The equilibrium price for Enemy's is probably around $30. That isn't to say people haven't paid more ($50 fifteen minutes before a PC starts) or less ($20 cause the store owner didn't know how much they were worth).

This is just basic econ. Next time you're on a plane, ask the person next to you how much they paid for their ticket ... it can differ 100s of dollars for essentially the same seat. It all depends when you buy, where you buy, and who you bought it from.

Which just goes to show that any sort of cash redemption program for banned cards would be too much of a headache to implement. I like what they've done giving out an EA Darkseid along with the EA Frankie. It's classy and you don't have much cause to complain.

If an expensive rare like Enemy does ever get the ban, the best solution is probably to hand out copies of a "fixed" version to those who want it and take the Enemies out of circulation. You might lose $$ value, but you'd get a functional replacement for tournament play. To eliminate transaction costs, you would do this in person at the PC instead of by mail.

What's funny is once a ton of Enemies are traded in, they would shoot up in value because of scarcity. Then people wouldn't be trading them in at all and they'll become a must-have item again. Go econ :)

THANK YOU!!!!

whatever jay u said they were worth 60$. i agree with u enemy is a 25$-30$ card.

I agree with your point about EoME not worth $60, but you need to stop talking like Thugmotivation101

This is ridiculous. I don't think that anyone would argue that Enemy of My Enemy has an actual value of $60. However, the point was made that it has very likely sold for that amount before under extreme circumstances. If you didn't figure it out before, read what I just said and figure it out now. Enemy is not a $60 card. Nobody thinks it's worth that much, but anyone with knowledge of supply and demand can see how it would on occasion sell for $60.

If you're still confused somehow, it's really not a big deal. Let it go.

Lock this already.

One banned list is easier than multiple ones, ultimately. It's a lot easier.

Technically they have 2 lists ... with nothing banned for sealed play.

Most of the cards that are legal in Silver would be abusive in Silver [if not more so because of lack of cards like Political Pressure, for example] ... so only Modern would be a question. And, at that point, there's only a few that would be in the next Modern format anyway [the 3 from HOG].

In most cases, the simplest solution is best. The 'benefit' of having a different ban list for each format wouldn't be enough to off set the costs of extra effort necessary to seperately determine each ban list individually, especially as future bans may be determined based on the differences in the formats [which different banned lists would include]. Not to mention that Silver ban lists would need to be reevaluated with each roatation, especially if Silver is to be the City Championship format and thus, every set rotation would lead to a "new" silver age format.

I think your complaint is very valid, and I hope UDE remembers it when they're designing cards.

Could you be more specific?

Dude, I wouldn't be calling anyone "most like a kid". I know a nine year old GIRL that types better than you, and she used the whole "u, r," system. At least she knows the difference between "no, now, and know". I think everyone has made it clear that you only disrupt perfectly good arguments between me and smarter people. I think I speak for us all when I say p!$$ off.

The pendulum swings. I mean we saw how bad hard-stamping could get with Ra's Al Ghul and League of Assassins. Even dual loyalty in Marvel Knights was hardly a homerun. I think those experiences led to a push for UDE design to be more free about who could show up where.

At about the same time, search was becoming more powerful and more generic. You can trace the line straight from Weapon of Choice to Secret Origins to Enemy of My Enemy. The best deck of this era, Curve Sentinels, was good because it could avoid the woes of missing a drop ... it effectively ran 10 5-drops and characters were always relevant in hand. Every other curve deck was plagued with consistency trouble.

You can see what happened when these two trends converged. Characters become easier to splash AND easier to find? Toolboxing abounds. You see it in every game.

Thankfully the trend is going the other way. Powerful splashy cards like Air-Walker (3) are now properly stamped. Search cards like Mobilize are now team-specific.

Banning Frankie is like cleaning out the gutters, something that just had to be done. I applaud the move and expect UDE will be more mindful of how these two trends affect one another in the future.

This was my concern also. I was more along the thinking of Hump in the fact that a one drop past turn one is pretty much useless in curve. I think team-stamping would have done alot to balance Frankie. I still hate the fact that we are more than likely never going to see free one drops. Like I said earlier cards like Lana Lang and Lois Lane are perfectly fine.

how about jamiez cullen?

What about jamiez [sic] cullen? She, like Haywire, is just a warm body.

You could argue that her cosmic surge could, in the future, enable uber-powerful combos. Of course, if you argued that, you'd be wrong.

Free characters (thus far) is NOT the problem. The problem is free characters that do too much.

-S