Cards balance tweaks (My wish list)

***Other Disciplines***

My opinions/ intentions are;

* "Strike: Combat Ends" is too easy.

Their Cost in general should be increased.

============================
* Protean cards

Earth Meld
Type: Combat
Requires: Protean
[pro] Strike: combat ends.
[PRO] As above, and this vampire untaps before combat ends.

->
Cost: 1 blood


Form of Mist
Type: Combat
Requires: Protean
[pro] Strike: dodge.
[PRO] Strike: combat ends. If this vampire is acting and needs stealth when this strike resolves, he or she may burn 1 blood after combat ends to continue the action at +1 stealth as if unblocked. A vampire may play only one Form of Mist at superior each action.

->
Cost: 1 blood


Rapid Change
Type: Action Modifier/Combat
Requires: Protean
Cost: 1 blood
[pro] [ACTION MODIFIER] +1 stealth.
[PRO] [COMBAT] Strike: combat ends.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Animalism cards


Flesh Bond
Type: Combat
Requires: Animalism
Cost: 1 blood
[ani] Strike: 2R damage.
[ANI] Strike: combat ends.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Celerity cards


Torrent
Type: Combat
Requires: Celerity
Cost: 2 blood
[cel] Additional strike.
[CEL] Strike: combat ends. If this vampire was blocked while performing an action, the action continues as if unblocked.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Chimerstry cards


Mirror Image
Type: Action Modifier/Combat
Requires: Chimerstry
Cost: 1 blood
[chi] [ACTION MODIFIER] +1 stealth.
[CHI] [COMBAT] Strike: combat ends. If this vampire was blocked while performing an action other than bleeding, the action continues as if unblocked.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Necromancy cards


Spiritual Intervention
Type: Combat
Requires: Necromancy
[nec] Strike: dodge.
[NEC] Strike: combat ends.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Obfuscate cards


No Trace
Type: Combat
Requires: Obfuscate
Cost: 1 blood
[obf] Only usable at long range. Strike: combat ends.
[OBF] Strike: combat ends.

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* * Obtenebrationcards


Shadow Body
Type: Combat
Requires: Obtenebration
Cost: 1 blood
[obt] Strike: combat ends.
[OBT] As above, and if this vampire was blocked while performing an action other than a political action or bleeding, the action continues as if unblocked.

-> Keep it as it is.


Oubliette
Type: Combat
Requires: Obtenebration
Cost: 1 blood
[obt] Strike: combat ends.
[OBT] As above, and the opposing minion burns 1 blood or life after combat (even at long range).

-> Keep it as it is.

============================

* Vicissitude cards


Meld with the Land
Type: Combat
Requires: Vicissitude
[vic] Strike: combat ends and untap the opposing minion (even at long range).
[VIC] Strike: combat ends.

-> Keep it as it is.

Is this just you throwing up ideas on the wall or have you actually plattested these proposed changes with your playgroup?


(aaaand my immediate initial thought is that such huge changes would wreck havoc on the game balance.)

None of these help the game, most make cards suck more.
Removing options from the game is harmful to the game, especially if you render dozens of staples unplayable all at once. I will not be computer hacking to hope it's not lost in translationed into my grand prey who's relegated to using zip gun and target leg combo. Pick on cards that are issues more often. Liquidation should go to the chopping block this month I believe......

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Removing options from the game is harmful to the game(...)

That's not really true though, is it?
For example: every ban has been done to improve the game by removing options. That's because removing some options can make room for another (maybe larger) number of options to exist.

AFAICT there are two ways of increasing options for the game:
1. Producing/printing new cards (high-effort, expensive, takes a long time)
2. Rebalance existing cards so that more cards are competitive:
a. Increase utility of underpowered cards
b. Reduce utility of the most powerful cards

<exagerated example>
Assuming the game has 5000 cards with a close-to-normal distribution, where 4500 have average ('balanced') utility, 250 have poor utility and 250 have high ('overpowered') utility, you will see tournament decks using the 250 overpowered cards almost exclusively.

If a new set of 250 cards (option 1) is introduced, they can be balanced for 'high utility' and end up with 500 'usable' cards, and the same 4500+250 'wallpaper' cards.

Option 2.a has a similar result: at best you end up with 500 viable cards - the initial 250 plus the 250 'rebalanced' ones - but the 'wallpaper' is reduced to 4500 cards.

Or you can remove/rebalance the 250 'overpowered' cards (option 2.b), making the 4500 balanced cards become viable and reducing your wallpaper pool to 250 cards.
</exagerated example>


Mind you, this assumes 'number of playable cards' is the best measure of game quality - I believe it is a good proxy, but it breaks down in some cases, eg: if bleed mechanics are made so innefective that most games time-out, that would make for poor game quality.

EDIT: I find most of these proposals fairly interesting, but I agree with Lönkka that it would change the game balance drastically and would have to be extensively playtested...