| theFarWilds.com http://thefarwilds.com/forum/ | |
| Valley Fog http://thefarwilds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1272 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | kash [ Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Valley Fog |
I think this card is too good a first turn draw. In particular, it seems to me it should be a valid strategy to have a deck that immediately heads for 2 domain. This is particularly true for 2 domain decks, where on some draws you may not have a card to play until you get out a second domain. This means you can get stuck in a situation where the only way to eliminate valley fog is to allow your domain card to get cancelled, an extremely heavy cost, since most of those cards are expensive and running out of them is the fastest way for a deck to lose. This problem also arises when the deck destroys an opponent's domain source, a common strategy for Mountain decks. I suggest either having Valley fog restore the flux (like Negate), to only effect cards up to a certain cost (say 4) to minimize the flux advantage, or to not effect 0 domain cards (to exempt most domain sources). On another note, Cancelled shows up on a lot of cards and should be linked to indicate that the flux is lost (which isn't obvious just from reading the card). |
|
| Author: | headshot [ Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
kash wrote: I think this card is too good a first turn draw. In particular, it seems to me it should be a valid strategy to have a deck that immediately heads for 2 domain. This is particularly true for 2 domain decks, where on some draws you may not have a card to play until you get out a second domain. This means you can get stuck in a situation where the only way to eliminate valley fog is to allow your domain card to get cancelled, an extremely heavy cost, since most of those cards are expensive and running out of them is the fastest way for a deck to lose. This problem also arises when the deck destroys an opponent's domain source, a common strategy for Mountain decks. Another "silver bullet" card, this time directed at decks that concentrate more on cards requiring 2 or 3 levels of domain to be cast, and especially multicolored decks. These types of decks are already hurt badly enough by fissure, negate, sinkhole and volcano. A luckily drawn Valley Fog makes them unplayable. I vote for removing Valley Fog entirely. |
|
| Author: | CaveTroll [ Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
I too think this card is too strong and easely abused. A return of flux is a good idea but can still be very strong in a building destruction deck. |
|
| Author: | headshot [ Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
Just got an idea: How about making it require 3 domains, like MF X X? This should fix most of the problems. |
|
| Author: | Altren [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 2:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
Well, MXX is king of overkill, but I always was thinking about MX. |
|
| Author: | Keyser [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 3:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
What about making it cancel the next non-domain giving card? |
|
| Author: | kash [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 6:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
Keyser wrote: What about making it cancel the next non-domain giving card? That would work equally well. I just wasn't sure how easy that would be to implement. For example, is glimpse of greatness a domain giving card? It doesn't autodraw |
|
| Author: | Keyser [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 6:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
"Cancel next card opponent plays that is not a domain giving building." |
|
| Author: | kash [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
Keyser wrote: "Cancel next card opponent plays that is not a domain giving building." Maybe "domain giving figure" to include the creatures that give domain? Probably a precise enough wording, but still potentially ambiguous when it comes to things that do not always give domain, for example the building that gives E whenever you sacrifice an E creature. |
|
| Author: | kash [ Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Valley Fog |
Another reason the current form is potentially too strong: Valley fog followed by Earthquake. Not only does your opponent lose all his domain buildings, but he is forced to have once cancelled. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |