Author Topic: Banlist Brainstorming (Read 15505 times)

Gabe · « **Reply #100 on:** November 27, 2012, 11:38:54 PM »

Quote from: Westy on November 27, 2012, 11:32:31 PM

Another thing I'd like to mention is that OP defensive cards are fairly easily splashed at this point. They came out with Assyrian Survivor, a great way to make sure you won't be Grapes/AotL'd so you can use your awesome Assyrian defense to it's fullest potential. Plus, it gives you inish. What's not to like?

That was Pol's awesome idea that I was able to slip into that tin to replace an unnamed magician reprint. But it's not like he's hard to stop with a number of things that either are, or should be, commonly used.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #101 on:** November 27, 2012, 11:54:47 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on November 27, 2012, 11:38:54 PM

Quote from: Westy on November 27, 2012, 11:32:31 PM
Another thing I'd like to mention is that OP defensive cards are fairly easily splashed at this point. They came out with Assyrian Survivor, a great way to make sure you won't be Grapes/AotL'd so you can use your awesome Assyrian defense to it's fullest potential. Plus, it gives you inish. What's not to like?

That was Pol's awesome idea that I was able to slip into that tin to replace an unnamed magician reprint. But it's not like he's hard to stop with a number of things that either are, or should be, commonly used.

Yeah, FBTN still gets him (which is really popular), but either way he's an awesome card that should be given the respect of being used in a decent sized defense, not just as a suicide block.

Gabe · « **Reply #102 on:** November 28, 2012, 12:06:25 AM »

I judged at Nats so I was able to look at what people were using at the top tables. Assyrians/Magicians were played by a few people. All of them that I saw used 7-8 ECs and at least a few EEs. I consider That to be decent sized defense for T1, especially compared to the previous meta defense of 4-5 ECs and Haman's Plot.

Ironica · « **Reply #103 on:** November 28, 2012, 02:13:22 AM »

Quote from: Arrthoa on November 27, 2012, 11:22:53 PM

There are ways to prevent AOCP, the pharisees/sadducees, egyptians, assyrians, and babylonians each have a protect fort that protects those say characters in your territory from discard. Then you have caesera phillipi that protects N.T. human evils from discard on opponent's cards.

Yes if you don't have any of those out you can't do nothing and some will say those cards are worthless to have in a deck.

1) And yet people have been crying out for a dom that discards fortresses. That is exactly why I have also been against that dom idea. Also you have to think of how many ways to get rid of one fort right now.

2) You can only be protected from it, you can't prevent it (unless you some how get rid of it before they can play it).

3) One of the biggest arts for Babs actually makes this card unstoppable. So when you face a disciples offense, you can either deal with their protection or know that you will get nuked any time you block.

4) As mentioned before, I am against banning. I only chose those two cards for the fact that they are extremely powerful and that they do not come in regular packs so you don't have to worry about people spending money on packs and finding out that the awesome card they just got is banned (unless you are Christian Solder (seriously, buy a lotto ticket and split it with me

)).

5) NJ as a dom makes no sense. It is a city. there is no way a city can save souls. It's the same logic as to why there are no animal heroes. If I had to make a card based on it, it would be:

New Jerusalem
Good Fortress
Id: Holds one Son Of God
SA: "While Son Of God is in this fortress, protect all NT heroes in territory from negative effects. If this fortress is removed from play, return Son Of God held here to your hand. CBN"

This way, when Christ is reigning in the city, all (including opponents) NT heroes in territory are taking refuge in the city.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #104 on:** November 28, 2012, 08:08:31 AM »

Quote from: Ironica on November 28, 2012, 02:13:22 AM

Quote from: Arrthoa on November 27, 2012, 11:22:53 PM
There are ways to prevent AOCP, the pharisees/sadducees, egyptians, assyrians, and babylonians each have a protect fort
1) And yet people have been crying out for a dom that discards fortresses.

Which is why it would be better if said dom only discarded a good fortress.

Master KChief · « **Reply #105 on:** November 28, 2012, 08:49:40 AM »

It's not like anyone really uses the forts to good effect in Type 1 anyways. The risks associated with drawing it late game and having it become even more of a dead draw makes them nigh useless. At least the territory protecting sites have applications to them besides just sitting there doing nothing else, which make them great adds towards any NT defense. Protection forts, not so much. There's also the issue of protecting only a specific theme, which most are subpar besides maybe Assyrians and Egyptians. Another big point to the protect sites, which lends itself to any NT defense character, and sometimes even any card (dat Naz). This is why I wouldn't be opposed to a Dom hitting any and all forts.

Arrthoa · « **Reply #106 on:** November 28, 2012, 02:32:00 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 28, 2012, 08:49:40 AM

It's not like anyone really uses the forts to good effect in Type 1 anyways. The risks associated with drawing it late game and having it become even more of a dead draw makes them nigh useless. At least the territory protecting sites have applications to them besides just sitting there doing nothing else, which make them great adds towards any NT defense. Protection forts, not so much. There's also the issue of protecting only a specific theme, which most are subpar besides maybe Assyrians and Egyptians. Another big point to the protect sites, which lends itself to any NT defense character, and sometimes even any card (dat Naz). This is why I wouldn't be opposed to a Dom hitting any and all forts.

The thing with a N.T. defense is that for those sites to help and to actually be able to block you would need to use either Pharisees or Herods for the defense cause the Sadducees, Heretics, and Romans are horrible defenses and a demon defense can't use those sites due to them being demons.

Master KChief · « **Reply #107 on:** November 28, 2012, 03:47:41 PM »

True, I would like to see more NT defenses more fully developed, especially the new ones like Heretics. Pharisees seems like the only rock star defense of NT, but even that has trouble against meta banding offenses.

Demons can still use Chorazin

. And Nazareth. Beautiful, beautiful Nazareth.

Josh · « **Reply #108 on:** November 28, 2012, 04:23:14 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on November 27, 2012, 11:30:04 PM

Herod's Temple gets around AoCp in battle too if the blocker is NT. Counters work well if people use them.

I do agree that HT is a great counter to deal with AoCP. But counters only work when drawn. Because of HT's flexibility (it can benefit both offense and defense, plus hold Lampstand or another temple artifact), it is frequently used. HT is an example of the best kind of counter; it has enough utility to go in a deck, even though you risk never using the "instead" ability.

A more risky counter, and therefore less-used, is Darius' Decree; I've had little success with it, EXCEPT when Disciples were popular and when I used it in a deck fast enough to draw it relatively quickly. DD's secondary ability is not useful enough on a regular basis to warrant a deck slot most of the time in T1.

Master KChief · « **Reply #109 on:** November 28, 2012, 04:44:36 PM »

Quote from: jmhartz on November 28, 2012, 04:23:14 PM

I do agree that HT is a great counter to deal with AoCP. But counters only work when drawn. Because of HT's flexibility (it can benefit both offense and defense, plus hold Lampstand or another temple artifact), it is frequently used. HT is an example of the best kind of counter; it has enough utility to go in a deck, even though you risk never using the "instead" ability.

I wholeheartedly agree, the counters that will be used the most often are those that are useful beyond just being a counter against something else. This is a good example of the way counters should be created in the future. Counters that serve no purpose other than strictly being a hard counter (see: Image of Jealousy, protect forts) should be avoided.

Quote

A more risky counter, and therefore less-used, is Darius' Decree; I've had little success with it, EXCEPT when Disciples were popular and when I used it in a deck fast enough to draw it relatively quickly. DD's secondary ability is not useful enough on a regular basis to warrant a deck slot most of the time in T1.

There are some times when I feel like DD is dead, but you'd be surprised how many times I've actually pulled it off. So much of the meta uses some form of set-aside (Pentecost, First Fruits, Mustering for War, Fishing Boat). It can also combo relatively well with Samaritan Water Jar, and since it's an artifact it can easily be Uzzah food as well.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #110 on:** November 28, 2012, 05:50:44 PM »

Actually some of the counters that don't see use in T1 are very useful in T2, so just because the card seems like it isn't that useful in playing one of the variants doesn't mean it isn't useful, just not necessarily for you.

For example: Protect forts may be next to useless in T1 but because of the availability of territory destruction in T2 (4 AoCp, Holy Grail, mass captures and all that) the protect fortresses are almost critical (to the point that one of my friends uses what he calls "layers of protection" to keep his defense alive when cards can get around one of the "layers"

Darius's Decree is also a very useful (close to staple) in T2 because it shuts down so much of what your opponent can do (pre battle, territory class and set asides.

Quote from: Master KChief on November 28, 2012, 04:44:36 PM

I wholeheartedly agree, the counters that will be used the most often are those that are useful beyond just being a counter against something else. This is a good example of the way counters should be created in the future. Counters that serve no purpose other than strictly being a hard counter (see: Image of Jealousy, protect forts) should be avoided.

I actually disagree with protect forts not being useful because while they are strictly a hard counter, they are a hard counter to enough stuff that they are really useful at least, as I mentioned before, in T2.

Master KChief · « **Reply #111 on:** November 28, 2012, 06:41:23 PM »

I should have mentioned anytime I post I almost am always talking exclusively about T1. However, I do realize protect forts do have their place in a slower format (T2), but such cards do not find their place competitively in T1.

slugfencer · « **Reply #112 on:** November 29, 2012, 03:59:46 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on November 28, 2012, 03:47:41 PM

True, I would like to see more NT defenses more fully developed, especially the new ones like Heretics. Pharisees seems like the only rock star defense of NT, but even that has trouble against meta banding offenses.

Demons can still use Chorazin . And Nazareth. Beautiful, beautiful Nazareth.

I believe demons can also use Golgotha

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Banlist Brainstorming (Read 15505 times)

Gabe

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Warrior_Monk

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Gabe

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Ironica

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Prof Underwood

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Master KChief

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Arrthoa

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Master KChief

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Josh

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Master KChief

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

ChristianSoldier

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

Master KChief

Re: Banlist Brainstorming

slugfencer

Re: Banlist Brainstorming