Banning Supernova, Quantum Tower, and SoG from Arena (Yet another new poll)

[Xenocidius]

BluePriest, I think shards are used by players to balance the games when AI has 'unfair' advantages (people are able to use in normal games, but they are not needed them). This is the case, I see no problem about people using them. But allowing people creating decks use them would just increase the advantages, so that I consider a bad thing. Speedbow to fight Arena? Doesnt seem probable, they dont work vs FGs, and they usually dont use shards, anyway. People will surely use some FG Killer decks, but there will be always variations. About the poll, people is already voting to not ban QT, and that looks already enough challenge. Well constructed rainbow dont need shards to be difficult. I understand your point, however.

The problem is that they are SUPPOSE to have an advantage. Shards shorten that advantage.

Regardless though, 1 area that people seem to have forgotten...
If Shards are banned from the arena, how do you plan on winning them? Not everyone has them. t50 is gone so they cant be farmed anymore. Pvp will be the only possible format to win them. Some would argue that this would make more people do pvp, however, it has extreme flaws so such an emphasis shouldnt be put on random pvp battles unless these flaws are fixed.

This just deals with SoG's of course, and I have other reasons, however, I dont remember seeing it mentioned yet.

But they do have advantages - high HP, double draw, and in Platinum leage, all the advantages of a False God. Plus, they have the advantages of being able to chuck in heavy PC, which few False Gods have due to balancing issues (there are only two False Gods with 12 PC cards, not including Seism). That alone is bad enough even without the SoGs healing them up, and using Miracle when you finally get their HP down (but that's a completely different debate).

Shards are effectively the main advantage the player has over the AI, and the only reason they were balanced is because nobody was ever allowed to use more than 6 of them.

But heavy PC and SoG spam is really only practical in a rainbow deck. Majofa's solution would limit the use of both (there are only two elements with reliable PC, and SoGs cost three times as much in a non-rainbow). That said, sometimes players will get all or most elements lit up, and will be able to use rainbows. But for the most part, the Arena will become more versatile, and consequently, more fun.

[Terrilocks]

Before Bucky...
The poll doesnt show that peoplen want them banned so that the decks can be more creative, it is made up of people who want to ban them because they make it too hard.

Not really, its not really the difficulty of arena decks. Its just people get bored seeing the AI plays the same QTs, supernovas, and SoGs. Im quite sure the thread started because the OP want to see more creative decks, its just bucky started showing up and act all high and mighty how easy the arena is and saying that there is no need to change anything(with calling people names as extra sauce) and the argument of the difficulty started to show up.

Sigh, Ive already pointed out that I am well aware of the OP's original reasoning for the topic, however, I am saying that although thats the OP's reason, majority of the people who are voting are voting due to the difficulty. If SoG/QT/SN were banned from the arena, they should be banned from the players deck as well. Why should we force arena participants to be creative, while allowing the challengers to use a boring rainbow or speedbow? Where you quoted me, the 2 posters before bucky outright admitted that they think its too powerful them having those cards. THAT is my point. The poll is worded in a way that shows bias, as well as how it has 2 different (and 1 of those 2 much more abundant) groups voting to ban. 1 small group that is honestly doing it for the creativity, and 1 large group that is doing it because they dont like the challenge.

Hmm, so you sorta completely missed the point of my post but still use me as an example of the camp that 'wants to make things easier' (with the implication that we're whining it's too hard). The problem here is you're missing the subtle distinction between making something easier so that it has more than one solution and making something easier for the sake of it.

If a card that healed 50 life every turn were added and cost 5 quanta, surely you would complain that it gave your opponent unfair advantages. Well on the face of it, you're also complaining to get rid of it and make things 'easier'. The difference here though is that the card is obviously not well-balanced.

We're using the same argument in regard to SoG. The difference is, instead of 1 card that gives 50hp it's up to a possible 12 that give +60hp. Not really that much of a difference. Besides, arena decks already have double drawing, extra life, extra mark etc. As the person above me said: SoG were introduced to make battles vs false gods easier - nearly every anti-FG deck has them. The thing is, now arena decks, which are comparable to FGs, also have them which not only makes them more powerful, but negates the original bonus we had to fight them making only a very few decks viable anti-arena decks.

And your point about not being able to win shards is simply not true - I've already won an extra SoR from the rare spin so they're still out there. Ironically, get rid of SoG from arena decks and there'll be more ways to win vs them and you'll win more shards from rare spins. xD

[BluePriest]

No im not missing your point. Your ultimate point is that you think it is too hard since they can use them. Its not any harder than that. You can try to make it foggy by saying that the other bonuses + these cards are the problem, but ultimately you are saying its too hard = not a valid reason.

[Terrilocks]

You're just looking at the surface level which doesn't show you the whole picture.

At what point would things become 'too hard' for you to start raising questions? Was my one-card giving +50hp per turn example acceptable to you then? Bearing in mind it's not SoG alone that's the problem, it's the wider impact of SoG in combination with other FG-like benefits. SoG is just the tip of the ice-berg built up by all the other advantages. I'm not saying that arena decks shouldn't be as strong or even stronger than their FG counterparts, just that imo, SoG tip the balance a little too far in their favour.

1. They can be used in every deck due to no specific element cost.
2. Only a few elements have persistent PC to deal with them.

How do you answer those two points or is it acceptable for every element to use the same healing source (making Heal, Holy Flash, Stone Skin etc. relatively pointless), and are elements without PC simply supposed to be inferior and not worthy of attention?

[ralouf]

Elements without reusable aren't pointless they are just bad in plat league.

[bucky1andonly]

Arena is not hard.  Build a better deck.

[Terrilocks]

I don't want an Immolation Rush thanks... oh wait, that's practically my only option other than a cookie-cutter rainbow.

[bucky1andonly]

There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks.  That just happens to be one that is successful, for me anyway. 

[Terrilocks]

Hah! QED

[SnoWeb]

There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks. 

I have to agree with bucky here. Platinum league is hard but not too hard. I believe that there are a way higher number of decks efficient in platinum league that there are against FG.

[BluePriest]

I don't want an Immolation Rush thanks... oh wait, that's practically my only option other than a cookie-cutter rainbow.

You can also go shakars.

So lets see, you can do shakars, immo rush, and cookie cutter rainbow. Has anyone tried Strong wyrms? That seems like it would work.

[bucky1andonly]

@Terrilocks
Have you tried other decks?  If you have how many?  What decks?  How many games did you play with each?  Are they fully upgraded decks?  If not, roughly what percent of the decks you used were upgraded?  What did you play against bronze, silver, gold, platinum?