Seriously.

This game needs... less damage reduction and less lifegain, and more smash face again. Big time.

Since about set 6-7ish and sealed with set 8 and the first rotation, the game slowly degenerated into the notorious "gray wars" metagame which peaked with the realisation that Set 8 + Concealed Shallow Swipe = Broken. I don't even call it the Universal Fighting System in my playgroup, I call it the Universal Foundation System.

The latest bans have been a great step, no doubt, toward reestablishing a healthy metagame, but at its core we're still missing something... pure muscle.

One of the most defining features of the game pre set 8 was at a tournament, you'd see not only the methodical control decks (Order/Death/Evil/Void) but a healthy showing of decks that could rip your face off on the 2nd or 3rd turn if you didn't have adequate defensive planning in your deck.

That kind of power is just gone now, it's very rare that a deck is capable of winning on the 3rd turn unless it gets lucky with certain pieces (momentum generation, for example). My *Siegfried deck has 16 attacks and uses Double Grounder Beta as its primary win condition right now, but if I don't have White Gi + multiple White Magic on the first or second turn, a long game of UFoundationS ensues since even though the goal of my deck is aggro-beat-face-roar-you-die, that three turn stall is long enough for control decks to put up their "fortress", so to speak. now, this is how it's always been - you stall out on your kill, and the control deck will make the win increasingly difficult... that's not a complaint on that end.

James has already started to address one of the larger reasons for early attack strings becoming useless - too many blocks on everything. STG saw the problem of the game being too fast and starting from set 6 (ironically the same set that gave us the Swipe) put blocks on nearly every card (in set 6, literally every card) including putting awesome blocks on equally awesome cards (one of my biggest complaints about Chester's and Mentoring was their blocks). Set 12 started a return to the original design philosophy of making foundations terrible for blocking, this isn't going to change any time soon, so that's great.

The other thing that's only been addressed partially so far is in the quality of attacks. Even with the attacks available now, it's hard to set up a scenario where a 2nd turn kill is possible. One big card that's reared its face a few times now locally is Midnight Launcher, which is one great example of an attack that you can drop 2nd turn to threaten your opponent big time. I really hope we start seeing more strong attacks that need less setup to apply pressure.

I really, really hope it becomes possible and even viable to run an aggro deck that tries to score a kill by the third turn again soon, it was such a defining aspect of the game back when it was actually fun to play regularly. Not only that, but it was a huge draw the game used to have for newer players, and made it feel more like the source material it's drawing from. I've already talked to James about this some, but I'd like to see how many people here agree with me.

I'll have to agree with you. during our last local tournament both me and Superandroid17 had so much defense out that attacking would have only given the other player the advantage so our match went to time.

I agree about attacks as well, but you have to keep in mind that we don't want other attacks such as Feline Spike, before errata, rolling back into the meta. Attacks are suppose to be better than what they are now, agreed, but they can't be so degeneritive to out right kill someone by them selves and to fast. Also agree with blocks and the change away from straight and tight control.

On another note I would have to disagree with you on damage reduction. Really, what is the problem? Well it's card like Holding Ground, Healer and Rejection which I find problematic with damage reduction. It is pretty hard now to find general damage boost that gives really good bonuses like Absurd Strength and Way of the Mightiest, though they are a bit more now with set 12, but still not a lot. Usually these boosts are printed on attacks now that require a lot of tech or costs, such as High Plasma Beam and Galactic Phantom, again which makes them kinda difficult to play agro with.

Doesn't it bug you when you play a high pace combo of cards and enhances to gain a decent damage boost then have it reduced by one card? Doesn't it bug ya even more when you have to play through multiple copies, which I think is one of the points that is holding agro back. In my opinion we still need damage reduction, but not over powered ones like Holding Ground and Healer.

Back in block two, damage reduction pretty much traded enhances with damage boost and it came down to the question that did you have enough damage reduction to midigate their damage pump? And usually the answer was no because your missing one or two cards to pop it back down to at least printed or you couldn't pay the costs. Solutions I am looking for is to simply add more free damage pump like Absurd Strength and Way of the Mightiest or fix the damage reduction base, by example of Evil Shunned, Mortal Strike and Tendon Strength. Not to powerful and not to pointless to run.

Response to life gain, well thats simple. Don't make cards over powered. Wasn't False Pretenses one of the only cards played back in block 2 that gained life? Also how was it to play against it? Not difficult at all since it had a wonderful cost effect that you could play around, however it still made it hard to kill the opponent. Battle Prowess on the other hand is just not funny. Kinda needed it against Feline Spike, Spint Loops and some of the other combo's but now with the recent errata's, and may be even before, it is just a bit to powerfull. There are ways to negate it, but a lot of those cards that do negate it are one trick cards, which really only take up space for cards you do need in your deck.

Sorry for the block, but that's just my two cents.

I agree wholeheartedly on that the game needs a bit more aggro muscle. I know that my playgroup was in danger of disappearing because we came to the dismaying realization that it wasn't worth attacking because you were going to be rebuffed and beat down the next turn. While I don't necessarily agree on that we need more Midnight Launcher -type cards (they're a bit expensive on the $ department, and I'm not even gonna talk about Knight Breaker ), I agree 100% that we need cards with the SPIRIT of Midnight Launcher making rounds on the new sets' Commons and Uncommons (aka smash your friggin' face in). Our game is on the road to recovery; it may take 2 or 3 sets for it to fully heal from the stale state it was in, but threads like these will (hopefully) make a difference.

Well my current issue if i were to have one is not lack of aggro, because i feel that the game is pretty up there with its aggro ability. A lot of typically control based cards make for strong aggro, including reppa and Ispin. My problem is Hildie, because she sthe perfect example of why aggro isnt working right now.

Hildie is in my eyes the best aggro character in the game right now. She wins without multiples so no need for momentum and no need to worry about ichy. She wins on one attack so no need to worry about packing 12+ attacks in a deck, 6-8 three check attacks will do fine, meaning her numbers are superior to other aggro decks. she has the mandatory 7 HS. Her kill can also be gaurenteed (more on this later).

But the biggest reason she trumps others right now is the banning of rejection, which is a huge mistake in my eyes. Rejection is the only card playable from hand (IE unknown to your opponent, bluffing and such) that can stop her from one hit killing you. Tag along is the only other card that works to stop her E, but not during heal snipe. Arguably if your character is tank enough something like Ra can leave you at one life, but it's unlikley. So why is this all relevant? Because since hildie can now ignore what is in your hand completley all she has to do is remove things from play that can stop her, something her symbols excel at, and thats all she wrote. She can gaurentee her kill because all of your answers will be known to her, so she can plan in advance and know she can deal with them.

Since all of hildies aggro pieces are also defence peices for her, she gets the best of both worlds. Why bother going aggro with any other character when you dont have too because there is someone who does it both just by being herself?

My Akuma deck is highly aggressive. It stands up to hildi,. but it's by no means pure aggro. Before rejection was banned it would play like an aggro deck, spam foundations turn one and then just attack over and over again. But now that rejection is gone and i dont have that from hand defence as an option, I simpily cant aggro most characters because most characters can kill me in one turn if i commit out or spend my hand trying to kill them. Since we are in an environment where amy's assistance typically reduces more damage than any in game damage pump can provide, you simpily cant play pure aggro unless your hildie and can turn your defence into offence pieces.

I cant believe im about to say this, but theres a short list of attacks i would love to see reprinted. I really found myself shocked to want these attacks back because a year ago I was screaming about them, but now I feel like the environment can handle them:

Chain throw - The penultimate attack. Theres no loops for it anymore like kunai used to provide, and on its own its not enough to kill a person turn 2, but ill be damned if its not something that can put early pressure on someone without forcing you to leave yourself prone.

Iori's FIreball - This card is aggro at its purest. Its got high damage, can force a block, low difficutly, and a risky control check. It encourages attacking and encourages you to use more than 4 attacks (cause the enabler isnt around anymore).

8th Bill - I dont know a single person who didnt think this card was one of the best and most balanced attacks in the game. It also has an interesting effect that you dont see on other cards and can be built around.

Clones - Ok maybe not this card itself, but attacks that had a high control check that a playable would be a welcome addition to this game again.

Blazing Cadenza - One of the ultimate set up cards. wouldnt even be that overbearing in an environement with the amount of anti commital stuff we have.

I agree and i somewhat disagree with this post. Let me clarify...

I agree because it's been looooong over due for Aggresive oriented decks to start making a comeback and become viable in tournament/competitive play. And, i think that without this archtype of playstyle being able to compete with more Control-centric decks, this game will die a slow and agonizing death. Not that Control is bad, mind you, because i believe every deck should have even a modicum of defense built into it. But a return of those decks whose single minded goal is to Kill before its adversary has even set up is a welcomed one, indeed, imho.

I disagree in part, because i truly believe (and this is from in-game experience as well) that players have become way more cautious; too cautious, if you ask me. This may be a learnt trait as the state of the game was in decline and discouraged attacking and rewarded "gray wars", until recently. However, now is the time to re-learn how to PLAY aggresively. Part of what makes Aggro isn't just the deck build, but the attitude and PLAYSTYLE of the player; Aggro demands that a player have a somewhat devil-may-care attitude and FORCE his opponent to react to what he or she is playing.

There has never been a more appropriate time within the last year, year and a half to experiment with a play a style that 'forces the issue'. There are some really great Aggro ideas out there, some revolutionary (intimidating presence + all life is prey) and some i would call classic (speed and damage pump a la cards like adoration, origins unknown, enraged golem, cobra blow, etc...etc...).

Sure moar aggro-centric cards and attacks are nice, and i'm sure they're on their way. But, as UFS needs to reobtain some testicular fortitude, we as players need to, in the words of my good acquaintence Archimedes, grow a pair and start PLAYING aggresively.

Protoaddict said:

OK allow me to rephrase then. Rejection is the only good card that can be played from hand to stop her and honestly the only one likley to see play. About face is not useful against most other strategies so as to be relagated to sideboard. Even with hildie top 8ing all over the place, people still arent running this card. Additonally rejection could not be canceled during the heal snipe kill (this is not an enhance so it can) and rejection in most decks could not fail because of its low difficutly, this one not only can fail but adds another 2 check to your deck.

In either event my point still stands. Why go balls out aggro when you can play grey wall tank and then hit someone for more damage than any aggro deck can hope to do.

Navi: it's not a single card, it's the whole package, notably when it gets compounded by a ridiculous lifegain staple like Battle Prowess or Abelia's Friendship. Recently I've actually more than once hit an opponent on the 2nd or 3rd turn down to single digits, then watch as they play 2-3 copies of Battle Prowess and completely nullify the entire tempo of the game.

Lord: Well, yeah, I didn't mean more Launchers specifically, just more efficient attacks in that same vein.

Fred: Hilde more or less straight up loses to Fight or Flight, Holding Ground, Assassination Arts, Healer, American Made, and Strife's Patronage. Oh, and Tag Along, Seal, No Memories, and Evil-Doer Destroyer. Cards people DO play. Then there's Rashotep and About Face, which can/should also see play. About Face isn't even as unplayable as people might think - it potentially halts Combos. Wrap your head around that.

Also, Chain Throw encourages a lowered attack count, which is one of the things we want to avoid, likewise 8th Bill.

Tagrineth said:

Donovan + Unstoppable Warrior [or other damage pump, All Life is Prey + Shadow Blade/Charisma for example] + Shredding Vibrato [ + Unorthodox Training or Dhalsim's Crouching Roundhouse]. Guess which of these decks I've played

Ibuki + hand full of orange cards including Midnight Launcher s and Knight Breaker

Hilde + Cobra Blow + orange card [ + Healer]

Felicia + Feline Spike

None of them approach the level of a guaranteed kill, and there's nothing wrong with that. The problem as I see it is that cards that can prevent the T2 keep getting stronger as the game goes on -- it's like you can build a wall, and then build a wall on top of the wall, and another on top of that. If there were a way through the wall, things would be fine, but usually you have to climb over it; so what could sap the T2 kill -- which has to roll good numbers, get good draws, etc etc -- keeps getting more insurmountable by turn 5, turn 10... and the defender has other advantages, too.

I don't disagree with the philosophy behind cards like High Plasma Beam or Tiger Fury -- they force the game to go on for more than two turns before they can start doing work, and at that late game point they're much more efficient than early-game options. The unfortunate fact of a longer game is that the most optimal way to play a deck that cannot end the game on the second or third turn is to play as few attacks as possible; you draw fewer dead cards, your control checks are better. Maybe a good idea with Tiger Fury or other cards that start out ok and become very powerful would be to put a cap on them -- "This attack gets +X damage. X equals the number of committed foundations in your area, or 15, whichever is lower." Might force more attacks in a deck...

Really, I think that'd be a good idea in general... how often in fighting games to do you see OHKOs? Extremely rarely -- maybe it'll be a finisher that has a ridiculously obvious setup (GG's instant kill attacks) or just an attack that happens to do a great deal of damage and circumstances make it add up to 100%. Or there's a Ring Out, which I guess was the idea behind Hilde (her gameplay is basically, touch you once, juggle you half a mile to the edge, ploop, RO).

OOFS needs its balls back, hell yeah, but Dark Empire + Absurd Strength could knock you out cold just by swinging its sack of brass.

Tagrineth said:

I can vouch for all the ones in bold. In EVERY game at that SCC someone played one of these against me and I DIED A SLOW, PAINFUL DEATH.

Without Rejection ever showing its ugly face, mind you. All Hugo needed to do was play that turn 2 Lynette's Shop to shut me down completely. So did the turn 2 No Memories that Zi Mei played. Or the turn 1 No Memories that Lilith played (the only match I won). Anything with a Lynette's Shop had to simply play it turn 2 and watch me squirm as they copied my Healer or Assasination Arts. And siding into Rashotep in teams and fighting a Hilde (Tag's Hilde, no less) proves why Rashotep is better than people would like to believe as an answer to anything.

THIS MAN SPEAKS THE TRUTH.

Protoaddict said:

Consider Yi Shan's support, where his damage/speed pump and damage reduction are equal to control values. If you want high CC attacks, play High Tides. Nothing should be 3M5 for 3 diff, 5 control.

And this is coming from someone who actually ran a themed Twelve and loved it.

I see the back and forth discussion, and yea i know that Aggro has an uphill battle to fight, but what's so new about that? Aggro has always been a style of play that's been on the timer i.e. Have to kill by T3 or else...It's not a play style that's suited for everyone.

I know Hilde is getting A LOT of attention right now, but i just don't think she's as pure of an Aggro character as, say, **Yang**. A properly built Yang based on Fire or a combo of Death and FIre should reliably kill by T3, if not T2. Seriously, Senkyutai w/momentum of any number + Cobra Blow + Yang's abilities = gg.

Don't know why folk are sleepin' on this character or some his support; they're really good, esp now!

RockStar said:

I agree that Yang is a very agressive player as well. His inherant speed pump and reduction negation make him great at it... Without Rejection he will see even more play I'm sure.

Regarding the OP and need for testicular fortitude I also agree. Besides there being few 'good' offensive options, I also think defense comes with too low of a cost (hence why I'm glad Rejection and Bitter Rivals are gone, they were both insanely defensive instruments and with very little cost).

I think the only problem with Hilde is that she pumps BOTH damage and speed. And as some have pointed out above, an answer to her speed is almost just as good as an answer to the damage. A character shouldn't be able to pump both, there should be a need to find 2 sources to make an attack hit/kill, speed and damage support. In Hilde's case all she needs is damage reduction support and she is already there. Characters that don't have viable answers to the character ability are left targeting one thing only, namely the damage reduction.

The only answer I see to the dilemma is for MORE attacks to be printed with balanaced abilities and numbers, and at the higher level. We are looking at Feline as being on a stage of it's own, followed now by Menuett. Why aren't all other 6 difficulty attacks with 2 checks offering the same type of damage potential as Meneutt does? Why isn't there more than one option here?

The way it boils down is for each symbol there are a handful of attacks that pose the desired level of threat, to ignore them from your attack lineup would be deck building suicide. There needs to be 5+ attacks and for each symbol that all offer the same magnitude of benefit (but not exactly the same attack). For this reason I am glad there are cards like Spinta, they are offering great magnitude with decent numbers (should be a 6 or 7 for the magnitude) but in a different arena than 'pure' damage. i.e. when building a deck off those symbols you want to include Spinta but you also need to consider other attacks of the same magnitude but to different ends (killing).

- dut

A card I would REALLY love to see back is infiltrating/start over. Back in the day if evil agro got behind against decks that ran awakening, yoga etc... it could play one of these and reset the game state back to a point where it could still win. My main problem with this game atm is that damage pump and attacks in general are balanced while cards like battle prowess, abelia's, holding ground, amy's etc... combined with very low block modifiers make defense way to easy. Also, a reprinted chain throw would make me so happy....just dont ever give it back it's partners in crime. (kunai, absurd strength).

Another random point... these defensive cards in the future really should destroy themselves after use in the future. My attacks once used can't be untapped the next turn and used turn after turn.

hilde is not agro. she is a control deck that can t2 with consistency. how many other aggro decks can win a game after 12 turns of control wars, and roll only 8 bad checks?

bloodocean said:

Begin Anew?

There's still ways to recur attacks over and over (ie defender loop, Kabuki Artist, Freewill, Gorgeous Team, etc.) even on the same turn. I'm not trying to insult or poke fun, it's just not a valid arguement to compare those defensive cards to attacks in order to try and justify destroying them on use. Since abilities are cancelled and negated after costs are paid, I'd hate for every good defensive piece have a destroy cost that could still be negated negated.

While I don't like games to get to ridiculous gray wars level either, I enjoy the defensive aspect of the game, which makes me one of the only people to not be in love with aggro without constantly reppin' Dhalsim or Tycho. The Devil May Care attitude of aggro aggravates (no pun intended) me to no end. The amount of sheer luck involved on some level is rough. The quickest I ever lost in UFS was to Chain Throw (which by the way should NEVER be reprinted) Ryu. We're talking a deck that was packing Seichu Nidan Tsuki and yet never checked the 2. First turn, with no foundations out, ChainThrow, Kunai, Seichu Nidan. I didn't even get to have my first turn. So yeah, I think aggro should have to actually do some work for a win.

i don't believe the game needs more good attacks, there's plenty, we just need an environment where it's NOT tomfoolery to run several attacks. As has been mentioned so many times before, there's too many ways to punish your opponent for attacking, when this game should encourage attacking in a FIGHTING game. Despite what my stance would suggest though: Good post Tag, and overall nice replies so far everyone.

Well, I have been out of the loop since taking my hiatus and making my return. To think that we would see so much happen in the two months or so I have been away. I have stated this on more than one occasion and I will state it for one last time...balance is key. With the recent changes I think that we will see aggro take it's place again, but in a balanced setting. Chinese Boxing on your turn only is quite adequate. Seeing Olcadon and Chester's out the picture will definately make things far more interesting as people won't have to worry about pulling off their key abilities from there foundations only to have them cancelled or moved from current play.

The problem with the aggro model is the nature of the game itself. We play a game that more than anything else, rewards being able to pass your checks and play your cards, period. Since the designers decided that attacks, which are typically the only kill condition, would have not only low checks, but checks that wouldnt pass their own difficulty, minimizing the number of attacks you need is simpily the smartest thing for a player to do.

Control OHKs most of the time, or at least needs the ability to. Since it only ever needs to throw its death attack, it can run less.

Aggro wants to win by attacking and exhausting the opponents resources, but to do that it needs more attacks.

So which deck would you give the edge too, the deck that can have a bigger opening turn and less risk based on its own checks, or the deck that runs more bad checks and has higher difficulty cards.

Now im not advocating clones. Clones was a problem on a different level because it was also a foundation which to me was silly. Why give an already amazing attack something else to make it good. But i think we need to see aberantly large attacks that reward aggro players and aggro players alone.

3 difficult 5 control

5 mid 6 damage

Fire - Order - Void

Powerful 1

You may not play this attack if you have committed any of your opponents foundations or made them discard any cards at random this turn.

See how it promotes and rewards aggro, but wouldnt even be considered by control? We need more of this.

ROTBI said:

ROTBI said:

While the DMC 'Tude may annoy you, it definitely has its place in UFS! Of course, there is a certain amount of luck involved in any card game, and the same holds true in UFS. The problem we've had the past year or so, is simply this: players were punished for playing attacks. Because of this, many players, imo, have lost that go-for-broke playstyle that made playing Aggro so much fun!

Call me crazy, but i think there should be high reward for high risk, and if that means a high risk taker kills opponents (on occassion) T2 or even T1, then you tip your cap to him or her and move on to the next game (or match). There's plenty of Control elements - and we've all witnessed this and know it to still be true in the current Meta - that games will typcially last between 3 and 6 rounds.

There is a certain beauty and art to creating decks that kill sooner than T3. They're very hard to build, aren't very consistent (or, i should say, AS consistent) as other deck types, and they do require a certain attitude of its player; kinda like Closers in major league baseball. And, yes, they should and do have a place in UFS.

I built a Good deck with alot of the defensive cards, Amy's, Holding Ground, Assassination Arts, Mysterious Stance. But the attack base is aggro enough that I can kill you on turn 2. Why can't decks just do both? Build your deck with survivability, but you need a kill condition. A 26 High for 26 Damage Sieg Earth Divide does the job pretty well.

Ender Dragon said:

Good has a lot of really neat things going for it right now, so i'm not surprised to hear that you've built your character the way you have. I think this very thing you are talking about is one of the reasons Hilde is such a hot topic of debate right now. She's an Aggro character with abilities and support that are defensive in nature, but synergize extremely well in forcing her Kill to go through.

I remember the WC Champ's Promo Talim being built very much the same way..

Regarding risk reward - it needs to stay in the game. But the designers need to continue to take steps to eliminate cards that don't carry risk (i.e. are without cost).

Regarding offense and defense... that is how I decide what to put in decks. Cards are ranked as follows:

A - can help me kill or my kill condition AND can help me defend

B - everything else

The trick to deck building is to maximize A and minimize B. It isn't that simple of course, but it isn't that hard to envision using more than a few cards as weapons and shields (holding ground and fight or flight are great examples of cards like this).

I run one checks. I typically run 3-4 1s with Dark Force Mirage Lately. Can I 'go off' on turn 2 and kill? Quite often actually, ask anyone who's played it. Do I hit the 1s on turn 1 and 2 and stuggle to regain some composure? Yes.

This is huge risk and huge reward. In fact, both of my Alex deck's losses in Can/US nats a) came to Chun-li, and b) came in games where I was limited to 2-4 foundations after turn 2 becuase of my checks.

Basically, I don't play a deck if it can't kill turn 2. I don't play a deck if it can't kill turn 20. I hope that more and more strong competitive decks need to be able to do both, becuase a lot of the past has just been the latter.

- dut

ps. Chun-li could easily do both.

Protoaddict said:

The powerful maybe over doing it, but then again it is only powerful one...either way I'd think the game would be really interesting if more attacks were made like that. Heck, maybe people other than Goo would make decks that have 75% attacks.

If you want aggressive decks to win, you have to make cards which reward aggression. I'd love to see things like these on attacks...

E: Your attack gets +X damage. X equals the number of attack cards in your discard pile minus the number of attacks in your opponent's discard pile (minimum 0).

E Commit 1 Foundation: If this attack deals damage, during your opponent's next draw step, they draw up to 1 less than their hand size.

E Discard 2 Momentum: Your opponent reveals their hand. If this attack deals damage, then their hand remains revealed until the beginning of your next turn.

While you can make cards which punish turtling, it'll also help out control decks just the same. Should they be made? I think so, but what would ultimately be better is rewarding aggression. Draw power can be considered the most powerful feature of the game, so if that's the case, then make sure that the better draw power comes from aggression, not control. Things like Abelia's Friendship and BRT are exactly the opposite of that.

If you want an even scarier suggestion, create a new You Will Not Escape with aggro symbols (i.e. not Death, Order, or Evil)