Vespyr
16 chars
How I would change cards and should not be on the balance team
2 Likes
3/5 sounds good on paper but it usually sucks.
4/5 doesnât die unless you have a very specific removal/gonna sacrifice a big minion/willing to take 4 to face.
The effect is not what makes caller scary - it is the body it leaves behind inconjugation to it and how close is it to late game threats (which in vanar means game over most of the time).
It goes like that - you got cryo to keep hand size and remove early duders.
You ramp a little, the ideal hand will be - finisher, backup and caller or two.
Because on the seven Mana mark you will want to snipe at least one backline game breaker minion or any minion that might distrupt your lethal. on 8 you blow up, they answer, you back it up by another finisher.
I really believe that vanar doesnât need that much attention, I like vanar as not beginner friendly faction.
Most of vanar cards are the way they are on purpose.
3/5 caller will be either spent as cheep early game removal or dropped on late game with easy body to remove.
4/5 is where bodies start to get real scary, and vanar polarize the gap by adding faieâs bbs to it or any other out of the blue Nuke lethal.
1 Like
I disagree. Xor is probably the only deck I would consider it to be an auto include. Yes it doesnât have good stats, but having good stats isnât what a value generating card should have. It should have decent or bad stats depending how impactful the effect is. Plus getting an extra spell is worth a lot more in decks that want them, like in Xor. While Loremaster would be somewhat better, but the minion itself after being played usually doesnât matter. Whereas, Fugitive does matter after being played. Even though youâre playing it defensively, usually you are the player who wants to be more defensive in the first place to try and be able to pull off the trial. I see getting a spell immediately, a decent sized body at 5 health and a chance to get value from it over more than 1 turn as a bit too much.
Its usually a 6 Mana combo, with Egg (1), Activator (4) and Greater Fortitude (1). All coming from out of hand. But part of the reason I donât mind the 8 damage as much. would be because it can be body blocked or provoked which can be commonly done by a lot of decks. Whereas, other out of hand damage usually doesnât care about the board, like Decimus Spikes, Warbird, 8 gates + PF, Mantra etc. But those out of hand damage cards Iâve mentioned, also usually come out at later turns past the 6 mana point or gets used over several turns for Warbird. But like I mentioned earlier, I wouldnât be against nerfing Ripper by removing Celerity, Rebirth or changing its attack.
Snowshot knows more about Vanar than I do and if he thinks that it would make the card worse, then Iâm not gonna argue against him. I just donât see Cloudcaller on ladder at all. Iâve played against more battle pet decks than I have Cloudcallers.
3 Likes
I really donât want this card to play more often, getting chain callered will make me drive my head through the monitor.
3 Likes
Rae: Eh sure fine. I donât really care much regardless, but at least give it 3 atk.
Kha: Meh, mixed with rae this is probably balanced. Still not healthy though. Rush/Flying combined is a bad deal. Kha really just ought to loose flying, could even possibly cost 4 mana at that point.
Wanderer: This is the bare minimum. I want it completely destroyed or reworked though. Its evil.
Lance/Ripper: I think this is a pretty fair way to go about things. Small enough not to be crippling, but enough to take it down a peg. Not the exact route I would chose my self, but I would be happy with this.
Cleric/Vit: Perfect, same thoughts as the Lance/Ripper change.
Fugitive: Wat? This card is already not that great.
Cloudcaller: Hum this might be a nerf. I am with snow shot on leaving this one alone. Its pretty balanced as is. @snowshot its far from an auto include, but it is very good, balanced, and can fit lots of places. I skip it more often than not, but really love it when I do run it.
Sister: Mmm, not enough. I think just strait adding that line to its current text would be fair. That way some Vespyrs can even double dip.
Huldra: +1 atk might be a nerf, lets just reduce its cost by one and or make it a vespyr its self.
This is a horrible design philosphy, one that CPG has fallen prey to many times. The smaller a nerf the better. You want things to be balanced, you donât want things to go from overpowered to never played.
4 Likes
Ok so I will say a personal opinion which I expect not to be popular but kind of surprises me when I normally see this kind of nerfs ideas, (which I actually love in fact XD) and itâs related to rae and fault. Letâs see.
I remember when the âstandardâ gamemode came to duelyst and started thinking which cards could loose potential and which others could shine because of rotations. And you know I think rae is ok as it is, but fault isnât. I mean, imagine rae to be out of the rotation, fault would be a much difficult card to use. But if by any chance had appeared another 0 cost minion, that minion will be a problem again. And that is a problem from fault perspective in terms of balance, as it limits a lot creative space. I think that in this âwildâ mode that is what we have now, is ok to have such broken things but if every faction could have them (each one in its unique way).
Thatâs the reason why I defend raising up the cost of fault by one before doing rae so. But by the end of the day one of those cards should definitely change XD.
Appart from that I think nerfs are all good. I suggest buff to makantor and Phoenix fire and nerf to party elf. Love reading your opinion 
3 Likes
Kha is the problem. Fault/Rae existed for a long time without kha and was never a problem. Kha/Fault existed for some time WITHOUT Rae and was still a problem.
2 Likes
Thatâs a point. I consider that combination of cards is a big problem, so I would accept a nerf to kha alone in that case. The proposed kha neerf seems legit, I would also consider buffing its health (jaja no joke) or removing flying but in this kind of deck where dervishes spawn in the middle could not be enough. Also limiting itâs deathwish to trigger only in certain conditions (for example, a random nearby dervish transforms) without changing stats could be a really meaningful, deep and interesting nerf to promote intelligent plays and positioning rather than just op works always crap
3 Likes
I understand your perspective. Rae is most known as a fault enabler, so hitting fault neuters the fault + Rae combo.
That said, Rae being 0 mana presents other problems, mainly with sniping mana tiles to accelerate plays. Turn one 4-drops and early Sandswirl Readers, among other issues, are things that Rae enables.
Lyonar had a 0 mana minion as well: Slo (pre-nerf). Slo had the same problems as Rae. Things like pulling off Holy Immolation earlier than average and playing turn 1 Spelljammer were too much, resulting in the nerf to costing 1.
3 Likes
I agree with you! The thing is that 0 cost minions can be problematic in general, because is how good enablers to other cards are. But I consider that that highly depends on the faction you are considering. For instance, lyonar which is a more tempoysh faction and having access to SLO 0 mana could be a problem for combo enablers, flooding re board ans also was a really good with a really good ability (provoke) with a lot of health for a 0 mana costo Minion was too much but the thing is that I think that from vetrubiana perspective things are quite different because the problem is due to a combination of only two cards, as Rae not being as good as slo in terms of self strength and synergy strength (with almost this only but enormous exception of fault)
3 Likes
Iâm a little confused. A 3/5 is poultry but a 4/5 is spectacular? I donât know about you, but I would certainly give up one stat to play a card a whole turn sooner.
You mentioned that a 4/5 demands specific removal. With that said, what removal deals with a 3/5 and not a 4/5? Just Plasma Storm and maybe Natural Selection? I guess if youâre facing exactly Vaath, you got me there. 
Comparing it to Cryogenesis, they each deal 4 damage. The difference being, instead of adding a vespyr to your hand, you get a 3/5 on the board. It may cost another mana core to cast your bbs, but accessing a tile on turn 2 is fairly commonplace.
I understand you love wall decks. For walls, single target removal is often not amazing. For midrange decks though, it can be backbreaking. Itâs just too much early tempo for my tastes.
3 Likes
Precisely. The Control Magmar match up is really even and interesting, and 4/5s are super important there. Considering caller is generally run alongside ramp I would much prefer the 4/5.
On the flip side of that, now the card will be much stronger in other matchups. Now we have polarization, rock paper siccsors, matchup game probelms.
Wether its a buff, a nerf, or both in either case its probably not a good thing.
4 Likes
Rae is what I call a catalyst, meaning it is the enabler of certain plays. Now, fault is the biggest payoff for this enabler, but that doesnât mean other problems canât arise later or that it doesnât enable anything else.
Duelyst has other enablers. Iâll use Darkfire Sacrifice as an example. Long ago in a galaxy far far away it was the enabler for Grandmaster Variax. Variax costed 7, and DFS let it be played for 5, making the Variax decks a true terror. Variax was nerfed to 8 mana and the world rejoiced.
Later, a new card wandered in calledâŚWanderer. DFS would go on to enable turn 2 wanderer plays and make many a player shed tears! 
We may have addressed an initial payoff card, but we didnât address the catalyst, so it found a new payoff card. Hope this makes sense. 
4 Likes
This is one train of thought that I am generally opposed to. Why go after enablers instead of problems? Take ramp for example: If a card is so good that getting out early is a problem, that is a problem with the card not the ramp. So why nerf the ramp when you could hit the problem? (Given I supported flash not stacking, and would support the same with darkfire, as extreme highroll is also bad. But am very against other changes)
Variax of the day was way over the topâŚbut frankly IDK if it would even be able to compete with todays meta at seven mana. But sadly that is a nostalgic sore spot, and my Abyss bias is likely showing.
Wanderer is a problem period, even outside of ramp. Its still an evil nightmare even in factions that have zero ramp.
Lets fix problems, and not enablers. Cool flashy stuff, and a strong base is great. Broken problems are not.
2 Likes
I have an analogy for this.
Say youâre uprooting some pesky weeds. You donât just address what you see at ground level. Itâs likely that the problem lies beneath the surface. If you only pluck out what you see, the weed continues to grow. But if you attack the ârootâ of the problem (ha-haâŚIâm such a dork 
), thatâs when the weed problem truly stops.
You may see that Wanderer or Fault can cause problems. But are they the root of the problem? Or is there another force at work beneath the surface thatâs causing the real issue?
2 Likes
I like your anaolgyâŚhowever I think it actually supports my argument. The root of the problem is stuff like Wander and Kha (Not fault or rae, rae would be the visible weed in this analogy). Now I do agree that 0 mana units have been a proven problem on their own, although much less so in Vet. But I am not against adjusting Rae, I just do not find it to be the real pressing issue.
I think Fault is fair and balanced. Rae has some issues, but is not broken. Kha is the root of the problem. And while I could support rae getting hit as well, I do not want to go overkill and hit both it AND kha.
Although if teamwars is any indication with Fault banned outright and often BOA and or Sandswhirl as well, vet is still doing fine. So I would be fine with hitting both Kha/Rae as they are both problematic.
3 Likes
The difference between 4 attack and 3 attack is imo the biggest difference in the game.
For example - zendo.
I donât tech for one removal I tech for most removals meaning if I got a unit that can Dodge every one of magmarâs removal Iâm good - this one will stick and stay a threat.
On the other hand 4 attack con trade into shadowdancer/ decimus/thorn and most of the annoying units on top of the effect and stay alive.
3 attack canât do it.
Dropping a unit that packs removal on random enemy considered nothing since you need to trigger it on an important unit.
Plus - if you ramp as vanar even this is not a problem, since 6 Mana is the other dudeâs 4 or 5 Mana.
Regarding walls, I love every vanar deck (that is not faice). There is a difference between wall decks, ice age decks should not be played as embla decks.
The way I play walls single target is very important since I want to counter as much as I can until the finish.
The worst case for walls is not to be able a backline threat that might kill you the turn after.
Edit: autocorrect killed my writing.
4 Likes
Ok so letâs consider talking about which is the real root of the problem. I can consider in some factions some spells to be it because of their effects are made for being enablers. For example flash or sacrifice. Those cards could be problematic and limit design space. But a 0 cost minion that the only thing it does bad is costing 0 shouldnât be the root by any means.
1 Like
But you donât get a spell immediately. Thatâs also why Loremaster is better. You usally donât need more than 1 copied spell anyways.
An Aphotic Drain, Loremaster, Aphotic Drain 5 mana turn is way better than a 6 mana Aphotic Drain Fugitive turn.
5 mana is just so much.
In this TW season Xor was played six times, 5 times without Fugitive. Doesnât seem an autoinclude to an already weaker (but annoying) deck.
But like I said your nerf would turn an interesting card into a dead one. 3/5 is still terrible for a 5 drop, especially if it doesnât do anything on the same turn. And because you have to wait a whole turn you need to play it even more defensively, so a +1 attack buff is not doing anything.
2 Likes