Elements 1.29

[Atico]

make firebolt do 1 less damage per 10 quanta? that seems to be a better option to me..

Then it will be weaker than Ice Lance.

And it will be problem? Fire as element is too powerful. It has got the best PC, the best CC, growthing creatures etc.
Water hasn't got PC, so I didn't see problem when IceBolt is better than FireLance. Fire don't need the best cards in every comparision.
Shockwave is also weaker than Thunderbolt in 90% games, some dragons too, and it isn't problem.

[bored_ninja777]

how is it weaker than ice lance? wouldnt it be the same? how many Water stalls do you see rampaging arena and pvp? not too many.. people will still use firestalls but it wont be as fast nor as effective as it is now.. big deal. maybe that will get new ideas for cards and new decks emerging? i think the lower damage of 1 on fire lance is better than capping off the quanta.. or at least cap it higher than 50.. the explosion nerf.. i made a topic about and it came out that the majority said 3|2 cost was best in polls.. oh man it costs 1 more than before.. not a deck ruiner, just means you have to manage your quanta better.

[~Napalm]

Ice Bolt can freeze creatures/weapons. However, if Fire Bolt had a CHANCE to hit 3 dmg rather than 2, It shouldn't be an issue. In fact, it'd be more of a gamble that way. Making it more fun altogether.

[bored_ninja777]

well give firebolt the chance to burn then like others have said? damage over time instead of the otk 3 damage version we have now..

[The_Mormegil]

Another possible change for Fire Bolt: starting higher damage, increase of 2. For instance, starting at 3-4 damage and gaining 2 more for every 10 quanta. Grows like a Bolt, starts like a Shockwave: strong versatile CC with its own perk as a Bolt spell.

Of course, I personally like the quanta cap best, but I think I said that enough times already.

[MatrimKK]

Interest ideas to the fact that firebolt has been suggested at 2 damage per 10 quanta interests me...
For those that argue that this makes it weaker than water/dark bolts they also don't attack nearly as fast as whole when considering mono elements nor do they feature so much hard creature control.  This could clearly add to the solution of some firestall variants having soooo much CC. 

I still think a diminishing returns would effect the game better than a quanta cap, but a testing I am going. 

To those that think 4 ttw decks need to be slowed down (aka immo nerf) dejadrena vu is quite consistent with 4~5 turn wins with SoR in it's current form.  Immo decks clearly had a much worse fail to launch %. 

Also I would like to suggest perhaps testing some of the changes separate from one another to see how each exactly effects deck building and how it helps/hurts in it's own right.  So many at a time can detract from findings on each individual change. 

@ Morm starting with more damage clearly adds to the hate of firestalls making it near impossible to play creatures against

[The_Mormegil]

Interest ideas to the fact that firebolt has been suggested at 2 damage per 10 quanta interests me...
For those that argue that this makes it weaker than water/dark bolts they also don't attack nearly as fast as whole when considering mono elements nor do they feature so much hard creature control.  This could clearly add to the solution of some firestall variants having soooo much CC. 

I still think a diminishing returns would effect the game better than a quanta cap, but a testing I am going. 

To those that think 4 ttw decks need to be slowed down (aka immo nerf) dejadrena vu is quite consistent with 4~5 turn wins with SoR in it's current form.  Immo decks clearly had a much worse fail to launch %. 

Also I would like to suggest perhaps testing some of the changes separate from one another to see how each exactly effects deck building and how it helps/hurts in it's own right.  So many at a time can detract from findings on each individual change.

Dejadrenavus is consistent if you don't use momentum? If not, then shields are going to be it's major problem. If yes, then people will actually start playing Thunderstorm for fast mass CC :3 it is funny.

[RootRanger]

I really, really like these changes. Fire was too imbalanced. SoP was strong and I like how SoR is unique to Adrenaline.

I hate this patch more and more as time passes by.Sogs nerf ruins both my fg grinders,fire nerf ruins so many pvp (upped and unupped decks like immophoenix),explosion is no longer splashable in nova-war decks.
Lovely,
 How about increasing graboid cost to 5,dim shield to 10,remove draw from sundial,increase poison to 3,half the damage of catapult,decrease sanctuary to 2 healing,make animate weapon cost air  quanta,increase hourglass to 6 and generally remove every fun thing that exists in this game and call it balance fix?

FG grinding hardly suffers. The best FG grinders work fine without SoGs.
Immophoenix is less powerful, which is a very good thing. It allows a lot of decks to become viable in PvP, and not just a few (mostly fire) decks at the top. Novagrabby was also too strong (so many war teams had one). The new metagame will be more diverse and interesting.

[russianspy1234]

I really, really like these changes. Fire was too imbalanced. SoP was strong and I like how SoR is unique to Adrenaline.

I hate this patch more and more as time passes by.Sogs nerf ruins both my fg grinders,fire nerf ruins so many pvp (upped and unupped decks like immophoenix),explosion is no longer splashable in nova-war decks.
Lovely,
 How about increasing graboid cost to 5,dim shield to 10,remove draw from sundial,increase poison to 3,half the damage of catapult,decrease sanctuary to 2 healing,make animate weapon cost air  quanta,increase hourglass to 6 and generally remove every fun thing that exists in this game and call it balance fix?

FG grinding hardly suffers. The best FG grinders work fine without SoGs.

the most accessible one (RoL/Hope) doesnt work fine with a 50 quanta cap though.  also, the oracle FG thread relies on firebolt sudden killer for a few of the FGs, and that will no longer work.

[Bhlewos]

To add to the alternative firebolt nerf suggestions:

I'd like to see something similar to the catapult equation for firebolt. This fits with the diminishing returns Matrim suggested a few pages ago, and would also be a sort of "middle ground" between the quanta cap and the original formula.

Below is 1) the Catapult formula for comparison, 2) the original Firebolt formula, and 3) my proposed equation for the Firebolt card.



If we draw an imaginary line at the 50 point (quanta cap), the current Firebolt would deal 15 damage, whereas the new Firebolt would deal 16 (16.67, but rounded down like with the Catapult formula). This might seem more powerful at first, but beyond the 50 mark the damage increase decreases very quickly, so that by 100 quanta it deals only 20 damage, compared to the current Firebolt which would deal 33 at 100 quanta.

This is what I propose instead of a quanta cap. This allows Stone Skin and Fractal to continue to be used to the fullest, but still nerf Firebolt so that it doesn't rack up damage so quickly. Compared to Catapult, which requires at least a two-card setup (three for Catatitans), and is vulnerable to both PC and CC, the direct damage Firebolt which only requires the card itself and enough quanta should have a much "weaker" formula. It also doesn't "reward" the player for blindly hitting spacebar until they reach a certain limit, and instead encourage them to think -- something that Firestall decks don't require much of.

[russianspy1234]

how about keeping the damage as is, but only letting it hit players?  the biggest problems with firestall is the sheer versatility of all of the cards.  if they had to rely on firestorm or other elements for CC, it would be a small but significant nerf.

[aqwsz0]

for the 50 max cap quanta, why not make it 75.  Will actually make stone skin better.