Chappie

Members
  • Content count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About Chappie

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Shadowverse Information

  • Shadowverse User ID
    231733596
  1. You personally may not run into Blood very often in AA but as fellow AA ranked player, I can tell you that I play on ladder I see mostly Blood and on occasion, rune and heaven. But personal experience is faulty because match ups are done through RNG and it could easily just be your own good luck that allows you to avoid all the blood. This is why objective data is important and it tells us that blood is objectively an issue. And please dont sit there and play the fool. "this is the worst its ever been" is not some mindless claim tossed out because I cant win. Its an objective fact and if you bothered to look at the data you would see this for yourself. Daria meta? Not even close. Pre-nerf TotG with shadows and dragons everywhere? NOT EVEN CLOSE! This is the thing about claims like yours, all you have is salt and hatred toward the playerbase but nothing tangible to back it up. Claims without evidence are worthless
  2. Kind of hard to make the game worse when, according to the data, this is the worst it has ever been both in terms of deck diversity and game balance. But nah, just hand wave any legitimate complaints and objective data supporting them aside. Cygames can do no wrong so it has to be the people who are the problem! (just ignore the fact that if cygames blindly followed the words of the people that would be their fault anyway)
  3. Its also possible that when they tested Phoenix roost after fixing it they discovered some legitimately broken combos which would up the amount of cards needing "changes". Point being, its too soon to start crying foul and instead we should just be happy that the meta will definitely be different by the end of the month and that the long held belief that legends were immune from changes was unfounded. So everyone just needs to calm down and see what happens.
  4. First of all, they said changes not nerfs so this could mean buffs to laughably obsolete cards. Secondly, we do not know how drastic these changes will be so claiming "the 4 year olds won" is incredibly childish. For all we know, according to cygames data the game warranted drastic changes and , as always, they will explain all their changes at the end of the month.
  5. First things I would add to your list are Corpselord of Woe and Dark Alice. Woe just needs his necromancy cost to be 4 OR for him to pay 6 to evolve for free during your turn (similar to a luminous mage) to be playable. Right now he is worthless outside of take 2 and mehtacular even there. Dark Alice needs to banish things on fanfare instead of needing to die since right now she is too easily countered on top of being stupidly slow. Her output simply does not justify her numerous restrictions. Sticking to my craft of choice on your list here, Pluto should gain some kind of skill as a fanfare (so you dont buff pact of the neithergod). Perhaps gaining rush and drain? That would certainly give her some niches to justify her massive cost and reliance on the opponents field. Atomy is actually fine as is, his current design allows him to pull off some stupid combos already. Buffing him is dangerous so let him stay a meme for now. Madame Liche should give bane to something as last words. Ghouls banquet is actually fine its just not a very good card by concept. You would basically have to make a new card entirely to make it work Oh and finally, Lord of the flies should be on here. He is bad due to RNG but everything he summons is good. Simply removing his endless spawning ability in exchange for letting you choose which of the three to summon (once on fanfare, once on evolve) would be a MASSIVE boost to his playability.
  6. I was not expecting 5 MINIMUM to be hit this month. I honestly thought it would be no more then 2~3, guess cygames realized just how badly they messed up this set. Obviously Alice is going to get hit as the biggest contributor to the snowballing going first gives. I am pretty sure she is just going to be bumped up to 5 cost but if they restrict her to just buffing the hand I think she would be a much more fair card even if she stayed at 4. Spawn is likely to get hit as well but I doubt it will be anything too major. Dropping the attack to 4 not only lowers his damage potential but also prevents him from being tutored. This will make him more fair without killing his playability. Tove is getting nuked and nobody will miss him. BKB is also at risk but hopefully they manage to "fix" him rather then "destroy" him. Control blood really needs a card like him so killing his playability completely would be a shame. Goblin Leader will be getting nerfed indirectly by hitting alice but if they feel he needs more balance then making him only summon a goblin when you play a neutral is a great way to keep with his flavor and make him fair. Finally, I agree heaven is going to be looked at as well but the only thing that really stands out is snow white due to being REALLY OVERPOWERED for a 2 drop which grants tons of advantage to the person going first. Anything else feels like it would be premature but it wouldnt surprise me to see them become public enemy number 1 next month.
  7. Brace yourself because it only gets worse from here.
  8. I dont see any harm in giving us a pity counter especially since Cygames increased the amount of legendaries in each set which drastically decreased our odds of pulling the legend we want. 1 Legend for every 20 packs or so sounds fair and they could also make packs bought with crystals give a minimum of 3 silver or greater rarity cards to give more incentive to spend money on the game. Seriously, can you imagine dropping 30+ dollars on this game and not pulling a single legend and only a handful of golds? I love how generous cygames are with packs but things are not perfect so hopefully they will consider this for their next update.
  9. I would quit and I am not even one of those crybabies you hate so much. They promised balance changes at the end of each month should the game need them and if they can look at all this data and say that "everything is fine for one more month" then there is no reason to continue playing the game because at that point the developers have proven themselves to be beyond incompetent. It would also be a very poor choice objectively speaking since the playerbase is on the decline because of this dumpster fire of a set. Sure the game isnt "dying" or anything but continued neglect like that will not help matters. Poor choices will lead to a loss of trust in the company and that is VERY difficult to earn back. People will start to leave in droves and the game may very well die in the end.
  10. Dont forget Tenko! Her southern accent is the stuff of nightmares!
  11. Putting aside what gets played from this set, I see no reason why they couldnt consider older stuff if that stuff was the actual problem. Tea Time just isnt an very problematic card across the board so hitting it would be the wrong choice here. Garuda+tea time is the only issue and its only in one deck. Therefore, IF ANY action were required it would make far more sense to hit garuda since that affects only that build. And if Aegis's decks turns out the be a problem in the meta then Tea time is not even worth consideration. In any case I feel we are getting ahead of ourselves here. Surely we can discuss future hits next month when we start to see what the new meta is like. Even if heaven becomes dominant I think its very unlikely it will be to the degree neutral blood is so we will be able to survive till the next set of nerfs without any issues.
  12. Eh tea time only really feels like it could be an issue in storm heaven due to more ways to burn the face. Its combo with Garuda is kind of dumb when you can pull it off comfortably but in practice you often have to burn that evo just keeping the board under control. I am not convinced that if something in heaven needs to be hit, that would be the correct choice.
  13. Where is the justification for your change? You have given no reason at all which is my problem. Oz changes the cost of spells to 1 but this effect is not continuous as spells added to your hand after she is played are not changed. Piercing Rune changes its cost to 2 when you evo Everything functions perfectly fine and so you need a reason to change it. All you have said is that it is "bad design" but why? Why is it bad design when the cards are functioning perfectly?
  14. So because there are cards that need updates because they dont follow their cardtext we should change one of the cards that follows its card text? What a foolish thing to say! Direct your complaints towards the cards that are not functioning correctly not the ones that do. Let the players who make the misplays for not reading their cards learn from their mistakes and move on. Just because people can make misplays, that doesnt mean something is badly designed. This game has many issues but this is not one of them.
  15. If it didnt work that way then the card would be functioning differently from its text which WOULD be bad design. There is no reason to complain about cards doing exactly as they are supposed to.