To think about it a different way, consider the Plasma as having the special ability "If Nether Plasma enters play from your hand, put two tokens on it." Then either way the plasma starts in the same condition (no tokens). Instead, it is just the case of a special ability doesn't triggering since it didn't come into play from your hand.

By the way, has anyone tried a Plasma, Foreshadowing Ragnarok, Cleanse combo?

I'm trying to make deck that can beat a deck with training without having them self. There is certanly not many decks. I, once again, plead for the nerfing of this card. I think four flux will do it. It will still be a good card, but not so overpowered as it it now. There is not many cards that is a good counter to it. So please: Nerf Training!

Nerfing training and fissure and negate would mean that there is no need to nerf Throne....

Those three cards are the main reason people splash MF.

I vote for the nerf of the three, not the one.

_________________

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|

Regardless of what is done to other MF cards, the current throne would continue to be the best way to escalate the domain level of a deck of ANY domain(s), allowing them to reap the benefits thereof...

On the beta server awhile back I was actually casting Rithig naturally with Throne and some of the new domain cards. Summoning circle or woven shadows are great options too, but casting tier four/five domain cards naturally is actually possible with the new set in constructed play.

Noob and non-White House approved opinion:

(That was my comprehensive disclaimer in case of flaming).

Doubling the price of Training seems a tad drastic. If it really must be changed, why not bump it to 3 first? In Borderlands, I have seen great decks that use Training or Negate and other great decks that had neither. Each time things get shuffled around there is a new slew of ideas and decks that seem pretty good IMO. Obviously I am not a hardcore veteran, but there seem to be a plethora of viable strats, cards, decks etc... Anywho, just my radical ideas placed humbly at the feet of the masters. [Bows and slowly retreats].

DarkJello

_________________
Ad astra per alia porci!$!

I think the best fix to training would be to keep the cost, but give only 1 health insted of 3. If it's always just raising flux costs, they slowly start to get out of hand. When a lot of cards get more expensive, the good ones that still cost 1 or 2 become too good and too common (in every deck), and then they need to be made more expensive and so on. Afterall, I think a deck's average flux cost should not usually exceed 3 by much (depends a bit on deck's flux gathering tactics of course), and already there are only so many good cards that cost less than 3.

with all due respect, the proposed changes (flux to 4 or hp to 1) would simply make the card completely useless. I understand this is appealing to some, but it's not in the best interest of anyone.

Any changes made have to be made in the context of other cards. Training's already been nerfed twice 4hp->3hp, 2M->2MX. Its closest counterpart is Bindweed Poultice which heals 4hp for 2S. No one uses it, but no one used Training before Altren and I started making decks that used it to great effect, so I think that argument's a bit of red herring. Training has +1 attack, -1 hp, and 1 more domain requirement. It's also counter-able with a wide array of cards. Overall, I'd say that's about balanced compared to Bindweed, with a slight edge to Training.

At most, I can see a drop to 1 attack/2 hp with cost the same, which would make it ok instead of good (I'd only pack 1 or 2 instead of 3 at that stage). Increasing the cost even to 3MX makes it too expensive (I'd rather just have another creature in my hand at that point). Another option would be 2MM, but MF already have the most domain-restricted cards so I don't think that's a great idea. But if training is nerfed, I'd like to see Bindweed taken down to +3 hp to balance effects.

I'm not in favor of nerfing training, but I don't think this is a fair comparison. The +1 attack is a *major* advantage. It changes the tradeoff from "save an existing creature that is in a position to threaten your opponent but is reactive" vs "an always playable creature that starts by your base" to in the first case add "and makes that creature a much bigger threat" 1 attack vs 2 is often a huge difference.

I think any changes right now aren't a good idea. I think with the new cards coming out, the dynamics of the game will change and different cards will be the best cards and there will be new best decks. I've come to think that the game being imbalanced is not a real problem right now. weakening the best cards and strengthening others might make the game a bit more balanced but I think there would still be one "best" type of deck.
I think the perceived imbalance is caused by not having enough players. When someone has a good deck it seems like other people tend to try to copy the deck. With more players I think we would see a lot more diversity of decks but right now there isn't enough competition at the top. Another issue is that in the seed set it seems like most of the rares are weaker than the commons and uncommons (since they need more domain) which makes it relatively easy for players to copy other peoples decks.

_________________
ȁ̎̉̈̂̎͋̈́̍n͂͑̿ͥͣ́̓ġͤ͑ͯe͌̓̊ͩ͗̅l̽̓ͬͬͥ̊͗aͣ̔̃ͧ̓̾̾t͊̑̆hͤ͆̓̉̌ͣ̚e̋ͩ͒̈́ĭ̌̒̎ͧ̓̋ͪs̋ͤͧ̅̇̋̎ͫ̂̾ͨ̽̄ͫͯt͒͐̌ͭ̂̃ͪ̽ͣ͗̒ͣ

With all due to respect, have you played constructed since the last balance changes? Sure, not many people used training before that, because almost everyone used ascent, which was a great counter for training. Now the only decent counters are negate and entangle, and even they do not put the guy who cast training to any disadvantage if he cast it on a 0 health creature. You could say training a dying creature is almost 100% guaranteed to give a great advantage. Drawing some weenies and 3 trainings is almost sure victory, and an easy one at that (just ask Uraxor). I've won as many games (and that is MANY) as I have lost because of trainings (often negates have had a part too though), so I'm NOT saying training is too powerful simply because I'm butt hurt after losing to it.

And comparing it to bindweed poultice doesn't frankly make much sense. Apart from the obvious very significant difference of 1 extra attack, training is good on any creature in almost any situation, whereas Poultice is only good on a Goose Tamer who is down to 0 health -or on any wounded creature enchanted with Training. That makes Poultice very situational, and in practice it often ends up healing only 2. Training ALWAYS gives 3 more health. Compare casting training on a craig scout to casting poultice on a thistle falcon to get an idea which card is more powerful.

But it's true that 4 flux would be probably too much. And cutting the health gain to only 1 *might* be a bit too much, though it would still be fairly good. And better do balancing carefully, overdoing it would just create a new inbalance. Probably would be better to proceed with caution and cut the health gain only by one, and keep the old cost.

MF is getting quite heavily nerfed anyway, if both fissure and negate get the changes presented in this thread. In fact, with the new autodraw rule, a fissure that has the glory as part of casting cost will be totally completely useless, I think. I personally don't mind, because I never liked the card, but still I don't think it would be good. So if training was heavily nerfed too, MF might jump from by far the strongest domain to by far the weakest domain just like that, which is against the whole idea of balancing of course.

Angelatheist has a point there, but on the other hand these beta leagues have taught us a great deal about how strong the current throne, negate, fissure and training would be even after the new set is out.