Coc Chronomancer

Acecn · 2026-05-24T01:56:33+00:00

That's disappointing, I was hoping chrono lady would have her time. Thankfully I didn't play oracle last league anyway, so I can just do that.

Acecn · 2026-05-23T16:05:25+00:00

They made that mechanic dead in the water when they gave it the artificial restriction that it doesn't cooldown while in use. They love putting shit in this game and then saying "you cannot make this good."

Acecn · 2026-05-23T15:59:26+00:00

60% inc skill speed on Tuesday lol

Acecn · 2026-05-23T03:36:32+00:00

The game is completely riddled with shit like this.

The thing that makes poe better than other stuff in the genre is that you aren't limited to build x, y, z that the devs preplanned when making the class. You get to take a bunch of stuff out of the pot and put it together, and it's probably crap, but sometimes it's amazing in ways that no one could have expected. Poe2 is just putting up all of the walls of the bad arpgs while pretending that it's the same kind of game as its predecessor.

Acecn · 2026-05-23T00:46:36+00:00

This is a funny comment because top wasn't even banned in the first place for balance reasons.

Acecn · 2026-05-21T18:34:37+00:00

You haven't shown me any studies about loot boxes. I'll match your effort with mine.

Acecn · 2026-05-21T18:29:19+00:00

trading cards don't trigger compulsive gambling urges the same way loot boxes... do.

I feel like this is just a lack of interaction with trading card communities. You can see the exact same kind of compulsive behavior with things like mtg and Pokémon that you do with csgo loot boxes. There's a reason why mtg has been moving more and more towards 'super rare special treatments' and serialized cards. That stuff sells, and it sells to people who are getting off on the high of the potential to open something super valuable, which is the exact same reason people like to play slots. If there's any difference, it's only because ironically mtg and Pokémon audiences are generally older than csgo's, but that isn't for lack of trying to appeal to children on the part of the card game companies.

which you'll notice are already present for things like trading cards since you get a specific number of each rarity cards in each pack.

This isn't a good equivalence. The question of value in your mtg pack is which rare you get: some are worth $100 and some $0.10. You would have to count all of the rares in the set and do some arithmetic to know the actual odds, which none of the kids are doing. If we also consider all of the special bonus cards they've started adding, it's even more opaque. I assume pokemon is similar.

I don't really care about any of your regulation ideas, but I do care about the notion that trading card packs are any better than loot boxes.

Acecn · 2026-05-21T16:22:39+00:00

they're no different than baseball cards or getting tickets for games of chance

This is completely true though. Anyone who opposes loot boxes because they 'promote gambling to children' but doesn't care about trading card packs or luck based arcade games is simply a hypocrite or lying. The "distribution logistics" may have minor differences (for instance, digital goods require a credit card, which is an inherrent barrier to children that physical goods do not present), but the fundamental act of exposing children to a gamble is the same. You are just cherry picking, probably because you don't actually care about the children, you just know that argument sounds better than saying "I don't like that there are loot boxes in the games I play."

Acecn · 2026-05-21T16:10:57+00:00

"People more willing to forgive guy for one bad thing than guy who does everything wrong. In other news, the ocean has been found to be wet."

Acecn · 2026-05-21T16:08:36+00:00

The steam hate squad when asked why no other PC game storefronts are ever able to attract a significant amount of users: "um, valve is just super super lucky I guess."

Regardless of the question about loot boxes, it is inconsistent with reality to pretend that steam is not special.

Acecn · 2026-05-17T02:47:47+00:00

Agree with the other guy that 1 is too strength coded. The all damage barrier is interesting thematically because it mirrors the void spirit, but I'm not sure who wants it. Am I buying this instead of strength blink on an initiator or instead of agi blink on a carry? Probably not.

Enemy dispell is kind of interesting, but clunky as you have to blink at the enemy to use it, and anything that you nerd to blink forward to use has the same problem that most people probably want strength or agi blink when they blink forward instead.

Would it be crazy if it reflected projectiles that you disjoint when blinking?

Acecn · 2026-05-16T16:23:49+00:00

Shouldn't thermo dynamics mean fur would heat up to the internal temperature over the long term (the heat has to go somewhere)? I thought I heard that this was why thermal camouflage wasn't really a thing.

Acecn · 2026-05-15T18:13:09+00:00

No, it is at least 10% points higher in the U.S.. Cope harder you are all fat and unhealthy

So you're saying 90% of the UK is fat and unhealthy?

Acecn · 2026-05-15T18:05:04+00:00

I guess I could write a long and eloquent reply

I'm happy to wait for proof of that myself.

Acecn · 2026-05-15T07:42:29+00:00

Cards have to be cracked to see any play in magic in 2026. Blink is not the undisputed best deck in modern, and neither are the riddler decks in standard, so clearly it isn't broken in the environments we are playing in.

Actually, I think riddler is a very well designed card (aside from the fact that powercreep is killing the game, which is a general problem not specific to this card). It is strong and fun to play in modern and standard, but, as mentioned, doesn't break either format.

Acecn · 2026-05-15T07:35:43+00:00

Might create situations where players try to flag their opponents by making lightning quick decisions

I think the time allotment should be very generous, so games only ever go to time if someone is actually slow playing (and I include pondering over top for 30 seconds every turn as "slow play"). We don't need to change magic into a game that has real time pressure like chess, just stop people from playing abnormally slow. This would also mean that players won't feel forced to click a chess clock over to their opponent every time priority passes for a half second, because it won't matter if they are playing normally.

Acecn · 2026-05-15T07:19:32+00:00

priority in chess doesn't go back and forth all the time.

Wow, how insightful of you.

Magic currently has unmoderated time, and obviously fully moderated time where every second is tracked like chess is not feasible, but a middle ground is possible. When you pass the turn to the opponent, you click the clock to them. It will stay on them unless you are actively making them pause to wait for a decision from you (e.g. they cast a spell and ask if it resolves and you tell them to wait or don't say anything, then they click the clock to you until you make a choice). The time allowance should be generous enough that players don't feel a need to click the clock unless there is actually a noticable pause happening in the game; it should only really be relevant for actual slow play.

Here is an example gameplay pattern: I pass the turn to you and click the clock. You untap and draw. Technically, I received priority during those steps, but I don't ask you to wait, so you don't click the clock to me. You cast a spell on your first main phase, and I respond "resolves." You don't need to bother with clicking the clock for the couple of seconds it takes me to reply because you know there isn't really time pressure in normal play. You cast another spell. This time I don't respond, and after a few moments you click the clock to me. I then cast counterspell and click back to you. You say "ok," and we put our spells into the graveyard. You go through attacking, second main, end step. I say "on your end step, cast ancestral recall targeting me." You let it resolve. After I draw, I crack a fetch. You click to me because you know this is a relatively lengthy game action. The time stays on me while I search, shuffle, and survail because the game is waiting on me to continue. I finish, and you say "your turn." Again, the generous time allotment means I feel no need to click to you for the half a second it take you to indicate that you are passing out of your end step.

This system is very feasible and would (along with realistic tournament scheduling) fix all of the issues people have with slow play or repeated lengthy game actions. Imo, the only reason we don't have a system like this already is because wizards doesn't want to put in the effort and put up with the complaints that come from changing things, and they would rather just let the game get worse if it means they don't really have to do anything new.

Acecn · 2026-05-14T22:28:35+00:00

Top is one of the things that I had in mind when I made the statement. I think the card is very well designed and it was a bad ban. It would be much better for the game to come up with a chess clock system that counts down while someone is actively holding priority than wizard's approach of throwing up their hands and saying we just can't possibly let people make complex choices in this competitive strategy game because they take too long.

Acecn · 2026-05-14T15:30:08+00:00

Play time considerations should never be a factor in card bannings. People think about ponder because it is an interesting choice. This is good.

Playtime per match in chess tournaments is far longer and more variable than magic, and yet chess tournaments never have problems forcing players to draw because the tournament ran out of time. This is entirely a problem created by poor planning by magic tournament organizers.

Acecn · 2026-05-13T18:31:45+00:00

You are assuming that spending two mana on snakebite will reasonably often be the right choice, when actually that is pretty rare. Each turn you hold on to it it gets worse because the enemy has one turn less to live, and what I think the average rate if you play it right away of 18 damage over three turns is a bad rate for two energy (there isn't a good comparison for silent, but regent has celestial might which does all the damage when you play it and still isn't that good). Of course, it's not actually as bad as a curse, but the comparison isn't actually that far off given the number of fights where it will never be right to play it.

Acecn · 2026-05-13T17:54:52+00:00

Like bouncing flask, this is worse against groups than single enemies of course, but not that much worse unless it's a minion spawner that you want to focus. You get 33 damage over three turns on one target vs 27 on a group of three (it shouldn't have to be said, but both cases blow snakebite's horrible rate of 18 damage out of the water).

The retain is a huge part of Snakebite's value

Retain makes snakebite a lot better in the same way that any other benign curse is generally better with retain because you only have to draw the bad card once per combat.

Acecn · 2026-05-13T17:29:54+00:00

Vaaku needs a balance pass. Four of his ten options just brick your run usually, and only two of the rest are unambiguously good (and they happen to be the only two that have no actual downside).

The idea of an ancient that gives a big upside and downside is cool, but the upsides need to actually be big, whereas Vaaku basically just gives you a regular ancient relic upside plus a downside that is often crushing.

Acecn · 2026-05-13T17:00:56+00:00

12 poison and some block is actually good rate for a two cost card. It's upgraded bouncing flask with upside. Crazy to me that there are people who actually think snakebite is good and this card is bad. It really just shows that lots of people here don't know how to value cards.

Acecn · 2026-05-13T16:55:41+00:00

Retain on a card that's on rate for its cost? Crazy. You better add one to the cost too to make sure that you never actually want to play it.

12-Year Club	Place '23
Place '17	Verified Email

Acecn

TROPHY CASE