For those who've been playing awhile, do you remember Intuitive Observation? It was a foundation that any character with matching symbols could play, but it only had a Taki response on it. I mention it because we had a discussion awhile ago about the presence of character cards in the current meta. This is one of the only times since I started playing the game that I've regularly run multiple character cards in my decks. There's no other 6 checks and given the modifier of the average block they're fairly handy now.

It was suggested that not-so great 6-check foundations be made, so as not to replicate instances of LotM or Chester's Backing while still supporting aggro-friendly meta. I personally, am against purposely making cards near-worhtless to balance stellar stats, however, I think if they had character-specific abilities like Intuitive Observation, that matched their mechanic, they could see play in certain decks while not being spammed in every deck. They would be uncommons or rares.

For example, Paul Phoenix has no real need for momentum in most builds. How about a foundation called "Rapid Fire" 1 difficulty/6 control check, 2 low block. Paul Phoenix E Discard 3 momentum: Your attack gets +2 to it's stun rating.

Maybe not that exactly, but something like that. In any case, what do you all think?

i think its a better way to go to keep 6 checks off of foundations completely and allowing for better attacks with moe 3 checks like we are seeing now. or maybe even attacks that might see a 4 check on them, something with a general to low end stat setup but checks a 4 wouldnt be bad, and not a lot of them either but 1 or 2 wouldnt hurt...

I agree with the idea of 4 check attacks. Maybe low stat vanilla attacks. Nothing like Clones!

No 6cc foundation should ever have a block. No matter how bad.

Tagrineth said:

Yep. That's double-dipping at the utmost degree. I see enough of that with 1/5 with blocks.

*sigh*

6 checks should exist in this game. I've played this game throughout ever single leg of its existence, and while our new game is different than anything we've had, it isn't as frail as people are thinking. Just because something has a 6 check on it doesn't mean anything bad would happen, because if such was the case, characters wouldn't be 6 checks.

My whole point of wanting 6 checks as more than just characters is so that they don't just fulfill their job of being a 6 when checked, but can be played as a foundation, and then used later to be committed by Stun, pass control checks, etc.

I definitely would like to see more character presence on static effects and bold-printed abilities, maybe even similar to Intuitive, for shizzle.

But for now, any 6 check foundation needs to likely be blank, or bastardized to a similar level as MBTM/HFOP

If you want to run 6's, you can do like Heichachi, Jin and Kazuya do... run characters. Then proceed to stack them via Researching the Past and Open Road.

6 check foundations are part of the reason the last block was so bad. You could literally Feline Spike turn 1 with Felicia if you ran NOTHING but 6 check foundations and 4 or less copies of Spike.

Foundation, Felicia F, Spike, commit Felicia to make it, fully multiple out your 24 damage, play up to three more foundations, an Olcadan's and end turn. Repeat next turn.

If I think 6 check foundations are bad, I remember someone asking for SEVEN checks. I remember all I said was "Anything that would let you topdeck a Shadow Banishment can go to hell".

By the same logic, not too many attacks are greater than a 5 check, except some of the REALLY good ones, like Fury, Menuett, DDT and others. NOTHING should let you topdeck a Menuett Dance. EVER. A 6 or higher difficulty should be generally viewed as an additional cost to bring on the awesome. And most attacks 6 diff or higher are definitely worth the risk, even with two checks (Menuett Dance suddenly comes to mind).

I would only accept 6 check foundations under the following conditions:

1) No block.

2) No difficulty less than 3, perhaps even 4. That way it's not an EASY auto include by making it also be spammable. High reward should have a higher cost.

3) No extremely undercosted negation (funny how I kill two birds with one stone here).

4) No aggressive symbols.

So you might as well run characters because that shyte ain't happening.

guitalex2008 said:

Just so you know Alex, that Felicia deck never, EVER worked.

Also, that was then (when everything was broke as ****), this is now. Now we live in a game where the only card that can really BREAK another is Path of the Master. The difference of committing nothing when checking a 6, versus comitting 1 when checking a 5 is near minimal.

Also, again, characters do not do what I want them to do: act as foundations.

Sure, a character can be committed to pass a control check...but all chars stacked act as one, which is my point. Also, suggesting I do "like Heihachi/Jin/Kaz" is stupid because their entire theme is based around doing so.

Sure, you can attempt to bring that type of message to other chars like maybe Algol or Cervantes whom rig their checks and can run Kazy's support, but it just wouldn't work nearly as well as it does in the Mishimas, and would kind of get lost in translation.

People aren't understanding that what we once had isn't nearly close to what we have now. I was actually at worlds, went 4 wins 3 losses, ZERO DRAWS *******! (draws are for wimps) I saw several decks, played several, and let me tell you, 6 checks did not define the game we just left. While Felicia COULD just run a bunch of 6s and Feline, that deck never worked, and the reason it never worked was because it was a one-trick pony that went off a lofty idea that Feline instantly wins games when it hits the table.

Like I said, in this game, just about everything is balanced, with the only card innately being able to push a card over its limits being Path of the Master. We have 6 checks in the form of foundations, and if they made a foundation with a 6 check, and if the fact that it had a 6 check was its problem, again, using that logic, characters wouldn't have 6s, because the very ASPECT of there being a 6 check is, apparently, broken.

It isn't, and characters being ran proves that. While one might say "well if they were foundations they could be played during your turn and help you pass control checks." Cool...my response: "yeah, and characters have the BEST BLOCK MODIFIER IN THE GAME and can potentially be used to stack for various purposes". Simply put, while foundations with 6s that have no effects can be used later to pass CCs as foundations, characters allow stupid easy blocking and potential stacking brokensauce (hi Astrid!).

I know how easy it is to look at what we had and notice some 6 checks here and there (Olc, Makai, Chester's), but I mean, blind pin-pointing and blanket assertions of judgment have historically lead to some very, very bad things (racism, religion, etc), instead of just using your noggin a bit and addressing the INDIVIDUAL problem, which, in this case, is a card's effect and cost, not its stats.

MarcoPulleaux said:

Strength and Beauty.

I believe that proves an important point. It was a piece of utter crap, but because it was a 6 check, it was in most of the decks at the time. It was also 1 difficulty, making it impossibly easy to spam.

Not wanting to sound like a ******, I do remember an insane list of 6 check foundations that were in the meta that were actually used: LOTM, Chesters (obviously), Soul of Ling Sheng Su (which for some odd inexplicable reason in addition to being 2 diff 6cc with a block, also gave boosts to CCs...), Blinding Rage, Makai High Noble (both of which were stupid because they shut down decks, then also sported 1 diff, the ugly 6 check and a +1 block... ALL taboo IMHO) and then there are the 6 check assets which can be summarized by the word "shops".

The end result was people putting them in decks not only because their abilities were good, because quite frankly their abilities may not have been as bad, if not for having a 6 check and low difficulty, WITH a block.

Thus I'd rather not have 6 checks with low difficulties, good effects or blocks. So to put it nicely, uh no. Because if you make a 6 check card with high difficulty, no block and no abilities, no one's going to run them, so why bother? Give it a low difficulty and find it in aggro decks. Give it a block and find it EVERYWHERE.

I'm not saying a blanket statement, I'm basically basing my opinion on facts. My opinion isn't fact, but at least it didn't come out of thin air either. Committing one foundation making a 6 diff with a 5 isn't trivial. Adding to the average control check in the card pool can only result in shorter games. And what with games lasting all of 3 turns sometimes 2 right now, do you really want turn 1 kills? Because Hammer of the Gods, Hammer of the Gods, Turn Thruster, Pommel Smash turn 1 = up to 23 damage, and that's checking a 5,6,6,6.

We have enough 6 checks with characters. Characters are good 6 checks because they don't also help you build your foundation base, which would in turn lead to quicker games (Jin stacking himself excluded).

We just fundamentally disagree.

Again, you list a bunch of 6 checks that have, and were always regarded as spam. Yeah, Rage and High Noble saw some play to counter Olcadan's, but once Olcs got banned, they were ran primarily as spam. I ran High Noble as a playset during Team Worlds, and cut all 4 for singles since I saw how destruction simply did not exist in the format.

Spam is exactly that: spam. Rubbish. Trash. Useless.

In UFS, spam is used SOLELY for stats, MAYBE IN THE WORST CIRCUMSTANCE its effect.

Strength and Beauty NEVER saw play. I'm sorry to hear your playerbase used it XD.

But, again, 6 checks simply aren't the devil people are making them out to be. We don't even really have that many "big" attacks, and once again, by the time you've put a big attack into your card pool, you'll likely pass it pass or fail.

MarcoPulleaux said:

Yeah i used to do this just run cards based on there stats.......and then i started expanding on my collection and becoming a better player thus stopping using cards due to its stats.

I cannot see why cards like ground fighter and aerial combatant or business associate are problems they barely saw play and were not broken by any means

We dont have to throw them out left and right but one or two in a set isnt going to hurt anything honestly

We don't really have any 1s or 6s worth speaking of in the current meta. Let's ditch the 2s and 5s too then. Make everything 3 or 4 checks. Or hell, let's just make all checks 3.5. Yeah that'd be exciting.

I for one miss the ones and sixes. Bring 'em back.

No kidding.

Especially 1 check attacks. We need more Go Shos and Messatsus =/

aslum said:

1s sure.

6s with no block go right ahead so long as it's not 0/6.

Homme Chapeau said:

what did loving devotion ever do to you?

Its innocent in this conversation leave it alone

Shadow Art was horrible; half the time, it was horrible, even if you WERE Ibuki.

But yeah, we need some 1 checks, and some 6 check foundations/assets. Not a LOT, and not something that's ZOMG STATS. I'd take a 2/6 no block or something, sure. Even a 3/6.

We really just need more variety in the cardpool. Reprints ftw.

See also - give me my **** 4-check attacks back; Soldier of Sparta is so lonely...

MegaGeese said:

Soul Spark is the ONLY 4 check attack.

The rest are just Foundations with an orange printing mistake.

Homme Chapeau said:

Mr. Clones asks, "How can the 'mistake' be the only part of the card worth playing?"

Homme Chapeau said:

I didn't ask for semantics.

I SAID GIVE ME MY FOUR CHECK ATTACKS BACK DAMMIT

ROTBI said:

Tell that to the opponents who fell to mistakenly placing Clones in my staging area with Olcadan's.

Homme Chapeau said:

I loved getting +1 to my attacks when people did that....specially when it won me the game lol

Da_ghetto_gamer said:

Never Gonna Keep You Down was a great card, everyone.

I want to see viable decks and mechanics that encourage running more than 20 attacks. We STILL don't have that...

I can gaurentee that if you print a foundation with a blank text box, no block, a high difficutly such as a 4, but give it a 6 check, on the worst symbol in the game it would still be an AUTO INCLUDE of staple magnitude. I know like everyone here would like to pretend it's not a bug deal, but there has almost never beedn a 6 check foundation that was not playable in its environment. There have been 45ish of them in UFS history and given their release set I would say they were all playable, If not brutally overpowered, based only on there check during the time where they were released.

Foundations don't need 6es. I would sooner say some asset could be made with 6es, as well as actions, all depending on what they do of course, but not cards that let you commit them to pass checks.

+1 for cards that roll sixes but are not Foundations (or attacks obvioulsy also...)