how about some proposals of tweaks for the chronomancer cards in the next (possible) balance update!
wondering where to start? let's look at the stats of sept 2014. we can see that time is best (55% or more) vs mecha, control, illusion, beast, hermit, cultist and golem. note that time is the only class having more than 53% win rate overall (and there is no class having less than 47%)
crosschecking with 2013 stats (feb, june, oct) to take out some statistical anomalies, we can see that control and cultist are not really that bad match-ups. of the aforementioned classes, the ones that stand out (a little bit) are illusion, hermit and golem
so let's think of card tweaks, having in mind those 3 match-ups if possible:
(i will try to make one proposal for each card. of course all of them should not be implemented together, as that would probably be quite excessive)
T1 - not too many options here. i like the new design concept (less HP bigger reward). perhaps it could go a little bit further (-1 HP) but that's as far as the card can be stretched. besides, i don't think T1 is vital for the chronomancer's strategy, more like a tactical weapon if the suitable situation arises. so there is probably little need to weaken it
T2 - the timeblazer can be used more easily to end games or just apply board/life pressure. -1 HP would not impact her usage overall, but it would weaken her effectiveness slightly (regarding board presence). another option would be to try her at 4/20 or something similar, but i'm not sure how that would pan out
T3 - an on/off spell. it can range from bone crushing to effectively useless, depending on the rest of the card pool (luck factor) and the overall board setup (skill factor). i think that max power = 9 is probably the sweet spot here. however, it is an exceptional spell vs hermit and golem, two of the three classes that struggle a bit vs time as we've seen above. so perhaps setting max power = 8 could be considered as a practical solution?
T4 - the chronomancer's trademark spell. this one had started as a 5 damage spell, then quickly got nerfed down to 4. i think taking it down to 3 would not be too much of a blow, since its main usage is to take the extra turn obviously. however, one less point of damage will sometimes be a life or death difference. i like the symmetry (4 mana -> 4 damage) but i guess you have to sacrifice little things like that in order to achieve balance
T5 - very interesting effect, one we don't really want to mess with. -1 HP would be my suggestion here as well
T6 - her attack (4) should not be messed with. we could try reducing HPs to help vs illusion sometimes. however, i doubt it would have substantial impact on the other two match-ups. also, the card starts becoming a lot worse overall. too much trouble for too little benefit, so i would probably leave her alone
T7 - very strong creature, often targeted with tornado. how about -1 attack? again, this would not impact its usage overall, but it would make it weaker vs small opposing creatures (not too much difference vs big guys)
T8 - i don't think this is responsible for many victories vs hermit or golem. it can provide the damage burst necessary to race the illusionist, but again i don't want to make the card much worse overall just to fix one match-up. reducing HPs would not make a difference here, while it could possibly disrupt the balance in other match-ups, so i would not consider it too much
so what do you people think? do you like those proposals? do you have any of your own? or perhaps do you believe that time is ok exactly as it stands right now?
Modified by filip on 2014-10-14 01:16:25 Wavelength | 2014-10-14 03:05:30 |
I really wish I had the individual card winrates, because that needs to be part of the consideration too when deciding which cards to nerf and which ones to leave alone. These are just my personal guesses for balance based on thousands of games with Chronomancer; I don't have any amazing statistical methods or anything to back them up: T1 - Leave alone (reducing the HP any further would make it vulnerable to Elf Hermit + Sweep, which I don't think is healthy) T2 - Timeblazer is a girl?! Also, leave alone T3 - Cap the damage to 7, but allow any creature to be chosen, even if it has greater than 7 attack T4 - Increase damage to 5. Add effect "You cannot use Time cards next turn" T5 - Reduce HP by 2. I believe Timeweaver is the single best card for its price among all Special cards, and I'd wager it's the reason for such high Time winrates. T6 - Increase HP by 1. My instinct is that this card is the weak link of the class. Alternatively, as a rework: Reduce attack by 1 (to 3), reduce HP by 8 (to 27), and add additional effect: Increases the attack of all other owner's creatures by 1. T7 - Reduce HP by 1 or 2. I think taking away 1 attack might be too much (if we did so, we'd have to increase the HP by at least 1); Chrono Engine's ability to wipe out an opposing creature for a free turn "unopposed" alongside Time Stop is the reason it still looks so good after repeated nerfs, and reducing the attack to 3 would make it much harder for Engine to do so. T8 - Leave alone Modified by Wavelength on 2014-10-14 03:11:53 FORESTRY | 2014-10-14 05:07:35 |
T1 idk... its the problem that when its used properly it seems broken, but its not an easy setup, so safe bet to not touch.
T2 according to my calculations has good presence value in itself with added benefit of ability trigger... but none uses it as presence becausetime mana is so valuable, so i think the balance of this one is dependant on how other cards get tweaked... it say minus 1 or even 2 hps, since ability is situational but potentially strong, so weaken its presence factor.
T3 id rather not comment other than it shuts down destruct play, but then again, so can CursedUniporn
T4 proper use is to molest players that fall behind in presence or just prolong an advantegeous board position... the possibility of doing a 8 damage sweep and the turn distortion with dragon just seems unfair, so i wouldnt mind its creature control aspect getting nerfed.
T5 already dies to Stoner's Rain... doesnt that keep everyone content?... its presence value is not outrageous anyhow.
T6... no Wave, i know its your wet dream to make it into a MinotaurCommander on crack, but please be realistic!... i think shes fine, its a brute force assault unit like MerfolkOverlards and parallels in presence and effect... seems fine.
T7 seems ok, just compare to Hypnotist as reference...
T8... compare to AncientGiant... seems fine Modified by Wavelength on 2014-10-14 06:43:31 Wavelength | 2014-10-14 06:48:19 |
T6... no Wave, i know its your wet dream to make it into a MinotaurCommander on crack, but please be realistic!... i think shes fine, its a brute force assault unit like MerfolkOverlards and parallels in presence and effect... seems fine. I'm all for cute puns and wild assertions about my fetishes XD ... but let's refrain from dropping the F-bomb, please. Just wondering, what don't you like about my crazy rework idea? T7 seems ok, just compare to Hypnotist as reference... The reference is a "worst case scenario" though. Time's strength is turning presence into speed. T4, T5, and T7 (in a weird way) are examples of cards that can do that really well. And I think they're the cards that most contribute to Time's high winrate. (T2 and T3 have tendencies toward that style of play, too. T6 creates speed out of thin air but doesn't combo well with established presence.)
T3 - Cap the damage to 7, but allow any creature to be chosen, even if it has greater than 7 attack
T4 - Increase damage to 5. Add effect "You cannot use Time cards next turn"
interesting ideas!
Modified by filip on 2014-10-14 09:52:29 mamoulian | 2014-10-14 10:45:05 |
T2 - Timeblazer is a girl?! Also, leave alone He's kinda breasty in that waistcoat. Also dynamite hip. Not sure.. T3 - Cap the damage to 7, but allow any creature to be chosen, even if it has greater than 7 attack I'm not sure that the second part is good idea. I'm more into a simply damage cut. T4 - Increase damage to 5. Add effect "You cannot use Time cards next turn" Like the idea of time cards ban! The other cards seems fine to me, maybe a little HP cut to chrono engine. Modified by mamoulian on 2014-10-14 10:49:22 mamoulian | 2014-10-14 10:48:48 |
...
Sorry I messed with the quotes... can't really figure it out.
srbhkshk | 2014-10-14 16:55:17 |
Nerf 3,5 and 7, the rest are okay.
RedRook | 2014-10-14 17:13:15 |
For what it's worth I thought I'd weigh in a little on this subject. There have been some excellent suggestions & ideas so far - I know my skills are not up there with you guys, but I'll throw my hat in the ring! I think the reason why Time is so strong against classes like Golem, Hermit, & Illusion is because if the class's innate ability to leverage board control. Once board advantage has been established, the Time class can release its full potential & crush the opponent. Unlike Mech which specializes in gaining board control (& keeping it) through creature damage & brute strength, Time capitalizes on utilizing the full potential of a strong board to devastating effect (which is why Mech is a good counter to Time). This is what makes the class so powerful when paired against classes like Illusion, Hermit, & Golem. With Illusion, Time can wipe out the Illusionist's rush by securing the board advantage with beefy creatures & effective sweeps. The Illusionist is not equipped to duke it out in a race of board control, though it does have some tools to combat this threat, like Spectral Mage & Oracle. As for Hermit, well... The Mad Hermit relies on quick bursts of rushing damage, often at the expense of prescience. The Chronomancer makes quick work of the low-health, junk rush creatures, breaking through to decimate the enemy line & rain damage on the Hermit. & agaisnt the Golem Master, the Chronomancer has quite an arsenal to bad-&-tag that hide-&-go-seek Golem. When the Time player has the advantage of board control with strong creatures & prescience, the Golem can run, but he cannot hide! - the Golem will be recieving damage left & right, making it very difficult for the Golem Master to protect herself while constantly losing life from that precious pain that is the Golem. (Time 3 is the Golem-bane!) Even with some nerfs to the Time class, the strategic theme of the class will remain the same, so those given classes that struggle against Time will still struggle... That's not to say that the class may not need some adjustments, however On to the cards! T1: This card is pretty well balanced as far as I am concerned - it is a weaker card with a good ability; great in the right circumstance, but under-average otherwise. Nice trade-off. T2: Little change is needed here in my opinion. There are several different ways to utilize this card depending on the individual player's preferences. Sometimes it cam pay off to simply use it for its prescience, while other times its ability can win games alone. If anything, a 1-2 life nerf would be good. T3: When considering lowering the damage on this one, one must also consider the pool of creatures that will be left to use the spell on. I like Wavelength's idea of capping the damage but allowing any creature to attack but dealing no more damage than the cap. 7 damage might be a little low, but 8 could be good. Just have to keep in mind continued spamming with creatures like Elementals. T4: This card is abused by players by double casting. That's the worst part of it. The effect & the damage are fine, but the double casting should go - I vote Wave's idea! T5: I think she is pretty good as she is, but that because she is one my favourite cards! Surely quite strong though. T6: I like her how she is. T7: -1 attack may be a bit too far, but a life nerf would help - especially since it is banned with Earth 2, so it is harder to heal. T8: Quite alright. I would also like to bring up another aspect of Time that lends to the class's power: a little thing I like to call IHS, or Intra-House Synergy - the class cards work extremely well together. Two of the best synergized cards of the class are T5 & T6. T5 coupled with either T3 or T4 can be used to devastating effect. With 7 special mana, the Chronomacer can summon T5 & blast the opponent with T3; with 8 mana she can summon T5 & stop the opponent dead in their tracks with T4. Deadly combos. T6 also works very well with T1 & T2. When T1 can attack when summoned, the possibility of triggering its ability becomes that mush more likely. & when paired with T6, T2 can absolutely dominate the opponent & overrun them, delivering both presence & direct damage. Of course, T7 also has it's dangers - play a card, *skip*, wham-bam T3-T4-T5. Also very dangerous when more than one makes it out, yikes! The Chronomancer's quiver is full of all kinds of weapons, making it a very difficult class to play against. Time is perhaps the best constructed class this game has to offer. HeadphonesGirl | 2014-10-14 17:38:35 |
I'd just keep it simple. On T3 cut down to 8. T4 cut the damage... it could probably do no damage at all and still be effective to be honest. It would just require more planning to use. 5 and 7 probably need hp nerfs. I think that would do it.
FORESTRY | 2014-10-14 18:14:34 |
... I'm all for cute puns and wild assertions about my fetishes XD ... but let's refrain from dropping the F-bomb, please.
Just wondering, what don't you like about my crazy rework idea?
... The reference is a "worst case scenario" though. Time's strength is turning presence into speed. T4, T5, and T7 (in a weird way) are examples of cards that can do that really well. And I think they're the cards that most contribute to Time's high winrate. (T2 and T3 have tendencies toward that style of play, too. T6 creates speed out of thin air but doesn't combo well with established presence.)
courruptz mod team altering mina words just cous hav ethnik spelling, disc-reaminating!
And Red:
I do think that Illussion is weak vs time in statistics, but maybe its a symptom that there are few good illussionists, since its a bluffing and sneaking thru the holes strategy generally... mech doesnt wreck illussion even though it controls the board, but it takes a longer game to do so, and by then illussion knows how to slip thru, or at least should... almost all classes intrinsically have a counter and a strong matchup.
forest rather than quick bursts, relies on weak but constant horizontal presence... thats why dragon with timestop makes for a huge difference in the outcome, where everything is so barely above the frontier of sweeps and why hasten wrecks all.
and yeah golem gets screwed hard with either hasten, priestess or tdrag
i think theres a consensus that 3-4 need some work, but moreso 4. Wavelength | 2014-10-14 19:00:01 |
I do think that Illussion is weak vs time in statistics, but maybe its a symptom that there are few good illussionists, since its a bluffing and sneaking thru the holes strategy generally... mech doesnt wreck illussion even though it controls the board, but it takes a longer game to do so, and by then illussion knows how to slip thru, or at least should... almost all classes intrinsically have a counter and a strong matchup. I LOVE Illusion lately for its versatility and ability to mindgame the opponent, and I feel like you're right that a lot of people don't play it the right way (going for the throat from turn 1 is only seldom the right way to play the class). I've been winning a lot with the class lately. But with that being said, I still feel like most of what Illusion can do, Time can do better. If you'd like, get in touch with ATOMS and have him run Time and I'll take Illusion, and let's see if I can even go 50/50.
FORESTRY | 2014-10-14 19:28:25 |
I LOVE Illusion lately for its versatility and ability to mindgame the opponent, and I feel like you're right that a lot of people don't play it the right way (going for the throat from turn 1 is only seldom the right way to play the class). I've been winning a lot with the class lately. But with that being said, I still feel like most of what Illusion can do, Time can do better. If you'd like, get in touch with ATOMS and have him run Time and I'll take Illusion, and let's see if I can even go 50/50.
Turn 3 spectral assasin FTW :thumbsup:
idk wave, its really hard to coordinate if you. dont have skype or messaging system, cause thats were we decide TheWillofSauron | 2014-10-16 12:24:49 |
For what it's worth, here my suggestions (some been already posted for ages lol :) ): T3 and T4 need to be nerfed/changed as they are the strongest Time cards to me if u look at thier costs. No other classes has such great low level cards (maybe Holy3 vs some particular combinations). T3: first, being a spell it should not touch GOLEMS. Then I'd change the damage to target OPPOSITE creature, cap is fine as it is I believe then, as soon as it depends on opponents' creatures, he/she has to think about that T4: please, simply disable that spell for 1 turn after it has been cast. Double/triple T4 are outrageous. All the rest can stay as they are, even if I still believe T7 is quite too good and I'd lower its HP by 1 or 2, simple as that. My 2 cents, mm75
Froggen | 2014-10-19 11:02:11 |
What about change the mana cost? Time stop->5 mana Timeweaver->4 mana
T3: first, being a spell it should not touch GOLEMS. Then I'd change the damage to target OPPOSITE creature, cap is fine as it is I believe then, as soon as it depends on opponents' creatures, he/she has to think about that
1)I think it shouldn t.Because T3 buff the attack of a monster so it isn t a like other spell. 2)T3 doesn t work good with low attack minion so i m fine with it. Sinist | 2014-10-19 11:27:54 |
T1 is probably fine as it is now. T2 is broken with T6, however this combo can hardly be solved by mere reducing hp. I like Wave suggestions for T3 and T4. T5 is not really that strong, so it doesnt need any nerfs. T6 is definitely overpowered, at least with chronoblazer... Maybe 3 attack would be enough for her. No buff of course -1 attack has nothing to do with time machine overall perfomance anyway. Its main problem shines when there is more than one T7 on the board. T8 is as good as Control 8, yet nobody wants to nerf giant. Hmm
Modified by Sinist on 2014-10-19 11:30:06 Wavelength | 2014-10-20 23:17:14 |
Cooler (or Estarh): would you be kind enough to give us the overall winrates for Time 5 and 6? It seems like there's some disagreement, even amongst high-level players, on which one represents the class' true power. What about change the mana cost? Time stop->5 mana Timeweaver->4 mana What changes would you then suggest making to Time Stop's damage and Timeweaver's attack/HP? T1 is probably fine as it is now. T2 is broken with T6, however this combo can hardly be solved by mere reducing hp. I like Wave suggestions for T3 and T4. T5 is not really that strong, so it doesnt need any nerfs. T6 is definitely overpowered, at least with chronoblazer... Maybe 3 attack would be enough for her. No buff of course -1 attack has nothing to do with time machine overall perfomance anyway. Its main problem shines when there is more than one T7 on the board. T8 is as good as Control 8, yet nobody wants to nerf giant. Hmm I'm really surprised to hear your opinions on 5, 6, and 7. I think that Timeweaver's versatility (it can provide speed, board control, or value as you need it - and it can play well offensively or defensively) makes it one of the strongest cards in the game. Meanwhile, Priestess can only provide speed and a bit of board control, and it can only play offensively. The combo with 2 is really nice but it's also really situational, don't you think? The reason I'm against -1 attack for Chrono Engine, as I mentioned earlier, is that the ability to clear whatever creature is in front of it means that it's usually taking 4-8 less damage for a turn, and thus surviving considerably longer. Alongside a Time spell and a sweep, Chrono Engine can usually do this - but with 3 attack, it might not be able to. So unless CE's winrate is over 55%, I think such a nerf (without compensating buffs) would be too extreme.
Modified by Wavelength on 2014-10-20 23:18:38 mezzzomix | 2014-10-21 08:11:49 |
Hi guys,
I am surely not as experienced as you are, but here are my two cents on the topic. In the past couple of months I played Illusionist and as discussed above this is one of the classes which really has problems with time. In my opinion there are a couple of things which might be done:
- T3 has to be reduced by 1 or 2 maximum damage, if you compare it with other special cards of mana 3 it is really, really strong at the moment - T4 as suggested do not allow it to be casted multiple times in a row - T6 hit points could be reduced by 2-5, very hard to kill for a 6 mana creature - change mana of T7 and T8: I think T7 is definitely the best card of time class (e.g. T7 often attacked with tornado, T8 almost never attacked with tornado) so it should cost the most mana, also when T7 is in play and owner skips turn, do an increase by 1 mana for a random power and not for necessarily for time. The reason behind this is that once T7 is in play and you can't respond to it properly (due to missing strong creatures or tornado etc.) you loose with a very high probability since it gets out of control very fast. What can you do against T7 with Illusionist? Maybe I6, I7, I8⦠All of them not really good counters, I think.
Hope this helps on the topic! Take care!
Valentyne | 2014-10-21 16:42:11 |
I'd just keep it simple. On T3 cut down to 8. T4 cut the damage... it could probably do no damage at all and still be effective to be honest. It would just require more planning to use. 5 and 7 probably need hp nerfs. I think that would do it. I have to agree with HPG, any balance changes that are to be made should probably just be minor ones, nothing totally class-altering. Though there have been some very neat ideas suggested! Sinist | 2014-10-21 19:01:19 |
I think that you overrate Timweaver a bit, Wave. frequently the only good combo for him is time 3/4 (not impressive stats, too). Which is even more situational than 6-2б which imho is kinda broken - way too much direct dmg, even illusion pales. As for priestess... she is extremely dangerous both in rush, board control (first strike for all creatures + 8/32 stats... with fire 5/7 - 12/10 attack! for 6 mana!) and hp control. Definitely not "a bit", as far as I am aware. No way it should be ever buffed, more like nerfed. P.S. Creature opposite to TIme machine should not "survive considerably longer"; if you only defend while opponent has 2 actions every turn, then you are screwed. It should kill machine as fast as possible, thus opposite crearure is probably strong enough not to care about some additional damage from engine`s attack. Thus T7 would go better with hp nerf Modified by Sinist on 2014-10-21 19:06:07 FORESTRY | 2014-10-21 19:03:37 |
Hi guys,
I am surely not as experienced as you are, but here are my two cents on the topic. In the past couple of months I played Illusionist and as discussed above this is one of the classes which really has problems with time. In my opinion there are a couple of things which might be done:
- T3 has to be reduced by 1 or 2 maximum damage, if you compare it with other special cards of mana 3 it is really, really strong at the moment - T4 as suggested do not allow it to be casted multiple times in a row - T6 hit points could be reduced by 2-5, very hard to kill for a 6 mana creature - change mana of T7 and T8: I think T7 is definitely the best card of time class (e.g. T7 often attacked with tornado, T8 almost never attacked with tornado) so it should cost the most mana, also when T7 is in play and owner skips turn, do an increase by 1 mana for a random power and not for necessarily for time. The reason behind this is that once T7 is in play and you can't respond to it properly (due to missing strong creatures or tornado etc.) you loose with a very high probability since it gets out of control very fast. What can you do against T7 with Illusionist? Maybe I6, I7, I8⦠All of them not really good counters, I think.
Hope this helps on the topic! Take care!
If we try to fix all bad matchups, the end result is ruining the diversity of the classes.
if time gets nerfed for illussion, then death should for forest, or forest for dominator...
Its very different interclass weakness from a general one. Wavelength | 2014-10-21 19:04:22 |
- change mana of T7 and T8: I think T7 is definitely the best card of time class (e.g. T7 often attacked with tornado, T8 almost never attacked with tornado) so it should cost the most mana, also when T7 is in play and owner skips turn, do an increase by 1 mana for a random power and not for necessarily for time. The reason behind this is that once T7 is in play and you can't respond to it properly (due to missing strong creatures or tornado etc.) you loose with a very high probability since it gets out of control very fast. The reason you can't make Chrono Engine into a Special 8 without altering its effect is that it would be hard-countered by Tornado. Special mana is generally accepted to be worth somewhere around 1.75x regular mana (except Forest and Golem, where the passive abilities mean that the cards have to be worth less, so the mana itself is also worth less), meaning that a Special 8 is worth 14 mana, and it would be too powerful if a 10 mana Tornado could wipe it away before it accomplishes anything. That's why all Special 8s (except Forest) will accomplish something the moment they come into play, even if they're wiped off the board the very next turn. I wouldn't necessary be against a rework that would swap Time's 7 and 8, for some of the reason you've mentioned - but it would require giving Chrono Engine a come-into-play effect, and rebalancing the stats appropriately. The two cards are fair enough for their cost right now that such an extreme measure (as swapping their places without changing stats) would make Engine too weak and Time Dragon far too strong. And I understand what you are saying about why Chrono Engine is so powerful, but I hate the idea of having any random elements in the Time class. It is a timing-rush class that relies on extremely precise calculations and gambits. It often gets its wins by being just half a turn ahead of the opponent. Introducing the uncertainty of not knowing what your mana levels will be next turn would completely destroy the joy of the Time class, I think. There are several cards in the game that are completely uncounterable if you're missing a lot of different cards that you'd need to counter them. No doubt the Engine is one of them. These are rare situations in Spectromancer, and the solution is to either try to control the pace of the game in a way that your opponent won't even want to use that card, or bluff like you do have the cards you need to counter it and hope that your opponent doesn't have it herself.
Froggen | 2014-10-22 07:45:41 |
@Wave: Nothing. Because i agree with Sinist. Maybe in other class T5 maybe is good, but in time class there are T7 and T8 (which are more valuable) so i prefer wait 2-3 turn. The power of chrono engine is about the respond:if you can t u have lost.Is like W12 but no one seem care about him. But i agree about keep giving time instead random element. About % win rate in descending order: T4>T8>T7>T3
mezzzomix | 2014-10-22 07:55:08 |
I agree. Random effects shouldn't be part of the time class. Still, if T7 is not killed very fast and the opponent can even cast a second T7, than it is almost impossible to come back (especially in combination with T4).
However, I don't completely agree with the switching problem of T7/T8. I agree that if T7 is switched with T8, T7 should have an immediate effect on gameplay (e.g. ability to cast two things takes effect immediately). On the other hand I think that currently a hard counter for T7 is tornado and this will not change. Tornado is seldom a good option to counter T8. I also think that 1.75 is a very big factor for the value of the special mana, I rather think it is around 1.5 (but again, you guys are better experts here).
Of course there are several cards, which are hard to counter but I think that T7 the hardest to counter due to 2 reasons. 1) You need "only" 7 mana to cast it and can do this as early as in the 5-th round. I.e. f12, w12, w11 are usually casted much later in the game and you have more time to prepare. 2) If you want to kill T7 right away before it has its effect you only have tornado. For w12/w11 you have e9/f11/f9, for f12 you have w6 as additional counters. The probability of having one of those counter-cards is much higher for f12/w12/w11 as for having tornado for T7. Modified by mezzzomix on 2014-10-22 08:02:45
Its very different interclass weakness from a general one.
you are right of course. this topic is about nerfing time in a general sense
the "problem" with time is its overall percentage (around 53% or close enough) and not its specific winrate against golem, illusion or forest
however, it certainly won't hurt if those nerfs happen to address matchups that are currently outside the 55%-45% range
in my opinion, these matchups do not represent a natural rock-paper-scissor situation (inherent to all card games) but indicate an area where a slight imbalance is taking place
Modified by filip on 2014-10-22 08:07:21 FORESTRY | 2014-10-22 09:10:35 |
...
you are right of course. this topic is about nerfing time in a general sense
the "problem" with time is its overall percentage (around 53% or close enough) and not its specific winrate against golem, illusion or forest
however, it certainly won't hurt if those nerfs happen to address matchups that are currently outside the 55%-45% range
in my opinion, these matchups do not represent a natural rock-paper-scissor situation (inherent to all card games) but indicate an area where a slight imbalance is taking place
dont make me pull out the calculator and the killratios! Wavelength | 2014-10-22 21:12:30 |
@Wave: Nothing. Because i agree with Sinist. Maybe in other class T5 maybe is good, but in time class there are T7 and T8 (which are more valuable) so i prefer wait 2-3 turn.
I don't usually speak for others, but I can guarantee you that Sinist would not support a Cost 4 Timeweaver with the same stats and effect that it has now. The power of chrono engine is about the respond:if you can t u have lost.Is like W12 but no one seem care about him. But i agree about keep giving time instead random element.
You're right that this is the power of Chrono Engine - but it's also the case (like you noticed with W12) for most high-utility, low-power creatures. Other examples are Ancient Horror, Elf Hermit, Master Healer, Mind Master, Insanian Shaman, and Blind Prophet. Some of these cards are considered powerful and some are not. My point is that the trait alone is not enough to say that the card is imba. About % win rate in descending order: T4>T8>T7>T3
Assuming you're saying these are the top four cards in the class, this can't be true, because T4 and T3's winrates MUST average to 53%, whereas T2 and T1's winrates must also average to 53%. If T4 has the highest winrate in the class, then T3 must have the lowest winrate. If you're just talking about these four cards relative to each other (and not the rest of the class), you could be right, but I'd find it hard to believe T8 does better than T7. By the way, is your name a reference to the famous Froggen from LoL by any chance? I agree. Random effects shouldn't be part of the time class. Still, if T7 is not killed very fast and the opponent can even cast a second T7, than it is almost impossible to come back (especially in combination with T4).
I'm glad you agree. :) I think the problem of multiple Chrono Engines within a game is overstated (I've won a lot of games against this, and lost several with this as well), and like I said to Froggen, this possibility to take over a game is not a reason for a nerf in itself. I do agree it needs a slight nerf as a recognition of its overall utility and power, but I'm putting emphasis on 'slight'. If the "+1 Time power" effect was changed, I'd like to see the key placed in the opponent's hand: "When you skip your turn, you gain 1 mana of the opponent's lowest mana type." (If it's Special, you get Time mana) That would be a good, non-random way to do it. But honestly, I like that you can buff your Time mana this way, and I wouldn't change it. However, I don't completely agree with the switching problem of T7/T8. I agree that if T7 is switched with T8, T7 should have an immediate effect on gameplay (e.g. ability to cast two things takes effect immediately). On the other hand I think that currently a hard counter for T7 is tornado and this will not change. Tornado is seldom a good option to counter T8. I also think that 1.75 is a very big factor for the value of the special mana, I rather think it is around 1.5 (but again, you guys are better experts here). The problem is that now, you've effectively given Chrono Engine the Time Dragon effect. Now we would need to change Time Dragon's effect completely to keep the cards sufficiently diverse. Some people do place the value of Special mana at 1.50x regular mana, but that view has generally fallen out of favor. One argument I've made for 1.75 are the fact that both Element 12's and Special 7's (7 x 1.75 = 12.25) do not have the "Tornado counter" restriction, but all Special 8's (sans Forest) have this restriction. Another is the evidence provided by "pure mana conversion" type of cards: Meditation uses your turn to increase your total elemental mana by 2 (I'd argue it's closer to 1.8 since Water mana is generally thought to be slightly more valuable than other elemental mana), whereas Overtime uses your turn to increase your Special mana by 1 (if this were only worth 1.5 regular mana, it would be inferior to Meditation and thus imbalanced). Similar calculus can be done with Divine Intervention, though the player healing makes it slightly trickier. Of course there are several cards, which are hard to counter but I think that T7 the hardest to counter due to 2 reasons.1) You need "only" 7 mana to cast it and can do this as early as in the 5-th round. I.e. f12, w12, w11 are usually casted much later in the game and you have more time to prepare. 2) If you want to kill T7 right away before it has its effect you only have tornado. For w12/w11 you have e9/f11/f9, for f12 you have w6 as additional counters. The probability of having one of those counter-cards is much higher for f12/w12/w11 as for having tornado for T7. I don't think your second argument is solid (W6 is only a counter for Dragon sometimes; if Dragon's owner has creature damage to amplify, Ice Guard becomes an awful counterplay)... but even allowing for that, couldn't you make the same exact arguments in an even stronger form for, say, Blind Prophet? Sorry to be kind of harsh to you guys! But I think you're both missing out on an extremely important game mechanic in strategic counterplay. Often in Spectro, killing a creature isn't the only way to counter it, and if you miss that tenet, some cards will certainly appear overpowered when they're not really. FORESTRY | 2014-10-22 22:20:08 |
yOU f##ks asked for it! This will be a the presentation of the context of Time creatures value vs. the nearest value of other creatures along with an analysis.
****************************************
Merfolk Overlord (26.4) Gobo Raiders (25.9) CHRONO HUNTER (25.9) Insanian Peacekeep (25.9) Time Dragon (25.3)
So, ChronoHunter is within the value of creatures that are offensive with an included additional ability... the deal with the other creatures is that their effect cannot fail, for its on-summon effect (battlecry =P) or even in one case, a generator... so even though the Hunter's ability could be considered more powerful than the others, it carries the burden of activation, and the possibility of it being wasted SO THIS CREATURE IS FINE
*********************************
Wolverine (27.1) Insanian King (26.9) TIME BLAZER (26.5) GoboHero (26.5) Scorp (26.5)
They all have in common a good presence value oriented in an agressive fashion... i would argue that Blazer not only has good presence, but a powerful ability to bypass presence and deal direct damage, and any manner of direct damage is always an expensive value SO I CONSIDER THIS AS TOO GOOD, for it can be played without its ability and still be of value, so i recommend either an attack or hp nerf.
********************************
Hypnotist (14.4) SteelGolem (14.1) TIME WEAVER (14.1) Ornithopter (14.1) PriestOfFire (13)
These creatures are in the range that they do not derive value from their presence, but rather from their abilities... F3 pales in comparison to any of these, but its the earliest to come and its a basic elements creature, so its only natural... Hypnotist has on arrival effect and passive generation, SteelGolem is invulnerable to spells and TimeWeaver facilitates spells, and Ornithopther breaks down horizontal trash compositions, so they seem to be on-par as powerful, they all have effects over the course of several turns... sure, 2x Weavers plays can look ridiculous, but then again, you should be countering with brute presence! THIS CREATURE IS FINE
********************************
Archangel (28.2) Oracle (27.6) PRIESTESS (27.4) Basilisk (27.2) Avenger (27.1)
This set has in common that they are good for brute forcing the opponnet... Overlord is 26.4 and its the most direct comparison, its only natural that a special class Overlord must be slightly better version... Archangel has much greater potential, but also a potential for much fail... Oracle is a very niche creature, and is arguably the weakest of the set... Basilisk is a living mountain with anti horizontal... Avenger is great presence with potential for scaling... THIS IS FINE
********************************
MindMaster (12) IceGolem (12) ENGINE (11.4) Turtle (11.4) AngryBear (11.1)
So its within value range of ability specialists, alongside Mindmaster... so its Attack and HP values are not broken, if anything, the ability is what's broken, but is it?... compare to Hypnotist (14.4) which has an upon arrival effect, better presence value and passive generation, so if you want to make a criticism on the Engine, you have to be able to address the comparison to Hypnotist (if anything, intraclass synergy with TimeStop, but the rest seem awful arguments) FROM PRESENCE AND ABILITY PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS FINE
********************************
ChronoHunter (25.9) Peacekeeper (25.9) T DRAGON (25.3) Bargul (25) GreaterDemon (24.7)
AncientGiant is 32.4, what differentiates them is that T Drag allows you to play 2 things same turn, while Giant makes the opponent lose a turn, but Giant has a much greater presence value, so i think wanting to nerf TimeDragon is just plain retarded tbh THIS IS FINE FORESTRY | 2014-10-22 22:37:43 |
So from pure value and abilities, the broken card is Blazer, but by a small margin... so the true problem is intraclass synergy and the spells, so the axis of imba would be:
Weaver + (T3 and 7-9attk creature) + T4 and an even or stronger board (expensive combo)
Priestess + T1 (free t mana) + T2 (constant direct damage)... (expensive combo)
Engine + Skipping (which is your own damn fault for not presencing harder)
*******************************************
I think that the core of imba is T3 and T4 rather than the creatures:
*T3 damage should be capped at 7 or 8 maybe *T4 should not do creature damage.
C'est fini mezzzomix | 2014-10-23 06:56:32 |
So from pure value and abilities, the broken card is Blazer, but by a small margin... so the true problem is intraclass synergy and the spells, so the axis of imba would be:
Weaver + (T3 and 7-9attk creature) + T4 and an even or stronger board (expensive combo)
Priestess + T1 (free t mana) + T2 (constant direct damage)... (expensive combo)
Engine + Skipping (which is your own damn fault for not presencing harder)
*******************************************
I think that the core of imba is T3 and T4 rather than the creatures:
*T3 damage should be capped at 7 or 8 maybe *T4 should not do creature damage.
C'est fini
Really, really good! Thank you! I like your suggestions at the end very much and think that they are based on a solid analysis.
Just one question: how do you compute the "creature value"? FORESTRY | 2014-10-23 07:57:34 |
... Really, really good! Thank you! I like your suggestions at the end very much and think that they are based on a solid analysis.
Just one question: how do you compute the "creature value"?
(Attk x HP) / 1.7 / Mana cost = value
edit: the 1.7 division only applies to special cards
Modified by FORESTRY on 2014-10-23 07:57:51 Sinist | 2014-10-23 08:16:40 |
Yes, neither would I support any other cost 5 creature to be moved to 4 level... Anyway, I think it would be good to nerf T7 hp. Currently it is just too dangerous due to extreme versatility (Hypnotist is nowhere nearly as versatile card; engine may be either better mana generator or grant unique deadly feature to double effectiveness of your actions). Not to mention deadly combo 2T7+T4 which is not as hard to setup as it might seem. Forestry underrates priestess imho. I have seen many times that in practice this guy... umm, girl just wrecks havoc. Both extremely good board presence and health control Modified by Sinist on 2014-10-23 08:20:30
i am SO glad this thread caught up!
hopefully it will also catch cooler's attention Krugopryad | 2014-10-23 10:22:36 |
Removing Time class from the game is the best way to balance it.
Removing Time class from the game is the best way to balance it.
i don't think the class imbalance is such that justifies your harsh comment. a 53% overall winrate shows an area with potential for improvement but come on, when your head hurts do you cut it off as a solution?
besides: the design of the class is original, innovative and fun (in my opinion). the implementation is also good, it just needs one more nudge to the proper direction
Modified by filip on 2014-10-23 10:45:40 Sinist | 2014-10-23 10:46:44 |
Now, now. If any class deserves being removed, it is golem (horrible design imho), definitely not time, which is quite fun and well designed, but for somewhat overpowered.
HeadphonesGirl | 2014-10-23 11:55:04 |
Removing Time class from the game is the best way to balance it. Alternatively, we could remove all classes except time. FORESTRY | 2014-10-23 11:56:59 |
... Alternatively, we could remove all classes except time.
Or remove all and leave Golem XSSXSXSXSSXSXSXSSX StephanieF | 2014-10-23 14:24:58 |
Theoretically 1 class could be removed, cause in Blitz-finals just up to 15 classes are needed; but as an old Magic-player, I estimate the variety for newbies/noobs to figure it out (the perfect deck)...until they had the honor to play with me...
For Spectro this is somewhat the same...for example, in the last tour Krugo had a better class-management finally than I had...
So we should rather add a class than removing anything! Time can be used just one time, so a strategic decision when to use it lol...so the more skilled player will use it to more advantage/success of course...so you all can see, that variety is just good always and never bad!
For normal duels, if a player plays mono-Time, I can just say the same as for Free-players (mono-Spirit)...the blacklist has space for 30 entries, and it's a so great function...
Krugopryad | 2014-10-23 15:52:44 |
The comment was a bit sarcastic, but still funny how many hungry trolls it has summoned. The problem with time is not about balance (despite some cards are really versatile and pretty strong for its cost). The problem with it's basic idea - all those extra turns, huge board impact and time mana accumulation make the duel extremely dull. Calculating all the probabilies (whether your opponent has t3 or t4, will he cast spell X next turn if he has t5, can I win the long game with possible t7, or should I play midrange in case of t6-t2 rush, etc.) is time/brain consuming and still doesn't guarantee you succesful results.
for example, in the last tour Krugo had a better class-management finally than I had...
I always use random, so I don't understand what class-management you mean. HeadphonesGirl | 2014-10-23 16:24:07 |
Trolls? Nobody here is trolling.
I am genuinely confused by your reasons for disliking time though. The things you are saying you don't like about it sound to me like playing spectromancer.
However, I get not liking the class. Personally I hate playing against death and think it is extremely boring. Krugopryad | 2014-10-23 16:43:41 |
I am genuinely confused by your reasons for disliking time though. The things you are saying you don't like about it sound to me like playing spectromancer.
Seems like the reason in bad language usage and expressions by my side, lack of active practice. I like analyzing opponent's hand, moves, logic; making calculations. But what concerns Time, briefly speaking, I wanted to say that even if you predict and calculate everything perfectly, using the potential of your deck for maximum, it still might not be enough against Time and that's make this class so boring to play against. Sinist | 2014-10-23 17:09:26 |
I see no trolls here... And there is no problem with its basic concept. It can be balanced, unlike some other class basises...
srbhkshk | 2014-10-23 17:37:03 |
...
But what concerns Time, briefly speaking, I wanted to say that even if you predict and calculate everything perfectly, using the potential of your deck for maximum, it still might not be enough against Time and that's make this class so boring to play against.
Which I'm pretty sure can be corrected by nerfing the cards, I'd hate it if time wasn't suitably nerfed but I'd hate it much more if the class itself was removed, it is a very interesting class to play both with and against. Froggen | 2014-10-23 19:53:08 |
Quote @wafe: If you're just talking about these four cards relative to each other
(and not the rest of the class), you could be right, but I'd find it
hard to believe T8 does better than T7. Yes.I think % of T8 is more then T7 because T8 more opportunity to win the game imho.
Quote @wafe:By the way, is your name a reference to the famous Froggen from LoL by any chance? Maybe.
Quote @Krugo:Removing Time class from the game is the best way to balance it. Just LOL.
I don t know all; but i think nerf the T4 damage to 0 is like total destroy the spell.I prefer Time stop 5 mana instead 0 damage. OK i said it, now i go in angle and get molested by all of you about this.
The comment was a bit sarcastic, but still funny how many hungry trolls it has summoned. we missed the sarcastic bit, simple as that... but i won't fall for it twice! this whole thing about hungry trolls is sarcastic too right? gotcha
Calculating all the probabilies (whether your opponent has t3 or t4, will he cast spell X next turn if he has t5, can I win the long game with possible t7, or should I play midrange in case of t6-t2 rush, etc.) is time/brain consuming and still doesn't guarantee you succesful results.
how is all that "extremely dull"? i find it very challenging and interesting. it's one of the reasons i like playing spectromancer, as HPG said. it may be time/brain consuming but also very rewarding when it pays off. besides, i don't think any kind of strategy could ever guarantee you perfectly successful results... you're not the only person trying to win
I always use random, so I don't understand what class-management you mean.
when you play in a tournament, you can only use each class for one duel (plus one more in the top8). this encourages proficiency with all (or at least many) of the classes, just like us who play full random class-management is about deciding which class to use for each opponent / stage of the tournament
Modified by filip on 2014-10-23 23:22:48
OK i said it, now i go in angle and get molested by all of you about this.
no worries about that mate it's always nice when people get interested and post stuff - that's what the forum is for, isn't it?
Modified by filip on 2014-10-23 23:28:55 FORESTRY | 2014-10-23 23:37:54 |
Yes, neither would I support any other cost 5 creature to be moved to 4 level... Anyway, I think it would be good to nerf T7 hp. Currently it is just too dangerous due to extreme versatility (Hypnotist is nowhere nearly as versatile card; engine may be either better mana generator or grant unique deadly feature to double effectiveness of your actions). Not to mention deadly combo 2T7+T4 which is not as hard to setup as it might seem. Forestry underrates priestess imho. I have seen many times that in practice this guy... umm, girl just wrecks havoc. Both extremely good board presence and health control
I still think that Engine "imbalance" is due to players not knowing how to counter it, simple as that, one should never fall behind in presence against Time in general, because of all the manners to punish being passive, the prime examples being T4 which forces the state of the board for one turn longer and punishes those with a weak board, and T7 punishes a passive board too cause there is no punishment for double skipping. Hypnotist on the other hand, does not rely on the opponent having a passive board, its a griffin riding a wall of fire that generates mana passively. Either way, as i said before, T4 does need a fix.
And Priestess... a special class Overlord, what did you expect? The solution remains the same, do not get outpresenced by Time. Froggen | 2014-10-24 09:29:26 |
... I still think that Engine "imbalance" is due to players not knowing how to counter it, simple as that, one should never fall behind in presence against Time in general, because of all the manners to punish being passive, the prime examples being T4 which forces the state of the board for one turn longer and punishes those with a weak board, and T7 punishes a passive board too cause there is no punishment for double skipping. Hypnotist on the other hand, does not rely on the opponent having a passive board, its a griffin riding a wall of fire that generates mana passively. Either way, as i said before, T4 does need a fix.
And Priestess... a special class Overlord, what did you expect? The solution remains the same, do not get outpresenced by Time.
True. But (against WillofSauron) i realize how much is strong an early F8+T3. Tell me how you can t get outpresenced in this situation spamming A8 every 3 turn. The "deadly" combo 2T7+T4 is hard to do it. In the perfect situation you need 3 turn of total skip(and already some good board or is useless spam T4)But i want point out that with a little logic the T7 doesn t resist more then 5-6 turn. I like say T7=W12 I use my w12 and the enemy can t respond because he got low mana. A:"OMG NERF W12 TOO OP!" B: "Ok, but why have you got low mana?" A: "....." B: "I tell it for you, because you played BAD the other round" The same dialogue can be applied for T7.(and yes, i m a HUGE fan of W12 <.<) For me Dragon+other huge attack+E6 or just Dragon+A6 are more frustating for me then just T7.(some one cry about dragon?....where are the tears?)
Sinist | 2014-10-24 10:45:47 |
Anyway, this discussion is probably useless since Spectro is already pretty dead in terms of development (no more patches, no addons planned)...It will be replaced with AM2 Modified by Sinist on 2014-10-24 10:46:08
Anyway, this discussion is probably useless since Spectro is already pretty dead in terms of development (no more patches, no addons planned)...It will be replaced with AM2 i kind of hope they will release one last update, balancing time and making this game perfect i believe it's already a classic and people will keep playing it for years to come TheWillofSauron | 2014-10-24 12:40:12 |
... i kind of hope they will release one last update, balancing time and making this game perfect i believe it's already a classic and people will keep playing it for years to come
+1 to that. I also agree that Golem class is really TERRIBLE. having the rabbit already, this is really a bad designed class, no plus or fun given to the game there. Of course it's personal feeling, but I hate playing and palying versus that class. I keep fingers crossed btw that some update (mainly the CLIENT version as, if I'm not wrong, it doesn't contain ALL the latest changes as they are only seen or updated when playing online games only) will come out. mm75
srbhkshk | 2014-10-24 18:20:33 |
... i kind of hope they will release one last update, balancing time and making this game perfect i believe it's already a classic and people will keep playing it for years to come
time and Dragon. Wavelength | 2014-10-25 07:53:37 |
I love love LOVE the concept and style of the Time class. A bunch of coherent cards that play with the idea of "one turn, one card" is brilliant.
Chrono Engine is the one card in the set that I find a little un-fun to play against, but it's also very fun to use because it entails a really interesting set of decisions. If you make the wrong decisions, it doesn't even matter how many free turns you get... you're just digging your own grave. If there's one class that occasionally seems impossible to beat it's Holy or Necro or maybe Goblin... definitely not Time.
I like Froggen's last post comparing Chrono Engine to Astral Guard. The comparison is rather apt... and I'd submit that while Engine is a better comeback card, there are usually ways to eventually counter Engine once you've been blindsided with it, so the balance there seems fair. Could it use a 1-2 HP nerf? Probably. But it's not totally gamebreaking.
I'd still argue, from my experience, that Timeweaver is the hidden dagger that makes its class so powerful - her versatility to play for speed, control, or defense is just so valuable. I can't believe I'm sitting here arguing that "my own card" should be nerfed, but that's what my experience has led me to believe.
I don't quite agree with the hate that's (all of a sudden) being thrown at the Golem class, but I'd agree it has its problems. Maybe a "Tuning Golem Master" thread is in order? =)
Wavelength | 2014-10-25 08:14:55 |
By the way, here are a few replays from my "Why Timeweaver Rules" collection. In several of these games, Timebreaker isn't immediately obvious as the thing that broke the game wide open. But I encourage you guys to consider how different the game would have been without it!
Sinist | 2014-10-25 09:37:38 |
I could post many replies titled (if i bothered saving each one) "Why basilisk rules", "Why priestess rules", "Why prophet rules",etc. It doesnt prove anything... From my experience, timeweaver is fra from being the best time card T7-T8 are more versatile while T2-T2 poses bigger threat. Oh well, everyone is free to have his own opinion The main problem with golem master is forced "all or nothing" style, similiar to rabbit but much worse; due to magic immunity and 10 hp loss you either have to win quickly, with mindless rush, or die horribly (golem sucks in long games, unlike rabbit). Depends on enemy healing draw a lot. Not good design at all... FORESTRY | 2014-10-25 09:59:17 |
I could post many replies titled (if i bothered saving each one) "Why basilisk rules", "Why priestess rules", "Why prophet rules",etc. It doesnt prove anything...
From my experience, timeweaver is fra from being the best time card T7-T8 are more versatile while T2-T2 poses bigger threat. Oh well, everyone is free to have his own opinion
The main problem with golem master is forced "all or nothing" style, similiar to rabbit but much worse; due to magic immunity and 10 hp loss you either have to win quickly, with mindless rush, or die horribly (golem sucks in long games, unlike rabbit). Depends on enemy healing draw a lot. Not good design at all...
I think golems design is good, but really annoying cause it forces a type of duel in which you mostly win or lose based on matchup and draw which takes away strategical depth. Sinist | 2014-10-25 10:00:51 |
Thats exactly what is called bad design Modified by Sinist on 2014-10-25 10:39:18 TheWillofSauron | 2014-10-25 12:03:51 |
Thats exactly what is called bad design Exactly. I really hope it simply can disappear and be replaced by a new class ... in something as "last update" :) mm75
Modified by TheWillofSauron on 2014-10-25 12:04:08
i disagree about golem. anyway, if you guys want to to talk about that please open a new topic like wave suggested
or just go on here, wave will move it around later :P Modified by filip on 2014-10-25 23:45:48 Wavelength | 2014-10-26 02:59:21 |
I could post many replies titled (if i bothered saving each one) "Why basilisk rules", "Why priestess rules", "Why prophet rules",etc. It doesnt prove anything...
I'm sure we could even make a few "Why Banshee Rules" replays, but my point is that those are just good examples of games where Timeweaver runs the game and you don't even notice it until it's too late. To me, that's a pretty unique trait about T5. I think the replays illustrate my point better than explanations can. I don't claim that they're any type of irrefutable proof; simply good, illuminating material to check out and consider.
Modified by Wavelength on 2014-10-26 02:59:44 HeadphonesGirl | 2014-10-26 04:15:50 |
There have always been classes in spectro that a vocal group of players hate. The original was death. I still hate death. Time is probably the most popular to vilify now but golem is a close second, and I'd guess forest comes right after that. All these classes have their supporters, though. I think the bottom line is that the more classes that are added to the game, the more likely it is one will be added that you hate playing against. It is the way it is in a game with many different classes/characters/whatever.
I've been playing Smash for 3DS lately... I could complain for hours about all the matchups I hate having to play in that game. FORESTRY | 2014-10-26 06:55:36 |
There have always been classes in spectro that a vocal group of players hate. The original was death. I still hate death. Time is probably the most popular to vilify now but golem is a close second, and I'd guess forest comes right after that. All these classes have their supporters, though. I think the bottom line is that the more classes that are added to the game, the more likely it is one will be added that you hate playing against. It is the way it is in a game with many different classes/characters/whatever.
I've been playing Smash for 3DS lately... I could complain for hours about all the matchups I hate having to play in that game. +1 for Anti-Spirit Club |