Fractal | Fractal

[Zeru]

Opening post updated. I would like to inform you all that every single Master has moderation rights in the card sub-forum, so you don't have to rely on the author to post updates.

[BluePriest]

The OP is sorta confusing. an image would be better. That way people know which one is actually the new one.  Besides, a picture is worth 1000 words.

[Essence]

^^ Done.

[EvaRia]

Fractal can haz fortune Essence? =]

[Sir Valimont]

I am not happy with this nerf. I see no need for it at all. Fractal had its uses in certain decks, but by no means was overpowered. It simply is a card with a useful effect conceptually for some decks ... but those decks are perfectly beatable.

[Kael Hate]

I am not happy with this nerf. I see no need for it at all. Fractal had its uses in certain decks, but by no means was overpowered. It simply is a card with a useful effect conceptually for some decks ... but those decks are perfectly beatable.

If a card sees overuse, then zanz may nerf it aswell. Fractal may not be ultimately powerful but getting a nerf because it causes more than 30% of the environment to play the same Fractal/Hope deck.

[Sir Valimont]

I am not happy with this nerf. I see no need for it at all. Fractal had its uses in certain decks, but by no means was overpowered. It simply is a card with a useful effect conceptually for some decks ... but those decks are perfectly beatable.

If a card sees overuse, then zanz may nerf it aswell. Fractal may not be ultimately powerful but getting a nerf because it causes more than 30% of the environment to play the same Fractal/Hope deck.

It is a false premise that popularity of a deck is based entirely on the potency of its cards. The nature of a community dictates that popular decks will always exist, whether it's because of efficiency, or coolness, or the flavor of the month. Trying to force a situation into existence where many people use many different decks is simply not going to work. The way to accomplish the goal of having a versatile game with many different but equal options is to balance cards independently of community input.

By allowing the balancing to be influenced by something arbitrary like popularity, in fact the very essence of balance is lost.

[Dragoon1140]

It is a false premise that popularity of a deck is based entirely on the potency of its cards. The nature of a community dictates that popular decks will always exist, whether it's because of efficiency, or coolness, or the flavor of the month. Trying to force a situation into existence where many people use many different decks is simply not going to work. The way to accomplish the goal of having a versatile game with many different but equal options is to balance cards independently of community input.

By allowing the balancing to be influenced by something arbitrary like popularity, in fact the very essence of balance is lost.

Tell 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25, and 1.26 this.  I don't think the community, as a whole, actually minds the super popular cards receiving the simplest form of a nerf available.

[Sir Valimont]

It is a false premise that popularity of a deck is based entirely on the potency of its cards. The nature of a community dictates that popular decks will always exist, whether it's because of efficiency, or coolness, or the flavor of the month. Trying to force a situation into existence where many people use many different decks is simply not going to work. The way to accomplish the goal of having a versatile game with many different but equal options is to balance cards independently of community input.

By allowing the balancing to be influenced by something arbitrary like popularity, in fact the very essence of balance is lost.

Tell 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20, 1.21, 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 1.25, and 1.26 this.  I don't think the community, as a whole, actually minds the super popular cards receiving the simplest form of a nerf available.

It is also a false premise that game balance should be tied to whether the community minds a shift or not ... so while your point is taken I don't think it changes what I'm saying.

[OldTrees]

It is also a false premise that game balance should be tied to whether the community minds a shift or not ... so while your point is taken I don't think it changes what I'm saying.

It is a false premise.
However Fractal does have reasons derived from theory as to why it was unbalanced.
There currently are 2 cards that create cards
Mindgate
Fractal

If we derive the value of a card generated from Mindgate [Initial cost and Activation cost] we get ~3
If we derive the value of a card generated from Fractal [Initial cost/Average cards created] we got ~1.33
3=/=1.33
Therefore one of the cards was unbalanced.

[Indrejue]

the mindgate fractal comparison doe not work one copies any card the other only creatures

[OldTrees]

the mindgate fractal comparison doe not work one copies any card the other only creatures

It is true that maybe the two values should not be equal.
However a random card vs a specific creature sounds about equal in value to me. The random any card is not worth 3x a specific creature in any case.