Post by kackman73 on Nov 27, 2012 16:23:34 GMT -5
I mostly agree with JeremyAT.
I probably agree with him because it's a variation of what I was saying in my FT deck thread - sure, you see X as cheap or imbalanced, but I can list off Y, Z, P, Q, and R that seem just as cheap to me. I'm beginning to think that our arguments mostly boil down to, "soul-crushing deck that I don't use = cheap; soul-crushing deck that I do use = not cheap (somehow)".
JeremyAT's point about the only decks that don't come off as cheap or imbalanced in some way are those in which both players slowly churn out not terribly powerful agents and sites until somebody finally wins is a good one. Given how many people I saw complaining about the recent patch that slowed down the game, I'd say that almost no one on this board enjoys a game in which they don't win (or set up their unbeatable combo) in less than 3-4 minutes, so I'm not exactly seeing a lot of people who are in a position to say that one quick win combo is any more or less cheap than another.
I think that we're all just trying to win games when we play. It's fun to try to come up with a new concept deck, or a variation on someone else's theme, but more often than not I think that we all prefer to win instead of lose, so we eventually gravitate towards those decks that are the most efficient for us. My efficient deck is your cheap/imbalanced deck and vice versa. Then I try out your "cheap" deck and see its efficiency for myself, and it suddenly seems far less cheap when I'm playing it (I've been playing Ezio Mentor/Piri/Gaspar/sites lately, and it's just silly - I had four Forums of the Ox in my hand at once last night... there was nothing the opponent could do at all. Is that any more fun for him or less cheap than a surprise Doomsday or a FT switch/Animus Reboot?).
Now that I think about it, I think that the expansion may have done more harm than good. There are certainly some fun cards in the expansion and we've been able to put together some interesting decks, but it blurred the lines between the colors (I think Tuism has made this point before). Now blue has agent and site removal, and red has counters, and purple and blue have draw power, and so forth. You don't really give up anything by choosing two colors over the other three, as all five can do about anything.
I think I'm rambling a bit, so I'll stop here.
I probably agree with him because it's a variation of what I was saying in my FT deck thread - sure, you see X as cheap or imbalanced, but I can list off Y, Z, P, Q, and R that seem just as cheap to me. I'm beginning to think that our arguments mostly boil down to, "soul-crushing deck that I don't use = cheap; soul-crushing deck that I do use = not cheap (somehow)".
JeremyAT's point about the only decks that don't come off as cheap or imbalanced in some way are those in which both players slowly churn out not terribly powerful agents and sites until somebody finally wins is a good one. Given how many people I saw complaining about the recent patch that slowed down the game, I'd say that almost no one on this board enjoys a game in which they don't win (or set up their unbeatable combo) in less than 3-4 minutes, so I'm not exactly seeing a lot of people who are in a position to say that one quick win combo is any more or less cheap than another.
I think that we're all just trying to win games when we play. It's fun to try to come up with a new concept deck, or a variation on someone else's theme, but more often than not I think that we all prefer to win instead of lose, so we eventually gravitate towards those decks that are the most efficient for us. My efficient deck is your cheap/imbalanced deck and vice versa. Then I try out your "cheap" deck and see its efficiency for myself, and it suddenly seems far less cheap when I'm playing it (I've been playing Ezio Mentor/Piri/Gaspar/sites lately, and it's just silly - I had four Forums of the Ox in my hand at once last night... there was nothing the opponent could do at all. Is that any more fun for him or less cheap than a surprise Doomsday or a FT switch/Animus Reboot?).
Now that I think about it, I think that the expansion may have done more harm than good. There are certainly some fun cards in the expansion and we've been able to put together some interesting decks, but it blurred the lines between the colors (I think Tuism has made this point before). Now blue has agent and site removal, and red has counters, and purple and blue have draw power, and so forth. You don't really give up anything by choosing two colors over the other three, as all five can do about anything.
I think I'm rambling a bit, so I'll stop here.