Gaius Marius said:
Being a big Earth player now, Battle Prowess can be a bit much. Especially when combined with Criminal Past/Amy's. One or two can be easily played around, but 3-4 will cause a person needing to string attacks to think twice. I think it is too much life gain for a 1dif foundation. If it were either based off an attacks control or Unique, it would not even be an issue.
Battle prowess + criminal past + Angel of Evening = your never going to damage me
you can hugo all earth splash. between : powerful style, battle prowness, amy assistance, the maxima 1/5 foudnations (the name eludes me atm), just finish your deck off with some nice attacks and dmg boosts = gg
Just played a match of UFS against an agggro deck using 15 attacks. ( All throws)
I was using ol' eye patch and soon managed to rock a playset of B prowess and C past. When Rev's hit the board he scooped the turn after, even pumping his crushing embrace to like 40 damage did absolutely nothing against the wall.
Now that I think about it. The problem isn't prowess, it's criminal past, it's Tycho on a foundation. Ridiculous.
Just my 0.02
Cheers
Hanzo
Bloodrunstrue said:
Just played a match of UFS against an agggro deck using 15 attacks. ( All throws)
I was using ol' eye patch and soon managed to rock a playset of B prowess and C past. When Rev's hit the board he scooped the turn after, even pumping his crushing embrace to like 40 damage did absolutely nothing against the wall.
Now that I think about it. The problem isn't prowess, it's criminal past, it's Tycho on a foundation. Ridiculous.
Just my 0.02
Cheers
Hanzo
Looking at the wording for Criminal Past, wouldn't it be useless against throws? You lose vitality equal to half the damage to block it, then the throw keyword kicks in for the other half? Criminal Past doesn't have the 'and this attack deals no damage' clause.....
Just wondering....
Gaius Marius said:
Bloodrunstrue said:
Just played a match of UFS against an agggro deck using 15 attacks. ( All throws)
I was using ol' eye patch and soon managed to rock a playset of B prowess and C past. When Rev's hit the board he scooped the turn after, even pumping his crushing embrace to like 40 damage did absolutely nothing against the wall.
Now that I think about it. The problem isn't prowess, it's criminal past, it's Tycho on a foundation. Ridiculous.
Just my 0.02
Cheers
Hanzo
Looking at the wording for Criminal Past, wouldn't it be useless against throws? You lose vitality equal to half the damage to block it, then the throw keyword kicks in for the other half? Criminal Past doesn't have the 'and this attack deals no damage' clause.....
Just wondering....
Revenant's calling. Read it.
And yeah i didn't use CP until i had Rev's out, cause that would've just been silly.
Bloodrunstrue said:
Just played a match of UFS against an agggro deck using 15 attacks. ( All throws)
I was using ol' eye patch and soon managed to rock a playset of B prowess and C past. When Rev's hit the board he scooped the turn after, even pumping his crushing embrace to like 40 damage did absolutely nothing against the wall.
Now that I think about it. The problem isn't prowess, it's criminal past, it's Tycho on a foundation. Ridiculous.
Just my 0.02
Cheers
Hanzo
My point exactly. I couldn't do this with Hugo because I had literally NO Reverend's Calling.
Bloodrunstrue said:
Gaius Marius said:
Bloodrunstrue said:
Just played a match of UFS against an agggro deck using 15 attacks. ( All throws)
I was using ol' eye patch and soon managed to rock a playset of B prowess and C past. When Rev's hit the board he scooped the turn after, even pumping his crushing embrace to like 40 damage did absolutely nothing against the wall.
Now that I think about it. The problem isn't prowess, it's criminal past, it's Tycho on a foundation. Ridiculous.
Just my 0.02
Cheers
Hanzo
Looking at the wording for Criminal Past, wouldn't it be useless against throws? You lose vitality equal to half the damage to block it, then the throw keyword kicks in for the other half? Criminal Past doesn't have the 'and this attack deals no damage' clause.....
Just wondering....
Revenant's calling. Read it.
And yeah i didn't use CP until i had Rev's out, cause that would've just been silly.
Sorry, missed the Revenant's. The indestructable wall that is Earth get's more and more beastly.....
i agree but like bloodruns true said its not so much battle prowess but criminal past any decient player would use them and they just make aggro useless unless you are able to lock them out. then the next solution is mill or control and how do they plan to survive. but i have no probs with battle infact i use them my self i say to either nerf criminal or get rid of it.
darkvision said:
i agree but like bloodruns true said its not so much battle prowess but criminal past any decient player would use them and they just make aggro useless unless you are able to lock them out. then the next solution is mill or control and how do they plan to survive. but i have no probs with battle infact i use them my self i say to either nerf criminal or get rid of it.
It's funny, my playgroup and myself have just the opposite view! Criminal Past is fine without lifegain and that Battle Prowess needs to be nerfed.
Gaius Marius said:
darkvision said:
i agree but like bloodruns true said its not so much battle prowess but criminal past any decient player would use them and they just make aggro useless unless you are able to lock them out. then the next solution is mill or control and how do they plan to survive. but i have no probs with battle infact i use them my self i say to either nerf criminal or get rid of it.
It's funny, my playgroup and myself have just the opposite view! Criminal Past is fine without lifegain and that Battle Prowess needs to be nerfed.
I agree. Crminal Past by itself is right costed without battle prowess to support it. Where as battle prowess can basically negate an attack completely without any health loss, and possibly even more health gain. If it was errated to be the control of an attack, 3 health gain is totally justified for a commit.
This is really a case of "one alone is okay, but with the other it's stupid awesome."
Glad to see me and Darkvision have the same view.
Indeed in this scenario it's a case of 1+1=4 Or the tank theory ( I forgot who made that, i think it was an english general, NVM)
But yes, these two cards together are problematic.
Homme Chapeau said:
This is really a case of "one alone is okay, but with the other it's stupid awesome."
and as history has proven, that means one will get banned.
MarcoPulleaux said:
Homme Chapeau said:
This is really a case of "one alone is okay, but with the other it's stupid awesome."
and as history has proven, that means one will get banned.
Actually shinji, I think you're just provoking bantalk here. History hasn't necessarily proven that one tool will get banned. IMO i can't see prowess getting the boot in any case, CP could possibly but that's all the ground i'm giving.
CP is silly when combined with prowess, but there are answers after all. Of course doesn't stop this combo from being a sweet combo but it's by no means banworthy really now is it?
Honestly ATM other than Akuma and Zi mei I honestly don't feel anything's ban worthy now
Cheers
Hanzo
Homme Chapeau said:
This is really a case of "one alone is okay, but with the other it's stupid awesome."
A lot of the past issues this game has faced have been from redundancy. Redundancy led to the unique stamp on Red GI, is what makes Emptiness a problem, and makes Amy's criminal and battle prowess problematic (not to mention the other redux on thoes symbols.)
Too much of one thing is almost always a problem. This would be my one gripe with how symbols tend to harp on one strategy. Earth can basicly put out a field that says you cant kill me at all. Order can put out a ton of commital faster than you can play stuff that can be committed. Before the banning of Forethough chaos could put out more fatal CC hax than you could top deck. Redundancy on single symbols can realyl be a terrible thing.
Bloodrunstrue said:
Actually shinji, I think you're just provoking bantalk here.
Honestly ATM other than Akuma and Zi mei I honestly don't feel anything's ban worthy now
OH NO! NOT BAN TALK! ANYTHING BUT THAT!
BOOOOOO
HOOOOOO
k
I'm not trying to incite bantalk (albeit this discussion IS about the card's power...), rather, I'm merely pointing out that, generally, when there are two problematic cards, one goes. To the Bone went when Chain Throw was breaking it (ugh, and what fun that era was), Ibuki went when Higher Calibur broke her (although some might say it was Lotus), and most recently, we had such examples of Makai-Defender and Hanzo-Fei Long; two banned, two untouched.
I'm gonna say that Amy's is the biggest offender between Prowess and Criminal Past.
Prowess: You still take damage (meaning they get momentum)
Criminal: 3 difficulty, and requires a vitality payment.
Amy's not just reduces attacks to the negatives, but it can commit assets. Bannable? Not entirely, but when it comes to damage reduction, Amy's and 5Zangief are horrid examples, and should've instantly been changed to (minimum 1). The only time there should be no minimum is if it's in smaller doses, and/or in more balanced conditions.
Also, Zi Mei isn't banworthy. When has Zi Mei won a regional?
Oh, right
NEVER
KawaiiMistress said:
Gaius Marius said:
darkvision said:
i agree but like bloodruns true said its not so much battle prowess but criminal past any decient player would use them and they just make aggro useless unless you are able to lock them out. then the next solution is mill or control and how do they plan to survive. but i have no probs with battle infact i use them my self i say to either nerf criminal or get rid of it.
It's funny, my playgroup and myself have just the opposite view! Criminal Past is fine without lifegain and that Battle Prowess needs to be nerfed.
I agree. Crminal Past by itself is right costed without battle prowess to support it. Where as battle prowess can basically negate an attack completely without any health loss, and possibly even more health gain. If it was errated to be the control of an attack, 3 health gain is totally justified for a commit.
I agree that Battle Prowess would be balanced if it were control rather than difficulty of an attack. 3 Life is better than 6+ for a mere commital (basically costless life-gain).
Hey, I like it when Earth gets called a sleeper symbol and then gets called out on being OP. To be fair, I love that its top teir now, sice it's always been my favorite symbol. I also agree that Criminal Past is way better than battle prowess, especially since there a great many number of answers to life gain and not so many to enhances. Ultimately Commital is the best option, obviously, but thats mostly order. Well, Block 2 was the Age of Evil, at least now there is a joint share of overwhelming power.
Gaius Marius said:
I agree that Battle Prowess would be balanced if it were control rather than difficulty of an attack. 3 Life is better than 6+ for a mere commital (basically costless life-gain).
And by doing so, it very successfully would not see play
MarcoPulleaux said:
Gaius Marius said:
I agree that Battle Prowess would be balanced if it were control rather than difficulty of an attack. 3 Life is better than 6+ for a mere commital (basically costless life-gain).
And by doing so, it very successfully would not see play
I don't know, 3 life for a commit isn't bad. But it is a 1/4 w/o a block, so it would definately not see play as often .
most attacks printed is about 5~6? even on some of the strongest 7~10. 3 health is still negating almost the entire effect of the attack if criminal past is played at printed dmg.
Battle Prowess is a powerful card for sure. Its basically a "try again" card for those who control it. Didn't kill me last turn? Commit 4 - try again. Annoying for sure, especially if you have no way to commit/negate the card, but not worth banning by a long shot. If a card like this shows up in block 4, hopefully it will be more appropriately costed.
Cards like this, amys, criminal past, cutting edge, mysterious stance, BRT (of course I'd mention it
) and uber reversals do give the finger to aggro players. How dare you attack in the universal
fighting
system?
Yet another reason utility attacks are as important as they are, namely Shadow Blade. Instantly, you're wading through these things as much as possible.
That, and lately, I'm starting to really respect Undercover Agent similar to how I used to
