Protoaddict said:

If they run other foundation control in place of the 4th owl, your All deck can run 3x Chester's, and if you're concerned about punching through your opponent's Chester's, you run 3 Prominent Noblewoman.

Tag, there ARE some counters, and offesnses, that have no substitution. Not that IVY is really any good anyhow, but she loses some copies of her stronger small attacks, and has to find something to make do...

Lynx Cobra Tail Blow Hilde can't hit that combo regularly (maybe a good thing? But so what, there's a deck that someone out there has been perfecting that got their deck nerfed).

This would be a better thing to announce will be instituted before a rotation. But its still agood idea. Its just going to impact a few decks, and people that'd payed 40 bucks for that last UR for their collection now have an extra UR sitting around (that they might just sell of course, assuming anyone is around to buy it)...

It would take a substantial market research to determine if this change would help, or kill the game. Market research I'm not sure is possible, or that FFG has the resources to conduct, or that FFG even WANTS to conduct.

Game on.

I dont have a huge history with other CCGs but i know magic has the 4-card rule. I just sort of assumed it was a standard.

However if some games rock the 3card rule thats a possibility...if nothing else it makes the chase cards slightly easier to get, as each person would only need 3.

4 just seems right to me...if i really want a card in opening hand i run 4, if i want one in the first few turns i run 3, if i just need one to backup my kill i can get away with 2. if the max is cut to 3, then you would almost never run 2 of anything and would probably never run a single anything (sans uniques like charisma)

Double Post (is too short to say without other filler text)

Smazzurco said:

The big difference between Magic and UFS is that by turn 4 in magic the players have seen 11 cards. In UFS they've seen 20+, as many as 35, plus the cards that are available via discard pile recursion.

4 is perfect for the game. 3 lowers consistancy and lowering of consistancy means we get less combo decks and just aggro and control. I like the balance of having the 3 rather than just 2.

I'm going to be this guy and say it, but FFG will not do this because there are other ways to make the game fun and balanced without reducing sales. If suddenly a full 1/4 of thier UFS profits flew out the window I think there would be some rammifications.

I doubt that sales would go down at all. No one buys enough boxes to get playsets of all the UR's they want. That would cost a ton of money. All that would happen is that people would get more of the cards they need from boxes instead of from trading, ebay and CSI.

Um, there are people who do buy that many boxes actually >_> There's one guy I know who has recently bought 2 boxes trying to get a single card. He also bought 5-8 boxes at PotM trying to pull a select few cards. This is after he bought probably 14 boxes at other places btw...

I've bought up to 12 or so boxes per set per release in the past. Guess what? Still didn't get playsets of everything I wanted. Having that experience makes you less likely to spend the money next set than if you bought the boxes and got the cards.

Unifiedshoe said:

Regardless of how much the box sales are affected, pure and simple if people need less cards for playsets people will have to buy less, regardless of the means they are sold. Less singles sales on CSI and EBAY is honesly as bad for the game as anything else. Lower secondary market means CSI pays less heed to the game which makes for less exposure and less oppurtunity for players to find the cards they need in the first place.

I think you might be off base.

CSI and EBAY aren't able to sell the singles people want now because they are unable to open enough from boxes to fill demand. That wouldn't change. The only thing that would change is that instead of the amount of people getting the cards they need now a couple more people would. For every 3 people that get playsets of a UR as a single a 4th could. I doubt that CSI has gone through more than, say, 20 copies of Feline Spike. Is it inconceivable that 7 people would have bought out playsets rather than 5?

Personally? Do not want.

I'm a bit fearful of people finding more things to fit into their decks. I enjoy a world where it's tough to find room for Ways of Punishment in a standard Evil deck.

Having played Magic, UFS, L5R, Pokemon, Yugioh, Inuyasha, Warlord, and VS I must say that the four of each cards works best with games that have decks with 60+cards. If you want to change the number of cards you can run you need to change deck sizes, which means you need a total rules overhaul. It's not as simple as going, oh hey, lets have it so people only run 3 of a card.

DoubleD said:

I'll see you Magic, UFS, L5R, Pokemon, Yugioh, Inuyasha, Warlord, and VS and raise you 7th Sea, Hecatomb, Heresy, Jyhad (when it was called that), WoW, Star Wars (Decipher), Star Trek (Decipher), and Doomtown. I'm not sure what listing your past games has to do with anything but there you go.

The number of copies per card rule should be based on the probability of drawing cards. While deck size factors into that, there are no set rules like 40-50 cards is 3 per deck, 50-60+ is 4. Realize that every card you play shows you another card of your deck, and that you draw more than an arbitrary amount of cards per turn. Like I've said previously, on turn 4 of Magic you've seen 11 cards, turn 4 Vs you've seen 12 cards, L5R you've seen 8 cards. In UFS you've seen an amount ranging from 3-60+. Other games are not comparable.

The reason i brought this up in the first place was not that I think players need more room to run answers. As has been stated, some people already only run 3 copies of most cards in their decks. I didn't even propose this because I think it's a change that needs to be implemented.

I posted this because it occured to me that this might be the correct amount of cards for the game based on how many cards you draw, etc. In addition, I think it would fix a lot of problems for a lot of people by making some of the monstrous control decks slightly less dangerous. It also allows more cards to enter the tournament scene that would otherwise not make the cut due to space, giving a little variety to games.

I'm not trying to vigorously defend or push this idea but as long as people post things I don't agree with I'm going to continue to respond.

Unifiedshoe said:

Listing my previous games adds some validatiy to my opinon, hence the list...I thought that was pretty obvious. Also saying that you see X of a card in a particular game is flawed, in every card game you need card advantage to win, if you are just relying on the one card you draw a turn things are not lookng good for you. UFS has a degree of built in card advantage because you do see a lot of the cards in your deck, but another thing to consider is that you also use your deck as a resource. If you had only 3 copies of a card it becomes much easier to check all your copies of that card.

DoubleD said:

That's not what the term 'card advantage' means. Card advantage is when a player has access to more cards than their opponent. They are said to have an advantage because in ccg's (typically) the player with the most cards wins.

As for the possiblity of checking all the copies of a given card, while I agree that it seems more likely I don't think it's a particularly bad thing to have happen. Also, when a card is put into a discard pile it becomes available to play as long as you have some form of recursion. Being in the discard pile does not automatically make a card inaccessible.

Protoaddict said:

I don't think it's as likely to reduce sales as you think.

Rather, I think it's more likely to encourage players to build more decks with the same amount of product.

Rather than saying, "I only have 6 copies of this excellent Fire card, so I only have enough to build an Astrid deck," the same player might say, "Yay! I have a playset for my Astrid, and playset to build Temujin with!"

ARMed_PIrate said:

you hit it right on the head.

I can safely say that in our local area that a Unique = 1 or playset = 3 rule would definitely increase sales. Instead of getting a card like spike then having to chase down 3 more copies to make a deck, you need 2 more, which is much easier to stomach than another stupidly expensive power card.

This especially applies to cards that are out-of-print like Mentoring, the shops, and various other Block 3 promos.