[Official] Phase Spider l Phase Recluse

[OldTrees]

Consider:
If 3|3 for 3 is balanced
then 4|3 for 3 would be too powerful
therefore 4|2 for 3 (aka Phase Spider) is likely to be balanced

Vs Skull Shield
Horned Frog estimated damage = 6 damage total (average result via infinite summation)
Phase Spider estimated damage = 4 damage total (again infinite summation)

Vs Fire Shield
HF 9 damage
PS 8 damage

Vs Thorn Carapace (i did not do the infinite summation here. I estimated 3 turns for 2hp and 3.5 for 3hp)
HF 10.5 damage
PS 12 damage

Vs CC shields
HF 8.5
PS 8

Wow these values are really close. Horned Frog is balanced and Phase Spider is barely less efficient vs CC but is faster in the short run.
Verdict: Balanced.

[RootRanger]

root ranger, the difference with all the other creatures you listed is that they all have a far higher success rate. by that i mean whenever you see them in play they always last a long time. usually to the end of the game. phase spider will get killed earlier because:
A) it has lower health than them - low enough to die when touched by any and all CC
B) due to its slightly larger attack it will likely get targeted first.

When phase spiders are in the same deck as graviton mercs, the mercs will often do more damage each. Does this mean graviton mercs are stronger? No, because the creature that is a larger threat will always be a higher priority for CC. And in most decks, phase spiders will not be your attacker with the highest amount of damage. Which means resilience probably won't be that important.

point be is the main problem because the spider does just enough damage to be picked on by most AIs and some players, but not enough attack to be classed as a high range power packed giant like a dragon or some other creature.

With this logic, wouldn't a "high range power packed giant" be less effective than the phase spider because it is even more likely to be "picked on"?

this added with its OFF ELEMENT ability makes it pretty darn annoying to play.

The phase spider and recluse is balanced even without its ability.
Also, its ability uses quanta from the element of the card that is most effectively used with its ability.

effectively you will waste all of that 4 you played in one go. all i would want is a small cost reduction.

Assuming the opponent just so happens to have the perfect counter in their hand, such as thunderbolt, you would do 7 damage for the cost of 4 quanta and 1 card. The opponent would lose 1 quanta and 1 card. Overall, you net 7 damage at the cost of 3 quanta. Basically, even when they have the perfect counter-spell, you still deal damage for a good cost.

think of the flesh spider/recluse. the only difference in attack is 1 and fleshy has 1 more health making him a good degree more resilient. so why then is there a cost difference? surely aether has had enough of over expensive cards?

The phase recluse has one more attack. The flesh recluse has one more HP (nearly useless) and one less cost (not very useful in a speedbow since supernova produces 2 quanta).
Seems balanced, or even beneficial to the phase recluse.

is making phase spider cost 3 too much to ask?

...
I'm hoping you mean phase recluse.
It's not a question of whether it is too much to ask, since that would imply changing the card is the only negative consequence. Changing the metagame would be the negative consequence, and it's much more severe.

[killybob]

point be is the main problem because the spider does just enough damage to be picked on by most AIs and some players, but not enough attack to be classed as a high range power packed giant like a dragon or some other creature.

With this logic, wouldn't a "high range power packed giant" be less effective than the phase spider because it is even more likely to be "picked on"?

no. did you not read my post properly? it would not be less effective because not only would it be likely to have more HP than the recluse but also i said that the recluse was inefficient because it wasn't a "high range power packed giant".

effectively you will waste all of that 4 you played in one go. all i would want is a small cost reduction.

Assuming the opponent just so happens to have the perfect counter in their hand, such as thunderbolt, you would do 7 damage for the cost of 4 quanta and 1 card. The opponent would lose 1 quanta and 1 card. Overall, you net 7 damage at the cost of 3 quanta. Basically, even when they have the perfect counter-spell, you still deal damage for a good cost.

no. spells are designed to be used. creatures are not designed to die. you usually only get six of them whereas CC can be abundant, sometimes multiple spell  per element. basically if you use a lightning to kill a spider/recluse you would have bought that card specifically for the purpose to kill something. the person who bought the recluse would have bought it to last.

think of the flesh spider/recluse. the only difference in attack is 1 and fleshy has 1 more health making him a good degree more resilient. so why then is there a cost difference? surely aether has had enough of over expensive cards?

The phase recluse has one more attack. The flesh recluse has one more HP (nearly useless) and one less cost (not very useful in a speedbow since supernova produces 2 quanta).
Seems balanced, or even beneficial to the phase recluse.

yes that 1 hp makes a difference. it means another turn of attack against fire shield and sometimes carapace, it reduces the chances of being turned into a skeleton to 0.125 with skull shield, and it puts it out of range of a couple of spells. and the one less quanta cost does matter. for example if you play 3 SN you can then get out 2 flesh recluses, but only 1 phase recluse. that's nearly double damage.

is making phase spider cost 3 too much to ask?

...
I'm hoping you mean phase recluse.
It's not a question of whether it is too much to ask, since that would imply changing the card is the only negative consequence. Changing the metagame would be the negative consequence, and it's much more severe.

and just how severe can it be? give me an example of a huge catastrophic occurrence due to a 1 cost reduction. my only other concession would be +1 hp instead.

[EvaRia]

Most people only think about ratios in attack to quanta, but since Elements is highly about card advantage, it's actually additive.

For example, instead of thinking of Minor Phoenix as a 2:1 Ratio, think of it as +2 attack advantage.

All the best rush creatures in the game only even go up to +3.
No creature goes to +4, which is what you are suggesting. It makes quite a larger difference than you might think. That would be like playing phoenixes for free.

[killybob]

Most people only think about ratios in attack to quanta, but since Elements is highly about card advantage, it's actually additive.

For example, instead of thinking of Minor Phoenix as a 2:1 Ratio, think of it as +2 attack advantage.

All the best rush creatures in the game only even go up to +3.
No creature goes to +4, which is what you are suggesting. It makes quite a larger difference than you might think. That would be like playing phoenixes for free.

but then my suggested 7:3 adds up to 2.33333:1 is nowhere near +4, and hey! not even 3. think of that as about +2.5 attack advantage. it's really not that much higher than the phoenix. and look, the phoenix is nearly indestructible which should put a little more on the value.

[Camoninja]

Most people only think about ratios in attack to quanta, but since Elements is highly about card advantage, it's actually additive.

For example, instead of thinking of Minor Phoenix as a 2:1 Ratio, think of it as +2 attack advantage.

All the best rush creatures in the game only even go up to +3.
No creature goes to +4, which is what you are suggesting. It makes quite a larger difference than you might think. That would be like playing phoenixes for free.

but then my suggested 7:3 adds up to 2.33333:1 is nowhere near +4, and hey! not even 3. think of that as about +2.5 attack advantage. it's really not that much higher than the phoenix. and look, the phoenix is nearly indestructible which should put a little more on the value.

So according to this logic, dragons should be roughly 20 attack because 21:9 is 2.3333:1.
The ratios are not so much what matters as the addition. Like the Ruby Dragon is 15 for 12 quanta, that's a difference of 3.

[RootRanger]

no. did you not read my post properly? it would not be less effective because not only would it be likely to have more HP than the recluse but also i said that the recluse was inefficient because it wasn't a "high range power packed giant".

Keep in mind that many decks have no CC, or they have CC that does not have an effect that takes HP into account. In this case, the recluses would outclass creatures with larger HP but equal efficiency (if both attack and HP are factored in). It makes sense that in some cases one card would be preferred, and in another cases a different card would be preferred.

no. spells are designed to be used. creatures are not designed to die. you usually only get six of them whereas CC can be abundant, sometimes multiple spell  per element. basically if you use a lightning to kill a spider/recluse you would have bought that card specifically for the purpose to kill something. the person who bought the recluse would have bought it to last.

If creatures were designed to last forever, resilience would be worthless, and many cards would have no use in the metagame. Clearly, creatures are designed to sometimes die.

yes that 1 hp makes a difference. it means another turn of attack against fire shield and sometimes carapace, it reduces the chances of being turned into a skeleton to 0.125 with skull shield, and it puts it out of range of a couple of spells. and the one less quanta cost does matter. for example if you play 3 SN you can then get out 2 flesh recluses, but only 1 phase recluse. that's nearly double damage.

Of course it makes a difference, as does the 1 quantum cost. However, the 1 hp and 1 quantum are together not enough to make the phase recluse significantly weaker. Thus, the phase recluse is balanced compared to the flesh recluse.

and just how severe can it be? give me an example of a huge catastrophic occurrence due to a 1 cost reduction. my only other concession would be +1 hp instead.

It wouldn't catastrophicly wreak the metagame, but there is no need to make a balanced card overpowered. It's a waste of programming time and centralizes the metagame.

[killybob]

no. did you not read my post properly? it would not be less effective because not only would it be likely to have more HP than the recluse but also i said that the recluse was inefficient because it wasn't a "high range power packed giant".

Keep in mind that many decks have no CC, or they have CC that does not have an effect that takes HP into account. In this case, the recluses would outclass creatures with larger HP but equal efficiency (if both attack and HP are factored in). It makes sense that in some cases one card would be preferred, and in another cases a different card would be preferred.

the only time phase recluse would outlast higher attack and HP creatures is with reverse time and that is too situational to make a solid argument out of.

no. spells are designed to be used. creatures are not designed to die. you usually only get six of them whereas CC can be abundant, sometimes multiple spell  per element. basically if you use a lightning to kill a spider/recluse you would have bought that card specifically for the purpose to kill something. the person who bought the recluse would have bought it to last.

If creatures were designed to last forever, resilience would be worthless, and many cards would have no use in the metagame. Clearly, creatures are designed to sometimes die.

creatures are NOT designed to die. it's just like we are not designed to fly, but we still manage it. i'm talking about how the creatures are not built with and automatic timer that kills the creature when it goes off, and the only reason they die is because of CC

yes that 1 hp makes a difference. it means another turn of attack against fire shield and sometimes carapace, it reduces the chances of being turned into a skeleton to 0.125 with skull shield, and it puts it out of range of a couple of spells. and the one less quanta cost does matter. for example if you play 3 SN you can then get out 2 flesh recluses, but only 1 phase recluse. that's nearly double damage.

Of course it makes a difference, as does the 1 quantum cost. However, the 1 hp and 1 quantum are together not enough to make the phase recluse significantly weaker. Thus, the phase recluse is balanced compared to the flesh recluse.

actually i beg to differ. in this situation it would induce almost twice the damage for an extra turn (basically 14 damage from the phase recluse against 24 from the flesh recluses). that is significant enough to cause imbalance IMO.

and just how severe can it be? give me an example of a huge catastrophic occurrence due to a 1 cost reduction. my only other concession would be +1 hp instead.

It wouldn't catastrophicly wreak the metagame, but there is no need to make a balanced card overpowered. It's a waste of programming time and centralizes the metagame.

it would in no way make it imbalanced, especially in view of all of aethers multiple expensive cards. if you ask me we owe it to aether anyhow. think of it this way. average scenario is it lasts for the 2 turns on the field as i said. now this is 14 damage you're looking at which is nearly 3 times that of a ball lightning which costs nothing. for a 1 turn card like BoL that does 15 damage i'd look to pay around  2 quanta. surely it's not too much to ask for a card that does 7 damage over 1 turn to cost 3 ? not a big deal and would not centralize or disrupt the metagame.

[RootRanger]

the only time phase recluse would outlast higher attack and HP creatures is with reverse time and that is too situational to make a solid argument out of.

Notice how I said outclass, not outlast. Also, you are missing one or two cards that can be used as CC that sometimes/always does not count in HP. Here are some of them:
Chaos Seed, Mutation, Fallen Elf, Antimatter, Butterfly Effect, Pandemonium, Purple Nymph, Basilisk Blood, Iridium Warden, Auburn Nymph, Mitosis, Freeze, Arctic Squid, Mind Flayer, Flooding, Reverse Time, Eternity, Lobotomizer, Quitessence. Oh, and Parallel Universe is less effective against creatures with less HP.

creatures are NOT designed to die. it's just like we are not designed to fly, but we still manage it. i'm talking about how the creatures are not built with and automatic timer that kills the creature when it goes off, and the only reason they die is because of CC

While the only reason they die is because of CC, CC is a large part of the game. Thus, creatures are designed to deal/prevent damage and to sometimes die.

actually i beg to differ. in this situation it would induce almost twice the damage for an extra turn (basically 14 damage from the phase recluse against 24 from the flesh recluses). that is significant enough to cause imbalance IMO.

You're assuming that both quantum is produced only once per turn (which would mean the flesh recluse gets a turn ahead) and that you are against a fire shield (which means a flesh recluse gets another turn ahead). Both of those cases are highly unlikely. In many of the other cases the phase recluse is the better choice.

it would in no way make it imbalanced, especially in view of all of aethers multiple expensive cards. if you ask me we owe it to aether anyhow. think of it this way. average scenario is it lasts for the 2 turns on the field as i said.

You really have nothing backing this up, except the small chance that you are up against a fire shield.

now this is 14 damage you're looking at which is nearly 3 times that of a ball lightning which costs nothing. for a 1 turn card like BoL that does 15 damage i'd look to pay around  2 quanta. surely it's not too much to ask for a card that does 7 damage over 1 turn to cost 3 ? not a big deal and would not centralize or disrupt the metagame.

Once again, you are assuming they have a fire shield, which is unlikely.

[Calindu]

The Phase recluse is one of the best creatures,it haves the best dmg/cost from  cards(excluding BoL)