Restore Quanta Limits

[storyteller]

I just found out about the Quanta cap at 75. I hate it. It nerfs like a half dozen cards right off the bat:

Ice Bolt
Fire Bolt
Fahrenheit
Drain Life

it also impacts Stone Skin a bit, and will affect Every Card Ever Made From Now On.

Im sure this was discussed before. I want to restore Quanta to being able to exceed high values. I personally think it should be able to go over 100, even 200-300, but at least 99. 75 is such an odd number and it really is a bit too low.

[Jenkar]

I don't dislike nor like the quanta cap myself. If the aim was to nerf firestall, it failed epicly, but it opens card making possibility.
Btw, it doesn't impact stonekin, really (1hp possibility lost), since it was capped at 75 before.

[TheonlyrealBeef]

Since 6 Fire Bolts can still do over 100 HP in pvp the cards nerfed worst were the ones who least deserved it: Ice Bolt and Drain Life. I can see something in 100 quanta, being not only a nice number but allowing 6 copies of these cards to deal over 100 damage.

[storyteller]

I get that, but with life total being closer to 196~ with divinity shards, higher with a  mark, stone skin, etc. I dont like that you cant make a reliable deck that wins using spell damage. Its just such an arbitrary cutoff, and kills one of the major styles of play, that as a 'wizard', using spell cards to win. Please bring back a higher limit, 200 is good, allowing a spell caster to win using only spell cards.

[OldTrees]

Most spell damage decks use other forms of offense to get some early damage in before the defenses go up. The spell damage then bypasses the defenses for the win condition.

Obviously Shard of Wisdom and Psion are atypical for spell damage decks.

[storyteller]

now I do see shard of wisdom as an interesting turn, but its still a creature. The idea of playing a deck with no creatures is a powerful powerful strategy, and one that shouldn't be done away with. consider you can make decks with no spells. no pillars. no permanents or weapons and win. the idea of having a deck with no creatures is not only viable but sound. nerfing this play style outright is not so great, in fact it takes away from the game as a whole.

t least 100, if not 200 or you take away from the game in an unalterable way, there is no way around it if these limits remain.

[OldTrees]

now I do see shard of wisdom as an interesting turn, but its still a creature. The idea of playing a deck with no creatures is a powerful powerful strategy, and one that shouldn't be done away with. consider you can make decks with no spells. no pillars. no permanents or weapons and win. the idea of having a deck with no creatures is not only viable but sound. nerfing this play style outright is not so great, in fact it takes away from the game as a whole.

t least 100, if not 200 or you take away from the game in an unalterable way, there is no way around it if these limits remain.

Novelty decks (aka ones with severe self imposed deck restrictions) are possible but should not demand to be competitive. (Bolt + Pillar only) decks would be duos under this quanta cap.

Bolt + Pillar only decks were nerfed into obscurity a long time ago. Back when Reflective was added.

[storyteller]

I disagree. Reflective shields have been in the game from a very early date and have been the natural counter. They are as rarely used as a spell only deck. I see each style of play as having a natural counter and they do seem to be about as used as the style opposite them hand-in-hand.
Consider:

Denial Deck == Pillarless
Spell Only == Reflective Shields
Poison == Purify

While the core game of Creatures vs Shields and Creature control stands, these subtypes have their place. If we do away with too many variants, we end up with a stale game.

[EmeraldTiger]

I would like to have cards that raised and lowered the quanta cap.

[OldTrees]

I disagree. Reflective shields have been in the game from a very early date and have been the natural counter. They are as rarely used as a spell only deck. I see each style of play as having a natural counter and they do seem to be about as used as the style opposite them hand-in-hand.
Consider:

Denial Deck == Pillarless
Spell Only == Reflective Shields
Poison == Purify

While the core game of Creatures vs Shields and Creature control stands, these subtypes have their place. If we do away with too many variants, we end up with a stale game.

Usage of Bolt OTK dropped drastically about a month after Reflective was added. Almost all the ones that remained were Bolt + Reflect (to bypass Reflect) OTK. So (Bolt + Pillar only) has not been competitive for a long time.

Also, variants do not need to be pure.

[storyteller]

see Im not even talking for certain about OTK and if they are so badly nerfed, it should be fine.  The idea of putting such an arbitrary limit is disconcerting. I still see no real reason why it shouldnt be higher.

[OldTrees]

see Im not even talking for certain about OTK and if they are so badly nerfed, it should be fine.  The idea of putting such an arbitrary limit is disconcerting. I still see no real reason why it shouldnt be higher.

The limit was selected to slightly nerf Fire Stall's win condition. It is not arbitrary.