[Official] Shard of Focus | Shard of Focus

[Atico]

Spoiler for Hidden:

If you start with 4 pillars

If You win on a lottery...

You show example in mono. The most popular are rainbows. Mono decks aren't so popular, more often You receive 30-36HP than 3.
All depends on deck which we play against. Rainbows got nerf (good decision), so why not nerfing BH, quantum denials and pillars destroying?

I can agree that it isn't the fastest tactic, so when we win on a lottery (4 pillars) we have a chance to avoid this combo. But here is a question - why lucky is the most important thing in game? When I draw 1 pilllar I lose, when I draw 4 I win. I didn't like this.
Remember also that we can put SoF in all mono-duo decks, so also against Explosion/QS decks. What is more - I don't need destroy all Your quantum which You produced. You spend quantum on creatures so I can kill creatures + towers and You haven't got chance to put next creature. It can be new mechanism of winning - destroying Towers. I didn't like this, but maybe it was planned

Still extremely slow unless you use earthquakes.  And so what if it's a nerf on rainbows? Rainbows often pack cc, plus think of novabows, maybe you'll get 2 quantum pillars, SoF can't BH with that, unless you destroy one of your own.  By the time 4 turns are up, there is often enough Damage on the field to get a kill in the next couple turns, especially with opponent spending 7 quanta on a creature (yes this is all unupped, upped is just as relevant)

OK, we have other look on this game. I see problem with PC for everyone and adding easy BH in hand, You no.
Probably I am wrong and maybe oldschool, because I see that today more players like SoF than when this topic was started. I must accept fields with SoF and new destroying tactics

Nobody like SoF as it is.  The PC ability does not cost enough.  However, nobody else has had any problems with the BH part.  I don't claim to have read all the posts, but from the posts I've read, you're the only one who has continued to say that SoF should not become a BH.  All you say is that "it creates too strong of a combo."  That's only an opinion, not evidence.  I don't think this is a strong combo, and it will be weaker if/once the cost of the PC aspect is increased.

Also, it seems like you're assuming you get a SoF out on the first turn.  That can't always happen.  If you're playing against a mono deck and it takes to 2-3 turns to get SoF out, I guarantee that you will not prevent them from playing stuff, unless they got a bad draw (like 0-1 towers or something) in the beginning.

As i said - BH isn't the biggest problem in this card, but giving BH after SoF is decision which I can't understand. We should promote in this game others cards than BH (for example Overdrive). BH is hard counter card and we allow to use 12 BH in game (24 in Arena) + Gravity Nymph. And it isn't important how much quantum BH destroy - sometimes destroying 3-6 quantum means problems for opponent. Zanz probably want to nerf rainbows in 1.30-1.31. Yes, rainbows needs nerf. But is it the best way to reach the goal? In my opinion no, escpecially when this card is powerful and it has got only one counter (Sanctuary), which is pretty easy to destroy for SoF.
I prefer more cards like SoW than SoF. SoW gives new possibilities of attack (by reflect) and allow avoid shield. Fine idea, 0% destruction, 100% tactic. And I want to see 12 Shards like this or like SoFr, which gives new abilities but not destroy. As long as SoF wouldn't be popular then this card isn't a big problem. But in few months this Shard will be the same popular as SoG - then situation wouldn't be so funny.

Ah, in that case, the explanation is simple: that's how the theme of the card works.  Supermassive stars become black holes when they die.  SoF gets too big -> dies and turns to black hole.  I don't think zanz intended to make another card to nerf rainbows; it was just something that happened.

And I now understand that you are giving your opinion on what you want (stuff like SoFr instead).  That's fine.  But you can't go saying SoF needs to do ___ instead without giving a justification.  There are people who like destruction effects.  Other people are looking at the card from a balance point of view.  "I don't like destroy effects"  isn't something they are going to take as justification for why SoF should be changed.

SoG was too useful -> got nerfed.  SoSa was too useful -> got nerfed (indirectly).  I'm sure that if SoF continues to be OP even after the new nerf, it will get another nerf.

You are of course right, that it isn't argument against SoF that I didn't like "destroy tactic" But You miss other aspects of my opinion - I said that Player should have a choice. BH hasn't got counter, good counter. Sanctuary works only with 1/12 Elements and it is pretty easy to destroy (also by SoF). The same PC - we have only PA. So I can accept that Fire, Darkness has got destroy tactics, but please give me a chance to play against it!
It is interesting that we have few "all in one" destroy Elements like Fire, Darkness, Entropy, which have PC + CC and we haven't got any Element which protect me against all "bad destroy effects"...

[OldTrees]

I said that Player should have a choice. BH hasn't got counter, good counter.

Aka go fix Black Hole.

[Atico]

BlackHole is on 3rd place in poll about OP cards. Higher are only SoSa and SoF (which create BH). So it isn't only my opinion that this card is too strong and there is no sense generating it after SoF. Of course it isn't topic about BH, but it is worth to mention that we should promote cards which people didn't frustrate or promote mechanism which aren't so popular today.

OK, I wrote a lot of text in this topic, maybe my English isn't the best but I hope that You understand To sum up: We should give for Players defending mechanism and later give for them powerful cards. Today we have situation when Players use SoSa, SoF, BH, Quicksand etc. and most of decks can't defend against it. And it is problem. Maybe TheTrial and Marks solve this. What is more - counters should have the last word against some mechanism (in my opinion). It is stupid (for me) when Sanctuary is easy to destroy by decks which it counter.

[yaladilae]

I still think this card needs a nerf

For the simple part that even as a creature, half of the cc is useless on it (lightning, rage pot, Rewind, bolts, gravity pull), because of its mega high hp

And the fact that you can combo with many things makes it too versatile to be called balanced
 
Put a gravity pull on there, you get a 45hp tank. Put an overdrive on there, you get a ticking dmg dealer. Put a butterfly effect on there, you get to destory more. Put some rage pot on there, you get a big critter

Its just too much...

[TheAccuso]

I still think this card needs a nerf

For the simple part that even as a creature, half of the cc is useless on it (lightning, rage pot, Rewind, bolts, gravity pull), because of its mega high hp

And the fact that you can combo with many things makes it too versatile to be called balanced
 
Put a gravity pull on there, you get a 45hp tank. Put an overdrive on there, you get a ticking dmg dealer. Put a butterfly effect on there, you get to destory more. Put some rage pot on there, you get a big critter

Its just too much...

don't forget that with gravity pull it's like 15 auto-heal everytime you want.

[BluePriest]

I think we should just wait for 1.31 to go live since its getting nerfed and then go from there.

[TheAccuso]

I think we should just wait for 1.31 to go live since its getting nerfed and then go from there.

seems quite fair .

[Aneninen]

...almost fair, I think.

"One-turn combos" are always more powerful than "Two-turn combos". Eg. Dune Scorpion + Blessing/Momentum/Chaos Power can be played in the same turn and the works is done before the opponent could react anything. On the other hand, for a Firefly Queen combo you need to play the Queen first and it can start spamming the Fireflies in the next turn, so, there is a chance to counter the process.

Shard of Focus is "semi-one-turn" due to the high HP. In theory, the opponent can react, in practice, very few things work (Lobotomizer and Liquid Shadow are my best bets, though, Guard/Congeal/Rewind/etc. can hinder the Shard). Plus, it is versatile indeed, especially with 45 HPs...
On the other hand, it can be used limited times.

1 HP is a bit few, I suppose. About 6HP would be fair. Eludes Rage, Lightning and Shockwave for good but, with some quanta in reserve, Siphon/Fire/Ice Bolt kills it, an Otyugh eats it after its 2nd meal. Perhaps it could gain only 5HP per destroy and could turn into a Black Hole at 21HP - no more Gravity Pull megatank, Acceleration time bomb, etc.

[Absol]

1 HP is a bit few, I suppose. About 6HP would be fair. Eludes Rage, Lightning and Shockwave for good but, with some quanta in reserve, Siphon/Fire/Ice Bolt kills it, an Otyugh eats it after its 2nd meal. Perhaps it could gain only 5HP per destroy and could turn into a Black Hole at 21HP - no more Gravity Pull megatank, Acceleration time bomb, etc.

5 or 4 HP should be enough. And i agree that the HP gain could be lowered, like 5 per use. It trades tanking ability for versatility (Lightning, Ragepot, Shockwave, most CC will now give more use. So this is a somewhat berf.)

[AquaticImpalement]

I personally think this isn't overpowered. It destroys only 3 permanents and afterwards only drains three quanta from each element. A rainbow deck is the only place this would even be considered gamebreaking and ever then only when quanta is scarce. There are other cards with similar effects, specifically pulveriser, trident, earthquake, deflagration, steal, butterfly effect, and you can even mutate a creature to give it steal or destroy. Most of these don't even have a limit to how many times they can be used and a Black Hole is a common card that a lot of gravity decks use. Other cards also drain large amounts of quanta. If you have a lot of devorers out (fractal/mitosis/twin-universe, or even mindgate, potentially) you can basically stop quanta flow and there are even mutants with the Devourer ability, as well as Shard Golems but that's an entirely different thread. I think at the most you should make it cost eight instead of seven and MAYBE change it from 50 to 45/44 (depending on what it means by >50) HP to become a black hole. Something along these lines has probably been posted before if so then cool story bro. If not then cool story bro.

All in all I think it's not that OP. But you know, what to I know.

[OldTrees]

I personally think this isn't overpowered. It destroys only 3 permanents and afterwards only drains three quanta from each element. A rainbow deck is the only place this would even be considered gamebreaking and ever then only when quanta is scarce. There are other cards with similar effects, specifically pulveriser, trident, earthquake, deflagration, steal, butterfly effect, and you can even mutate a creature to give it steal or destroy. Most of these don't even have a limit to how many times they can be used and a Black Hole is a common card that a lot of gravity decks use. Other cards also drain large amounts of quanta. If you have a lot of devorers out (fractal/mitosis/twin-universe, or even mindgate, potentially) you can basically stop quanta flow and there are even mutants with the Devourer ability, as well as Shard Golems but that's an entirely different thread. I think at the most you should make it cost eight instead of seven and MAYBE change it from 50 to 45/44 (depending on what it means by >50) HP to become a black hole. Something along these lines has probably been posted before if so then cool story bro. If not then cool story bro.

All in all I think it's not that OP. But you know, what to I know.

The complaint is not about the effect nor about the cost but rather about the effect / cost. Yes it is too efficient.

[Alchemist]

To be honest, I am so glad that SoF is banned from tournaments, and SoSac as well. Those "space-tech" cards are good only for speedfarming Arena and FGs. But even for farming, they are making this game boring and lame, sorry to say that, but they killed all the fun. All the magic is gone. In last two years there were no new cars except shards. Shard of This, Shard of That... Only new non-shard card I saw was Seraph - thank goodness for that. And honestly, I belive that we need more "common" cards and less shards. IMO cards like SoF or SoSac shouldn't even exist in EtG, or there should be another button besides PVP1 and PVP2 called "PVP3 - Shard Wars". I hate to see such a great game ruined by simple and trivial concepts contained in cards like SoF (and SoSac). Don't get me wrong - Pulvy is my second favorite weapon, and "steal" is my favorite mutant skill - I got no problems with destruction, since the goal of match is "destroying (at least) 100HP". But it's the matter of principal and game mechanics. Pulvy at least had some requirements, and Steal, deflagration or BH are payed by card per effect - not card per 4 effects (at least 4 - since SoF is (ab)usable in more ways). I like to win with pride, and not to humiliate my opponent. Cards like SoF and SoSac are turning this game into bitch-slapping rather than sport. Isn't the fact that now everyone has Purify in deck just in case of a fight vs SoSac deck hilarious? "Ha! I got Purify - I win!" And I sense some weird solution for SoF as well. Destruction should stay aspect of this game but not in that form.