[Official] Enchant Artifact | Protect Artifact

[coinich]

I've always thought that this effect is slightly strong for its cost.  A permanent becomes truly permanent for 2 (or 1) quanta.  A bit cheap I'd say.  While I hope that there become other options to deal with permanents, and possibly PA'd ones, at the moment, they are more invulnerable than Immortal creatures, for essentially half the cost.  I think a 2 or 1 casting cost to each card should be at least considered.  Now if I could just get a poll up...

[GG]

i think the problem is not that the card itself is overpowered, but how only can use its benefits.

therefore, i suggest making the upgraded version similar to Animate Weapon in the sense that it costs random quanta to play. Of course, it wouldn't cost one random quanta; i suggest 2 or 3.

seriously, unlike creatures, which can be harmed via fire shield or spine carapace, permanents become really invulnerable.

[BluePriest]

i think the problem is not that the card itself is overpowered, but how only can use its benefits.

therefore, i suggest making the upgraded version similar to Animate Weapon in the sense that it costs random quanta to play. Of course, it wouldn't cost one random quanta; i suggest 2 or 3.

seriously, unlike creatures, which can be harmed via fire shield or spine carapace, permanents become really invulnerable.

Isnt that more of a buff than a nerf?

[jmizzle7]

I vote for a big fat no on a buff or nerf of this card. Protect Artifact should never, ever cost random quanta to play, just like Purify shouldn't cost random quanta.

[Malduk]

I vote for a big fat no on a buff or nerf of this card. Protect Artifact should never, ever cost random quanta to play, just like Purify shouldn't cost random quanta.

...just like healing shouldnt cost random quanta. Oh wait!

So, what exactly should and what shouldnt cost random quanta in your opinion? Why is it ok for healing 5 per turn to be random, while healing for 2 that cleans poison is not? Permanent destruction is available to several elements, protection is available only to 1 element. Do you think other elements should get some way of perma protection too?

On topic: I dont see the reasoning for nerfing PA. Card slot in the deck is more expensive than its quanta cost. Decks that carry PA are not really dominating the game.

[Daytripper]

Enchant artifact is cheap, but it is also a defensive card. You have to sync it with another card, and if the opponent has no counter measures anyway, you play it for nothing.

- 1 quanta cost is a minimal buff... I have upped other cards. 2 or 1 earth, you barely notice the difference. Compare that to quicksand, an active destruction card. It still costs 2 earth upped, but it is really annoying and you can use it almost always.

I keep reading ''earth gets too much'' all the time.. That's hard to judge for me. There's still no way to kill off any creatures, maybe some other things make up for that. I don't know how these decks are being designed, I do see some decks have way more cards than others. I'd like to see every element has some basic strategies and the same amount of cards, while every element is still denied one or two trumps to keep it fair.
 

[jmizzle7]

I don't like life gain costing random quanta. I have never really liked Shard of Gratitude because I think it completely blurs the lines of Elements gameplay and makes every element play like the other elements. The more cards that cost random quanta, the less clear the dividing line is between the elements, which waters down gameplay and elemental distinction, two things that Elements is most known for.

[ratcharmer]

I think the problem here isn't so much that this card is too strong as it is something no other element can do.

In elements there are a lot of very cheap ways to make permanents go away, so if destroying a permanent is cheap, then protecting one should be too.

What makes this card seem unfair at times, is that most players have no way whatsoever to protect their permanents, whereas it's really easy for an earth player.

Basically I think we need more ways to protect permanents, not a nerf for the one way that actually is in the game

[smuglapse]

I think the problem here isn't so much that this card is too strong as it is something no other element can do.

Light has built-in protection.

In elements there are a lot of very cheap ways to make permanents go away, so if destroying a permanent is cheap, then protecting one should be too.

What makes this card seem unfair at times, is that most players have no way whatsoever to protect their permanents, whereas it's really easy for an earth player.

Basically I think we need more ways to protect permanents, not a nerf for the one way that actually is in the game

I agree.

[Higurashi]

Protecting shields/perms/towers is often more important than protecting weapons, though. I like that elements can do specific things none of the others can. Makes the contrast stronger. It's also not as unbalanced as being the only one with perm destruction would be. Not powerful enough as long as it takes a card space to deserve a nerf.

[Szklarzified]

I think this card is perfectly balanced

[Avenger]

The best would be to have some way around it.