to 6|4, because is  only 50% more damage with 100% more expensive than thunderstorm
I think it's fair, and yet not destroy a fractal of psions, however 2 thunderstorm do it

oops, there is a correction, is 6 | 4 and not 5 | 4

[UndeadSpider1990]

2 Thunder/Lightning Storms deal 4 damage and costs 6/4.
1 Rain of Fire/Fire Storm deals 3 damage and costs 7/5.

You missed one thing. The cost of 2 Thunder Storms is 6 +two cards. The quanta cost of Rain of Fire is higher, despite dealing less damage, but it is only one card. If that second card was a Fire Pillar, you would easily make up the quanta difference.

decks also work differently to because a lot of Fire cards gain from having a lot of Quanta. Air keeps Quanta supplies low, and repeats a lot of abilities like Dive and Eagle's Eye which cost .

Fire can also surprise an opponent by using Immolation to get the Quanta when they thought they were safe. In unupped play, an advanced player will be very sure if his opponent can afford Thunder Storm or not.


Despite all this, I still don't think it would be the end of the world if unupped RoF cost 6 . I think the upped cost is correct.

[arthur974]

Most of the time those cards are not 6 packed in 30 cards deck. I think that an essential question is what do you kill with one firerain a simple thunderstorm won't take out, and does it worth the quantum difference. Dealing 3 instead of 2 makes a big difference against othyugs, (mitosys) frogs, mummies, wyrms, upped vampires, ect

Simply not the same card, upped thunder is splashable but less powerful, firerain kills almost all the "starting" creatures of both control and aggro decks.

(edit: just saying a diferent way that what you guys just say before... /edit)

[Kilokrema]

Someone tell me why RoF dont hit immaterial creatures?
Immaterial: ~ can not be targetred
RoF text : Deals 3 damage to every enemy creature
As I see RoF dont target creatures.
Only way to kill this kind of creature playing mono  is Fire Shield(medicore solution) or ... kill enemy before Immaterial creature swarm kill you 

[Treldon]

Someone tell me why RoF dont hit immaterial creatures?
Immaterial: ~ can not be targetred
RoF text : Deals 3 damage to every enemy creature
As I see RoF dont target creatures.
Only way to kill this kind of creature playing mono  is Fire Shield(medicore solution) or ... kill enemy before Immaterial creature swarm kill you 

RoF works by targeting individual creature slots, not the field, thus the 'cannot be targeted' rule still applies. Shields are different, since those don't target anything.