The 17th Claw may not make my deck better, but that analysis fails to consider that it's a prerequisite for the 19th Claw, which as we all know is a real game-changer.
I'm not sure what's happened in the StS community/space such that you're more comfortable putting this type of content out there again, but I was really really happy to see this and the shorts on my feed this morning. If this is the dawn of more in-depth Spire talk from Jorbs I am all for it!
literally just came out of a run where I died in act 3 because I dealt too much damage but couldn't block enough. up to now I assumed fission+ was like the best upgrade in the game, thanks for this
one takeaway I got from it, Fission is so good already, its better to make the other cards in your decks to be better for when you dont draw Fission, or after you Fission. Thank you for making more of these again
This is interesting im def a fission+ enjoyer. Thanks for explaining this. The way you lay things out using statistics and logic makes it so engaging for me. Im always happy to learn more tips in general from someone with so many more hours in the game than me.
I love that you're putting this stuff out again. This is probably my favorite type of spire content and it's so useful to see how a top player evaluates the spire
Really interesting talk this, thank you - as a habitual Fission upgrader who plays on Asc20 but struggles to, well, win much...this is deffo gonna make me consider more whether it's the right time to upgrade it.
One thing I wonder about is whether card draw gets better relative to output as you get better at the game. I think I have a lot more trouble than Jorbs making a deck that has enough output at all. When Jorbs loses, it's more likely to be because of 'I had a deck strong enough to win the fight, but I drew my deck upside down, with Genetic Algorithm on Turn 1 and then Echo Form when I wasn't getting attacked.' When I lose, it's often because my deck simply didn't have enough output in it to beat the fight even if I drew well. This might make output upgrades better for me even though card draw upgrades are better for Jorbs.
I always figured there was a good reason you didn’t prioritize this upgrade as much as I do during your runs. Looking forward to listening to your explanation!
My favorite/worst part about StS is that everything can kill you, so every decision matters. Even at floor 1 and 2 you can get screwed by jaw worm. My favorite fission+ moment was when I was about to go into an act 2 elite with half health and not enough damage to deal with slavers so I got the dark orbs potion, and was like... wait a minute... so I upgraded fission + and melted those motherf*ckers. In a sense it helped me scale 😅
I think a parallel can be drawn between Fission+ and Offering+. Most players can recognise that Offering is a fantastic card, but Offering+ generally gives you *too much* to be worth upgrading over something else. Going from 5 -> 7 cards in hand is a 40% increase in handsize but 7 -> 9 from Offering+ is only ~30% increase, and the likelihood that you already encountered a way to spend your energy from the first 7 cards is incredibly high already from a well drafted deck. It's an easier analysis to do with Offering because the output is linear, whereas with Fission+ the output is multifaceted (up to 4 different types of output and varying values based on focus), so players struggle to evaluate this card as readily.
Well you ain't wasting the orb, you're using the orb to accelerate and put your more powerful stuff in play, if you build your deck properly you'll have plenty more orbs to just replace the ones you already had.
Oh the explanation is very clear to me. I think you said it yourself in a video some time ago: fission is already good at generating card draw and energy, it doesn't need to be doing anything else. I've seen the case for fission over fission+ be crystal clear in the heart fight, where once you have managed to block using frost orbs, you really don't wanna evoke those
If you're thinking of blocking with frost orbs at the end of your turn, when you play fission you lose the frost orbs anyway, so it's more likely you want to evoke them. And maybe you have some other way of keeping / using that block. Say you have calipers, or prismatic shard and you have blur / barricade / body slam. There are ways you could want to evoke them. The question is how often you want to use fission after you already *did what you need* for the turn vs before you *did what you need* for the turn (be it block, attack, etc.)
This is all well and good when you're capable of choosing good cards and not just clicking on damage commons on every floor. A frictionless vacuum, in StS terms.
Thank you for these informative videos. No matter what topic it is, it is a nice and open invitation to think about the game, and I really enjoy that. Hope you have a good start to 2024!
Re: card draw; over time I've found that in all card games of all types simply 'seeing' more cards in a turn let-alone having access to those cards is the most powerful kind of effect. In my experience this applies to every kind of card game from traditional 52-card deck games to modern digital deck-builders. The second most powerful kind of effect is getting more card-play resource (in this case energy). So yeah, unless you have an energy orb or a high-scaled dark orb or something ridiculous like that, evoking the orbs you're discarding is much less powerful than the base effect of drawing and gaining energy. Personally, when I find myself really needing to upgrade my fission, is when I play out the fission only to spend the energy and card draw to rebuild the orbs I just evoked. Presumably this is a symptom of my deckbuilding needing improvement, though I'm also open to it being a playstyle difference. I think what the fission upgrade really matters the most for is plasma (as mentioned in the video) and dark orbs. Plasma because energy is the second most powerful effect in these kinds of games and dark orbs because losing the built-up scaling can hurt your ability to win the fight disproportionally. This I think is especially true for decks that include a fission to take advantage of the relics which give you extra starting orbs.
How many fires equals the worth an elite? How many shops equals an elite? How many fires equal a shop and vice versa. How do we weight and valuate which path to take in the spire?
Commenting before I watch, I am someone who is always very excited to upgrade fission when I get it, and I greatly value the extra output it provides. It’s come in very, very handy in a lot of runs. That being said, if my decks were built properly perhaps they wouldn’t need that extra output burst… and I can certainly see merit in saying that fissions primary purpose is as an engine and not a burst skill. Very curious what I will learn from this vid. Thanks for all the content mr jorbs
>That being said, if my decks were built properly maybe I wouldn't need the extra output Yeah that's exactly the takeaway from the video. Jorbs recognises the upgrade is good, but the benefit it gives you is typically something that you already *should* have surplus of (if your deck plans to beat A20H), and you are paying the opportunity cost of not upgrading something else potentially better. Really insightful comment. I'd say that Fission is an extremely powerful burst card that enables you to set up your engine. I wouldn't consider the card itself an engine since it exhausts. I also wouldn't say the card's upgrade moves it any closer to being an engine component either, other than maybe supplying damage so you can spend energy on setup instead of damage.
Fission makes your turn great. The best synergy are cards that make your other turns good. Fission+ doesn't usually do that. Really good video. It's something I've been wondering a several times. Thank you for explaining it.
I mean, at the end of the video you compare cards that are good to upgrade including Coolheaded, Skim, Recycle and Defrag. So, you know, 4 of the best upgrades in Defect. Have people been arguing that Fission is the premier upgrade in Defect? Because really, I think the issue here is I don't have an understanding of your value of unupgraded Fission. Are you excited to take Fission at boss 1? Does this judgment change if you have cards that you deem necessary to upgrade in near future (see: Defrag)? I get you are just explaining the concept of "Output-Focused Heuristics" and using Fusion as your example, but video was frustrating for me because I feel like I missed the explanation about why pick Fusion at all.
it is common for people to expect that fission upgrade would be better than the four upgrades listed, yeah, the intention of the video is mostly just to thoroughly answer why it isn't, because it isn't immediately obvious to everyone how an upgrade which deals 20-30 damage and/or blocks for a bunch could be lower value than +1 card, and any good explanation is a little long in my experience.
>I feel like I missed the explanation about why pick Fission at all I think Fission- is a perfectly good card without an upgrade. If your deck isn't bloated then the potential value and optionality of drawing into 3/4/5+ cards is immense, and the bonus energy is just a cherry on top of an already delicious cake. The concept is somewhat addressed later in the video. I think if you replay the video from around 12:00 with this specific question in mind, you'll see that it pretty decently addresses your point.
Having a 0 cost card that gives you 3 energy and 3 card draw is a mighty powerful card, so how much explanation on why pick it is necessary at this point? The argument is about the fact that people think "oh I'm losing 3 orbs, that's bad", because they don't like to lose stuff, and forgetting that you get freaking 3 energy and 3 card draw for those orbs, which is insanely strong already. And if you get 5 energy and 5 card draw it's so ridiculously strong that it should (probably) beat every turn in the game 99% of the time anyway. I also think there's lots of situations where it could be better to upgrade it. The part of "there aren't many turns where 5 energy and 5 cards is not enough" argument is an anchor. If, instead, you think of turn 1 where you have maybe 1 lightning and 1 frost orb (but then maybe you have plasma/frost as starting orb) the extra output is more valuable more often. But Jorbs isn't giving a scientific analysis of what the card does and how strong the upgrade is, just his perception on its value and the value of its upgrade, so anchoring in that way is fine.
So I personally REALLY like Fission+ because it seems to act as like the omni upgrade AS LONG AS the rest of your defect deck is making orbs. Being able to semi-randomly get that kill spell is really good. But, over all, and perhaps I have kind of forgotten if you did this, its not about "Is Fission+ good" but "Is Fission+ better than the other options open to me" cuz there are definitely times when Fission+ isn't as good.
Is this similar to the concept of a 'win-more' choice? In many games there are some choices that seem powerful, but they might only make a winning position stronger, without making that winning position more resilient, nor making that winning position more likely to come about in the first place. I think this concept comes up a lot in Magic: the Gathering (and probably some other games), where a card is judged to be a 'win-more' card, and thus not generally very good. It can feel good to crush your opponent, but what you really need is to get ahead, and then have the tools to stay just far enough ahead to eventually win by at least 1 Life Point. The analysis is a bit different in StS because your health (and gold, and other consequences) carry from floor-to-floor, but I think the overarching concept is similar, espeically since you get a fair chunk of HP back at the end of each Act.
Not really, it's the similar of "It's not necessary", you aren't ever 100% to win in StS so the concept of "win more" makes no sense, winning is THE goal, you can't win more. If your chance to win is 99% and the Fission upgrade would be "Win more" you'd still do it since you don't want to lose 1 in 100 runs because you drew the worse cards in your deck turn 2 against the heart. You understand?
@@spirecat652 - I think you've misunderstood the concept of 'win more'. It doesn't mean 'win more often', it means 'when you already are winning, win by a larger margin'. If upgrading Fission was free, yes of course you do it and you win more at no cost. But upgrading Fission does have a cost, and it makes already likely winning scenarios (the cases where you draw Fission early) stronger, so that you win that hallway fight harder or faster, but you might not win the hallway fight much . Upgrading something else helps you in some scenarios where you don't draw Fission early, and instead draw that other card.
I'll be honest; I just can't stomach throwing all those orbs in the trash. I know you still get something for them, but having played a bunch of cards/energy just to get 5 orbs, it feels like a gutshot not to evoke them. This is not logic, it is emotion; I'm well aware of why this isn't correct
My funny way to think about this is, imagine adrenaline+ instead giving you more energy it somehow gives 30 damage and 20 block. Should I upgrade it? I really need to think how my deck interact with the acts case by case. it's hard to list all the factors. Examples favouring upgrading are such as: early game needs frontloaded dmg/block, deck has little block except for 3 genetic algorithm and a few frost orb, deck has 1 tempest 10 orb slots a few thunder strike for dmg (I have to evoke the lightning orb so that the thunder strikes do dmg later) These situations probably don't appear often
This is why STS is the best deck builder game. I've spent hundreds of hours and can still be exposed to something that really changes how I think about the game
I hope it is not a problem for me to request/suggest topics for future spire side chats, but would you be interested in talking about why you (usually) prefer to kill deca over donu first? My friends and I were talking about it last night and how a lot of new players think they need to always kill donu first but I would love to hear an in-depth elaboration on why you might think otherwise, or at least why there is actually nuance to which you kill. Maybe it’s not a topic that has a long-winded enough answer but I figured it doesn’t hurt to ask. Love your content as always!
So if I understand correctly, the idea is basically fission already gives you a strong enough single turn spike in power, so other cards that can give you more consistent power over many turns is usually better to upgrade.
Is fission upgrade better in the situation where you have darkness orbs? Whenever I gain them I am always looking forward to some way of activating orbs independently of their position.
Doubtful because, as he said, Fission is a card you're incentivized to use as soon as you draw it, or to deal with a specific turn, both situations that don't really make sense revolving dark orbs. They're barely any different to lightning orbs in those cases.
The 17th Claw may not make my deck better, but that analysis fails to consider that it's a prerequisite for the 19th Claw, which as we all know is a real game-changer.
That's why I only do custom runs with Hoarder enabled. You get to that clutch 19th claw much faster!
He makes a very convincing case. Counterpoint, fission gets cards and energy while fission+ go brrr then gets cards and energy.
I'm not sure what's happened in the StS community/space such that you're more comfortable putting this type of content out there again, but I was really really happy to see this and the shorts on my feed this morning. If this is the dawn of more in-depth Spire talk from Jorbs I am all for it!
Right? I’m fairly new to the game and enjoy getting the chance to learn from an experienced player, in addition to watching great gameplay.
literally just came out of a run where I died in act 3 because I dealt too much damage but couldn't block enough. up to now I assumed fission+ was like the best upgrade in the game, thanks for this
didnt focus enough on frost orbs I assume?
one takeaway I got from it,
Fission is so good already, its better to make the other cards in your decks to be better for when you dont draw Fission, or after you Fission.
Thank you for making more of these again
This is interesting im def a fission+ enjoyer. Thanks for explaining this.
The way you lay things out using statistics and logic makes it so engaging for me. Im always happy to learn more tips in general from someone with so many more hours in the game than me.
Jorbs makes me think new things about StS every time he makes one of these videos and it's SO FUN!
I love that you're putting this stuff out again. This is probably my favorite type of spire content and it's so useful to see how a top player evaluates the spire
Really interesting talk this, thank you - as a habitual Fission upgrader who plays on Asc20 but struggles to, well, win much...this is deffo gonna make me consider more whether it's the right time to upgrade it.
This is a really good point. Ofc Fission+ is an amazing card, but I was definitely undervaluing Fission, as silly as that sounds.
Counterargument: big number big dopamine
One thing I wonder about is whether card draw gets better relative to output as you get better at the game.
I think I have a lot more trouble than Jorbs making a deck that has enough output at all. When Jorbs loses, it's more likely to be because of 'I had a deck strong enough to win the fight, but I drew my deck upside down, with Genetic Algorithm on Turn 1 and then Echo Form when I wasn't getting attacked.' When I lose, it's often because my deck simply didn't have enough output in it to beat the fight even if I drew well.
This might make output upgrades better for me even though card draw upgrades are better for Jorbs.
I suspect there is some truth to this observation, yeah!
I always figured there was a good reason you didn’t prioritize this upgrade as much as I do during your runs. Looking forward to listening to your explanation!
My favorite/worst part about StS is that everything can kill you, so every decision matters. Even at floor 1 and 2 you can get screwed by jaw worm. My favorite fission+ moment was when I was about to go into an act 2 elite with half health and not enough damage to deal with slavers so I got the dark orbs potion, and was like... wait a minute... so I upgraded fission + and melted those motherf*ckers. In a sense it helped me scale 😅
I think a parallel can be drawn between Fission+ and Offering+. Most players can recognise that Offering is a fantastic card, but Offering+ generally gives you *too much* to be worth upgrading over something else. Going from 5 -> 7 cards in hand is a 40% increase in handsize but 7 -> 9 from Offering+ is only ~30% increase, and the likelihood that you already encountered a way to spend your energy from the first 7 cards is incredibly high already from a well drafted deck.
It's an easier analysis to do with Offering because the output is linear, whereas with Fission+ the output is multifaceted (up to 4 different types of output and varying values based on focus), so players struggle to evaluate this card as readily.
The main reason people want to upgrade fission is because it feels bad to "waste" the orbs. It's not about being useful.
Well you ain't wasting the orb, you're using the orb to accelerate and put your more powerful stuff in play, if you build your deck properly you'll have plenty more orbs to just replace the ones you already had.
Oh the explanation is very clear to me. I think you said it yourself in a video some time ago: fission is already good at generating card draw and energy, it doesn't need to be doing anything else. I've seen the case for fission over fission+ be crystal clear in the heart fight, where once you have managed to block using frost orbs, you really don't wanna evoke those
If you're thinking of blocking with frost orbs at the end of your turn, when you play fission you lose the frost orbs anyway, so it's more likely you want to evoke them. And maybe you have some other way of keeping / using that block. Say you have calipers, or prismatic shard and you have blur / barricade / body slam. There are ways you could want to evoke them.
The question is how often you want to use fission after you already *did what you need* for the turn vs before you *did what you need* for the turn (be it block, attack, etc.)
@@floriancazacu4504 My bad! Forgot that fission still removes orbs. Agree with your points
This is all well and good when you're capable of choosing good cards and not just clicking on damage commons on every floor.
A frictionless vacuum, in StS terms.
This was precisely the question I had when I watched the recent run. Thanks for making this video!
Thank you for these informative videos. No matter what topic it is, it is a nice and open invitation to think about the game, and I really enjoy that. Hope you have a good start to 2024!
You make a good point... but fission+ make brain go brrrrr
Great card and game analysis! Love all your content and similarly this style of video! Thanks
Re: card draw; over time I've found that in all card games of all types simply 'seeing' more cards in a turn let-alone having access to those cards is the most powerful kind of effect. In my experience this applies to every kind of card game from traditional 52-card deck games to modern digital deck-builders. The second most powerful kind of effect is getting more card-play resource (in this case energy).
So yeah, unless you have an energy orb or a high-scaled dark orb or something ridiculous like that, evoking the orbs you're discarding is much less powerful than the base effect of drawing and gaining energy.
Personally, when I find myself really needing to upgrade my fission, is when I play out the fission only to spend the energy and card draw to rebuild the orbs I just evoked. Presumably this is a symptom of my deckbuilding needing improvement, though I'm also open to it being a playstyle difference.
I think what the fission upgrade really matters the most for is plasma (as mentioned in the video) and dark orbs. Plasma because energy is the second most powerful effect in these kinds of games and dark orbs because losing the built-up scaling can hurt your ability to win the fight disproportionally. This I think is especially true for decks that include a fission to take advantage of the relics which give you extra starting orbs.
These are helpful concepts, thanks Jorbs.
How many fires equals the worth an elite? How many shops equals an elite? How many fires equal a shop and vice versa. How do we weight and valuate which path to take in the spire?
Spireside chats are the best, please keep doing content like this!
Commenting before I watch, I am someone who is always very excited to upgrade fission when I get it, and I greatly value the extra output it provides. It’s come in very, very handy in a lot of runs. That being said, if my decks were built properly perhaps they wouldn’t need that extra output burst… and I can certainly see merit in saying that fissions primary purpose is as an engine and not a burst skill. Very curious what I will learn from this vid. Thanks for all the content mr jorbs
>That being said, if my decks were built properly maybe I wouldn't need the extra output
Yeah that's exactly the takeaway from the video. Jorbs recognises the upgrade is good, but the benefit it gives you is typically something that you already *should* have surplus of (if your deck plans to beat A20H), and you are paying the opportunity cost of not upgrading something else potentially better. Really insightful comment.
I'd say that Fission is an extremely powerful burst card that enables you to set up your engine. I wouldn't consider the card itself an engine since it exhausts. I also wouldn't say the card's upgrade moves it any closer to being an engine component either, other than maybe supplying damage so you can spend energy on setup instead of damage.
I don't normally comment on videos, but I'm extremely happy that you're making type of content (again) : )
Fission makes your turn great. The best synergy are cards that make your other turns good. Fission+ doesn't usually do that.
Really good video. It's something I've been wondering a several times. Thank you for explaining it.
Great video. Would love if you cover crippling clould next.
I mean, at the end of the video you compare cards that are good to upgrade including Coolheaded, Skim, Recycle and Defrag. So, you know, 4 of the best upgrades in Defect.
Have people been arguing that Fission is the premier upgrade in Defect? Because really, I think the issue here is I don't have an understanding of your value of unupgraded Fission. Are you excited to take Fission at boss 1? Does this judgment change if you have cards that you deem necessary to upgrade in near future (see: Defrag)?
I get you are just explaining the concept of "Output-Focused Heuristics" and using Fusion as your example, but video was frustrating for me because I feel like I missed the explanation about why pick Fusion at all.
it is common for people to expect that fission upgrade would be better than the four upgrades listed, yeah, the intention of the video is mostly just to thoroughly answer why it isn't, because it isn't immediately obvious to everyone how an upgrade which deals 20-30 damage and/or blocks for a bunch could be lower value than +1 card, and any good explanation is a little long in my experience.
>I feel like I missed the explanation about why pick Fission at all
I think Fission- is a perfectly good card without an upgrade. If your deck isn't bloated then the potential value and optionality of drawing into 3/4/5+ cards is immense, and the bonus energy is just a cherry on top of an already delicious cake.
The concept is somewhat addressed later in the video. I think if you replay the video from around 12:00 with this specific question in mind, you'll see that it pretty decently addresses your point.
Having a 0 cost card that gives you 3 energy and 3 card draw is a mighty powerful card, so how much explanation on why pick it is necessary at this point? The argument is about the fact that people think "oh I'm losing 3 orbs, that's bad", because they don't like to lose stuff, and forgetting that you get freaking 3 energy and 3 card draw for those orbs, which is insanely strong already. And if you get 5 energy and 5 card draw it's so ridiculously strong that it should (probably) beat every turn in the game 99% of the time anyway.
I also think there's lots of situations where it could be better to upgrade it. The part of "there aren't many turns where 5 energy and 5 cards is not enough" argument is an anchor. If, instead, you think of turn 1 where you have maybe 1 lightning and 1 frost orb (but then maybe you have plasma/frost as starting orb) the extra output is more valuable more often.
But Jorbs isn't giving a scientific analysis of what the card does and how strong the upgrade is, just his perception on its value and the value of its upgrade, so anchoring in that way is fine.
THE CHATS ARE BACK!!!!!
so excited to see this spireside chat. i hope you make more!!
So I personally REALLY like Fission+ because it seems to act as like the omni upgrade AS LONG AS the rest of your defect deck is making orbs. Being able to semi-randomly get that kill spell is really good.
But, over all, and perhaps I have kind of forgotten if you did this, its not about "Is Fission+ good" but "Is Fission+ better than the other options open to me" cuz there are definitely times when Fission+ isn't as good.
Is this similar to the concept of a 'win-more' choice?
In many games there are some choices that seem powerful, but they might only make a winning position stronger, without making that winning position more resilient, nor making that winning position more likely to come about in the first place.
I think this concept comes up a lot in Magic: the Gathering (and probably some other games), where a card is judged to be a 'win-more' card, and thus not generally very good.
It can feel good to crush your opponent, but what you really need is to get ahead, and then have the tools to stay just far enough ahead to eventually win by at least 1 Life Point.
The analysis is a bit different in StS because your health (and gold, and other consequences) carry from floor-to-floor, but I think the overarching concept is similar, espeically since you get a fair chunk of HP back at the end of each Act.
Not really, it's the similar of "It's not necessary", you aren't ever 100% to win in StS so the concept of "win more" makes no sense, winning is THE goal, you can't win more. If your chance to win is 99% and the Fission upgrade would be "Win more" you'd still do it since you don't want to lose 1 in 100 runs because you drew the worse cards in your deck turn 2 against the heart. You understand?
@@spirecat652 - I think you've misunderstood the concept of 'win more'.
It doesn't mean 'win more often', it means 'when you already are winning, win by a larger margin'.
If upgrading Fission was free, yes of course you do it and you win more at no cost.
But upgrading Fission does have a cost, and it makes already likely winning scenarios (the cases where you draw Fission early) stronger, so that you win that hallway fight harder or faster, but you might not win the hallway fight much .
Upgrading something else helps you in some scenarios where you don't draw Fission early, and instead draw that other card.
Yes!!!!!! I miss spireside chats!!!
SPIRE CHAT lulululululu
I'll be honest; I just can't stomach throwing all those orbs in the trash. I know you still get something for them, but having played a bunch of cards/energy just to get 5 orbs, it feels like a gutshot not to evoke them.
This is not logic, it is emotion; I'm well aware of why this isn't correct
Thank you Jorbs :)
My funny way to think about this is, imagine adrenaline+ instead giving you more energy it somehow gives 30 damage and 20 block. Should I upgrade it? I really need to think how my deck interact with the acts case by case. it's hard to list all the factors.
Examples favouring upgrading are such as: early game needs frontloaded dmg/block, deck has little block except for 3 genetic algorithm and a few frost orb, deck has 1 tempest 10 orb slots a few thunder strike for dmg (I have to evoke the lightning orb so that the thunder strikes do dmg later)
These situations probably don't appear often
my goat
This is why STS is the best deck builder game. I've spent hundreds of hours and can still be exposed to something that really changes how I think about the game
I hope it is not a problem for me to request/suggest topics for future spire side chats, but would you be interested in talking about why you (usually) prefer to kill deca over donu first? My friends and I were talking about it last night and how a lot of new players think they need to always kill donu first but I would love to hear an in-depth elaboration on why you might think otherwise, or at least why there is actually nuance to which you kill. Maybe it’s not a topic that has a long-winded enough answer but I figured it doesn’t hurt to ask. Love your content as always!
I'm pretty sure it's because he thinks that getting rid of the dazes is more important than getting rid of the +2 str every couple turns.
I'm pretty sure it's because he thinks that getting rid of the dazes is more important than getting rid of the +2 str every couple turns.
So if I understand correctly, the idea is basically fission already gives you a strong enough single turn spike in power, so other cards that can give you more consistent power over many turns is usually better to upgrade.
Yes
so, you're saying it's not e-fission-ent? 😜
If your deck is producing dark orbs. Would this make the fission upgrade more desirable?
So like basically fission is just used to get to your good cards and therefore it doesnt really need to be good on its own?
I'd reframe that as fission is already really good and more of it is not necessarily better.
@@floriancazacu4504yes that is better than what i said
Awwwwee boy lemme grab some snacks❤
Is fission upgrade better in the situation where you have darkness orbs? Whenever I gain them I am always looking forward to some way of activating orbs independently of their position.
Doubtful because, as he said, Fission is a card you're incentivized to use as soon as you draw it, or to deal with a specific turn, both situations that don't really make sense revolving dark orbs. They're barely any different to lightning orbs in those cases.
TLDR: 1) diminishing returns, 2) variance
Im not going to watch. But my guess is: "card is situational"
Audio super low
If you read this comment, you will become a weeb.