Are good relics with HP that is equal to its nora cost balanced?

With psy blast on a 7 turn CD, 2 marsh songs
to fuel aggression, and 2x shadow spawn champions to harass side fonts, I can win early with a quick double psy blast, or scale to infinity lategamr because that's how amp BGs work.

I can choose my poison.

Champions don't help you at all in some situations, the reason being is because they are telegraphed. The reason why spot AP such as horn of order comes at such a huge premium of 50 Nora, is because it is untelegraphed. You can give your champions attacks your opponent wasn't calculating in their head when positioning on their turn.

Another example is boundless enthusiasm. I feel like very few people actually understood why it was so strong other than 'hurr durr' nerf. It's one of the few cases where I don't believe it would be as strong in other factions. It's power stemmed from the fact that it was essentially the same as spot 5 range in a faction of 20 damage champs. The reason 20 damage champs are balanced is because they are all melee, they aren't hitting you for 40 damage at 5+ range, except now they were. There was no way to play around it other than to not exist on the board and it was extremely frustrating to face it when it was so cheap and was never off CD.

Say you were to swap the above utility for champions that fill the role of ap gen and ranged respectively. Now it's easy for your opponent, you simply factor in the added ap in to your positioning, and either find a new champion to contest the ranged area, close the gap or run away.

Utility is always better than champions because your opponent can SEE the champions. They know what to expect. I can guarantee you your opponent will play around champion threats with good proficiency, and that if there was simply another champion on the board with ap gen, they would most definitely play differently than if the equivalent ap gen was sitting quietly in your rune dock.


Obviously I don't mean don't run champions but I'm sure people will read it as that. Champions are the most efficient runes in the game but they are easy to play around. I still think more than 14-15 is too much, I still don't see what you're including that I'm not.

Even in meta, sallys, snaps etc, I'm still running 13-14 champions. I'm the opposite of markoth. If I could run a BG with 12 champs, 15 gales and 3 other things like banner etc. it would be the easiest game in the world

 

You can account for utility and spells, it is more difficult but you can reasonably guess what they will have access to and play accordingly. If you have the right champions out it will make your use of the utility more effective and have a bigger impact on the game.

The only time I have lost to psy deck in recent times is in a rush situation where the likelihood of winning was very low anyway.
I get to decide which champion gets vuln pys, if the game is not a rush fest I get to decide how inefficient your kills are going to be and usually get the nora globe.

If I can make it past the rush phase its usually GG in my favor.

 

Do the people you play against run psionic impact, horn of order, double Pygmy hippos and double marsh song for added late game steam past the psy blasts? I've never thought of psy as a rush or nothing style BG.

This is where I feel like players are constructing BGs wrong. You probably perceive psy to be rush oriented because after their two psy blasts they got nothing left but champs so they just got get crushed.

Note your BG does do well against psy anyways. Aspect of infinity wins the game by itself so I don't think your BG is a good matchup by any means or indicative of winrate.

 

I build BGs that give me the best chance to win any type of game against any deck/champion. By doing this it makes some games a more difficult match up but other games which would typically be an auto lose much more winnable. I try and "get away with" as least spells as I can. When I do use a spell it will almost always have a secondary function, ideally more.

 

I think you guys can get a room now...

@Chris "Are you going to wear black today?"

@GoldTiger "No I always wear blue when it's sunny, people should really start dressing differently."

@Chris "yes but if you wear blue then you may want to wear black later on in the day...you should wear black...trust me I know."

@GoldTiger "What? No, do you even change your clothes throughout the day? I wear the clothes that match my activity and today I'm wearing blue cause the sun is out!"

@Chris "You should really do what I say, it's just the norm, you want to wear black because the sun will set and then what, are you goin to wear black then when it suits you?"

@GoldTiger "Yes! What kind of idicrocy is that? I'll wear whatever colors I want! The weather isn't even extreme to care how heavy of clothing I'm wearing, so of course I'm going to choose what I wear when I wear it, I think everyone should do that..."

Your guys argument about rune slots is kind of laughable; que up and record a game together. Because you both seem to be saying the same thing without realizing the other is just paraphrasing their playstyle with the reasoning of "I play what I want"

Also Spare Parts you should be running 17-18 champion runes. However you can also get away with fewer than 15...deck building is about playstyle and when you have S/R/E that help change the roles of a unit, you shouldn't always use archetypical roles to build a bg. But of course that's just how I mod my decks so that if ever I fall into a situation where "I wish I had x" I simply copy that battlegroup and replace the runes that would handle X.

This way I build a "wardrobe" of decks which extends my 30 rune count to 35-40 rune decks.

@GoldTiger can make a deck that replaces x1 of each spell and swaps them out to make a Highlander bg, perhaps it won't have the best win rate, but Highlander's bgs are really good at figuring out what shines with what since the variables you implement are from a single source.

@Chris & @GoldTiger take the bgs you have now, then replace every x2 unit to make a highlander bg, you now have two bgs. Remove whichever unit runes you don't deploy consistently enough, and replace those unused runes with a duplicate run you run a lot. Now you have three decks.

These decks should all be with different unit counts and even if they aren't, the runes will be different should you make your ideal deck, then make it into a highlander bg, then replace your problem runes with constantly played ones. Finally you can make a fourth/fifth/sixth deck that focuses more on Shatter or Detection or Spells/Relics/Equips. You can absolutely make a Tank bg or a Beater bg, but Idt that is as advantageous since those archetypes are harder to identify from faction to faction imo.

 

But my BG is already highlander with the exception of gale force

 

I didn't mean anything was wrong with your bg. That's just how I make multiple bgs, with slightly different runes in each.

The "dialogue" was how I read your two responses in my head, nothing against either of you @GoldTiger @Chris

Perhaps working backwards to make a non highlander bg with deck building in your case. Find the runes you want to run x2 of and then play some games with those. If you find out you just like running highlander bgs then there is always going to be some kind of draw back, however it is out weighed if you select very efficient runes the same way your opponent would run x2 of their efficient runes.

I personally enjoy the playstyle of Highlander decks, although that is a handicap and more times than not I am digging my own grave by doing so. The game is designed to run multiple runes and it doesn't benefit the player to run a highlander bg the same way it does to run multiple of several runes.

As far as the OP I think we are getting new abilities soon. The last of our abilities were Relic and Equip driven which did a lot for those playstyles to build around but I do think more can be done which is perhaps the answer to future issues with relics. If there is an issue with select relics that have HP values too high or this or that, I'd say relics have then gotten to a point similar to Detection where the player has to decide to add those counter mechanics into their bg and play accordingly if they don't.

I'd prefer to see more added than have them removed, similar to more stealth/Detection than have the mechanics change as a whole. If the formula is 1:1 for those runes...I think it is pretty straight forward enough and we just need to find answers to solve any issues a 1:1 ratio produces.

Create a new Relic Guardian ability that buffs differently; not saying to rework RG

Or perhaps a new ability similar to Impassioned that procs with Relics. Or a new gift ability that adds HP to a relic, or sabotage, or make them with aggregate. There are a lot of answers, but imo 1:1 ratios are as simple as you get. Time to add more if there's an issue.

TL;DR (cause I always post walls) Regarding the OP I think relics with a 1:1 ratio or mechanics that have been established should not be reworked when their values are 1 (imo that's as simple as it gets which is good) to begin with. My opinion is to add more of those mechanics and have new abilities be the answer for any issues a 1:1 relic may have; add more Detection/Stealth rather than limit those instances for example.

 

summon relic abilities that have a cool down and then the summon relic has full hp is silly.

 

There is nothing wrong with Valdaci imo but yeah maybe add aggregate to the Relics/Equipment

 

Your thoughts on Biogenesis and Geogenesis @OriginalG1 ?

Those are passive spawns, can move and get amped by the same sources as Champions.

 

ya, hatted those from the start.
edit: i was thinking of propagate self, i have to off site to find out what Biogenesis and Geogenesis is.
edit: ya free stuff is better then no stuff. Biogenesis is not the worst thing ever. Geogenes is is op, but it is the only thing that makes rockforger playable. But many thing in pox are just that, playable or not.
my main beef is with Skeezick Machinist and summon Gatling gun. Even within their own faction Skeezick Arthromancer summons a a relic with lower hp then the one you have to pay nora for or she used to, i noticed the description has changed. Deploy relics should be a one and done ability. Even the 15 hp thing is bs.

 

When this champion is deployed and at the start of its every third turn, a X is summoned in an adjacent space

 

That's not really true, if you remove his equip, it can win you the game very easily. Just for an easy example, I move in with a black blade baron equipped with bone cloak, you remove the ewuip for a 30 nora spells (net gain 5 me), then I effectively just lost a 105 nora unit due to unforseen, bad luck. This is why defensive equips are a joke. I almost exclusively use equips as a very high gamble, or when it's extremely effective no matter what. For example, a 59 nora frenzied zombie is op as Firk, because he'll get a free attack in and I don't even care if you break the equip and give him wandering, he's just that cost efficent. Just another example of why equips are not used in the meta unless they are overpowered. Horrible design.

 

No, you lost that Nora because you refused to play around a rune you know existed and you should have assumed he ran.

Its the same story as when you were complaining about medal of valour. You acknowledge these runes exist, yet refuse to use that knowledge in a game. You have to anticipate your opponents moves to become a better player.

Tldr: git gud

 

To come back to the nora gen discussion by @GoldTiger

Your logic is that if your opponent is better than you nora gen is useful because it can help to overcome the equivalent nora advantage of a better opponent.

Then it makes sense to me to always have nora gen because: vs the players worse than you one will win anyway and the so the nora gen should only increase your win chance or you are playing against a better player so it helps offset the skill level difference.

Also to nitpick you must be better than a good player since your win verses good players 60% which is a lot more than 50%

 

Being 30 nora ahead isn't the same as being 30 nora behind, especially against players of different skill levels. That's why its good vs one and bad vs the other.

You also have to remember Marsh Song isn't just pooping 20 nora into your bank instantly.

 

Explain. They look plenty similar to me.

Edit: I think I get what you're getting at. Vs worse players the edge that Nora gen gives you is insignificant, you'd be better spending that Nora on killing stuff. Vs better players, that edge can win you the game.

Right?

 

Nora gen is in theory very powerful and should be used, its a tool that helps you put more power into the game later, but if you lose a 70nora champ because you used nora gen rune instead of keep deploying, keep casting spells, it will cost you the game early. atm defense is so much weaker in long term then offensive, there is no version of amp, surge, fury, render... for defense, and in my point of view deploying a nora mine puts you into defense mode instead of using that 25nora for aggression.
Marsh song has a benefit also that if you have any adaptive unit out, it gets stronger at the same time as you gain nora and spells have no "free" counter like relics that can be countered by dropping seism champ

ive tried alot of decks with FF IS and nora gen, but removed them all, its better to try to find nora effective units instead, hp vs nora, nora vs damage potential instead of try to get nora gen down so you can deploy these expensive units that you have and want down.

 

Using Marsh Song doesn't "create nora deficiency". Killing stuff does. You're not going in to their nora bank and taking away 20 nora.

Marsh Song gives you nora, in essence, putting yourself further ahead. You're going in to your nora bank and adding 20 nora.

While these two look like similar situations they aren't exactly the same.

In terms of basic maths if both players start at 100 nora:
If you're 30 nora ahead - 130 nora vs his 100 nora, the % difference is +30% to you.

If hes 30 nora behind - 100 nora vs his 70 nora, the % difference is +42% to you.

Putting an opponent behind is far more valuable than putting yourself ahead, when considering equal nora deficiencies either way. Now flip the situation and you can see why being behind is very bad (since generally opponents aren't putting themselves ahead by using things like marsh song) which is why I value marsh song more against good opponents (who I presume to be behind in my own fantasy scenarios) than equal ones. Why put myself 30 nora ahead when I can put him 30 nora behind etc.

If that doesn't quite make sense lets exacerbate it to both players starting at 30 nora:
30 nora ahead - 60 nora vs his 30 nora, i.e. +100% nora to you.
30 nora behind - 0 nora vs his 30 nora, you have no nora you cant even deploy. Your opponent can deploy a carrionling to victory.

Stretch these values over the course of a game to hundreds or thousands of nora while 600nora vs 500 nora looks the same as 500 vs 400 nora its not.

Lets take it in a simple case of each champion costing 100 nora for examples sake and create 100 nora deficiencies at different times:
1 champion vs 2 champions. The 2champions will easily win
5 champions vs 6 champions. The 6 champions will have a slight edge
11 champions vs 12 champions. It's basically up to skill at this point.

Basically putting your opponent behind (i.e. killing and invalidating their nora usage) is better than putting yourself ahead (realistically only things like marsh song and nora miner etc. since both players are usually accruing nora at equal rates). Note this is all with the assumption that against the better player you can't typically create the nora deficiency yourself since you're not good enough or they are too good or their BG too efficient etc. If you could then they aren't the better player/BG are they and you should just play normally get it?

 

Nora mine has 25 hp...