Help us improve Answers HQ! Take Survey No, Thanks

Re: Regifting Zombie: A Plea

by puntwothree

Original Post


Regifting Zombie: A Plea

★ Guide
Hey Devs. I know you’re listening. Well, I hope you are. I’ve never had a lot of faith in anything, so that’ll have to do.

I see the proposed change to Regifting Zombie and it makes me cringe. I get that Regifting/QuickDraw is a synergy that may need to be disrupted, but consider the independent utility of the card. Right now, it is a flavorful but risky play. A 3/2 at 2 has upside, but it does not produce card advantage. There are already a number of ways for plants to “trade up” (1-drop tricks or spells) and see extra resources essentially before the zombie player does.

Costing the same body at 3 just makes it unappealing. There are literally tens of ways (... this game is not that big) for plants to spend 1 or 2 sun to trade up with your zombie, whereupon your opponent gets cards “first” (having resources to spare). And that’s only if your opponent cares to trade. (S)he might just use those three sun to seize a tempo advantage and leave you in the dust.

If you’re running multiples, you may now have below-average-bodied zombies in your hand that are only going to exacerbate the situation you have created for yourself. Regifting Zombie just became Gifting Zombie, like a Trojan Horse full of tiny chocolates.

So please. If you must “hit” something, hit QDCM. He’s got a target on him anyway, and he deserves it. QDCM was a cool idea, but it was just too good. You could raise his cost and his toughness, or his cost and his power and toughness. That would slow him down. You could raise his toughness and take away his bullseye. You could find a fair way to strip bullseye from him and Astro-Shroom, which is the #1 thing I’ve been advocating for.

Regifting is a cool card, but isolated I don’t think it’s a broken one. And it’s an event card, which makes it budget. Don’t destroy a budget card because it combos well with a non-budget card. “Hitting” QDCM instead would just keep it in 1000 dust range for another rotation. No one loses.
Message 1 of 4 (303 Views)

Re: Regifting Zombie: A Plea

★★★★ Guide

that's why I dont sympathize so much the nerfing, I know that it may become necessary in certain cases, but, i mean, the feeling when a card improves is great, like Poppin Poppies when it was improved, but the opposite feeling, when a cardr is nerfed, is awful. 


 i guess that dino roar is very powerful now, but weird because Mechasaur is being improved¿? , and stompadon was already nerfed, so i don't know, I suppose also that the data show that Regifting has been used a lot.

Message 2 of 4 (279 Views)

Re: Regifting Zombie: A Plea

★ Guide
Being used a lot doesn’t make a card good. I still see plenty of clique peas in circulation, and my experience with that card (since nerfing) is that I beat it (and the player playing it...) about 95% of the time it hits the table.

Now Regifting... certainly has upside, and has certainly improved, as you say, with Dino Roar. But in all of its most degenerate uses (i.e., with QDCM), I don’t think it is the card that is most degenerate. (Plus, Dino Roar is a double-edged sword. Face a Tricarrotops, and Regifting might just put you under.)

My argument is that at 3, Regifting Zombie loses its independent viability. You can still play it, and I’m sure some will try to.... and in the right context, and with a little bit of luck, it will work... but it just isn’t a good card anymore. It is a fun card that will cease to be fun, because your opponent is likely to put you on your heals or kill you before you benefit from it.

It’s really a Catch-22 at three... Playing Regifting is a bet w/your opponent that your deck is faster. But fast decks can’t afford clunky 3-drops. Therefore, if you should play Regifting, you shouldn’t play regifting.
Message 3 of 4 (260 Views)

Re: Regifting Zombie: A Plea

[ Edited ]
★ Guide
A reconcieved Regifting might work. Instead of 3/2 at 2, 2/3. That’s a hit to its aggression (which is not great, on an aggressive card...) but at least puts in on curve and allows you to trade up with most one-drops. It would make it less valuable to decks like Valk (because harder to kill, less demanding of an answer, and less less valuable in death... i.e., vrs. a 3/3), but wouldn’t completely kill its viability out of context.

I really get annoyed by these, “you can have the same card, except it’ll cost you more” nerfs. A Cancel is no Counterspell. Stop messing with my curve.
Message 4 of 4 (247 Views)
Twitter Stream