|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 17, 2012 0:50:55 GMT -5
Ever since the previous round of balancing changes, the world had been generally a better place. Biodiversity has set in and everyone's playing their favourite decks instead of just those one or two  I just have a few minor tweaks to propose, what do you think about them? 1) faux pas: 0 cost instead of 1 Yes a lot of ppl will say told you so. The current faux pas just doesn't have a lot of point to it... If you counter a Dama with it you've denied income, but why not just pack your own income booster like plentiful crap to be on the same footing? Having it zero cost makes it fall between old too-powerful faux pas and now a little underwhelming faux pas. 2) differentiate behind closed doors and hasty move:
They're the same card, one gets you an extra card for 1 more gold. No brainer. Hasty move should give you income or be a surprise for it to be of any point. Hasty move at 3 cost surprise makes a difficult choice between it and behind closed doors!3) weren't radical promotion and against all odds supposed to give income? Marc mentioned that they were supposed to keep their income... Was that a mistake or...? 4) underground passage > 3 cost instead of 4 Income killing needs juuuust a little bit more imperative and consistency. Just a liiiiittle bit more. It's really no biggie at all, though |
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 17, 2012 0:59:15 GMT -5
Hasty move can be used on your opponent's sites as well as your own, I think, which explains the overall cost.
|
|
|
|
Post by jefmajor on Mar 17, 2012 1:06:01 GMT -5
Doesn't explain why it isn't a surprise but is called "Hasty".
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 17, 2012 1:07:12 GMT -5
Hasty move can be used on your opponent's sites as well as your own, I think, which explains the overall cost. Ah! I missed that. Cool thanks its worded really strangely though. Why must the controller move it if I'm stipulating the target, or does my opponent choose where it goes to? |
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 17, 2012 1:26:55 GMT -5
You get to choose where the site goes. Maybe it is worded that way to imply that your opponent keeps the site? It is strangely worded all right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob (Roebidoebi) on Mar 17, 2012 18:34:02 GMT -5
I think Faux Pas should get it's +1 back, it is a gamble card just like radical demotion and against all odds. These should also get their +1 as suggested.
Cesare should really get Cunning. I think it is redicoulus he can't block one of his own guys (I.e. officials).
I run a very effective income denial deck. Don't think it will need any boosting...
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 17, 2012 18:42:23 GMT -5
Er, Cesare isn't an official, therefor he won't be blocking "his own"  by that logic all order guys must get official I actually think he is really fine as he is, which is an uncounterable surprise big chump. Use him to attack, use him to surprise-block attackers. If he's to block officials he'll do with cunning, but that doesn't fit at all Faux pas really was too powerful as a +1, as it denies a card, the gold the opponent gets from it, AND the gold he spent on it, AND is a surprise +1 income. I think making it 0 cost gives it a bit of the edge back without being overpowered, so you can play it and still play something else - a temporary tempo boost and not an unfair income boost. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob (Roebidoebi) on Mar 17, 2012 19:00:51 GMT -5
What I meant to say is that Cesare is the captain general of all order agents (in the AC world/lore). Now as a memory in recollection he was too strong having the official ability. I understand that. Giving him the cunning ability (and with him maybe all bosses) would not make him too strong, but still allow him to address official agents.
A boss is a boss, usually because he's smarter than the rest. Hence cunning would fit very well!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 17, 2012 19:28:23 GMT -5
This has been mentioned before... Just because you can justify it doesn't mean it's right, by "fit" I mean the game's world order - that is order - official, media - fierce, scholar - cunning, faith - recover, crime - threat. There are exceptions to this (why exactly does Lia D Russo have recover?) but generally it holds true as long as it doesn't break the game. If we start rationalizing it according to our history and logical deduction, Cesare certainly should have threat. And I would say bart's wife pantasilea is fiercer than anyone so she should have fierce, and half the assassin heroes would have cunning, etc etc |
|
|
|
Post by aman8912 on Mar 18, 2012 10:14:25 GMT -5
what did the old faux pass do?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tuism on Mar 18, 2012 11:18:27 GMT -5
The same, it just gave +1 income as well. It was, in my opinion, overpowered as it is a counter AND boosting - denying income AND boosting income. At surprise speed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ringel on Mar 18, 2012 13:46:53 GMT -5
I don't think the old Faux Pas is overpowered, but we had long discussions about that in the past.
I do think Tuism's proposal here is a reasonable compromise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob (Roebidoebi) on Mar 18, 2012 14:20:28 GMT -5
This has been mentioned before... Just because you can justify it doesn't mean it's right, by "fit" I mean the game's world order - that is order - official, media - fierce, scholar - cunning, faith - recover, crime - threat. There are exceptions to this (why exactly does Lia D Russo have recover?) but generally it holds true as long as it doesn't break the game. If we start rationalizing it according to our history and logical deduction, Cesare certainly should have threat. And I would say bart's wife pantasilea is fiercer than anyone so she should have fierce, and half the assassin heroes would have cunning, etc etc Whatever... |
|
by that logic all order guys must get official