[Official] Dimensional Shield | Phase Shield

[Keolino]

I don't have any respect for people who have nothing better to do with their time than type garbage into a post box.

And here I tried to stay polite....

But, to tell you the truth, I should be happy that you can't understand it. And you should probably be it too.



Well, well. I should post something on topic which you can think about.

"Improving the game" which you hopefully seek and "nerfing overpowered things" isn't always in the same direction. There are times when the "nerfing" will reduce the fun of a game, and therefor the nerfing wouldn't be any improvement. (Well, I doubt that that would be the case with dim shield, but it is still something to think about.)

[jawdirk]

"Improving the game" which you hopefully seek and "nerfing overpowered things" isn't always in the same direction. There are times when the "nerfing" will reduce the fun of a game, and therefor the nerfing wouldn't be any improvement. (Well, I doubt that that would be the case with dim shield, but it is still something to think about.)

That's a step in the right direction, but this has been said probably ten times in this thread alone, and another hundred times in various other "Nerf this card" threads.

[timetock]

Numbers aren't everything. It takes creativity to think of synergies, combos, strategies...

Sure, you can try and balance the cost. Sure, you can calculate hand drawing chances and adjust the turn numbers of Dim shield, SoSac, Freeze/congeal, whatever. And I appreciate the way how the game is balanced: 2 for upped blessing, 2 for an upped poison, gives you about the same damage per turn.

But it all boils down to the 'feel' of the game. Numbers help of course. I'm not denying that. Sometimes I wish Eternity would get a buff, and I feel the same for Ash Eater|Brimstone Eater. Even though they aren't splashable, they still have their own unique niche.
Dim shield has this niche.

[jawdirk]

Even a poll documenting opinions about synergies, niches, combos, and/or strategies would be numbers. Just saying it personally is nothing more than a single ambiguous data point - one opinion in a sea of disagreement. You can do better. We can do better. In fact, better has been done several times in this thread, if you have the time to dig through and find it.

[dragonsdemesne]

I don't know if this will count as hard numbers, but here goes.

Last season in battle league, I posted all of the decks I used more than once here: http://elementscommunity.org/forum/deck-compilations/the-dragon's-bl-decks-22013/

The total number of dimshields used in all of those decks combined is...

Spoiler for Hidden:

0

I don't think that dimshield needs a nerf.  However, if it were to be nerfed, my suggestion would be to change the 'prevents all damage for 3 turns' into a 5 damage shield for 3 turns (or 6 damage if upgraded).  This would keep the massive temporary damage prevention theme of the card intact, but give more ways to get around it.  Large creatures such as dragons, steam machines, and so on could still get past it, but it would still do basically the same thing it does now against smaller creatures.  (I believe I suggested this once before or something very much like it, but it was buried in the fifty-odd pages of arguing here, though it may have been in chat that I suggested it)

Winning a league without using dimshield doesn't prove on its own that it doesn't need nerfing, but it does make a case for it.  (maybe I'd have won more games if I had used it, for instance)  I didn't actually even realize I hadn't used it at all, but I did know when preparing this reply that I hadn't used it very often.  I never made the conscious decision not to use dimshield; I simply didn't design and play with any decks where I thought it would be advantageous to include it.

I will concede that in certain limited environments, dimshield is overpowered.  One of the most famous AI4 grinders is simply just monoaether with dimshields and phase dragons/immortals, but that's because virtually no AI4 decks have a way to deal with that kind of deck.  It's also overpowered in certain restricted pvp environments, such as some tourneys or other forum events.  (I've heard complaints about its presence in War, for instance, but I haven't been in War since #5)  When a fully unrestricted pvp metagame is considered, I don't think dimshield needs a nerf.

[serprex]

http://elementscommunity.org/forum/nerf-this-card!/dimensional-shield/msg1010712/#msg1010712

[Lech]

Just reduce it to 2 turns already, instead of creating cards for most elements to deal with this op card. Then add suitable cost (4 ?).

[Blacksmith]

51 pages later and 11,7K times read. No change has been made, maybe it's time to make a summery of this in a new thread and start a pool?

[SiiNK]

The Dimensional Shield is a defining card in countless decks. To change this would anger a lot of people I'd assume.
 
The issue regarding whether its overpowered is hard to disagree with when your playing an opponent who has a Dimensional Shield which means they most likely have 5 more. 6x3 = 18 Turns of power.

Although this post is about the "Nerfing of the Dimensional Shield" you must compare it to the other shield and wonder if its really that game changing.
Example: Think of some RoL/Hope decks and how high creature control is vital to overcome hope.
Example two: Bone wall with some fancy combo's can net you a high amount of defense which is arguably worse.
Last Example: Fire shield if left alone can destroy many decks due to its creature control.

No doubt there are more/better examples.
Dimensional Shield is a *very powerful shield *Note not Op*. If a nerd had to take place it would be to increase its cost.

If this post is found to be retardedly*  stupid apologies.     

[omegareaper7]

The Dimensional Shield is a defining card in countless decks. To change this would anger a lot of people I'd assume.
 
The issue regarding whether its overpowered is hard to disagree with when your playing an opponent who has a Dimensional Shield which means they most likely have 5 more. 6x3 = 18 Turns of power.

Although this post is about the "Nerfing of the Dimensional Shield" you must compare it to the other shield and wonder if its really that game changing.
Example: Think of some RoL/Hope decks and how high creature control is vital to overcome hope.
Example two: Bone wall with some fancy combo's can net you a high amount of defense which is arguably worse.
Last Example: Fire shield if left alone can destroy many decks due to its creature control.

No doubt there are more/better examples.
Dimensional Shield is a *very powerful shield *Note not Op*. If a nerd had to take place it would be to increase its cost.

If this post is found to be retardedly*  stupid apologies.   

Hope and bones need support to be anywhere near as good, and firewall is plain bad in most decks. Firestalls and mono fires aside.

[jawdirk]

Dimensional Shield is a *very powerful shield *Note not Op*. If a nerd had to take place it would be to increase its cost.

Dim shield is still more powerful than dusk shield when it lasts 2 turns (according to simulations). Increasing the cost of dim shield is not very effective, since the cost is spread over 3 turns, and it is used late-game (simulations agree with this, showing it to be significantly more powerful than dusk shield at 10 ). Increasing the cost of dim shield would likely limit it to use in mono aether, which in my opinion is a bad outcome.

Edit:

To change this would anger a lot of people I'd assume.

This is sort of the elephant in the room throughout this thread. My guess as to why dim shield hasn't been nerfed is that it would decrease options for anti-false god decks, and Zanz has no interest in rebalancing the false gods and other cards to fix that. A huge proportion of anti-false god decks rely on taking advantage of false gods' lack of PC.

[andretimpa]

This is sort of the elephant in the room throughout this thread. My guess as to why dim shield hasn't been nerfed is that it would decrease options for anti-false god decks, and Zanz has no interest in rebalancing the false gods and other cards to fix that. A huge proportion of anti-false god decks rely on taking advantage of false gods' lack of PC.

In 1.4 this problem should disappear, since there are more effective ways of farming, even though the false gods will remain.