Your 2nd point is interesting: You seem to mistakenly believe that a Barrier'd blocker absorbs a portion of the damage from an Overwhelm attacker. But in fact, the entire Overwhelm damage goes through to the nexus.
I don't think that's the case. I recently lost a game because I thought it worked the way you are saying, but not all of the Overwhelm damage made it through.
Overwhelm also punches through barrier--i.e., if he didn't have Judgement and you had blocked the Ancient Yeti with something and then gave it barrier, then your blocker would take no damage but your nexus would receive 5. (Not sure if that's as intended or not, but that's how it currently works.)
I'm pretty sure the blocking unit's health is still subtracted from the Overwhelm damage in the case of Barrier.
It's just that the damage assigned to the blocker is then negated (not the overflow damage to the nexus).
I'll give you a practical example why this card needs some changes. I had a game where opponent was with a full board of tokens/creatures max power 2. He was at 15 health, I was at 5 and I only had 1 unit on my board. I was gonna lose, as simple as that. I dropped Ledros, I attacked, I won. It's kinda not fair.
There are plenty of ways you could have won that game with other cards if your opponent didn't have removal or purify. it's perfectly fair.
Board presence is not the only win condition, nor should it be.
Then it's a good thing they are being upfront about their no-refund policy. You can decide for yourself if that OP Champion is worth the risk of a future nerf. Seems perfectly fair to me.
Butcher needs to be at 1-mana. It's a card that would be absolutely bonkers in Hearthstone and it's not different here....welll either that or nerfing the Cursed Keeper spawn.
I absolutely agree that Cursed Keeper does not need a 0-mana activator. People would still happily play it even if Glimpse and Vile Feast were the only ways to pop it yourself.
Butcher could even cost 2 mana, and people would still used it to kill Undying and Keeper and probably other Last Breath units as well.
I continue to be firmly confident in the meta resolving itself without balance changes. Probably in the form of Hecarim-centric Ephemeral decks steamrolling the Elusives.
I feel like you are making a pretty big assumption here -- namely that Riot achieved the uncanny feat of getting the balance exactly right after exactly one balance patch following a very limited pre-beta event.
The whole point of beta is to fix bugs and address balance problems that come to light when large numbers of players start playing your game.
Riot's stated goal is to have about 10 different decks showing strong representation in the meta at any given time. We are obviously not there yet, and I don't think the meta is going to self-correct enough to get us there unless Elusive takes a hit.
It doesn't belong in every deck -- certainly not most aggro lists -- but it's amazing if your strategy is to buff one minion and protect the bajeezus out of it.
Even when that's not your plan, it's great hard "removal" in a pinch.
Also, there are some clever tricks you can do, like Detain your own unit that is about to die -- it comes back fully healed and replays any "on summon" effects. Or Detain your own frostbitten unit with something you can kill cheaply and quickly to put it back all nice and thawed.
You feel enraged, right? You just paid $10 USD plus most of your starter resources towards a deck that will never climb ladder--what are you going to do now? Not only are you out the cash, but you still don't have a competitive deck AND your out most of your wildcards.
No, because I can easily earn every bit of it back by leveling up one region. No one playing this game will suffer from having a truly limited collection for very long if they put forth a minimal amount of effort to complete quests and such.
The kind of person who gets enraged at Riot for something that is so clearly a result of the player's own impatience? That person is never going to be happy with any game they try.
(Also, if Riot makes a habit of nerfing cards into unplayability or letting a broken meta fester, the problem is bigger than some silly refund can solve.)
I mean the fact that you die first from a resolved spell before your opponent dies from your board makes sense mechanically, but thinking about it, it is a shitty mechanic in its core.
I guess this is more about the back and forth action trading, but yet another example of a loss you can sustian from a commanding lead on the board. I dont know if i like this.
A commanding lead on the board has nothing to do with it -- that will never be an absolute guarantee of victory. All that matters is who drops to zero first.
(Otherwise, they may as well delete Ezreal from the game.)
Assuming we're drawing a direct comparison to League, the answer would be that you get nothing, but you'll wind up using those cards in three months anyway as the revolving door of 'balance' changes comes around :P
More likely, you'll never stop using them and won't even blink.
That's what happened with the pre-beta nerfs, anyway.
It's also way too common in Expeditions, where it's a surprisingly easy build to force if you are offered any Ionia at all.
If the statistics indicate a change is needed (and I strongly suspect they do), I expect to see an increase in mana cost for all Elusive followers across the board.
Playing big, powerful spells MUST have an opportunity cost beyond just the mana expenditure. There MUST be an inherent risk.
Following your line of reasoning, that opportunity cost only exists when playing against an Ionia deck. I think that's a problem as it's not "inherent".
No, because you build a deck against the entire meta, not just against one opponent. The existence of Deny is important to the entire meta, not just individual games, because it forces control players to be less greedy in their deckbuilding.
If someone is building greedily, without regard for the threat of Deny, I'm not surprised if that person gets tilted when it beats them.
This doesn't mean you can't use big spells at all. It means you have to support your big spells correctly, both in deckbuilding and gameplay.
Also, I see Vengeance all the time, so it's simply not true that "big spells aren't worth playing."
The deck that plays Deny has similar costs, though.
- Dead most of the game: Deny is absolutely dead until the opponent plays a deniable effect.
- Might not swing the game: Deny absolutely will not swing the game unless it hits a key effect and sticks.
- Autolose: OK, not really applicable to Deny; however, keeping mana open for Deny is often problematic and can lead to game-losing situations.
Deny can be played around, baited out, and -- yes -- countered with Deny.
You know when Deny is easiest to play? When you don't give the Deny player enough reasons to waste it early. Also when you don't apply enough pressure to make it hard to reserve spell mana.
I don't think that's the case. I recently lost a game because I thought it worked the way you are saying, but not all of the Overwhelm damage made it through.
I'm pretty sure the blocking unit's health is still subtracted from the Overwhelm damage in the case of Barrier.
It's just that the damage assigned to the blocker is then negated (not the overflow damage to the nexus).
There are plenty of ways you could have won that game with other cards if your opponent didn't have removal or purify. it's perfectly fair.
Board presence is not the only win condition, nor should it be.
Then it's a good thing they are being upfront about their no-refund policy. You can decide for yourself if that OP Champion is worth the risk of a future nerf. Seems perfectly fair to me.
This video by Saucy Mailman might help you with your deck building at the very least; it also has a few gameplay tips: https://youtu.be/RfDjkOehk5k
The info comes from a guest speaker -- the mailman acknowledges that he is not an Expedition master himself.
I believe the next patch is scheduled for Feb. 18, and yes, it's supposed to be a big balance patch.
I absolutely agree that Cursed Keeper does not need a 0-mana activator. People would still happily play it even if Glimpse and Vile Feast were the only ways to pop it yourself.
Butcher could even cost 2 mana, and people would still used it to kill Undying and Keeper and probably other Last Breath units as well.
I feel like you are making a pretty big assumption here -- namely that Riot achieved the uncanny feat of getting the balance exactly right after exactly one balance patch following a very limited pre-beta event.
The whole point of beta is to fix bugs and address balance problems that come to light when large numbers of players start playing your game.
Riot's stated goal is to have about 10 different decks showing strong representation in the meta at any given time. We are obviously not there yet, and I don't think the meta is going to self-correct enough to get us there unless Elusive takes a hit.
It doesn't belong in every deck -- certainly not most aggro lists -- but it's amazing if your strategy is to buff one minion and protect the bajeezus out of it.
Even when that's not your plan, it's great hard "removal" in a pinch.
Also, there are some clever tricks you can do, like Detain your own unit that is about to die -- it comes back fully healed and replays any "on summon" effects. Or Detain your own frostbitten unit with something you can kill cheaply and quickly to put it back all nice and thawed.
I think mine is pretty obvious.
No, because I can easily earn every bit of it back by leveling up one region. No one playing this game will suffer from having a truly limited collection for very long if they put forth a minimal amount of effort to complete quests and such.
The kind of person who gets enraged at Riot for something that is so clearly a result of the player's own impatience? That person is never going to be happy with any game they try.
(Also, if Riot makes a habit of nerfing cards into unplayability or letting a broken meta fester, the problem is bigger than some silly refund can solve.)
A commanding lead on the board has nothing to do with it -- that will never be an absolute guarantee of victory. All that matters is who drops to zero first.
(Otherwise, they may as well delete Ezreal from the game.)
More likely, you'll never stop using them and won't even blink.
That's what happened with the pre-beta nerfs, anyway.
It's also way too common in Expeditions, where it's a surprisingly easy build to force if you are offered any Ionia at all.
If the statistics indicate a change is needed (and I strongly suspect they do), I expect to see an increase in mana cost for all Elusive followers across the board.
The Elusive Fiora deck that doesn't run Deny at all even though it's Ionia. ... what's your point?
No, because you build a deck against the entire meta, not just against one opponent. The existence of Deny is important to the entire meta, not just individual games, because it forces control players to be less greedy in their deckbuilding.
If someone is building greedily, without regard for the threat of Deny, I'm not surprised if that person gets tilted when it beats them.
This doesn't mean you can't use big spells at all. It means you have to support your big spells correctly, both in deckbuilding and gameplay.
Also, I see Vengeance all the time, so it's simply not true that "big spells aren't worth playing."
The deck that plays Deny has similar costs, though.
- Dead most of the game: Deny is absolutely dead until the opponent plays a deniable effect.
- Might not swing the game: Deny absolutely will not swing the game unless it hits a key effect and sticks.
- Autolose: OK, not really applicable to Deny; however, keeping mana open for Deny is often problematic and can lead to game-losing situations.
Deny can be played around, baited out, and -- yes -- countered with Deny.
You know when Deny is easiest to play? When you don't give the Deny player enough reasons to waste it early. Also when you don't apply enough pressure to make it hard to reserve spell mana.
Playing big, powerful spells MUST have an opportunity cost beyond just the mana expenditure. There MUST be an inherent risk.
Deny is that risk. Any change that obviates that risk is a non-starter. Making it so Deny works only on cheap spells is out of the question.
I don't see any reason for any kind of refund.
Cards are extremely easy to come by in this game -- plus, if they nerf correctly, the altered card would not become useless.
Refunds are a tacit admission that the affected cards are no longer worth playing -- something that should never happen in practice.
Looking at Riot's previous nerfs, every single altered card is still very strong.
Finally some Shadowed Isles love!