Elements v 1.31a: (not) Shards the Game

[Mathematistic]

Shard Golem has always been RT resistant. SoW adds tons of damage to the shard golem and is commonly used already.
The cost of shard golem is more about the possibility to fractal it, not its vulnerability to CC.

[furballdn]

Shard Golem has always been RT resistant. SoW adds tons of damage to the shard golem and is commonly used already.
The cost of shard golem is more about the possibility to fractal it, not its vulnerability to CC.

You are implying a user always gets 2 SoWs in the opening hand. Many times, that does not happen, and the user will have to risk playing an unprotected golem for the sake of speed, because waiting a turn for the right shard might mean the difference between a win or loss. (Shard golem decks need early burst damage. They lose speed later on compared to SNbows and other rushes).

Making it cost from to is a buff and I will explain why.

1. RT resist.
RT is a powerful CC, and deadly to shard golems. If a shard golem costs and is RT'd, the user may as well concede the match right there, since there is little chance of them getting enough to resummon the golem before dying. If it were , they can summon the golem immediately next turn because of the influx of that nova (the most common shard golem quanta generator) gives. Even if it were to cost 24 , that's just 2 novas, not too hard to achieve, and much easier to get in a shard golem deck than 8 .

2. Fractalling is easier.
While I have yet to find a fractal shard golem deck that does really well, if you wanted to balance out it's fractalness, it'd have to cost at least 24 .

absol currently has their cost at 7|5. What does this mean?

1. A single nova can summon a shard golem, then if RT'd,resummon it, and resummon it again after 2 turns.

2. Much more easy to fractal. Before, 8 towers was one golem. Now, 8 QTs can give you enough to summon nearly 6 shard golems in a turn.

Does shard golem need a buff? No. Is changing cost from to a buff? Yes.

[Mathematistic]

If you don't wait for 2 SoW, you also loses a lot of speed, as every subsequent SoW gives 4 damage. Yes you can argue that it has more RT resistance, but the difference is trivial.
But yes, fractalling and mitosis is buffed.

[furballdn]

If you don't wait for 2 SoW, you also loses a lot of speed, as every subsequent SoW gives 4 damage. Yes you can argue that it has more RT resistance, but the difference is trivial.
But yes, fractalling and mitosis is buffed.

The added SoW does extra damage, but mostly used for shield bypass. The 4 damage is in most times, negligible, and certainly not something a player would depend on for massive speed. I guarantee you that if you had an opening hand with only 1 SoW, it'd be a faster win (considering no CC) if you played the golem then and there and draw multiple SoWs in a row and waiting a turn.

Besides, your argument of "Golems are already resistant because of SoW" isn't really relevant to the topic of "Golems do not need to cost . They do not need this buff"

[Absol]

At times like this, I wish that Shard Golem costs for real.
I overlooked Fractal. Though, to fractal it, you need tons of generator, which takes space for generator.

[furballdn]

At times like this, I wish that Shard Golem costs for real.
I overlooked Fractal. Though, to fractal it, you need tons of generator, which takes space for generator.

So you're okay with 2QT=1 shard golem per turn? (Although I have yet to seen a good fractal shard golem deck since it cuts into the shardness)

[Mathematistic]

Side note, fractals and shards are both cards that makes your hand uneasy to play...
As such, opening up a reasonably powerful (not OP) fractal golem combo may not be a bad thing after all.
But, well, no one cares about mitosis?

[Absol]

At times like this, I wish that Shard Golem costs for real.
I overlooked Fractal. Though, to fractal it, you need tons of generator, which takes space for generator.

So you're okay with 2QT=1 shard golem per turn? (Although I have yet to seen a good fractal shard golem deck since it cuts into the shardness)

It will be raised.
As for Mitosis, it's slower than Fractal, but need less quanta generator. Balanced?

[furballdn]

But why? is the question. Why do you want to make shard golem instead of ? Just to fit with the whole "everything shard related is other" concept or for the sake of mitosis/fractal?

[Absol]

For the sake of RT resistant. 8 is hard to get, should be around 6 or 5. In low quanta rainbow decks, 5 is hard.
Then again, i might change the mechanics so it will be RT resistant BUT not easily Mitoable/Fractallable.

[furballdn]

For the sake of RT resistant. 8 is hard to get, should be around 6 or 5. In low quanta rainbow decks, 5 is hard.
Then again, i might change the mechanics so it will be RT resistant BUT not easily Mitoable/Fractallable.

Again, WHY? Why does golem need to be RT resistant? What is wrong with having a counter card to a very well balanced dangerous deck? Why does shard golem need a buff?

[Absol]

Updated.
Summary of update:
SoSa now uses old mechanic, but sacrifice Max HP instead of current HP.
Renamed shards, now they have unique acronym.
Shard Golem now costs 6 , with their skill costs . This one's for you, Fur. RT resistant, though not by much, and certainly slow to Fractal and Mito.

Why does golem need to be RT resistant?

Because it currently is not. It's a weaksauce weakness for Golem.
With cost reduction, hopefully the counter is not as deadly, but still effective.