Are Quantum Towers Too Powerful?

[Scaredgirl]

Number of differnet element cards in deck --- Best choice for towers (regardless of viability)
mono --- reg towers
duo --- your mark as the minor element and most of the towers as the main element.
trio ---  your mark minor, and splitting up all the towers exclusively to the other two elements , or 100% quantum towers, both about as effective.
4 or more --- 100% quantum towers

If that's doesn't scream out that something is wrong, maybe you love how things are now and now want them to change, AKA bias.

I don't get it. What's wrong with that?

Like I said in the other thread, problem is not the Towers, it's card costs. too many cheap powerful cards for rainbow to use.

[wckz]

Maybe take out the cards, but give every deck a free +3/+6/+9 random quantum per turn ability <-- Can focus on mono/dual decks, while using their special skill without having to do rainbow.

[JTWood]

The programmer could run at end of month a programm which filters the most played card of the top 50 decks (without lands) and double the cost for 3 months.
Would create an always changing environment.

That'd be fine if people in the top 50 couldn't submit any deck any time.

In theory, they could submit a deck of pillars, photons, and sparks.

[Kumlekar]

If you still aren't convinced consider this.  If you wish to make a deck that will only use 3 different elements, your best option for quantum generation isn't to have a mix of 3 kinds of towers.  It is to have all quantum towers.  Just for tri-element decks, one goes all quantum.  It's clear that either the quantum towers are over powered (and thus the gods too difficult), or the reg towers are too weak.

um, I'm not following.  Theres 12 elements total, Quantum towers produce 3 quanta per turn.  that means to average 1 usable quanta per tower per turn (i.e. the effectiveness of a mono-deck) you have to be using a minimum of four elements.  Why would a tri-color deck be more effective with quantum towers?

[laf]

The programmer could run at end of month a programm which filters the most played card of the top 50 decks (without lands) and double the cost for 3 months.
Would create an always changing environment.

[Scaredgirl]

The programmer could run at end of month a programm which filters the most played card of the top 50 decks (without lands) and double the cost for 3 months.
Would create an always changing environment.

That'd be fine if people in the top 50 couldn't submit any deck any time.

In theory, they could submit a deck of pillars, photons, and sparks.

Yeah but he's talking about PLAYED cards. I doubt those top-50 guys would grind Gods for 12 hours with Photons and Sparks.

But doubling the cost is a really bad idea. It would be the same if you just removed those cards because nobody would use them.

However increasing the cost of most frequently used cards for about 15-20% would be a much better idea. This would force players to come up with something new and change metagame.

This would go on until all the cards in the game would be in roughly same use. And that's balance.

[Scaredgirl]

If you still aren't convinced consider this.  If you wish to make a deck that will only use 3 different elements, your best option for quantum generation isn't to have a mix of 3 kinds of towers.  It is to have all quantum towers.  Just for tri-element decks, one goes all quantum.  It's clear that either the quantum towers are over powered (and thus the gods too difficult), or the reg towers are too weak.

um, I'm not following.  Theres 12 elements total, Quantum towers produce 3 quanta per turn.  that means to average 1 usable quanta per tower per turn (i.e. the effectiveness of a mono-deck) you have to be using a minimum of four elements.  Why would a tri-color deck be more effective with quantum towers?

Yeah. I personally would never take Quantum Towers for tri-color deck. Best bet is to take roughly same amount of two different Towers + mark.

[Uzra]

Try it.  I think you'll see that if half of your 30 card deck is pillars (half is a lot) and you have 5 of element you'll have next to no consistency in getting 1 or 2 of each pillar by 12 cards resulting in it being about as random and productive as Q.Pillars.

[Evil Hamster]

The metagame has changed many times- every time new cards get added. The problem is there haven't been any new cards in a while.

[laf]

The programmer could run at end of month a programm which filters the most played card of the top 50 decks (without lands) and double the cost for 3 months.
Would create an always changing environment.

That'd be fine if people in the top 50 couldn't submit any deck any time.

In theory, they could submit a deck of pillars, photons, and sparks.

Yeah but he's talking about PLAYED cards. I doubt those top-50 guys would grind Gods for 12 hours with Photons and Sparks.

But doubling the cost is a really bad idea. It would be the same if you just removed those cards because nobody would use them.

However increasing the cost of most frequently used cards for about 15-20% would be a much better idea. This would force players to come up with something new and change metagame.

This would go on until all the cards in the game would be in roughly same use. And that's balance.

It was just an example. I would prefer just adding 1 mana to the color of the card. So sundial would cost 2G instead of 1G, otuygh 4R instead of 3R and so on...
It would be an automatic process and the programmer wouldnt need to manually tweak cards (and get flamed for it). You would force change into the environemnt as a gameplay element which, as a nice sideeffect, would prevent decktypes to dominate. A monthly changing metagame sounds pretty promising. Would show clearly whos the best deckbuilder of the available ressources.

[Uzra]

. A monthly changing metagame sounds pretty promising. Would show clearly whos the best deckbuilder of the available ressources.

I'd like a metagame that changed every 3 or 4 months personally.  If a month why not 4 weeks? why not 3 weeks 6 days?  I'd also prefer, by far, that the meta change from new cards, instead of changing old cards.