This card is OP. I know from playing against it and using it myself.

In playing with it, it allows me to create a deck that is mostly 3 domain powerful stuff while my opponent has to spend at least a third of his deck on 1 domain things.

In playing against it, I managed to destroy all three trade routes when they came out, costing me a negate and two disenchants. This set me back in flux and position while barely hurting my opponent.

At the very least, please remove Salvage from trade routes.

_________________

Altren wrote:

I agree with Keyser, and that's what I'm planning to implement actually.

|| The Rise of the DCC | Plasmatium Netherious | Tastes Like Chicken | The Astridian Conspiracy ||

Guild -> | Platypus Rising|

Ditto on the remove salvage...

Even if you have the ability to disenchant you can't without giving them huge flux advantage because of the salvage. So they are still getting 3 turns of domain while you wait to disenchant.

Yes you can build a deck to cash in on the extra domain, but said deck won't be very viable against other decks.

Main advantage is Trade Routes decks can plan on having 3 domains quickly, other decks can't. Goes back to my argument that cards were made 3 domain so they weren't cast in early rounds, Trade Routes kills that idea. Proof of this is Trade Route decks have hardly any one or two domain cards, other that Royal Guard that also benifits from Trade Routes and Sky Cavalier because its a great flying low cost creature.

_________________

Voice of dissent:

CI with Trade Routes often is weak to rush IMO. And, of course, you cast Trade Routes and then opponent gets to cast 2 Domain stuff at ZERO cost. Maybe I have just not had enough battles against the CI-TR masters... Anyways, good day.

DarkJello

_________________
Ad astra per alia porci!$!

I wouldn't call myself a master, but, yeah, you're right... I often find myself battling against 2-3 domain creatures played on round 2-3 thanks to my trade routes. Now, I'm stuck with no flux and am being trampled by some random big guy.

_________________
Looking for: Crumbling Alone (2)
Also looking for: Revenant Bishop, Osin Faith Healer, Pilgrim's Cairn, Avenging Angel (2)

agree with keyser and mist. as I have said before, other than orb, I think trade routes is the most OP card in the game (and the recent changes do nothing to change this).

to DJ: isn't the premise of a "rush" deck that it be one domain? yes, my s/hoc deck is an exception; but extra ci domain doesn't help me.

to Atahualpa: non-trade routes decks are limited in the amount of three domain cards they can include. could an opponent gain an advantage with a lucky draw? sure. but the advantage is largely tilted in favor of the CI player. really ... if you think otherwise, feel free to not use trade routes.

Feel free to not use trade routes to prove that it's overpowered? That can't be right? Burden of proof is not on the defense, ever. Anyway, I'll gladly play without Trade Routes, but first, you give me a good non-CI deck to play with. At the very least give, me two Halls of Justice, cause I don't really want to buy them off the market and, to be honest, I'm really sick of helping my opponents with their domain levels. Thanks in advance.

Regardless, I played for weeks without Trade Routes and realized that CI is the dumbest domain in the game without them. I went from losing in the first round of EVERY EC I played in to... actually winning SOME games!!! I just changed some Keeps to Trade Routes.

Does that make them overpowered? Nah, that only makes them vital to most CI decks. So, there. I've done what you asked and have found that Trade Routes is NOT overpowered.

But I agree it should be changed... I vote to completely change Trade Routes. How's this?

Trade Routes
Buidling
0/3/0/1/0
1xCI 6 Flux.
{dim} Sacrifice a creature in sight, gain 2 flux.

There, now it's turned into what so many people call an unbeleivably weak card! And I wouldn't mind playing it over that crappy Observatory any day.

Alternately, just make them cost more, just get rid of the damned domain for the opponent. I'd love to have a 5-6 flux cost domain source for CI that isn't stupid.

_________________
Looking for: Crumbling Alone (2)
Also looking for: Revenant Bishop, Osin Faith Healer, Pilgrim's Cairn, Avenging Angel (2)

Trade Routes is brutal against decks that can't take advantage of the extra domain (i.e. 1-D rush). There's no way a rush deck can compete with a turn 4 Paladin of Xosa (with 2 flux to spare). Even if you get rid of Trade Routes (an option that isn't available to Sylvan Rush, only to Chaos Rush), they'll just autodraw another one, with no flux loss.

After losing every single game I played against Illithid's TR deck (and quite a few against Atah), I decided to go 2 domain, and buffed my Sylvan Rush with Vessel of Cathil and some good 2 domain cards - mainly Sylvan, so I can play them off my Grove + TR. The resulting deck beats TR more often than not (at least Atah's version, not sure I got a chance to play it against Illithid), and isn't too shabby in other match-ups - I've won several EC's with it.

So, yes, it is possible to build a deck that takes advantage of Trade Routes, but isn't horrible in other match-ups.

However, I still think Trade Routes is a problematic card. It is problematic because it is so match-up dependent. Against a roughly equal opponent, you pretty much know the result of the game the moment you see what the other deck is. While I agree with Illithid (in another thread) that some Rock-Paper-Scissors is ok, Trade Routes is taking this to an unhealthy extreme.

I don't think the card needs a nerf. Rather, it needs to have its variance reduced.

For example, it could cost 4, and give you 1 flux back every time the opponent uses the extra domain it gives. So if the opponent ends up using it a lot, it could cost even less then 3. But if she doesn't, it's just a cheap (but not ultra-cheap) source of domain.

Another, similar idea: cost 4, and instead of giving the opponent straight domain, it has: "1: gain a CI domain until end of turn. Use up to once per turn. Only Enemies can use this ability".

Both are nowhere as elegant as the original, so I'm hoping other people come up with better variance-reducing ideas.

I really think removing salvage is enough

_________________

Altren wrote:

I agree with Keyser, and that's what I'm planning to implement actually.

|| The Rise of the DCC | Plasmatium Netherious | Tastes Like Chicken | The Astridian Conspiracy ||

Guild -> | Platypus Rising|

I didn't even know it Salvaged till you posted this. I don't think removing Salvage is going to do the trick, people will just whine for a further nerf because the bottom line is CI gets a 3flux domain. Just go straight for the jugular and save everybody the effort. Now's a great time to do this with Jed's rebalancing... the next time might be long off.

_________________
Looking for: Crumbling Alone (2)
Also looking for: Revenant Bishop, Osin Faith Healer, Pilgrim's Cairn, Avenging Angel (2)

It doesn't actually seem imbalanced to me. Sure it is good against rush decks but that is by design. It was too easy to make a rush deck before BL.
Pack Acmar's Stabilizer if you really hate trade routes. Best thing is against trade routes stabilizer is a 2X card.
I can see maybe getting rid of salvage but not sure even that is needed.