[Official] Shard of Focus | Shard of Focus

[mega plini]

Too draw the tangent back on topic.

Current PC has a baseline to which it is balanced. SoF is cheaper than this baseline. Hence it is OP. The reduction to 1hp helps but I think the current side effect (Extremely cheap mass PC that is vulnerable to CC -> All decks required to have CC) is still harmful to the metagame.

It turns into a black hole as well, do you think that it is advisable to nerf that aspect as well?

[OldTrees]

Too draw the tangent back on topic.

Current PC has a baseline to which it is balanced. SoF is cheaper than this baseline. Hence it is OP. The reduction to 1hp helps but I think the current side effect (Extremely cheap mass PC that is vulnerable to CC -> All decks required to have CC) is still harmful to the metagame.

It turns into a black hole as well, do you think that it is advisable to nerf that aspect as well?

No and Yes.
The ability to turn into a card should, theoretically, have the same value regardless of the card it turns into. This assumes all cards are balanced. It would be better to balance the card it turns into rather than change that part of the effect.

[mega plini]

@oldtrees: I get your point. I do not mean that Black hole is OP. But the fact that you get extra use out of this card results in great card advantage.
One can argue about this, saying that it would be neccesary to build a deck around it before it comes to good use. This is true: without gravity quanta, the black hole is a waste.
On the other hand we must not forget that the black hole, when  is available, is a big treat.
I do not think that this has priority over the cheapness of the card when nerfing it, but I would be happy if the whole BH thing is reconsiddered.

[OldTrees]

@mega plini
I think the card advantage, assuming BH is balanced, is roughly equivalent to other loyalty bonuses like Shard of Gratitude's +2 regen for Life marks.

However this means that the rest of SoF should be balanced using the same metric as the regen 3 version of SoG. Aka weaker than the baseline.

[Korugar]

Hmm, this might have fixed some of the balance issues, but it still doesn't fix the biggest problem: this is supposed to be the gravity shard, yet it provides virtually no advantage to playing it with a gravity deck.

[OldTrees]

Hmm, this might have fixed some of the balance issues, but it still doesn't fix the biggest problem: this is supposed to be the gravity shard, yet it provides virtually no advantage to playing it with a gravity deck.

Non gravity decks: PC
Gravity decks: PC and Quanta Denial

[Korugar]

It's not as simple as that. Assuming you're just referring to gravity pull, that can easily be used in rainbows. Plus, most decks put out more than fifteen damage per turn fairly quickly, which means the shards won't last more than an extra two or three turns. That's not enough damage for quanta denial, unless you ignore more expensive damaging permanents. If you leave it till later, the deck will probably not be significantly damaged by losing a few pillars.

[OldTrees]

It's not as simple as that. Assuming you're just referring to gravity pull, that can easily be used in rainbows. Plus, most decks put out more than fifteen damage per turn fairly quickly, which means the shards won't last more than an extra two or three turns. That's not enough damage for quanta denial, unless you ignore more expensive damaging permanents. If you leave it till later, the deck will probably not be significantly damaged by losing a few pillars.

You do know that non gravity decks cannot play Black Hole.

[Korugar]

Ah, I feel stupid forgetting that, now. Anyway, yes, of course that's true, but black hole is really only useful against rainbows, correct? It would also, I suppose, hit a trio pretty hard, but that's not a good thing, with as weak as they already are.

[Sqantic Pilau]

I'm aware that I hold an extreme view, but I dislike the idea of PC being available to all elements at a reasonable cost (3 destructions for 7/5 quanta) so much that I feel SoF should be removed from the game and replaced with something else.

Not sure if I could possibly agree more - if we're not careful all elements will have both PC and CC - we need less rather than more in my opinion.

[Atico]

Hmm, this might have fixed some of the balance issues, but it still doesn't fix the biggest problem: this is supposed to be the gravity shard, yet it provides virtually no advantage to playing it with a gravity deck.

Non gravity decks: PC
Gravity decks: PC and Quanta Denial

Really?
I played against MonoAether deck, but with Gravity Mark. 0 Gravity cards, but Gravity Mark. Why? If You use Shards then type of mark is not really matter, because SoF cost rainbow quantum (so it isn't important which mark You have). But interesting situation is later. 3 turns of destroying Towers, gain 3 Gravity quantum (or 6, 9 in Arena) and gain BlackHole. Perfect!

The same is with SoD. Poison deck, 0 Light cards, but Light Mark But adding +8HP more isn't the same problem for opponent (this bonus is acceptable) as clearing quantum pool and gain up to 36 HP. It is OP mechanism (or more powerful than SoD bonus), the same like duos between QS, BH, Discord, Pests.

[OldTrees]

Hmm, this might have fixed some of the balance issues, but it still doesn't fix the biggest problem: this is supposed to be the gravity shard, yet it provides virtually no advantage to playing it with a gravity deck.

Non gravity decks: PC
Gravity decks: PC and Quanta Denial

Really?
I played against MonoAether deck, but with Gravity Mark. 0 Gravity cards, but Gravity Mark. Why? If You use Shards then type of mark is not really matter, because SoF cost rainbow quantum (so it isn't important which mark You have). But interesting situation is later. 3 turns of destroying Towers, gain 3 Gravity quantum (or 6, 9 in Arena) and gain BlackHole. Perfect!

Summary: You were able to have quanta denial because you chose to use a Gravity mark  with Shard of Focus. As far as shards go that is sufficient to qualify for the loyalty bonus.