theFarWilds.com
http://thefarwilds.com/forum/

Negate
http://thefarwilds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=578		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  RedFlag [ Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Negate
Negate is way too annoying to allow it to remain only with MF. Make it a X(2) spell, so everybody can enjoy the chaos it creates.
Author:  doiron [ Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
I disagree with Red's recommendation, it would make the game way too frustrating to play. I've talked about how effective domain denial strategies are before and no one cared. Now that Altren's deck is so powerful I think people might be more receptive to hearing out things.

The only change I would make personally is make Negate destroy not remove. This is a very subtle change but makes a huge difference. It would make the caster think twice about negating a newly dropped graveyard, for example since they'd get salvage and casting refunded. They could still do it and it'd still be very effective, but there'd be much more of a price to pay.

For whatever warped reason mahal and throne don't get salvage, so it would actually make throne a bit worse. But it would make mahal a little more playable since you'd still be able to draw them (fissure would take them out permanently tho). It would still leave them both incredibly flimsy and easily destroyable.
Author:  MistStlkr [ Wed Feb 11, 2009 6:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
Again, disagree. If DL gets to keep Lysis [and nobody has suggested otherwise] then there is no reason to take away Negate
Author:  RedFlag [ Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
MistStlkr wrote:
Again, disagree. If DL gets to keep Lysis [and nobody has suggested otherwise] then there is no reason to take away Negate


Not saying take away Negate. It's a great spell. I'm saying, give it to everyone.

This accomplishes two things that have been an issue:

(1) It gives every faction the (limited) ability to remove enchantments, and comes with some additional permanent removal utility

(2) It lessens (but does not remove) MF's dominance in the area of permanent removal. Right now, they have THREE ways to permanently remove any enchantment (Hex Chaser, Disenchant, and Negate, and you could even count Fissure though it's limited to land, creature and building enchantments), a capability that is at best shadowed by Silver Stagg, Gossamer Palace, and whichever Syvlan spell swaps the target of enchantments.

Alternatively, give Disenchant to everyone and lower its casting cost by 1 flux(though I think Negate Wars are more fun).

Additionally, Negate needs to be adjusted so that it refunds the (X) flux used to cast things like Demonic Surge. Otherwise, its balancing factor (that the flux is returned to the caster of the negated permanent) isn't present. It essentially allows a player to spend 1 flux to remove 1 to a potentially infinite amount of flux from their opponent's arsenal by negating a charged enchantment, and is therefore unbalanced in that regard.
Author:  jed [ Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
doiron: then you can negate your own buildings for a quick 6 flux.
Author:  Altren [ Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
doiron wrote:
I disagree with Red's recommendation, it would make the game way too frustrating to play. I've talked about how effective domain denial strategies are before and no one cared. Now that Altren's deck is so powerful I think people might be more receptive to hearing out things.
Actually this deck can be easily beaten with default sylvan deck in right hands. Or just any deck that contain many 1st level cards. Yes my deck was created for domain control and nothing more, and it quiet stable in most cases, but there's nothing strong in it - you can easily kill small creatures or build not in their sight and everything will be fine. Negate is thing that you should think about whan playing against MF same way as when you think about lysis or ascent. Just play a bit more wisely and nothing can help your enemy.
Author:  Sunyaku [ Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:03 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
This is the closest thing to a counterspell that TFW currently has, and thus I am somewhat against its existence to begin with. If we make it a neutral card, you can bet EVERYONE will play with three in their deck. :-(
Author:  RedFlag [ Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
Sunyaku wrote:
This is the closest thing to a counterspell that TFW currently has, and thus I am somewhat against its existence to begin with. If we make it a neutral card, you can bet EVERYONE will play with three in their deck. :-(


I'm against it simply because it can fuck EVERYTHING. Which is why I feel like if one army can have it, all armies should have the benefit of having it.

Ord Stone too now that I think about it. Having a turtling army that can get bonus flux and undo any entity they see cast just seems like a bad plan to me.

The thing about both these suggestions is that they aren't going to cripple one army or overly dilute its effectiveness.
Author:  doiron [ Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
jed wrote:
doiron: then you can negate your own buildings for a quick 6 flux.


true. and I hadn't considered that, but it's a simple enough change to add "enemy controlled card". no real good reason to cast it on one of your own anyway.
Author:  RedFlag [ Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Negate
doiron wrote:
jed wrote:
doiron: then you can negate your own buildings for a quick 6 flux.


true. and I hadn't considered that, but it's a simple enough change to add "enemy controlled card". no real good reason to cast it on one of your own anyway.


Sure there is: you cast a new building construction site and it gets instantly volcanoed.

Or a creature that gets sunbursted. Etc.

Negate basically boomerangs you the flux casting cost minus 1. Which is pretty significant
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/