Shard of Bravery | Shard of Bravery

[dragonsdemesne]

I think it should have a +2 increased cost.  Just comparing it to how it was used before in 1.31 and how it performed in various decks there, I think that would be appropriate.  A 1 cost is too fast.  Even a 2 cost feels too cheap, when 1 supernova can get it out.

[jawdirk]

SoB is often a dead card. It is at best net 0 card advantage, and typically -1 card advantage. I don't think it is too cheap. If anything, fire's OP rush should be nerfed before SoB. I like that SoB can still be splashed in decks powered by nova/SN. Some of the most interesting decks are combo-dependent and SoB can give them a little help.

[ZephyrPhantom]

SoB is often a dead card. It is at best net 0 card advantage, and typically -1 card advantage. I don't think it is too cheap. If anything, fire's OP rush should be nerfed before SoB. I like that SoB can still be splashed in decks powered by nova/SN. Some of the most interesting decks are combo-dependent and SoB can give them a little help.

Fire's rushpower was already nerfed in the form of a weaker Immolation/Phoenix combo and more expensive Explosion.

You probably won't worry about what three cards the opponent draws considering that you'll have much greater tempo than him in a rush deck and can play your threats quicker, unless your opponent also happens to be using a fire rush. Alternatively, you can attempt to quickly draw into a Shard of Integrity, which results in a big golem an opponent without Reverse Time will have issues with. (And considering how cheap shards are, it should be easy generate the quanta to just replay an RT'd golem). I think the issue comes from the speed burst this card provides to certain decks, as opposed to the how the decks are supposed to work.

(Sidenote : On a single-card scale, 3-for-1 in any form of card draw is much better than 1-for-1 in card draw in games since you get more options.)

[jawdirk]

Fire's rushpower was already nerfed in the form of a weaker Immolation/Phoenix combo and more expensive Explosion.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed again. It is still easily the most efficient rush. It is more fragile than , but I don't think anyone would say is more powerful.

(Sidenote : On a single-card scale, 3-for-1 in any form of card draw is much better than 1-for-1 in card draw in games since you get more options.)

Yes, I agree, precognition is weak compared to SoB, but precognition is of such marginal utility that people debate its effectiveness even in decks that should most benefit from it.

Maybe a more important question is, would you expect any non-mono fire rush decks to use SoB if it stays with the current cost? If the answer is no (presumably because they are not fast enough vs. mono-fire) then we should either nerf SoB or something else in mono-fire. If the answer is yes, then we shouldn't nerf them (relative to mono-fire) by putting the cost of SoB out of reach for them.

[ZephyrPhantom]

Fire's rushpower was already nerfed in the form of a weaker Immolation/Phoenix combo and more expensive Explosion.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be nerfed again. It is still easily the most efficient rush. It is more fragile than , but I don't think anyone would say is more powerful.

IMHO, that is more a lack of element completion itself rather than a power imbalance - Life doesn't have quantum acceleration, CC, or PC, while Fire does (Life in general doesn't have many options in mono). Nerfing elements into the ground doesn't sound as good as giving elements what they need - I would rather have a more fast, versatile life than singular and a subpar . (That could be a matter of opinion, though.)

Yes, I agree, precognition is weak compared to SoB, but precognition is of such marginal utility that people debate its effectiveness even in decks that should most benefit from it.

Maybe a more important question is, would you expect any non-mono fire rush decks to use SoB if it stays with the current cost? If the answer is no (presumably because they are not fast enough vs. mono-fire) then we should either nerf SoB or something else in mono-fire. If the answer is yes, then we shouldn't nerf them (relative to mono-fire) by putting the cost of SoB out of reach for them.

I disagree with precognition's lack of utility. Cantrips exist to thin your deck below the minimum size, so Precognition is meant for speedy decks that want 24 cards instead of 30 to increase consistency. Golden Hourglass tends to be used more often since it's just better to have the chance of getting several draws out of one card.

SoBravery is low-costed enough to be run off a mark and nothing else, which is only encouraged by it's mark bonus. I think that a mono deck that previously used 5 | 3 SoBraverys could easily retain the same efficiency with a mark switch and some quanta adjustment - granted, the deck is now a duo instead of a mono, but the potential draw advantage is much better than a same deck that runs a Time mark and Precognition since you can effectively cut 18 cards from a deck's total size as opposed to 6.

[jawdirk]

I disagree with precognition's lack of utility. Cantrips exist to thin your deck below the minimum size, so Precognition is meant for speedy decks that want 24 cards instead of 30 to increase consistency. Golden Hourglass tends to be used more often since it's just better to have the chance of getting several draws out of one card.

I'm not arguing that the effect of thinning your deck by 1 is useless, I'm arguing that doing it for 1 is questionable. It's debatable whether that effect is ever worth 1 . In my experience, it is not, simply because precognition is a dead card until you have  , and because it is bad on the first turn when every is precious.

SoBravery is low-costed enough to be run off a mark and nothing else, which is only encouraged by it's mark bonus. I think that a mono deck that previously used 5 | 3 SoBraverys could easily retain the same efficiency with a mark switch and some quanta adjustment - granted, the deck is now a duo instead of a mono, but the potential draw advantage is much better than a same deck that runs a Time mark and Precognition since you can effectively cut 18 cards from a deck's total size as opposed to 6.

Sure, but just because SoB is way better than precognition doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed. I'm saying that precognition is not a good baseline (because it is so weak and hard to quantify). I would go so far as to say that SoB is a better card than precognition. Heck, if it were up to me, I would probably replace precognition with SoB and make it a time card.

SoB is itself hard to quantify, and it is always risky to include it in your deck. It is a good, interesting card, that promotes interesting decks, and that is true independent of whether it also happens to supercharge mono- rush. But increasing its cost in just makes it less interesting and prevents its use in more interesting decks.

[asymmetry]

Sorry if this has been dealt with before. Scenario:

I was playing against Lionheart with  eaglgenes101's Voodoo bravery
3 cards in my deck, my hp intact, inminent eternity (=getting hit) , plenty of room in my hand, needed TU... Heck, let's draw!
GAME OVER
Wut?

[Chapuz]

Sorry if this has been dealt with before. Scenario:

I was playing against Lionheart with  eaglgenes101's Voodoo bravery
3 cards in my deck, my hp intact, inminent eternity (=getting hit) , plenty of room in my hand, needed TU... Heck, let's draw!
GAME OVER
Wut?

Known bug, if you get 0 cards in your deck using SoBr you lose.

Off topic, long time no see!!

[Acsabi44]

Off topic, long time no see!!

Lots of old folks coming back

Yea I'm totally offing the heck out of the topic

[traceurling]

Does emerald shield affect this spell?
Also do you guys prefer using this for its draw power or deck out power?

[xsindomanx]

If I use SoB, it's usually for the draw power, and such is the case with most decks.

However, there are some decks that do use SoB to deck out opponent successfully. Example here: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,42284.0.html

[Jangoo]

Sorry for the necro. 

Concerning SoB and the AI:
Could it be that the AI likes to play like 3 of them in a row
either not minding that its oppents hand (=the players hand) is already full and that they are wasted
OR
cheating somehow and still drawing 2-3 cards for each shard?

Been trying to pay close attention when its the AIs turn but just can't figure out what the hell exactly is happening there.