Things that make Rainbow decks overpowered, solutions.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

Right now the only thing that matters in this game is killing gods to get upgrades, and Rainbow excels in it.

PvP is broken: its slow as hell, it is insanely buggy and unfair (with full upgraded decks being matched against starter decks). The fact that gradually the Top 50 list is getting filled with Rainbow decks has nothing to do with how well player versus player gameplay is balanced, or how well rainbow matches against other decks, but simply because a 66% win ratio against gods gives score easily and god killing is what everybody is doing.

Any discussion regarding rainbow "overpoweredness" must make clear distinction between those two aspects.

100% Agree. Well said, Brian.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

Rainbow is just the best in all situations; it has healing, it wins pretty quickly (although that needs supernovas), and it works the best at every level of the game. For me, that is the definition of overpowered.

Isn't that the point? People were actually trying to make a deck that could adapt to more situations than any others. However, like every other deck, it has it's weaknesses. Aether and Rainbow can be taken down with deflag/steal/earthquake, FFQ can be destroyed with creature denial and fast damage, as well as steal/deflag/earthquake, Darkness Denial can be stopped by rainbow/novas (or supernovas)/and creature denial, Mono-Fire Rush can be shut down my sundials and creature denial. The list goes on. Rainbow decks aren't perfect, and if you play a deck that runs permanent denial, you can shut them down almost instantly. Though once people start designing anti-rainbow decks, there are going to be counters to those counters, etc. We should just wait until more cards are released, and then we'll see the power of rainbow decks decrease.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

Isn't that the point? People were actually trying to make a deck that could adapt to more situations than any others. However, like every other deck, it has it's weaknesses. ... Rainbow decks aren't perfect ...

So just to make sure I understand your line of reasoning.  Because a deck has weaknesses or / and is therefor imperfect, it can not be overpowered.   Is that it?  perfection is a necessary attribute of overpowerness? I'd for one disagree, and for two: point out that if you also disagree you have not yet addressed the issues people are raising.

You're taking things out of context and blowing them out of proportion (that seems to happen a lot here, it seems). My line "...rainbow decks aren't perfect..." was an observation, and has no relation to my logic. If it was perfect, it would be overpowered. It's not perfect, but it is still very good. Rainbow decks can be beaten a number of ways, but really it all just comes down to luck of the draw. Just like how Mono-Aether can really only be beaten by a bad draw or deflag/steal/gravity shield, Rainbow can be beaten by deflag/steal/earthquake, and if you plop and Oty out soon enough, you could almost guarantee a win (I'm hoping that if you're playing Otys, you have creature buff, too).

I don't think we should really be arguing about how to nerf the rainbow decks just because people are biased against them (the point of the game is to have a strong deck, so why be a rebel and not use one?). Sure, rainbow decks are strong, they have weaknesses to be exploited, and are beatable, but overall, they can take on most standard decks. What I'm trying to say is that instead of trying to make rainbow decks weaker, we should make mono-, duo-, and tri-element decks BETTER.

[Uzra]

Right now the only thing that matters in this game is killing gods to get upgrades, and Rainbow excels in it.   ... PvP is broken

Right now?   What do people who have all the upgrades do?  We don't care? They don't exist? I think not.  PvP is what matters, farming gods is only a means to an end. The end, the why, the reason, is pvp.

Any discussion regarding rainbow "overpoweredness" must make clear distinction between those two aspects.

So you are suggesting that someone somewhere has talked about rainbow being overpowered in regards to farming gods?  I'd like to see a link or quote please.   No one cares what deck you are using to play by yourself or how powerful it is, you are playing by yourself... "Rainbow is too powerful for farming gods"  What's that mean? that they win too often against the computer?  How can that be of concern to anyone?

[Uzra]

Isn't that the point? People were actually trying to make a deck that could adapt to more situations than any others. However, like every other deck, it has it's weaknesses. ... Rainbow decks aren't perfect ...

So just to make sure I understand your line of reasoning.  Because a deck has weaknesses or / and is therefor imperfect, it can not be overpowered.   Is that it?  perfection is a necessary attribute of overpowerness? I'd for one disagree, and for two: point out that if you also disagree you have not yet addressed the issues people are raising.

[vice123]

I don't get all the crying about rainbow decks. This game is not meant to played with mono deck. The colors are more for reference of cards. If you choose only one you limit yourself to 10% of the cards available. Even the started decks are mixed. Deal with it.

[brain9h]

PvP is what matters, farming gods is only a means to an end. The end, the why, the reason, is pvp.

I disagree.

And because there's people like me who likes farming gods per se, and there's people like you who think PvP is "the why", that I insist that any discussion regarding rainbow power MUST make clear distinction between the two worlds, because it would be bad to break one in order to fix the other.

[brain9h]

Right now the only thing that matters in this game is killing gods to get upgrades, and Rainbow excels in it.   ... PvP is broken

Right now?   What do people who have all the upgrades do?  We don't care? They don't exist? I think not.  PvP is what matters, farming gods is only a means to the end, the end, the why, the reason, is pvp.

First of all your own personal opinion is not compass for how the game should be designed. I for one don't enjoy competition when there's luck involved... you can say I'm more of a chess guy and not so much a poker guy. Anyway, personal opinions on what the objective of the game SHOULD be are meaningless. That's up for the game creator/designer.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to be offensive in anyway, I just think your generalism regarding PvP to be wrong.

Any discussion regarding rainbow "overpoweredness" must make clear distinction between those two aspects.

So you are suggesting that someone somewhere has talked about rainbow being overpowered in regards to farming gods?  I'd like to see a link or quote please.   No one cares what deck you are using to play by yourself or how powerful it is, you are playing by yourself... "Rainbow is too powerful for farming gods"  What's that mean? that they win too often against the computer?  How can that be of concern to anyone?
[/quote]

Check the previous post, first line. Or many other posts on this thread and many others on this forum.

How can that be of concern to anyone?

Not all is a matter of competition. I play against the gods because I like it, and that's it. Unfortunately the game is designed in such way that playing against gods with other decks is not fun, and that is why I think the discussion of rainbow power versus gods is relevant.

[brain9h]

So.. do you plan to collect gold after you have all the upgrades you want?  Do you think gods are the best way to get rare cards?  Do you have no other "why"?

I don't plan anything. I'll just keep playing, trying to learn more about the game, waiting for the future changes.
I think gods are currently the best way to get rare cards, yes.

It's not just my opinion, It's based on observations from every other game that can be palyed PvP and PvE
I'm sorry but It's the driving factor behind long-term dedicated players for everything I've ever seen.

True, but still you don't represent the totality of the player base (not even the majority). The same pattern occurs in the same games you mentioned (some of which I also played).

Look, I don't intend to get into infinite discussions, specially flamed ones. I think I made my point, and that's enough. Since this forum was created we never heard from the game designers, so it's possible we're debating over nothing.

cheers,

[Daxx]

Yeah, sundials are a bit of a bitch. I still think there's a place for them in the game, but they do cause problems considering how cheap they are to play (and the Hasten ability).

As a side note, I don't understand why a card game should be compared to chess. A card game, even poker, is most of the times won if you have the right cards at the right time, uncertainness if your opponent has the card to counter may come into play as well. There is no uncertainness on a chess board, all your "cards" are there from the beginning, and you can see all of the "cards" your oppenent.

This is belated, and may have been explained before, but I believe the point being made was that the poster preferred less hidden information. Chess has no hidden information compared to poker which is predicated upon it, and therefore has less uncertainty and randomness, and a greater impact of skill over luck.

Incidentally, this is why many of the best decks try to reduce their size to the minimum possible, so as to improve the odds of drawing your best cards, and to reduce the probability of bad draws. Where there is less randomness, your skill in deck design and play is more important.

[Daxx]

Rainbow wasn't very popular before the upgrade system. Care to explain that little factoid?

Very simple. Card casting costs, cost/power ratios and Towers vs Pillars. As any CCG player will tell you, tempo (and mana curves) are important factors in top-level decks in this type of game. Rainbow decks are more viable after the upgrade system than they were beforehand because:

• Many upgraded cards cost less to play. This is an important consideration when otherwise you might disregard a card because it requires too many of the same quantum type.
• Some cards become more powerful for the same cost. This makes them more attractive, and worth splashing for.
• Finally, quantum towers provide extra quanta, and they provide them now. This means you have an extra turn's headstart on your mana curve.

This suggests that introducing more cards with a higher cost that are worth playing will make mono-decks more attractive, since those cards might be powerful but only worth taking if you can afford to play them. Even packing novas and supernovas, a costly card is going to be tricky to cast early enough to make a difference. Lots of different cards with low costs means that Rainbow decks get more fodder.

As for "rainbow decks are overpowered wah wah wah", my personal response is that a) the game is not finished, and it's possible that the design has a long way to go, and b) the meta-game exists; that is, anti-rainbow deck tech will improve as more people play rainbow and the game community matures.

[Evil Hamster]

I think youre all wrong. The issue isn't wether or not rainbow is "overpowered".

The problem is the game is still new and there aren't a lot of cards for mono strategies.

Right now while each element only has 8-12 cards to choose from rainbow will always have the full list of cards.

Once all the individual elements get 20-30 cards to choose from then rainbow will necessarily diminish in prominince.