Laying Nate/George to Rest

sXeAndriex Wrote:So what you're saying is... if someone is using a small deck that is using N/G to stop a decking situation, it actually doesn't? Either I don't quite get what you're talking about, or what you said made no sense.

No, what I'm saying is: if someone is using a small deck that is using N/G to stop a decking situation, adding milling to use it won't stop this.

Yea, what bane said: You can also use N/G without using its ability. The milling nerf would then be pointless, because if you don't use N/G's ability, you'll still be able to use a small deck that rocks.

Example of such a small deck:
6x Bucket
1x Shadehawk Prime
1x N/G

Turn three shadey&N/G. Add minor support to that (one counterspell? what could you need at turn 1-3? you'll have dark and light mana to spend there).

It has flaws, I know. But that's because I just made it up within a minute. The thing remains that smaller decks are way more powerful than larger decks, and the only problem they used to have was that they would deck so damn early.

If you're not that convinced, think of a 15-20 card deck that uses two or three N/G's, merely for keeping them from decking. Those decks are definitely more refined than any larger deck you could come up with.

Why not auto-mill one card per turn then? And probably knock the cost back down to 6 if that were to happen.

Also, I think that there are going to be cards in MC that punish the opponent for having cards in the graveyard. Either powering up from them, or drawing from their graveyard (the Recycling spell?), or somesuch. Can't quite remember the specifics...

Now you're coming up with new ideas again! This isn't going anywhere like this.. If you want to come up with a good third option, I say you eliminate the current two options by logic first..

bane2571 Wrote:

sXeAndriex Wrote:So what you're saying is... if someone is using a small deck that is using N/G to stop a decking situation, it actually doesn't? Either I don't quite get what you're talking about, or what you said made no sense.

No, what I'm saying is: if someone is using a small deck that is using N/G to stop a decking situation, adding milling to use it won't stop this.

It seriously cuts the deck's effectiveness. You're talking about a difference of one opponent's monster per turn. N/G retains its functionality, but tiny decks won't be able to use the ability. That's a big deal.

In all seriousness, I think that the mill one card per activation of the ability is a good balance for Nate/George (automill would be too drastic imo).

It's been pretty much consented so many times in the past (just never implemented), was suggested and seemingly backed by webrunner, and there is currently code in place for it to be made real.

As far as I see, the only question that remains is whether it should mill on failure or not.

Quote:It seriously cuts the deck's effectiveness. You're talking about a difference of one opponent's monster per turn. N/G retains its functionality, but tiny decks won't be able to use the ability. That's a big deal.

Maybe, but most tiny decks don't need to continually kill one monster per turn. Many of them are designed to finish the opponent off in a matter of three, at most four turns...

automill instead of no draw was what I was considering - but with a lower cost and stuff then normal. It's much in line with what the card is supposed to represent, and it takes away the ability to use it as a decking-blocker.

it's a drastic cost but keep in mind it's one of the only free repeatble monster destruction cards in the game

Hey, it's your sword, and your card. You're the only one who knows what it's "supposed" to do. So do whatever you want!

Auto-mill would solve the problem of anti-decking and it wasn't part of the poll so you don't have to reject it simply on principle MooNFisH. If N/G gets auto-mill and cost decrease, would that work for you or does it further increase its potency of Bakuga decks too much?

I personally wouldn't mind an automill since it does solve the problems that seem to have inspired the mill on use idea. I'm not too sure how balanced N/G will then be with alternate draw, but at least they will be losing 2 cards off their deck instead of just the one they are drawing.

One card auto-mill (and reversion to 6) is actually my preferred balance, but I'm not opposed to an on-activation mill.

i think the bakuga synergy should be considered too far out of full synergy to be considered in a balance conversation, since you have no control over what's going into your grave.

If there's a small amount of chance that a very well built deck can use the card to it's advantage, how is that unbalanced?

Some drawbacks can be advantages in some situations, that's not imbalance, that's cleverness.

I'd be fine with auto-mill a card/turn, 6 cost and maybe an activation cost of .

Not hearing any complaints. MooNFisH and Shuryou, you didn't like the original proposition so we need to hear if you two are fine with Web's suggestion. Unless someone else has a complaint, I think this'll be fine with the general majority.

I like webrunner's suggestion, and I voted no becuase auto-mill every turn is vastly different then your "suggested mill on use". This is why polls DONT WORK.

Um, no. This started as a straight poll over whether to accept this suggestion that had general consensus already, but then people started throwing new suggestions in. It's not a BAD thing to do, mind you, but it shure ain't a proof of why polls don't work.

Xagar Wrote:Um, no. This started as a straight poll over whether to accept this suggestion that had general consensus already, but then people started throwing new suggestions in. It's not a BAD thing to do, mind you, but it shure ain't a proof of why polls don't work.

Actually, there were two options out there for balancing the N/G, and only one is represented in the poll. So the poll wasn't even complete when this thread was started, making it utterly pointless.
Has nothing to do with the fact that people also started to throw in more balances afterwards.

Well then, it just shows that the poll ITSELF was bad, not that POLLS in general are bad.

The poll may as well have asked "Does N/G need a nerf?" Mostly the Yes camp is saying that it doesn't need to be milling and the No camp is saying polls are bad but the card should be nerfed.