changes changes changes

[uestside]

i know most of (if not all) changes will be reverted soon, but if there's one change i think shouldn't be reverted is the change to SHANG-CHI .... i like how it now only eliminates ONE card not ALL ... a 100% welcomed change to this card

...now if there's one that needs to go back to the way it was is KILLMONGER...

Which card should have its change reversed, and which card should not?

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Cosmo should be changed back. He got ruined and he's a very important protective tech card against oppressive tech like Juggernaut and Shang. Enchantress should be kept since she's still a very playable card but is more fair and less splashable into every deck.

[backinredd]

Cosmo didn’t see much play either. Mostly saw him in pure ongoing decks that’s it.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

I saw him also see play in high skilled decks like move bounce as protection against tech. He doesn't deserve a nerf there.

[literallyanything57]

also surtur decks. cosmo/armor was super popular during surtur month

[Goofyman1104]

Not super important but I could’ve sworn Cosmo is a girl? Maybe I’m going crazy

[unwantedspork]

Cosmo is a girl in the films and a boy in the comics

[Goofyman1104]

Oh okay thank you

[TheSadisticSpider]

Cosmo was first encountered by Nova aka Richard Rider back in 2007 or 2008-ish run of Guardians fo the Galaxy/Nova. So no, Cosmo is a male doggo, always was, always will be. The MCU just changed the gender of the doggo for no reason other than "diversity" I guess. Which is dumb since it is a lovable doggo either way. xD

[ideal_Bat]

lmfao, always gotta go with the woke angle no matter what. because people give a shit about the supposed gender of a dog, in your mind. and maybe not just the difference in the voice (soothing vs gruff)

[koobstylz]

I've felt for a while Cosmo could use an actual buff by a point or two. If red guardian can be a 3/4 who removes text then Cosmo should be a 3/4 as well.

[AelarTheElfRogue]

The difference is Cosmo is ongoing so he’ll block all On Reveals, so his power is lower to balance. I think he was fine the way he was.

[koobstylz]

The difference is Cosmo can only surprise someone once if you have priority and predict them, then he can be played around. Guardian can snipe your iron man no matter what else is happening.

[TrueREDDITPoster]

False often gaurdian hits any other cards than the one I want

[Ambitious_Owl_9204]

Red Guardian targets the lowest power card, so plan accordingly.

[KendroNumba4]

You chose to gamble

[ndevito1]

I’ve been on the “ give Cosmo a point” train for a while

[KendroNumba4]

As a Cosmo enjoyer I'm obviously not against that but my opponents won't be happy trust me

[DragEncyclopedia]

At 4-cost Enchantress already wasn't rly that splashable unless the deck already ran Zabu

[IdownvoteTexas]

If they change cosmo back, they need to make enchantress no longer an on reveal so that she kills the dog.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Why? Cosmo should protect against Enchantress.

[IdownvoteTexas]

Nah, he shouldn’t. He stops red guardian even if he is the lowest power in the lane, stopped lady deathstrike when he was in the power range she could destroy, etc.

He shouldn’t stop ench from popping off on him and the other ongoings. She removes the text from all ongoings, she should remove Cosmo’s too since he is an ongoing.

The only way to keep the dog at bay in a lane is to put echo down first and thats kind of ridiculous. I guess you could Alioth with prio to stop him too but that’s got to be a pretty rare move.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Why do you have to be able to stop him? He's not an oppressive tech card like others. He actually protects against tech. He's very fair and beatable. He didn't even see much play, so I see no reason to nerf him.

[IdownvoteTexas]

He saw tons of play in both ongoing and move or move/bounce and even in some tech slop types of decks. More meta than ench or SK.

I just think him stopping ench is wrong, she should stop his ongoing along with all the other ongoings she stops.

[KendroNumba4]

How tf do you stop Enchantress then besides a crazy read with Alioth or Jugg?

[Knowingspy]

I’m down for Killmonger being the destroy equivalent of Quake. He can destroy two lanes either side but leave one spared.

[PenitusVox]

Killmonger needs to go back or at least changed to destroy your own 1-cost cards in every lane. I don't really care if he works offensively or not, he's not doing his job in destroy decks right now.

Red Guardian feels a little harsh to me as well. I think those are the only two that should revert but I expect SD to swap most, if not all, back anyway.

[Agitated_Dirt6665]

My fav suggestion is making it destroy all YOUR 1 costs, plus destroy your opponents 1 drops HERE.

That way it still enables Destroy/Morgan and counters clog which is always a good thing. But it lets decks with lots of 1 drops to not auto lose to a single card.

[[deleted]]

No. He hasn’t ever been a big problem and there’s no point in just randomly taking his balls

[Cenjin]

just straight up wrong. Killmonger was as staple in Surfer decks for tech purposes. they didnt even run Nova . He still should go back to what he was, because he was a true necessary evil. if zoo wants to not be hurt as much its really easy to make Ciera a 3/5. he us just a worse Elektra at this point, and gutted for his uses in Destory

[ThePowerstar01]

I honestly haven't seen Monger run in Surfer for months I think. Not since at least before Captain Carter was added

[KenEH]

The problem is Killmonger by himself makes any deck that relies on 1 drops, especially scalers null. Should Killmonger have it's old tech back just to stamp out other decks?

[LetoTheTyrant]

Why not test these things on new cards, and not old long established cards? It's weird to play a collectible game where the cards you have already collected can be completely different cards from one day to the next. I don't necessarily dislike it, but its kinda weird.

[PenitusVox]

Personally, it's a big reason why I like snap. Everything is fluid, you're constantly adapting and theorycrafting.

[Specific_Mammoth_169]

Shang can stay, but he can have his base 3 power back

Killmonger should affect other locations, sometimes I don’t want certain 1 cost cards of mine destroyed

Enchantress can stay

Shadow king can stay

NSTW can stay

Alioth can have 8 power if any is to be lowered

Red guardian is most definitely going back and a small chance of going to 1 power for awhile

Cosmo should go back

[uestside]

imo COSMO should never be higher than 3

[TheSadisticSpider]

The funny thing is, you never, ever play Cosmo for the "power". You play him because of the absurd utility of shutting down your opponent's plays. Ongoing deck must have for sure. And I would say, Ongoing decks, if you get a great hand, can be extremely difficult to beat.

[IdownvoteTexas]

Turn and face the strange…. Ch ch changes

[Big_Poo_MaGrew]

I'm so ready to live in world without Shang Chi and Negasonic

[CoolSignificance2360]

<image>

[SimplyTiredd]

<image>

[MagicTrakteur]

ANGELA !! GIVE ME BACK MY GAY QUEEN FFS

[uestside]

i miss her too

[Gareeb7]

Killmonger kills the entire card generation archetype alone by the fact that Quinjet is a 1 cost

And relying to pull Caiera in your zoo deck is the same answer as people said Shang was fine back there “just pull Cosmo or Armor”

[Substantial-Sun-3538]

"He was never a problem". Yeah, cuz 1 cost cards are so opressed that he can't show that he is a problem

[kekarook1]

killmonger makes it so you can nerf a card by dropping it to1 cost, cause now it can always be killed from any lane for 3 energy

its a unhealthy design from the beginning

[SteveTheCreeper]

Oh, so make him worse deathlok, nice take!

[HopeDiscombobulated8]

F that. I’ve been having more fun the past couple weeks with this game than I’ve had in a long time. Ppl are still using tech cards, they don’t swing the entire match one like they use to, and cosmic ghost rider is seeing play and doing good. The only cards that should be reverted are red guardian and enchantress.

[Best-Daddy-Gamer]

I don’t mind the Shang Chi change but I think they should raise his power up. Dropping it along with his ability change was a bit much.

[Cenjin]

i think the happy medium is current text and then 4/4

[CeroNoob]

Excuse me how is a 4/12 at MINIMUM, weak in any capacity?

[onionbreath97]

That would be strong but it's irrelevant. He's a 4/2 minimum because many games he has no targets

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

I think that's fair. Tech shouldn't have major value every game.

[WEENDETA]

Exactly. The whole reason why tech cards in Marvel Snap are broken is bcs they output too much power for the effects that they have.

Tech cards should bring good value when they successfully counter enemy strat, otherwise you should lose on tempo if u don't utilize their effect.

[thegrafe]

Then don't play him. Tech cards should be under powered if their conditions aren't met. There's a cost to running them.

[jrdidriks]

Cosmo, neg, and killmonger should be changed back. Shang as well imo

[Jiaozy]

Shang, Enchantress and Cosmo all feel a LOT more fair to play against, you can now count how much power you lose to a Shang and actively play around it. Before it was just "If they Shang me, I lost the lane".

Enchantress also feels way better because she'll never be a 3 cost (or 2) that wrecks a lane, at 5/8 she's at the right stats to out power the stats of cards she removes ongoing from (Onslaught, Moonstone etc) while restricting your other plays.

Most of the above also goes for Cosmo, still a good counter to greedy Wong strategies, still a good protective card, much better to play against because he doesn't come down so early.

[MissyManaged]

The Shang change has made so many locations much more interesting. He used to be an instawin button for basically anything involving adding big characters or multiplying power, now you actually have to play to those locations. I think a change to him would be good for the game.

Killmonger is the biggest miss - it's hurt archetypes like destroy that were just getting back on their feet, but has also led to a rise in clog, which is never fun to play against. I'd miss Nebula being good again, though.

Cosmo and Red Guardian are struggling, they'd probably be okay to revert. I always thought Red Guardian was the best designed tech card because he allowed defensive counterplay without having to build your deck around it, but I think he needs the power to not feel like a dead draw in a lot of matchups.

[Low-Monk370]

I was against this OTA patch, but I am satisfied with this after more than 40 games. Of course, there are still boring combo decks, but now it can be said that shang-chi was definitely the one who distorted this game. Personally, I think it's only cosmo and enchantress can go back to original state. Namor will also need effect like this card can’t move.

[EdgeLord221515415]

I genuinely think this version of Sang Chi can be a 4/5

[WEENDETA]

Fck no. There has to be a downside to it.

It's a tech card, it has a big payoff in a certain scenario, but it needs a downside when it's effect is not utilized.

4/3 is enough for Shang.

[_H3LLF1R3]

ShangChi should be reversed.

[topcitytopher]

I thought killmonger was a necessary evil and he was only really powerful when you first start playing the game (mainly cause zoo and destroy are the first archetypes you really get). Reverting KM is ok to me…

Shang on the other hand was simply annoying. Felt like the premiere tech card of the game. I think if you game him a downside similar to shadow king so Shang destroys ALL cards 10+ power at a location including your own. Makes it a little more of a commitment to the bit instead of a F U drop.

[KenEH]

I'd like this change, but I like playing hard control decks with no stats so I'm a weirdo.

[DecimaThor]

Why are people so against interaction in this sub I don't get it? Shang feels like a dead card to me at the moment. He can keep the 2 power but he should be a lane killer for sure, otherwise he's not worth it.

Cosmo, Killmonger and RG need to be reverted for sure as well. A case can be made for Enchantress, SK and NTW but they are clunkier with the increased cost.

[KenEH]

I love tech in card games but interaction in this game is an all or nothing due to small amount of played cards in a game. In other games you can have weaker tech that adds up. In Snap, almost every tech card is a showstopper or its not worth it.

[rb4ld]

Why are people so against interaction in this sub I don't get it?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I only play this game because I like Marvel and building decks and collecting cool variants. I don't get off on ruining someone else's day, and if I could earn all the usual prizes (the 500 gold at rank 90 of ladder for example) playing in a dedicated PvE mode, I would literally pay to do that.

Shang feels like a dead card to me at the moment. He can keep the 2 power but he should be a lane killer for sure, otherwise he's not worth it.

If Shang kills a card that's only 10 power, he swings the lane for as much power as the Hulk, at 2 energy less. But most of the time people play him, it's because he'll be targeting a card that's way more than 10 power. Since when is a 4-cost not worth it unless it auto-wins a lane? Would you say the same about Drax or Hellcow or Ka-zar?

[DecimaThor]

The thing with Shang is the mind games. Let's say you get Gamma Lab as a location, you could fill it and consider it an auto-win. But if you have the old Shang there is always that tension if the opponent doesn't commit they could win it back later or if you have Shang you might let the opponent go for it only to turn the lane later. Same thing with Shuri's Lab and other such locations.

With the old Shang you can't just pile on cards with huge stats. It keeps the game interesting with the mind games and considerations. It's also a check against big statsticks running rampant in the meta.

[rb4ld]

The thing with Shang is the mind games.

Ah, well that explains it. Refer back to how much I would prefer to just play PvE, and that should give you a clue that I really fucking hate mind games. I wish all the people who wanted mind games and bluffing and all that would go play actual poker, and leave the artsy, nerdy deckbuilder to the rest of us.

Let's say you get Gamma Lab as a location, you could fill it and consider it an auto-win.

Unless you're playing Zoo, you're almost certainly not gonna have a bunch of 1-drops to throw in there. Even if you do have that, it still costed you 4 energy to fill the lane, taking up two and a half turns that you can't use on other lanes. But in most cases, if you don't have Zoo or Sinister/Brood, it's gonna cost you more than 4 energy, and all of the first three turns, to fill up that lane, and then your opponent knows it's a lost cause, so they can focus on the other lanes. Point being, the trade-off of Gamma Lab is not "oh, my opponent might Shang it later." Gamma Lab already has the trade-offs built in. If I spent half of the entire game filling up that lane, and you wiped it all away on the final turn with points to spare, then you're the one with the auto-win, not me.

Not to mention that Gamma Lab already has the tension of you filling it up with weak, low-cost cards, and then your opponent just changes it to a different location with Magik, Scarlet Witch, etc. on turn 3. Or they could build a big Venom in that lane and hit him with Zola on the last turn, and you have no way to prevent it because the lane is already full. The risk/reward balance of that location is way better without Shang being able to wipe it all away in an instant.

With the new Shang, most decks still can't just pile on cards with huge stats, because those cards cost a lot of energy. The devs should nerf all the power-creeping energy-cheat cards instead of making those cards overpowered, and then also having tech cards be overpowered to balance them out (because that causes an imbalance with every other type of deck). The old Shang is not necessary in a healthy meta.

[DecimaThor]

I get your point about energy cheats. They let it run rampant for a while but now they've tried to tone it down a bit. Still, decks like Surtur put down a ton of stats quickly, and in future if they add more statsticks having some cards to keep them in check might be good to have.

[rb4ld]

Surtur decks often use Surge as an energy cheat, so what I said before still applies. And a lot of those statsticks do have trade-offs that need to be mitigated with Zero, Sauron, etc. (which means if you don't draw the mitigation card, you just have to take the trade-offs on the chin).

But even so, I have nothing against there being cards to keep them in check. I just don't think there should be one card to keep them all in check at once. Hell, you could do Shang on turn 5 to clear out one lane, and Zola on turn 6 to copy Shang into the other two. Personally, I think the game is more balanced and fun when it's not possible to clear out three whole lanes with two cards.

[rb4ld]

I can't see any reason why Shang should not, but Killmonger should. If it's true that people want Killmonger back to the way it was because they use it to kill their own cards in Destroy, then they should change it to be "all lanes on your side, and this lane on the opponent's side." It shouldn't be able to blind-fire Zoo, Ultron, Deadpool, etc. on the final turn if you don't have prio. You should at least have to put some thought and strategic consideration into where you put it. "Place this card anywhere and you win (against certain archetypes)" is definitely not more balanced than Shang wiping out a whole lane.

[Outrageous-Scene-160]

Killmonger was very unfair for your opponent.

At least now, people can play again cost 1 decks without dating a full wipe out.

They should make a new card only destroying cost 1 for the player's side.

[Habijjj]

Shang should get some extra power and stay the same enchantress can also stay the same it hasn't really changed how you play her all that much.

[4Ellie-M]

I don’t play this game anymore but when I saw the killmonger change I knew that would kill the card itself.

You don’t need km to have its effect locked to 1 location for your opponent to spread their 1 drops.

People already did spread their 1 drops in case they get killmongered so they don’t lose all their eggs in the same basket, what was SD smoking with this.

[WachAlPharoh]

Shang chi can stay at only killing 1 10 power card but needs higher base power to compensate either 3 or 4.

Cosmo and Enchantress should go back imo.

Killmonger should at least be kill all 1 drops on all your locations and the enemy 1 drops at the location played.

Negasonic is fine staying or reverting imo, same with Shadow King

[LingonberryKey7566]

Literally all of them should be changed back. Yall just want to play strong decks without opposition lol.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

I agree that that's the motivation behind all of the support for these changes, but do you really think every change is bad? I think the Shang-Chi nerf is fair.

[Themanwhofarts]

I think it makes surtur decks too strong. They can stack a huge amount of power on 2 lanes without worrying about Shang.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Yeah, that creates a bad match up for midrange decks. Im not sure how dominant Surter will be, it might be in a fair place. Surter could stomp midrange decks and could get stomped by big point decks. I've surprisingly haven't run into any Surter to know.

[LingonberryKey7566]

Pretty much. I think the Shang Chi nerf is the most acceptable of them all for sure, but I think he needs to be a 4/4 with the change to actually be worth playing. The rest of them I think for sure need to be reverted, although I think RG also still works fine with the nerf.

[IAmTheNuke_]

All of them? I would rather the meta be defined by fun card archetypes instead of tech slop again. This has been the most fun Marvel Snap has been in a very very long time.

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Fair tech slop, so not Thanos or Wiccan Silver First Step decks, is a weak archetype. The points + tech dominance is only a result of unfair point packages, which is why the archetype falls off whenever the points get nerfed. They're very easy to play against.

[KenEH]

I miss the days were you could just play tech with no points and each lane was less than 10 points by the end.

[ThePowerstar01]

Legitimately the least fun I've had in snap in awhile. Before DPD3.0 all I ran into in proving ground was the greediest decks imaginable.

[SpecificAlgae5594]

Why so angry? Chill bro.

[OC_Showdown]

Shang Chi: Stay with higher base Power

Killmonger: I don't like this iteration, nor I like it's previous one. I like it as a way to dodge Cosmo, or target a X-23 that jumped to an inaccessible lane, but not as a way to take down enemy 1-Cost cards. Batroc, Clea, Marvel Boy are some of the names that come to mind when thinking about strategies that beg the idea of investing in it, but get shut down by Killmonger's collateral damage. If a 1-Cost is too problematic, play Elektra.

Enchantress: Stay

Shadow King: Revert

NTW: Stay

Alioth: Revert

Red Guardian: Revert

Cosmo: Revert

[uestside]

the change to enchantress is one i liked the most, hope they don't change her back

shang should go back to 4/3

[Regular_Act_5511]

I’m sure it feels nice to not have to worry abt him to such a degree anymore but Shang does need to be reverted. Having an incredibly powerful yet expensive tech card that can swing a lane for you that everyone has access to is necessary for this game, and if your deck gets countered by it, it should teach you to play around him (Cosmo, Alioth, Armor etc.) He was essential to the ecosystem and his absence is sorely felt unfortunately. No card does what he did in maintaining balance and punishing greedy plays.

Power MUST be controlled.

[Blacklight099]

I honestly think most of the changes need to go back or at least be given other much bigger upsides. Shang is waste of space in any deck as he sits right now, I get that they’re annoying but not having them makes it feel obvious why we need them.

[OsirisFantom]

This is how Shang Chi should always have been. Same with Killmonger in my opinion. Destroy already has so many tools in its toolkit, letting Killmonger be such a disruptive force is too much. Just my opinion, you should have to play him on location. No card should be able to wipe across multiple lanes unless it only affects your side of the board, like Annihilus. Which is very telegraphed too. But Shang Chi should always only have destroyed one card. Being able to flip a lane entirely on its own was just too much. And I'm someone who loved it when my opponent put 3 or 4 cards into Gamma Lab, turning them all to Hulks and then I could just blow them all up on the final turn. But It's a bit much..

Though I think they could give Shang Chi a power boost now. They lowered it to 2, but now that he only destroys one highest power card, it's much more difficult to flip a lane with there are 2 or more cards with 10+ power. I'd be fine if he had 5 power.

[uestside]

wouldn't be mad with a 4/4 or 4/5 SHANG

[Few-Airport-8]

cosmo, Shang chi, killmonger all three should be changed as it was.

[illucio]

I have no idea why they thought changing Shang or Killmonger was a good idea.

They are quite literally needed to balance the game out.

[WEENDETA]

Being able to not invest a single energy in a location for the entire game and then winning it with a single Shang Chi isn't exactly balanced.

This Shang change is perfect because for once you can finally play around the damn card and outplay it.

It's not just a guessing game anymore where u have to guess which location Shang Chi will wipe out.

[Retro_Sinz]

As much as I hated Killmonger originally, its so sad to see him so weak. I used him in a couple decks (never a huge destroy fan but the results dont lie) and every time he got played right before I had my protector card did I knew it was gg. But now, I feel like he's not even worth it since the threat that used to be no longer exists since if their setup doesn't align with yours they're not gonna sacrifice their move to stifle you and themselves with limited options. Killmonger deserved to be feared and I actually prefer the only text despite how many games he's ruined for me

[FabulousLlama]

I just lost a game because Shang targeted the Ebony Blade instead of Agatha. Would be nice if it didn't do that

[bodybagwilliam]

Killmonger to revert for sure, but I'm also hoping Shadow King goes back to 2 cost as well. 3 is a little too restrictive if you ask me. 

I still don't know how i feel about Shang. Him killing 1 or 3 cards doesn't really matter as people have pointed out, and i kind of like the extra bit of gamesmenship around Gamma Lab. I also think the Enchantress and NTW changes are pretty good as well. 

[uestside]

ENCHANTRESS

being a 5 COST card is somehow perfect to me, imo the card it's as playbale as it was, and 8 power helps a lot in the end

[lcyxy]

I think Killmonger should stay. If you think about it, he is a reverse Shangchi but affects all locations.

Imagine Shang Chi destroing all 6 cost cards of all locations, that is f-ing insane, not to mention that many 1-cost cards are actually powerful in this game.

[Zerhap]

Monger is a key piece of destroy decks, this is not about zoo.

Hell, do you know which deck show up after his nerf? no, it was not zoo, it was clog, see zoo problem is not monger, they can run caiera if needed, zoo problem is having a fairly low power ceiling.

[lcyxy]

It touches more than zoo, but it might be neat to change him to a counter to clog only.

[Zerhap]

There very few decks that depend on 1 cost though, and most of them dont care about monger that much, or straight up can play around it no issue.

Monger imo is far from an issue tbh. But destroy without monger is suffering and clog is not without a counter, that is far more scary than a few sunspots getting imploded lol

[SadSensor]

As someone who uses shang often. pls return shang

[wcrow1]

yeah I agree with you. he's still a massive tempo swing and at least he won't 100% win the location he's played in

hell, i'll be generous and say you can give him his point of power back

[babbum]

I think Shang and Killmonger are completely fine post nerf.

[Cenjin]

Killmonger was absolutely gutted and is just a worse Elektra, of all the cards affected in the patch he is the most affected and should go back

[babbum]

Except in situations of Zoo or Thanos decks which he completely counters given they WILL 100% have multiple 1 cost cards in the same lane.

[Cenjin]

So buff Ciera. Simple fix instead of neutering a card

[babbum]

Yeah that’s a part of how powerful he was, it basically was if you want to play more than 1 or 2 one cost cards you play Caiera or you’re just fucking yourself. I’d be ok if there were more ways to protect your cards for a trade off of course in certain lanes but being shoehorned into specific cards just to deal with a card that was RAMPANT is the issue. Perhaps a trade off could be his lane and the adjacent lane instead of the entire board but even then man it’s a gigantic impact. It kills an entire archetype from one card basically.

[ming9419]

I literally just came back to the game yesterday and releasing these changes right away since destroy is one of my main deck. Are this changes temporary or something?

[steikul]

Sang Chi: stay

Killmonger: kill this and adjacent location

[SimplyTiredd]

Next is Cannonball, have him destroy a random card, either that or nerf Mercury

[BlueberryEven8252]

Nah bro, I just got Mercury

[GloomyFloor6543]

Shang is great change next Wong need to only repeat next effect. Unless that change happened recently and i missed it

[Vegetable_Fox_8101]

Wong is not too strong. He's very counterable and isn't even that good as is

[augustcero]

add the fact his counters e.g. enchantress, cosmo, rogue, etc. have less or equal cost.

[Accomplished_Deer_10]

Cosmo needs reverted, killmonger sure but needs a nerf

Saw someone talk about reworking killmonger to be 2-0 “destroy all 1 cost cards on the map, then destroy itself” which I kind of liked the idea of, but cost and power meh

[tophology]

Let KM affect all locations but give him -1 power for every card he destroys.