MarcoPulleaux said:

Well, it was mostly just meant as an extreme example. I'm aware of your stance on negation, but generally disagree. You appear to be working under this assumption that every decent negation card is a nothing boon to control decks and only control decks, yet last time I checked the decks the rely on resolving certain specific abilities the most are those same control decks. If an aggro deck and a control deck played each other under the condition that each player could unstoppably negate one ability each turn, the aggro deck would win easily, because the control deck would never pull off their narrow win condition. In some twisted manner, one could even say that it's the existence of powerful cards that help get around negation - Chester's, Olcadan's, Inhuman Perception, etc. that are the true cause of control's dominance right now. Of course, there are ways in which an aggro deck might rely on a certain specific ability resolving as well, (i.e. Rolling Storm) but there are plenty that don't. For instance the standard Midnight Launcher/Knight Breaker attack base doesn't *need* anything specific to resolve in order to win, there's just some stuff that helps out a good bit. And so long as there's not a YM-like repeatable negate-everything card, ultimately only one or two of those helpful enhances will be negated in a turn and the other however-many will go through fine. There's a balance to it, for certain, but I'm beginning to think that the right balance might be to move more towards difficult to stop one-shot negation, as opposed to weakening it and letting narrow control decks run even more free than they are now.

Shinji: Mighty Knee Strike isn't a Throw. It combos off them, but is not one itself.

Also, I agree for the most part with Shinji's last post.

Also, it's sad when you look at a card like Prominent Noblewoman and elevate it to that kind of status purely because it does one thing, negate Chester's. Well, yeah, it also negates Rejection, but it pretty much says R Commit: Negate Chester's Backing, and sees play purely for this reason.

Well Cetonis, I view it as such:

Direct E, R, and F negation need to be sorely limited, costed-properly, etc. Why? Because this entire GAME is based around Es, Rs, and to an extent, Fs. Almost every card in this game has 1 of the 3. As such, you can't just go and say, "Well, Oral Dead is balanced because it commits itself, and it only stops Fs on foundations and assets, and not on characters or actions." Sure, that is balancING, but that isn't nearly balanced enough. It has an amazing +1-LOW block, is a 2/5, and has no other cost but to commit itself sideways. Furthermore, the amount of assets and especially foundations with Fs absolutely overrides the amount of characters and actions with Fs. Oral Dead doesn't negate any SPECIFIC F ability, just an F ability in general (as long as it's a foundation or asset). As such, per each Oral Dead you stare down, you know that turning your F-ability foundations sideways is pointless, because Oral Dead is waiting to just eat them.

A response such as the one on Distractible is a step towards the right direction. It only stops enhances, and only enhances that reduce damage. Prominent Noblewoman as well is a good step, as it not just cancels vitality gains, but abilities that gain vitality. Both, if memory serves, are 2/5 no-block foundations.

Kung-Fu Training, being an action card, is allowed to have the abilities it has. While I'd much rather it had kept Yun's symbols of All/Death/Life (or even All/Fire/Life seeing as how none of his support had Death), action cards are second in line to be most powerful cards just behind characters. As such, KFT is an absolute shining example of what control should look like, at least, as far as actions go.

They need to start printing more cards that only counter specific keyword-laden cards, or stop cards with specific diffiulties, and Seth's stuff IMO needs to either be reprinted, or his theme carried on to newer characters.

You're free to disagree, as most do, but as I've said repeatedly, the more powerful your abilities, and in this case, the more global your control, the more bastardization and costing you're gonna need. There is simply no excuse to have its only cost be that it commits itself, unless said card becomes like, a 5/4 foundation, or something.

Tagrineth said:

*in addition to my above-post, sorry for the double posting*

Well, to be fair Noblewoman wouldn't see play without Chester's and Rejection (although I openly want both gone), because Prowess simply doesn't see that much play (in major part due to its symbols).

This game has a lot of concepts that are being thrown out the window:

-Speed pumps don't matter, because while they MIGHT be able to make your attack unblockable, your attack has to actually be able to deal the damage as well. Plus, most speed pumps have costs, except for Wind Dance, which is hawt.

-Speed reduction arguably is the worst mechanic in this game, if only because you need to have cards in the hand with which to BLOCK. Terry and Rock's support is cool, but both characters involve ditching cards to reduce speed, which is contradictory, and their support simply doesn't help in the manner it should (Jeff's Gloves being a possible exception). While I agree this game needs draw, Aquakinesis is NOT an example of what I mean, and should've been a 3 or 4 difficulty card (as it is the spiritual successor to Beefy, which is a 4/5 no block). Either way, speed reduction means all of about nothing until support comes out in which, perhaps, when you reduce the speed of an attack, you can tutor a block or draw a card or something.

-Life gain doesn't really matter, because most games your opponent either kills you, or just waits for their momentum; the days of several turns of attacking are over, and as such, the concept of gaining vitality on your turn is otherwise useless. In order for vitality gain to matter, they need to have gain that works during your opponent's turn, and at a reliable rate, not Schoolgirl Innocence

-Damage redux is extremely close to working, as it always has, but more often than not, it always gets the same symbols (lolEarthlol), and I don't think we've ever seen a character or a day when tank decks could both reduce at acceptable rate and be aggressive at an acceptable rate.

So yeah, just my input there =/

Well, I don't entirely disagree with you Shinji, what you're saying does make logical sense after all. Something like Chester's certainly should not have been done, Red Lotus could've used a real cost, yeah I agree with you in the sense that they need to be more careful about such things. (just maybe not to the extremes that you speak of) On the other hand, the heart of the problem with today's meta is that it is too easy to execute a narrow gameplan consisting of few attacks and a very certain set of abilities. And, there are too many different such gameplans being used - Feline Spike, Arrow lock, Deadly Ground mill, Spinta lock, Hanzo kick, etc. - for specific narrow counters to be effective due to the inability to play more than a couple of them at once.

The potential solutions, off the top of my head anyway, are (A) Ban a piece of each and every such low-attack win condition that ever comes up. (B) Print attacks with such ridiculous base stats that turn 2 kills become the norm. © Better/harder to stop, but cautiously made, negation to make these 3-attack gameplans nowhere near as reliable. I would personally say option C is the most reasonable of the bunch.

I've said this plenty of times, but such cards as:

-Siegfried's Earth Divide
-ANYTHING with Combo, really
-Character-only/Character-specific cards
-Resource-specific abilities
-Powerful

Are the ONLY way "kill cards" should be printed. Although I understand Multiple has been a game mechanic since set 1, and I'm not saying it should be eliminated, it has been an extremely popular kill for its ability to turn momentum into non-control check attacks of essentially equal value to its original copy. Because Multiple copies do not require control checks, the way in which you go about multiples shouldn't be so easy as "enhance with its Multiple".

...which brings us full circle to enhance negation being expensive versus inexpensive powerful enhances such as multiple's on Spike, etc.

Honestly, I know it's been said a bunch of times but Constant Training AND Contemplation (or cards like them) are always needed in this game. They should be reprinted or reincarnated at the least.

Shinji: I was generally referring to more immediate options, but I do think you might just get to see the sort of game you talk about come next rotation. It'll be easier to tell once set 13 comes, but from what I can garner the general plan seems to be:

- A lack of blocks on foundations, hence encouraging running more attacks (though I still say they could put some +2s on weak or strictly-aggro ones)

- Minimal/weakened articificial momentum generation

- Most finishers of the variety you described

- A general lack of negation; I don't recall a single negation card in the entirety of set 12 anyway, despite it being a "base set." There'll probably be some, but I bet it'll be toned down.

I'm worried that a lack of negation would cause problems the moment the next unforseen low-attack kill comes along, but it's possible that the foundation non-block bit will take care of that in turn. Well, in any event it'll be easier to see what the plans are when set 13 is out.

ROTBI said:

Whoa whoa whoa

NOT Contemplation. Mill can exist, but it doesn't need a card that has the potential to actually MILL a COMPLETE deck. And don't say, "It will promote using more attacks", because that's a problem that can be solved by making this game more attack-oriented in general. Mill can certainly exist in a better form than it does now, but I've seen entire decks get milled or nearly milled by either one Contemplation, or a field of them.

MarcoPulleaux said:

If the game becomes more attack-oriented, we'll see. As you yourself said in your tourney report, you cam up against of "walls of gray". If your deck is all gray Contemplation will hurt, if it's not than your opponent will let you draw those attacks for nearly free.

I should have added Pull of the Tides too, anyone can run that since it has inifinity and it stops Contemplation, and many other recylce-locks.

MarcoPulleaux said:

I don't like Pull of the Tides very much. While it can stop some dumb loops, I recall attempting a "Once per Turn..." ability, getting Sealed, trying it again, getting stopped by something else, then trying it a 3rd time and getting Pulled.

There are plenty of fair cards that just get devestated by PotT - Visions of Destiny, Unstoppable Warrior, Kyo's Red Lotus (okay it's not fair), Wind Dance... the cards with small or nonexistant costs have that because they have smaller effects. Or imagine running Hwang's Protection against a Water control deck with Shooting Capoera. I'm not against having a card with a similar mechanic to Pull of the Tides (see: US Airbase), but Timewalk is such a strong mechanic that the only card to do it as a Form was a 6/1 foundation that costed 12 momentum.

Wafflecopter said:

To each their own. As you said, it stops dumb loops. Also, 4 Wind Dances should be added to the "okay, it's not fair" section with Kyo's Red Lotus. Again while I have no problem with it, and it does have answers, I don't think anyone can convince me that +8 speed for free is "fair" in any way shape or form. All players would have to be a little more on their toesif it were around. Yeah, I know it doesn't beat Bitter Rivals too, but it still would keep some of this stuff to a minimum.

Good examples, by the way. It's always nice to see someone back up their views with examples.

ROTBI said:

This.

Constant Training wasn't an auto-include, but was techy as hell in allowing you to pick up your crap checks after you checked them, plus stopping Multiple and various other "no control check necessary" abilities.

ROTBI said:

tannerface said:

Astaroth isn't a damage redux character...

Contemplation should VERY much be reprinted in one way shape or form. It gives Evil/Death/Void actual good mill abilities. At the moment the primary mill decks are All/Good/Earth (with Bishamon).

And Marco, Contemplation would VERY much promote more attacks. Look at block 2 Mill decks, a lot of them ran Demon Hunting, Forsaken, or another split or just crappy attack JUST to avoid getting their whole deck milled. It being around might start pushing the game towards a more attack heavy deck, not these so called "balanced" attacks that'll never see play because they don't check a 4+ and aren't a Seal of Cessation, Ira Spinta, or Feline Spike.

B-Rad said:

The player using Contemplation gets to select the side of the checked card; running splits cannot stop Contemplation, and anybody who used splits to evade Contemplated CHEATED

Also, the reason why decks aren't so attack-oriented right now is simply because we have enough autonomous attacks, and that while Combo COULD dominate, it really isn't (outside of KBreaker) because of the fact that the chief cards function alone.

Feline wins games, sometimes by itself, end of discussion
Hanzo only needs his Kick, and unfortunately, that's the only version of Hanzo that has seen play.
Defender loops are kinda low, but they are still around
Order has access to Ira-Spinta and Juni's Spiral Arrow, both of which can lead to lockdown or lockdown-esque situations, which will eventually seal the game.
Evil, as always, has access to the best (or cheapest) cards around, and a well-balanced line-up of such cards as Ichi no Tachi, Reverse Flayer, Midnight Launcher, and Knight Breaker are enough to seal any game.

People need to stop giving forth alternatives, counters, or wishes, and get to the crux of the issue: you don't reprint cards or make more counters, you just errata or ban the problems. How hard of a concept is that to grasp? To The Bone had been out for a WHILE before Chain Throw, and most people saw it as a skillful card that only certain decks could utilize, and *Adon* was QUITE popular (Overhand, Strike, Strike, Bo Rush ftw), but as soon as Chain Throw came out, people at STG did the STUPID thing by banning TTB, errata'ing Adon to the point of uselessness, and what legacy did Chain Throw go on to claim?

Pretty much staple in any deck, and a LARGE reason Olexa won worlds.

I want to see a medium-cheap foundation (say, 3-diff-4-control, or 4-diff-5-control, or 3-diff-5-control-no-block) that says, "R Commit: After your opponent plays an E ability that would NOT increase an attack's damage or speed, negate that ability."

It would negate Multiple, but not Powerful. It would negate Spinta. It would negate control E's (including life gain and damage reduction E's, as well as Stun). But it wouldn't do anything to limit the two core attack mechanics: damage and speed.

MarcoPulleaux said:

Once again you are wrong =/

I card cannot not be an attack. It has been ruled this way forever...

Your second sentence makes no sense

Also, our scout has always ruled it that "whenever a player uses the F on Contemplation, and the discarded card is a split, the person who used Contemplation gets to decide which side of the card is used for Contemplation".

If the scout was wrong, well then shame on him, but it certainly makes sense, and that's the way the card has always been used around our store.

From the AGR:

"2.6.0.4 While a split card is in a player’s hand, deck, discard pile, or removed from game area (See 4.0 Zones of Play) it may be targeted by a card or effect that targets either side of the card."

Basically, a split counts as BOTH types while in out of play zones. So a split attack/anything always counts as an attack while in the deck or discard pile. So Split attacks stop the Contemplation loop.

Wafflecopter said:

Unless it was rules differently, the card says "R: After your opponent plays the same Ability [not card] for the third time this turn, their combat phase ends."

ROTBI said:

My three Wind Dances all have a different ability on them. If they were the same ability, you wouldn't be able to Enhance with all three of them in the same Enhance step.

Silly ruling. I understand it, and abide by it. I just don't agree with it. I understand that you can only enhance with a specific enhance once per card that has that enhance, per enhance step. But the fact that it's the same exact card, means it's the same exact ability, it can just be played multiple times (again, once per each instance of it being able to be played per enhance step). Playing it multiple times is all well in good, it's just that the ruling doesn't abide with logic and/or symantics.

In light of this, I revoke my previous previous stated desire to see Pull of the Tides come back as an answer and instead have it replaced with a similar card that doesn't fail in this situation.

R: Whenever your opponent is doing the same cheap, uninspired thing, rinsing and recyling, stop that crap and end their turn.

I jest of course, but you get the idea.