Do you like the idea of Shards?

[vrt]

I thought I posted this in here but it might have been something discussed in chat.

I think the shards are 12 missed opportunities for new themed in-element cards.

[eaglgenes101]

I must say i don`t like idea of shards. First thing is they don`t belong to any elment so rainbows are favoured by implementing them and I don`t think this is something we really need. But that`s not really a big deal, the worst is they are killing creativity. Almost every new deck posted on forum contains at least one (usually more) kind of shard. I have a feeling that community members don`t try to develop new strategies and combos anymore but focus on attempts at fitting shards in every possible deck.

Rather, the opposite. It takes skill to make the most of a shard. SoG does not work well in a rush, nor does SoSac in a firestall. They are balanced, so they expand the metagame,  allowing for more creativity.

[pedzacyzolw]

I must say i don`t like idea of shards. First thing is they don`t belong to any elment so rainbows are favoured by implementing them and I don`t think this is something we really need. But that`s not really a big deal, the worst is they are killing creativity. Almost every new deck posted on forum contains at least one (usually more) kind of shard. I have a feeling that community members don`t try to develop new strategies and combos anymore but focus on attempts at fitting shards in every possible deck.

Rather, the opposite. It takes skill to make the most of a shard. SoG does not work well in a rush, nor does SoSac in a firestall. They are balanced, so they expand the metagame,  allowing for more creativity.

But it seems that most of people think the way: "my deck is stall. Lets put in 6 SoG or even better - 6 SoD and 6 SoSa!" or "my deck is rush. SoBe is really necessary!" or "my deck is rainbow. It would be awesome to use SoSe!". I know I`m exaggerating but hope you get my point.

[OldTrees]

I must say i don`t like idea of shards. First thing is they don`t belong to any elment so rainbows are favoured by implementing them and I don`t think this is something we really need. But that`s not really a big deal, the worst is they are killing creativity. Almost every new deck posted on forum contains at least one (usually more) kind of shard. I have a feeling that community members don`t try to develop new strategies and combos anymore but focus on attempts at fitting shards in every possible deck.

Rather, the opposite. It takes skill to make the most of a shard. SoG does not work well in a rush, nor does SoSac in a firestall. They are balanced, so they expand the metagame,  allowing for more creativity.

But it seems that most of people think the way: "my deck is stall. Lets put in 6 SoG or even better - 6 SoD and 6 SoSa!" or "my deck is rush. SoBe is really necessary!" or "my deck is rainbow. It would be awesome to use SoSe!". I know I`m exaggerating but hope you get my point.

Reminds me of Fractal, Mitosis, Adrenaline, Supernova, Immolation, Hourglass (a long time ago), Quint, Explosion, or Steal.

[Aneninen]

I know I won't be popular, but...
...aren't shards a bit too common?

[mega plini]

I know I won't be popular, but...
...aren't shards a bit too common?

Common as in "I Have to farm night and day to get them"

[pedzacyzolw]

I must say i don`t like idea of shards. First thing is they don`t belong to any elment so rainbows are favoured by implementing them and I don`t think this is something we really need. But that`s not really a big deal, the worst is they are killing creativity. Almost every new deck posted on forum contains at least one (usually more) kind of shard. I have a feeling that community members don`t try to develop new strategies and combos anymore but focus on attempts at fitting shards in every possible deck.

Rather, the opposite. It takes skill to make the most of a shard. SoG does not work well in a rush, nor does SoSac in a firestall. They are balanced, so they expand the metagame,  allowing for more creativity.

But it seems that most of people think the way: "my deck is stall. Lets put in 6 SoG or even better - 6 SoD and 6 SoSa!" or "my deck is rush. SoBe is really necessary!" or "my deck is rainbow. It would be awesome to use SoSe!". I know I`m exaggerating but hope you get my point.

Reminds me of Fractal, Mitosis, Adrenaline, Supernova, Immolation, Hourglass (a long time ago), Quint, Explosion, or Steal.

This is something different. Cards you mentioned are in single element, while shards are other so it is easier to use them

[OldTrees]

I must say i don`t like idea of shards. First thing is they don`t belong to any elment so rainbows are favoured by implementing them and I don`t think this is something we really need. But that`s not really a big deal, the worst is they are killing creativity. Almost every new deck posted on forum contains at least one (usually more) kind of shard. I have a feeling that community members don`t try to develop new strategies and combos anymore but focus on attempts at fitting shards in every possible deck.

Rather, the opposite. It takes skill to make the most of a shard. SoG does not work well in a rush, nor does SoSac in a firestall. They are balanced, so they expand the metagame,  allowing for more creativity.

But it seems that most of people think the way: "my deck is stall. Lets put in 6 SoG or even better - 6 SoD and 6 SoSa!" or "my deck is rush. SoBe is really necessary!" or "my deck is rainbow. It would be awesome to use SoSe!". I know I`m exaggerating but hope you get my point.

Reminds me of Fractal, Mitosis, Adrenaline, Supernova, Immolation, Hourglass (a long time ago), Quint, Explosion, or Steal.

This is something different. Cards you mentioned are in single element, while shards are other so it is easier to use them

Shards can be used by more decks than elemental cards like Fractal. So more decks are added to the game by Shards than by elemental cards like Fractal?

I would also note that some of the popularity of the shards is related to them being new. This factor is exaggerated further by them being other cards.

After noting these two details, would you clarify the difference you are upset about?

[pedzacyzolw]

As I said befor I think using shards is too easy. They reduce differences between elements. For example Life decks didn`t have access to PC unless you added in Fire or Darkness but it was at least a little challenging. Now we have Shard of Focus which doesn`t need dedicated quanta and can be easily used in mono Life. For me it kills the creativity needed to overcome weaknesses of particular elements and makes deckbuilding too simple

[ARTHANASIOS]

 Personally, I dislike the idea of shards because I don't like the "rare card" idea at all. I believe that every single card should be available in the bazzar (even Nymphs).
 I also may like the idea of neutral cards which can fit into any color, however their neutral cost is too small in rainbow decks which produce 12 quanta with a single Nova, or 3 quanta per turn with a single Quantum Pillar/Tower.
 Their effect is also quite OP in certain shards (SoSa).
 I am also against the fact that permanent Shards are stackable (SoG, SoV) and can be protected by a single Enchant/Protect Artifact spell.

[OldTrees]

Personally, I dislike the idea of shards because I don't like the "rare card" idea at all. I believe that every single card should be available in the bazzar (even Nymphs).

Reason for rarity:
The game is meant to appeal to a broad range of players. It meant to appeal to players ranging from those that hate grinding to those that love grinding. The trainer satisfies the end that hates grinding. The vast quantity of common cards and easy to acquire rares are there for the average player. The extreme that loves grinding gets to try to complete the collection including nymphs.
By having a broad audience the game is able to provide more total enjoyment.
(As always, the need for rare cards to be balanced is larger that the need for common cards)

[rosutosefi]

Shards are nice, they give a different flavor in the game (that you don't need a specific element's quantum to use it) and that is good. Just needs balance. But I dislike the part where the effect is "do more if mark is  ", "affects    creatures only" and whatever mark-related effect just because elemental shard whatever thematic thingy. It just looks too much like a card game we all know that has cards that favors dragons just because they're dragons and offers a card that counters ONE card. I actually expected better ways to make these shards match an element, like a shard that gives bonuses every time you draw, a card that amplifies healing, one that affects immortal creatures (okay. SoW got that right, but only SoW) and other things. It's just too... weird.