Let's assume a deck is 40 cards. For some draw-heavy heroes it might be higher (I could see Spiderman going higher), but hero cards are so much better than aspect cards that you're gonna want as much chance to draw them as possible in 95% of decks.

So we start with 15 hero cards. 25 remaining.

Every deck will likely include Energy/Genius/Strength/x2 Power of [aspect]. That's five more cards. Those are cards that will be in every deck, because they provide 2 resources each. You always will have to spend resources over the course of a game, so why not use these and save cards. 20 remaining.

1x Nick Fury will likely be in every deck as well. He is the "Gandalf" of the game, meaning he comes in to bail you out for a turn 95% of LoTR decks have Gandalf, doubt it will be different here. 19 remaining.

So for most decks (let's say 85% in total, given the various assumptions that were made here, it's probably higher though), there are 19 cards to choose. In the core, there seems to be typically 2-3 allies beyond Fury in every deck. So then from there, probably 3x each of 5 different cards, then 1x-2x of one. Of course, there might be some cards that you only want one or two of, so I mean it could be a lot more complicated than that, but still, the theory holds.

So it looks like, including allies, and allowing for some 1x and 2x cards, you'll be choosing 10 different card titles to put in your deck.

Thoughts?

22 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

Let's assume a deck is 40 cards. For some draw-heavy heroes it might be higher (I could see Spiderman going higher), but hero cards are so much better than aspect cards that you're gonna want as much chance to draw them as possible in 95% of decks.

So we start with 15 hero cards. 25 remaining.

Every deck will likely include Energy/Genius/Strength/x2 Power of [aspect]. That's five more cards. Those are cards that will be in every deck, because they provide 2 resources each. You always will have to spend resources over the course of a game, so why not use these and save cards. 20 remaining.

1x Nick Fury will likely be in every deck as well. He is the "Gandalf" of the game, meaning he comes in to bail you out for a turn 95% of LoTR decks have Gandalf, doubt it will be different here. 19 remaining.

So for most decks (let's say 85% in total, given the various assumptions that were made here, it's probably higher though), there are 19 cards to choose. In the core, there seems to be typically 2-3 allies beyond Fury in every deck. So then from there, probably 3x each of 5 different cards, then 1x-2x of one. Of course, there might be some cards that you only want one or two of, so I mean it could be a lot more complicated than that, but still, the theory holds.

So it looks like, including allies, and allowing for some 1x and 2x cards, you'll be choosing 10 different card titles to put in your deck.

Thoughts?

Can two different decks have named characters like Fury, or are they unique, with just one allowed in the group playing?

20 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Can two different decks have named characters like Fury, or are they unique, with just one allowed in the group playing?

Multiple people can have him. Only one can play him.

1 minute ago, CitizenKeen said:

Multiple people can have him. Only one can play him.

Since he only lasts a round though, there's not too much drawback to having everyone deck him.

Much like Gandalf, Nick Fury only stays in play for one round (less than that, technically), so there are no uniqueness conflicts to worry about.

40 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

Every deck will likely include Energy/Genius  /Strength  /x2  Power of [  aspect   ]    . That's  fi  ve more cards. Those are cards that will be in every deck, because they provide 2 resources each. You always will have to spend resources over the course of a game, so why not use these and save cards

Because if you end up with a hand full of resource cards, you're useless for the round. And don't forget that some characters want to load their deck with specific resource types (right now, that's Tony Stark for Repulsor Blast, but more will likely come in the future).

Just now, rsdockery said:

Much like Gandalf, Nick Fury only stays in play for one round (less than that, technically), so there are no uniqueness conflicts to worry about.

Because if you end up with a hand full of resource cards, you're useless for the round. And don't forget that some characters want to load their deck with specific resource types (right now, that's Tony Stark for Repulsor Blast, but more will likely come in the future).

It's extremely unlikely though to end up with a handful of resource cards. Only five in the deck, but everyone starts with six hand size. That would take some serious bad luck, plus you would still have one non-resource. It's really hard to imagine leaving one out.

6 minutes ago, Supertoe said:

Since he only lasts a round though, there's not too much drawback to having everyone deck him.

Ah, nice. Given a choice I’d want to include as many allies as possible; they just seem like fun.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

Ah, nice. Given a choice I’d want to include as many allies as possible; they just seem like fun.

I think i remember there being something about an ally limit, it's referenced on one card. Someone more informed would have to elaborate though.

Maximum 3 Allies in play (per player).

I would include 2x Avengers Mansion on the auto-include list too. Deckbuilding is going to be incredibly tight in this game once we start seeing more aspect/basic cards.

I'm not a fan of the resource cards. They are too one dimentional and the economy boost they provide is not strong enough. I much rather have Avengers Mansion or Helicarrer as my economy staples over those. They have a cost, but they are recurrable and more flexible. Even if drawn late game, they seem more useful to me than any of the current resource cards.

My decks will most likely have 2 Mansions, 2 Helicarrers, 1 Nick Fury and 20 cards among the remaining aspect/basic cards. Anything that draws cards will be a must include for me, as draw is a way better resource engine.

Black Panther could afford to skip the double resource cards, because he has 3 double wilds in his package.

Does anyone else feel FFG should have not used aspects like justice or leader, but used teams or factions, like Avengers, SHIELD or Marvel Knights?

Constructing a SHIELD Iron Man or an Avengers Spider-Man would seem so much cooler than constructing a Spider-Man aggression deck

They probably can use thoseas themes.

But there are so many potential teams that it would be impractical.

45 minutes ago, cheapmate said:

Does anyone else feel FFG should have not used aspects like justice or leader, but used teams or factions, like Avengers, SHIELD or Marvel Knights?

Constructing a SHIELD Iron Man or an Avengers Spider-Man would seem so much cooler than constructing a Spider-Man aggression deck

I'm a firm believer that factions in games like this should always be abstract, otherwise you're limiting yourself (significantly) down the road.

I contest that Nick is an auto include having played it a couple times. He's fine as a closer, but most characters have a card that can out damage him or do the same amount of damage as him in their decks potentially. Also 4 resources out of aspect is kinda hard to swing considering you basically blow your hand or are holding only a couple of the two resources neutrals to make him fire. I think he's better in Leadership and Black Panther has an easier time affording him (and drawing a ton of cards). The 4 resources allies in an aspect are easier to play since you have the "Power Of" cards floating in your deck to help out paying for them.

The two resource neutrals seem like auto includes now, but for instance I tried Spiderman/Protection last night with proxies and he has such a low cost curve that often they were overkill considering I have 3 of those, 2 of the "Power of"s, Peter's card ability and Web Shooters. I kinda didn't want to draw them because I wanted to draw into cards that actually do stuff. Even in core only I can see cutting them depending on your build. They are definitely good in deck's like Captain Marvel or Iron Man that want to stack a particular type of resource, but again you might want to skip on one or two of them if you are trying to skew your deck toward energy resources or mental resources for example. In an aggression deck you might want one or more of the cards if for instance you are trying to optimize Hulk's card effect statistics.

1 hour ago, phillos said:

I contest   that Nick is an auto include having played it a couple times.

He is as of right now. I am sure that will change within a year's worth of released content.

3 hours ago, Turtlefan2082 said:

He is as of right now. I am sure that will change within a year's worth of released content.

Even right now I can see an argument for cutting him depending on your deck. Especially in higher player counts where everyone else is looking to include him (and you may run into the possibility of two people banking on playing him in a turn). Deck space even in core feels quite tight. LOTR is a different system where card draw and damage are valued differently than in Champions. What Gandalf does in that game and what Nick does here has a different value. He's a perfectly fine card, but he's not the ridiculous bomb card Gandalf was for LOTR in my opinion. What Nick offers you in this game is some very nice flexibility in how you want to use him. He's definitely costed correctly. You are definitely getting 4 resources worth of value out of him for sure when you look at what the other 4 cost allies do for you. Though for example if you are looking at him to just push out a bunch of damage many decks have cheaper alternatives that potentially do more. He's a nice tool in the tool box though for a deck that needs more damage or needs more thwart etc.

I think cutting Nick makes sense in an Aggression deck, for example, where you're trying to minimize Mental/Star resources.

5 minutes ago, CitizenKeen said:

I think cutting Nick makes sense in an Aggression deck, for example, where you're trying to minimize Mental/Star resources.

I’d rather just cut Hulk. Nick is a significantly better card.

More consistent would be a better way to classify Nick versus Hulk. Hulk can give you way more value potentially. Especially if you stack the deck in his favor.

Though I'm sure many people won't want to roll the dice on him unless you could completely mitigate his downside (like being able to seed the top of your deck or something with a future card effect).

That said some people want the fun moments more than a completely optimized deck and Hulk is definitely gonna give you a memorable moment. Different cards for different players.

34 minutes ago, iJiminy said:

I’d rather just cut Hulk. Nick is a significantly better card.

I respectfully disagree. I think Hulk is stronger if you can make him consistent. I'm willing to be convinced.

On 8/11/2019 at 5:12 AM, xchan said:

decks will most likely have 2 Mansions, 2 Helicarrers, 1 Nick Fury

Aren't mansion and helicarriers limited to one per deck?

And I'm in the "Nick Fury is optional camp. The cost-to-return isn't there, much of the time.

40 minutes ago, iJiminy said:

I’d rather just cut Hulk. Nick is a significantly better card.

Hulk is an amazing damage sink. Let him speak up a bunch of damage before trying to use his ability, if you ever bother to risk him going berserk.

22 minutes ago, CitizenKeen said:

I respectfully disagree. I think Hulk is stronger if you can make him consistent. I'm willing to be convinced.

If you could make him consistent then I’d be inclined to agree with you. He’d be a very strong ally if your deck was full of physical resource cards and/or top deck manipulation.

In the core set environment though, and probably for the foreseeable future, I feel Nick Fury’s versatile consistency makes it the better of the two options.

Right now all Hulk brings to the table is additional RNG. However, I can see the appeal in a group game for the potential laugh out loud backfire.