Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Sorry, next time I'll say 'actually used in the meta'. I don't know, it might just be me, but cards used in the meta tend to actually be good. If it isn't meta, then is it really relevant at all?

If 'meta' wins all of the top positions at the high-level tournaments, then you'd be right.  But it doesn't.  And of course they're relavent.  Saying that cards don't matter because you don't use them is a little close-minded, and the best deck designers over the past few years have been open to the new strategies as far as I can tell.

Forgot the part about the lists in my other post.  I figured that if you were going to challenge me on a point I made, you'd want to actually prove that it has no validity.  As far as I know, there are 0 counters to this card in the very strict confines of the 'meta' as you define it, which is why I ask for you to show that there is no actual difference, as you seemed to contend.

Samuel's Edict, Bravery of David, MLAMG are all meta and discard an evil card, including Wastefulness.

I don't mind this card, its decent, but not really that powerful. It had enough counters that could easily be put into decks if it were a problem, as well as a shift in deck construction. Although I would argue that it is far closer to underpowered than over:

1) It only affects things that are (in general) choices your opponent makes at the time the card is activated (many of the card draw abilities are may) therefore it won't stop them from being in decks because they have card draw.
2) It doesn't actually stop card draw, just adds a trigger effect that can be rather annoying, but doesn't effect a battle directly, only the game as a whole.
3) It really only works in a deck that doesn't have lots of drawing (or one that doesn't care if half their deck gets discarded in the process of drawing)
4) It can fairly easily be discarded or will  be able to be fairly easily discarded as the game continues.

The arguments from the point of view of meta cards is silly. Yes you may be right that very few counters to counters are in decks, but if the counters became used to the point the decks have difficulty dealing with something the meta will change to deal with that. The meta is the pools of cards that give results, therefore if results aren't coming out of a specific strategy the meta will shift to deal with that. The problem comes when there is only one or two decks that work at all.

My final rating of this card is that it wouldn't be an effective counter to speed, it would however be an incredible counter to combo decks. The entire idea of speed is to get the cards it needs quickly to win, however if you think about it, does half your deck matter? (although its probably close to 1/3 that would be hit). There are many times that I would discard 3 cards from my deck to draw 3 cards, in fact, if it comes down to winning a battle or not, of course I would. But then again I play T2 and I run on the deck building theory that my entire deck looks fairly similar (or at least most cards get similar results) when looking at it from a distance so losing X cards is mostly meaningless because the next X will accomplish the same thing (not to mention recursion).

So I say this is a cool card, and possibly a somewhat effective one, but all in all I would suggest that this wouldn't be an overpowered card and probably wouldn't make it into most decks, in fact I would say its biggest advantage would be in weakening dominants, since those are the cards that would be hit hardest by this, there is usually another character or enhancement to take the place on one discarded, but there is only one SoG or Angel of the Lord in a deck.

And with those walls of text I say, I may be wrong about my suggestions, they are more of a product of my experience, which may be heavily influenced by the amount I have been thinking about a different card game that shall not be named (you know the one). But I like that people are still working on counters for speed.

Also, a side note KChief, if your area is still seeing Disciples played, then they are behind in the meta. FF2 and RoA2 have them an insane amount of damage and made them less playable because of the damage they took (especially since they can lose Boat and so many CBN's now)...

So your assertion is just because the new set sees counters to Disciples this somehow makes them 'unplayable' now? That couldn't be further from the truth. You seem to be under the impression that somehow Boat is the lynchpin of the deck, which it isn't. It isn't like the deck falls apart without Boat. Darius' Decree and Rain Becomes Dust are still far better counters that still see play in the meta more than anything else pushed out of FF2/RoA2. Aside from Covenant with Death possibly, but then you're putting yourself in the exact same camp as Wastefulness: your deck must be built and specifically tailored around the card itself to take advantage of it.

Again, I just can't get behind the line of thinking that just because counters are being printed every expansion this somehow equates to the meta shifting drastically. It isn't, the same exact stuff plus the new flavor of the year (Danny and fwiends this year) still top Nats every single year. TGT was printed how long ago, and it's received how many counters since then? Would you argue TGT players are also 'behind the meta' as well? As ChristianSoldier said, the meta are the decks that produce results. That's how meta's are defined...by what's good, what's working, what produces positive results consistently every time, what everyone is using because of that. TGT, Di, and FbtnB are still very consistent decks and quite capable of easily topping despite being older archetypes, thus people still heavily favor them in the meta.

Samuel's Edict, Bravery of David, MLAMG are all meta and discard an evil card, including Wastefulness.

Edict and Bravery only target ECs with their discard.  Their negate can target any evil card, but that would be useless against an evil Dom.

Quote from: Westy on October 19, 2012, 12:06:46 AM

Samuel's Edict, Bravery of David, MLAMG are all meta and discard an evil card, including Wastefulness.

Edict and Bravery only target ECs with their discard.  Their negate can target any evil card, but that would be useless against an evil Dom.

Whoops...

I still say this card is fairly easily counterable with just a few adjustments. For the most part, people aren't going to include counter-counter techs (i.e. ASA for the sole purpose of discard JT). There are cards that discard evil cards, in which case it's totally useless after that; there are cards that protect your deck, in which case they can try to get rid of those; and there are cards that don't draw, in which case it isn't a problem. It effecting both players is huge too. They aren't drawing, why do you need to? And you can draw, but then you have to discard some cards.

The only problem is potentially the identifier. Without it though, it wouldn't be as great of a card and certainly not as much of a speed killer, since you can still outrun it.

People look at drawing and searching as flaws. Frankly that's being ignorant. Drawing and searching reduce the luck in the game. That's a fact.

The problem is that the meta has become so focused around drawing, all it is is luck. Speed vs. Speed is a coinflip when both are piloted by good players, and whoever gets the better draw will win.

It's also not so much speed that's the problem, but the offensive heavy meta.

I agree with the offensive heavy part. The only way to actually legitmately fix this meta is to buff defense to point of overpowered cards otherwise the game will only continue in the path its on. This card wouldn't fix the issue. Drawing/search is not the problem. Overpowered offense is.

IMO, this is just a supped up Abom that attacks deck instead of territory. It can be gotten rid of, but it also can be used to troll others if built around like Abom.  Overall, I don't like it.  At least with Abom, you have to work to get it put in place...this is just an easy grab to suit your own playing style.

Someone asked earlier (I think Lambo): what forced draw cards are there...my answer: try most of the gold heroes.  Remember there is a strategy that was built around forcing your opponent to draw.  In fact, a CtB with Drawing ECs could kill your opponent as well.

Overall, this card could be easily to troll others. Few people (if anyone) enjoys getting trolled.  It is for that reason that I don't like it.

Quote from: soul seeker on October 19, 2012, 02:03:16 PM

IMO, this is just a supped up Abom that attacks deck instead of territory. It can be gotten rid of, but it also can be used to troll others if built around like Abom.  Overall, I don't like it.  At least with Abom, you have to work to get it put in place...this is just an easy grab to suit your own playing style.

Someone asked earlier (I think Lambo): what forced draw cards are there...my answer: try most of the gold heroes.  Remember there is a strategy that was built around forcing your opponent to draw.  In fact, a CtB with Drawing ECs could kill your opponent as well.

Overall, this card could be easily to troll others. Few people (if anyone) enjoys getting trolled.  It is for that reason that I don't like it.

I worded this specifically so you can't use it like ABOM.

Place in a territory: Every time a player uses a drawing ability on a card they own, discard an equal number of cards from the top of their deck. Lost souls are put in play instead.

So, the only way you can force a discard is if THEY put down a drawing character and you force them to use it.

k, apparently I missed that wording on the card.

Bottom line: I think it's a good counter for drawing.  Something needs to be done, otherwise we might as well change the name of the game to Pictionary.

OK, that brought my old thread out of retirement

Quote from: megamanlan on October 19, 2012, 05:04:12 AM

Also, a side note KChief, if your area is still seeing Disciples played, then they are behind in the meta. FF2 and RoA2 have them an insane amount of damage and made them less playable because of the damage they took (especially since they can lose Boat and so many CBN's now)...

So your assertion is just because the new set sees counters to Disciples this somehow makes them 'unplayable' now? That couldn't be further from the truth. You seem to be under the impression that somehow Boat is the lynchpin of the deck, which it isn't. It isn't like the deck falls apart without Boat. Darius' Decree and Rain Becomes Dust are still far better counters that still see play in the meta more than anything else pushed out of FF2/RoA2. Aside from Covenant with Death possibly, but then you're putting yourself in the exact same camp as Wastefulness: your deck must be built and specifically tailored around the card itself to take advantage of it.

Again, I just can't get behind the line of thinking that just because counters are being printed every expansion this somehow equates to the meta shifting drastically. It isn't, the same exact stuff plus the new flavor of the year (Danny and fwiends this year) still top Nats every single year. TGT was printed how long ago, and it's received how many counters since then? Would you argue TGT players are also 'behind the meta' as well? As ChristianSoldier said, the meta are the decks that produce results. That's how meta's are defined...by what's good, what's working, what produces positive results consistently every time, what everyone is using because of that. TGT, Di, and FbtnB are still very consistent decks and quite capable of easily topping despite being older archetypes, thus people still heavily favor them in the meta.

It's not that there are now counters (there were back in Disciples), it's that the FF2 and RoA2 counters are extremely easy to pull off and a lot were made to damage Disciples. Gardensciples took their place, and the problem is that their is just no great counter against it. And I know quite well that Boat wasn't the top card in a Disciples deck, but by getting rid of Boat, you damage the deck, not destroy but damage. And combining the new cards with old ones like HHI, it crushed Disciples. That's why most players don't run Disciples. Remember that the meta is what is generally played out there, not the top decks at Nats or even what appeared at Nats or even what's in your area. I run a Deck that's nowhere near meta, but I still can run the meta down fairly badly. (Given, I need to test my Deck more against "The Deck" but I've been able to run with most other decks fairly easily) FbtnB isn't nessessarily meta, but neither is Disciples. Gardensciples, Sam/Red, Sam/Purple, Isaiah, Daniel dudes, and a few other Decks are the main meta.

It's not that there are now counters (there were back in Disciples), it's that the FF2 and RoA2 counters are extremely easy to pull off and a lot were made to damage Disciples.

First of all, define 'extremely easy'. Second, what are these counters you speak of?

Gardensciples took their place, and the problem is that their is just no great counter against it.

There has never been a great counter to TGT. Same with TGT/Teal. Same with TGT/Gold. Same with TGT/Red. The inclusion of Disciples have little to do with it.

And I know quite well that Boat wasn't the top card in a Disciples deck, but by getting rid of Boat, you damage the deck, not destroy but damage.

It only damages the deck if 1) You had a boat full of Disciples and no way to recur them or 2) You're playing against a site-lock and have no other means for access. The deck in no way relies on Boat all that much, and getting rid of it is just the same as Boat coming up late game. It's good, but certainly not a necessity for the archetype to win.

And combining the new cards with old ones like HHI, it crushed Disciples.

The meta doesn't run any of those counters. Disciples doesn't care.

Remember that the meta is what is generally played out there, not the top decks at Nats or even what appeared at Nats or even what's in your area.

I've already explained to you what the meta is. It is the culmination of what the majority of everyone is playing. Why are the majority playing those decks? Because they're either 1) Top tier or 2) Flavor of the year. The decks that top Nats will almost always be nothing but meta. Of course you have your very few rogue decks that top Nats, but that is exactly why they are able to top: they're not meta and no one expects to see them, thus no one prepares for them.

FbtnB isn't nessessarily meta.

Wrong. It is a known truth that anytime a deck wins the last Nats (and even to a degree rogue decks that top) many players will try to mimic the success that it had.