[Official] Shard of Focus | Shard of Focus

[Aneninen]

Remove the turns into a Black Hole part, in my opinion.
Since Shards are In-Element now, it's unnecessary to associate it with  by the Black Hole anyway. (In other words: now, if you have quanta for the Shard itself, most probably you'll have quanta for the Black Hole too which means, Black Hole won't be a dead card anymore if you have no  .)

In all other aspects, the card is fine.

[omegareaper7]

Remove the turns into a Black Hole part, in my opinion.
Since Shards are In-Element now, it's unnecessary to associate it with  by the Black Hole anyway. (In other words: now, if you have quanta for the Shard itself, most probably you'll have quanta for the Black Hole too which means, Black Hole won't be a dead card anymore if you have no  .)

In all other aspects, the card is fine.

3 permanents for one card is fine? Explosion weeps.

[OldTrees]

3 permanents for one card is fine? Explosion weeps.

Your incomplete argument sounds like you are unaware that cards also cost quanta and turns. Please don't forget to mention why you are ignoring the 2 other costs.

[omegareaper7]

3 permanents for one card is fine? Explosion weeps.

Your incomplete argument sounds like you are unaware that cards also cost quanta and turns. Please don't forget to mention why you are ignoring the 2 other costs.

3 card slots and 6 cost for upped deflag, but only 1 slot and four quanta for focus. (More potential uses and defense if used along with gravity pull, but this can be ignored for now)  I ask, how is it balanced, even without black hole, in regards to explosion?

[OldTrees]

Thanks. I think the extra time it takes to resolve and the fragility do make up some of the difference but I would like a small nerf still.

One thing to consider is it just got a large nerf so some are satisfied, some are patient and some are testing.

[Calindu]

3 permanents for one card is fine? Explosion weeps.

Your incomplete argument sounds like you are unaware that cards also cost quanta and turns. Please don't forget to mention why you are ignoring the 2 other costs.

What is that incomplete? If you would be to play the game more, you would see that SoFo is quite overused and OP.
One bad part at SoFo is that it can do too many things in the same time, it can attack(Rage Potion, Acceleration), it can act as PC(obvious), it can act as denial(the BH after you use it) and can act as a form of defense(combined with GPull).

The other bad part is that it blows out of the water any other form of PC, in effectiveness.
Let's take the case when SoFo is not used with anything else and try to get other forms of used PC at the same level, with the mention that SoFo is weak in the first turn and requires a turn to get active.

Deflagration: You need 3 of those to get to SoFo power, so 9 quanta and 3 card slots.
Steal: You need 3 of those to get to SoFo power, so 12 quanta and 3 card slots, instead you get 3 permanents too.
Pulverizer: You need it and then 3 uses of Pulvy to get it to SoFo power, so 4 quanta, 9 quanta and 1 turn slot, but it's weak in all the turns and requires a turn to get active, also needing a duo to work.

[OldTrees]

3 permanents for one card is fine? Explosion weeps.

Your incomplete argument sounds like you are unaware that cards also cost quanta and turns. Please don't forget to mention why you are ignoring the 2 other costs.

What is that incomplete?

Read the post I was replying to. Then read the expanded argument in his/her next post. Someone as smart as you should be able to find out what was being talked about.
In the meantime don't put words in people's mouths.

[BunKeR]

Thanks. I think the extra time it takes to resolve and the fragility do make up some of the difference but I would like a small nerf still.

One thing to consider is it just got a large nerf so some are satisfied, some are patient and some are testing.

I was heavily in favor of adding an activation cost to SoFo of 1 to use each time . Would that nerf be considered small or large ? Also , I'm still testing the new SoFo but my gut feeling is that its a lot more balanced but there is a little more work to be done .

[OldTrees]

@Bunker
Increasing the activation cost by 1 would be a small nerf.

[BunKeR]

@Bunker
Increasing the activation cost by 1 would be a small nerf.

Of the options in the OP , the only other one that looks good is "Card stats changed to 1|1, making it prone to additional CC (fireshield)"


Edit : The other thing is maybe fixing the +15 boost so that if you cancel the activation it doesn't get the boost ?

[xsindomanx]

Edit : The other thing is maybe fixing the +15 boost so that if you cancel the activation it doesn't get the boost ?

Didn't know this happened. Wouldn't this be a bug?

[BunKeR]

Edit : The other thing is maybe fixing the +15 boost so that if you cancel the activation it doesn't get the boost ?

Didn't know this happened. Wouldn't this be a bug?

I dont think it is a bug . It boosts when you activate , if you cancel the boost is still there .