example of a nuetral spell: 4/5 cost “destroy an enemy minion”
example 2: another 4/5 cost “dispel an enemy minion”
if they can make nuetral minions work nuetral spells shouldn’t be too much different.
Nuetral spells/Generals; yes or no?
1 Like
sure they can be played to support other factions but as a standalone card type they don’t really hold their own. The generals aren’t made to support those play types. The generals are made to support their own faction.
1 Like
Then why do they necessarily have to be neutral? I can imagine a Lyonar golem general slinging Warblades and Vanquishers, or an Arcanyst Abyssian General using Death Knell in the late-game. Granted, the chances of fourth generals seem pretty unlikely, but at least they’ll more practical and consistent than neutral generals whose entire arsenal would also be available to faction generals.
1 Like
If they’re neutral spells, every general should have access to them. Is there a way to ensure that these cards would be exclusive to neutral generals only?
1 Like
Exactly. Cause there has to be room for player creativity in deck building. Do you know how boring it is to queue up to a general and before turn 1 know every card in their deck? Cause thats whats gonna happen if they make a neutral general with “bbs: give +2/1 to mechs”
And halcyon, the only way to do that would be to have an awkward and terribly undescriptive bbs like “upgrade the neutral cards in your hand” turning certain minions into spells like reliquerian or monolithic vision
1 Like
But at that point you’re just creating a new faction.
Every faction has better removal at the 4/5 mana cost than that so why would anyone play neutral exclusive when other factions have holy immo, OBS, BoA, Dark Transformation, etc.
Why even have this with the existence of lightbender and shroud who can also leave a body on the board?
1 Like
That could work. I just think that decks like mechazor, golems, arcanyst, etc. Are less immersive when the generals don’t fit the part. I want a giant robot mech general. I want a giant rock golem general. I want a warlock type general. It’s weird to me to play certain generals with certain nuetral types when the generals look nothing like the cards in the deck. Again this was just an idea in my head and I wasn’t really looking into the very core specifics of how it would work. But I think it would add a fun dynamic. The nuetral generals could also be like the “rogue” generals. Where they don’t have to look the part of other factions because like nuetral minions they can look like anything. For me the idea is more for immersion and more deck building possibilities rather than “this will change the competitive game forever” which is what everybody commenting is talking about. I’m honestly starting to think that this community just doesn’t like change because every single idea I bring up is swiftly answered with 100 no’s.
1 Like
Then create a new faction? I mean we’ve had about enough time to make a new faction. I was honestly surprised that there wasn’t a new faction when I came back after like a solid year of not playing.
1 Like
It’s not that no one likes change, but we just don’t want ideas to be put into the game without serious thought otherwise you get things like October Reva or Control Vanar metas.
For another example, look at Yu-Gi-Oh and the many, many new mechanics they are adding to the game specifically the extra deck. Not all change is good.
The kind of generals you are suggesting are just too specific to be fun and oranos is right, if I see you play Shidai for example I know you are playing a deck with a shite ton of spells which makes it boring regardless of the outcome.
Maybe create a mechanic similar to the Lyonar Grandmaster or a mechanic similar to Geomancer to transform your general or its BBS, but I’m not the creative type so I dunno.
I am ambivalent on the point of creating a new faction mainly because it could become too much for CPG to manage making the game very unstable and also consider the lore part of it. I also wonder just what niche could this new faction fill to make unique from others, this can only be done if they introduce completely fresh mechanics making the issue even more complex.
If it can be done, great! But I don’t know for certain, until then we can all just keep suggesting faction ideas and the others can just “NO” us into submission.
Also, if you want to see some faction ideas other people have had I think @thefirstgokun had one in a dedicated thread for card ideas called the Unami Coven or something like that.
2 Likes
Pretty much, and that’s why I’m against archetypes that support neutral cards. With the existence of specific factions and BBSs, neutrals can never be an archetype. Games like Yugioh are able to print supports for vanilla cards because deckbuilding is so much more flexible there.
Not all change is worth praise. There is a distinction between change for the better and change for the worse. As for this idea, it’s simply unexecutable.
1 Like
I mean it’s gotten to a point where the changes I’ve suggested are so diverse and from looking at other threads on the suggestions page literally no suggestions get very many yes’s. Also the yugioh mechanics keep that specific game interesting. I think people confuse a faster focus of a card game with the game being out of control. Every single card game has metas like yugioh the only reason yugioh gets the bad rap it does is because everybody is used to card games that are slow as molasses. Not to mention the way this game is designed literally prevents it from becoming like yugioh unless they just up and got rid of the mana system entirely.
1 Like
We have nuetrals spells
Ephemeral Shroud 2 mana dispell a space
Rust Crawler 2 mana destroy an artifact
Saberspine Tiger 4 mana do 3 damage
Spelljammer 4 mana draw 2 cards at the end of the turn
Emp 7 mana dispel the board and destroy all artifacts
Why does a game focus on board interaction,need nuetral non interactive spells ?In all honesty factions spells should be a little more rare than they currently are things should be more unit focused.
1 Like
Sunset Paragon ≈ nearby Homeostatic Rebuke 
3 Likes
The devs said they won’t do it as there will be simply too many cards to balance around.
1 Like
Hey, we know that, it’s just a cycling topic …
… and we also know new players don’t use search engine 
2 Likes
I just want a new race, with 3 generals for it. And like, 400 more cards in the game and a better deck builder and ban THL and ban rebuke. Also by tomorrow.
1 Like
yeah, it’s pretty easy to make a neutral general: BBS (this turn the first time your general takes damage, permanently lose 1 mana; summon a ROOK from your deck)
neutral spell: (cost 4) give a neutral minion that cost 7 or more +1/+1 lower the cost of golems in your hand by 2
BBS: alied minions gain +1/0 this turn.
neutral spell: (cost 3) minions that have their attack boosted gain 0/+2 and provoke until your next turn, draw a card.
BBS: golems you play this turn lower the cost of your next non-bloodborn spell by 1.
neutral spell: (cost 3) give golems you summoned this turn forcefield, add a random golem from your deck to your hand.
BBS: Dispel ANY non-token Arcanyst, add a copy of it to the hand of the player that controled it.
neutral spell: (cost 5) whenever you add a card to your hand this turn (except by drawing) play it inmediatly.
BBS: dispel a minion you control, draw a card.
neutral spell: (cost 1) give a golem: if this card is dispeled add a diamond golem from your deck, it cost 2 less.
neutral spell: (cost 3) deal 1 damage to anything, draw a card.
neutral spell: (cost 1) move one of your minions one space.
neutral spell: (cost 6) resummon the last minion destroyed this turn, it gains +1/0.
neutral spell: (cost 4) destroy your non-token minions gain life equal to their attack.
neutral spell: (cost 2) give a cost 3 minion forcefield.
neutral spell: (cost 5) give a minion rush, add a random arcanyst from your deck.
This topic was automatically closed 5 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.