After seeing this card a couple of times at regionals and groaning (plus seeing it in recent play) I have to wonder if there needs to be some errata to the card due to the stupid stuff it allows. For those who haven't seen the card, the ability is this:

E: Destroy this foundation: discard all attacks from both players' card pools. each player draws X cards. X equals the number of attacks discarded from either player's pool due to this ability (your choice)

Being a Fei-Long card, the point of this ability was to discard your attack string and draw a couple more cards to continue your assault. Instead it's become a costless Power of the Edge where you can just destroy it to negate any one attack being played (and any multiple copies as well) without any issues. Hell, you can even deny card draw from it by choosing your own pool when it happens. I highly doubt that this was the intent of the card and I'm seeing it abused more and more of late. Rather than crying out for a ban I think one simple line of errata would fix the issue:

'Only playable on your turn.'

That fixes the power of the edge nonsense and keeps the original spirit of the card intact (and still makes it usable). It's probably too late to address for the August SOTG, but I hope someone from FFG takes a look at the card long enough to consider 'Is this how this card is really meant to be played?'

Anyways, Let the flaming begin.

Have you ever heard of baiting? or commiting? Plus this card can be double edged, I've drawn into many many foundations and was unable to attack for 1-2 turns after using this card before. Also this is almost one of the only cards that can protect you from a OTKO, Turn one/two, or multiples. The card is a one time use and promotes attackings. You can even draw 0 cards on your own turn if you want to play a few more while making sure they cannot block. Of course this card is annoying to the opponent but it is a card that you can work around. (not to mention BRT? Amys?, etc.)

Second of all the user must choose when he must block or when he just wants to use Make a Difference. By then, will the user have added 2? 3? attacks to his card pool? Will his opponent draw into a kill card afterwards? Of course its great just to get rid of a pesky attack, but of course that may just of been the bait :X. Also, Feline Spike is still invulerable to this card because of its enhance. This card has answers, can be double edged. Of course with a bit of luck and in the correct user's hands this card is great offensively and defensively.

This is not a riskless card. If you are annoyed at the defensive side of the card, why not be angry at Mysterious Stance? (R commit, discard one momentum: this attack is completely blocked) That card is reusable (of course make a difference can be recurred) and played on the first attack it still gives you the +1 difficulty (because the attack is not discarded from your card pool)

All I'm saying is this: Voice of the Land.

Hayamachop said:

Just because I state an issue I have with a card does not make me an idiot and I don't appreciate being treated like one (a typical issue with the FFG forums it seems). I've been in the game since it came out with Set 1, so of course I've heard of baiting. Baiting is all well and good but it doesn't stop the fact that this card probably doesn't work as intended. And I fail to see how it could be double-edged if you have no attacks in your card pool, such as blocking with non-attack cards. No attacks = no cards drawn, which is the only downside to it.

As for why I don't get angry at Mysterious Stance, they're hardly the same. First off MS is an UR from set one that I've never seen used in any games I've played. Make a Diff is uncommon. Mysterious stance can only be used once without a second card (much like Criminal past and frankly I feel that card's better as there's fewer means to ready assets, though this is besdie the point) and it makes it completely blocked. Throws still have an effect in that case and it doesn't sack multiples, meaning it's not a 100% kill all to the attack. Even power of the edge had the steep cost of 2 momentum back in the day (very steep off of Evil, Death, and Void back then). This is just a quick easy E: that's frankly hard to take out with very little enhance negation out there.

Anyways, this is all well and good, but it missed the point of the original post. As you can see I'm not blindly calling for the ban hammer here. I've simply stated that this card is more than likely not being used as was the intent in the original design, something that can easily be fixed with with five words of errata. It's something that can easily be done, and given FFG's recent work on streamlining the game I simply thought I would bring this issue to light for anyone who cared to listen.

And, let the flaming continue.

Yea I am sure that wasn't the original intention.

I have personally never had a problem with this card. When I first read it, I was like "OMG, this card is amazing!!". However, I do not think it is errata worthy. at 3/4 with no block and it destroys itself, I would say it is fine as is. And while it may not be played as intended, if all cards were only meant to be played one way, then where is the fun in the card game? I rather enjoy keeping an Make a Difference on the field, it makes your opponent think their turn out a bit more, cause they have to wonder what and when you are going to block, and when you are going to use MAD. I think it is fine as it stands.

I think this card is absolutely fine.

Perhaps it wasn't intended to be usable as a defensive tool, but it reads "Discard all attacks in both players' card pools." Why would it discard your opponent's attacks if not to abort them? Why wouldn't they just make this a Form if it was to be used solely on offense?

But when you say, it's a costless PotE... destroy this foundation is probably the steepest single cost a foundation can have.

Being a common, uncommon, rare, UR, promo, starter exclusive has no bearing whatsoever on how a card should be balanced in the game. It's simply irrelevant. For casual play, it might be relevant -- but the bans or erratas that affect everyone are performed with everyone in mind, and especially the competitive players that can be assumed to have access to a set of every card.

griffinman01 said:

griffinman01 said:

Mysterious Stance is from Domination; hardly set 1 (SF set 7). I think you refer to Enigmatic Maneuvers, to which Mysterious Stance is a spiritual successor.

Also, why do you start a topic and end the topic with "let the flaming begin"? How do you expect people to change their stupid arguing ways if you taunt them to it? I would start the change by making a change yourself.

Toke Jopic?

Wasn't Gman the guy complaining when cards were banned, now he's pointing out which ones are 'too good' ? About Face?

- dut

guitalex2008 said:

That was a typo that I missed. It was meant to read:

"First off, MS is an UR from a set, one that I've never seen used in any game I've played."

Secondly, the reason why I ended my post like that was because I was expecting the inevitable "you're just too stupid to find a way around it" arguments that always spring up. It's unfortunate, but typically when people come up with a reasonable discussion about a card, it's always seen as whining by everyone and it's generally met with scorn and ridicule instead of a reasonable discussion. What's the point of a forum if we can't state any issues we may see to the community without 'joke topic' and 'haven't you heard of XXXXXXX' comments? FFG relies on us to point out issues that may arise with cards and interactions and all my intent was to point out that this one might need a look at by someone in the dev department. Granted I may have instigated things with the comment, but I wasn't exactly proven wrong with it either.

As for Dut's comment regarding About Face, I think it is a little powerful, but there are more options to get rid of R:'s in this format than E:'s and there's been plenty of talk on About Face as it is. I haven't seen anything commenting on Make a Difference and, in my opinion, it shouldn't hose attacks the way it does on the defensive. Not every attack is Feline spike so we shouldn't use that as a good 'defense' against it.

And yes I complained back in June about the banning of certain cards simply because the ones they banned at that time were only part of the big issues. If you also recall, in July when there were 6 or so bans, I supported the list because I thought that they made good choices then. Again, FFG relies on the forums for feedback and we provide it, pro or con. I apologize for any abrasiveness I may have caused unintentionally.

All you guys calling out insults...have you ever actually played against someone who knows how to use this card?

Not everybody runs commital. Not everybody draws into commital when they need it. Same goes for negation. In fact...and I know this is hard to believe...some symbols don't have any enhance negation or pinpoint commital or it just doesn't fit in certain decks. If you want to talk about baiting this card, how many attacks do you need? 2? 3? 4? What guarantee do you have of drawing that many attacks when you need them, or do you just hold your attacks over several turns and hope they don't play more MAD?

You can bait it out with a big multiple I'll give you that, but the moment you try to pull any combo or attack string you're going to find out just how screwed you are if you can't shut it down. Hey I play two attacks and suddenly they disappear without any compensation? Wow nice play...I only have one more attack and it's not enough to kill you. What's that? You blocked with something that wasn't an attack and you're not going to let me draw? How nice of you.

There's just not that many ways around it if you don't run negation or commital. The only effective way is to force your way through, which only works if you consistently draw attacks. I take it you guys never had a turn where you draw only one attack? Or only draw 3 or 4 attacks over say 3 turns? As far as using it offensively...interesting idea if you can get around the new blocks you just gave your opponent, or reversals. And I do mean interesting idea. But the argument here isn't about offensive power, it's about the power to completely screw your opponent over when used defensively.

Here's what I think. Since some of you seem to think "card discussion" equals "ban hammer" I'll say right now, seeing certain other overpowered cards still in the format I don't think this cards needs a ban, and honestly with said other cards gone I still don't think it needs a ban. I think it's a bit overpowered for the cost. Destroy isn't a problem when it gives you a chance to draw another one or gives you just enough time to survive and draw your own kill condition. There needs to be some drawback with it given that any half-decent player not only knows how to block without using attacks, and any decent player knows when to take a little bit of damage and wait for the next attack to use it. Maybe force players to draw instead of choosing 0 would work? It kills strategies, it kills turns. It's kinda funny sometimes.

The big thing right now is we've seen a few support cards off the new sets that lock down certain aspects of the staging area. Zhao Daiyu's little 1L2D attack the shuts off enhances for the next attack if it deals damage. That's potential bait for those symbols if you're running discard to back it up and force it through. So maybe there's some new defense when Tekken hits, but until then the card is just mildly overpowered.

3/4

no block

destroys itself

i don't see what the problem is here.

but this thread further proves the point. remove cards people ***** about, and people will just find new cards to ***** about.

Tagrineth said:

Agrees.

What deck doesn't run a) commital, b) negation, c) many attacks? The reason a deck needs to and does run these things is becuase they are universally efficient answers to cards like Make a Difference that, if left without an answer, can ruin your day. There is actually a card just to counter Make a Difference that doesn't see play... I shouldn't have to name it. But the fact that it doesn't see play means that everyone is running a), b), or c) to some degree of sucess.

And yes, I've stared down Make a Difference, I've played with Make a Difference, it is one of many types of defenses.

The original design was defense and offense... Make a Difference? What do you think that means, it means have a strong impact on a turn which this card can do defensively and offensively if built around.

I would bet a lot of anything that the designers knew of the defensive capabilities of this card as well as the offensive ones when designing it.

The point isn't that we can't discuss these things on the forums, the point is that when you pick relatively balanced cards and complain about them the majority of players that know the impact of said card, or lack therof, are going to sneer. Even worse when you openly admit the discussion point is moot, granted it will incite flames, you are yourself perpetuating what you claim to dislike about forums.

Finally, this card asks you to run 'more attacks' which is generally a good thing for the game.

- dut

Tagrineth said:

The only thing this thread proves is that a player can't have a negative opinion on a certain card without being treated like a dumbass. Gman was just stating an opinion and the very first response was an insult. The problem is that those of us with an opinion that doesn't line up with how everyone else thinks are automatically subject to ridicule just because they think for themselves. That's all this thread was supposed to be, a statement of opinion and the request for constructive comments and other opinions regarding this one card, not a flamefest where people can't handle an opinion so they have to go with "dur...you don't know anything...youre just a big baby...". Why don't you go over and ***** about the Battle Prowess thread too?

In Gman's place I'll thank Wafflecopter and Cronos for actually adding something constructive, and on my own behalf I'll tell the rest of you children to get bent if you can't handle someone else's opinion. If you don't have anything that can't be said without an insult then kindly piss off and let the grown-ups have a constructive conversation without dealing with your idiocy. Also, Tag, what you don't see as a problem someone else does. It's in the nature of discussion that those involved may have differing opinions, that's the whole point. If all you have to add is that you don't see a problem with it go ahead, but your comment about people bitching was uncalled for and unnecessary.

I'll say this. The card is a pain in the ass, much like Battle Prowess, Feline Spike, BRT, Zangief, Undercover Agent, and a ton of other cards out there that people used to or are still bitching about. The simple fact is, it's beatable in some situations and it's unbeatable in other situations. That's part of the game. People having opinions is part of the game. People being able to see every possible way to play around something is not part of the game, it's what makes the game fun. Not knowing how somebody else plays makes things interesting.

So instead of insulting someone for not seeing something the way you do, why don't you share your wonderful strategies for getting around this card since you seem to know so much more than we do.

Tagrineth said:

Tagrineth said:

First off, where and when did I say this card needs to be banned? I said it can be fixed with one line of errata and that's all I've said on the subject. The card, much like what Judas Said, is just mildly overpowered. Ban worthy, no. Errata worthy? I think so. And the reason why we find new cards to '*****' about is because people are looking to new was to abuse them constantly, especially after previous overpowered cards are removed. With spike useless in 99% of decks now, you think people are crying and moping over it, or do you think they're looking for a new way to abuse cards? These games are always in need of tuning as they are far from perfectly balanced and as such new issues arise.

As for comittal. Sure most decks run it, but it's not always there to answer it. I agree pretty much with Judas on this one as he's put forth the best arguments I've seen about the card. The times I've seen it used have stalled me enough to keep me from killing my opponent before he kills me. There's only so much you can do to 'bait' the card when there are two on the table. It's not as easy to bait as BRT for instance where a good foundation or asset can serve the purpose. Make a Difference can only be baited by attacks and if you only draw 2-3 in a turn, which happens even in the best of times with decks running 20 attacks (if 1/3rd of your deck is attacks it only seems logical that 1/3 of your hand would consist of them most of the time. ie 2-3 depending on your hand size) then you're pretty much screwed as he can null 2 of those attacks without even dropping a block. It gives wind aggro in particular a sizeble wall that needs clearing in order to put it down, and if you only get 2-3 turns to do it, you may not be able to draw your answers fast enough, or reliably enough, to deal with the problem.

Again, I'm not saying it needs to be banned, but I think it's undercosted for what it does. And just because it's stats suck doesn't mean people wont run it. Yoga mastery was a 4 diff with no block yet nobody said That was balanced. Battle prowess is a 1/4 with no block and it's pretty unbalanced as well. If the effect is good enough people wont care about the stats and most decks wont feel the sting of a single 3/4 foundation with no block in a deck that can run 36+ other foundations with better stats and better blocks. It's a drop in the ocean to talk about stats on a single card in a deck, especially when it's something like a 4 check. A 4 check isn't a 1 check and nobody is going to balk about it.

In fact, for those of you who play the card, have you ever thought about not running it because of the stats?

Judas225 said:

I'll second that.

Make a Difference was definately designed to be used both offensively and defensively. It works wonders for both. Certainly it is powerful, and the 3/4 no block isn't really much of a drawback compared to what the card can do for you. Personally I only run this card if its part of my offense. I will only use it defensively as a last resort. I actually wouldn't mind the errata suggested by the OP, just so people would stop targeting all my Make a Differences with Program Malfunction/Chinese Boxing, etc. I jest, but in seriousness this card should be left as it is.

Judas225 said:

Maybe you and Griffin think everything is an insult and have become too sensitive?

In anycase, symbols are what symbols are, i started playing around the time Fortune and Glory? came out and I remember that each symbol had its own tricks. Of course some tricks were better than others which made some symbols were obviously more powerful than another. I feel that this is one of the main reasons Chesters was banned. There were only a few symbols that could effectively negate back in the day. This is how the game is going back towards (hopefully) and also runnign many strings of attacks. Hopefully you are not one of those 1HKO or maybe multiple users as seeing this card will ultimately make you cry. In anycase i feel that the majority of us feel that this card is fine the way it is no errata needed. This card actually promotes packing more attacks which is what we want to go back to?

Hayamachop said:

Considering your first words I don't see how that could be taken as anything but an insult. It seems that your assumption based on those words is that you always draw your answers when playing against that card. I don't know about you but I've had my share of games where I didn't see a single copy of a set of 4 cards even in my discard pile until I was about 40 cards through the deck. It's improbable, but it happens.

Hayamachop said:

We're not arguing against which symbols do what. We've been experimenting with plenty deck types lately, most starting at 15 attacks and wondering how much more we can put in. MAD is still a pain to those decks simply because nothing ever works out perfectly the way you think it will. So yes, you do have a chance of drawing 4 or 5 attacks in one turn that lets you get around it, but you also have a chance of drawing only 1 or 2 that turn instead which means you're screwed.

Just keepin' this simple: I disagree with the OP. I think the card is fine as is, and in now way is in need of an errata, or being banned (which the OP specifically said he is NOT suggesting).

I've played with this card and against this card, and let's be honest...until the bannings, this card was barely even a blip on the radar. It's usefulness has certainly increased, but it is no where near the NPE of the cards that did get the Bann-Hammer smack down, or the Errata-Kick-To-The-Face.

Judas225 said:

As a matter of fact, I did post in the Battle Prowess thread. It's a card I've thought was overpowered from the moment of its release and I've said as much on the forums, and when asked by James I told him flat out that if he was doing stuff to Bitter/Chesters/etc that he should look at Battle Prowess too, and sadly nothing was done yet. Oh well, ****. Good thing I don't play Standard anymore because it's unbelievably boring.

Judas225 said:

This board is full to the brim of people crying about this card and that card. It's all you ******* see lately, it's so inhumanly tiresome and ten times worse than any other CCG community I'm a part of. People complain about CH Sasuke and not much else on Bandai, and only Machamp really got this much QQ on the PokeGym. Here it's THIS CARD AND THAT CARD AND THIS OTHER CARD AND NOW THAT THOSE ARE BANNED, THIS CARD AND THIS OTHER CARD TOO PLZ BAN THEM 2

Learn to play the ******* game, christ.

Judas225 said:

People ***** about Undercover Agent? Holy ****, how bad do you guys really have to suck to ***** about that card, for real, what the hell

Judas225 said:

You could try running cards that negate it, many resources have a way to do so, for example we just got Martial Arts Champion reprinted which quite summarily negates Make a Difference (AND BRT, in case you didn't realise it yet, since you so kindly mentioned that card too).

Further quotes because this sh*tty forum software chokes on quote blocks..

"First off, where and when did I say this card needs to be banned? I said it can be fixed with one line of errata and that's all I've said on the subject. The card, much like what Judas Said, is just mildly overpowered. Ban worthy, no. Errata worthy? I think so. And the reason why we find new cards to '*****' about is because people are looking to new was to abuse them constantly, especially after previous overpowered cards are removed. With spike useless in 99% of decks now, you think people are crying and moping over it, or do you think they're looking for a new way to abuse cards? These games are always in need of tuning as they are far from perfectly balanced and as such new issues arise."

I didn't say anything about people wanting cards banned, necessarily (I did above but that was in this very post, which you clearly aren't responding to here). This is still a waah waah ***** ***** moan moan thread. The card doesn't need errata, it has answers already in place in the format and its stats are bad, and it's one-time-use-only. As a point of comparison, most of the cards banned/errataed had above average stats, the only one that didn't was Bitter and it is infinitely reusable versus MaD being once only. Negate MaD and now they blew up a foundation for nothing.

"As for comittal. Sure most decks run it, but it's not always there to answer it. I agree pretty much with Judas on this one as he's put forth the best arguments I've seen about the card. The times I've seen it used have stalled me enough to keep me from killing my opponent before he kills me. There's only so much you can do to 'bait' the card when there are two on the table. It's not as easy to bait as BRT for instance where a good foundation or asset can serve the purpose. Make a Difference can only be baited by attacks and if you only draw 2-3 in a turn, which happens even in the best of times with decks running 20 attacks (if 1/3rd of your deck is attacks it only seems logical that 1/3 of your hand would consist of them most of the time. ie 2-3 depending on your hand size) then you're pretty much screwed as he can null 2 of those attacks without even dropping a block. It gives wind aggro in particular a sizeble wall that needs clearing in order to put it down, and if you only get 2-3 turns to do it, you may not be able to draw your answers fast enough, or reliably enough, to deal with the problem."

It's not always there to answer it. OK, then how about WAITING UNTIL YOU DRAW IT BEFORE ATTACKING lol what a concept. Hold off on the attacks until you're ready, don't just blindly attack into your opponent's defenses and then be SURPRISED when you can't handle it.

Also, you're going to go in with that few attacks? Your probability estimation there is based on you drawing a completely fresh hand, are you not saving attacks in between turns so you can stock up and have 4-6 attacks in hand plus answers on the board? I mean, seriously, are you that bad a player - by your own admission?

"Again, I'm not saying it needs to be banned, but I think it's undercosted for what it does. And just because it's stats suck doesn't mean people wont run it. Yoga mastery was a 4 diff with no block yet nobody said That was balanced. Battle prowess is a 1/4 with no block and it's pretty unbalanced as well. If the effect is good enough people wont care about the stats and most decks wont feel the sting of a single 3/4 foundation with no block in a deck that can run 36+ other foundations with better stats and better blocks. It's a drop in the ocean to talk about stats on a single card in a deck, especially when it's something like a 4 check. A 4 check isn't a 1 check and nobody is going to balk about it."

It's undercosted? It's pretty much the highest reasonable difficulty a foundation can have, the lowest reasonable check (aka people will rarely turn it down because of its stats because it's NOT 4 difficulty or 3cc, if it was then yes people would probably avoid it more), but it blows itself up . You get to use it once, then it's gone until you cycle your deck and redraw it, or spend recursion on it. Also, the stats are bad enough that you aren't going to run it alongside many other 3diff and/or 4cc foundations without having to start worrying about your diff/cc ratio.

Also, ROFLMAOHAHAHAHAHAOMFGLOL at comparing Make a Difference to Yoga Mastery. Are you people really that bored/bad at the game that you can't come up with even a better comparison? I mean what the ****.

Whatever. BAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE LOL

I know that this is the internet, Tag, but you're being a total jerk. You have the ability to be a better person. I have to wonder what's going on in your personal life that you feel you have to take it out in the forums. Please calm down.

Tag, seriously, calm down. Grab a cold drink and stop the insults for a short period of time. I'll respond to your points in order and I'll ignore the personal jabs as they have no bearing in the topic at hand.

"Learn to play the F*&@# Game, christ."

I have learned to play the game as everyone who's posted here has. The problem is we aren't all-knowing and all-powerful. We don't inherently know the answer to everything and we can't draw them at a moments notice. Learning to play the game has no bearing on whether or not a card is powerful and may need errata.

"People ***** about Undercover Agent? Holy ****, how bad do you guys really have to suck to ***** about that card, for real, what the hell?"

People have opinions and they have a right to voice them. There's no need to get personal on it. Calm down.

"You could try running cards that negate it, many resources have a way to do so, for example we just got Martial Arts Champion reprinted which quite summarily negates Make a Difference (AND BRT, in case you didn't realise it yet, since you so kindly mentioned that card too)."

True, but how badly can you get hosed in the couple of turns it may take you to draw it.

"I didn't say anything about people wanting cards banned, necessarily (I did above but that was in this very post, which you clearly aren't responding to here). This is still a waah waah ***** ***** moan moan thread. The card doesn't need errata, it has answers already in place in the format and its stats are bad, and it's one-time-use-only. As a point of comparison, most of the cards banned/errataed had above average stats, the only one that didn't was Bitter and it is infinitely reusable versus MaD being once only. Negate MaD and now they blew up a foundation for nothing."

I'm sorry you consider this a '***** moan thread'. So, for answers to the card we have: Martial arts champ (death, fire, void), No Memories (death, fire, void), and Evil Doer Destroyer (evil, Death, void). Wow, 4 out of 12 symbols can stop it. Well, I'm sure you're counting seal of cessation, right? That brings it to all of them. That is until you realize that CoS has more answers than almost any other card to. Frankly, enhances are **** hard to cancel in this format. As for the One-Time-use-only, argument, it shares 2 symbols with The Gorgeous Team so destroying it isn't exactly one-time-use.

"It's not always there to answer it. OK, then how about WAITING UNTIL YOU DRAW IT BEFORE ATTACKING lol what a concept. Hold off on the attacks until you're ready, don't just blindly attack into your opponent's defenses and then be SURPRISED when you can't handle it."

Because we all know that the best way to win against aggro is waiting. Kinda not the best thing to do when you're opponent is hitting you with Multiple Menuette's or spikes by turn 2. If you wait until you draw it, chances are you'll die waiting.

"Also, you're going to go in with that few attacks? Your probability estimation there is based on you drawing a completely fresh hand, are you not saving attacks in between turns so you can stock up and have 4-6 attacks in hand plus answers on the board? I mean, seriously, are you that bad a player - by your own admission?"

So are you saying you don't block with your attacks? Okay, how do you play a hand that has 5 foundations and 2 attacks? Play 3 foundations then end your turn so you don't use your attacks as blocks? Wow, hope you don't run a fast deck because two turns of that is going to put you way behind the other player. Plus, the best way to draw attacks is to keep your hand full? You honestly expect to play like this and get 4-6 attacks with answers on the board? Sorry, but the game doesn't work like that. Most aggro decks have to hit the ground running and if you stumble that badly you'll never get back up. This card will stop an early assault like that and aggro loses their best advantage.

"It's undercosted? It's pretty much the highest reasonable difficulty a foundation can have, the lowest reasonable check (aka people will rarely turn it down because of its stats because it's NOT 4 difficulty or 3cc, if it was then yes people would probably avoid it more), but it blows itself up. You get to use it once, then it's gone until you cycle your deck and redraw it, or spend recursion on it. Also, the stats are bad enough that you aren't going to run it alongside many other 3diff and/or 4cc foundations without having to start worrying about your diff/cc ratio."

That argument fails when you realize that people will play power cards regardless of the stats. Feline spike is one of the worst statted cards in existence yet it was used in every deck that could run it before the errata. As for the blows itself up part, I addressed that earlier. The Gorgeous Team makes that cost kind of pointless, much like Military Rank did with Seal of Cessation.

"Also, ROFLMAOHAHAHAHAHAOMFGLOL at comparing Make a Difference to Yoga Mastery. Are you people really that bored/bad at the game that you can't come up with even a better comparison? I mean what the ****."

If you bothered to read the post you'll realize I never drew a conclusion about Yoga Mastery on a power scale to Make a Difference. I simply used it as an example of how high difficulty cards can and will be used if their abilities are good. I could have used any card to make that point: Feline Spike, Lunar Slash, etc. I didn't say anything like 'Make a Difference is just like Mastery.' so there was no comparison between the cards. Calm down and keep the conversation civil.

Now, I think this is getting a little out of hand here. People have started getting personal and angry over a thread that was supposed to be discussing this card. I'd like to think this isn't Pokemon and that we aren't dealing with a bunch of kids, so can we keep this thread on topic and lose the personal insults? I, for one, want to ignore the name-calling and continue the discussion. Now, does anyone have constructive opinions on the matter?

I will reply to this topic.

Yes you are someone, thus obviously someone thinks that it is too good. The general thought on the topic, however is that Make a Difference is perfectly fine.

"As for the One-Time-use-only, argument, it shares 2 symbols with The Gorgeous Team so destroying it isn't exactly one-time-use."

lol fail.

And yes, I'm being a jerk. I'm sick of this community doing nothing but whine about cards being overpowered. The only time it didn't was when Rapierduel deleted threads that did so back in the day. My C&D on ban threads on the old boards was part of this same situation. It's at the point where Steve and James don't even want to look at the boards, this place is such rubbish.. and FFG doesn't seem to care one little bit about the state of the forums - I mean, I'm still here, right? Though, admittedly, peoples' whining got my rules arbiter status that I stopped caring about more than six months ago revoked. Funny how when I started playing and posting on the STG board that was all I wanted, and now I'm glad it's gone. Har har har.

Edit: Look at it this way. All it takes is a little more thought from you guys on the matter. Look at the OP. First thing stated. "I think this card needs errata".

Most of your counter-argument is "We don't seem to know what you do about beating the card". If the OP had said "What are some good ways to counter/play around this card?" then cool, it's discussion. But no, the OP is "crd iz overpowrd plz errta", aka waah i can't handle this card, i don't want to know what to do against it, i'd rather you change what the card does so it's easier to handle.