[Official] Shard of Focus | Shard of Focus

[RRQJ]

I played against the same deck FireNymph+RageElixir+BlackHole+SoF, fine combo.

That's my deck -- unless somebody else made the same too. 
I also thought this shard was OP, but the performance of my deck in the arena actually demonstrates that it is not
This deck went 4-2 so far and is almost out of the league due to strong negative rating. When I submit a speedbow, that easily gets 10-1 win-loss results.
Which means a deck built around SoF is still significantly weaker than a speedbow.

the deck I played was monofire.  No blackholes.  It just focused on SoF and raging it while destroying permanents.  If I remember correctly, it was 10-0 when I played it.

[Atico]

I played against the same deck FireNymph+RageElixir+BlackHole+SoF, fine combo.

That's my deck -- unless somebody else made the same too. 
I also thought this shard was OP, but the performance of my deck in the arena actually demonstrates that it is not
This deck went 4-2 so far and is almost out of the league due to strong negative rating. When I submit a speedbow, that easily gets 10-1 win-loss results.
Which means a deck built around SoF is still significantly weaker than a speedbow.

Yes, it was Your deck. I beat Your deck because AI was "stupid" in this game, he didn't use skill every turn and You didn't draw BH so early But concept is fantastic.

I saw that we have in Platinum more decks with quantum or pillars destroy. A lot of Pests, Quicksands, BH is in 20-30% decks, Discord and SoF. Add Explosions and Steals. Sorry, but it is too much.

This game lose a lot of fun in 1.30 when opponent can easily clean Your quantum. I want to PLAY this game, PLAY with more strategies, more tactics. All cards which I mentioned destroy sense of this game especially when are playing in duo-trio, like Pest+Quicksand, Discord+BH, BH+Quicksand etc... What is the sense of game when I haven't got any chance to produce a quantum? Sorry, but it is stupid. Only bad hand gives a chance to win against this decks. So when coin toss or lucky will be the most important things in game then we will have a problem...

PS. Sanctuary didn't solve the problem. It is card for only one element, which cost 3, so often You haven't got any chance to play it. What is more SoF+BH or Pest+Steal laughs at Sanctuary.

I have no idea what we should do, but something in this game goes wrong.

[Korugar]

Glitch is correct, for a couple reasons.

First, the only major synergy with this card and Gravity is gravity pull (acceleration removes its focus, and if you go there you might as well use something that starts with a higher attack, like the dragon, or is cheaper, like armagio) and that's cheap enough that a rainbow can easily use it, while taking advantage of the higher quanta production. Thus, this is a true "other" card, in that it is much better within a rainbow than its intended elemental preference.

To build on that, let's approach this thematically. Entropy has always been more directly connected to rainbows, what with nova and supernova, along with improved mutating (this is much more useful if you can take advantage of the skills of said mutants). So it seems as though it's natural opposite, Gravity, should be more naturally opposed to rainbows, which is also evident from the cards. Black hole is, of course, the most obvious example, only useful vs. rainbows (and immolation decks), but there's more. While in the unupped environment, Gravity is one of the weakest elements, I do believe it holds its own in upped situations. However, as opposed to the other elements that get cheaper when upgraded, Gravity creatures usually get stronger instead. This presents a unique situation, in which it becomes very difficult to splash most Gravity creatures in other decks, making it a preferred mono, or perhaps duo element. So, connecting the element to rainbows in any way seems counter productive thematically.

I would suggest a modification or selective nerf to this card, but not a general nerf. The current cost makes it acceptable within a mono environment (in my opinion), but not rainbow, and even if one were to narrow it down to mono, it should still have a slant toward Gravity that is currently lacking.

As such, I think the following addition should be made to the text: "Accretion: Destroy a permanent and gain +0/+15. Turn into black hole if HP>50 and mark is gravity. If not, then when HP>30."

I think the text becomes too long in this case, but you get the idea.

[Captain Scibra]

Like Glitch said, the universal use as PC, which practically guarantees 3 dead permanents, far outweighs the synergies with Gravity.  Though, I think the general capability to destroy 3 permanents with one card for 7 other quanta is ridiculous.  Pulverizer needs 4 + 3*3 = 13 duo quanta, while this only needs 7 quanta, and can be summoned so easily with a Nova first turn. 

Also, I have a general notion that PC in itself is somewhat imbalanced, but let's leave that alone for the time being...

[SnoWeb]

This is one of the shards I hate the most, both in concept and in execution. It seems like a bad excuse for the lack of Permanent Control in most elements, and I'd rather see cards such as Touch of Midas, Implosion, Rejuvenation and Dark Kraken in the game in its place.

I agree fully.

[Bonestorm]

This is one of the shards I hate the most, both in concept and in execution. It seems like a bad excuse for the lack of Permanent Control in most elements, and I'd rather see cards such as Touch of Midas, Implosion, Rejuvenation and Dark Kraken in the game in its place.

I agree fully.

+1 for more varied in game PC, this card needs a complete effect change IMO.

[Pwnator]

Drop 2 of these early game and you can pretty much deny anything the opponent has if he/she doesn't have EA/PA. Have an Eternity at hand and you can have 'permanent' (hurr hurr) PC.

I hate this card more than I hate SoSa. >.<

[Mathematistic]

(I know I'm gonna be beaten up for posting this, but well...)

Well, first of all, is eating 3 permanents then die really that OP? While pulvy is long lasting, this shard implodes automatically. As opposed to pulvy, it has no attack as well, and provides wee rushing and stalling power. Its sloe use is to destroy permanents, which is like an insurance. If your opponent doesn't play any perms at all or does not rely on them (or have so many pillars that SoFo can't do much), it's basically a dead card. If you use it outside of gravity, it is even more dead-the BH go waste (side note, upped SoFo gives unupped BH, intended?). It is only powerful in the sense that it helps breaking stalls by smashing perms. For the pillar smashing part, looks at EQ... it is way more versatile but fail to perform specific duties. Once again, it's an insurance in case you see mono-aether or other perm-heavy deck types (including stalls, which would have included PA for important perms anyways). Other than reducing the power of perms (which is quite high now IMO, or else why do we need all those pulvies in non-DBH speedbows, steals in rainbow DBH, explosions in immorush etc?), which is completely fine to me, it only provide a BH with 3 turn delay... (sounds so much like event horizon to me XD) OP or not?

Secondly, you know, most of you think that it provides a cheap way out for all elements to have PC, but... no. Remember it's 7/5 in cost. It's either nova+SoFo or SoFo consumes effective quanta. The former one is a 2-card combo, and deserves to be more powerful than a single pulvy (2 card combos like oty+quint could have won you a game, for comparison). The latter one uses up your quanta which could have used for summoning mid-rangers that could deal 20+ damage (for instance, GotP, costing 6 unupped, deal 28. the value is underestimated due to potential CC.) while SoFo is active, assuming SoFo really destroy 1 perm each turn. By using up a card slot in your deck for SoFo, you essentially gave your opponent a heal. Let's compare this to upped oty. For around the same quanta cost (and slightly higher activation cost of oty ability), oty guarantees death of all your opponent's creatures which are not protected and has lower than 5 hp (and more due to growth of oty, underestimated again), but for a cost slightly lower cost you can smash 3 perms. OMG! 3 perms! It can occasionally win you a game, but never as frequent as oty. Sure, oty is for gravity only, but other elements have similar cards that uses quanta way more efficiently than SoFo. Putting a pair of SoFo in every deck actually impedes the speed, while "smart" novas waste card space or conflict with other uses of your quanta.

Thirdly, it enriches the metagame. GP+SoFo, another 2 card combo, is a very effective synergy. The BH is situational, but nonetheless, powerful. Instead of turning it into a BH, you could have catapulted it for massive damage or accelerate it to bring doom slowly. It even encourages the use of mono-gravity, which increases the variety of the metagame. It also enables a lot of fun synergies by compensating their lack of PC, compromised by deck speed, which is a fairly fair trade. It gives  rise to alternative ways of deck building, which adds to the fun of the game (and more topdecking chaos!). It has good enough reasons to stay the way as it is.

One might argue that SoFo is OP by comparing it to BE and/or pulvy. Yes, it's much better than BE, so what? SoFo is something between instant PC and chronic PC. It does not give as much guarantee to the complete obliteration of stalls than pulvy/BE, and usually needs multiple copies to work. However, in comparison, drawing 1 BE/pulvy is enough to break lots of stalls given enough quanta is produced (by proper deckbuilding skills of course). They are not exactly of the same genre, and so, arguing that SoFo is not element specific but cost roughly the same (or even less) to destroy perms is not valid, as the perm destroying power is much weaker unless multiple copies are used, which, again, is related to card advantage, and let me remind use all once, 2 card combos deserve to be better than single cards. Well, but, BE is a 2 card combo too. However, BE is better in terms of PC for mono-entropy, and is more of a guarantee, as said above. Overall, SoFo is not much better than BE and is comparable to pulvy, and it's BE that needs a buff IMO, not SoFo needs a nerf.

In conclusion, SoFo is not OP, but just quite powerful. It weakens perms, which changes the metagame in a good way, and balances the nerf to rushes by nerfing SN. It is a semi-sustainable form of PC only, is is powerful, but not OP. I know this is against the general consensus, but ah well...

*Gets ready to be decapitated*

[mega plini]

Destroying three permanents is a big deal. But the biggest deal is you can't get rid of it easily. This thing is to big to throw a bolt at. Wich means only reverse time, freeze and Basilisk blood are capable to do something against it. Notice that thes do not kill it, they  merely slow it. The other possibility is ofcourse, lobotomising.

The fact that it cannot be removed is in my eyes the OPness. you might also notice that you need only 5 quana (7 unupped) to destroy 3permanets. Compare this to any other form of Permanent control and dare to say this card is not OP. It uses , any quanta will do! You are not restricted to a color.
Of course that was the point of  Permanent Control, but would't you expect that it's flexibility comes at a cost? No! They instead made it better than any other form of Pc!

I can understand you disagree about this (actualy I can't but I respect your oppinion)

But now... Prepare to be slaugthered!!!!
There is one part in your argumentation that makes no sense at all! You claim that This card would enrich the metagame!
You dish up some story of a synergy with gravity pull, failing to see the bigger picture! How can a card that destroy's Dozens of achtypes (basicly anything that relies on permanents) because of it's OPness enrich the metagame?
Not only it makes decks relying on permanents impossible, it also nerfs the rainbow decks.

So basicly it destroyed more than it ever can contribute.

[Mathematistic]

Damage is not the only form of CC. Also, it spontaneously implodes, doesn't it? It's basically a pumped-up deflag with 1 turn delay and 2 more perm destroying capability, which is balanced out by the cost.
Once again, perm heavy decks always have excess perms that could only be obliterated by chronic PC, as well as PA on important perms, so you argue that they are "destroyed", pulvy has "destroyed" them anyways.
... and it at least gives some chances (usually small) for non-PC decks to win vs perm heavy stall, and gives flexibility to the decks not to contain pulvies/BE/other PC. This helps reducing the Rock-Paper-Scissor situation in games and enables 80% Rock and 20% Scissors in case Paper is encountered. Simple RPS is way too primitive... card games can do much better than that.
Rainbows (but not SN, at least not as much as singularity) deserve a nerf in order to encourage the use of monos and duos in the metagame, which is a form of enrichment.
One side note, BH is more powerful vs duos than it seems. It is a great push factor for people to use it with gravity, or at least, splash in gravity and gravity cards.

[BluePriest]

I am inclined to agree that this card is OP, but not nearly as OP as people are saing it is. It is definitly not Pre Sundial Nerf OP, I would rank it as more of a Pre SoG Nerf OP. The effect, I would say is fine. However, the only problem I see with it is the amount of HP it has. Nerf the HP it has (while lowering the amount of hp before it goes BH, and the amount gained per use accordingly) and the card is fine. I would prefer more Gravity synergy, but im not all that pick on that aspect.

[eaglgenes101]

I'd say initial HP to 6. It's too hard to get rid of initially.