Honestly, at my Hobby League, assuming we discussed it beforehand, I don't think anyone would have a problem with allowing banned cards to be played. This isn't really an issue, because I'm pretty happy with the ban list as it stands (except for Overload), but it's completely baffling to me how anyone could have a problem with banned cards being played assuming they were notified of it.

Maybe you don't care, and are arguing this for the sake of other people. You can ask me to respect this opinion, but I won't, because honestly it seems to me that anyone who refuses to let someone play their Emerald Enemies deck with Dr. Light in it in a casual setting is just being an #######. I can understand someone getting upset when you whip out a busted combo deck and proceed to rape your opponent without even telling them what you're playing beforehand, though.

Basically, it seems like if you just go to the trouble to let your opponent know you're playing with a banned card, it shouldn't be a problem. Otherwise, your opponent's just being a dick.

And I agree with this position.

Initially, it may have sounded like I don't understand the way the casual environment works (largely because I don't really have the desire to repeat arguments I've made before, even if it was awhile ago). What I don't understand is the mentality behind how the casual environment works.

It's a casual setting, without prizes on the line. Are your friends really big enough dicks that they won't let you play your fun equip deck because it has Antarctic Research Base in it (or something), if you tell them about it beforehand?

That's just sad.

That's not always true.

I consider Hobby League and Local Comic-Book Level type tournaments as part of the Casual scene.

To be honest, I can't think of a time where anyone has casually even TRIED to play a banned card.

Because it is banned.

The vast, vast majority of the casual scene, due to both stigma and necessity, group the ban list together within the rules of the game.

You may find this "silly" or "irrational", but it should be noted that these are "silly" and "irrational" that buy product and support the game, and wish to play a game "legally".

An overall banning on the scope that Prosak is proposing will damage the casual game, if there is an alternative to going "ban-crazy" (and I believe there is), it should be looked into.

If "engine" cards are the biggest issue here, why not create tools to disrupt the engines? That seems to be the biggest gripe... "there is nothing in Silver or Modern to disrupt X--only Golden has the answers and that format is borken anyway".

If we had Political Pressure in the current "block", Frankie would be less of an issue. Any deck that wanted to abuse the engine would have to run something to nuke the Pressure.

It's not just the "pros" that come up with degenerate combo decks. It's not that difficult to formulate these clock-burning interactions or to see the potential for abuse with certain card combinations and synergies.

BTW, even in a Casual setting I will call out the guy running 4x ARB with Fate Artifacts to draw his deck on turn 3. I might not call him a douchebag, but I will let him know WHY ARB is banned as he draws his deck up.

Prescisely.

The casual game is not an independent body. If you do something to the professional game, it will effect the casual game.

This is the nature of the casual community.

If there is a problem that requires a banning, the effect it will have on the casual game should be taken into consideration (as these are people, too, who support the game). Bans are sometimes necessary, of course, but the premise that we should ban cards both pre-emptively and err on the side of over-banning is, at best, a broad statement that doesn't factor the casual game in. In some cases, there may be alternatives that help to solve the problem without damaging the casual base to as large a degree. I believe that this concept currently applies in regards to Prosak's list.

I only care to see frankie banned. I find searching fun. The more search the better, as that is a skilltester. With searching you have more options, and more room to make a mistake or make a good play. You remove search you turn the game into topdeck, let the luckiest man win. I see nothing wrong with slaughter swamp or soul world or avalon space station at all. 2 basically trade a card in hand for a character in the ko, and one trades 4 (usually) life for a character in the ko. I dont see how any of those cards make the game less fun or broken. Same thing for EOME and mobilize, I dont see a problem, all they do is prevent those turns where you blank and forfeit the game, doing that is fun? Sure EOME lets you search for a lot of different characters, but we've been banning the broken characters so who cares. I dont think the free characters without broken text need to be banned either. Frankie drawing your whole deck .. bad. Haywire coming into play and being ko'd to an effect, not so bad. Sure he can be recurred infinitely with that stupid jla location, but that doesnt seem like a big deal to me. You play him on 2 with ivy, ko him get that location (forget the name, dont care to look it up), bring him back on 3, ko him to get some location you actually want. Bring him back on 4.. oh crap ivy's dead cuz dr light is banned.

etc etc, just get rid of frankie.

Well yea... You would be playing it for the effect only... But with enemy you can do that... You can get kang against power up decks...

But Kang can be handled with deadshot/ attack hidden. Unmasked Is WAY Harder to deal with.

I'm one of the players that likes the game "for the game". I Didn't get into it for the comic theme, But because i liked the playstyle of the game...

I Enjoy being able to choose between a power up mechanic, A reservist mechanic, Being able to get 20 cards off of longshot and only having 2 different guys (besides) longshot on the field etc. etc.

And i don't mind tech, I LOVE that games have tech. It's adds to the flavor of the game and makes it more interesting.

But unmasked literraly Destroys an archtype. Doom 4 cripples reservists, Big Hand cripples no hand, And Kang (3) Cripples Power up decks, But the game is still win-able...

Since my opponent techs kang, I can tech sabertooth, And with unmasked i can tech x2 Tech upgrade, with 1 n'th metal and 1 reality gem.

But unfortunately, If My Opponent is playing Doom crisis they can always garth back unmasked. I CANNOT Stop that.

I Could play a New god's character and the source... But they can still respond by using 3 drop doom to get rid of unmasked, and then garth it back again...

I'm probably the only person who would ever ask for something like unmasked being banned, When they're are much bigger threats like frankie and press the attack etc. etc...

But i just don't like "theme's" being fully denied... That's Why we play the game... If It wasn't We would just be playing all the best cards like yugioh does...

The proposed EomE ban (not to mention Mobilize)

The proposed EomE ban (not to mention Mobilize)

These two cards are at the very heart of an enormous amount of casual decks, people's "pet decks".

There - That's closer to reality for 4 out of 5 kids in our store.

Lol - Fair enough. :p

My arguement was about legality, not availability.

If anything, the casual community's leniency on the proxy issue lends more to how ingrained EomE and Mobilize have become.

Before I made my own personal ban wishlist, I thought about the impact that it would have on the game. The way I see it, banned cards are often played fair, and often to good effect. Anthony Calabreses' Society deck from PC Indy is an excellent example of cards being used as intended, yet still having a good effect in a competitive environment. In casual play, there are tons of examples, everyone likely has their own.

The problem is, not everyone plays fair. If you're(speaking to everyone generically) going to base your casual ban list off the competitive banlist, then you have to realize that competitive players try to break cards, and abide by the competitive players banlists. Of course, as stubarnes repeatedly beats his drum about (and rightly so), all players are shades of both.

I try to break cards for PCs, then play fun decks at Hobby League. Currently, I still love making "normal" decks for hobby league, but can't stand the highest levels of play right now. I'm willing to give up my fair Frankie Rayes for not having to play against broken ones.

Could not disagree more. Instead of infinite search(which basically exists), why not just let people stack their decks. Or not have decks at all. I can't remember the last time I've missed a drop past turn 2, and I put basically no thought to my curve. Being able to do whatever you want is not a sign of a healthy game. Having infinite search cards is basically like trying to beat a video game with cheat codes on.

When I played Magic if we were playing at a friends house the banned list was never enforced against a card itself as much as a deck or combo was. Why should someone be punished to the extent of knocking a pet deck they like out because of an interaction they never use?

And I consider hobby league and comic store tournaments still competitive, not so much hobby league since these are free, friendly environment tournies. Anywhere there are ratings points up for grabs is competitive, to me. Since that is a way to qualify for the PC.

frankie should have been banned with dr. light. everything else is fine even phantom stranger.

the people who say they should ban eome and mobilize are the ones who dont have them. there is nothing wrong with those cards with the exception of the price they fetch.

Because then the game stops being about teams and superheroes beating each other up, and becomes about Tar Baby/Phantom Zone versus Slaughter Swamp/Soul World. When metaconsiderations trump team playability in every respect then the game is effectively dead. Ask Star Trek TCG players how much fun the Kevin Uxbridge metasituation was sometime. The answer will be "not much."

Silver bullets, as a rule, suck. They're the opposite of what the game is supposed to be about (superheroes beating each other up) because good silver bullets (like Tar Baby, for example, who's a fantastic silver bullet against KO manipulation pile decks) are reusable and harder to balance and will take precedence over weaker silver bullets of the same type.

Which is the problem; an overabundance of search effects, along with designers still designing for frigging Golden Age (which has to be abandoned at this point in terms of design considerations, honestly) means that even a Silver environment can't anticipate all the problems of potential card combinations.

I actually don't agree with Prosak's list in every respect. I don't have a problem with Slaughter Swamp or Soul World, because those two cards don't fundamentally erase costs. Slaughter Swamp effectively acts as a lending agent - "sure, you can discard your 6-drop to grab that 3 out of the discard pile now, and come back and get it later." Soul World, in comparison, essentially transfers your discard cost to one of endurance. I can definitely see the case for banning Ahmed Samsarra but in practice I find he's simply too easy to deal with for me to really care. (Ivy is a much bigger concern.) And no way I ban Mobilize; an on-team tutor that encourages monoteam play AND facilitates teamup decks to an extent without making them too consistent (as Enemy does) is too worthy of inclusion.

Most of the people arguing for bannings of these cards have at least a full playset of each.