PDA

View Full Version : Titania's Majesty ruins diamond cup.



Altima
08-10-2015, 02:13 AM
This card is one of the biggest design failure in this game.

5 Titania's deck in top 8 and 4 Titania's deck in top 4.

Maybe it is fine if you are going to say that this tournament is limited to only set 3. Maybe you will wait for it to ruin next VIP construct tournament before you really try to fix the problem.

Erukk
08-10-2015, 02:21 AM
I probably wouldn't agree with the "biggest design failure" statement, but I will agree that this card can be ridiculously OP when combined with (and it's able to fish out) Ozawa and WC.

It almost makes its previous +2/+2 plus socketed gem to your troops version looks positively tame in comparison. :p

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 02:28 AM
Fun to see Wild grace the meta as a true contender.
I think Cressida pushed this over the top though. Lot of answers to the combo, but some of them would be better reserved for a turn 3 or turn 4 response. With Titania's on the play now, the opposing player has to pass their turn 2, and have a 2 cost answer to respond to a potential game loss.

Will be interesting to see how the meta shapes up.
I'd go as far to say, something will either happen to Cressida, or Titania's before too long, or we will be seeing a lot of 2 cost answers pop up in set4.

With that said, many aggro decks now have the ability to ramp into wins by turn 3 without Titania's.

Games are now more heavily decided by RNG - I guess that is the direction HEX is going with their constructed design.

Poetic
08-10-2015, 02:37 AM
Expected results with the limited card pool. We'll see how it plays out in standard constructed. That was a one time event that you'll probably never play again.

tyra
08-10-2015, 02:46 AM
standard constructed is doing fine imo...
Is it a strong tier 1 deck? Yes!
Can anyone beat it? Of course. S/D, S/B, B/D and Mono Blood Control all have good matchups. And the more you prepare for W/R Titania, the weaker your matchup against Mono Ruby becomes.

hammer
08-10-2015, 03:17 AM
I totally disagree with the OP. Majesty is the scissors in the paper-rock-scissor paradigm its good to see "combo" being viable and balancing the meta with aggro and control. Historically we have seen RS gorefeast, and S control. Majesty can be beaten but needs reserve slots or careful consideration in the main deck. More people should and will run Martyr. I really like Majesty style decks in the meta. The meta will evolve the answers are there and this format (set 3 only) and the Set 1/2/3 format are relatively new and unexplored. Plus the set 1/2/3 format as it is intended to be played has more answers for Majesty, CZE never designed Set 3 to be standalone playable in constructed, this was a fan run event using an "experimental" format.

Showsni
08-10-2015, 03:34 AM
Majesty can be beaten but needs reserve slots or careful consideration in the main deck. More people should and will run Martyr. I really like Majesty style decks in the meta. The meta will evolve the answers are there and this format (set 3 only) and the Set 1/2/3 format are relatively new and unexplored. Plus the set 1/2/3 format as it is intended to be played has more answers for Majesty, CZE never designed Set 3 to be standalone playable in constructed, this was a fan run event using an "experimental" format.

Well, I decided to try and run as many answers to Majesty as I could in my Diamond cup deck. I had Martyr, of course. Lifegain to avoid the 20 point finish from Calamity. Pride's Fall to kill Crocs, Syyns, etc. Noxious Glory and Rot Cast to kill Periwinkle, Lyricist and the other enablers. Discard to strip their hand of threats. Shard Ward post board to deny the big damage swing off a Majesty turn.

I met Majesty decks 4 times out of the 6 rounds I played, and lost all of them. (At least I had an amazing matchup against mono Ruby aggro!) You might be able to weather one Calamity with a Martyr, but that makes their Crocosaurs all the more scary. You can discard their hand, but they can topdeck a random Calamity and finish you. I guess attempting to out aggro Majesty decks and pray they don't hit turn three/four combo might have been better than attempting to control them; but then they brings in Lullabies and things and wreck you. I'll admit I had a few unlucky draws/mulligans, and my losses against Majesty were often 2-1 (so it is beatable); but even trying to run a dedicated counter Majesty deck in the format basically didn't work.

Voormas
08-10-2015, 04:11 AM
It's a really strong combo, but it was so prevalent in a player-run event because of the restrictions put in place by the organizers (Set 3 only) - I expect it to make a good showing during VIP but so will plenty of other decks that don't have their centrepiece do nothing something like 10% of the time

VicMan
08-10-2015, 05:01 AM
I disagree with titania's majesty OPness.
I face 5 R/W titania deck and i beat 3 without losing against other deck.
For me what make the deck so strong is crocosaur, it beat 2 troops without die sometimes.

Think out of the box and you will reach top 8 sometimes ;)

Verdant
08-10-2015, 05:09 AM
VicMan, you've promised YouTube videos featuring your deck :-)

DoctorJoe
08-10-2015, 05:19 AM
I don't think they design for a "Block" metagame. It seems fine in normal constructed. A few of the premium answers aren't available in block.

I like that combo is a valid option in the competitive scene now. I've played the deck and it's not my favorite, but I like it being an option.

Altima
08-10-2015, 05:21 AM
I disagree with titania's majesty OPness.
I face 5 R/W titania deck and i beat 3 without losing against other deck.
For me what make the deck so strong is crocosaur, it beat 2 troops without die sometimes.

Think out of the box and you will reach top 8 sometimes ;)

ิีbut you lost anyway 2-0 in top 8.

VicMan
08-10-2015, 05:49 AM
VicMan, you've promised YouTube videos featuring your deck :-)

Video incomming i put the first round but other round are longer so take more time to upload.
I go as quick as my PC can !


Altima, what is your point ? I also beat Malicus 2-0 in the swiss round

tyra
08-10-2015, 05:54 AM
there were 58 Titania decks (55 were Cressida) out of 181. That's about 30%. More than 50% of the Top8 were Titania decks. Since we only have this tournament as data, we will never know if this is an outlier or whether the deck is truly OP. I would guess it is not an outlier. But that does not really matter, does it? Set 3 constructed is likely never to be played again in a tournament.

Speaking for normal constructed, TM is a very good deck and it definitely puts restriction in place for other decks. But there are decks that can beat it easily. I don't know if it's gonna be a healthy environment, nobody can at this point. But we should not worry too soon...

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 06:08 AM
When you limit the tournament to set 3 only, it's obvious Titania is the easiest and most powerful to go forth with due to lack of serious counterpspell and discard. However, it remains to be seen how that deck will manage in a tournament with Verdict, Inquisition, Withering Touch and Counterspell in play which are always present in any Blood or Sapphire deck.

Will competitive players really take the risk of being so obviously countered? They might get past a few rounds from luck, but will they really be able to constantly face Titania's hard counters game after game? I don't think so.

Metronomy
08-10-2015, 06:16 AM
There are no other decks that can beat is easily. Maybe it gets better with sideboards but believe me when i say even a deck that runs counters and discard has problems against the deck. The problem is not only majesty. Its gamewinning topdecks + the fact its hard to establish pressure when a single crocosaur completly turns the board. Mono-Blood or Blood/Sapphire maybe has around 55%. Thats not much for the perfect answer-deck.

There are no hard counters for the deck.

Eetabee
08-10-2015, 06:24 AM
I had some success against r/w with my mono blood. This was my first tournament, I have no testing group and I just tried to think of ways to beat Titania (early discard and removal of ramp) and quash (exarch and early removal). I think I was 2/2 against r/w. Turn 3 and turn 4 arachnophobia are devastating to anyone. If I had a turn 2 rot cast for their ramp then it was almost gg at that point. Of course if I didn't have arachnophobia then I was pretty much toast.

With even more answers in full constructed I don't see this being a problem. Everything is cyclical. Gorefeast, mono sapphire, b/d all had their day as kings of a cup. Wild/ruby even had its day in one cup with scraptech into eye decks.

tyra
08-10-2015, 06:46 AM
@Metronomy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74Z6xkXh9CE
I have now 8ish gauntlet runs with this deck (in the comments), my win% against WR is about 80%. It's horrible against Mono Ruby though.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 06:47 AM
People arguing that counters can deal wth titania clearly have not faced skilled titania majesty player.

So imagine majesty player being on the play. He starts with turn 1 brave. What are counter options?

1. Ruby player will burn it
2. Blood player will use his Withering touch and maybe hit, maybe not

So Majesty player in first case will play chlorophyllia in second he will drop Periwinkle.

So what are counter options? In the first case Ruby player needs a sapphire or diamond and he has to pass the turn.
Second option: player may drop second blood and use inquisition (hes dead to the majesty topdeck) and play sapphire and keep 2 open for a counter.

And now Majesty player's 3rd turn. First case - he has 4 resources and Cressida, opponent either has 2 open or played a troop. If first - play Periwinkle, if second play majesty.

Second case. You have 4 resources + Cressida and Periwinkle, you dont have majesty (or you do if you topdecked it). Play a 5drop from your hand and have him copied. And the best thing is that if you have Periwinkle in play and you play majesty they can counter only one of those so good luck with playing counter-game.

Also opponent at any point in the game cannot tap out or he will be dead to majesty topdeck.

Thrawn
08-10-2015, 07:55 AM
Gorefeast is OP.

tyra
08-10-2015, 08:07 AM
@JohnDruitt:
Overdramatizing much? Yes, the "on the play" god draw with turn two Periwinkle will beat all the decks. Then there are the games where the deck does nothing or a SINGLE counter completely wins the game.
It's not as consistent as you think.

@Thrawn:
Yes, yes it is! ;)

N3rd4Christ
08-10-2015, 08:08 AM
I remember when people said similar things about mirror knight.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 08:16 AM
I remember when people said similar things about mirror knight.

Mmm. Mirror Knight is good, but it has very poor matchups. Gorefeast too. And Titania will as well. I am willing to wait for the meta to shake out, but the Gorefeast era was not a fun time to play (sure, it was competitive, but not enjoyable, which to me is half the game.) So I would rather avoid a repeat of that.

If we look back at the set 2 diamond cup though, Mastermoss + Azurefate was pretty dominant, and didn't instantly overrun the meta (although it saw a similar deck crop up much later in the form of Tetzot.) So with the card pool we have with 1/2/3, I would actually be a lot more afraid of mono-ruby Quash decks.

Jemy000
08-10-2015, 08:23 AM
A few people have mentioned mono-ruby as a possible contender, and it's not. It fails hard against titanias, especially after sideboard, and it's not good enough against other decks to make up for that failing. The meta is gonna be titanias vs anti-Titania control decks.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 08:39 AM
People arguing that counters can deal wth titania clearly have not faced skilled titania majesty player.

So imagine majesty player being on the play. He starts with turn 1 brave. What are counter options?

1. Ruby player will burn it
2. Blood player will use his Withering touch and maybe hit, maybe not

So Majesty player in first case will play chlorophyllia in second he will drop Periwinkle.

So what are counter options? In the first case Ruby player needs a sapphire or diamond and he has to pass the turn.
Second option: player may drop second blood and use inquisition (hes dead to the majesty topdeck) and play sapphire and keep 2 open for a counter.

And now Majesty player's 3rd turn. First case - he has 4 resources and Cressida, opponent either has 2 open or played a troop. If first - play Periwinkle, if second play majesty.

Second case. You have 4 resources + Cressida and Periwinkle, you dont have majesty (or you do if you topdecked it). Play a 5drop from your hand and have him copied. And the best thing is that if you have Periwinkle in play and you play majesty they can counter only one of those so good luck with playing counter-game.

Also opponent at any point in the game cannot tap out or he will be dead to majesty topdeck.


Unfortunately, I agree with this. In my experience, decks that are built to do "well" against majesty deck while still having a reasonable winrate against other decks just plain absolutely do not do well enough vs majesty to make it worth it.

Going 52% vs majesty long term with a deck that will go 40-45% vs lots of other decks puts you up as an underdog i nany sort of big event :(

W/E, we will see.
But in my experience the "good" counters to majesty are not good because you are not trying to just stop majesty. Everything in their deck is a problem.

We are going to start seeing more decks that abuse majesty without relying on it. Decks will not have oziwa because they won't want dead cards. Players have already started to see and will continue to see that they can actually just stall as a majesty player until they can hard cast their big threats, while forcing their enemy to use removal on smaller threats like periwinkle. There is no reason to try to risk everything on a 1 turn play that could go wrong when you can just win a straight up game anyways.

And don't even get me started on sideboarding in spellshield into majesty vs certain decks.

tyra
08-10-2015, 08:52 AM
A few people have mentioned mono-ruby as a possible contender, and it's not. It fails hard against titanias, especially after sideboard, and it's not good enough against other decks to make up for that failing. The meta is gonna be titanias vs anti-Titania control decks.
Again, Mono Ruby will be a part of this because it completely smashes the decks that win against Titania. Countermagic, Verdict and Martyr are all terrible against a t1 Quash. It will be rock>scissors>paper>rock (Titania>MonoRuby>Control>Titania)



Unfortunately, I agree with this. In my experience, decks that are built to do "well" against majesty deck while still having a reasonable winrate against other decks just plain absolutely do not do well enough vs majesty to make it worth it.
Again, look at the S/D Control deck, I checked and it's 11-3 against Titania in Bo1. I would even go as far and take ante games against Titania decks. And the deck is fine against non-Titania decks, except for Mono Ruby
(here are vids against Titania: https://youtu.be/z9uL8b0EmYI and http://youtu.be/65iPg0kzeTw)

And I would argue that Titania decks are perfect for Bo1, but worse in Bo3

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 09:03 AM
Again, look at the S/D Control deck, I checked and it's 11-3 against Titania in Bo1. I would even go as far and take ante games against Titania decks. And the deck is fine against non-Titania decks, except for Mono Ruby
(here are vids against Titania: https://youtu.be/z9uL8b0EmYI and http://youtu.be/65iPg0kzeTw)

And I would argue that Titania decks are perfect for Bo1, but worse in Bo3

You do realise that your only answer to turn 2 Perlwinke is martyr, right? Without martyr in hand you cannot deal with that card and it makes your counter nearly useless.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 09:22 AM
It's way too early to tell if titania's majesty is busted. Need standard constructed for a few popular tournaments to see what shakes loose. Personally I think there are a number of decks that win vs it. At this point this thread is just like all of the gorefeast threads before it. You see a popular deck and think it's broken. Time will tell. As others said it is possible that it was busted for block constructed, but HXE isn't officially supporting block constructed yet. That was just a fun tournament by the fiveshards guys which actually had a number of very interestong non majesty decks that I didn't see coming.

Malakili
08-10-2015, 09:27 AM
Yeah, it's too early to see if this is really degenerate. It's clear that printing Titania's Majesty and Walking Calamity in the same set was at least a little bonkers, but I don't know if it actually breaks the meta.

Armies
08-10-2015, 09:34 AM
obviously the really broken cards must be periwinkle :D

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 09:41 AM
tyra that deck probably does do well that majesty, i wouldn't be surprised if it could keep a very high winrate, maybe close to a winrate like what you said. But then I think it probably does horribly vs many other decks, because every single card in that deck targets titania's majesty plays.

And I don't really agree with you about the bo3 thing. I don't see how sideboarding would hurt majesty deck much. Sure, blood can bring in withering touch or a sapphire deck that wasn't using verdict can bring that in.

But if your deck is control, a good player could actually take majesty out for game 2 if they want. It's really just unnecessary. If I was playing a majesty deck I might just take it out for something else and laugh.

Saeijou
08-10-2015, 09:46 AM
tyra that deck probably does do well that majesty, i wouldn't be surprised if it could keep a very high winrate, maybe close to a winrate like what you said. But then I think it probably does horribly vs many other decks, because every single card in that deck targets titania's majesty plays.

And I don't really agree with you about the bo3 thing. I don't see how sideboarding would hurt majesty deck much. Sure, blood can bring in withering touch or a sapphire deck that wasn't using verdict can bring that in.

But if your deck is control, a good player could actually take majesty out for game 2 if they want. It's really just unnecessary. If I was playing a majesty deck I might just take it out for something else and laugh.

if they don't counter majesty, they counter the threads you play otherwise...
taking it out doesnt help you i guess

hitchslap88
08-10-2015, 09:46 AM
From a more semi/casual perspective, Majesty is just unfun to play against. That's its biggest flaw. I put a cool Mancubus deck together and the first time I queued up to try it in the proving grounds I lost to a turn 3 Ozawa. 20 damage on turn 3 without some complicated chain of cards going off just shouldn't be possible.

And from a competitive standpoint, the fact that you have to dedicate your entire deck to avoiding the one turn kill only to be beaten by a topdeck or hard cast of a massive threat is too much to expect one deck to handle. Also, the presence of Titania's forces non-Titania's to be reactionary and defensive. If you look at the deck lists of the non-Titania's decks that made it to the top 8, they were all forced to take cards like withering touch, martyr, eye of lixil, etc. I understand that in competitive tournaments there will always be a meta, but it can't be healthy when the top 8 is entirely full of one deck that contains the overwhelming threat and a few other decks designed explicitly to counter it.

I watched a stream of a German couple who was new to the game playing pvp with the dwarf starter deck. They came up against Titania's in their second matchup. They had lost their first game but seemed to enjoy it. After losing to a turn 4 Rootfather they stopped playing pvp. They were probably going to lose with the starter against anyone, but the problem with Titania's is that it makes you feel like you never had a chance.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 09:48 AM
if they don't counter majesty, they counter the threads you play otherwise...
taking it out doesnt help you i guess

Periwinkle will double even if they counter, though. And verdict / withering touch can potentially become dead.

That's my reasoning at least.

Also it could con an enemy into holding resources when you actually aren't even playing anything yet, though that would be a pretty weak reason.

Graydeath
08-10-2015, 09:51 AM
From a more semi/casual perspective, Majesty is just unfun to play against. That's its biggest flaw. I put a cool Mancubus deck together and the first time I queued up to try it in the proving grounds I lost to a turn 3 Ozawa. 20 damage on turn 3 without some complicated chain of cards going off just shouldn't be possible.

And from a competitive standpoint, the fact that you have to dedicate your entire deck to avoiding the one turn kill only to be beaten by a topdeck or hard cast of a massive threat is too much to expect one deck to handle. Also, the presence of Titania's forces non-Titania's to be reactionary and defensive. If you look at the deck lists of the non-Titania's decks that made it to the top 8, they were all forced to take cards like withering touch, martyr, eye of lixil, etc. I understand that in competitive tournaments there will always be a meta, but it can't be healthy when the top 8 is entirely full of one deck that contains the overwhelming threat and a few other decks designed explicitly to counter it.

I watched a stream of a German couple who was new to the game playing pvp with the dwarf starter deck. They came up against Titania's in their second matchup. They had lost their first game but seemed to enjoy it. After losing to a turn 4 Rootfather they stopped playing pvp. They were probably going to lose with the starter against anyone, but the problem with Titania's is that it makes you feel like you never had a chance.

This is the real problem of Majesty

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 09:53 AM
This is the real problem of Majesty

I don't think so. As he mentions, any competitive deck would have crushed a starter deck, I disagree that only majesty would make them feel like they had no chance. Mono sapphire can be just as crushing, and even more annoying to play against. The issue that he highlights there is there should be a starter only pvp queue for new players, you shouldn't be forced as your first experience to go up against any tier 1 deck.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 09:53 AM
tyra that deck probably does do well that majesty, i wouldn't be surprised if it could keep a very high winrate, maybe close to a winrate like what you said. But then I think it probably does horribly vs many other decks, because every single card in that deck targets titania's majesty plays.

And I don't really agree with you about the bo3 thing. I don't see how sideboarding would hurt majesty deck much. Sure, blood can bring in withering touch or a sapphire deck that wasn't using verdict can bring that in.

But if your deck is control, a good player could actually take majesty out for game 2 if they want. It's really just unnecessary. If I was playing a majesty deck I might just take it out for something else and laugh. Like set 01 extinction meta, you have to play around a card no matter what. Wasn't great for that meta and it is not great here.

Mahes
08-10-2015, 09:54 AM
I am going to trust in that, the decks obviousness, is why I do not have as great a concern as some have stated. It is clear that the combo exists. This is not some hidden deck that came out of nowhere. So I am going to assume that the cards were play tested a lot, as were the counter decks. The S/D deck actually does a pretty good job of dealing with the threat. While Periwinkle is certainly a threat, it is what comes after Periwinkle that makes him so powerful. A B/D control deck will let Periwinkle drop. I will counter what you attempt to cast after Periwinkle. I am not even sure I would bother Martyring Periwinkle. The power of the deck is its ramp and Titania with Eye thrown in for good measure. Obviously the large creatures make a difference as well but I would be much more likely to Martyr those.

A Side note: I think Martyr is under valued at the moment.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 09:56 AM
It was different card when it was first spoiled, so thorough playtesting isn't a given.

tyra
08-10-2015, 09:58 AM
You do realise that your only answer to turn 2 Perlwinke is martyr, right? Without martyr in hand you cannot deal with that card and it makes your counter nearly useless.
You do realize that t1 acceleration into t2 Periwinkle into t3 Titania's does not happen every game, right? I would say it is far more likely that you get a hand without acceleration or without the finishing action or WITH X Ozawa and Y Calamity in your hand.

Yes, it is a very strong combo deck. Yes, it MIGHT be too powerful, time will tell.
No, it is not unbeatable. No, it is NOT winning against every deck all the time.

and yes, it is quite unfun to play against. But I have hope that people will find a counter and the deck will not be as dominant as it is right now

EDIT:
Also, there is one simple change that HXE could do without changing a single card. Remove/Change the ruby gem...

hitchslap88
08-10-2015, 10:04 AM
I don't think so. As he mentions, any competitive deck would have crushed a starter deck, I disagree that only majesty would make them feel like they had no chance. Mono sapphire can be just as crushing, and even more annoying to play against. The issue that he highlights there is there should be a starter only pvp queue for new players, you shouldn't be forced as your first experience to go up against any tier 1 deck.

I think it's the suddenness of Majesty that creates this feeling. Against mono sapphire you may feel powerless much of the time, but at least you get to see that process play out slowly and methodically, perhaps teaching you about the value of spellshield and delaying your threats. What do you learn from paying against Titania's?

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 10:07 AM
About the same thing you learn to losing to turn 4 gorefeast I'd assume. Not all decks you play against are going to be good teaching experiences for new players, which just reiterates my point.

hitchslap88
08-10-2015, 10:21 AM
About the same thing you learn to losing to turn 4 gorefeast I'd assume. Not all decks you play against are going to be good teaching experiences for new players, which just reiterates my point.

Even with Gorefeast there's a big difference. Against Gorefeast:
Turn 1: threat
2: threat
3: threat
4: gorefeast

Vs Titania's, Lyricist or Chlorophylia don't create the same sense of threat crescendo. And against Gorefeast there are just more and diverse answers that could have been a part of one's deck without foreknowledge. The threat presented by Titania's is so specific and potent that it completely invalidates many styles of deck. And it still manages to beat down even when it doesn't draw Majesty.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 10:22 AM
I think the true discussion here is what it means to turn the combo clock up from Turn 4 to Turn 3.

What would people think if Cressida's charge power was 4charges rather than 3?

hitchslap88
08-10-2015, 10:42 AM
I think the true discussion here is what it means to turn the combo clock up from Turn 4 to Turn 3.

What would people think if Cressida's charge power was 4charges rather than 3?

That would help. Combo could still go off on three w soloist or maestro, but at least maestro gives your opponent something. Even making that change doesn't really solve the problem entirely, though.

Kayas42
08-10-2015, 10:43 AM
I didn't play this weekend but after observing several matches I came to a few conclusions.

1) Titania's Majesty is broken. I mean broken in the original sense of the term that it does completely bypass rules of the game and allows you to ignore thresholds and costs. Some cases thresholds were met, some cases they were not. High thresholds are used to balance cards and the ability to ignore high thresholds on cards such as Walking Calamity and Crocosaur makes those cards unbalanced. People are already planning on adding Osawa which is not even on color for the deck. Titania's Majesty also only has a meager threshold of 1 Wild. What about Eye of Creation you say? Well Eye has a 3x Wild threshold and if you could meet it's threshold on turn 3 with 5 resources doesn't give you nearly the same opportunity to find a troop as TM does. You also can't meet that 3x Wild threshold nearly as consistently which doesn't make it an auto turn 3 play. It might have the same end result but if it's used in the same manner as TM it will whiff since you have less cards to pick from. Of course we never had to deal with Eye+Calamity. TM is superior to Eye though since it's threshold is miniscule and can be splashed easily and played on a more consistent basis. It can also be played to much greater effectiveness on turn 3-5 than Eye can.

2) Crocosaur is a monster card. It probably influenced more games than WC did. Tough to judge how good it is since most of the time it was played was via Titania's Majesty. If it was limited to a hard cast, it would still be amazing, just not as consistent in a multi-shard deck and I think that's what the design team had in mind. Even with ramp, as a hard cast only, you likely delay the consistency of meeting the threshold by at least 1 turn which does help a lot.

3) The majority of decks were either an R/W Titania's Majesty deck or an Anti-Titania's Majesty deck. I see no difference in thought process going into a full Set 1-3 situation. That should say something. If it wasn't for Titania's Majesty, there would be a greater variety of decks, but right now it's TM or !TM.

4) Walking Calamity would have had even more of an influence if the explosion on copy wasn't bugged. As it stood, there were situations where it "ONLY did 18 damage on a single turn" as Penta said in his shoutcast once. There were situations where the exploding Calamity was ignored, sometimes played around just in case. Either way it will have a greater impact once fixed.

5) You can be winning and still lose to a Titania's Majesty top deck. No other card can win now or change the course of a game like TM can. Whether it hits Crocosaur, Walking Calamity, Ozawa, Rootfather, whatever. Even in mull to 5 games, a top deck TM won the match.

6) Periwinkle is super strong in Set 3 only but a burn or Crackling Bolt from being just another Sight of the Sun in Set 1-3 play.

7) I've never seen the coin flip be so important.


If I was to suggest a change it would be that TM only lets you copy cards you meet the threshold for and I would increase the threshold of TM to 3 Wild. Let it be, just reduce it's consistency.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 10:48 AM
Great post Kayas.
1 thing your post highlights well is the other side of the coin.
Don't focus on Cressida's charge
Focus on Threshold requirements for Titania's.
Either the card itself, potentially making it a 3x Wild Threshold
Or requiring that Thresholds must be met on the troop revealed to copy/cheat that card into play.

We saw some things that were broken with "Copy" during the tournament as well, that will definitely need bug fixes.

Also, Titania's when I first read it, I questioned whether or not the player got to choose what went into play. Removing the choice, and having the troop selected at random would be another way to mitigate some of its effectiveness.

Croc is definitely a blow-out card.

Malakili
08-10-2015, 10:50 AM
They aren't going to change TM. Modifying a card (aka nerfing) that is already printed would do far more harm to this game than even the most degenerate combo deck. The question is whether or not to ban it, and I don't think it should be banned, at least not yet. It's very powerful, but powerful doesn't mean degenerate.

As for it being "broken" - that's kind of the point, it lets you cheat things into play. Cheating things into play is a well established mechanic in this sort of game. Printing TM in the same set as Walking Calamity is a weird choice - granted. That kind of interaction being in one set is pretty rare, and I think the interaction is going to be a lot less powerful in the grand scheme of things when we have a much deeper card pool.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 10:57 AM
6) Periwinkle is super strong in Set 3 only but a burn or Crackling Bolt from being just another Sight of the Sun in Set 1-3 play.


The only point where I cannot agree. Only ruby has 1 cost answer for Turn 2 Periwinkle. And using turn 2 for an answer lowers your shield for turn 3 kill with majesty.

Bmon
08-10-2015, 11:09 AM
I agree with Malakili that the question is whether to ban Titania's majesty or not, and that it is way too early to make that decision. We have not even had a set 1-3 full constructed tournament, nor is one tournament even enough data to make a ban decision. For example, that would have led to a gore feast ban after the Hextechs Oberon open to hate out gore knights, and that clearly would have been premature.

It is also premature to say a deck has a good overall match up vs. Majesty just because you have a good win rate in a BO1 format. The majesty decks appearing in the constructed gauntlet are in no way tuned for a full BO3 tournament, and Majesty has several good anti-control options post sideboard. DS or mono B control might end up having a good match up even against a Majesty deck tuned for a BO3 tournament, but no one has demonstrated that yet.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 11:12 AM
I agree with Malakili that the question is whether to ban Titania's majesty or not, and that it is way too early to make that decision. We have not even had a set 1-3 full constructed tournament, nor is one tournament even enough data to make a ban decision. For example, that would have led to a gore feast ban after the Hextechs Oberon open to hate out gore knights, and that clearly would have been premature.

It is also premature to say a deck has a good overall match up vs. Majesty just because you have a good win rate in a BO1 format. The majesty decks appearing in the constructed gauntlet are in no way tuned for a full BO3 tournament, and Majesty has several good anti-control options post sideboard. DS or mono B control might end up having a good match up even against a Majesty deck tuned for a BO3 tournament, but no one has demonstrated that yet.
They said they would never change a PvP card once released. So, yeah, seems like a ban would be more likely if anything. However, I am not against an errata within the first few weeks of a set if it means a functional card can still be playable.

I wonder if the design decision for all the socketed actions come into question now, as both the Time's Offering card, and Ozawa's Dream never saw the light of day after being spoiled...

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 11:16 AM
Yeah, I have been well aware of Majesty's power for a while now, and seen it in action, and I agree that it is premature. Give it a while for people to brew some solid decks and see if Majesty continues this 'rampage' (really, one tournament isn't much of a rampage :p) after some of the best deckbuilders in the game have a whack at the current meta.

If nothing emerges in the next few months, then I am sure it will be banned. But until then, everyone hold onto your hats and watch the masses rush to play this deck. :p

Fyren
08-10-2015, 11:17 AM
Given prior hysteria over other cards, I agree; I think we're going to have to see the Titania's deck wreck a major Standard Constructed tournament before it is declared to be broken enough for a ban. I think I can safely say two things:

1) The Diamond Cup Top 8 was very short and somehow still managed to be dull to watch. At least when Mono Sapphire was dominant, plays happened.

2) We shouldn't be seeing another Set 3 Only tournament anytime soon.

havocattack
08-10-2015, 11:28 AM
Very likely already mentioned, but you can't really compare Tits to cards like gore feast. Gore has prerequisites that are required before it can become a finisher, not to mention, those prerequisites can be dealt with.

Tits just requires the right deck build and some luck and even with a 6 shard, 1 majesty hand, you can win on turn 4 -_-

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 11:31 AM
Very likely already mentioned, but you can't really compare Tits to cards like gore feast, it has prerequisites that are required before they can become a finisher. Tits just requires the right deck build and some luck and even with a 6 shard, 1 majesty hand, you can win on turn 4 -_-

Yeah, the apparent lack of interactivity is an issue, but I feel this is something that will just require some outside thinking to solve. Much like Martyr is a brilliant solution, I am sure there are other hidden gems that simply haven't been considered yet.

Thrawn
08-10-2015, 11:31 AM
They said they would never change a PvP card once released. So, yeah, seems like a ban would be more likely if anything. However, I am not against an errata within the first few weeks of a set if it means a functional card can still be playable.

It's not really a stance that can be fluid. You either say you're never going to functionally change released PvP cards and will only do bans, or you say you're going to destroy player trust in collection values and hurt the economy. No middle ground.

zadies
08-10-2015, 11:32 AM
I want to see a hard counter to copies put into play like frost mage is a hard counter to escalation cards that just prevents copies from coming into play.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 11:33 AM
Except you know cluckadon was changed post release.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 11:33 AM
It's not really a stance that can be fluid. You either say you're never going to functionally change released PvP cards and will only do bans, or you say you're going to destroy player trust in collection values and hurt the economy. No middle ground.
True... I guess it's foolish to think anything would happen to a released card outside of a ban if it's that powerful.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 11:35 AM
Except you know cluckadon was changed post release.

I don't recall this happening. Care to elaborate?

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 11:37 AM
The battle effect was made optional as was shinobi's exist effect.

Zophie
08-10-2015, 11:37 AM
It's not really a stance that can be fluid. You either say you're never going to functionally change released PvP cards and will only do bans, or you say you're going to destroy player trust in collection values and hurt the economy. No middle ground.

I agree.

Also as many others have pointed out, Set 3 probably shouldn't be by itself in a constructed tournament like this. After Set 4 comes out maybe then you can do a block constructed format, but I don't think it was ever intended for Set 3 to be alone in constructed.

hex_colin
08-10-2015, 11:38 AM
The battle effect was made optional as was shinobi's exist effect.

In both those cases that was always the design intent. Those were bug fixes rather than changes.

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 11:38 AM
About the same thing you learn to losing to turn 4 gorefeast I'd assume. Not all decks you play against are going to be good teaching experiences for new players, which just reiterates my point.

I personally wouldn't put losing to gorefeast in the same category. The other player spent the first few turns playing troops. If you spent those same turns playing equivalent troops, when he plays gorefeast, all his stuff dies. The idea that your opponent won by playing a lot of troops and buffing them is very intuitive for new players to grasp, even if the particular buff card catches them by surprise. It usually doesn't feel 'unfair' to them. They say "well, that troop was sitting around for 3 turns and I had several opportunities to deal with it but did not"

Axle
08-10-2015, 11:40 AM
I would like at the very least for Cressida to give both players a temp resource. Obviously the opponents temp would refresh on their turn, so it's just for quick action related things.


Makes going first less important. This bugs me the most.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 11:41 AM
The battle effect was made optional as was shinobi's exist effect.

From what I remember, those were things that hadn't been changed in time, and were always intended, much like Tiaanost's void (essentially being bugs.)

Not to mention they were changed much faster than the change to Majesty would be happening in terms of release.

And lastly - those changes were directly in line with the original design of the cards, whereas changing majesty would either leave it he same (useless) or nerf it (which would destroy confidence in the devs.)

So I don't feel the two situations can be compared like that, although you are technically right about changes happening after a card was finalised.

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 11:43 AM
They said they would never change a PvP card once released. So, yeah, seems like a ban would be more likely if anything. However, I am not against an errata within the first few weeks of a set if it means a functional card can still be playable.

I wonder if the design decision for all the socketed actions come into question now, as both the Time's Offering card, and Ozawa's Dream never saw the light of day after being spoiled...

A nerf is a nerf, even if you choose to call it an 'errata' instead. I think they've been pretty clear that they aren't going to change PvP cards once released, and they will just ban them if necessary.

I don't know that we are at that point yet.

If there was an actual bug with the card (say, it put two copies into play instead of just one) then obviously those should be addressed.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 11:51 AM
Technically is the best kind of correct. The only difference that matters to me is that that changes didn't impact the meta. So no one gives a poo. But if they did, I think people would saying HexEnt broke their word. Obviously any change to TM would. So going after champs or gems might be better from a PR stand point.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 11:57 AM
People saying majesty and gorefeast are incomparable I don't think have done enough research on what gorefeast is capable of with the new champs/tools in set 3

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 12:07 PM
People saying majesty and gorefeast are incomparable I don't think have done enough research on what gorefeast is capable of with the new champs/tools in set 3

So you are saying that gorefeast can turn 3 deal 20 damage from 1/1 on the table?

loopholist3
08-10-2015, 12:14 PM
In case anybody cares:

Odds of having a brave, a periwinkle, a Titania, and 3 resources in your top 9 cards is about 7.25%, taking into account the turns you need them by. Given 4 of each card, 25 resources and a 60 card deck.

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 12:24 PM
Technically is the best kind of correct. The only difference that matters to me is that that changes didn't impact the meta. So no one gives a poo.

Yes, but the rest of the community is capable of distinguishing between bug fixes and card changes.

nicosharp
08-10-2015, 12:27 PM
In case anybody cares:

Odds of having a brave, a periwinkle, a Titania, and 3 resources in your top 9 cards is slightly over 7.25%, taking into account the turns you need them by. Given 4 of each card, 25 resources and a 60 card deck.
You don't need all 3 for the combo/turn 3 win. The odds increase drastically when just looking at the 1 card needed by turn 4, and/or 10 or so early fixers that get you a 2 card combo by turn 3.

Regardless, looking forward to the constructed scene. I won't be playing in it much, but it still is thrilling to see new brews hit the main-stream.

loopholist3
08-10-2015, 12:33 PM
You don't need all 3 for the combo/turn 3 win. The odds increase drastically when just looking at the 1 card needed by turn 4, and/or 10 or so early fixers that get you a 2 card combo by turn 3.

Regardless, looking forward to the constructed scene. I won't be playing in it much, but it still is thrilling to see new brews hit the main-stream.

I agree, I just posted odds for that so people could have an informed argument, because that is just about the worst case scenario for most opponents.

Malakili
08-10-2015, 12:35 PM
Like I have been saying, this deck's strength comes from how good it is even when it ISN'T going off. Those are the scariest combo decks.

Biz
08-10-2015, 12:38 PM
this isn't a combo

it's just 1 card.
it's like calling oakhenge ceremony a combo

the only "combo" is playing it on turn 3 instead of turn 4 or playing 2 copies of it instead of 1, and none of that is essential

loopholist3
08-10-2015, 12:39 PM
In case anybody cares:

Odds of having a brave, a periwinkle, a Titania, and 3 resources in your top 9 cards is about 7.25%, taking into account the turns you need them by. Given 4 of each card, 25 resources and a 60 card deck.

If you replace a brave, and a periwinkle with a brave, Chlorophyllia, Lithe Lyricist, or Puck, the odds become 35.4%.

If your willing to wait until turn 4, and don't require any of those cards, the odds become 28%. Having 4 resources on turn 4 is actually worse odds then having one of those cards.

DaethStaR
08-10-2015, 12:45 PM
I didn't play this weekend but after observing several matches I came to a few conclusions.

1) Titania's Majesty is broken. I mean broken in the original sense of the term that it does completely bypass rules of the game and allows you to ignore thresholds and costs. Some cases thresholds were met, some cases they were not. High thresholds are used to balance cards and the ability to ignore high thresholds on cards such as Walking Calamity and Crocosaur makes those cards unbalanced. People are already planning on adding Osawa which is not even on color for the deck. Titania's Majesty also only has a meager threshold of 1 Wild. What about Eye of Creation you say? Well Eye has a 3x Wild threshold and if you could meet it's threshold on turn 3 with 5 resources doesn't give you nearly the same opportunity to find a troop as TM does. You also can't meet that 3x Wild threshold nearly as consistently which doesn't make it an auto turn 3 play. It might have the same end result but if it's used in the same manner as TM it will whiff since you have less cards to pick from. Of course we never had to deal with Eye+Calamity. TM is superior to Eye though since it's threshold is miniscule and can be splashed easily and played on a more consistent basis. It can also be played to much greater effectiveness on turn 3-5 than Eye can.

2) Crocosaur is a monster card. It probably influenced more games than WC did. Tough to judge how good it is since most of the time it was played was via Titania's Majesty. If it was limited to a hard cast, it would still be amazing, just not as consistent in a multi-shard deck and I think that's what the design team had in mind. Even with ramp, as a hard cast only, you likely delay the consistency of meeting the threshold by at least 1 turn which does help a lot.

3) The majority of decks were either an R/W Titania's Majesty deck or an Anti-Titania's Majesty deck. I see no difference in thought process going into a full Set 1-3 situation. That should say something. If it wasn't for Titania's Majesty, there would be a greater variety of decks, but right now it's TM or !TM.

4) Walking Calamity would have had even more of an influence if the explosion on copy wasn't bugged. As it stood, there were situations where it "ONLY did 18 damage on a single turn" as Penta said in his shoutcast once. There were situations where the exploding Calamity was ignored, sometimes played around just in case. Either way it will have a greater impact once fixed.

5) You can be winning and still lose to a Titania's Majesty top deck. No other card can win now or change the course of a game like TM can. Whether it hits Crocosaur, Walking Calamity, Ozawa, Rootfather, whatever. Even in mull to 5 games, a top deck TM won the match.

6) Periwinkle is super strong in Set 3 only but a burn or Crackling Bolt from being just another Sight of the Sun in Set 1-3 play.

7) I've never seen the coin flip be so important.


If I was to suggest a change it would be that TM only lets you copy cards you meet the threshold for and I would increase the threshold of TM to 3 Wild. Let it be, just reduce it's consistency.

Great post. I want to add my 2cp here if it matters.

I came from another dTCG that I will not name that put out sets and cards like Hex. The one thing about Hex that really bothers me and I can only speak as someone who only recently started playing. The statement that I hear that the devs will never change a card once released.

I can not wrap my head around that statement. I can understand not wanting to change/ban/errata a card once it is in the pool. But to stand on that when something may be game altering in anyway to the point that it makes the game NOT fun to play against said card or combination of cards seems foolhardy.

This every thing happened in the other game I played. The card was what we would call "broken". It was in every deck and made the game not fun in any way to have to worry about it being cast once you saw the "colors" they were playing. The devs had to go back in and rework the card which meant they had to change all the cards that folks had already accumulated.

Was it a popular decision? Heck no it wasn't but it was needed for the health of the game at that time. I would rather HEX step back and say that the promise while the intention was honorable, is not realistic to hold to.

It is much easier to rip the scab off now as opposed to let the infection fester until it ruins the game.

Now all that being said, I am not sure whether or not TM is completely busted but I highlighted the part of the previous post that makes the most sense to me. The threshold cost of the card is extremely under-costed compared to the power of its ilk (Parade) which is two threshold and does not do nearly as much to change the game as TM regardless of the cost difference.

It seems that it would be an easy enough fix that would not nerf the card but put it inline with what I hope the devs intentions were for the card. I am sure they do not want any cards they release to stagnate the game to where no one wants to play constructed. That would basically make the game almost unplayable because what would be the point of collecting cards you will never use for anything?

So the suggestion of making TM more threshold intensive would allow those playing against it feel they have a shot at beating the deck without destroying the usefulness of the card. Adding the caveat of meeting the threshold of the card copied from TM seems like it would be harder to implement in the short term although, would be a way to "fix" it.

DaethStaR
08-10-2015, 12:48 PM
Like I have been saying, this deck's strength comes from how good it is even when it ISN'T going off. Those are the scariest combo decks.

So much this. The deck is still good without TM, it is much worse with it.

Aradon
08-10-2015, 12:49 PM
They've said they can ban a card if they must, but the decision not to alter cards after release is based around the fact that people pay money for an object, and it would be bad to change the thing they have already paid money for.

The counterargument is that banning a card or restricting its usage is altering a card already, but this is the reasoning behind CZE's decision.

Fyren
08-10-2015, 12:52 PM
I came from another dTCG that I will not name that put out sets and cards like Hex. The one thing about Hex that really bothers me and I can only speak as someone who only recently started playing. The statement that I hear that the devs will never change a card once released.

I can not wrap my head around that statement. I can understand not wanting to change/ban/errata a card once it is in the pool. But to stand on that when something may be game altering in anyway to the point that it makes the game NOT fun to play against said card or combination of cards seems foolhardy.

I actually seriously agree with this. MtG can't rewrite cards after they're printed, so they just can't nerf; in Hex this seems like failing to take advantage of the dTCG format, which is something Hex is not known for doing. I know people have cited the value of the cards and trust in their collections, but wouldn't adding them to a banlist also cause their value to plummet?

Granted, it's not something to do lightly; Hearthstone waits a >long ass time< before they go and nerf a card causing problems. A card has to be a consistent problem causer for months and months before it gets nerfed, and it's way too early to nerf Tits by that standard; But they do it if they have to.

JohnDruitt
08-10-2015, 12:56 PM
I know people have cited the value of the cards and trust in their collections, but wouldn't adding them to a banlist also cause their value to plummet?


This. There is a player who bought 4x TM from AH. So from his perspective - is it better to have the card changed so that it is still playable and retain some value or maybe ban it so that he cannot use it in PvP whatsoever.

Koz
08-10-2015, 12:57 PM
They've said they can ban a card if they must, but the decision not to alter cards after release is based around the fact that people pay money for an object, and it would be bad to change the thing they have already paid money for.

The counterargument is that banning a card or restricting its usage is altering a card already, but this is the reasoning behind CZE's decision.

But that reasoning is bad IMO. Banning a card devalues a card just as much (or more) as an errata does. I mean, they'd basically be saying "we don't want to change that card because it would devalue what you paid for it. Instead we just won't let you play with the card at all. You're welcome."

Cards that can't be played don't have much value...

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 01:02 PM
Great post. I want to add my 2cp here if it matters.

I came from another dTCG that I will not name that put out sets and cards like Hex. The one thing about Hex that really bothers me and I can only speak as someone who only recently started playing. The statement that I hear that the devs will never change a card once released.

I can not wrap my head around that statement. I can understand not wanting to change/ban/errata a card once it is in the pool. But to stand on that when something may be game altering in anyway to the point that it makes the game NOT fun to play against said card or combination of cards seems foolhardy.

This every thing happened in the other game I played. The card was what we would call "broken". It was in every deck and made the game not fun in any way to have to worry about it being cast once you saw the "colors" they were playing. The devs had to go back in and rework the card which meant they had to change all the cards that folks had already accumulated.

Was it a popular decision? Heck no it wasn't but it was needed for the health of the game at that time. I would rather HEX step back and say that the promise while the intention was honorable, is not realistic to hold to.

It is much easier to rip the scab off now as opposed to let the infection fester until it ruins the game.

Now all that being said, I am not sure whether or not TM is completely busted but I highlighted the part of the previous post that makes the most sense to me. The threshold cost of the card is extremely under-costed compared to the power of its ilk (Parade) which is two threshold and does not do nearly as much to change the game as TM regardless of the cost difference.

It seems that it would be an easy enough fix that would not nerf the card but put it inline with what I hope the devs intentions were for the card. I am sure they do not want any cards they release to stagnate the game to where no one wants to play constructed. That would basically make the game almost unplayable because what would be the point of collecting cards you will never use for anything?

So the suggestion of making TM more threshold intensive would allow those playing against it feel they have a shot at beating the deck without destroying the usefulness of the card. Adding the caveat of meeting the threshold of the card copied from TM seems like it would be harder to implement in the short term although, would be a way to "fix" it.

They have been quite clear that they will not change, only ban cards.

One benefit is that everyone and their mother has little 'tweaks' they think should be made to certain cards to make them more balance and can incessantly lobby that these changes be made. We might have tons of cards changing in every patch.

A binary 'banned/not banned' system is far less likely to be used. It is a steep bar to prove a card is so banned it needs to be banned.

There have been many discussions about the merits of banning vs leveraging the digital nature of Hex to modify cards, and which approach leads to better long term value. Some thing modifying a card is better than banning it, others point out cards are generally only banned in one format and would be viable in others. Both involve a loss of value but it is hard to quantify which is worse. The devs have always been clear on the 'bans only, no changes' approach however.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 01:10 PM
Yes, but the rest of the community is capable of distinguishing between bug fixes and card changes.
The cards changed. Card wording changed that resulted in functional change. Maybe it didn't meet you level of importance. If there was a bug it was in the Hex's development process that allowed cards to get released that was than different than developer's intent.

Also I am fine with minor tweaks, but for those drawing a hardline. We have already crossed it.

EccentricFan
08-10-2015, 01:11 PM
Yeah. I've always thought it would be better if they were willing to change a card for the purpose of balance. Even if they're very reluctant to do so, I don't think they ever should have taken a strong a stance against it as they did. There may come a time where they miss some combination that makes TM look like a joke, and they'll need to change it for the good of the game. The backlash will only be worse if they do because of that comment they made.

As for TM itself, I think it's probably a bit overpowered. IMO, a better format would have been cost 3X instead of 5. Then you can only select a card up to cost X + 5. Now if you spend 5 on it, you can only get up to a cost 7. So no Walking Calamity without spending 8, and a greater chance of wasting the card.

On the other hand, you can spend a little less and still potentially get a decent card out with the bonus gem, which opens other possibilities. Still a significant nerf, but leaves it a powerful card nonetheless.

Metronomy
08-10-2015, 01:15 PM
Again, Mono Ruby will be a part of this because it completely smashes the decks that win against Titania. Countermagic, Verdict and Martyr are all terrible against a t1 Quash. It will be rock>scissors>paper>rock (Titania>MonoRuby>Control>Titania)


Again, look at the S/D Control deck, I checked and it's 11-3 against Titania in Bo1. I would even go as far and take ante games against Titania decks. And the deck is fine against non-Titania decks, except for Mono Ruby
(here are vids against Titania: https://youtu.be/z9uL8b0EmYI and http://youtu.be/65iPg0kzeTw)

And I would argue that Titania decks are perfect for Bo1, but worse in Bo3

I havent read all 9 pages but I want to respond to that. 14 bo1 matches arent nearly enough to establish a win ratio. 80% win ratios have the best hard counter decks in mtg. It doesnt get much better than that usually. So I want you to do more matches and report again. And of course...the question then becomes how good is your win ratio against other decks. But if your deck is indeed a hard counter against titania and does have a 80% win ratio then that would be a good starting point. So far I remain doubtful..

tyra
08-10-2015, 01:28 PM
I havent read all 9 pages but I want to respond to that. 14 bo1 matches arent nearly enough to establish a win ratio. 80% win ratios have the best hard counter decks in mtg. It doesnt get much better than that usually. So I want you to do more matches and report again. And of course...the question then becomes how good is your win ratio against other decks. But if your deck is indeed a hard counter against titania and does have a 80% win ratio then that would be a good starting point. So far I remain doubtful..
will do, though I am in my last weeks of finishing my masters thesis and thus have not much time... but the matchup feels VERY good. I am not saying that 80% is a long term equilibrium, it just was at that point :)

loopholist3
08-10-2015, 01:33 PM
But that reasoning is bad IMO. Banning a card devalues a card just as much (or more) as an errata does. I mean, they'd basically be saying "we don't want to change that card because it would devalue what you paid for it. Instead we just won't let you play with the card at all. You're welcome."

Cards that can't be played don't have much value...

Banning a card doesn't prevent it from being played, only from being played in standard. This does devalue the card, but unbalanced PvE cards are currently worth more than most balanced PvP cards. Nerfing it down to the perfect value so that it is slightly better than balanced would probably be the best, but being able to do that is hard, and requires a lot of work. So they rather ban, and maintain the OP status for PvE and Wild West, than nerf, and risk making it unplayable in both PvE and PvP.

Falaris
08-10-2015, 01:40 PM
In this case they can just change Cress, which I think is perfectly valid. Changing Cress to RRW to activate instead of RW changes the dynamic quite a bit. Majesty decks for the most part focus on wild with a splash of ruby. Making its draws a bit less consistent would go a long way.

WWKnight
08-10-2015, 01:49 PM
Great post. I want to add my 2cp here if it matters.

I came from another dTCG that I will not name that put out sets and cards like Hex. The one thing about Hex that really bothers me and I can only speak as someone who only recently started playing. The statement that I hear that the devs will never change a card once released.

I can not wrap my head around that statement. I can understand not wanting to change/ban/errata a card once it is in the pool. But to stand on that when something may be game altering in anyway to the point that it makes the game NOT fun to play against said card or combination of cards seems foolhardy.

This every thing happened in the other game I played. The card was what we would call "broken". It was in every deck and made the game not fun in any way to have to worry about it being cast once you saw the "colors" they were playing. The devs had to go back in and rework the card which meant they had to change all the cards that folks had already accumulated.

Was it a popular decision? Heck no it wasn't but it was needed for the health of the game at that time. I would rather HEX step back and say that the promise while the intention was honorable, is not realistic to hold to.

It is much easier to rip the scab off now as opposed to let the infection fester until it ruins the game.

Now all that being said, I am not sure whether or not TM is completely busted but I highlighted the part of the previous post that makes the most sense to me. The threshold cost of the card is extremely under-costed compared to the power of its ilk (Parade) which is two threshold and does not do nearly as much to change the game as TM regardless of the cost difference.

It seems that it would be an easy enough fix that would not nerf the card but put it inline with what I hope the devs intentions were for the card. I am sure they do not want any cards they release to stagnate the game to where no one wants to play constructed. That would basically make the game almost unplayable because what would be the point of collecting cards you will never use for anything?

So the suggestion of making TM more threshold intensive would allow those playing against it feel they have a shot at beating the deck without destroying the usefulness of the card. Adding the caveat of meeting the threshold of the card copied from TM seems like it would be harder to implement in the short term although, would be a way to "fix" it.

And I left that same game exactly because they went and changed a whole bunch of cards and I lost all faith in the developers having any clue.

Keep in mind, I was their biggest kickstarter backer AND an employee. I had a lot of faith to lose, and the patch where they "fixed" a whole bunch of cards, some of them 18 months after they were released, is the last patch I played.

Saeijou
08-10-2015, 01:50 PM
In this case they can just change Cress, which I think is perfectly valid. Changing Cress to RRW to activate instead of RW changes the dynamic quite a bit. Majesty decks for the most part focus on wild with a splash of ruby. Making its draws a bit less consistent would go a long way.

i think making it activating at 4 charges is better

IronPheasant
08-10-2015, 02:04 PM
Yeah, it's a busted card. Elvish Piper should take an entire turn to activate, and only play a card you have in hand. It shouldn't play the dude immediately AND dig for him at the same time AND filter out non-creature draws from your future turns.

Generally there should be a pause when you're creating a card with an unbounded power level.

DaethStaR
08-10-2015, 02:31 PM
And I left that same game exactly because they went and changed a whole bunch of cards and I lost all faith in the developers having any clue.

Keep in mind, I was their biggest kickstarter backer AND an employee. I had a lot of faith to lose, and the patch where they "fixed" a whole bunch of cards, some of them 18 months after they were released, is the last patch I played.

lol wwknight. I remember your name. 18m is a LONG time to wait to fix busted cards. A lot of cards should have never made it out of QA which i was a part of. They didn't listen although they said they wanted our feedback, and ultimately, I feel it is going to be the death of "that game'. I am hoping that Hex is willing to look at things from a distance. Again, I am not saying TM is broken or not. We need more standard matches to happen and such to really see if it is a card that should not be as it is. I do not feel there is nothing wrong with "errata" on a card. I guess I wonder if the value of one card in a persons collection is worth crippling a format over it?

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 02:33 PM
The cards changed. Card wording changed that resulted in functional change. Maybe it didn't meet you level of importance. If there was a bug it was in the Hex's development process that allowed cards to get released that was than different than developer's intent.

Also I am fine with minor tweaks, but for those drawing a hardline. We have already crossed it.

Unless you can show me the development version that doesn't have the text they 'added', or that the development intent was not to function exactly how they fixed it to function, I've gotta go with the devs on whether it was a bug or a change. If they always tested the set to work a certain way, and it was not working that way when coded into the game, it's a bug. Regardless what the card may have said in client at any point.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 02:37 PM
Unless you can show me the development version that doesn't have the text they 'added', or that the development intent was not to function exactly how they fixed it to function, I've gotta go with the devs on whether it was a bug or a change. If they always tested the set to work a certain way, and it was not working that way when coded into the game, it's a bug. Regardless what the card may have said in client at any point.
That's the sound of handwaving.

bofedy
08-10-2015, 02:40 PM
"I can understand not wanting to change/ban/errata a card once it is in the pool."

Um hex said they would only ban PvP cards as they want cards to keep as much value as possable while keeping faith that cards would not just get buffed and nerfed all the time HOWEVER hex did say they will nerf PvE cards and buff if needed and out right ban hello shadow stalker.

So im hoping for a hammer sound in the future.

RamzaBehoulve
08-10-2015, 02:56 PM
I really don't care if they nerf a card. Hearthstone has been doing it all the time since closed beta. It's expected if it's breaking the game's balance (which TM has yet to be shown to in a normal constructed tournament). That said, Hearthstone gives the option of refounding the full cost of the card in crafting material so you can make another if you wish. So I guess until we get a crafting system, it's going to be hard to reimburse players for their purchase.

However, officially Hex is still in beta, so it's really the last time they can get away with changing a card without people making too much of a fuss about it.

Vorpal
08-10-2015, 02:59 PM
I really don't care if they nerf a card. Hearthstone has been doing it all the time since closed beta.

Not analogous at all. Hearthstone is a CCG. Hex is a TCG. There is no trading in Hearthstone.

When a card in hearthstone is nerfed, you are able to turn it into any other card of the same rarity, for free. Your account value remains the same and no one has lost anything.

If they nerfed titania's majesty, what are you going to do for people who spend thousands of plat buying it on the AH?

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 03:02 PM
That's the sound of handwaving.

Seems like the sound of a development process where the designers are not the programmers, and very short bug fixing phases.

asdf2000
08-10-2015, 03:06 PM
I just played a game in constructed gauntlet where I literally had every answer for him. ignore the ramp weenies, bounce periwinkle at my 2 shards, counter the periwinkle at 3, counter the crocosaur, counter the next crocosaur, am 1 card up he has 0 cards he draws titania's majesty i instantly die.


me 3 counters in first 8 hands, counter everything, still die at like turn 6

it's actually pretty hilarious

Malakili
08-10-2015, 03:06 PM
But that reasoning is bad IMO. Banning a card devalues a card just as much (or more) as an errata does. I mean, they'd basically be saying "we don't want to change that card because it would devalue what you paid for it. Instead we just won't let you play with the card at all. You're welcome."

Cards that can't be played don't have much value...

Cards would be banned in a format by format basis. This is problematic only because we don't currently have different constructed formats, but they are a fundamental part of the game that we are still waiting on. A card might be degenerate in one format but simply another powerful card in another.

Luckily, we don't need to be speculative about this, we have a working model of how a game like this with banned cards works and we know that banning cards in a format doesn't actually tank their price. Particularly as long as it is playable in other formats.

On the other hand, changing a card that is already printed destablizes the economy because people can't really count on their card to be the same card in the future. That has a TREMENDOUSLY negative impact on a game where your collection has value. Stability matters quite a bit, and saying "Yeah, we might nerf powerful cards" throws a wrench into the entire economy.

Tazelbain
08-10-2015, 03:10 PM
Seems like the sound of a development process where the designers are not the programmers, and very short bug fixing phases.

People can decide for themselves if changes were justifiable. Moving on.

What if the Destruction gem effect required the troop to be in play to work. That would make a few counters better?

Axle
08-10-2015, 03:15 PM
It would probably make the gem not worth it and we'd move to using the card to grab more kill-proof threats with another gem. A lot of the power of the gem in constructed play comes from how little interaction there is once your card hits the board.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 03:26 PM
People can decide for themselves if changes were justifiable. Moving on.

That assumes that they weren't implementation errors rather than changes. If they were changes they aren't justifiable. Period. Changing the cards after release is not okay. Fixing errors in their implementation absolutely is okay. The sets should be reflections of the design. If there's a bug, or even card text left off of cards between design and being programmed into the client those things should be fixed. Otherwise the entire design of the set can be f'd up by a silly programming error.

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 03:28 PM
Gwaer is right - this is why Pterobot still doesn't stay at 7 cost while in play, despite us having had an article explaining that the card was intended to work that way (I am wondering what precisely happened between then and now anyway? It seems entirely possible that they decided the change was unnecessary.)

magic_gazz
08-10-2015, 04:21 PM
Why are people discussing nerfs. Hex have said no nerfs to PvP cards. You can think its a good idea all you want but its not happening.

As for should Majesty be banned? Probably.

Someone should get some data and see how often when someone casts Majesty they win the game and how often they lose. They don't need to win the game that turn, just win after casting Majesty. Im pretty sure there is a point that means its ban worthy. Like if a player casts Majesty (a 5 cost card that can be cast on turn 3) and they are then 90% to win the game there is obviously a problem.

Cressida should probably be removed too. Just asks for trouble.

Nero_Jinous
08-10-2015, 04:27 PM
My problem with majesty is the low skill ceiling required to pilot the deck to victory and how 1 card top decks swing 20 to 1 heath 0 cards on board games.

That being said there is definitely a difference between a good pilot and a bad pilot.

If anything the set 3 only tournament taught players how to use a majesty deck and not rely on it as their wincon, while in the VIP constructed(first few were constructed not sealed) people were purely going for the OTK.

So instead of having a bunch of people mindlessly slamming t3 majesty people will make decks with multiple options and consider the 2 resources their opponent is holding up. This becomes a battle of inevitability where the majesty play will just hardcast threats forcing their opponent to react then when out of 1 for 1 answers will punish with a majesty. During play testing I had around a 50% win rate vs majesty and it all came down to if they ran out of threats before I ran out of answers. Putting us in a topdeck war to decide who wins.


Summary: the card is not properly costed for how swingy it is and forces an awkward play style on your opponent that can be punished by a single topdeck.

tecnophi
08-10-2015, 05:00 PM
Why are people discussing nerfs. Hex have said no nerfs to PvP cards. You can think its a good idea all you want but its not happening.

As for should Majesty be banned? Probably.

Someone should get some data and see how often when someone casts Majesty they win the game and how often they lose. They don't need to win the game that turn, just win after casting Majesty. Im pretty sure there is a point that means its ban worthy. Like if a player casts Majesty (a 5 cost card that can be cast on turn 3) and they are then 90% to win the game there is obviously a problem.

Cressida should probably be removed too. Just asks for trouble.

I would like to pull the focus to the general game design intent. The question to me is that if Hex is intended to have a turn 3 ramp play (if not directly interrupted) that has a significant chance to A) instantly win, or B) puts the player in strong position to win with X turns.

In terms of deck building and in match decision making, that is one of the current benchmarks and with it's small window for the opposing player to response within, I think (as is) this benchmark will stick for a long time.

plaguedealer
08-10-2015, 05:28 PM
The card is meta defining for sure. The people who play alot more constructed than me say that it means low resource answers are required to stop it. Discard, martyr, ripple, verdict will stop it.

I think we will see majesty decks for a long time. But, I am not sure if it is something we will see in legacy decks three years from now (to me that is the definition of a op card). Regardless, I bet we will see more mana leak cards in set 4 (or other answers).

The main thing I don't like about majesty is that wild or ruby do not have many answers to it (other then to play majesty).

Biz
08-10-2015, 06:10 PM
i personally don't see much downside to banning/nerfing cards as long the developer eats the cost instead of the players

collections will actually have more value if constructed play has more appeal

Fyren
08-10-2015, 06:16 PM
i personally don't see much downside to banning/nerfing cards as long the developer eats the cost instead of the players

collections will actually have more value if constructed play has more appeal

Dude, that conversation was about banning versus nerfing. No one, so far as I could tell, is for letting broken cards run unbanned and unnerfed in perpetuity. :p

Though what do you mean by "the developer eating the costs" in this case?

Biz
08-10-2015, 06:34 PM
Dude, that conversation was about banning versus nerfing. No one, so far as I could tell, is for letting broken cards run unbanned and unnerfed in perpetuity. :p

Though what do you mean by "the developer eating the costs" in this case?

like if a player spent 10K plat on making a deck that abuses titania's majesty and some part of that gets banned or nerfed, they should have a way to get at least 10K plat back by selling those cards back to the developer.

it's not an exact science, but the general idea is that players shouldn't end up in a worse situation just because the developer made a mistake

hex_colin
08-10-2015, 06:41 PM
like if a player spent 10K plat on making a deck that abuses titania's majesty and some part of that gets banned or nerfed, they should have a way to get at least 10K plat back by selling those cards back to the developer.

it's not an exact science, but the general idea is that players shouldn't end up in a worse situation just because the developer made a mistake

That's insanity. We make the market, HEX doesn't. Buyer beware, especially early in a set cycle. That's just part of the risk everyone assumes when they participate in a TCG economy.

ziggarius
08-10-2015, 07:01 PM
That's insanity. We make the market, HEX doesn't. Buyer beware, especially early in a set cycle. That's just part of the risk everyone assumes when they participate in a TCG economy.

This pretty much. As n00bie as i am to tcgs, i know that it has to be this way. Which is why hex will ban not nerf cards if it becomes degenerate.

Thrawn
08-10-2015, 07:20 PM
It seems likely we're going to be playing this set for a very long time so not much harm in waiting at least a little while to see if the deck stays so over represented without a solid counter.

ossuary
08-10-2015, 07:24 PM
There's a very important point that some people in this thread keep getting wrong.

Periwinkle is a SHE. :p

havocattack
08-10-2015, 08:15 PM
There's a very important point that some people in this thread keep getting wrong.

Periwinkle is a SHE. :p

Maybe I'm going nuts, but I'm pretty sure its a dude on the normal card and just like all the elf AA's, the gender swaps no? ;o

Xenavire
08-10-2015, 08:19 PM
Maybe I'm going nuts, but I'm pretty sure its a dude on the normal card and just like all the elf AA's, the gender swaps no? ;o

Periwinkle is a lore character, that is absolutely female. :p

Spiredore
08-10-2015, 08:22 PM
I'm pretty sure its a dude on the normal card and just like all the elf AA's, the gender swaps no? ;o

We know Periwinkle from 'The Accidental Knight'. She remains resolutely female throughout.

Zophie
08-10-2015, 08:29 PM
Periwinkle is a lore character, that is absolutely female. :p


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMXehqqR8J8

Zubrin
08-10-2015, 08:33 PM
What we really learned this past weekend is that Titania's Majesty is not a card, but the real Titania's Majesty are the players. We were Titania's Majesty all along.

havocattack
08-10-2015, 08:34 PM
Nuts confirmed and no nuts confirmed!

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 08:36 PM
Nuts confirmed and no nuts confirmed!

http://i.imgur.com/NPKnAlW.png

She's clearly a she, even with the lute covering her most predominant secondary sexual characteristics, even taking into account effeminate elfdom.

havocattack
08-10-2015, 08:37 PM
http://i.imgur.com/NPKnAlW.png

She's clearly a she, even with the lute covering her most predominant secondary sexual characteristics, even taking into account effeminate elfdom.

I was confirming that I was nuts and periwinkle has no nuts ;) but yea, after making the first post about elves changing gender on AA cards, I went back and looked at periwinkle more closely and realized I was wrong :P

Malakili
08-10-2015, 08:38 PM
Apparently this thread got weird while I was gone.

PentaChills
08-10-2015, 08:39 PM
Perhaps Zubrin is correct.
Perhaps if we look deep inside of ourselves, we'll all see the reflection of our souls that is Titania's Majesty.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 08:41 PM
Perhaps Zubrin is correct.
Perhaps if we look deep inside of ourselves, we'll all see the reflection of our souls that is Titania's Majesty.

Great, here comes to zubrin train.

Spiredore
08-10-2015, 08:44 PM
after making the first post about elves changing gender on AA cards, I went back and looked at periwinkle more closely and realized I was wrong :P

I don't think it's true for Constantina either. My bet would be that we won't see gender swaps for any card that portrays a specific character.

PentaChills
08-10-2015, 08:46 PM
Great, here comes to zubrin train.

I had to read this like seven times, the typo made it super hard to read for some reason.

Zophie
08-10-2015, 08:50 PM
Great, here comes to zubrin train.

It is here that zubrin comes to train.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 08:55 PM
I had to read this like seven times, the typo made it super hard to read for some reason.

We all know how poorly you deal with minor hiccups from your streaming, totally understandable. Glad you were able to get there.

Fyren
08-10-2015, 09:32 PM
I was confirming that I was nuts and periwinkle has no nuts ;) but yea, after making the first post about elves changing gender on AA cards, I went back and looked at periwinkle more closely and realized I was wrong :P

And here you had me thinking you were on about Schroedinger's Nuts.

EDIT: Actually, it occurs to me that a lot of males played female roles in Shakespearean plays...

Altima
08-10-2015, 09:50 PM
At this point I am not going to spend my money to make a construct deck because of this deck. Maybe I'm naiev but I enjoy more of slower meta than a game that finish in turn 3-4 thank to RNGsus.

Gwaer
08-10-2015, 09:55 PM
At this point I am not going to spend my money to make a construct deck because of this deck. Maybe I'm naiev but I enjoy more of slower meta than a game that finish in turn 3-4 thank to RNGsus.

I'll be totally frank and honest with you. I too enjoy a slower meta. I'm hoping enough anti TiMa tech exists to slow the game down a bit, a turn 7-8 win is much better to me. Heck I largely prefer even longer games. That all being said, you can't have all fast or slow metas in a TCG this deep. Sets will come and go that speed up and slow down the game. It's okay to not enjoy any particular format.

Malicus
08-10-2015, 10:32 PM
For my 2 cents a deck that lets a luck sac like me top 8 is great. The deck is really fun to play.

WWKnight
08-10-2015, 10:42 PM
I thought it was OP originally. Having tried to play the deck myself, the turn 3 win is the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Yes, the deck is still strong without it. I'd want to hope so. Decks that rely on one random win-con on the third turn tend to not be good. Why are we all upset that a deck is good?

havocattack
08-10-2015, 10:51 PM
I thought it was OP originally. Having tried to play the deck myself, the turn 3 win is the EXCEPTION, not the rule.

Yes, the deck is still strong without it. I'd want to hope so. Decks that rely on one random win-con on the third turn tend to not be good. Why are we all upset that a deck is good?

wut? It is not just relying on ONE random win-con... it has many ways to win... but ALSO has the ability to with with just 1 card BY ITSELF... that is the problem -_-

WWKnight
08-11-2015, 01:38 AM
It has many ways to win, one of which is random. Other decks have many ways to win too. Shall we ban them?

EDIT: For that ONE card to win by itself, it needs a) sufficent ramp to make it at all scary. Titania's Majesty on turn 5 isn't upsetting anyone. b) The right card in the top 5 cards of your 50 card deck (assuming turn 3 cast).

Thats not one card winning on it's own. That's the stars aligning. It isn't anywhere near as consistant as people would have you believe. As I said, I was worried about it too, until I made the deck and tried it myself. The turn 3 win is the dream you chase, it's not the main function of the deck.

VicMan
08-11-2015, 02:07 AM
Im glad some poeple start to realize that yes titania's majesty is strong but no not OP.
You can play titania's majesty and have a 1/1 troop.
The difference beetween titania's majesty and monorubis (gorefeast for exemple) is TM can win on this own yes but can do nothing, when monorubis play gorefeast it's over.

So yeah there is luck in this game but everybody know that deal with it4

CoolGer
08-11-2015, 03:57 AM
It has many ways to win, one of which is random. Other decks have many ways to win too. Shall we ban them?

EDIT: For that ONE card to win by itself, it needs a) sufficent ramp to make it at all scary. Titania's Majesty on turn 5 isn't upsetting anyone. b) The right card in the top 5 cards of your 50 card deck (assuming turn 3 cast).

Thats not one card winning on it's own. That's the stars aligning. It isn't anywhere near as consistant as people would have you believe. As I said, I was worried about it too, until I made the deck and tried it myself. The turn 3 win is the dream you chase, it's not the main function of the deck.

Its pretty much simle math. Gorefeast does not win on its own cause it needs setup. Same goes for Mastery of Time(imo the best card to compare with). These cards can win games, but they still need interaction with ur opponent, since u need a setup. Titanias has way to many good targets (Ozawa, Calamity, Rootfather, croco (this one is ok imo)). This card mostly wins on its own, thats the sad part about it. But easy to fix. Take away the socket or make it summon a troop with maximum cost 6 and its fine.

WWKnight
08-11-2015, 04:41 AM
And completely arbitary. Since elves mechanics is cost 5 or more, why would the wild card in a cycle themed around elves cap at 6? "fixing" a card with inelegant design does no-one any favours.

People say "Oh wow, great deck building. Titania + Calamity. No brainer" but the fact is that Titania looks at 5 cards. I swear most people would seem to think TM reads "Search your library for a troop and put it into play with this cards gem power". Mill them. 5th book them. Spider their deck up.

"Oh but we cant cause they cast it on turn 3" Well, Titiania is a 5 cost spell. So clearly, there is some set up to do this all before the 5th turn. Again, this deck doesn't get turn 3 Calamity or rootfather or ozawa every game. Thats a rare exception. Also, let's not lose sight of the fact that this tournament was done without the previous sets, where a lot of the answers can come from.

nickon
08-11-2015, 05:33 AM
Considering all the awkward abbreviations and gender confusion in this thread, I'm voting to call this metadeck Periwinkle's majestueus Tit's! ( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)

Just let me know when a line has been crossed ok? :o

Nero_Jinous
08-11-2015, 06:03 AM
And completely arbitary. Since elves mechanics is cost 5 or more, why would the wild card in a cycle themed around elves cap at 6? "fixing" a card with inelegant design does no-one any favours.

People say "Oh wow, great deck building. Titania + Calamity. No brainer" but the fact is that Titania looks at 5 cards. I swear most people would seem to think TM reads "Search your library for a troop and put it into play with this cards gem power". Mill them. 5th book them. Spider their deck up.

"Oh but we cant cause they cast it on turn 3" Well, Titiania is a 5 cost spell. So clearly, there is some set up to do this all before the 5th turn. Again, this deck doesn't get turn 3 Calamity or rootfather or ozawa every game. Thats a rare exception. Also, let's not lose sight of the fact that this tournament was done without the previous sets, where a lot of the answers can come from.

The setup required is 1 ruby shard 1 wild shard 1(either shard) 1 chlor(play it on t2)and charge power(There is currently 1 card in the game that prevents charge powers and 1 card that removes charges). This yields a t3 majesty. There is currently no answer to playing the 3 shards, so the only card in the setup process that can be stopped is the t2 chlor or t3 majesty. Also read Walking calamity. 5th book doesn't help. As soon as calamity hits the grave it will go back into their deck, so no discard and no mill will work on it.

Majesty is a 3-4 cost card not a 5 cost card because of the low level of interaction necessary to get the resources.

VicMan
08-11-2015, 07:05 AM
And again you forget the important part here : TM look the 5 forst cards not all the deck. In 5 match i never see TM onto Walking calamity, i see just one on crocosaurus and all the other that was just little elves.
Stop the hate guys.
And just for the records, I manage yesterdays to kill one opponent on turn 3 with a monorubis without gorefeast, so please tell me where is the interaction here.
Setup : Quash Ridge Tusker on turn one, any troop on turn 2, charge bot+Crackling Vortex on turn3+ Lionnel fynn+Soul of Battle.
yes that was luck but its the same thing than TM onto WC on turn 3.

Vorpal
08-11-2015, 07:18 AM
The setup required is 1 ruby shard 1 wild shard 1(either shard) 1 chlor(play it on t2)and charge power(There is currently 1 card in the game that prevents charge powers and 1 card that removes charges). This yields a t3 majesty. There is currently no answer to playing the 3 shards,

Demolition!

Xenavire
08-11-2015, 07:50 AM
Demolition!

Which you can only play if you are on the play, or are ramp yourself. ;) (Yes, I am aware it was a joke, but it would be a serious answer if TM wasn't so fast. :p)

Altima
08-11-2015, 08:04 AM
Anyway, you need to have at least 2 mana open to use counter/removal when TM deck have enough mana or there is a chance that you will lose next turn. This is definitely a big disadvantage.

Vorpal
08-11-2015, 08:27 AM
Which you can only play if you are on the play, or are ramp yourself. ;) (Yes, I am aware it was a joke, but it would be a serious answer if TM wasn't so fast. :p)

yeah. It's a bit of an issue you can die to a single card after having taken a grand total of two turns.

Even if you decided to deal with titanias by, I dunno, lifegain and cheap lethal troops, you don't really have time to do anything appreciable.

bootlace
08-11-2015, 09:05 AM
There's no way the HxE didn't know about the power of Titania's Majesty. It was probably introduced to target specific 'problems':

-Meta was way too slow, which usually meant the best control decks had a significant edge (=Sapphire domination)
-Really no T1 caliber combo decks to speak of
-Wild was never really a threat

Titania's Majesty fixed all three of these problems in one fell swoop (Quash Ridge Tusker also helps in terms of removing effectiveness of control decks).

Has it created new problems? I don' know, haven't really been able to access my cards since set 3 launched due to the massive memory bug (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=44420). But I'm pretty confident some good midrange deck will emerge that fare well against both Majesty and Quash. I mean Killblade of the Milky Eye (or Exarch of the Egg) with Shard Ward already shuts down a lot of what Majesty and QRT throws at you, and those are two cheap cards...Let's be patient and see.

Axle
08-11-2015, 09:34 AM
There's no way the HxE didn't know about the power of Titania's Majesty. It was probably introduced to target specific 'problems':

-Meta was way too slow, which usually meant the best control decks had a significant edge (=Sapphire domination)
-Really no T1 caliber combo decks to speak of
-Wild was never really a threat

Titania's Majesty fixed all three of these problems in one fell swoop (Quash Ridge Tusker also helps in terms of removing effectiveness of control decks).

Has it created new problems? I don' know, haven't really been able to access my cards since set 3 launched due to the massive memory bug (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=44420). But I'm pretty confident some good midrange deck will emerge that fare well against both Majesty and Quash. I mean Killblade of the Milky Eye (or Exarch of the Egg) with Shard Ward already shuts down a lot of what Majesty and QRT throws at you, and those are two cheap cards...Let's be patient and see.

Using kill card + shard ward to stop them is a 2-1 though and you might lose the war of attrition. You also can't really afford to drop an Exarch because the midrange blood decks rely on Vampires to apply pressure. If you go Exarch -> Princess, then you get wrecked by Crocosaur. For the blood decks to apply pressure they need to just sit on 1 vampire (or Totem if B/D) and hold back removal.

loopholist3
08-11-2015, 10:32 AM
I was going to save the deck for the next tournament, but I doubt I will have time to play. This was my attempt to make a counter to Titania by focusing mainly on quick troops. I don't have the time to test if it actually works, but I haven't seen many people trying to use quick troops, so I hope this creates some ideas for potential counters for the people who can actually play.

http://hex.tcgbrowser.com/#!/deck=26116

Kayas42
08-11-2015, 10:55 AM
"Oh but we cant cause they cast it on turn 3" Well, Titiania is a 5 cost spell. So clearly, there is some set up to do this all before the 5th turn.

Clearly it's easy to set up a turn 3 or 4 play of Titania's Majesty with only set 3 cards on a regular basis, especially with RampChamp(tm) Cressida. Remember, RampChamp(tm) happens as long as you get one of each shard color and 3 charges. It will be even more consistent with all 3 sets. If you watched the tournament this last weekend it was clearly not an issue.


Again, this deck doesn't get turn 3 Calamity or rootfather or ozawa every game. Thats a rare exception. Also, let's not lose sight of the fact that this tournament was done without the previous sets, where a lot of the answers can come from.

Assuming that you have 4 of each, Walking Calamity, Arborean Rootfather, Crocasaur and Ozawa in your deck. On turn 3 you have 50 cards left in your deck.
On a turn 3 Titania's Majesty:

Chances of pulling at least 1 of the 4 different Troops mentioned if all 16 cards are still in your deck: 87%
Chances of pulling at least 1 of the 4 different Troops mentioned if only 12 remain in your deck: 76%
Chances of pulling either a Walking Calamity or Ozawa if all 8 are still in your deck: 60%
Chances of pulling at least 1 specific troop if all 4 of that troop are left in your deck: 35%

I'd say a 76% chance to pull something useful is pretty good and that's assuming 4 of any of them are in your hand.

And 60% to get a OTK potential creature is hardly a "rare exception".

Elwinz
08-11-2015, 01:40 PM
"Oh but we cant cause they cast it on turn 3" Well, Titiania is a 5 cost spell. So clearly, there is some set up to do this all before the 5th turn. Again, this deck doesn't get turn 3 Calamity or rootfather or ozawa every game. Thats a rare exception. Also, let's not lose sight of the fact that this tournament was done without the previous sets, where a lot of the answers can come from.

If it was rare exception we wouldnt have this topic here and titania wouldnt be top deck. Rare exception combo deck wouldnt have made numerous 7-1s in big turnament

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 01:45 PM
If it was rare exception we wouldnt have this topic here and titania wouldnt be top deck. Rare exception combo deck wouldnt have made numerous 7-1s in big turnament

Lol, yea. That's why we had these exact same threads about gorefeast. It may turn out that majesty is busted but literally no one can say for sure right now.

Falaris
08-11-2015, 01:50 PM
Lol, yea. That's why we had these exact same threads about gorefeast. It may turn out that majesty is busted but literally no one can say for sure right now.

I disagree, you can absolutely say whether a card is busted, depending on your definition of busted. To me, something is busted if its environment-deforming, EVEN IF there are answers within the context of the environment for it. That's the case here. The card allows for a turn 3 win a prohibitive amount of the time. Every single deck in the environment needs to have the ability to stop (at quick speed) a turn 3 win. I don't know if Majesty will end up being the best deck in the environment, but do we really want an environment where decks can threaten turn 3 wins with any degree of regularity? I can definitively say I don't.

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 01:54 PM
It's a super intuitive card and crossida plus elf ramp plus walking calamity is not some obscure interaction. You may not like how this set is designed but that doesn't make something busted. Just like extinction shaped the meta in set 1 this can shape the meta in set 3 without being busted. As long as there is room for several decks to exist in a changing meta game then it's not broken it's just designed to force a very fast constructed set.

Werlix
08-11-2015, 02:00 PM
This card is one of the biggest design failure in this game.

5 Titania's deck in top 8 and 4 Titania's deck in top 4.

Maybe it is fine if you are going to say that this tournament is limited to only set 3. Maybe you will wait for it to ruin next VIP construct tournament before you really try to fix the problem.

Incoming rant.

So this is the kind of post that annoys me more than any other. A player takes a statistically tiny sample size (set 3 pretty much still has the "new card" smell) to make an illogical conclusion (a card dominates a set 3 only tournament so therefore it's OP in constructed) and then falls back to the new standard complaint line amongst ill-informed players. Not, "hey do you all think there a problem with X?", or "I think for reasons X and Y, Z might be a bit OP".. no no no... it's straight to the classic "game design is bad" call.

Do you even understand what you are saying? You can't say something is a "design failure" without a lot of backup. Game design incorporates the game as a whole. The story, the mechanics, the art, the user interface... You have a lot to prove to say that a single game element was designed badly. Sure you can say that you think the single element is overpowered in certain contexts. But then you'd be making a reasonable point which would take more than a few quick sentences to write. And we can't have that, can we?

And also you'd be basically making the point that the card is designed well. One of the design philosophies of most good TCGs is to make a bunch of cards feel massively powerful. Examples are Gorefeast, Mirror Knight, Angel of Dawn, Vampire King, Xentoth's Inquisitor, Soul Marble, Master Moss, Monsuun, Titania's Majesty etc... And when you have a whole bunch of these powerful cards that interact in different ways, then you have a vibrant, interesting, fun and dynamic card game. Sure this can lead to some decks having bad matchups, but that's the price you pay for those benefits. If we toned down these exciting cards, we'd basically be spending our games blocking 4/4s with 2/5s and yawning ourselves to sleep.

If you want a stale, boring, yet balanced game, then I suggest checking out Shadow Era. It feels like a game designed by players that always like to complain at "OP" things, and so designed a game where nothing is OP, but everything is boring instead.

Next time please refrain from calling out something as "bad design" without some actual discussion, evidence and reasoning.

asdf2000
08-11-2015, 02:06 PM
It's a super intuitive card and crossida plus elf ramp plus walking calamity is not some obscure interaction. You may not like how this set is designed but that doesn't make something busted. Just like extinction shaped the meta in set 1 this can shape the meta in set 3 without being busted. As long as there is room for several decks to exist in a changing meta game then it's not broken it's just designed to force a very fast constructed set.

I don't see what the interaction being obscure or not has to do with anything. Just sayin

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 02:08 PM
All that I have said, plus as much as I agree with werlix above this post, I am open to TiMa being busted. It is possible. It's a very fast card that might end the game if it isn't countered. It might be broken. My group has a couple of decks in our radar that seem to win vs it a lot, and not in bo1 gauntlets. In full test bo3 with sideboard match ups. If those hold up, then it's probably fine. If they just get blown out, and aren't legitimate wins vs most versions of the majesty deck then it might be busted. But it will take some actual standard constructed tournaments to know for sure.


I don't see what the interaction being obscure or not has to do with anything. Just sayin

That means it is far more likely to be a design choice rather than a mistake. Which is an excellent indicator of a format defining development choice rather than a format warping mistake.

VicMan
08-11-2015, 02:08 PM
Clearly it's easy to set up a turn 3 or 4 play of Titania's Majesty with only set 3 cards on a regular basis, especially with RampChamp(tm) Cressida. Remember, RampChamp(tm) happens as long as you get one of each shard color and 3 charges. It will be even more consistent with all 3 sets. If you watched the tournament this last weekend it was clearly not an issue.



Assuming that you have 4 of each, Walking Calamity, Arborean Rootfather, Crocasaur and Ozawa in your deck. On turn 3 you have 50 cards left in your deck.
On a turn 3 Titania's Majesty:

Chances of pulling at least 1 of the 4 different Troops mentioned if all 16 cards are still in your deck: 87%
Chances of pulling at least 1 of the 4 different Troops mentioned if only 12 remain in your deck: 76%
Chances of pulling either a Walking Calamity or Ozawa if all 8 are still in your deck: 60%
Chances of pulling at least 1 specific troop if all 4 of that troop are left in your deck: 35%

I'd say a 76% chance to pull something useful is pretty good and that's assuming 4 of any of them are in your hand.

And 60% to get a OTK potential creature is hardly a "rare exception".


Tell me what is the chance to have titania's majesty in hand ?
Don't use number if you don't know how to use them ...

Again I face TM, I win 3 out of 5 with a deck i made without thinking at TM (in fact i did the deck in 5 minutes).
The worst i have in this 5 BO3 was turn 4 TM with syyn.

Experiment always beat theory. Experiment TM you will see that not broken.
Im sure a lot of talented poeple will figure out how to beat that.

JohnDruitt
08-11-2015, 02:14 PM
48-52% depending on going first/second. Even greater odds if we include Eye of Creation as alterative wincon.

asdf2000
08-11-2015, 02:19 PM
to gwaer:

Oh ok yeah, it does seem hard to believe the interaction between all these cards isn't intentional. There are so many r/w cards that go together, and it's fairly obvious. But then again, majesty was changed from it's original design right? So it does seem like it's at least a possibility that it wasn't adequately tested. I don't know anything about that stuff though.

Tazelbain
08-11-2015, 03:02 PM
All that I have said, plus as much as I agree with werlix above this post, I am open to TiMa being busted. It is possible. It's a very fast card that might end the game if it isn't countered. It might be broken. My group has a couple of decks in our radar that seem to win vs it a lot, and not in bo1 gauntlets. In full test bo3 with sideboard match ups. If those hold up, then it's probably fine. If they just get blown out, and aren't legitimate wins vs most versions of the majesty deck then it might be busted. But it will take some actual standard constructed tournaments to know for sure.It's been 3 weeks and our first show and tell is a month away.

Eredyn
08-11-2015, 03:09 PM
Majesty isn't a combo deck. The card does not combo with anything. It hits your hand, you throw it down ASAP, and you have a great chance of hitting something that immediately wins you the game.

Comparison point:

Ruby Shard
Ruby Shard
Ruby Shard
Ruby Shard
Ruby Shard
Sapphire Shard
Gorefeast

Wild Shard
Wild Shard
Wild Shard
Wild Shard
Wild Shard
Ruby Shard
Titania's Majesty

One of these hands is keepable and quite likely to win you the game against most decks. The other is not.

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 03:17 PM
If I list a no shard hand that's keepable with robots and any other deck that would never dream of keeping a no shard hand does that prove anything? I don't think so. You keep a 6 resources hand with a majesty in it vs a quash Ridge deck, or even a set 1-2 gorefeast deck and it's not very likely to win.

It's a silly premise. You can argue about what a combo deck is or isn't, but if you majesty into 5 spider eggs or resources or even another majesty, you're certainly not winning the game off of that.

f5shooter
08-11-2015, 03:40 PM
If I list a no shard hand that's keepable with robots and any other deck that would never dream of keeping a no shard hand does that prove anything? I don't think so. You keep a 6 resources hand with a majesty in it vs a quash Ridge deck, or even a set 1-2 gorefeast deck and it's not very likely to win.

It's a silly premise. You can argue about what a combo deck is or isn't, but if you majesty into 5 spider eggs or resources or even another majesty, you're certainly not winning the game off of that.

If you watched the Diamond cup.. the first game the Mono Ruby player had about as good a start as he possibly could.

Turn 1 Quash
Turn 2 Quash
Turn 3 gets Cressida to 1 health.

Turn 4 loses to a Majesty into Calamity.... It was the first featured game in the stream.

I have no idea if the Titania players started with 6 shards and a TM, but he could have.....

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 03:55 PM
So all he needed was to play a 1/1 troop turn three and not attack with it and he would have won? Seems legit. Two quashes as the only cards you told me about doesn't seem like the best hand he could hope for, when literally any blocker played that turn, swinging as normal with the quashes and then winning the following turn seems superior to losing. Or just having a burn I guess for that last point, seems better.

At this point people are just being silly. I had these exact same discussions about gorefeast, wasn't broken then isn't broken now. We'll see about majesty. Could be broken. Talking about a set 3 only tournament where it performed as expected isn't getting us any closer to anything remotely resembling a determination.

tecnophi
08-11-2015, 05:04 PM
It's been 3 weeks and our first show and tell is a month away.

I believe the next VIP tournament is constructed at the end of this month, and likely that the 4-0 undefeated decks will be published before the next FiveShards tournament.

Xenavire
08-11-2015, 05:08 PM
I believe the next VIP tournament is constructed at the end of this month, and likely that the 4-0 undefeated decks will be published before the next FiveShards tournament.

As nice as VIP is, it doesn't always give a clear representation of the meta (which is strange, but oddly true.) Most VIP tournaments have been showing high numbers of certain decks, and after the diamond cup I am expecting a very large number of Majesty decks (and when a majority enters with a single deck, the chances of those going 4-0 is rather high.) I am hoping whatever isn't a TM deck in the 4-0 list is a good example of an evolving meta, but I don't think we will know for sure until the next shard cup.

Speaking of the shard cup, I am really looking forward to the wild cup (I missed it last time.)

Selanius
08-11-2015, 09:30 PM
As nice as VIP is, it doesn't always give a clear representation of the meta (which is strange, but oddly true.)

I have to disagree with this. VIP Constructed Tournaments and 5 Shards tournaments ARE the meta. If it doesn't match up with the meta in your head your imaginary meta is wrong. There are only two real places people play Constructed seriously and these are it until HEXEnt puts out something else.

Gwaer
08-11-2015, 09:40 PM
Xenavire kind of has a point. The shard cup meta does seem to be largely divorced from the vip meta. I can only assume that's because a lot of people are vips that don't actually pay attention to the third party tournaments? I really don't have a good explanation for why it happens either.

magic_gazz
08-11-2015, 09:41 PM
VIP is less serious as you only need 2 wins to profit.

asdf2000
08-11-2015, 10:02 PM
Yeah I would say in general VIP is just less serious. Shard cup is more prestigious(lol).

ok, sorry for laughing. shard cup is awesome. but hex still has a way to go on the competitive side.
it really is just more prestigious than vip tourneys though. hell my plan for vip tourney is just play tusker rush and collect my wins while watching tv

wolzarg
08-11-2015, 10:08 PM
I played the diamond cup and had issue with cressidia ramp a single time and that was because my opponent pulled a rather surprising play by duking his permatapped calamity. Now i will say that i think the deck is too fast and i think the interactions are too few, the topdecks are too live.

But this all makes a deck that i personally find unfun to play against not a deck that i know is a bad deck for the game. I found blood diamond imensely fun to play and you can argue that it is/was more skill based and interactive but i really don't think the difference was that much. We complain about turn 3 calamity but really how much worse is that compared to a turn 2 angel backed by control spells.

I obviously hope that the meta evens out as i dislike the deck on many levels and that if it doesn't we see our first ban. But as far as the tournament goes for showing results of a specific deck i lost 0-2 to shift necrotic and won 2-0 against cresidia decks. This sample size is pathetically low but the results honestly are as expected by me as i thought i would face more elf ramp.

Vorpal
08-12-2015, 06:50 AM
If you watched the Diamond cup.. the first game the Mono Ruby player had about as good a start as he possibly could.

Turn 1 Quash
Turn 2 Quash
Turn 3 gets Cressida to 1 health.

Turn 4 loses to a Majesty into Calamity.... It was the first featured game in the stream.

I guess scorch isn't as underpowered as we thought!

Vorpal
08-12-2015, 06:52 AM
As nice as VIP is, it doesn't always give a clear representation of the meta (which is strange, but oddly true.) Most VIP tournaments have been showing high numbers of certain decks, and after the diamond cup I am expecting a very large number of Majesty decks (and when a majority enters with a single deck, the chances of those going 4-0 is rather high.) I am hoping whatever isn't a TM deck in the 4-0 list is a good example of an evolving meta, but I don't think we will know for sure until the next shard cup.

Speaking of the shard cup, I am really looking forward to the wild cup (I missed it last time.)

Right, but any good player would know this, and if a good anti-titania deck existed, he would play it and stomp all the titanias and so you'd see a lot of anti-titanias in the 4-0 bracket. So clearly, I cannot take the deck in front of you!

Xenavire
08-12-2015, 07:33 AM
Right, but any good player would know this, and if a good anti-titania deck existed, he would play it and stomp all the titanias and so you'd see a lot of anti-titanias in the 4-0 bracket. So clearly, I cannot take the deck in front of you!

My point was mostly that even if a few counter decks exist, they won't all be identical, and they will still be small in number compared to the 4-0 TM decks (simply due to the number of people walking in with TM.)

But people will pick up on those counter decks, and then the sapphire cup will roll around and things will most likely shake out very differently.

I do see some hope at the moment in early testing of a new deck, but I am unlikely to be entering this months VIP (simply because I ended up getting all the AA's I needed by entering the sealed event last month.) It might end up in the hands of my guild members though... Assuming the testing goes well. :p

Kayas42
08-12-2015, 09:28 AM
Examples are Gorefeast, Mirror Knight, Angel of Dawn, Vampire King, Xentoth's Inquisitor, Soul Marble, Master Moss, Monsuun, Titania's Majesty etc...

Next time please refrain from calling out something as "bad design" without some actual discussion, evidence and reasoning.

And of all those powerful set defining and environment defining cards, only Titania's Majesty can flat out win the game by playing it on an empty board, no cards in hand on a top deck. You can counter 3 of them, destroy their hand, wipe the board with Extinction, do everything right in a game and in the end a single top deck and you lose. That's why it's scary, that's why people complain and that's why it's bad design.

Note: I said can, because there's always a chance it misses.

We'll see how the Sapphire Cup turns out. I suspect that we'll have more of the same though. At the very least it will restrict the top decks to either being a R/W TM Style deck or a deck that tries to stop it.

Gwaer
08-12-2015, 09:34 AM
Yea, sorry. Cards that can win without a response aren't bad design by default. We'll see how it shapes up. The only real question is can other decks exist and win reliably vs majesty decks.

Kayas42
08-12-2015, 11:37 AM
Yea, sorry. Cards that can win without a response aren't bad design by default. We'll see how it shapes up. The only real question is can other decks exist and win reliably vs majesty decks.

Of course there can be cards which played untested can win you the game. Burn to the Ground for example can do this. Eye of Creation could potentially hit 3 Rampaging Tarrasque or something crazy. I'm not saying there should not or can not be cards like this. But cards like these take time or setup to accomplish that feat. This was meant to be used in conjunction with the arguments that accompany the rest of the thread where the timing and ease of playing the one "i win" card for as little resources as required is the problem.

It's similar to the infamous example of Channel-Fireball. Note which card was banned/restricted. Not the finishing card Fireball but the enabler Channel. TM enables a win in either a short time or from nowhere similar to the Channel-Fireball combo.

But as you said, we'll see. It may be a lot of red flag waiving for nothing.

nicosharp
08-12-2015, 12:07 PM
Just another weird note...
It's peculiar to me why Flaring Passions got a nerf after test server, and Time's Offering and Ozawa's Gift never made the game, while Titania's went unchecked. So, obviously, if they had a problem with this card, we would have already seen something happen to it's design. I think there is a strong intention to make Wild constructed viable, and both Titania's and Crocosaur speed it into contention.

WWKnight
08-12-2015, 02:20 PM
What was Ozawa's Gift and Time's offering?

thegreybetween
08-12-2015, 02:24 PM
Ozawa's Dance - 6[D] - Basic Action. Socketable Major. Troops in your deck get all socketed powers of this.

Time's Offering - 2[S] - Quick Action. Socketable Minor. Void target troop you control. It gets "At the end of your turn, if this is in your void, put it into play" this turn. That troop gets all socketed powers of this.

Source: http://www.hexprimal.com/spoilers/

Too bad to see these go away. Time's Offering was the card I was most excited about during Spoilergeddon. I hope it comes back at some point.

EDIT: That said, it is no surprise why they disappeared. Ozawa's and that damned Ruby damage gem would be ridiculous (actually, with any of a few Major gems). And Time's Offering has crazy combo potential with any card that has enter-play effects. I'm not at all surprised if they stumbled onto some broken interactions there. That said, the design space of an effect like Time's Offering is soooo fun. I really hope they find a way to make it work reasonably.

hex_colin
08-12-2015, 02:30 PM
Ozawa's Dance - 6[D] - Basic Action. Socketable Major. Troops in your deck get all socketed powers of this.

Time's Offering - 2[S] - Quick Action. Socketable Minor. Void target troop you control. It gets "At the end of your turn, if this is in your void, put it into play" this turn. That troop gets all socketed powers of this.

Source: http://www.hexprimal.com/spoilers/

Too bad to see these go away. Time's Offering was the card I was most excited about during Spoilergeddon. I hope it comes back at some point.

EDIT: That said, it is no surprise why they disappeared. Ozawa's and that damned Ruby damage gem would be ridiculous (actually, with any of a few Major gems). And Time's Offering has crazy combo potential with any card that has enter-play effects. I'm not at all surprised if they stumbled onto some broken interactions there. That said, the design space of an effect like Time's Offering is soooo fun. I really hope they find a way to make it work reasonably.

Remember that cards don't make it for many reasons. Sometimes it's power level. Sometimes it's thematic. Sometimes it's just implementation issues. We generally don't know for sure why any given spoiled card doesn't make it to live...

WWKnight
08-12-2015, 02:52 PM
Wow. Those are awesome. Hopefully they at least get released in PvE, if not a later set.

ossuary
08-12-2015, 04:55 PM
Well, considering Time's Offering is the same power as Mistlord (minus the minor gem socket), hopefully we will see more of that kind of thing in the future. Phasing is fun (and highly annoying for your opponents). ;)

thegreybetween
08-12-2015, 05:10 PM
Yeah, I was very excited to see an analog for phasing here. The big difference with Mistlord is that he only targets himself (outside of PvE equipment), so it is much easier to limit the scope of the shenanigans. Time's Offering having not only the potential to target any troop, but to also imbue it with socketed powers, introduces a great many interactions which could prove problematic without sufficient testing.

I'm not sure why TO didn't make the cut, but I wasn't too surprised. I really hope we see more phasing-esque cards in the future, be they Time's Offering or otherwise.

Malicus
08-13-2015, 04:08 AM
Yeah, I was very excited to see an analog for phasing here. The big difference with Mistlord is that he only targets himself (outside of PvE equipment), so it is much easier to limit the scope of the shenanigans. Time's Offering having not only the potential to target any troop, but to also imbue it with socketed powers, introduces a great many interactions which could prove problematic without sufficient testing.

I'm not sure why TO didn't make the cut, but I wasn't too surprised. I really hope we see more phasing-esque cards in the future, be they Time's Offering or otherwise.

Mistlord has shift so you can put it on anything - my favourite is a terrorantula

Tazelbain
08-13-2015, 06:16 AM
Storm Cloud couldn't make it into Set 01 but still came out in Set 02.

Ertzi
08-13-2015, 10:04 AM
I made a PvE Majesty deck with Ozawa, but he does not actually work in the deck, or he is bugged. He always dies as soon as I play him via Titania's Majesty and deals 0 damage to opponent. So for some reason the check for his att/def does not happen when he comes into play. I had 18 life and played him with Majesty just a second ago, but he dies instantly again. What am I not understanding? Is he working as intended?

Xenavire
08-13-2015, 10:09 AM
I made a PvE Majesty deck with Ozawa, but he does not actually work in the deck, or he is bugged. He always dies as soon as I play him via Titania's Majesty and deals 0 damage to opponent. So for some reason the check for his att/def does not happen when he comes into play. I had 18 life and played him with Majesty just a second ago, but he dies instantly again. What am I not understanding? Is he working as intended?

Did you have any equips on for Ozawa? Because sometimes equips cause bugs, and I would not be surprised if copy + equipment is bugging Ozawa.

Ertzi
08-13-2015, 10:14 AM
Did you have any equips on for Ozawa? Because sometimes equips cause bugs, and I would not be surprised if copy + equipment is bugging Ozawa.

Yeah, I have him equipped. I will try without them when I lose this Arena run. I will inform the results when I have the chance to replicate the play. Thanks.

Xenavire
08-13-2015, 10:16 AM
Yeah, I have him equipped. I will try without them when I lose this Arena run. I will inform the results when I have the chance to replicate the play. Thanks.

Happy to help, and you should write up a report when you figure out the cause. :)

Ertzi
08-13-2015, 10:19 AM
Happy to help, and you should write up a report when you figure out the cause. :)

Sure, I'll write a report if I can replicate the results a few more times and it is not on the bug forums yet. I would be surprised if it wasn't. Such an obvious and talked-about combo. That is why I tried it. :D

Kilo24
08-13-2015, 10:38 AM
Sure, I'll write a report if I can replicate the results a few more times and it is not on the bug forums yet. I would be surprised if it wasn't. Such an obvious and talked-about combo. That is why I tried it. :D

Here (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=44853) and here (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=45271).

Ertzi
08-13-2015, 10:56 AM
Here (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=44853) and here (http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=45271).

That's what I thought. Thank you, sir. Saved me some redundant writing. Although I would have probably found the threads before posting, because I would have searched for them. Just was able to confirm that unequipped Ozawa works fine. Oh, HEX, the shenanigans you cook up.

Timlagor
08-13-2015, 04:51 PM
Interesting idea that the AH 5% could give you insurance against nerfs/bans*: if you bought a card through AH and it gets hit then you can sell it back to CZE for the price you paid (assuming you still have it). There could potentially be abuse by conspiring to overpay for cards you expect to get nerffed/banned but that would be pretty risky and the policy could potentially have a cap based on average prices and/or available cards number of cards (if you have more than 4, could have bought it cheaper or pay a clearly excessive price then you get no insurance -might need a popup warning on that last one)

..of course having an AH system that actually works well for the casual user would be rather more helpful.

I think the no-nerf policy is bonkers ...and reckon they could still change it for future sets without seriously undermining their credibility (I agree it would be bad to change the policy for already-released cards)

ossuary
08-13-2015, 07:15 PM
People who continue to say "nerfing PVP cards would be fine" simply don't understand how TCGs work. It's not a reasonable request or suggestion, and fortunately CZE understands this. It will never happen.

Thrawn
08-13-2015, 07:27 PM
People who continue to say "nerfing PVP cards would be fine" simply don't understand how TCGs work. It's not a reasonable request or suggestion, and fortunately CZE understands this. It will never happen.

Indeed. The fact that Hex is digital or a newer game are completely irrelevant to the reasons why cards can not be nerfed after release.

Fyren
08-13-2015, 07:28 PM
People who continue to say "nerfing PVP cards would be fine" simply don't understand how TCGs work. It's not a reasonable request or suggestion, and fortunately CZE understands this. It will never happen.

I don't suppose you could enlighten on this particular topic? Articles you can point to, etc?

asdf2000
08-13-2015, 07:36 PM
I don't suppose you could enlighten on this particular topic? Articles you can point to, etc?

I'd imagine a primary reason if not the only reason is that you have purchased an item for real money, and if they changed the card they would be essentially taking back the purchase but not refunding the money (which has indefinite value so they can't really refund it anyways).

Xenavire
08-13-2015, 07:36 PM
Indeed. The fact that Hex is digital or a newer game are completely irrelevant to the reasons why cards can not be nerfed after release.

Absolutely agree.

Hieronymous
08-13-2015, 08:23 PM
I don't suppose you could enlighten on this particular topic? Articles you can point to, etc?

There were quotes from Cory on this topic during the kickstarter; it was basically stated as an ironclad rule that they would never nerf PvP cards -- if necessary ban from tournaments, but not nerf.

The short version is that the PvP cards are collectible, and nerfs harm the value of the collectible. PvE cards, generally speaking, aren't purchased with real money in the same fashion, at least not directly. We've actually already seen them apply this policy -- Subtle Striker and something else are banned in PvE, rather than nerfed or changed.

If there's a hole in this argument it's that PvE weapons and gear and cards are swiftly becoming collectible investments also -- see: slaughtergear prices -- so really they probably shouldn't be "nerfing" them either. But w/e, in PvE, you have to balance the game in a different way anyway.

Fyren
08-13-2015, 08:30 PM
I'd imagine a primary reason if not the only reason is that you have purchased an item for real money, and if they changed the card it would be essentially taking back the purchase but not refunding the money (which has indefinite value so they can't really refund it anyways).

Sure, and I don't think you'll find anyone here who'll argue those things should be done without the greatest of reluctance, but surely banning cards is a nerf as well? Or should impact value?

Maybe I don't "get" TCG economies, true, and they will not be the same as MMO economies, where most of my trade experience originates. What brief time I did spend playing MtG was not spent heavily engaged with its economy. But the tone I'm getting from the posts just prior to yours is that it should be self evident why bans are acceptable and nerfs are not; to me this is not obvious. I'd like the long form explanation.

ossuary
08-13-2015, 08:35 PM
Bans affect a single format. Changing the card affects everything (and likely makes the card worthless, since it would break whatever combo made the card good and valuable in the first place). There have been a number of threads discussing this in very great detail in the ancient past of the forums - try searching general discussion for "nerf" and find an old thread with several hundred pages, it's worth reading if you would like to know more about the logistics.

Aradon
08-13-2015, 08:46 PM
Bans can be done selectively by format, meaning that a card banned from constructed tournaments could still be played in limited or PvE, retaining most of its value. Nerfs pull the rug out from under people in terms of buying something.

asdf2000
08-13-2015, 08:48 PM
Sure, and I don't think you'll find anyone here who'll argue those things should be done without the greatest of reluctance, but surely banning cards is a nerf as well? Or should impact value?

Maybe I don't "get" TCG economies, true, and they will not be the same as MMO economies, where most of my trade experience originates. What brief time I did spend playing MtG was not spent heavily engaged with its economy. But the tone I'm getting from the posts just prior to yours is that it should be self evident why bans are acceptable and nerfs are not; to me this is not obvious. I'd like the long form explanation.

There are cards in MTG that players have bought, and then the card has been banned, but it is still worth a lot (more than they paid for originally) - because it is so good in other formats where it was not banned. If the card had been nerfed they might be worth less or worth nothing at all.

wolzarg
08-13-2015, 09:57 PM
As an example i lost about 120$ when a certain fairy enchantment was sold on MTGO because it was banned. Had i held on to them for later i would have lost 20$ or less. Cards can be banned and then unbanned when the awnsers are plentyful enough that they don't destroy a format any more. Changing a card only to change it back later is not only weird it destroys all trust in card value and ruins the card for formats it might not impact.

loopholist3
08-14-2015, 06:02 AM
Maybe I don't "get" TCG economies, true, and they will not be the same as MMO economies, where most of my trade experience originates.

Have you ever not done a strategy in an MMO because you assumed it was going to get nerfed later? I am aware that the answer to that for some people is no, but for me it is yes. I would have not bought 4 Titania's if nerfs were in the game because I would expect the card to get worse. I am actually surprised that Titania's is still worth less than 500 Plat, but maybe I am over estimating the value of strong rares.

Xenavire
08-14-2015, 06:29 AM
Have you ever not done a strategy in an MMO because you assumed it was going to get nerfed later? I am aware that the answer to that for some people is no, but for me it is yes. I would have not bought 4 Titania's if nerfs were in the game because I would expect the card to get worse. I am actually surprised that Titania's is still worth less than 500 Plat, but maybe I am over estimating the value of strong rares.

On rares: it is very rare for a rare to be worth more than 500p, due to the amount of supply. Ignoring the inflation directly after a set releases, the highest price for a given card will be seen just before a major tournament/constructed VIP, and even then I don't recall ever seeing a rare break 1000 plat on average sales.

Also, with TM being weaker after the diamond cup (Verdict and other answers) people aren't as likely to overrate the card.

If anything, I am surprised Crocosaur is so cheap atm, since it is one of the best cards in the TM deck - removal, a beater, and a decent target for TM, all in one. I would expect that to be up around 500 too.

gonzo007
08-14-2015, 06:30 AM
1st. it was set3 only, so deck/card choices are very limited
2nd. titania are just most consistent deck to play and have higher chances to win

so why would anyone be shocked that there's 4 of them in top4? look any other tourneys, they have pretty much same - majority of top made by most strong deck in the meta (previous cup http://fiveshards.com/ruby-cup-season-2-top-8-sponsored-by-tecnophi/ not that far away from "4 titania in top8" in term of decks variety in top)

vulture27
08-14-2015, 07:43 AM
On rares: it is very rare for a rare to be worth more than 500p, due to the amount of supply. Ignoring the inflation directly after a set releases, the highest price for a given card will be seen just before a major tournament/constructed VIP, and even then I don't recall ever seeing a rare break 1000 plat on average sales.

Also, with TM being weaker after the diamond cup (Verdict and other answers) people aren't as likely to overrate the card.

If anything, I am surprised Crocosaur is so cheap atm, since it is one of the best cards in the TM deck - removal, a beater, and a decent target for TM, all in one. I would expect that to be up around 500 too.

I wouldn't call it average, but just this week I sold 2 Crackling Vortexs for over 1000 plat each.

StormDeck.Hype

Tazelbain
08-14-2015, 08:13 AM
Also rares that part of sets that being used in limited are going to have a downward pressure due to packs being cracked all the time.

Vorpal
08-14-2015, 08:45 AM
Have you ever not done a strategy in an MMO because you assumed it was going to get nerfed later? I am aware that the answer to that for some people is no, but for me it is yes. I would have not bought 4 Titania's if nerfs were in the game because I would expect the card to get worse. I am actually surprised that Titania's is still worth less than 500 Plat, but maybe I am over estimating the value of strong rares.

That's about the max for a rare (see CMK) the only rare that is consistently higher is crackling vortex.

It's higher than many (most?) legendaries.

Xenavire
08-14-2015, 08:54 AM
I wouldn't call it average, but just this week I sold 2 Crackling Vortexs for over 1000 plat each.

StormDeck.Hype

Actually, with set 1+2 not being cracked as often, this does seem to be a bit of a trend - those cards are slowly rising in price.

Chase rares like CMK, Vortex, etc, are probably going to see more spikes than any set 3 card will for a long time. :p

darkwonders
08-14-2015, 09:05 AM
Actually, with set 1+2 not being cracked as often, this does seem to be a bit of a trend - those cards are slowly rising in price.

Chase rares like CMK, Vortex, etc, are probably going to see more spikes than any set 3 card will for a long time. :p

Which is good cause that means S1 & 2 packs should bounce back up on the AH if people are still seeking sought after cards. I managed to find 2 Crackling Vortexes in 15 packs, so not counting all the other cards I could sell from those packs, I did pretty well in pack opening as opposed to just buying 2 from the AH.

Fyren
08-14-2015, 10:52 PM
On the Nerf/Ban thing:

Okay, after some poking around, I think I understand why bans are perceived as better. The understandable confusion arises largely from Hex only having one "format" at the moment; two if you count PVE. When we have enough such formats (And MTG currently has at least 6 constructed formats, several team formats, and 10 online formats) a ban in the context of a single format will seem less punishing to a card's existence than an alteration that will work across all fronts. It's just that right now there's no difference between banning a card and nerfing it into unusability from a gameplay standpoint.

Elwinz
08-14-2015, 10:56 PM
Actually, with set 1+2 not being cracked as often, this does seem to be a bit of a trend - those cards are slowly rising in price.

Chase rares like CMK, Vortex, etc, are probably going to see more spikes than any set 3 card will for a long time. :p


Yeah thats why ignore set3 mostly now and trying to get out set1/2 frist. Many cards alreaady rised a lot even those not constructed playable. Set 3 will mostly not rise besides some meta cards.
IN thoery is very wise to buy od booster and high chance to get something expensive now insteas of direct buy but .. knowing my luck i wi stil open 30p rare .;p

Vorpal
08-15-2015, 09:27 AM
And you can't even really sell the 30p rares :p

I wonder if you could if crafting came in and you could, say, melt down 10 rares to make another rare.