It's a bit of a loaded question, but all the generic E negation cards in standard right now run a 4 check with a 4 difficulty, and the second enhance on no memories costs 2 momentum which on void, not easy to come into. The action side of Rising tackle is a 4 difficult 2 check with a less than great attack side. the R negation how ever seems to be more so 5 checks and lower on average controls.

I recognize that KFT needs 2 commitable foudnations, which is mitigatable with chasing the power and determined, and Inhuman needs a discardable card (also can be worked around). It just feels like theres more of a premium on E negation than other Negation. Is this because we are all still trying to live down yoga mastery or is it truly that we think R negation should be much cheaper?

I always felt it was an over-compensation for the way people complained about Yoga Mastery.

everyone knows how i feel about yoga *cough* we need it *cough* but i guess people enjoy getting wooed by no cost enhances b/c of a bad taste left in their mouth by block one. such good logic, gotta love the forums. it really pisses me off too that non control symbols are now getting control cards. no memories with fire? yoga adept with fire? inhuman perception/chesters/spinta with air??? spinta with fire?? UMMMM

What you're getting now is a more expensive generic negation, and a significantly less expensive targetted E negation. Healer effectively neutralizes damage E's, it's a 1/4. Holding Ground does the same, it's a 2/4. Distracted and Spiritual Center target damage/speed decrease and increases, they are 2/5. So, if you want generic E negation, you run the more expensive card. If you want something targetted, it's easier to pass.

This game is trying to become more attack-oriented. As such, enhances, which are nothing BUT attack-oriented, shouldn't be as monitored as responses, which can be any number of things.

As I've said repeatedly, though, control needs to either start becoming more limited, or more costly.

ROTBI said:

i agree.

I also think that right now e's, which are more agresive, are being allowed to flourish, whereas r's, which are more defensive (or control oriented) are being supressed.

Well its been this way for a long time since block 2 so I wonder why now we are bringing it up since we had a year of the hammer to deal with .

But my thought is with multiple being the main E right now a good card to come back would be constant training . Deals with the big multiple enhance from the populat cards has awesome stats and a decent secondary ability .

there are alot of cards that we would all like to see come back but it looks like FFG already picked the reprints that they wanted and thats that....what i dont understand is why close throw......lol

anyways thought on topic im pretty sure that it is because of yoga mastery and how alot of decks at that time relied heavily on enhances and everyone complianed about it they just dont want to give anymore then they can get away with

and there still is cheap negation just not specific enhance negation i mean look at chesters it negates an enhance if its on a foundation and i consider that card pretty cheap

It's simple.

Block 2 didn't have response control. Don't give me the Syndicate semantics - it's just that simple. There WAS enhance control, but nothing in the way of responses. People bitched about it, and so now we have lots of response control and only 2 cards that directly negate enhances.

Enhance control, btw, has always been at 4 difficulty, with the exception of Brethren of the Coast (Lost Memories does not count).

It's why I personally enjoy cards that don't snipe a particular ability type, but what said ability does. Example would be Lotus even though that protects way too **** much (yet it is necessary.)

Instead of saying : "This negates an E", it could say : "After your opponent plays an ability that would increase damage." Takes care of a LOT more abilities, but that control E you don't want him to use? It goes through.

Simply put, enhances win games (they are agressive pro-active abilities) and if they were easy to negate agro would never stand a chance. All it would take is a low difficulty foundation to stop all early agression...

Responses be nature are defensive (or reactive) and therefore not as pivotal in the process of winning the game. A well timed response can win the game of course, my point is you cannot count on a response to win you a game, as they are only used in certain situations that (arguably) your opponent can play around.

- dut

Actually, I do believe that easier enhance negation would make aggro *more* prevalent. Not I-stop-every-enhance-ever cards like Yoga Mastery, but more/better/cheaper ways to deal with singular enhances. Think about it - control decks that run lower attack counts tend to rely on one or two specific enhances going through in order to win - whether it be a multiple, or some piece of a loop/lock, etc. The more difficult it becomes to implement such a narrow plan, the more people will be encouraged to run decks with enough attacks to kill even if their best enhance or two gets countered, whether it be simply by doing base damage or playing way too many attacks and/or strong enhances for the opponent to handle. Sure, aggro decks in the vein of Rolling Storm Talim with a specific narrow plan in mind wouldn't work too great, but decks that just play a bunch of good attacks and enhances until they win would be relatively unaffected.

Homme Chapeau said:

Yet again Hatman wins the thread

Global control is a horrible idea, and should only be allowed if barraged with costing. Control should be more situation-oriented, which would certainly help give way to a tad more creative and tactical decisions, as opposed to, "Well, I know this game has a TON of commit effects, so Red Lotus is a must."

Cheaper enhance negation most certainly won't make aggro better. I already have cheap enhance negation called "blocking" -- if their move is big enough to really matter, despite my reduction stuff and whatnot, then odds are good my opponent did not draw their speed pumps or discard or whatever to disrupt my blocking game. When you have to run the gauntlet of a 2/5 that shuts down your biggest pump or the one anti-block piece you did get, plus cheap reduction/return to printed tech, plus blocks, plus making the control checks... things are just 30x easier for the defensive deck.

On-topic: I think it makes some sense from a game design standpoint... Responses, as they are now, are largely from one of two categories, a) really bad or b) control or counter-control. An aggro deck might not see much purpose in running any control pieces, and it'll obviously avoid bad cards, so the response negation cards - while cheap - will be effectively dead the entire game. 'course, the fact that every "aggro" deck has to play counter-control or lose horribly kinda pokes holes...

I don't really have a problem with global control; it's easier to bait is all. I'd rather play against 1 really strong card that stops any 1 thing, than 15 weak-ish cards that each stop something my deck really has to do... and believe me, no matter how bad you think it would work, someone in my area WOULD play the latter deck if he could (and he has).

Da_ghetto_gamer said:

If Enhance negation wasn't so limited right now, Spike and Spinta wouldn't be nearly as bad.

Personally I really don't think I'd mind even Yoga Mastery coming back into Standard, considering we have the unbelievably game-crushing foundation control from Mentoring+Chester's in the game right now.

I can't believe people can consider Lost Memories broken but not Chester's...

Tagrineth said:

The only difference is that Lost Memories has significantly worse stats and only works once. And doesn't gain life.

It's 100% worse.

Tagrineth said:

Very true !!

Not to mention red lotus still stops LM where chesters so few things can . Not to mention the symbols on LM with the exception of evil desperately need a card like that ,

Plus Chester's has a +1M block and 4 symbols... the only thing LM has for it, is easy recursion via Gorgeous Team

Aaaand... Chester's has that +momentum E

I really think Battle Prowess alone (not to mention Tira's, Fast Food Lover, all the other lifegain tech, the 'keyword ability' change with Bitter Rivals) does enough to nerf throws that you could bring back Glass Slippers, Overhand Throw, etc and they'd still be balanced, or reprint new throws near their power level. Chain Throw is probably still over the top because it's freakin' Chain Throw.

Waffle: earlier post: It seems what you're really talking about is damage redux being too powerful; it's true that a cheap negate-one-enhance card would be one more thing for aggro to deal with on top of all that's already out there, but I'm talking about making it so that those 95% control decks don't work anymore. Imagine a card like this:

Foundation 2/4
<some 4 symbols>
R Destroy this foundation: After your opponent plays an enhance ability, cancel its effects. This ability may not be negated or cancelled. Playable while committed.

Decks that rely solely on 3x Spike (or 3x RSS, or Menuette, whatever) to kill would be in a ton of trouble. Same goes for many of the lock/loop decks. But for a true aggro deck, while it would be one more thing to deal with, the effect is minimal by comparison. Okay, so you negated my big speed boost; I've still got over a dozen other attacks in the deck and they will be coming next turn, if not right now. Plus, such a card run by an aggro deck would help it on offense against the likes of Rejection or Amy's if needbe. And, if 95% control decks are no longer as reliable, having some one-shot enhance negation to deal with is more than balanced out by facing decks with a lower total amount of control foundations overall.

Wafflecopter said:

Cetonis said:

FAN CARD DESIGNER'S SENSES ARE TINGLING!

Once again, global needs more costing than that. It can't be negated AND can be playable while committed?

Here's an example of one of my foundations that essentially does the same thing:

At the Peak of Power ©
3/5
Chaos/Death/Good

R Destroy this foundation, commit 1 foundation: Whenever your opponent plays an enhance ability, cancel that ability’s effects.

Abyss First E Destroy this foundation: Your attack has its damage doubled. Only playable if you have at least two other attacks in your card pool that dealt no damage.

More difficulty, 3 symbols, not playable while committed, can be negated, and present-day Chester's, Cessation, and Inhuman LOL at its existence. (and obviously it has an Abyss ability because it's one of Abyss' support cards).

As I've already said, this game needs control measures that are more situation-specific, like if Red Lotus stopped Stun only, or if it only worked during an attack's enhance phase, or more importantly, required 1 momentum, or something like that.

Love me some close throw, but I'm glad throws aren't automatic wins anymore. Bitter eats them up as do tons of other cards, Revenants Calling (pick up the phone), Tira's Contract, Lumber Axe, etc.

I'll agree that in a meta where we have Midnight Launchers, and throws are as dilluted as they are now, those difficulties should come down a bit. Besides Spinta I can't think of (off the top of my head, I'm sure someone we'll prove me wrong, lol) a throw that people would run in place of Launcher/Rivals.

Also, I am like the only person doesn't think Chester's is the most broken card ever. Promient Noblewoman owns Chester but doesn't touch Lost Memories. I think the fact that Chester's doesn't do anything to any type of card other than foundations makes it so that it's not the be-all end-all. Plus that life gain doesn't save you from being one-shotted. Is it great? Heck yeah. Is it brokensauce? Not at all.

It isn't that throws are automatic wins persay. It's that almost every Throw back in the day were given above-average stats AND the ability to deal half damage rounded-up. Plus, damage pumps were everywhere, ESPECIALLY for Throw's premier symbols, Earth and Fire. For our current metagame, not gonna lie, Witch Hunt is a necessity, and Widow Maker would be nice.

Throws are risky BECAUSE they deal half damage rounded-up. As such, Throws shouldn't have built-in effects like "if this attack deals damage..." because, under almost every circumstance, they WILL deal damage (not to mention most damage redux is minimum 1 now adays). What's more, other cards that say "if this attack deals damage..." become that much better on throws (lol No Forgiveness! lol)

Ragnar-Rashotep are steps in the right direction, ESPECIALLY when you've got the amazingness that is Mighty Knee Strike. Anybody who doubts MKS doesn't remember the days of Glass Slippers. Yeah, it is a 2 check throw, but its damage output is insane, especially for its difficulty (and conjunction with other copies). Ragnar + MKS + Stormhammer = dead, easily.

Chester's is only broken in the sense that it has unbridled control over foundations, and as I've said, turning a card sideways is not a cost, it's just "you may only play this ability once per turn." Of course, even that's an understatement, sharing 2 symbols with Shooting Capoera and all. As has been said, no card that is THAT needed in the meta should roll a 6, especially when No Memories arguably does less than Chester's, rolls a 4, and has easily worse symbols (and 1 less lol).

I'm sure come June SOTG Horvath will bless us with his usual, "We are PROUD to announce we have no bans or erratas, as we feel this game is just peachy", and yet again I will grovel and grimace and mug school children to accomodate, but I'd like to dream one day they'd buckle.

Oh, and as for Noblewoman, yeah, it is a good card. It's too bad its symbols are garbage, with only All being of major use. One day, Life and Void will blossom into fruition, but that day isn't today, and as such, Noblewoman won't really be mentioned until it comes.