Laying Nate/George to Rest

Alright, debate for this card just will not die. Such being the case, I'm going to try going about this differently.

There are a lot of ideas for this card; BUT, just as a bare minimum change, can we agree to milling the top card of the deck per use? There might be a change that you'd like better or that might make more sense to you, but just as a minimum ground, can we at least form consensus around this change? If we don't agree on SOMETHING, N/G will never get even one of the desired changes.

Add "Whenever you draw a card, destroy self".

Later Aldgar, first I just want to focus on what has been consented to before as a correction to the original theme of the card; that being that it's not suppose to prevent decking. After that, THEN we can all continue debating more nerfs for the card.

Yeah yeah. Mill the top card.

(reads thread title)...Amen!
As for the mill...Uh, no opinion. -_-;

Blue_Elite Wrote:Later Aldgar, first I just want to focus on what has been consented to before as a correction to the original theme of the card; that being that it's not suppose to prevent decking. After that, THEN we can all continue debating more nerfs for the card.

You're going to get people voting yes just because they want it consented, even if they'd like other options better. It'll get almost the same result as the poll "Should N/G get a change? - Yes/No". Some proof:

sXeAndriex Wrote:I could live with N/G with that effect. Almost any balance would be better than how it is now.

..even though he likes the option Aldgar mentioned earlier as well. Can't judge whether or not he likes one option better than the other, the poll doesn't allow for it.

I prefer the option where it gets destroyed upon drawing a card about a million times better than the milling option.
Also, I'm still boycotting polls. This one is plain and simple enough, but its options aren't sufficiently well thought of (no offense).

"destroy upon draw" would also allow players to destroy n/G easier, as many decks run card drawing spells. This would also limit the lock value of N/G, as you can't keep on drawing cards and have N/G in play at the same time.

i actually do have a command for mill (dsicard that top card in your deck).. i could easily add that to what it does, although I was originally going to introduce the ability in MC.

Mill would be just fine; I'm against nerfing N/G into the ground though. For one thing I like actually having Puzzle Solve be good.

Puzzle solve is good already, as it nukes most multicolor effects, controls, N/G, silver arrow, committee, and others.

To MooNFisH:
Ya, I'm well aware of the problems of using polls to balance cards. Learned that from my Politics in CMC Balancing thread. The problem here is that N/G isn't getting balanced BECAUSE of open opinion. N/G has been brought up in at least 5 different threads, each proposing something new or a variant of another idea. Because of that, none of the ideas got a consensus and we all ended up just bickering and arguing so that all Web could do without getting a huge number of complaints directed at him was boost the cost by 1.
As I said, I'm going about this a different way by limiting the choice to 1 option that was justified as nerfing the card's unintended second use. If the change gets implemented, maybe players will become more focused on how strong N/G's monster D is and form consensus around a better change. This is merely to get SOME progress.
On another note, this is also one of the lightest changes proposed that the pro-don't-change-N/G won't be too upset about.

On-topic: I'm for this, have always been. Milling makes it either A) a unique decking protector-ish effect or B) repeated card advantage (monster-D = card advantage if you can take out multiples) balanced with the loss of card advantage (drawing extra cards).

Off-topic: I think the "Draw a card, destroy self" is nerfing it to the ground. It's unplayable with Trading Post out, its destruction will commonly be at A-speed (read: uncounterable) with the prevalence of ToK and Legends, plus it becomes more a "stay in control" card than a "turn the tide" card.

I am all for milling the top card, however that would leave the need for a card to prevent decking

Blue_Elite Wrote:On another note, this is also one of the lightest changes proposed that the pro-don't-change-N/G won't be too upset about.

Are you kidding me? Milling one card in a refined deck.. Do you know why people don't want to change Cameo?
I mean, this will make bakuga even stronger.. and he's a pain in the ass already!

Like I said, the other option is way better imo. I mean, aren't we supposed to balance cards without conceptually changing them? With both these changes we remove the unintended decking prevention, that's good. But the milling adds a new dimension to Bakuga decks. I mean, Bakuga can even bring the card into play with his ability :S

Also, AFAIK the oh so many variants of N/G balance suggestions seem to have been narrowed down to two. A poll can handle that, no?

azulknight: You're saying the card will be nerfed to death by this suggestion because it's unplayable with Trading Post in play. I say it will be unbeatable because it can be played with Bakuga. If I have to choose between those two, to me, the choice is obvious.

Azulknight:

The whole POINT of this balance suggestion is to make N/G UNPLAYABLE WITH ANY FORM OF ALTERNATE DRAW!!!

N/G's drawback for it's ability is nothing compared to the one's of tarafang and the yaibas. Or warhammer. Or khrimalith.
Heck, it isn't even a "drawback" most of the time!
And alternate draw effectively negates the drawback.

You can't do that with the others...so you shouldn't be able to do that with N/G.

I thought we didn't want to change Cameo because it was balanced...

Anyway, if instead of conventional milling, the card was obliterated...?

Yes, I suggested something not already coded. Aren't I a terrible person?

I don't see how N/G's forcing use of extra mana and cards to get new threats is that hugely different. I mean, Tarafang can't be compared to it because Tara's grossly overpriced. The yaiba's don't have true "drawbacks" aside from their mana cost, as long as you build your deck to accomodate them. Warhammer's different since it is ENTITY-WIDE OBLITERATION, and you still get mana for one turn. Khrimalith nets you two for one commonly and requires you have at minimum a 7 monster that is an effective wall. Nate/George seals your own board to what you have UNLESS you have a card-drawer beforehand.

Fine, I don't care which balance you put. It's not like I use it, anyhow.

azulknight Wrote:I don't see how N/G's forcing use of extra mana and cards to get new threats is that hugely different. I mean, Tarafang can't be compared to it because Tara's grossly overpriced. The yaiba's don't have true "drawbacks" aside from their mana cost, as long as you build your deck to accomodate them. Warhammer's different since it is ENTITY-WIDE OBLITERATION, and you still get mana for one turn. Khrimalith nets you two for one commonly and requires you have at minimum a 7 monster that is an effective wall. Nate/George seals your own board to what you have UNLESS you have a card-drawer beforehand.

Fine, I don't care which balance you put. It's not like I use it, anyhow.

Umm...WRONG. First of all, fang can be used quite effectively in bakuga decks, and I've seen and used it myself many times. Second, the yaibas DO have drawbacks...since their damage is tied to the life of a player, m-yaiba won't help you much if you are losing, k-yaiba however won't help you much if you are winning. Warhammer doesn't obliterate, for one. Second, he costs both life to use and drains your mana at EoT, meaning you can't cast spells or use any abilities that need mana in your opponents turn. Khrimalith costs 8 himself and is easily circumvented by saccing the effects above the monsters you don't want to die.

N/G, however, has no drawback whatsoever if you have alternate draw out. Therefore, it's unbalanced and broken.

my vote is for no, in fact VERY no. This nerf will not fix the primary imbalance of N/G in that it stops decking. If someone has N/G in play you won't be playing monsters since you won't want to lose 2 right off the bat then 1 each turn therafter. That means that mill to use actually does nothing if anything it turns it into a slightly more useful cards since cards in your graveyard are more useful than cards in your deck if you aren't drawing.

I like aldgar's idea because it (I feel) fits exactly what N/G was always meant to be: no new monsters for me, but you also get none until yo ufind an answer. On top of that it makes N/G a bit more versatile as the user can opt out at the end of an opponents turn with TOK and draw 3 cards.

bane2571 Wrote:This nerf will not fix the primary imbalance of N/G in that it stops decking.
...
mill to use actually does nothing if anything it turns it into a slightly more useful cards

I think you're using two arguments that coexist about as well as matter and antimatter.

Mill to use stops the 8-card degenerate N/G decks cold, which were the biggest issue with N/G preventing decking.  Granted, I was in favor of mill-two-to-use or mill-one-every-turn, but Blue_Elite wanted to try to get consensus on a mild nerf.

Also, Aldgar's argument that N/G's drawback can be completely circumvented is inaccurate.  N/G's drawback is that you draw one less card per turn.  Usually that means zero cards unless you have some other drawing mechanism available.  Even with another drawing mechanism, you're still drawing one less card than if you didn't have N/G out.  That's like saying Tarafang's drawback can be circumvented by having a bunch of Gamewhales.