Nighthawk42 wrote:
Let me rephase that: I see a card that is broken. It's expensive because you pretty much need it to win and people like to win. I buy it because everyone's doing it....and then it gets nerfed. I lose half my gold invested. I'm going to be much less likely to bid the price of a card up to the moon knowing that it will only stay broken for so long. The card buying economy becomes more fluid.
So how do you, the purchaser, know that a card is "broken" and is going to change or simply know that it's a really good card?
How do you do determine the card is broken vs. the card is good, but there are ways to beat it?
If it's "broken", then, according to your posting, you shouldn't buy it, because you might end up losing money. If it's just darn good, but not broken, then buying it keeps your money safe.
Some examples:
Some of the cards that were just nerfed didn't seem overly broken to me, such as Lightning Elemental or Volcano. Most of us would gladly paid the price of Lightning Elemental and never thought it would be nerfed.
Some of the cards that were nerfed. We expected Fissure to be nerfed, though it's change it's quite detrimental to the card and will severely effect the market value.
Some of the cards that were nerfed, such as Throne... it's value will drop dramatically now that it's only useful in a predominantly MF deck, but I never thought it was OP, so that loss in value will hurt, because it wasn't "broken" in the sense that you HAD to have it to win.
Many of the nerfs do a good job of balancing the game, but they do so at the result of devaluing cards that may or may not have been "broken". None of these cards were "must haves" in order to win, so they weren't "broken" by your definition.
Therefore, I FULLY and COMPLETELY support Jed's policy on this.
