We have cards that cost foundations other than itself for commiting.

For instance, Stand Off. Comit 2 foundations: +damage or - damage.

Why NOT wall of grey it up?

James Hata:

Comit for bonus. Why not grey wall it up?

Mitsu: Destroy a foundation. Gonna need foundations to do this.

Gray wall will continue to exist as long as we are encouraged to run many foundations, and not rewarded more for running attacks. If you agree, join me in emailing the designer things of this mental nature.

Thanks.

wat

You didn't list nearly enough cards. Know why? Because not nearly enough "wall" cards exist. Besides Stand Off and Paid to Protect, there really isn't damage redux that counts (OMFG REPENTANT HERO NOOOOO!)

The simple solution would be to ban Stand Off, which already is the nail in the coffin to such characters as Ivy, Padma, and to a lesser extent Christie. With Stand Off gone, sure, gray wars would still be possible, but I mean, it's not like Chesters vs Chesters, Inhuman vs Inhuman, or even Stand Off vs Stand Off. IMO, Paid to Protect is balanced, the problem is that it has Fire which is a **** good draw symbol.

vermillian said:

Because it could get blanked? It could get destroyed? Flipped face down? Added to your card pool? So long as we do not have universal cancels (Chester, Yoga) Grey Wars will still feel the fires of aggro, no matter what.

vermillian said:

Because he can kill you before then? Why play a stall game and possibly die, when you can play aggro and kill them first?

vermillian said:

Yeah. And? That is ONE foundation for +3 damage on any attack that matches the zone you call. Much better than some of the other destruction costed foundations.

Overall, I would say that grey wars are only created in a meta where playing attacks is punished more than rewarded, which is not true in the current meta.

-Tinman

There will be "grey wars" as long as there are grey cards. Your definition of grey wars is flawed. This is nothing like what it was at the end of block 3. A couple of damage reduction cards consitis of grey wars? Grey wars is "well I'm going to Boxing his Lord of the Maki, but then he will use his other Chester's, then I'll use mine, then he will Lost Memories, then I'll use my last Chesters, then when I commit the Lord, but then he will Cursed Broken twice hmmmmmmmm....". Foundations bring stragegy into the game. If you want to blindly chuck attacks at your opponent then be my guest and do so but that's not the game I signed up to play, that's NEVER been the game I have played. If you have decks that go off and play 6-8 attacks turn two then you NEED cards like Stand Off in the game. And even then it's not even that bad, it has a BUILT IN NEGATION . I mean seriously? Your complaining about a card that has built in negation for the opponent? And games last like 3-6 turns now? How many times do you think one can Stand Off in a turn. It's not like people can build up 25 card staging areas anymore and can just sit back and Stand Off 15 times a turn. If you don't like "grey wars" go play war or something, that might be more your style.

I laughed when you mentionen mitsurugi and greywars.. Imo he is supposed to build hopefully 5 foundations turn1 and turn 2 blow one and use the other 4 to pass checks and go all out aggressive

You will have Grey wars untill the control values on foundations become less vital than thoes on attacks. It's a fundamental flaw in the system that we hold foundations control values to the 4+ standard while attacks are in the current format exclusivley 3 or less.

Well, vermillian is known to overexaggerate quite a bit, so I'll give him that

But Mitsurugi is definitely no control character. He's like....... ..... ... Adon v2.

You go away and build grey, I will smash your face in T2/3

As long as no foundation is "Commit: Block this attack" or no action named Rejection...and plenty of good cheap attacks, I have np with that.

Also most good blocks are on attacks, so you go ahead and build your deck with foundations with no blocks.

So what exactly do the game designers have to do to make everyone happy here? i mean the way i see it theres always someone who is going to complain no matter what happens......

The game is as balanced as its ever been, even at the start of the game there were cards that needed to be banned like yoga mastery, to the bone, cassie, etc....but people considered the game to be a good game and it was growing as more and more people were playing it

Just the other day i killed a james hata turn 2 after he dropped Double Stand off, P2P, an Ultimate Team, and another spam foundation, yeah he only had one card in hand but hey if he wants to spam his foundations then let him be my guest ill stun him out with the million stun attacks in the game and no stand off has no use, P2P only works if you have enough keywords in hand which if they are trying 2 wall it up and play as many foundations as they can, they dont have.....

Morale of the story.....Dont *****, learn to deal with certain cards everything has multiple answers go find them and build a good deck. If your getting wrecked by those cards your probably building your deck wrong and should look at your strategy. and lastly if you want to play a card game where your opponent cant screw with you and you dont have to make decisions go play pokemon.....

Da_ghetto_gamer said:

This is precisely why I play AirHata.

Da_ghetto_gamer said:

Spoken like someone who has no idea what he's talking about.

Pokemon has a LOT of control aspects. Stadiums, Lv. X, Poke-Powers and Poke-Bodies are enough to give a normal person a headache.

For example, my Poison/Psychic/Dark deck. I played a pokemon who searched for Stadiums and Trainer cards and used his ability (for free). Then next turn, I played the Stadium that gave Poison/Psychic and Dark types no retreat cost. Then I retreated them for Muk, used a Poke-Power to poison both active Pokemon from another basic I put down from hand, but Muk heals in Poison and his attack deals 70 damage and confuses if he's poisoned. This is enough to destroy most Pokemon in the game.

Or how about my all-basics deck. Every one of them deals damage to every Pokemon simultaneously, even when not in the bench. Then it's easy to snipe the weakened Pokemon that come out, and none of these Pokemon are evolution Pokemon but they are all above 80HP (normal for mid-evolution Pokemon) except for random Shellos. The deck has a Stadium that gives unevolved Pokemon +20HP, making one of the basics in the deck a 110 HP with resistance to Psychic and with the Metal energy, when it does his big attack (80 damage), you flip a coin and if tails he does 80 to himself, which would kill him, but with the Stadium out and Metal Energy he only does 70 or less damage to himself IF it lands on Tails and even if, he can repeatedly do it because of Poke Turn bringing the hurt Pokemon and all cards attached to it back to your hand.

So yeah, Pokemon can be extremely disruptive, so please do your research before making blanket statements.

But enough about games about keeping wild endangered animals captive inside a ball. It's true that in most cases people should just find ways around problem things. But when the only ways to get around the problem are only on the symbols that are already top tier, this becomes sort of... moot point?

vermillian said:

like the ultimate team off of all or fire....

when a deck that is running 20 attacks, has 12-14 of them in their card pool and they have barely managed to push their opponent to desperation, AND their opponent still has 12+ cards in hand...

I haven't been subject to a grey war for a long time in constructed. Well that isn't 'entirely' true, a game or two against an earth brian fury felt like one last wednesday, but! in its defense the same brian fury killed me turn 3 in a game the week before so...

I'd say many would consider my staging area a wall of gray with Hilde, but can you really call it a greay 'war' when I kill you turn 3/4/5latest consistently? Especially since the 'major' reason I survive isn't because of damage redux (damage redux isn't as strong as damage pump, trust me on this...) but rather because I block with 4+ of my own 15 attacks the turns before?

Just because you've lost your ability to 'just' spam attacks and win doesn't mean the game has degenerated in any fashion. Foundations are just that, the support needed to continue to compete with your opponent in order to beat him in the fight, if you have wasted your first 3 turns just throwing attacks and 2-4 foundations how can you expect to deserve to be able to still do the same thing and continue to dent someone who has forgone the ability to kill as quickly for a more consistent game that includes building, blocking, and attacking...

In a fight if I posture and you decide to attack instead you are now in a worse posture than me, continue this for as long as the attacks are not deadly blows and the better posture 'should' mean victory. It is a game of decisions, most of the time if I decide to build you need to keep up or start winning in another area, if you think starting to win in the vitality area is best then by all means attack early and hard. If you think matching my build and maintaining an equal ability to deal damage later or survive until later than please do match build.

I guess what I am saying is this, if you consider yourself an agressive deck you need to actually build the deck agressively. This means packing answers to defense in addition to just packing and passing attacks. Anyone can pass red cards, it takes a skilled player (and imo the reason the game is fun for most) to combine a build of a number of synergistic foundations that work well with attacks, so well that they bust through defenses. I can gaurantee you that an agressive deck that needs to do damage will, and against things like standoff/ultimate team/whatever...

Not saying I don't agree with reusable abilities being partially responsible for defense standing a chance against multiple attacks late game (once they have the resources to actually use repeatedly). But also consider that late game an agressive deck should have completed a board that allows for their bigger combos or damage pump, things that far dwarf 4 uses of a standoff on a single attack.

I had a few grey wars against Astrid in the past, but the addition of Tekken and now SC seems to ensure damage being pushed through in some quantity is almost a sure thing with a well built deck...

This meta is a substantial improvement over the last, what without MASS reusable negation. Most/all hard negation in block 4 destroys itself, and most soft negation (damage reduction) is worse than its damage pump rivals or isn't cost effective. The better ones, like the reduce to 1 bodygaurd destroys itself, we are playing in a much less frustrating ufs card world.

- dut

guitalex2008 said:

Did somebody just make a huge reference to Platinum Muk?

If you think Pokemon doesn't feature disruption, you should read Palkia G Lv. X, Dialga G Lv. X, Luxray GL Lv. X, Infernape 4 Lv. X, Power Spray, Mesprit LA, Tyranitar SF, Gengar SF... the list goes on.

i think the grey wall is not as serious as it was before, this set is very angry and it's to a point were you know what to make in order for that not to happen. i think this set has raised the bar for those who turtle or control too much. i suggest that momentum should play a huge role in this game so it would be to a point that cards can't be as abused.

MarcoPulleaux said:

guitalex2008 said:

I know that pokemon can be extremely disruptive at times hell i still play every now and them but as far as i know it has the least disruption of any game at least that ive ever played that ive played quite a few games.......there were so many turns where i just sit on my turn and didnt do a single thing but take damage, which is what the guy posting this seems to want to have happen to our game....all i want to do on my turn is mindlessly play attacks and occasionally block if there isnt too much speed pump la la la

I think UFS is going to be fine, because James won't repeat past mistakes -

Right now the game is back into the groove of somewhere around set 3~4 range (closer to 4, but minus some of its shenanigans like Rolling Storm and Seichu). Minus the dominance of brutal control, aggro was right about where it should be in that set range - reliable kills by turn 3 assuming no majour disruption, very good conditions net turn 2 kills.

I think, as long as James doesn't bring the aggression to set 5+ level, or defense to set 1 or set 6+ level, we'll stay stable.

He can tune up the defenses a bit (and has been, with marginally better blocks creeping onto foundations), as long as we don't get blocks on just about everything like we saw on sets 6-11, or redux like we saw in the last few STG sets.

Don't forget Life Gain. As it is, there are very, very little ways to regain health, which is one of the reasons that the current meta has room for throw decks. If major Life gain were to enter the mix, we could very easily cause balance issues. I think that was one element of the wall of grey that people overlooked, because so many of the big name decks revolved around high damage, high control foundation bases. Anyone want to see another Battle Prowess? How about Revitalize? Thought not. They caused more headaches in the form of 'required answers' that decks had to produce.

-Tinman

Wouldn't mind if more stuff like Tira's came out.. gain 1 if this deals damage and so on.. Battleprovess without criminal past/ Holding ground..

I honestly believe that the aggro decks we got right now can get through that.. Battle provess was so strong because it was backed up by earths enourmous defensive staging area

Battle Prowess was stupid off Life and Water too, it basically said "You're gonna have to do all of my life plus more any turn you ever try to kill me"

Too true, Battle Prowess was bloody stupid. "Oh, your string of attacks lowered me to one vitality but failed to kill me? Okay, you're going to need a better string of attacks next turn to deal all that damage again and have a hope of killing me".

I built a Makoto Life with that and Independent Operative. Always was full-life. I don't think we need that sort of jank back.

Still Nekuro.. you backed it up by other cards.. Alone battle provess nets you what? 4-5+ in this meta.. few people run higher diffs.

But still forget what I was saying.. didn't think about Standoff..