[Official] Toadfish | Puffer Fish

[Demut]

Thats called the Nirvana Fallacy.

Just because a perfect end result cannot be achieved does not mean one shouldn't strive for that.

[Ekki]

In the few matches I've played in PvP, I've NEVER faced a single toadfish...

I don't believe its damage/cost ratio is OP, since it isn't even the best of all unupped cards... Neither do I the fact that it has inflate (it is part of other element and it's not THAT good, apart from the fact that it's not fractal-efficient because of its 5 )

IDK, but as Glitch said, have you ever had a Toadfish deck? Have you been having lots of easy wins in PvP/AI matches? I don't see any FG slayer using Toadfishes, and nearly any creature can be used to slay AI3, and, as I don't know about PvP's, I'm asking you...

[Baily18]

I don't see any FG slayer using Toadfishes

*cough* http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,15519.0.html *cough*
but anyways, on topic. Like krathos said, i hardly ever see this in PvP, and it seems fine to me.

[Uppercut]

Thats called the Nirvana Fallacy.

Just because a perfect end result cannot be achieved does not mean one shouldn't strive for that.

I don't see how its fallacious to think it'd be a waste of time to try and do something that technically can't be done instead of trying to make an actual good product. I'd rather Elements be a good game than be wasted potential because the non-official development team decided to fart around and try to make something of it that isn't even theoretically possible. Sorry for wanting a game to be enjoyable, I guess.

[Ekki]

I don't see any FG slayer using Toadfishes

*cough* http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,15519.0.html *cough*
but anyways, on topic. Like krathos said, i hardly ever see this in PvP, and it seems fine to me.

FAIL **punchs self in stomach**
But I was saying a good FG killer (lol joking )

I meant it's not overused, and it sucks in most cases, since bloodsuckers are better for infection and 6 attack for 5 isn't exactly OP

[ArtCrusade]

I already used a Toadfish-deck for PvP and AI3, and while it worked good against the AI, I had a 50:50 ratio on PvP. Mono Aether owns any Toadfish-deck, and so do creatureless Pyromancers. There is a whole bunch of tactics that the Toadfish just cannot win against, so it is fairly balanced and there is really no need for a nerf.

[Demut]

I don't see how its fallacious to think it'd be a waste of time to try and do something that technically can't be done instead of trying to make an actual good product. I'd rather Elements be a good game than be wasted potential because the non-official development team decided to fart around and try to make something of it that isn't even theoretically possible. Sorry for wanting a game to be enjoyable, I guess.

And now you straw man. perfect can't be obtained, but the cloer to perfect, the better the game. Tat is basically the definition of good. Close to perfect = good.

[Uppercut]

And now you straw man.

No I'm not. Straw manning would be attacking a non-point. The thing I addressed is an actual point.

perfect can't be obtained, but the cloer to perfect, the better the game. Tat is basically the definition of good. Close to perfect = good.

But you're not getting closer to perfect by trying to balance a bunch of things that operate just fine.

[OldTrees]

On Topic:Let us compare the vanilla (no skill creatures) of Darkness and Water

Black Dragon
10|5 for 10
Ice Dragon
9|6 for 10
(0<HP<6) is worth 0, (5<HP<8] is worth 1
From these stats we can conclude that the stats of Darkness and Water creatures are comparable.

Now let us compare the Infect creatures of each
Parasite
1|1  :Infect for 2
Toadfish
6|4  :Inflate for 5
The difference in Cost - Value between these two is 2
From these stats we can conclude either
Parasite needs a buff on the order of an equivalent of 2 attack or
Toadfish needs a nerf of the same magnitude or
Parasite needs a buff on the order of an equivalent of 1 attack and Toadfish needs a nerf of the same magnitude.

The Current side discussion:
A standard can and has been calculated. This standard can be used to balance the cards within the rounding necessary by the game.

[Ekki]

A standard can and has been calculated. This standard can be used to balance the cards within the rounding necessary by the game.

never knew that was actually standarized... Please PM me the thread (if there is one) in orderto be better prepared to comment about OP/UP-ness

[OldTrees]

A standard can and has been calculated. This standard can be used to balance the cards within the rounding necessary by the game.

never knew that was actually standarized... Please PM me the thread (if there is one) in orderto be better prepared to comment about OP/UP-ness

I sent you a PM of the old thread and a preview of the new thread.
New thread expected to be posted in Design Theory within a month.

[Demut]

But you're not getting closer to perfect by trying to balance a bunch of things that operate just fine.

They don't operate just fine, thats the point. Toadfish/Squid was the most common strategy used in the winner's brackets of Underworld.

But more importantly it hard counters a shitload of strategies. Hard counter, not soft counter, but hard counters.

And that is bad.

 

No I'm not. Straw manning would be attacking a non-point. The thing I addressed is an actual point.

No, a strawman is a misrepresentation of my argument, a red-herring is the addressing of a non-point.