Post by: ElementsDecks on September 08, 2011, 02:47:19 pm
(http://elementscommunity.org/images/Cards/Upgrade.png)
What do you think? for me, it's underpowered, should cost random quanta. Suitable for :rainbow decks. I tried a Mitosis/Golem Duo but it was not fast enough, then i tried a Phase Recluse/mitosis deck, a firefly/mitosis, and everything failed. :'(
What do you think?
Post by: TheManuz on September 08, 2011, 03:04:13 pm
Post by: Pineapple on September 08, 2011, 03:09:43 pm
I tried a Mitosis/Golem Duo but it was not fast enough, then i tried a Phase Recluse/mitosis deck, a firefly/mitosis, and everything failed. :'(I tried a Parallel Universe/Skeleton Duo but it was not fast enough, then i tried a Flesh Recluse/parallel universe deck, a firefly/parallel universe, and everything failed. :'(
What do you think?
Therefore, we should buff parallel universe to make it random cost.
Post by: johannhowitzer on September 08, 2011, 03:26:22 pm
Post by: adrix89 on September 08, 2011, 03:58:29 pm
(http://elementscommunity.org/images/Cards/Mitosis.png) (http://elementscommunity.org/images/Cards/MitosisUpgraded.png)Its not the card's fault you suck at using it. And makes absolutely zero sense as an :rainbow cost card.
What do you think? for me, it's underpowered, should cost random quanta. Suitable for :rainbow decks. I tried a Mitosis/Golem Duo but it was not fast enough, then i tried a Phase Recluse/mitosis deck, a firefly/mitosis, and everything failed. :'(
What do you think?
Post by: Ryli on September 08, 2011, 04:09:29 pm
You just need to learn what creatures go well with mitosis, and how to balance the quanta, because mitosis is a powerful card.
Post by: willng3 on September 08, 2011, 04:23:38 pm
No to :rainbow quanta though. May as well make the card of the Other element in that case which would give all elements access to such a powerful swarm ability...and that is a very bad thing.
I would also hate the thought of seeing Fire Rushes pulling off turn 2 Mitosis Ruby Dragons with extreme ease. This change would just be too much of an imbalance of both game themes and mechanics.
Post by: Jappert on September 08, 2011, 04:45:20 pm
Its not the card's fault you suck at using it. And makes absolutely zero sense as an :rainbow cost card.No reason at all to be unfriendly here Adrix! Mind your manners in the future please.
To get back on topic: I don't think Mitosis needs any change atm. It's certainly not one of the strongest cards out there but it has it's uses. It requires a combo to be usefull, costs alot of quanta and is very weak vs strong CC.
I agree with what Will said earlier.
Post by: ndclub on September 08, 2011, 06:09:58 pm
If anything MAYBE it could use a cost of -1 but anything other than that would be shortsighted. Even that is unnecessary in my mind.
Post by: ElementsDecks on September 08, 2011, 08:13:50 pm
Cost decrease is MUCH better...
4 :life ---> 3 :life
Post by: Camoninja on September 08, 2011, 09:03:13 pm
Post by: willng3 on September 08, 2011, 09:12:01 pm
What about keeping the cost the same (or higher maybe) and bringing back the mitosword idea that we could do in the trainer before? It can't be too much faster than Fire, and Life has no active control as a mono anyway.That was one of the combinations that was deemed the most "broken" from when it was first released. After people started showing evidence of 4 turn wins against FGs being more commonly possible than not, its fate was pretty much sealed.
However, I would LOVE to see this mechanic added again to make Flying/Animated Weapons target-able again. If there was a clause that assigned Other cards a certain amount of :life quanta as a cost when targeted by Mitosis, I'm pretty sure that would stop the aforementioned combo from being abused. But I'm fairly certain that would require some amount of coding magic to make possible.
Post by: Naesala on September 09, 2011, 01:32:06 pm
Post by: SnoWeb on September 09, 2011, 01:49:48 pm
For example, the following Pestosis deck is one of my favourite grinder in Platinum at the moment. This decks beats a Pestal (even play by the AI), mono aether and most stalls. It is just purely destroyed by a rainbow strategy with early CC. It obviously has weaknesses as it should and strengths as it should.
An adaptable card which goes well with several cards in-element and plenty others off-element. It doesn't need any buff IMO.
Post by: pancosis on September 11, 2011, 09:32:45 pm
no buff, it works how it should
Post by: ralouf on September 11, 2011, 09:54:18 pm
Post by: gjhh on September 19, 2011, 04:04:00 am
Post by: Annele on November 10, 2012, 12:28:26 am
(http://elementscommunity.org/images/Cards/Upgrade.png)I got an idea while reading the Druidic Staff 'Buff this card' thread. My proposed change would be more a buff to the elemental weapons, but it changes this card, so I'm sticking it here.
(http://i.imgur.com/KTNbi.png)(http://elementscommunity.org/images/Cards/Upgrade.png)(http://i.imgur.com/nan4M.png)
BTW vrt, I didn't full appreciate your art until it was full-size on my computer screen. I love it <3
So basically, it can now target the elemental weapons, but no :rainbow creature. Help on wording is appreciated.
From what I understand, there was a really over-powered deck that involved Long Swords, and that is why Mitosis was nerfed to only be able to target creatures. However, this hurt synergies like with Druidic Staff, that I don't recall as being totally OP. Firstly, it takes 3 cards to set up, and a slow start. It also requires constant pumping of quanta, unless you use SoR, which makes it a 4-card combo, and there are many better synergies with Mitosis and SoR. And it's not just with Druidic staff. I cannot think of a single elemental weapon that would be OP with Mitosis.
One drawback with this Buff, is that Malignant Cell and SoFo can no longer be targeted by Mitosis. But is this really necessary? MC already has a built-in mitosis, and SoFo is already OP, and has many better synergies.
So, all in all, I believe that Mitosis should be able to target weapons. If I have missed something, please do not hesitate to point it out.
I've also added the old suggestion for Mitosis to the poll, just in case anyone wants it.
Post by: Chapuz on November 10, 2012, 01:31:33 am
Post by: Shantu on November 10, 2012, 01:38:45 am
Post by: kimham8a on November 10, 2012, 01:44:17 am
Post by: whatifidogetcaught? on November 10, 2012, 01:54:31 am
Decreasing only the upped cost makes no sense. :-\
Gravity Shield has 2 less quanta upped than unupped. It seems to make no sense, but it is still a buff.
Post by: kimham8a on November 10, 2012, 01:55:45 am
Decreasing only the upped cost makes no sense. :-\
Gravity Shield has 2 less quanta upped than unupped. It seems to make no sense, but it is still a buff.
Oh nvm somehow I thought upped meant unupped my bad.
Post by: skyironsword on November 11, 2012, 04:11:07 pm
Post by: OldTrees on November 11, 2012, 05:55:02 pm
1)
Weapons receive a discount to their casting cost because they have to pass through the weapon slot.
2)
Furthermore animated weapon synergies are balanced with 1 animate weapon per animated weapon in mind.
However this would solve the problem of mitosis other creatures in the future.
Post by: eaglgenes101 on November 11, 2012, 10:28:33 pm
Please address these 2 points:Comparison to adrenastaves.
1)
Weapons receive a discount to their casting cost because they have to pass through the weapon slot.
2)
Furthermore animated weapon synergies are balanced with 1 animate weapon per animated weapon in mind.
However this would solve the problem of mitosis other creatures in the future.
Post by: kimham8a on November 11, 2012, 10:41:44 pm
Post by: furballdn on November 11, 2012, 10:54:45 pm
Is it just me, or does every card seem to need a buff these days after the new shards came out?If that is the case, that strongly implies that the shards are overbalanced and are more powerful than they should be.
Post by: kimham8a on November 11, 2012, 11:05:22 pm
Overbalanced? Did you mean overpowered?Is it just me, or does every card seem to need a buff these days after the new shards came out?If that is the case, that strongly implies that the shards are overbalanced and are more powerful than they should be.
And if you meant overpowered, yes, I think we should think of ways to nerf those cards rather than buff every other card in the game. (as I feel we're trying to do slowly but steadily)
Post by: ZephyrPhantom on November 11, 2012, 11:17:16 pm
Regarding Shards and how they compare to other cards:Overbalanced? Did you mean overpowered?Is it just me, or does every card seem to need a buff these days after the new shards came out?If that is the case, that strongly implies that the shards are overbalanced and are more powerful than they should be.
And if you meant overpowered, yes, I think we should think of ways to nerf those cards rather than buff every other card in the game. (as I feel we're trying to do slowly but steadily)
I think the ideas of power creep and psychological standard sum this up the best, as seen in the Top Comment on MTG's Baneslayer Angel (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Discussion.aspx?multiverseid=205077). The idea is that if you keep releasing more powerful cards for the next generation, you come to accept these new powerful cards at the standard (Which leads in to powercreep, where better cards replace old ones.) Consequently we look on what might be 'practical' cards as obsoleted by the broken ones that draw everyone's attention. (Thought not strictly better due to their 'instant' speed Explosion and Steal tend to be used less than SoFo since SoFo can go 1-for-3 (1-for-4 if you're counting the Black Hole) in terms of cards, while Explosion and Steal are 1-for-1 and 1-for-2 respectively..)
Ontopic:
IMHO Mitosis does not need a buff in any form : if you compare Adrenaline, Mitosis has the ability to repeatedly copy a creature while Adrenaline produces no additional copies. Since token cards don't exist in ETG, you're technically getting card advantage out of a successful Mitosis whereas an Adrenaline'd creature will be a sitting duck for CC. (This is most notable with Reverse Time : against Mitosis, you still have another creature on the field so you at least have 1 card to 'pay back' for the Mitosis used. Against Adrenaline, you've waste two cards.) Adrenaline should have a 1 :life advantage to even this possible anti-CC advantage out.
Post by: kimham8a on November 11, 2012, 11:24:32 pm
ETG, on the other hand CAN nerf cards and doesn't really make money by releasing new cards. (unless you count donations, but I don't think zanz wants to make lots of money off of this). Zanz could just release UP cards each patch and we'd have a power drop if the old cards got nerfed along with them.
Post by: OldTrees on November 12, 2012, 05:40:21 am
Power creep happens because MTG card makers are just making money off of people. They need to make stronger cards each generation so people have to buy them to stay in competetive play. (no disrespect to them, I like the game) plus MTG can't nerf cards.
ETG, on the other hand CAN nerf cards and doesn't really make money by releasing new cards. (unless you count donations, but I don't think zanz wants to make lots of money off of this). Zanz could just release UP cards each patch and we'd have a power drop if the old cards got nerfed along with them.
Natural powercreep in EtG:
Zanz creates cards. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. Some cards are not included because they are too weak. Zanz examines the power level (based on what is used) and tries to make more cards. Zanz makes cards with some weaker and some stronger than the power level. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. We abandon some old card for the new cards that are stronger than the old power level. This raises the power level. Changing cards can affect/reverse this but this is the natural powercreep.
Post by: kimham8a on November 13, 2012, 01:05:44 am
So it's because zanz doesn't want to nerf OP new cards, and would rather have to buff the weaker cards eventually (or keep them UP)?Power creep happens because MTG card makers are just making money off of people. They need to make stronger cards each generation so people have to buy them to stay in competetive play. (no disrespect to them, I like the game) plus MTG can't nerf cards.
ETG, on the other hand CAN nerf cards and doesn't really make money by releasing new cards. (unless you count donations, but I don't think zanz wants to make lots of money off of this). Zanz could just release UP cards each patch and we'd have a power drop if the old cards got nerfed along with them.
Natural powercreep in EtG:
Zanz creates cards. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. Some cards are not included because they are too weak. Zanz examines the power level (based on what is used) and tries to make more cards. Zanz makes cards with some weaker and some stronger than the power level. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. We abandon some old card for the new cards that are stronger than the old power level. This raises the power level. Changing cards can affect/reverse this but this is the natural powercreep.
Post by: OldTrees on November 13, 2012, 01:30:18 am
That was neither stated nor implied. I merely stated that if Zanz does nothing but add cards then the natural powercreep would surface. Zanz can artificially reverse this powercreep. However if he does not then the natural powercreep will happen.So it's because zanz doesn't want to nerf OP new cards, and would rather have to buff the weaker cards eventually (or keep them UP)?Power creep happens because MTG card makers are just making money off of people. They need to make stronger cards each generation so people have to buy them to stay in competetive play. (no disrespect to them, I like the game) plus MTG can't nerf cards.
ETG, on the other hand CAN nerf cards and doesn't really make money by releasing new cards. (unless you count donations, but I don't think zanz wants to make lots of money off of this). Zanz could just release UP cards each patch and we'd have a power drop if the old cards got nerfed along with them.
Natural powercreep in EtG:
Zanz creates cards. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. Some cards are not included because they are too weak. Zanz examines the power level (based on what is used) and tries to make more cards. Zanz makes cards with some weaker and some stronger than the power level. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. We abandon some old card for the new cards that are stronger than the old power level. This raises the power level. Changing cards can affect/reverse this but this is the natural powercreep.
Post by: kimham8a on November 13, 2012, 03:49:32 am
It looks like we've agreed.That was neither stated nor implied. I merely stated that if Zanz does nothing but add cards then the natural powercreep would surface. Zanz can artificially reverse this powercreep. However if he does not then the natural powercreep will happen.So it's because zanz doesn't want to nerf OP new cards, and would rather have to buff the weaker cards eventually (or keep them UP)?Power creep happens because MTG card makers are just making money off of people. They need to make stronger cards each generation so people have to buy them to stay in competetive play. (no disrespect to them, I like the game) plus MTG can't nerf cards.
ETG, on the other hand CAN nerf cards and doesn't really make money by releasing new cards. (unless you count donations, but I don't think zanz wants to make lots of money off of this). Zanz could just release UP cards each patch and we'd have a power drop if the old cards got nerfed along with them.
Natural powercreep in EtG:
Zanz creates cards. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. Some cards are not included because they are too weak. Zanz examines the power level (based on what is used) and tries to make more cards. Zanz makes cards with some weaker and some stronger than the power level. We examine the cards and make good decks out of them. We abandon some old card for the new cards that are stronger than the old power level. This raises the power level. Changing cards can affect/reverse this but this is the natural powercreep.
I say:
If zanz doesn't balance cards after their release, powercreep happens.
You say (I think):
If zanz releases cards and nothing else, powercreep happens.
Maybe some misreading/understanding?
Post by: OldTrees on November 13, 2012, 05:02:49 am
It looks like we've agreed.There is a slight difference between those two sentences. However my last post was in reference to you dropping the "if".
I say:
If zanz doesn't balance cards after their release, powercreep happens.
You say (I think):
If zanz releases cards and nothing else, powercreep happens.
Maybe some misreading/understanding?
Sidenote: Not saying something does not mean disagreement or agreement.
Post by: seulintse on November 26, 2014, 08:38:14 pm
Post by: bossitron on November 26, 2014, 08:50:46 pm
Post by: seulintse on November 26, 2014, 08:56:54 pm
Post by: laelin on August 13, 2015, 08:17:59 am
Post by: Ginyu on August 13, 2015, 08:33:09 am
Not saying Mitosis is weak at all, it can perform some pretty nice combos.
Post by: omegareaper7 on August 14, 2015, 03:36:07 am
while I wouldn't mind seeing it go to 1 less cost, keep in mind mitosis on a time creature with a shard of readiness: instant three dragons or GotP or even scarabs. Plus another free creature every turn afterward. It can be a pretty powerful card.3 creatures for 3 cards. Not super amazing. There is a reason mito-ghosts/dragons aren't exactly top end decks.
Post by: seulintse on August 15, 2015, 12:01:57 am
Post by: laelin on August 16, 2015, 02:33:29 pm