Bomb, you don't need to draw the Crewman because when you reveal with Satin, you just choose everyone to draw that card rather than discard it.
Jonathan: OK touche there. Still that's, once again, a problem with trait manipulation. Not all combos that will work with fat bob will be that insane. I see this as a problem with Satin instead of Bob. I don't understand how that passed playtesting honestly. Unless the playtesters felt it wasn't broken.
Staton said:
Bomb, you don't need to draw the Crewman because when you reveal with Satin, you just choose everyone to draw that card rather than discard it.
Josh, I don't think I understand what you mean. Triggering Satin's ability along with your choice of what to do with it affects you just the same as everyone else. The only way the card is discarded from the draw choice is when that player is draw capped.
There are so many ways to stop this combo and get rid of the parts is just silly.....shadows, burn, discard, valar, direct kill, direct discard, blank, cannot trigger abilities, cannot kneel or stand...etc.
Francisco G. said:
There are so many ways to stop this combo and get rid of the parts is just silly.....shadows, burn, discard, valar, direct kill, direct discard, blank, cannot trigger abilities, cannot kneel or stand...etc.
The problem is that you also need to have drawn something to stop the combo when it happens. If it happens in round 1, your deck will be milled before you even start marshaling. Of course there are lots of things you can do to Robert or Satin, it's all about having them at the right time. You really need to stop it as soon as it's established.
If you see one of them in setup just throw a plot and thats it......you have fortified position, valar, burned bridges (5 gold)....and you coud use that turn to get rid of one, or put a card in shadow.... way easier than GG
Francisco G. said:
If you see one of them in setup just throw a plot and thats it......you have fortified position, valar, burned bridges (5 gold)....and you coud use that turn to get rid of one, or put a card in shadow.... way easier than GG
You're right. As soon as I see that combo, I will make sure I go and grab those plots and grab a shadows card from an out of the game state and put it in my hand.
If you are caught playing any of those characters in setup, then you deserve to lose.
If you catch cards in the Shadows, you should be King's Lawed.
No one is saying the combo is impossible to stop, but you still need to have the proper plots and drawn the proper cards just to stop it. AND you need to be able to have a turn of marshaling to use most of them. I am not going to start adding all kinds of extra plots I wouldn't normally use just to stop this one combo. If everyone did that, then the combo would be very easy to stop, which is the entire point that many people try to make.
In order to burn him, you will need to have a good draw and have had been able to do it before the milling began. And I promise you, I am not going to stop the combo until your deck is gone which will be before you can marshal. If I am marshaling after you, you won't have a good chance to burn him without ambushing burn attachments and playing Any Phase burn events.
Yes - he is easy to stop if you have the cards and the plots to do it. But why would you build a deck just to stop 1 combo?
I actually don't think it will be too hard to prevent it to be honest because I don't think it'll be too often the combo will be drawn by then and affordable all in round 1. By round 2, you will probably be more ready for it.
alpha5099 said:
Rave said:
I don't think that forcing people to include cards of a certain subtheme is an adequate way to balance such a strong ability. This is also what I believe is wrong with the Summer agenda. (though Ill-tidings helps!)
Or just give him a limit 3 per round, which is still incredibly good. I don't know why you would ever need to stand and kneel a character endlessly without infinite combos.
Variables that all decks can have a chance to counter, such as the new less cards in hand, or more gold in your gold pool mechanics would make more sense in terms of balance.
I can think of plenty of reasons I would want to use him more than 3 times in a round, none of which involve the specter of "infinite combos." Kneel him for Into the Lists. Kneel him for various costs. Or just to be able to use him fully on both offense and defense.
You cite less cards in hand or having most gold, both of which are Lanni variables. Martell has cards that like it went they're outnumbered. Stark has cards that run better when it's Winter and/or when there're cards in Shadows. Baratheon has a handful of cards that become most powerful when there are no cards in Shadows. That's just a flavor for the House, and I don't want that nerfed. Particularly when Baratheon is currently one of the weaker houses.
I can think of plenty of creative reasons I'd want Core Set Joffrey or Anguy to not have limits placed on them, but do you think that would be good for the game?
Also, I'm not saying the non-shadows mechanic for Bara needs to go, I'm saying it does not offset the strength of Robert's ability. Knight of Flowers is a much better example of a killer card with this mechanic: it is solid, thematic, and totally in the spirit of bara, but has inherent limits built into it.
Robert's ability has too much potential for abuse. You can do tons of stuff to him, yes... but if you don't have an answer the one turn all parts come into play, you lose. Hooray... Satin mills your whole deck or something equally thoughtless. Where is the flavor in this?
~~~
Also, because you need to splash Syrio or Varys into your deck just in case he pops up doesn't make your deck "good". The moment you have to slot Robert control in with attachment and location control means the card is a little OP.
Bomb said:
I also want to point out that I can also put it on Satin and make him become relatively useless as well. Sure, Milk of the Poppy works, but that is easier to discard.
Satin has the No Attachments keyword.
Bomb said:
The problem is that you also need to have drawn something to stop the combo when it happens. If it happens in round 1, your deck will be milled before you even start marshaling. Of course there are lots of things you can do to Robert or Satin, it's all about having them at the right time. You really need to stop it as soon as it's established.
...Isnt that how the defence to Any combo works? >.>
This recent wave of cries to restrict/errata strong combos lately has been insane guys, remember when we all complained that errata-ing Heir to the Iron Throne before it saw tournament play was **** because it was essentially saying Power Rush wasn't viable? If we keep freaking out when a half decent combo comes out then thats the same thing as saying that combo decks are not viable.
I understand that the two most recent errata magnets, GG and Shadows Bob, are more efficient in their combo/control capabilities but Come On, at least give these a chance to run through one tournament cycle before they get shot down, even the North Agendas got that much? Also keep in mind that discussing how great a first turn full deck mill IS who would actually run that competatively? I think the reason Satin got through play testing is because I doubt FFG thought any serious tourney player would really consider milling everyone's deck just because the possibility Exists =/
Wrecking Ball said:
Staton said:
I don't see how people can say "Oh just put answers in your deck for GG! There are a million answers out there!" But those same people say that Robert is broken. Just another example of the community thinking uber control is fine, while being scared to death of anything that isn't control possibly gaining ground.
The reason why no shadows Robert might need to be fixed is because of his uber control aspect. I don't see anybody complaining about his insane rush or powergrab.
I realize this thread has moved on from here, but I really want to go back to this. I really don't give a crap about this or any other combo involving Shadows Bob. FFG can break the Satin combo all they want, I won't miss it. But the cries for erratas for Bob specifically will do more than break the combo; they will hamper this ability to work as a rusher. I like him as a rush character, he's obviously one of the best, and I want him to stay strong in that regard. If there's a way to errata Bob that kills his ability to be used in combos without affecting his ability to rush, I'd be fine with that, but given that the most popular suggestion seems to be to make him limit three times per round, I think that will hurt the way he functions in all regards.
Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless)
now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check)
oshi said:
Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless)
now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check)
I'm actually excited to see the satin combo get pulled off, it doesn't scare me that much either. Robert's self standing ability will be an issue in the future as it has in the past and is now. Maybe a no attachments errata is the way to go.
DerBarchen said:
Bomb said:
The problem is that you also need to have drawn something to stop the combo when it happens. If it happens in round 1, your deck will be milled before you even start marshaling. Of course there are lots of things you can do to Robert or Satin, it's all about having them at the right time. You really need to stop it as soon as it's established.
...Isnt that how the defence to Any combo works? >.>
This recent wave of cries to restrict/errata strong combos lately has been insane guys, remember when we all complained that errata-ing Heir to the Iron Throne before it saw tournament play was **** because it was essentially saying Power Rush wasn't viable? If we keep freaking out when a half decent combo comes out then thats the same thing as saying that combo decks are not viable.
I understand that the two most recent errata magnets, GG and Shadows Bob, are more efficient in their combo/control capabilities but Come On, at least give these a chance to run through one tournament cycle before they get shot down, even the North Agendas got that much? Also keep in mind that discussing how great a first turn full deck mill IS who would actually run that competatively? I think the reason Satin got through play testing is because I doubt FFG thought any serious tourney player would really consider milling everyone's deck just because the possibility Exists =/
Well, there was Maester Robert that won a big tournament and pretty much errata'ed the maester agenda, right?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also don't want to ruin his rush potential over infinite combos, but would 3 times per round really do that? Being able to participate in 3 kneel actions/challenges and still stand for dominance seems like plenty to me.
oshi said:
Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless)
now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check)
I'm actually excited to see the satin combo get pulled off, it doesn't scare me that much either. Robert's self standing ability will be an issue in the future as it has in the past and is now. Maybe a no attachments errata is the way to go.
oshi said:
Personally, i think the satin combo isn't THAT bad... Though one card(s) having infinite potential is just not great for the game...as some one said, "just put "printed" on more cards" is a solution that works. im not entirely sold on that yet. I still think the way support of saltcliff went is best for the game. even if it nerfs a card which wasnt broken when standing alone. (pun unintended, but awesome nonetheless)
now it has me wondering, is bob the reason for the random "non-noble" requirement on songs of bael the bard? (in before: hurrr you're so dumb, songs came before Robert...i couldnt be bothered to check)
That could be. That plot would be after Robert was around. There are some other non-noble effects, though the only other one I can think of off the top of my head is You've Killed the Wrong Dwarf. Which obviously came before Shadows Bob, but would also be pretty absurd with him.
Bomb said:
Francisco G. said:
If you see one of them in setup just throw a plot and thats it......you have fortified position, valar, burned bridges (5 gold)....and you coud use that turn to get rid of one, or put a card in shadow.... way easier than GG
You're right. As soon as I see that combo, I will make sure I go and grab those plots and grab a shadows card from an out of the game state and put it in my hand.
If you are caught playing any of those characters in setup, then you deserve to lose.
If you catch cards in the Shadows, you should be King's Lawed.
No one is saying the combo is impossible to stop, but you still need to have the proper plots and drawn the proper cards just to stop it. AND you need to be able to have a turn of marshaling to use most of them. I am not going to start adding all kinds of extra plots I wouldn't normally use just to stop this one combo. If everyone did that, then the combo would be very easy to stop, which is the entire point that many people try to make.
In order to burn him, you will need to have a good draw and have had been able to do it before the milling began. And I promise you, I am not going to stop the combo until your deck is gone which will be before you can marshal. If I am marshaling after you, you won't have a good chance to burn him without ambushing burn attachments and playing Any Phase burn events.
Yes - he is easy to stop if you have the cards and the plots to do it. But why would you build a deck just to stop 1 combo?
I actually don't think it will be too hard to prevent it to be honest because I don't think it'll be too often the combo will be drawn by then and affordable all in round 1. By round 2, you will probably be more ready for it.
Bomb said:
Francisco G. said:
If you see one of them in setup just throw a plot and thats it......you have fortified position, valar, burned bridges (5 gold)....and you coud use that turn to get rid of one, or put a card in shadow.... way easier than GG
You're right. As soon as I see that combo, I will make sure I go and grab those plots and grab a shadows card from an out of the game state and put it in my hand.
If you are caught playing any of those characters in setup, then you deserve to lose.
If you catch cards in the Shadows, you should be King's Lawed.
No one is saying the combo is impossible to stop, but you still need to have the proper plots and drawn the proper cards just to stop it. AND you need to be able to have a turn of marshaling to use most of them. I am not going to start adding all kinds of extra plots I wouldn't normally use just to stop this one combo. If everyone did that, then the combo would be very easy to stop, which is the entire point that many people try to make.
In order to burn him, you will need to have a good draw and have had been able to do it before the milling began. And I promise you, I am not going to stop the combo until your deck is gone which will be before you can marshal. If I am marshaling after you, you won't have a good chance to burn him without ambushing burn attachments and playing Any Phase burn events.
Yes - he is easy to stop if you have the cards and the plots to do it. But why would you build a deck just to stop 1 combo?
I actually don't think it will be too hard to prevent it to be honest because I don't think it'll be too often the combo will be drawn by then and affordable all in round 1. By round 2, you will probably be more ready for it.
Sooo... you're saying that you wouldn't normally play things like Valar, Burning Bridges or Fortified Position? Wow. That stinks. Those are really, really good plots.
In a more general note on the discussion as a whole, especially since there's been some comparisons to to GG, I'm curious-
Do Satin mill combos largely invalidate another deck type? No, not really. When an entire deck is milled, it sucks for the person milled, but doesn't single out a particular strategy and neuter it.
Do GG shenanigans largely invalidate another deck type? Yes, the particular blow that they deal to uber character/ Voltron style decks is substantial.
Do Satin mill combos (particularly in reference to No Shadows Robert for this discussion) keep effective means of thwarting that combo from happening? No, not if any of the counters are played before the full assembly of the combo. Yes, once the mill goes off, the opponent won't be able to draw into answers as it's too late and their deck is gone, but as illustrated, there are a number of ways to stop it through plots, playing Shadows cards, etc that none of the mill combo cards inherently offer protection against.
Do GG shenanigans keep effective means of thwarting that control from happening? Yes, as illustrated in other threads, usage of GG actually goes a long way toward preventing a large portion of the location control effects that could be used to stop GG itself by hampering all of the challenge based effects.
Rave said:
DerBarchen said:
Bomb said:
The problem is that you also need to have drawn something to stop the combo when it happens. If it happens in round 1, your deck will be milled before you even start marshaling. Of course there are lots of things you can do to Robert or Satin, it's all about having them at the right time. You really need to stop it as soon as it's established.
...Isnt that how the defence to Any combo works? >.>
This recent wave of cries to restrict/errata strong combos lately has been insane guys, remember when we all complained that errata-ing Heir to the Iron Throne before it saw tournament play was **** because it was essentially saying Power Rush wasn't viable? If we keep freaking out when a half decent combo comes out then thats the same thing as saying that combo decks are not viable.
I understand that the two most recent errata magnets, GG and Shadows Bob, are more efficient in their combo/control capabilities but Come On, at least give these a chance to run through one tournament cycle before they get shot down, even the North Agendas got that much? Also keep in mind that discussing how great a first turn full deck mill IS who would actually run that competatively? I think the reason Satin got through play testing is because I doubt FFG thought any serious tourney player would really consider milling everyone's deck just because the possibility Exists =/
Well, there was Maester Robert that won a big tournament and pretty much errata'ed the maester agenda, right?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also don't want to ruin his rush potential over infinite combos, but would 3 times per round really do that? Being able to participate in 3 kneel actions/challenges and still stand for dominance seems like plenty to me.
As pointed out above (I think by myself, though others might've brought it up), Shadows Bob was far from the only voltron deck the old Maester agenda allowed.
Perhaps I'm being overly paranoid about his effectiveness if he could only stand 3 times a round, but I'm thinking that if I have him out, there're no cards in Shadows, and he's more or less safe, I'm going to want to use him in every challenge I can get him into. He essentially has both Vigilant and Vengeful. Even if I'm not winning on defense, he can help block for unopposed at least. Plus at least in my Bara decks, I generally try to give my rushers an Int icon, through Selyse or Court Advisor or Devious Intentions, so there's more challenges he could be helping on.
If, as Wrecking Ball said, his rushing potential is not the issue -- and maybe some people here may want to nerf his rushing too -- then I just don't see why the errata has to be something that hurts his ability to perform his role there.
Staton said:
I don't see how people can say "Oh just put answers in your deck for GG! There are a million answers out there!" But those same people say that Robert is broken. Just another example of the community thinking uber control is fine, while being scared to death of anything that isn't control possibly gaining ground.
Staton said:
I don't see how people can say "Oh just put answers in your deck for GG! There are a million answers out there!" But those same people say that Robert is broken. Just another example of the community thinking uber control is fine, while being scared to death of anything that isn't control possibly gaining ground.
Except you have to essentially pay for GG, and you're limited to once per noble. Robert can pay the cost of an action as many times as he likes with a 2 or 3 card combo.
I think it makes more sense to just limit Robert than limit every powerful in-play card with a kneel cost.
I feel it is also safe to say most decks run location control on principle, while most decks do not do this with shadows.
As pointed out above (I think by myself, though others might've brought it up), Shadows Bob was far from the only voltron deck the old Maester agenda allowed.
That's right. Thanks.
Rave said:
"Well, there was Maester Robert that won a big tournament and pretty much errata'ed the maester agenda, right?"
Touche! I still stand by what I said though, the Maester agenda in general needed that errata, and frankly he's still pretty insane as a maester if you draw into the right links. Thats the thing with this Satin madness, you have to draw into Satin and Robert and a trait manipulation, then play them all and if you want any deck left you either run it in an 80 card (good luck drawing the right pieces) or you hope you get a motley crewman (again, you have to draw and play him)
I know the biggest point for errata-ing Bob is to stop any further shennanigans with him happening in the future but I say lets burn that bridge when we get to it, lets see how many people actually end up using this combo when its possible.
Also, this just crossed my mind, are we ignoring the fact that Bob is a Baratheon? Thats 1 out of 6 houses! This isnt some uber netural kill switch, or even as efficient as GG, this is one character in one house (a house that got kind of short changed in the last cycle) that abuses Some, flashy but mostly impractical, combos. Isn't that a valid point against nerfing him?
DerBarchen said:
Touche! I still stand by what I said though, the Maester agenda in general needed that errata, and frankly he's still pretty insane as a maester if you draw into the right links. Thats the thing with this Satin madness, you have to draw into Satin and Robert and a trait manipulation, then play them all and if you want any deck left you either run it in an 80 card (good luck drawing the right pieces) or you hope you get a motley crewman (again, you have to draw and play him)
I know the biggest point for errata-ing Bob is to stop any further shennanigans with him happening in the future but I say lets burn that bridge when we get to it, lets see how many people actually end up using this combo when its possible.
Also, this just crossed my mind, are we ignoring the fact that Bob is a Baratheon? Thats 1 out of 6 houses! This isnt some uber netural kill switch, or even as efficient as GG, this is one character in one house (a house that got kind of short changed in the last cycle) that abuses Some, flashy but mostly impractical, combos. Isn't that a valid point against nerfing him?
This is true. I guess I just really hate the herp derpness of infinite combos and the cards that enable them to exist.
DerBarchen said:
Bomb said:
The problem is that you also need to have drawn something to stop the combo when it happens. If it happens in round 1, your deck will be milled before you even start marshaling. Of course there are lots of things you can do to Robert or Satin, it's all about having them at the right time. You really need to stop it as soon as it's established.
...Isnt that how the defence to Any combo works? >.>
Of course. Did you read what I wrote? Your deck is gone if you can't stop it right away. It isn't rocket science that you need to draw the cards and play them to stop a combo. As soon as the combo is established, they won't let you marshal anything to stop it. At least not until your deck is gone, and then the combo is not as valuable.
Rave said:
This is true. I guess I just really hate the herp derpness of infinite combos and the cards that enable them to exist.
I can agree with the sentiment -- I don't really like this Satin combo at all. I still think errataing Satin just works better, as, at least in my opinion, he's the card that enables the combo. The argument that someday maybe they'll design another card that can exploit Shadows Bob so he's the real issue just feels fallacious to me. I think part of it is that I feel like the newer card should be one forced to change. Does that make sense?
Bomb said:
Of course. Did you read what I wrote? Your deck is gone if you can't stop it right away. It isn't rocket science that you need to draw the cards and play them to stop a combo. As soon as the combo is established, they won't let you marshal anything to stop it. At least not until your deck is gone, and then the combo is not as valuable.
But as Ive already said you geting all the right pieces out at the same time is hard enough already, if your opponent has managed to get Bob and the NW trait manipulation and Satin out and you still havnt goten things of equal value/strength out then doesnt he deserve to win? (although how he is going to win by milling both your and his own deck begs its own discussion)
Its all about looking at the combo in the flow of an actual game, if you're going to theorycraft the situation in which your oponenet has all the necisary pieces out then why not theorycraft yourself having Your necissary pieces? By the time all those dudes are out you should have Something decent out too and now that your oponenet has milled both his and your deck well, I guess youre both still on even footing, its just going to be a quick game! Also, keep in mind that every turn that he's focusing on pulling off his ridiculous mill you're geting closer to wining using actual, tried and true, methods so by the time he Does pull it off who's to say that he didnt just hand you the game? Just because this combo is possible doesnt mean its nearly as game breaking as it seems =/
Kennon said:
Sooo... you're saying that you wouldn't normally play things like Valar, Burning Bridges or Fortified Position? Wow. That stinks. Those are really, really good plots.
I'm actually not saying that at all. You completely misunderstood my sarcasm. Sorry I forgot the ~.
DerBarchen said:
But as Ive already said you geting all the right pieces out at the same time is hard enough already, if your opponent has managed to get Bob and the NW trait manipulation and Satin out and you still havnt goten things of equal value/strength out then doesnt he deserve to win? (although how he is going to win by milling both your and his own deck begs its own discussion)
Its all about looking at the combo in the flow of an actual game, if you're going to theorycraft the situation in which your oponenet has all the necisary pieces out then why not theorycraft yourself having Your necissary pieces? By the time all those dudes are out you should have Something decent out too and now that your oponenet has milled both his and your deck well, I guess youre both still on even footing, its just going to be a quick game! Also, keep in mind that every turn that he's focusing on pulling off his ridiculous mill you're geting closer to wining using actual, tried and true, methods so by the time he Does pull it off who's to say that he didnt just hand you the game? Just because this combo is possible doesnt mean its nearly as game breaking as it seems =/
Lol. I am completely misunderstood. I think you are taking what you are reading from me out of order of my posts. I don't think the combo is broken at all. I just don't think it's so simple to eliminate once it happens like Francisco sounded like he was suggesting with his 20 ways in single sentence. Of course it's easy to stop when you have a chance to do so. Read most of my other posts in this thread to see how I really feel.