24 minutes ago, clanmccracken said:

I disagree with this statement. You very much CAN play around BC, and you can play around it easier than you can WotCH. The thing with WotCH is its a neutral card. It can literally be in any or every deck. You will never know if its in the deck or not, unless you happen to know the exact contents of the deck you are playing. With BC, you only have to worry about it if you are playing against that particular role, and only then if they are splashing scorpion.

Sure WotCh can be in every deck but the opportunity to play the card is extremely narrow and easily identified........any time your opponent has two open fate when you go to honor dials you have to consider your bid more carefully. So literally once per turn. And the only time it's a game winner on it's own is when you're at 17 honor or higher.

BC on the other hand has no fate cost and can be played in any action window so any time you face a Keeper role you have to be aware of the threat of BC the entire game.

Someone pursuing an honor victory also naturally puts them at a card, disadvantage. On the turn you play WotCh you generally put yourself at a board disadvantage too. In order to play WotCh you have to wager your hand and current board state is strong enough to carry you to an honor victory before your opponent can bring your honor back down or crack your stronghold. You only put pressure on yourself by playing it.

BC doesn't require you to play to a particular strategy. You could use it for your own cycling if you wanted. You don't have to put yourself at a card disadvantage to play it. It puts pressure on the other player by being unpredictable.

2 hours ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Sure WotCh can be in every deck but the opportunity to play the card is extremely narrow and easily identified........any time your opponent has two open fate when you go to honor dials you have to consider your bid more carefully. So literally once per turn. And the only time it's a game winner on it's own is when you're at 17 honor or higher.

BC on the other hand has no fate cost and can be played in any action window so any time you face a Keeper role you have to be aware of the threat of BC the entire game.

Someone pursuing an honor victory also naturally puts them at a card, disadvantage. On the turn you play WotCh you generally put yourself at a board disadvantage too. In order to play WotCh you have to wager your hand and current board state is strong enough to carry you to an honor victory before your opponent can bring your honor back down or crack your stronghold. You only put pressure on yourself by playing it.

BC doesn't require you to play to a particular strategy. You could use it for your own cycling if you wanted. You don't have to put yourself at a card disadvantage to play it. It puts pressure on the other player by being unpredictable.

WotCh can be in every possible deck ever. BC can legally be in 4 possible deck combinations out of 49. That's like, what, 8%? I'm not worried.

BC is only a game-losing threat if you are playing a deck that can legaly use the card, AND you have 3 (or lower) honor, AND your opponent has equal or more copies of BC in his hand than you have honor, AND you don't have anything in your hand that can possibly cancel the Event, prevent the event from being played, or can immediately gain you a single point of honor. That is a lot of factors and a lot of stars that have to align. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the either BC or Wotch.

21 hours ago, Hinomura said:

What Brad tried to do was worthy of respect and admiration, and he undertook this course of action knowing he would get heat for it.

What the person did was throw away a hard-earned title because of a knee-jerk reaction from a hasty deliberation of a card with incomplete cardpool and no hard data. Hardly worthy of any admiration. People in this very forums has been openly mocked by others, mostly by people who keep defending your stance, for making these kinds of mistakes. It didn't earn them respect here, let alone for somebody to do it on a grand scale just to tank a clan. And on top of that, putting on a vigilante hat trying to pre-emptively "soft ban" a card not trusting that there are systems in place against these potential problematic cards that uses hard data before handing decisions.

The mere fact that you believe this act deserved respect and admiration clearly casts shade on your standards.

1 hour ago, clanmccracken said:

WotCh can be in every possible deck ever. BC can legally be in 4 possible deck combinations out of 49. That's like, what, 8%? I'm not worried.

BC is only a game-losing threat if you are playing a deck that can legaly use the card, AND you have 3 (or lower) honor, AND your opponent has equal or more copies of BC in his hand than you have honor, AND you don't have anything in your hand that can possibly cancel the Event, prevent the event from being played, or can immediately gain you a single point of honor. That is a lot of factors and a lot of stars that have to align. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the either BC or Wotch.

We've already established what decks each card can be played in. Restating the obviois doesn't support your opinion, or sway me at all.

It's clear my opinion doesn't change yours either. So we're at an impass. I can throw back hypotheticals to dispute your hypotheticals but there really is not much point.

I have not seen a compelling argument that will change my opinions that:

dishonor is not NPE, (I never said it was)

BC is more impactful than WotCh

it's a good thing Scorpion do not have a Keeper role at this time

25 minutes ago, Shosuro Teri said:

The mere fact that you believe this act deserved respect and admiration clearly casts shade on your standards.

That's the funny thing about opinions and perspective. Myself and some others see someone willing to sacrifice the title they earned to prevent something they felt was bad for the game from happening as a good deed. Whereas you and others see it differently and could lead people who don't see it your way to think your standards are lacking because of it.

To each their own I suppose.

10 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:

I have not seen a compelling argument that will change my opinions that:

dishonor is not NPE,

BC is more impartial than WotCh

it's a good thing Scorpion do not have a Keeper role at this time

I don't want to change your opinion, nor am I trying to change it. I dont believe that dishonor is NPE. I think its a fun mechanic and enjoy both using it and having it used against me. Not sure what you mean by impartial, but believe what you want. And I don't really care one way or another what roll the scorpions have. It's all gravy. Have a good day, sir.

3 minutes ago, clanmccracken said:

I don't want to change your opinion, nor am I trying to change it. I dont believe that dishonor is NPE. I think its a fun mechanic and enjoy both using it and having it used against me. Not sure what you mean by impartial, but believe what you want. And I don't really care one way or another what roll the scorpions have. It's all gravy. Have a good day, sir.

Impartial = Impactful

Autocorrect

Fixed

17 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:

Impartial = Impactful

Autocorrect

Fixed

Cheers

8 hours ago, Hinomura said:

I already suspected English wasn't your first language, but now it looks like it's pushed into distant third by your ability to speak total bollocks.

I saw a guy over the weekend wearing a Vikings jersey. Do you think maybe an invasion is coming?

In case it's not obvious: we're not magical Samurai, and Rokugan isn't real. The ONLY determination of what makes a 'Scorpion player' is 'someone who plays in a tournament as Scorpion'. The unarguable fact is that in the LCG, you're a much less successful Scorpion player than Brad or I. And for all your bleating, you're stuck with the choice I earned for the next twelve months.

Have fun.

This isn't just seeing someone with a jersey. This is your honest post initially about lampooning the clan, wearing a Spider jersey in contrast to your endless rant following that you "promise you really are scorpion and this was the role you wanted because you think its good"... You can quit the BS. You didn't pick this role because it was good, you picked it because it was bad - and for foolish reasons.

On 11/4/2017 at 10:59 PM, TheItsyBitsySpider said:

Considering the Spider garb you were wearing as you picked dont worry... we all saw the villainy.
#ClassicArmitage

Dont worry scorpions, your backhands will be loved dearly by us Fire Chickens.

On 11/5/2017 at 8:02 AM, Hinomura said:

Dude, I played all of Saturday in a Spider hockey jersey. Good times

20 minutes ago, Soshi Nimue said:

This isn't just seeing someone with a jersey. This is your honest post initially about lampooning the clan, wearing a Spider jersey in contrast to your endless rant following that you "promise you really are scorpion and this was the role you wanted because you think its good"... You can quit the BS. You didn't pick this role because it was good, you picked it because it was bad - and for foolish reasons.

Whatever was the motivation behind the choice of the Seeker of Void at this point is mute. The choice was made and all Scorpion players who want to play by the rules must use this role. I completely disagree with your statement that it is a bad role, it is in fact an amazing role as now we can use both Shameful Display and Pilgrimage as our provinces. While we get locked out of Backhanded Compliment (as well as other awesome keeper cards) for the time being, I am 100 % happy with this role. I do think that anyone who justifies the choice by saying that Backhanded Compliment is overpowered and will break the game is jumping way too many guns here, the card has not even been released and no one actually knows how it will affect the overall game. On top of that, there are far more cards in the cycle that have not been spoiled yet and the usefulness of these or Backhanded compliment is yet to be seen.

4 minutes ago, cforfar said:

Whatever was the motivation behind the choice of the Seeker of Void at this point is mute.

Clearly not, given that everyone is still talking about it

(Sorry, I know it was a misspelling or auto-correct, but just too funny in context...)

3 minutes ago, agarrett said:

Clearly not, given that everyone is still talking about it

(Sorry, I know it was a misspelling or auto-correct, but just too funny in context...)

What I meant was that people need to stop being hurt about the choice, and the player who actually won the right to choose earned that regardless of motivation. I should have said "it should be a mute point".

Mute - refraining from speech or temporarily speechless.

Moot - subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty, and typically not admitting of a final decision

27 minutes ago, cforfar said:

Whatever was the motivation behind the choice of the Seeker of Void at this point is mute. The choice was made and all Scorpion players who want to play by the rules must use this role. I completely disagree with your statement that it is a bad role, it is in fact an amazing role as now we can use both Shameful Display and Pilgrimage as our provinces. While we get locked out of Backhanded Compliment (as well as other awesome keeper cards) for the time being, I am 100 % happy with this role. I do think that anyone who justifies the choice by saying that Backhanded Compliment is overpowered and will break the game is jumping way too many guns here, the card has not even been released and no one actually knows how it will affect the overall game. On top of that, there are far more cards in the cycle that have not been spoiled yet and the usefulness of these or Backhanded compliment is yet to be seen.

I'm playing with it, obviously - but its foolish to say this choice was made with the intentions of helping Scorpion. Shameful Display and Pilgrimage are both going to be in my deck, but that is a mear consolation prize. I would have no problem without that province combination in favor of access to +3 influence, Keeper Initiates (especially important to secure the Imperial Favor with these new cards), and BC to help put a nail in a coffin of dishonor.

Talking about it here isn't going to change what it is - but I don't think its right that people are being applauded for lampooning a clan over a knee-jerk reaction, nor is it acceptable that argument is continually dumped on with comments of "show up and win worlds or your opinion doesn't matter."

I think a larger problem in the game isn't even that players were able to make this choice - but that such a bad choice could be made. The Seeker role is generally a horrible role currently. There are very few Seeker cards that anyone would want to play with comparing them to the same Keeper cards.

1 hour ago, Soshi Nimue said:

This isn't just seeing someone with a jersey. This is your honest post initially about lampooning the clan, wearing a Spider jersey in contrast to your endless rant following that you "promise you really are scorpion and this was the role you wanted because you think its good"... You can quit the BS. You didn't pick this role because it was good, you picked it because it was bad - and for foolish reasons.

Considering that Jon Butler has come out publicly and confirmed the discussion with Mark about the Seeker of Void being the intended role that Scorpion wanted to lock themselves into for the year and purposely passed on it at GenCon to keep it open for worlds pretty much sinks your battleship.

If you choose not to trust the word of players who have been committed to the Scorpion for many years with the old CCG, and well before the LCG began, then I don't really know what to tell you. I've met them in passing and know them by reputation to be good players and men of their word.

If you don't want to believe the Dragon player that gave up hatamoto to "sabotage" the Scorpion did it for what he felt were good reasons, I can't help you there either. I've only gotten second hand information from people who know him and I have no reason to doubt them when they tell me that was his motive. If you choose to doubt his reasons then I can't help you there either.

You have the choice to believe what you want and you've chosen to assume the worst in people. I find that rather sad.

3 minutes ago, Ishi Tonu said:

You have the choice to believe what you want and you've chosen to assume the worst in people. I find that rather sad.

Well, he’s really a Scorpion at heart.