dboeren said:

You're fooling yourself if you think that this game is so dissimilar from a CCG.

Imbalance is used to help drive sales, whether it involves rare chasing or not. The other incentive is to grow the card pool for a wider selection to build decks from and with that wider selection comes greater risk of combos that can overpower and become a part of universal meta.

By it's very nature such games are imbalanced. If they were balanced then you would be playing a completely different game. A game where the randomness of card drawing played no part in the fundamental game mechanic design.

However, even though I am being contrary, I do agree with your position overall. We do need more balance but something will always slip through the cracks whether they be intentional design decisions or by pure innocent accident.

I beleive this to be a case of slipping through the cracks. Overall, I have to say that the design is successful, if somewhat bland in many cases. (just check the pile of cards you know you have never used for evidence of that)

Magnus Arcanis said:

Quoted for truth.

Thats the brass tacks of the matter. Test all the decks you want against it, but the fact remains for the potential of a 1st turn win and no amount of decktesting changes that.

It's the first time I have ever been in favor of softbanning a card(s) to break a combo. How exactly to best handle that is still acadamic, but address of the issue is needed.

Hellfury said:

Balance doesn't mean that every card has to be identical, just that the differences in power (or more accurately, power-for-cost) are within reason. They can still be very different from each other.

I agree that both variety (card pool) and also power (better than average cards) are both expected when you buy a new card pack and that both of these drive sales. Out of a 20 card pack, I expect some to be more powerful than average, and some to be less powerful than average. However, the amount by which they are more/less powerful should remain reasonable so that the overall game isn't adversely affected. Players looking for a power benefit will mostly focus on the ones that are better than average. Players who want a bigger pool or casual players will be interested in most of the cards. The few relatively weaker cards will mostly be used for themed decks, special situations, or in conjunction with other cards that make them work better or cost less to play.

Anyway, it's pretty clear that most of us have decided whether we like or don't like a turn 1 win combo and probably most of us aren't going to be persuaded to change our minds. Now it's mostly up to FF to decide whether something should be changed, we just have to wait and see. They're probably out for the holiday so I don't think we could hear anything until Monday at the very earliest, and they probably will want more time to think it over so likely not until later in the week.

Tokhuah said:

I'm neither sure if his diagram is applicable to the argument at hand, nor if your interpretation of what it means is actually correct.

And I'd like to add that casual play is a _completely_ different beast from (official) tournament play. If you'd like to know more about the difference, here's my recommended 'random guy from the internet': www.sirlin.net/about/

So, yes, we really have to agree to disagree on this.

Well, if the combo has to go, hopefully it can be modified so that it is still viable, but not usable on first turn somehow. Making Large Man Ancient One would be silly though.....

Well, at least the combo kicked more life into these forums

Hellfury said:

If I'm playing Straight Poker and I'm dealt a Royal Flush I've also won the game and there's nothing any of the other players can do about it.

Even worse: Have you ever checked out the list of games that have been mathematically solved? It's growing all the time as computational power increases. This list starts with the simple case of Tic-Tac-Toe and (currently) ends with Checkers. It's likely that Chess and Go will also eventually end up being on that list (in fact they already are, for smaller boards): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved_board_games

Does that mean that these games are suddenly no longer games? Or that they'll stop being played by anyone? Of course not.

In Checkers the player that makes the first move cannot lose the game (unless he makes a mistake)!

So, aren't we lucky this combo isn't nearly as effective in CoC? Not only is it not guaranteed that the first player will draw the right cards to play it in the first turn (or actually ever!), the opponent can also make sure the combo will be interrupted 100% of the time simply by including the right cards in her deck.

Of course you can argue that it is bad for the game because I have to include at least one of the several cards that can stop the combo or risk being helpless against it if it should make it into play. But apart from the potential first turn win that isn't much different from the situation created by a bunch of other extremely powerful cards.

For me the important question is: Will a player using this combo in his deck have a good chance to win a tournament? If the answer is no, I'm not worried about it because good players will realize it and not bring this combo to the tournament. It then becomes a matter of personal preference if I feel obliged to include a card that can stop the combo or not.

jhaelen said:

+1,000,000,000,000

This is exactly how I feel. Until we start getting reports from various groups that this combo is winning regularly this is all theory crafting, and while fun (and super for board activity, is ultimately no different than "Who would win a race Superman or The Flash?" We have our personal opinions, but without actual numbers of won or lost games from multiple playgroups by the combo deck, there is literally no point in discussing if it is good or bad for the game because it hasn't happened yet. The question then is the idea or possibility good or bad for the ame, and even that is still nothing more than opinion since we would need to see people choosing not to start the game or quiting the game because of the possibility. It has not stopped people from playing numerous other games where it is possible, and I played magic during the black lotus channel fireball days. That game only got bigger during that combos heyday.

I say it is something to be concerned about, but until proven to be detrimental and meta-defining/warping I fervently hope FFG doesn't take any action what-so-ever. This isn't Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh, we are all adults. Give us a chance to find ways to defeat the combo in play.

As we all can see, there is no reason worry about the combo:

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=35&efcid=4&efidt=583159&efpag=0#584148

2 Feint + 1 Shotgun Blast will do the job, and I am very happy about that

Personally, I would just rather play Cthulhu and use Sac Offerings. It's the most efficient way to deal with it still I think.

Of course, but the fact that there is a general solution to deal with the combo in ANY faction on T1 is important. Even if you do not include any combo breaking card in your deck, your opponent will not be aware of it and he will have to build a strong environment in order to protect the combo (I personally would use Dutch courage or Regeneration or Forgiveness?, see my decklist sooner in this thread), unless he can afford to take great risk. Obviously, in tournament, no experienced player will.

For this reason, I think no card should be banned or modified whatsoever. It is very nice to see that only a few days have been necessary for someone to find a general, free and unpredictable solution.

could not edit: sooner => earlier (sorry for my poor English).