PDA

View Full Version : Spearcliff Cloud Knight: Too much power for low cost



rangerike1363
11-27-2013, 02:10 PM
I played MtG for years and one of the things that many of the cards followed was +1/+1 per mana and 1 mana per ability. Now this wasn't always true, their were plenty of exceptions, but Cloud Knight is kinda insane for it's cost. 3 resources for a 3/2 flying, steadfast(vigilance), lifedrain card. That's really insane. I'd expect this card to cost 5 or at least 4, but it's three. This makes it too powerful for such and early game card.

Alaeryn
11-27-2013, 02:21 PM
I agree completely. I think what they are thinking is it's still open to Burn cards. But it should be open to more than that. To make it more fair it should lose an ability (lifedrain makes most sense), make it -1/-1, or make it cost 2 more. And the first two cases, it is still a pretty good card and the last makes it more fair. At the very least, it should cost 1 more and have 3 or 4 threshold. Similar cards don't have flying or steadfast and cost 1 more.
I feel cheap if I'm playing Diamond and I'm playing this card.

poizonous
11-27-2013, 02:31 PM
I agree completely. I think what they are thinking is it's still open to Burn cards. But it should be open to more than that. To make it more fair it should lose an ability (lifedrain makes most sense), make it -1/-1, or make it cost 2 more. And the first two cases, it is still a pretty good card and the last makes it more fair. At the very least, it should cost 1 more and have 3 or 4 threshold. Similar cards don't have flying or steadfast and cost 1 more.
I feel cheap if I'm playing Diamond and I'm playing this card.

This card Dies to way more than burn cards... Sapper's Charge, Persecute, Murder, Any 2 atack flyer... VERY common things that are abundant in set 1. Every color has more than 1 answer to this card and all the answers are not some weird card you have to put in that wouldnt already be there.

rangerike1363
11-27-2013, 02:48 PM
This card Dies to way more than burn cards... Sapper's Charge, Persecute, Murder, Any 2 atack flyer... VERY common things that are abundant in set 1. Every color has more than 1 answer to this card and all the answers are not some weird card you have to put in that wouldnt already be there.

Even with ways to kills it, for it's low cost and various abilities, you can pop it really early and because of the lack of fliers overall in this set, it's hard to defend against it unless you throw a spell at it that often cost the same as it does. It simply has too much, and if you don't have your "answer/counter/defense" in your hand or coming up really soon in the deck, it will tear you apart and make it very difficult to kill your opponent.

It's power forces your to use a spell you may want to save for other cards. It's cost is way out of line.

Alaeryn
11-27-2013, 02:55 PM
I said burn cards.. Not meaning Burn itself. Burn in this case means a card that easily does 2 damage for a relatively low cost. Murder can kill anything that's not invincible so it doesn't merit mentioning here. Most 2 attack Fliers cost more than this card. Or are meant as attackers, not defenders (like Thunderbird). There are answers to every card. What I was saying is the reason why it's out there with 2 touph-ness is because there ARE a lot of answers to it. It's still overpowered for it's cost. .

ossuary
11-27-2013, 04:54 PM
Man, when this community decides something, they decide it 20 different threads. :p

It is NOT too powerful. It is, indeed, powerful, but not TOO powerful. It's just a very good rare.

Yeesh.

escapeRoute
11-28-2013, 03:20 AM
well, i kinda agree that for its cost it should lose the steadfast and it would still remain a card to be used in any weenie with d or almost any d deck... but still its not broken... just a bit underpriced, especially tnx to the 2 heatlh ir is not op at all

Storm_Fireblade
11-28-2013, 04:02 AM
I see no reason at all to call this card OP, as long as it keeps the 2 defense. Soooo many ways to get rid of it. Don't forget about Inner Conflict, Repel, Heat Wave just to mention a few more besides Sappers Charge, Countermagic, Burn, Burn to the Ground, Terrible Transfer, any 2 attack flyer....I could go on here.

Am I in favor of a well balanced set? Yes. But that doesn't mean to nerf every single powerful (something very different than overpowered) card! Especially not if the rarity is correct and some of us actually are looking forward to a decent draft set as well.

Lawlschool
11-28-2013, 12:11 PM
Hex seems to have more powerful cards than MtG, at least from what I remember. Just because it might be too powerful for MtG doesn't mean it's too powerful for Hex. Like people have said, there are plenty of ways to deal with this card. Yes it's powerful, but it's also vulnerable. The first solution shouldn't be to change a card that seems OP, it should be to find a way to work around it.

Indormi
11-28-2013, 01:20 PM
I think the curve from hex is way lower than the one of magic, if you search the 3 costed troops, the only ones that are "on curve" or above curve are Crash of beast, Lord Alexander and Fang. Other cards that could be consider on curve for its abilities are Veteran Gladiator, Blood Creaper, Fiendish Cavalist (sort of), Glimmereng Witch and Clergymen Protectorate.

So for 3 resources the usual stat we get is 5 and if is above curve and extra ability. Baneslayer pony has 5 and 3 abilities. I think which are fine of their own but on combination are pretty devastating. I believe it should lose 1 keyword(most likely steadfast) or just 1 "stat point". It could also gain a 1 cost but I dislike this route as it would make it harder to play and mess with the curve of the decks that usually have ponny in it.

LargoLaGrande
11-28-2013, 01:34 PM
I played MtG for years and one of the things that many of the cards followed was +1/+1 per mana and 1 mana per ability. Now this wasn't always true, their were plenty of exceptions, but Cloud Knight is kinda insane for it's cost. 3 resources for a 3/2 flying, steadfast(vigilance), lifedrain card. That's really insane. I'd expect this card to cost 5 or at least 4, but it's three. This makes it too powerful for such and early game card.

You must hate Loxodon Smiter (http://magiccards.info/rtr/en/178.html).

rcl
11-30-2013, 03:55 PM
I suggest reducing it to 2/2 -- or even 1/3. The life drain is kind of like getting 2x the stat bonus in some cases. White getting a flyer to me seems like either A) a defensive measure, or B) a weaker attack that pumps your white decks on-heal procs

jtatta
11-30-2013, 03:59 PM
After reading three other threads today about different cards, I'm just under the impression that 99% of the people here are just new to CCGs. I'm fine with that as long as you stop assuming cards are too powerful for what they do. One of the defining natures of CCGs is that some cards are better than others. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

This card isn't too powerful.
Extinction isn't too powerful.
Eldritch Dreamer isn't too powerful.

C'mon guys.

Damascus
11-30-2013, 06:00 PM
After reading three other threads today about different cards, I'm just under the impression that 99% of the people here are just new to CCGs. I'm fine with that as long as you stop assuming cards are too powerful for what they do. One of the defining natures of CCGs is that some cards are better than others. That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

This card isn't too powerful.
Extinction isn't too powerful.
Eldritch Dreamer isn't too powerful.

C'mon guys.

+1

There are plenty of cards that are threats - cards that will win the opponent the game if left unchecked. That's just how tcgs work, and that's why people need to conserve their hands and answers in preparation for when those cards are played. You should expect the opponent to have at least a couple of plays like this each game, and not only save cards in hand for them, but build decks around being able to handle them (not just a single-minded win condition as if playing in a vacuum). This is what a 'meta-game' fundamentally is.

Deadhorn
11-30-2013, 07:15 PM
Problem with a lot of these replies is failing to take all things in consideration. Yes, many counters exist for this card but how many of them can you have per deck? Conversely, how many cards that force a counter can you have in a deck? Rarity doesn't answer everything, either.

Damascus
11-30-2013, 07:47 PM
Problem with a lot of these replies is failing to take all things in consideration. Yes, many counters exist for this card but how many of them can you have per deck? Conversely, how many cards that force a counter can you have in a deck? Rarity doesn't answer everything, either.

As many as you want. If I am playing any deck with blood and/or ruby in it, I can make the entire thing removal if I want. I won't have a win condition, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. All the colors have answers and access to plenty of threats that need to be dealt with. If you're doing nothing all game and playing defensively hoping to have an answer in hand to every single thing your opponent does, all I can say is you'd better be throwing down threats of your own too or you're playing wrong.

Deadhorn
11-30-2013, 09:10 PM
As many as you want. If I am playing any deck with blood and/or ruby in it, I can make the entire thing removal if I want. I won't have a win condition, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. All the colors have answers and access to plenty of threats that need to be dealt with. If you're doing nothing all game and playing defensively hoping to have an answer in hand to every single thing your opponent does, all I can say is you'd better be throwing down threats of your own too or you're playing wrong.
That's pretty much my point. Since you *can't* just counter everything, where cards lie on the curve is still important, no?

poizonous
12-01-2013, 01:28 AM
Problem with a lot of these replies is failing to take all things in consideration. Yes, many counters exist for this card but how many of them can you have per deck? Conversely, how many cards that force a counter can you have in a deck? Rarity doesn't answer everything, either.

The same amount of cards that you can have to answer is the same amount of cards I can control that you need an answer for. This logic is honestly retarded. And ACTUALLY you can control more cards to deal with my threat than I can control of that threat.

E.G

Your playing blood. I am playing Diamond.

You have 4 murders 4 extinctions and 4 persecutes
I have 4 Totems 4 Spearcliffs and 4 Stoneskins (Dont stop extinctions) So therefore you have more answers to my bombs then i actually have bombs

Lets also not forget Giant Corpse Fly which is strong enough to trade with a spearcliff when blocking

Damascus
12-01-2013, 02:00 AM
The same amount of cards that you can have to answer is the same amount of cards I can control that you need an answer for. This logic is honestly retarded. And ACTUALLY you can control more cards to deal with my threat than I can control of that threat.

E.G

Your playing blood. I am playing Diamond.

You have 4 murders 4 extinctions and 4 persecutes
I have 4 Totems 4 Spearcliffs and 4 Stoneskins (Dont stop extinctions) So therefore you have more answers to my bombs then i actually have bombs

Lets also not forget Giant Corpse Fly which is strong enough to trade with a spearcliff when blocking

Exactly, there are sooo many answers to a flier with 2 toughness - both creature-wise and burn/removal/bounce/void/pacify/etc-wise. Most of which cost 3 or less to boot.

Indormi
12-01-2013, 04:51 AM
My issue with Baneslayer ponny is more a power creep issue than anything else. If you are making cards and decide that 5 "points" is on curve and 6 above you dont suddenly give a card 9 points, cause it highers up the powercreep curve a lot.

Points is an imaginary meassure of power.

Jugan
12-01-2013, 09:26 AM
Card is fine. Might have a case if it was 3/4.

HellsingDS
12-03-2013, 07:25 AM
I actually have a blue/white deck with living totem, protectorate defender (with +1/+1 for all), eldritch dreamer (draw a card), cloudknight, ancestors chosen, a card im still debating (large cost high atk) then lots of bounce with howling ambush. All coupled with palamedes and oracle song for extra card draw. That's a lot of threatening troops to deal with when you have limited removal and probably why it nearly always wins. People also forget games are only out of 1 right now and we don't currently have sideboards.

That decks nothing though, as more sets come out we'll be able to make decks exclusively from rares or even super rares. They'll never cycle out so commons/uncommons are set to eventually become redundant.

Rare cards might be allowed to be slightly more powerful but there ought to be a limit and they need to be kept niche, especially when you consider they'll never be cycled out. Right now we're seeing super powerful rare cards filling core functions within decks that are already making commons worthless in comparison.

Of course, still the same short sighted vocal few stomping around these threads though... -_-'

escapeRoute
12-03-2013, 10:53 AM
where did u ever get the never cycle out... it has been stated more than once that there will be a cycle... maybe not in normal games... but who care about normal games? they are for fun