[Official] Shard of Readiness | Shard of Readiness

[choongmyoung]

 < 1. Quanta Value with and without Mitosis>

Let's think about this in specific cards.

duo worth -1 quanta.
1 card worth 2 quanta.
X cost per turn worth X cards, which works as 2X quanta.

with Pharaoh = 2 instant free Scarabs(2 turns 4 saved), delete skill cost(2 per turn saved)
 = as not counting free turns, SoR worth 8 quanta.

with Scarab = 2 instant om-nom-noms(2 turns 2 saved), delete skill cost which makes mono(1 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 5 quanta, but actually you are not devouring every turn so seems it's more like 4 quanta.

with Vu = nerfed, so instant vu-ing(1 turn 1 saved)
 = SoR worth 1 quanta

with Anubis = 2 instant immortalities(2 turns 1 saved), delete skill cost which makes mono(1 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 5 quanta

with flying Eternity, which is 3 card combo = 2 instant RTs(2 turns 6 saved), delete skill cost(3 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 12 quanta

with Egg = 2 instant creatures(1~2 turns 1 card 5 saved)
 = SoR worth 7 quanta

with Nymph = 2 instant Precogs(2 turns 2~4 saved), delete skill cost (1~2 per turn saved) (I'll count 1~2 for drawing because of the hourglass)
 = SoR worth 4~8 quanta

So they seems quite balanced except Vu with SoR worthing 5 quanta.


Well, mitosis isn't. Let's think about Mitosis combo. While this is duo and 3 cards combo, it's OP.

with Silurian Dragon + Mitosis = 2 instant new Dragons (24 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(12 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 52 quanta.

with GotP + Mitosis = 2 instant new GotPs (14 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(7 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 32 quanta.

with X cost creature + Mitosis = 2 instant new creatures (2X 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(X per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 4X+4 quanta.

Very very OP.



 <2. Summoning sickness / Skill Activation Guarantee with Mitosis in >

Actually, thinking Mitosis is 4 + 1 card = 6 quanta = 3 cards (or 3.5 cards if not ), Mitosis is considered as 3 new creatures.
This calculation seems very balanced since Mitosis can be countered by CCs in a few turns anyway.
Summoning turn death is possible. However Mitosis-turn skill activate is guaranteed. So,

Mitosis = First turn death possible. If not, one new creature is guaranteed.

SoR removes the summoning sickness. So it can remove possible summoning turn death.

SoR+Mitosis = First turn death not possible. 2 new creature is guaranteed.

Okay, not OP, but it's quite powerful anti-CC and speeding up mechanism.



 <2-1. SoR with non-:time Mitosis>

Surprisingly, when the Mitosis card is added to the EtG, there was SoR already.
Of course there was Jade Dragon - Mitosis - SoR combos. Once the combo started, it was really powerful.
The only problem was that Jade Dragon was too expensive.

Whatever, SoR still removes the skill cost.

1 skill + SoR = First 3 turn is loss, after is good. Able to remove duo-element problem. Good balancing.
ex) Pegasii, Physalia

2 skill + SoR = First 1 turn is loss, after is good. Able to remove duo-element problem. Nice balancing though.
ex) Firefly Queen, Steam machine

3 skill + SoR = Good from the first turn. Able to remove duo-element problem. Actually only Nymphs and Weapons are there. Nymphs are rare, Weapons need Flying. Powerful though. Now there's Butterfly Effect but it isn't used quite much.
ex) White Nymph, Flying Pulverizer

4 skill + SoR = Powerful, but only three cards are in there.
ex) Purple/Red/Water Nymph. Water nymph still removes one pillar though.

So even it's powerful, it seems balanced with 1~4 skill cost.

But with mitosis, you can make an X skill.
X skill + SoR = Crazy good. If you are not able to kill or lobo him, you fail unless you rush him away.
Removing X skill means you are adding X pillars.
So one card becomes X pillars, max to 12? Isn't this Overpowered?
What the problem is, the skill cost can be increased as much as the card cost. It's way too high for literally removing them. Compare Mitosis'd creature's skill cost with BE, which give a creature a new active skill.


 <3. Multiple SoRs with Mitosis>

I was talking about the first SoR. Let's think about the further SoRs.
The skill cost is already deleted so no benefit from this way. However the Creature+Mitosis combo is already on the field.

So Each SoRs adding is 2 free instant new creatures without cost. Means, you are using 2 creature cards with no cost.

3 1 card now values X 2 card. Certainly OP.


 <4. What the text says>

Not talking about the game balancing but about the text.

"The target creature's skill cost is now zero. creatures can use their skill twice this turn.

No. If you activate the skill and cast SoR to the time creature, you are using the skill thrice this turn.
When I first saw this text, I thought that the creature gains one skill activation.
So if you want to make SoR to literally using skill twice this turn, pretty much better to say "adding one skill activation".

But think about it. If you cast SoR to a creature in the summoned turn and you use the skill twice as the card says, you get the skill activation twice.
First turn SoR = 2 activation, Second turn SoR = 1 activation? It's quite embarrassing.
It's better either make SoR's wording to "activate skill once" or "activate skill twice" for creatures.





Overall I see the nerf with SoR+Mitosis combo.
I think it's balanced with original creatures, so no nerf needed in my opinion. Though I'll add this in the poll.
I'm not sure it's OP with non-:time Mitosis SoRs. Certainly powerful combo though.

But I'm sure that Mitosis + SoR is OP as I said.
So I am suggesting possible changes:

(1) Don't need change.
(2) <Medium nerf with > Target creature's skill cost is now zero. creatures can use their skill now.
(3) <Major nerf with new given skills> Target creature's original skill cost is now zero.
(4) <Major nerf with Mitosis> Can't target / Doesn't work for Mitosis'd creature.
(5) <Major nerf with Mitosis> Can't target / Doesn't work for Mitosis'd creature.
(6) <Medium nerf with Mitosis> Mitosis'd time creature do not get additional free skill activation.
Edit: (7) <Medium nerf with > SoR cannot affect creature already affected.
(8) I have an another idea, I'll post it.

I'm voting for the fifth option. Edit: I agree with jawdirk. Added and reset.

[Picheleiro]

 

Well, mitosis isn't. Let's think about Mitosis combo. While this is duo and 3 cards combo, it's OP.

with Silurian Dragon + Mitosis = 2 instant new Dragons (24 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(12 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 52 quanta.

with GotP + Mitosis = 2 instant new GotPs (14 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(7 per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 32 quanta.

with X cost creature + Mitosis = 2 instant new creatures (2X 2 cards saved), delete skill cost(X per turn saved)
 = SoR worth 4X+4 quanta.

Very very OP.

With 12   5    3 and 3 specific cards you can do a great combo. But with simply 15  and 3 cards you can get a eternity, a hourglass and a GotP. And its faster and more reliable.

I see your points but I think is more powerful the pharaoh+SoR  (straightforward but cheaper and simple) that fancy stuff that can mess up easily and its still really slow.

[choongmyoung]

@Picheleiro
Eternity + Hourglass + GotP damage = 11, 4 per turn to use skill, RT/turn, +1 Drawing/turn.
1 SoR Instosis combo = 36. +12 ATK/turn.
Which is more powerful?
/
I wrote that Pharaoh+SoR combo is not OP at all.
/
And that's why I wrote about number 3, the additional SoRs. Additional SoRs do a great deal.

[Cheesy111]

A question to think about.

If Silurian Mitosis SoR is so powerful, why is it not a major component of the CL meta (to the best of my knowledge)?  What weaknesses does it have that make it not a large concern?

[Picheleiro]

@choongmyoung

My main point was that it isnt easy to set up and not versatile. Without a doubt 36 attack + 12/ turn is awesome, but you will need several turns to chain it and if the opponent can kill a 4 def creature its not-so-awesome anymore.

Would you post a deck where we can see SoR OP'ness? Im curious of see what kind of strategy you feel unfair.

[choongmyoung]

A question to think about.

If Silurian Mitosis SoR is so powerful, why is it not a major component of the CL meta (to the best of my knowledge)?  What weaknesses does it have that make it not a large concern?

Like More Certain Overpowered Deck => More Specific Countable Deck => Less Certain Overpowered Deck Feedback, a game can carry a OP deck.
This actually happened for SoSac. More SoSac deck => More Purifies => Less SoSac Deck.

And many other card nerfs were done when it was not a super-duper gamebreaker.

I heard that this was broke Yu-gi-oh once. 40% of players carried of a specific deck, 40% of players carried of a counter-specific deck, 20% of players carried of a counter-counter-specific deck. Like as always, that card was banned in the next chapter. This is a rare and almost never seen in other games and Mitosis SoR is not this-like big problem, but still it's OP.

[choongmyoung]

@choongmyoung

My main point was that it isnt easy to set up and not versatile. Without a doubt 36 attack + 12/ turn is awesome, but you will need several turns to chain it and if the opponent can kill a 4 def creature its not-so-awesome anymore.

Would you post a deck where we can see SoR OP'ness? Im curious of see what kind of strategy you feel unfair.

One of the most pure, Instosis. 70% winrate vs Plat seems insanely good.

[Picheleiro]

SoSac and Instosis are not very good vs human players (as far I know). All my lasts Platinum/FG farmers had SoSacs or Sundials or SoR/Mitosis combos but in pvp people woud (and have) bite my head off.

Dumb AI is not good a measure for card quality. And worse for decks.

[meowww]

@choongmyoung

My main point was that it isnt easy to set up and not versatile. Without a doubt 36 attack + 12/ turn is awesome, but you will need several turns to chain it and if the opponent can kill a 4 def creature its not-so-awesome anymore.

Would you post a deck where we can see SoR OP'ness? Im curious of see what kind of strategy you feel unfair.

One of the most pure, Instosis. 70% winrate vs Plat seems insanely good.

Wait, someone make a 70% winrate vs Plat with Instosis?
If he got a large enough and recent sample, it is really good indeed, I think Instosis is not this good against all those SoDiv/SoFo/Fire/Ghostmate which are almost every Plat deck nowadays...

[jawdirk]

The only thing that needs to be done to fix this card is for it to only have an effect on each creature once. That is, once it gets a readiness attribute, SoR has no effect.

[choongmyoung]

The only thing that needs to be done to fix this card is for it to only have an effect on each creature once. That is, once it gets a readiness attribute, SoR has no effect.

Good idea, as it was in the past. (Nobody would use twice yes)

[dragonsdemesne]

The only thing that needs to be done to fix this card is for it to only have an effect on each creature once. That is, once it gets a readiness attribute, SoR has no effect.

I definitely agree with this.  Heck, even the card wording agrees with this :p  The shard says "time creatures can use their skill twice this turn".  It doesn't say 'two more times', it says 'twice'.  Going by the literal reading, you shouldn't be able to spam SoR like you can in instosis and use a skill 4 or 6 or 8 or whatever times in a turn.  I assume this must be working as intended, since it's done this ever since the 3 older shards were reworked summer before last, but I've never liked the interaction myself.  (even though I've abused it to no end :p)