Psijic Patron is far too expensive at a price that is in no relationship with its primary function

AnduinTryggva

The activation of Psijic patron needs to be reduced to minimum 3, better 2.

As it is now it is far too expensive to activate putting it at an imbalance with what it is meant to fight off, that is with actors.

Actors cost 5g or 6g most of the time, some are even just 4 irc and only very few cost more than 6g. And while you only have to pay ONCE for an actor and then you can play them every round without additional costs if it is not killed off or you can play it anew as soon as it gets back into your hand (I leave out the one time patrons here which are more bonus actors).

On the other hand you have to pay 4g every time you want to kill of an actor of your opponent. Considerably reducing your ability to buy other stuff.

It can soon go out of hand if your opponent manages to buy three of four patrons.

The kill-off cards in the tavern are simply too rare to compensate for it.

This whole situation creates a complete imbalance between someone playing several actors and a player not able to do so.

This really needs an urgend rebalancing.

I suggest two alternatives:
- Playing an actor costs money, I suggest minimum 2g (strict minimum), better 3. Actually reactivating should also cost some gold but it would not make sense unless gold paying actors give out more gold.
OR:
- Reduce Psijic patron cost to 3 minimum, better 2.

I prefer the last option but could probably live with option 1 too.

SeaGtGruff

Personally, I think a cost of 4 gold seems reasonable. It shouldn't be too easy to knock out an opponent's agents, but it also shouldn't be too difficult. I actually cringe whenever the NPC opponent chooses the Psijic deck, since it makes it harder for me to use any agents for an appreciable amount of time-- although it helps that the NPCs will focus on knocking out agents from certain decks (such as Crow) yet will ignore other agents which are actually more of a threat to it (such as Almalexia).

AnduinTryggva

Play against human opponents and you see that it is a necessity to be able to knock out actors more easily.

It is already a limitation that you can use the patron only once in a round irrespective of its cost. Lowering its costs would not interfere with that limitation. And even at 2g it would limit the player's ability to purchase other cards considerably. Particularly during early and middle stage. 4g renders it basically impossible without considerable tavern luck. As such it is a huge imbalance.

It is a huge imbalance that it costs so much to knock out an actor and that every time with respect to the power of an actor that only costs ONCE in a whole match.

Personofsecrets

The cost of Celarus is excessive.

If someone has to use Celarus to knock-out an agent, then they are probably in some trouble.

The tempo lost from having to do something like use Celarus to knock-out a Witch, for example, can be crippling.

A cheaper Celarus can help bring Agent stacking strategies into line while not being so punishing.

What should be remembered is that Celarus doesn't only cost 4 gold. There is also the cost of using the Patron effect for the turn to kill an agent rather than develop Writs of Coin. The writ of coin portion should also not be ignored.

Someone with Agents that are getting knocked-out by Celarus is sort of a case of the "rich getting richer." One often can't just leave the agents around, but getting rid of them with Celarus is another game action that can put the Agent player ahead.

El_Borracho

I agree with @SeaGtGruff. 4 is more than the black hand or flaming wheelbarrow, but that's the premium you pay to do it on demand. And you can only do it once, unless you get tithe or another source for a second patron use.

I think if you made it cheaper, Celarus would become indispensable. Patron-wise you could use it to destroy any agent-heavy strategy without it seriously impacting your ability to purchase strong cards. Secondarily, the purpose of Celarus isn't to destroy agents, but to manipulate your deck with Celarus cards. So you would get both for a cheaper price.

spartaxoxo

I disagree. Agent stacking should be a viable strategy and it should be significant cost to disrupt the entire strategy of a deck. At the phase of the game where that coin cost is the most impactful, agent killing is also extremely impactful.

Moreover, psijic patron is already one of the most powerful decks in the game. It's doesn't need a higher power budget

AnduinTryggva

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I disagree. Agent stacking should be a viable strategy and it should be significant cost to disrupt the entire strategy of a deck. At the phase of the game where that coin cost is the most impactful, agent killing is also extremely impactful.

Moreover, psijic patron is already one of the most powerful decks in the game. It's doesn't need a higher power budget

And I disagree to what you say.

Sure, agent stacking is a valid strategy. The thing is, you can do agent stacking with almost any deck and hence you select an anti-patron stacking deck like rhajin, psijic and Allesia or you have to rely on the rare random tavern killing cards.

Psijic is the ONLY deck that can reliably kill off agents while all other decks that can act against patrons rely on tavern luck (snatching the right card, provided that you had the chance to have sufficient gold generation the moment the right card appears in the tavern BEFORE your opponent). This makes the patron stacking strategy rather successful and there is no balanced(!!!!) possibility to counter it.

A card game should have not one single strategy that is close to be unbeatable.

Again, as @Personofsecrets rightly pointed out: The penalty of the high cost of Psijic is not only that it is so expensive, it also limits considerably the perimeter of action of the player who has to activate it to counter an agent stacking strategy.

It is a doubly penalizing cost and there should be NOT ONE SINGLE strategy that does not have a valid counter.

A cost reduction of psijic to let's say 3g is still costly, specifically during early stage that limits significantly the possibility of the player activating it. Let's not forget: Agents have a snowballing function: They give extra bonus to the owning player AND it hampers the opponent in double way. So an angent has triple advantage over the other player. This is multiplied by any additional agent.

It is just a bad design as it is now.

spartaxoxo

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Sure, agent stacking is a valid strategy. The thing is, you can do agent stacking with almost any deck and hence you select an anti-patron stacking deck like rhajin, psijic and Allesia or you have to rely on the rare random tavern killing cards.

To counter agent stacking you can

Use the agent killing Tavern Cards, as noted earlier by you

Use the decks that have cards dedicated to kill agents, as noted earlier by you

Spend power to kill the agents

Use cards that allow for you to remove a card from the tavern without picking it up, denying it's use in the game

Use the Druid patron to do the same

Most decks have a way to counterplay agents. Not all of them. But agent stacking very much has counterplay. And Psijic is already one of the strongest decks in the game.

AnduinTryggva

spartaxoxo wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Sure, agent stacking is a valid strategy. The thing is, you can do agent stacking with almost any deck and hence you select an anti-patron stacking deck like rhajin, psijic and Allesia or you have to rely on the rare random tavern killing cards.

To counter agent stacking you can

Use the agent killing Tavern Cards, as noted earlier by you

Use the decks that have cards dedicated to kill agents, as noted earlier by you

Spend power to kill the agents

Use cards that allow for you to remove a card from the tavern without picking it up, denying it's use in the game

Use the Druid patron to do the same

Most decks have a way to counterplay agents. Not all of them. But agent stacking very much has counterplay. And Psijic is already one of the strongest decks in the game.

But you understand the flaw that while with ALL decks except psijic it is pure random if you can counter an agent stacking strategy while agent stacking is devoid of any randomness because you always will be able to reapply your agent almost every second turn if it gets killed off. You do understand that this is an issue?

Of course you understand it. I understand why people fight against a moderate psijic cost reduction as it would be a valid counter to agent stacking strategy.

And no, I disagree with your assertion that psijic would get overpowered by that moderate cost reduction as there is no mutual interaction between the patron functionality and the card functionality. Two separate functionalities that do not mutually enhance each other.

AnduinTryggva

I forgot to add:

There is a reason why agent stacking became a very popular strategy in recent months. The majority of players I play against apply it.

If it were ONE strategy among others with its advantages and drawbacks the strategies that I see applied would be much more varied.

If so many uniformly apply it then it is a strong indicator that there is an imbalance.

spartaxoxo

The only time I see too much agent stacking is the new deck

spartaxoxo

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Sure, agent stacking is a valid strategy. The thing is, you can do agent stacking with almost any deck and hence you select an anti-patron stacking deck like rhajin, psijic and Allesia or you have to rely on the rare random tavern killing cards.

To counter agent stacking you can

Use the agent killing Tavern Cards, as noted earlier by you

Use the decks that have cards dedicated to kill agents, as noted earlier by you

Spend power to kill the agents

Use cards that allow for you to remove a card from the tavern without picking it up, denying it's use in the game

Use the Druid patron to do the same

Most decks have a way to counterplay agents. Not all of them. But agent stacking very much has counterplay. And Psijic is already one of the strongest decks in the game.

But you understand the flaw that while with ALL decks except psijic it is pure random if you can counter an agent stacking strategy while agent stacking is devoid of any randomness because you always will be able to reapply your agent almost every second turn if it gets killed off. You do understand that this is an issue?

Of course you understand it. I understand why people fight against a moderate psijic cost reduction as it would be a valid counter to agent stacking strategy.

And no, I disagree with your assertion that psijic would get overpowered by that moderate cost reduction as there is no mutual interaction between the patron functionality and the card functionality. Two separate functionalities that do not mutually enhance each other.

There doesn't have to be an interaction between them. Every deck has a total power budget and Psijic already arguably does too much.

And no, I don't see agents stacks pop up every other turn.

Personofsecrets

Agent stacking is exceptionally powerful and it's a shame that the most reasonable way to combat them is via tavern luck such as Black Sacrament or Ambush showing up. Fun fact, there is only one Ambush in the tavern deck!

With the number of Contracts that are Agents, there become a number of ways to start a cheesy board. Oathman picking up a free Witch or Shieldbearer is devastating. Stonelore into Wraith is often disgusting. Temple Arbiter into Gaoler or Clergy is cheesy - that line is enabled by Mother's Mercy ability to get back Agent's that were just killed or play Agent's the same turn that they are purchased. With how commonly the seeding issue seems to produce duplicate cards, players can sort of get carried by the tavern reveals. Heck, even Relicmaster all on his own can be a giant game winning pain.

It's cool that the game has permanents, but many of them could, at the very least, stand to lose a health point.

El_Borracho

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The only time I see too much agent stacking is the new deck

With the irony being the new deck is also the perfect deck to counter agent stacking. If someone chooses Druid or Pelin, two decks with strong agents and with tank agents, I will go with Alessia just for the cards that wipe all agents.

LukosCreyden

4 gold is a fair price. Surprised the Psijic patron is all about killing agents though seemed like an easy pick for a DB themed deck.

AnduinTryggva

LukosCreyden wrote: »

4 gold is a fair price. Surprised the Psijic patron is all about killing agents though seemed like an easy pick for a DB themed deck.

Mh, can you elaborate?

I and others say: Price is to high. And we even give reasons for it. So please share yours...

LukosCreyden

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

LukosCreyden wrote: »

4 gold is a fair price. Surprised the Psijic patron is all about killing agents though seemed like an easy pick for a DB themed deck.

Mh, can you elaborate?

I and others say: Price is to high. And we even give reasons for it. So please share yours...

Ok then.
4 gold is fair. Any cheaper and agents, which are already pretty easy to eliminate, would lose further value. 3 or 2 gold would be far too cheap, it is quite common to have that amount of gold spare at the end of a turn. The patron should be a choice you have to make, not an auto-click. Conversely, raising the price any higher would make the patron too expensive to use.

In short; 5 gold is too expensive, going below 4 gold would make it too cheap and easy. We already got plenty of other options for taking out agents.

AnduinTryggva

LukosCreyden wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

LukosCreyden wrote: »

4 gold is a fair price. Surprised the Psijic patron is all about killing agents though seemed like an easy pick for a DB themed deck.

Mh, can you elaborate?

I and others say: Price is to high. And we even give reasons for it. So please share yours...

Ok then.
4 gold is fair. Any cheaper and agents, which are already pretty easy to eliminate, would lose further value. 3 or 2 gold would be far too cheap, it is quite common to have that amount of gold spare at the end of a turn. The patron should be a choice you have to make, not an auto-click. Conversely, raising the price any higher would make the patron too expensive to use.

In short; 5 gold is too expensive, going below 4 gold would make it too cheap and easy. We already got plenty of other options for taking out agents.

Thank you for your opinion.

I guess we completely disagree as I don't see that eliminating agents is pretty easy. For me it is not. It is easier for the agent owning person to spam agents than to kill them off. Provided that one has two or more agents in his hand, it is well possible to play two agents in one turn or in two consecutive turns requiring to pay 4g for each of the next two turns in order to eliminate that agent.
In addition it STRONGLY reduces purchasing power. During early or middle stage it will leave you most probably with only 1 or 2g to purchase stuff. In the first case one even cannot use the treasury to convert a 1g card into a 2g card let alone buying a meaningful card.

It is simply double penalty in any case.

Reducing it to 3g cost it would allow the player at least to turn a 1g card into a 2g card. It would still be a penalty because it obliviates the possibility to buy a card in the tavern but it would not act as an almost skip of this turn.

Major_Mangle

My issue with agents is that even if I manage to get rid of some of them they'll be straight back into play a few turns later. Would be interesting if cards like black sacrament moved agents back into the tavern instead of into your opponents cooldown pile (or if the psijic patron did that). That way you truly get a good counterstrategy against agents.

Personofsecrets

It would be sort of cool and funny if Celarus destroyed Agents from the game.