PDA

View Full Version : Goodbye, Hilde. And hello new version of Martial Arts Champion



Loon
10-04-2010, 09:34 PM
Hilde got banned: http://www.jascogames.com/official_banned_list

MAC was errated to no longer effect characters: http://www.jascogames.com/ufs_official_errata

Now you know.

My own opinion, just to get things rolling, is that Hilde wasn't a bad move (though also not great) and that changing MAC was a bad idea. In fact, it's the first thing Jasco's done that I've thought a bad idea.

Shinguyi
10-04-2010, 09:40 PM
Democracy I believe. The majority thought Martial Arts Champion was more of a fluke than a fix/good reprint.

Maybe it was going to mess up too many future mechanics.

Overall, I'm alright with everything. I hope the errata of Martial Arts Champion shows in the near future to see if its really because of the mentioned above.

As for Hilde, we look for the day she comes back I guess.

Xenomic
10-04-2010, 09:43 PM
So wait...why exactly is MAC being errated? I don't understand.

Hayamachop
10-04-2010, 09:52 PM
either A. it renders a few characters completely unplayable or B. jason knows something that we don't know :p

Loon
10-04-2010, 09:56 PM
If it's option B, I'm ok with it. And given what I've seen so far, I'm happy to take option B on faith for now.

tannerface
10-04-2010, 09:59 PM
I guess cause it turns character abilities that draw cards into E, F, or R (insert cost here): commit a copy of mac in your opponents staging area. Look at it in a specific example with John herr: E discard a card: Draw a card. With MAC on the board using my ability only discards a card from my hand. Two MAC's out and my second ability is useless. Omar: A MAC out and using my ability is just a bad play. Now I personally don't care about MAC hitting characters. What I do care about is that MAC's abiliy is too broad a negation. Stoping your opponents draw I'm cool with (albeit maybe undercosted), negating abilities tied to drawing is what I don't like. Such as mortal strike enhance. Abilities that are made in the future will also get the blanket negated.
TL&DR: Blanket negation is bad if not properly costed.

Edit: Oh yea bye bye hilde, you failed me at worlds.

Shinguyi
10-04-2010, 10:03 PM
Do note that Martial Arts Champion says "ability that will draw cards or add cards" and not "an ability that would draw cards or add cards". Unlike how other cards are worded, I think its fine as it is.

Unlike how Torn Hero used to be and how it could respond to Amy's Assistance just because it COULD commit something if the player wanted to.

B-Rad
10-04-2010, 10:04 PM
So now that that's happened, I am very much in favor of banning/errating JJ please, as he shuts off characters completely as well. And no I am not joking in the slightest.

Shinguyi
10-04-2010, 10:11 PM
At least JJ needs to commit himself to negate an ability, and how Rashotep needs to commit himself to blank abilities.

Still amazed how people were about Martial Arts Champion because it stops Algol and Omar... oh well.

Birch
10-04-2010, 10:17 PM
So wait...why exactly is MAC being errated? I don't understand.

J. Ray complained.

B-Rad
10-04-2010, 10:48 PM
At least JJ needs to commit himself to negate an ability, and how Rashotep needs to commit himself to blank abilities.

Still amazed how people were about Martial Arts Champion because it stops Algol and Omar... oh well.

MAC has the exact same cost! God forbid some characters have a tough matchup.

tannerface
10-04-2010, 11:52 PM
Yea Mac has the same cost but it isn't unique.

Link
10-05-2010, 12:25 AM
MAC and JJ are not 2 things you can compare. JJ trades his character for your character essentially not a foundation for a char

tannerface
10-05-2010, 12:50 AM
MAC and JJ are not 2 things you can compare. JJ trades his character for your character essentially not a foundation for a char

This is what I'm talking about.

Xenomic
10-05-2010, 02:47 AM
So we're gonna errata MAC, but not do anything about say Financial Troubles which is just a tad much? Or say...other things that are MORE important than MAC? I'm fairly certain that there's quite a few things much worse than MAC that could use errata/banning.

And I agree with what B-Rad says...not EVERYONE that's played is gonna have easy matchups. That's not how it's SUPPOSED to be...it's not like in fighting games ever so why should it be here, right?

KodiakZero
10-05-2010, 02:51 AM
So we're gonna errata MAC, but not do anything about say Financial Troubles which is just a tad much? Or say...other things that are MORE important than MAC? I'm fairly certain that there's quite a few things much worse than MAC that could use errata/banning.

And I agree with what B-Rad says...not EVERYONE that's played is gonna have easy matchups. That's not how it's SUPPOSED to be...it's not like in fighting games ever so why should it be here, right?

Quite honestly i do not believe there was a reason to errata MAC at the moment; however it may foreshadow Red Horizon...

Tagrineth
10-05-2010, 03:54 AM
Do note that Martial Arts Champion says "ability that will draw cards or add cards" and not "an ability that would draw cards or add cards". Unlike how other cards are worded, I think its fine as it is.

Unlike how Torn Hero used to be and how it could respond to Amy's Assistance just because it COULD commit something if the player wanted to.

doesn't matter. MAC can still hit any ability that has any component of drawing/adding cards, period. Potentiality. The response trigger to MAC is before resolution would determine what the ability does (if there's an option).

Torn Hero got a functional errata to change its trigger entirely (responds to the act of cards being committed instead of an ability being played).

Bloodrunstrue
10-05-2010, 06:39 AM
Link to Hilde being banned and Mac being errated please...

I can't seem to find it anywhere. Or was this just private info someone gleaned from Jasco and decided to leak.. :/

so looks like my competitive deck get axed with the worst possible outcome. Awesome. _

Cetonis
10-05-2010, 07:00 AM
They just kind of showed up on the lists linked from the rules page one day apparently -.-' Would have been nice to see some sort of announcement. Perhaps Jasco planned on posting a larger article covering a bunch of things (upcoming majors, RH release date, maybe a few previews, etc. in addition to the ban/errata) and just didn't finish writing it...?

Hatman
10-05-2010, 08:31 AM
In short, we are now in the era where characters are untouchable.

I motion for the errata on Killer Android. That :):):):) it not fly well with me boyo.

To say I'm extremely disappointed in this decision is putting it mildly

failed2k
10-05-2010, 09:31 AM
I can't believe it happened, but I'm very glad it did, kudos to both the made moves.

Saying characters are "untouchable" now is so insanely ridiculous it baffles me. There is a TON of ways to deal with characters or what they do, but you actually have to WORK for them now, by playing a action or destroying a foundation or playing a 3 check. GOD FORBID YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY WORK TO STOP THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ABILITIES IN THE GAME.

I love how up in arms people are about this INCREDIBLE SMALL NERF TO THE MOST POWERFUL NEGATION CARD IN THE FORMAT BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS. It is STILL the best negation in the format, it STILL negates all the cards it needs to. The only difference now is you don't Autowin against a few select matchups. GOD FORBID YOU DONT GET EASY WINS.

The card basically nuetered some already existing characters, and also crippled future designed characters with draw/add before they even came out. It is ridiculous to say "there should be bad matchups!" to this because hey, last I checked there is no grey card that totally shuts down for the entire game 90% of the characters currently in the format, hell there really isn't a whole lot of cards of any color that do that. BUT WHAT ABOUT TORN HERO!?!?!@!@!@! Torn hero allows the ability to be played and then punishes for it, smart play allows you to make good plays to work around it or right through it.

Do not compare MAC to cards that do not compare. MAC is not a action, asset, or character card. Those abilties are supposed to be different/stronger, because they are not a fundamental building block tho every deck in the game.


While I see your point on Killer Android, that card is NO mac, it is extremely situational, and because of it's goofy wording, SUPER easy to play around. JJ I think is a terrible NPE currently, but his ability can be dealt with too like everyone else, you just have to work for it and he is a long ways from overpowered.

All in all I applaud jasco for the moves, it's clear to m e that the health of the game is #1, and that means a lot to me and my playgroup

ATLDrew
10-05-2010, 09:58 AM
I really don't see why people are mad... Like for real. It literally does nothing to the effectiveness of MAC outside of it not being able to nerf someones champion card into the ground.

Guys its really not that relevant. People who weren't maining it still won't main it. People who were maining were doing it to stop Financial Troubles and Chaos and will still main it to stop those strategies. NOBODY RAN MAC BECAUSE OMAR WAS SUCH A PROBLEMATIC CHARACTER THAT THEY NEEDED A MAIN DECK BULLET FOR HIM. Get over it. MAC is hard to design around and is stupid YET IT STILL DOES WHAT ITS SUPPOSED TO.

SMazzurco
10-05-2010, 10:08 AM
@Failed2k

ya, basically what i said in not so many words in the other thread. The errata to mac does very little to the current game. People are thinking it is foreshadowing that Jasco is going to "ruin" the game by caveing in. If it wasn't for Jasco, there would be no UFS, plain and simple.

I'm not gonna lie and say i didn't feel the same way after PotM and Standoff were banned, but i said "that sucks" and moved on.

Let Red Horizon come out people.

dutpotd
10-05-2010, 10:24 AM
I can't find said banning/errata anywhere. But assuming that is the fact of the matter I have no problem with it, and I'm hard pressed to figure out why anyone else has a problem with it.

I'd guess that 'negation' is coming back into the game, and the powerlevel on MAC needed to be toned down to keep it at par with whatever new 'negation' we get. i.e. I'm pretty sure block 4 negation abilities that target many abilities will not be as cheap as r commit on a reusable foundation...

I also know the real reason for the ban and errata - Rexen! http://www.jascogames.com/community

- dut

Hayamachop
10-05-2010, 10:37 AM
hahahah rexen who is braden cox anyways :P?

SMazzurco
10-05-2010, 10:50 AM
hahahah rexen who is braden cox anyways :P?

Hey, get in touch with Omega for me if u can...i STILL haven't gotten my cards...

Rider kick
10-05-2010, 11:12 AM
Some people will just be upset to see their favorite character go or a staple in their deck changed. I mean personally I'd be pissed if we banned Iori one dot and changed hammer. Even if it was for a good reason and the errata helped the overall meta I would still be mad. Its just the way some people are.

Loon
10-05-2010, 12:09 PM
Here is the link to the banned list: http://www.jascogames.com/official_banned_list

Here is the link to the errata: http://www.jascogames.com/ufs_official_errata

I edited the OP to include these links. An announcement would have been a good thing, I think. I'll stay out of the rest of the debate.

JinKazama
10-05-2010, 12:38 PM
THE MOST POWERFUL NEGATION CARD IN THE FORMAT BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS. It is STILL the best negation in the format

I think controller of souls is more powerful, just my opinion

also not that I even care about the errata but what happens when we see another ken ..?

Rider kick
10-05-2010, 01:00 PM
The banned list page is down.

JinKazama
10-05-2010, 01:16 PM
no its not

Judas225
10-05-2010, 01:56 PM
Doesn't seem to be working for Internet Explorer. Works under Firefox though.

My thoughts: Hilde gone is great. MAC, I'll agree that it is not a major change and won't have much of a major effect except that some people won't be so afraid to play another character or two. I suppose it's probably going to have more relevance with RH coming out but right now the change does practically nothing.

Xenomic
10-05-2010, 03:10 PM
If people wanna complain about things locking down character abilities or whatnot, there's Nakoruru, Paul, World Warriors, TYPFG, Whimsy, Roam the World, etc. etc......the list goes on and on, yet nobody bothers with THOSE which are worse than MAC. All of which can just shut down characters far worse than MAC, and for free essentially. Then again, I guess this only applies to Standard and not Legacy...

tannerface
10-05-2010, 03:13 PM
I think controller of souls is more powerful, just my opinion

also not that I even care about the errata but what happens when we see another ken ..?

I would politely disagree with you. While controller of souls is not limited to just negating draw/add affects, it is limited to negating assets. MAC, while only being able to negate draw, can negate abilities on attacks, assets, actions, and foundations. Before errata it could potentially negate every cardtype in the game.

tannerface
10-05-2010, 03:14 PM
If people wanna complain about things locking down character abilities or whatnot, there's Nakoruru, Paul, World Warriors, TYPFG, Whimsy, Roam the World, etc. etc......the list goes on and on, yet nobody bothers with THOSE which are worse than MAC. All of which can just shut down characters far worse than MAC, and for free essentially. Then again, I guess this only applies to Standard and not Legacy...

Legacy also has the cardpool to answer those back.

Xenomic
10-05-2010, 03:26 PM
Thing is though, you have to COMMIT the card, therefore at most you'll only get to use it maybe 4 times if you're lucky. I don't see what's so bad about that what with the amount of card draw in the game anyways.

Hatman
10-05-2010, 04:09 PM
While I see your point on Killer Android, that card is NO mac, it is extremely situational, and because of it's goofy wording, SUPER easy to play around. JJ I think is a terrible NPE currently, but his ability can be dealt with too like everyone else, you just have to work for it and he is a long ways from overpowered.
Does it or does it not nail Kazuya's F?

Because the fact that it neutered Omar/Algol was the lynchpin in your argument in getting it errated as that's the only "errata" it got. It's strength "remains" the same, except against those two characters.

If it doesn't nail Kazuya's F, then I have no problems with KA as it stands. If it does, then it needs to be errated. The precedent is made - a simple commit on a foundation cannot neuter a character. Yes, it's less strong an ability as you still have to destroy one asset in order to fulfill it's condition. It's a redirect as opposed to an outright negation.

Still, in light of what happened to MAC, we're in the same situation. An ability designed to reset the game is neutered by a simple commit. Why wouldn't it get the same errata? Because it's slightly less strong?

ARMed_PIrate
10-05-2010, 05:09 PM
Do note that Martial Arts Champion says "ability that will draw cards or add cards" and not "an ability that would draw cards or add cards". Unlike how other cards are worded, I think its fine as it is.

As Tag said, "will" vs. "would" doesn't matter. There aren't official game rule definitions for those words. They're not keywords. They're supposed to be relatively intuitive, and they mean the same thing in this case. This kind of thing is not an intentional foothold for rules lawyers, but rather an artifact of bad templating (or complete lack of templating). UFS just never got the same wording standardization that Magic did, and it never had an Oracle-equivalent created to standardize all the old cards.

Hayamachop
10-05-2010, 05:15 PM
Does it or does it not nail Kazuya's F?

Because the fact that it neutered Omar/Algol was the lynchpin in your argument in getting it errated as that's the only "errata" it got. It's strength "remains" the same, except against those two characters.

If it doesn't nail Kazuya's F, then I have no problems with KA as it stands. If it does, then it needs to be errated. The precedent is made - a simple commit on a foundation cannot neuter a character. Yes, it's less strong an ability as you still have to destroy one asset in order to fulfill it's condition. It's a redirect as opposed to an outright negation.

Still, in light of what happened to MAC, we're in the same situation. An ability designed to reset the game is neutered by a simple commit. Why wouldn't it get the same errata? Because it's slightly less strong?

I think it can only stop Kazuya's F if they have a asset out :o

Shinguyi
10-05-2010, 05:20 PM
As Tag said, "will" vs. "would" doesn't matter. There aren't official game rule definitions for those words. They're not keywords. They're supposed to be relatively intuitive, and they mean the same thing in this case. This kind of thing is not an intentional foothold for rules lawyers, but rather an artifact of bad templating (or complete lack of templating). UFS just never got the same wording standardization that Magic did, and it never had an Oracle-equivalent created to standardize all the old cards.

Read it from Tagrineth, hehe. Guess I am used to different templates from other card games.

And as Hatman said Killer Android needs to be changed then. Also, not sure if I'm wrong with this but there is no condition regarding Killer Android. Just that if you negated an ability, you get to destroy an asset. If there is no asset, well, you just negated an ability since you don't need to destroy an asset to negate anything since it resolves as much as it can.

Killer Android still cancels Kazuya's form..

ARMed_PIrate
10-05-2010, 05:31 PM
I think it's best to look at the MAC errata as a one-time thing.

Yes, it allows certain characters to not sweat MAC, when before it was a direct counter to their character abilities.

Yes, Killer Android is also a direct counter to a character ability.

However, the argument can easily be made that MAC was too broad in its negation effects (especially since it was created in a time when broad negation effects were loved by the designers, before FFG moved in a different direction re: negation). It stopped any ability, on any card, that would add cards to hand, from anywhere. I (personally) didn't find it _too_ broad or powerful, but I think a strong argument can be made that it was.

It is hard to make the argument that Killer Android is too broad in its negation. It stops abilities that would blow up the whole board, and it stops abilities that would destroy your assets. That's a pretty specific range, and I think I'm probably okay with it.

HypeMan!
10-05-2010, 05:31 PM
It's probably because I'm not gearing up for Nats, but I had completely forgotten about the ban and errata talk. Still, they look like good moves. I hate seeing character banned, especially ones I like outside of the game, but whatever is healthy for the game comes first. Kudos. Look forward to seeing how much of an impact Red Horizon makes following this and what the outcome of Nats will be.

Shinguyi
10-05-2010, 05:35 PM
At least Hilde can still be used in Legacy and Extended, which isn't a bad thing at all.

I guess what bothers regarding Martial Arts Champion is the reason why it got an errata since we don't know the real reason why, and all we can do is speculate. As mentioned before by another person, lets wait for Red Horizon and complain afetr that if necessary.

Da_ghetto_gamer
10-05-2010, 07:46 PM
The way i see it is that leaving MAC as is hinders card design for later characters and the abilities that they could potentially have...

Jasco wants to move the game forward and having to limit design due to cards that argueably shouldnt have been reprinted in the first place just isnt very smart

Hatman
10-05-2010, 10:14 PM
However, the argument can easily be made that MAC was too broad in its negation effects (especially since it was created in a time when broad negation effects were loved by the designers, before FFG moved in a different direction re: negation). It stopped any ability, on any card, that would add cards to hand, from anywhere. I (personally) didn't find it _too_ broad or powerful, but I think a strong argument can be made that it was.

If the card is too strong for the meta, the proposed errata won't do jack other than protect a few characters, so it should be banned for Standard outright.

If the reason why it was errated is for the characters, then Killer Android negating Kazuya is the same situation and thus should be looked at.

I don't get why this should be a one time thing. There is no logical argument that it should be the exception and not the rule. It's high time we get some sort of consistency in the rulings/erratas/bans in this game, and just looking at Killer Android would definitely be a step in the right direction. If they feel it doesn't warrant errata, it's fine - but they'll at least have considered it, whereas right now, it's not even near their radar.

JinKazama
10-05-2010, 10:41 PM
I completely agree with Hatman there should be no exception to the rule.
If mac gets errated everything that would shut down a character with a commit should be errated/ banned.

Hatman
10-05-2010, 11:31 PM
I completely agree with Hatman there should be no exception to the rule.
If mac gets errated everything that would shut down a character with a commit should be errated/ banned.
I make the case with Killer Android if only because it's similar and it's in the same environment. In earlier environments, there's ways to deal with this. In Standard, well, there isn't a whole lot for all symbols. I can't speak for other means, but for Killer Android, at least, that's pretty simple - it's the same situation : An entire character is neutered by a foundation (all right I'll admit the E is why people play him, but it's the F that got people interested in the character anyway) that has a Commit cost.

Yoko Charming Fox
10-06-2010, 12:19 AM
Ok, I have to make a case for Killer Android, because I don't see this as being the same situation as MAC and Omar.

1). MAC stops a character form adding a card to their hand, this ability is not as powerful as blowing up your opponents staging area, therefor a more powerful answer can be acceptable.
2). In order for KA to stop Kazuya the non-Kazuya player must have both and asset and KA in his/her staging area. Otherwise KA can't trigger since no asset is destroyed. Kazuya having assets in his staging area doesn't matter, because they will be removed from play due to the cost of his ability. Once Kazuya sees either an asset or KA out he can potentialy pop the field before the other card gets there.
3). Finaly when mac hits the board it must be dealt with every turn for the rest of the game (since there is little to destroy it as is, although if somthing like Lost Memories was printed this would not be a big of an issue for me), so even if you commit through it one turn and get your one card, it will still be a problem next turn. This isn't much of a problem for symbol that can run MoaN, but symbol like all and caos have to use attacks and baiting to deal with mac. KA on the other hand gets blown up once Kazuya gets his ability off, so once Kazuya manages to commit KA one turn he will not have to worry about it again till his oppenent draws another KA, and another asset.

I havn't played with Kazuya much, so I can't say for sure if KA needs to be banned to protect him, but I can tell that this situation (while similar in concept) is not exactly the same as the sutuation with mac. KA needs to be looked at and tested carefully, not just knee jerk banned, because of a new "presedent" set by Jason.

GrandmasterAmon
10-06-2010, 01:50 AM
Mark of the Beast needs errata too, it shuts down Tira. Just though I'd mention that.

failed2k
10-06-2010, 02:57 AM
Mark of the Beast needs errata too, it shuts down Tira. Just though I'd mention that.

good tira's don't play multiple, you are wrong.

NJBrock22
10-06-2010, 03:38 AM
well to tell ya the truth by the way that MAC is worded it stops in order:

1) Drawing Cards
2) Graveyard Retrieval(one of the main perpetrators was Mai5 back in the day also Millitary Rank)
3) Momentum Retrieval
4) RFG Retrieval
5) Card Pool to Hand
6) Staging Area to Hand
7) Tutoring

yeah this stops a LOT of tricks, most are still in Extended or Legacy but meh...

N.J.

KodiakZero
10-06-2010, 04:42 AM
well to tell ya the truth by the way that MAC is worded it stops in order:

1) Drawing Cards
2) Graveyard Retrieval(one of the main perpetrators was Mai5 back in the day also Millitary Rank)
3) Momentum Retrieval
4) RFG Retrieval
5) Card Pool to Hand
6) Staging Area to Hand
7) Tutoring

yeah this stops a LOT of tricks, most are still in Extended or Legacy but meh...

N.J.

Lol, that is why Legacy players have that "other" bag of tricks :) for such occasions.

Yoko Charming Fox
10-06-2010, 08:39 AM
2). In order for KA to stop Kazuya the non-Kazuya player must have both and asset and KA in his/her staging area. Otherwise KA can't trigger since no asset is destroyed. Kazuya having assets in his staging area doesn't matter, because they will be removed from play due to the cost of his ability. Once Kazuya sees either an asset or KA out he can potentialy pop the field before the other card gets there.

I just reread KA and I'm don't think this is actualy true anymore. If that is the case I would be more open to a change in KA's wording or rulings about it, but it still needs to be dealt with on its own, since in addition to Omar mac effected two characters in the works, and has a broader negation base (as Kodiak Zero pointed out).

Hatman
10-06-2010, 09:18 AM
good tira's don't play multiple, you are wrong.
Zi Mei though...

However, people are just being facetious now.

Yes I love that word. It likely does not mean what I think it means though.

Shinguyi
10-06-2010, 09:29 AM
Mark of the Beast needs errata too, it shuts down Tira. Just though I'd mention that.

Mark of the Beast is not a problem because its not reusable as Martial Arts Champion is.

SMazzurco
10-06-2010, 10:02 AM
Mark of the Beast is not a problem because its not reusable as Martial Arts Champion is.

If they were able to grab it from their card pool though then you could stop it with MAC.

Circular argument ftw

GrandmasterAmon
10-06-2010, 10:56 AM
good tira's don't play multiple, you are wrong.

Yeah cuz Mark stops it. Lol.

Getting serious though, why does a "good" Tira not use multiple? That's kinda what's printed on her card....give your attack multiple. Is this ment to imply she's terrible? Obviously we know there are other Tira's that are better, but that's the only one legal for standard, which we are talking about. By the same logic thats like saying "Good Algol's don't draw cards" cuz from what I gather people seem to think he's rather crap either way...

dutpotd
10-06-2010, 11:33 AM
Yeah cuz Mark stops it. Lol.

Getting serious though, why does a "good" Tira not use multiple? That's kinda what's printed on her card....give your attack multiple. Is this ment to imply she's terrible? Obviously we know there are other Tira's that are better, but that's the only one legal for standard, which we are talking about. By the same logic thats like saying "Good Algol's don't draw cards" cuz from what I gather people seem to think he's rather crap either way...

I think what was meant to be said was a 'good' Tira does not rely on Multiples. The strongest form of Tira abuses card pool clearing and burn effects together with the odd multiple attack to win games. Relying on multiple when there are many answers to them, not just Mark of the Beast but momentum hate - other block clear alls, is not a 'good' way to run a deck.

Also, you and others are taking the errata to MAC way out of context. The idea that it is being errated because it impacts characters (end of story) is juvenile. It is being errated because its benefit/ability including the ability to impact characters is out of whack with the new negation coming our way, and this is not surprising since it was a reprint from a time when the cost for said ability appropriately was less.

A 5 diffculty attack that is 4 damage, 4 speed, and has a +2 block mod is costed properly to support a multiple hate ability and isn't a problem as is. A 2/4 reusable foundation that stops a good portion of the abilities in the game needs to be toned down to be on par with where that stoppage ability will be costed in the Standard meta to avoid Grey Wars, where foundations are more powerful (offer better cost for their benefit) than the attacks/actions and other cards that the game should be played around.

- dut

GrandmasterAmon
10-06-2010, 11:56 AM
Lol. I was actually just joking about the whole Mark thing...maybe I should have made that clearer, next time I'll slap a "lol" or "j/k" guess that what I get for posting before bed.

Anyway I agree no problems with Mark and I really have no cares what happens with MAC, I just find it a little sad that we need 3 topics saying the same things over and over, but with nothing else really to talk about waiting for RH spoiler to break, I guess it can be expected. I really don't see the Standard environment as being anywhere near as balanced as some poeple seem to think, but I don't play Standard so I'm just the outside observer looking in on this one. What does concern me is the direction the game is going in if it's starting to adopt this super character sensitive mindset that seems to be implied...but we can really only wait and see from here.

Also dude said "does not play" not "does not rely on" if this was what he ment I agree full heartedly....but if not I'm just curious as to what he means that's why I asked. I mean if you're sitting on a momentum or two and you drop a Midnite Launcher for example, is there really a reason NOT to bust a multiple in most cases?

jason
10-06-2010, 11:59 AM
To address the attacks, actions, characters, assets that shut down characters, we will not be changing those (Pomel Smash being the biggest), nor will we be changing Rashotep. In standard at the moment there are a few powerful Character negating abilities. Obviously coming from a much more extensive background of UFS, these kinds of abilities have been around forever, and Legacy/Extended do not really get affected by MAC's errata much, as you can pretty much cancel what ever you want with a huge arsenal of cards.

I see arguments on both sides of Killer Android, and we may take a poll on that as well to see what a broader view of the community is, and I agree with the idea of changing it for consistency. I also agree that it doesn't stop nearly the amount of interactions in standard (notice there are over 30 cards that add cards to a players hand already and only 3-4 cards that destroy assets).

Please keep up the discussions, I am interested in these points and like where this is going. I also want to know what the public view is on Character cards being the focal point of your deck? This has not been the case in several years. Characters have been used for their abilities, yes, but relying on foundations and assets has been much more important in the past. We took lots of time to examine where we think standard is heading. We have noticed that characters have 17 support cards if they come out in the set, and in each set they typically do very specific interactions with their characters (Astrid is a good example here). I don't know if you remember the past, when starter decks were semi-random and support matched random symbols with the characters.

What I am getting at with this is, by having foundations out that can cancel a character ability with a commit cost all game long, is very powerful in this format, where cancellation is relatively weak. If you look at it like this, I am playing Ryu and you are playing Ken, but I have a move that allows me to press A and negate your special moves (Kazureppa, Shoruken, Hadoken). I still get to use mine, but you have to punch, kick and block only.

I know that is not a perfect example, but we are trying to stay away from simple commit cancellation that shuts down a characters ability. Canceling foundations is also strong, but not nearly as strong. Standard characters, for the most part, are all very good as well. We strongly believe that characters are the center point of a deck, and should be where the feel and "character" of the deck comes from.

You can expect to see Action cards, and to an extent attack cards, having most of the control elements in the game now. We like the surprise of actions coming from the hand, and throwing the opponent off guard. Seeing the cancellation staring you in the face from the staging area the whole game and knowing it stops the main theme of your deck (the character) is powerful, but also a bummer if you like your character.

Please let me know your thoughts. You will all find out over time, that I listen very closely to what you say, and I value all of the opinions expressed. Please discuss :)

-Jason

dutpotd
10-06-2010, 12:10 PM
I also want to know what the public view is on Character cards being the focal point of your deck? -Jason

Good reply Jason, always nice to see you read and want to see more discussion. I quoted the part that I feel you want the community to answer most and which I will weigh in on now in a new thread to keep discussion topics separate.

- dut

HypeMan!
10-07-2010, 10:49 PM
A Character is what I build my deck around these days. Resources take a second seat at this point. Also, I'm fairly against toolbox decks that switch between a lot of characters, just no character for me if you'll excuse to pun.

Should the Character be the focal point of a deck? Hell yes, they are in mine.

Loon
10-07-2010, 11:01 PM
Should the Character be the focal point of a deck? Hell yes, they are in mine.

Should the Character be the focal point of a deck? Hell no, they aren't in mine.

NJBrock22
10-07-2010, 11:38 PM
hell i'm a rarity... i chose a symbol FIRST, THEN chose my attack base, then foundation base, fill it out with Actions & Assets, THEN i decide on a character, and if that character has character only cards i can use i fit them into the deck, but i'm a weird player...

N.J.

Trip Se7ens
10-08-2010, 03:45 AM
I always pick my char based on if I like them or not, then I try to pick the best symbol they have.... and build around that...

JinKazama
10-08-2010, 08:44 AM
I pick a character I like, then find a kill condition that is synergistic with the character or allot of cards with one of its symbols

Shinguyi
10-08-2010, 09:39 AM
I usually go with a Symbol first, then pick a character with that symbol and the deck is made from there. other times its a character first, then symbols and then the rest.

Really like Air as an element so I try to make a lot out of it throughout the resource symbol even if it wouldn't be as good.

SMazzurco
10-08-2010, 09:54 AM
i usually find an attack i wanna use, then a char to use it, which usually locks me down on a symbol choice, then go foundations and assets/actions. Dragon's Flame for example

Sometimes though i build a deck around an asset, or an interaction of foundations.

Lastly, i look at a character, then build a deck solely around that character. Lizardman for example.

ReploidX
10-08-2010, 11:33 AM
I always build the deck around what my chosen character for the deck can/will/does do. I figure out what I'm building in the order of "Character (Mitsurugi (or a samurai-type character with Fire, if necessary)) -> Symbol (Fire (some All/Life splash as appropriate)) -> big damage killswitch (Heavenly Prayer, 'Rugi's Phoenix Tail, etc.) -> other cards".

Target X
10-08-2010, 06:16 PM
Step one: Chose character based on personal preferences.
Step two: Chose most unlikely symbol on the toon to build deck.
Step three: ???
Step four: PROFIT! And most likely fun. Like breaking the brain of an Oshawa player or getting T1 kills out of nowhere.

Zzasikar
10-12-2010, 05:12 PM
I fully support errataing JJ if it means I get a new set of copies of the card drawn by the Red Horizon artist!

From everything I can piece together from reading these forums though, JJ's flimsy as hell, with low vitality and no real access to any defensive cards. Also, his ability costs you two foundations as well as committing him which seems pretty weak in what I can only imagine to be a very tempo based format.

When I designed him with the FFG staff (who were less than helpful at best), he was always meant to be a sideboard character for control matchups where your opponent's deck relied on their character ability for their deck to work properly. His second ability is basically just filler. That said, the format also had a lot of easily accessible negation (Seal, Tag Along etc.) that could negate JJ's ability which is very different to how things are now, so whether that ability might be a problem at some point in the future I'm not sure. I guess the symbols he has would have to become more playable first. Even then, you have to commit your character and two foundations on top of having what is essentially a blank character yourself in order to take out their character ability. For that to be worthwhile, their deck has to revolve around their character ability to a fairly great extent. Also keep in mind that characters with more than one ability or that can use their ability in both players' turns can get around JJ pretty easily if played sensibly.

On topic, I'm sad to see Martial Arts Champion get neutered because it's one of very few cards with controlling elements left in the game. That said, in the direction the game is going, I can see why it was done. As I've mentioned to a few people, I know I'm in the minority when it comes to my love for control matchups. Jasco's reasoning seems pretty sound, and to be honest I think everyone should be happy just that the game has some owners who have an actual clue about what they want to do with it for the first time ever.