You are currently viewing HCRealms.com, The Premier HeroClix Community, as a Guest. If you would like to participate in the community, please Register to join the discussion!
If you are having problems registering to an account, feel free to Contact Us.
Well, I have a strong feeling this card will be banned now.
Usually when someone actually proves it with a deck list that is actually possibly consistant, it means someone else will find out a better way to break it, and others will follow, creating another metagame just like DC modern and glee (Which I was suprised they didnt decide to ban him then, although he was only broken at that time in modern).
In any case, will the game be weaker without frankie? Will previously fun decks be destroyed because other decks break it? Have people payed large sums of money getting a play set?
The problems with Frankie have been pointed out almost since the Heralds Prerelease. "Pushing the envelope" is not a good enough reason to print abusable, nay, degenerate cards that will wind up as useless cardboard as soon as the format changes.
Well to play devil's advocate - Pushing the envelope does sell packs. Man of Steel and Web of Spiderman stayed safely inside the envelope.
It's really a herculean task to create new expansions that
1. Satisfy the fanboy in all of us
2. Give us cards that we desire to play because of their interesting and powerful effects
3. Not break the game doing #2.
Too far on the cautious side and we are all bytching about the weaksuace Mos-like set that we're stuck with. Too far on the other side and we get a busted play environment.
Maybe it's too big of a task to be taken on every 90 days
I really am amazed at the last 3 or 4 (excluding legions) sets that UDe has produced and their effect and archetype changes to the game. And not just the constructed portion, but a vibrant limited format as well. OUtside of a handful of bustedness....
Maybe that's just the devil we have to deal with if UDE has to churn out sets every 90 days and we want sets that are interesting and powerful.
The hard bannings were the first time through the process. UDE just needs to commnicate an Omelette policy on Vs. Production. Something like:
"You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. We can't push out this many sets at this speed and make it interesting without letting a few goofs out the door. When the community uncovers those goofs, we'll act quickly and decisively and cards will get banned. Expect it and don't bemoan the loss of one card when we're trying to keep an environment filled with thousands of other cards rewarding and fulfilling."
So not turning away "scumbag netdeckers" (your term, not mine) is better than letting 20 other people get thrashed by a degenerate combo deck, thus reducing the likelihood that they will A. continue to play at PCQs B. Continue to buy new product because their OP experience was awful.
Two different issue. I specifically made the example of a player playing a NON-degenerate deck that uses a soon to be banned card showing up and getting screwed over. I also mentioned how I have fun losing as well as winning even though I do go out of my way to try and win. It's better to go all that way and play and lose than to go all that way and find out, "Oh sorry, you don't even get to have fun in the bottom pairing jank on jank match. Go home."
Quote : Originally Posted by CaptainCuba
I'm sorry if the other netdecks can't compete against this deck, but maybe it's time people started thinking outside the box instead of waiting for the Hagers of the world to tell them what deck to play.
You made the implication that playing a net deck makes you stupid. It's bull####. It's insulting. It's WRONG.
The issue of making bans effective immedaitely is ANOTHER seperate issue. Any OP organizer who made bans effective immediately should be reported to the proper officials and punished. That's just as bad as deciding to let players play Dr. Light in a PCQ on the 21rst.
As far as riding the fence, how ####ing ridiculous. I've NEVER been accused of riding the fence. Having contradictory thoughts is tough I know, drugs make you feel good, but they're BAD!? What!? (I don't even drink so, no I'm not saying you should use drugs...) Here, to clear the air...
Frankie Raye should be banned. Players should have 2 weeks in which to play her brokenness at a BARE MINIMUM before she is banned to avoid ruining plans. UDE banning a card immediately ruins plans. Players finding a broken combo and leaking it can ruin plans. One is in control of UDE, the other is not. Frankie Raye should be banned. I don't think Frankie Raye is half as broken in Golden Age as she is in Silver Age. Yet. Don't have 4x PP? Run AbDom and Mikado, respond to all KO effects with Mikado. It's not perfect, but it's better than you can do in Silver Age. Frankie Raye should be banned. I would play Frankie/Attend or Die/Hala if I had the cards and had a chance to go to Sydney. Or Frankie/Bomb if I found the win condition I thought gave me the best chance to win. Frankie Raye should be banned.
I don't think Frankie Raye is half as broken in Golden Age as she is in Silver Age. Yet. Don't have 4x PP? Run AbDom and Mikado, respond to all KO effects with Mikado. It's not perfect, but it's better than you can do in Silver Age.
No clue if you're serious about the alternative (AbDom/Mikado) mentioned above (I have a bad radar for online sarcasm), but it actually doesn't work -- M&M is combat only, and even if it wasn't the KO effects are past of a cost (as opposed to a resolution) and cannot be responded to on the chain. It's silver legal, but does nothing.
That being said, UDE did a great job responding to players' concerns before PCLA, and that ended up being an amazingly diverse and enjoyable meta. One can only hope that they continue in the same vein for PC Aussie. Being as I have a plane ticket already, I don't want to play in an environment where whoever gets initiative on turn 3 wins the game. I appreciate that UDE is pushing the envelope, and new and powerful effects are part of what keeps the game fun and interesting -- but that approach is going to have to result in some backtracking from time to time when certain cards get too big for their britches. The player base seems to accept this (the response to the pre-PCLA bannings was overwhelmingly positive, and Frankie seems to a be a parallel situation), UDE just has to understand that these things will happen from time to time, fix it, and move on. I'd a thousand times rather have sets that push the envelope than those that play it safe, provided that UDE realizes occasional bannings will be an unfortunate but necessary by-product and act on them accordingly.
UDE just needs to commnicate an Omelette policy on Vs. Production. Something like:
"You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. We can't push out this many sets at this speed and make it interesting without letting a few goofs out the door. When the community uncovers those goofs, we'll act quickly and decisively and cards will get banned. Expect it and don't bemoan the loss of one card when we're trying to keep an environment filled with thousands of other cards rewarding and fulfilling."
You just did it for them, why would they need to do it themselves?
Seriously, they have at least three or four equivalent statements on Metagame. Just go to the archives and dig through the Humphreys file. They explain their philosophies and thought processes every single time they make a decision on an issue like this. These forums tend to forget all that has come before, and make a brand new ultimatum environment whenever something evolves that is considered too strong.
I like your explanation alot, thanks. We should sticky that at the top of General Discussion or something.
No clue if you're serious about the alternative (AbDom/Mikado) mentioned above (I have a bad radar for online sarcasm), but it actually doesn't work -- M&M is combat only, and even if it wasn't the KO effects are past of a cost (as opposed to a resolution) and cannot be responded to on the chain. It's silver legal, but does nothing.
It also doesn't work because just about every relevant way of removing Frankie from the board KOs her or returns her to hand as a cost, leaving nothing for you to chain a stun effect (like, say, Rose Wilson 3) onto.
No clue if you're serious about the alternative (AbDom/Mikado) mentioned above (I have a bad radar for online sarcasm), but it actually doesn't work -- M&M is combat only, and even if it wasn't the KO effects are past of a cost (as opposed to a resolution) and cannot be responded to on the chain. It's silver legal, but does nothing.
Partially sarcasm, though I did space on a lot of the important details so yeah, I was wrong on top of that. lol Was a bit flustered while responding there.
I wanna just apologize to CC, right here, for anything I said that might have been worded too harshly and upset you before anything gets too out of hand.
Netdecking is a necessary evil, I know that. But at the beginning of the thread, all we had were VAGUE and UNDEFINED "Frankie needs to get banned" comments. That's why I #####ed about people thinking outside the box.
It sounded more like people complaining that TNNB/HV/DoomCrisis/FLAVOR OF THE MONTH was going to get the shaft from Frankie.dec.
It wasn't until a PRO out there CREATED A NEW ACCOUNT to spoil a decklist that we really knew how busted Frankie.dec and all it's variations could be. Why do the more casual PCQs have to suffer through this?!?!?
It's Wednesday, the PCQs are on the weekend, the decklist (which only select teams had) wasn't posted until today. How is an immediate ban going to hurt at all?
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE DECKLIST UNTIL TODAY!!!
So ok, save the precious PC that only effects 300 of you, but I'm sure that there will be more than 300 people at local PCQs throughout the country that will feel disgusted when some random netdecks this list and proceeds to ruin their first OP experience.
Didn't we learn anything from LightShow? Do you realize how many people went to the 10k knowing that they were gonna lose? How many people just sat there on turn 3-4 and watched not having a clue what was happening? I was there, I teched, unfortunately I never once played one of the number of LightShows there. So I was indirectly neutered because my match-ups sucked against everyone else.
But yeah, give them two weeks to play a deck they just found out about today and ruin a bunch of PCQs which may be the ONLY OP experience in an area. That'll bring in the new players. That'll boost sales. That'll make people want to come back and buy new product to compete.
Do you really think Vs can survive a Raffinity fiasco? My local store used to get 30+ people for Magic on Friday nights and Saturdays. They are lucky if they break a dozen since Raffinity and Skullclamp.
Either way, let's agree to disagree on the reasons why we're upset, I'm sure people on here aren't as interested in this back and forth as we are.
We both think she should get banned, you're loking out for your interests and I'm looking out for mine. They are both important to us, and neither one of us should be stifling the other's passion for the game.
So yeah...Unexpected Mutation + Nega Bomb FTW!
And because there is light at the end of the tunnel:
From the "other" Nega Bomb thread:
"turn 5 drop surfer 2 and doom 3
attack with doom, play unexpected mutation, activate surfer, put another nega bomb on top, play a second unexpected mutation. Viola, +32 attack :-) "
Kree can do Frankie cycling with Stargate and Penal Colony (that's not one but two extra freeplays of Frankie every turn with a tutor for extra deck thinning).
Ummm ... no. You might be able to bounce a 2-drop that you can exhaust with Frankie to get back Phantom Stranger a second time, and you could bounce Poison Ivy and get to use her a second time. However, you have to bounce a 2-drop to that effect ... Frankie doesn't count.
Quote : Originally Posted by exiledforcefrea
Or you can just bounce those characters first
In the example given, that would mean using FOUR copies of Remnant Fleet in a single turn ... just pointing out that while it's good, there is some tendency for hyberbole as to what it 'can' do.
Quote : Originally Posted by chdb
No, it really, really wouldn't.
So, the loyalty-reveal on 2-drop Black Thorn makes her unplayable because you only get Enemy on 3 and thus, before that, you don't have access to the tutors for the characters you want. However, the loyalty reveal that would delay Frankie until turn 3 in a number of games, not to mention adding extra cards which are NOT a win condition/engine component to be able to reveal to her [or getting two copies of her at once] to feed the engine would hit it.
Not arguing that adding it is a good solution, or one to be considered, but seeing as you've argued in the Black Thorn issue that her loyalty-reveal makes her worse than Frankie, but now Frankie having it wouldn't hinder her effect ... even though the turn you've stated her starting to go off is turn 2 ... the same turn as Thorn.
In the example given, that would mean using FOUR copies of Remnant Fleet in a single turn ... just pointing out that while it's good, there is some tendency for hyberbole as to what it 'can' do.
I personally don't even see why you bounce them. So they leave the game. So what? It's not like you don't have more copies by that point in your hand or discard pile waiting to be played.
So, the loyalty-reveal on 2-drop Black Thorn makes her unplayable because you only get Enemy on 3 and thus, before that, you don't have access to the tutors for the characters you want. However, the loyalty reveal that would delay Frankie until turn 3 in a number of games, not to mention adding extra cards which are NOT a win condition/engine component to be able to reveal to her [or getting two copies of her at once] to feed the engine would hit it.
Not arguing that adding it is a good solution, or one to be considered, but seeing as you've argued in the Black Thorn issue that her loyalty-reveal makes her worse than Frankie, but now Frankie having it wouldn't hinder her effect ... even though the turn you've stated her starting to go off is turn 2 ... the same turn as Thorn.
Walter, for the love of Christ you have to get off this Black Thorn thing.
Speaking as someone who actually has built and played numerous Frankie decks, although you want to play her on 2, it's perfectly acceptable to play her on 3 instead. It's a bit of a slow start, but so what - it's just a game where you win on turn 5 rather than turn 4. Since Frankie is free-alt-costed, this is not an issue, whereas playing Black Thorn on 2 kind of sucks ###, but that is because Black Thorn is not that good.
Please, stop making nitpicking, irrevelant comparisons. Please. You're too intelligent to not realize that Loyalty-Reveal is a very, very minor thing for a free character in a combo deck, as opposed to a non-free character in whatever the hell deck you would run Black Thorn in.
Please, stop making nitpicking, irrevelant comparisons. Please. You're too intelligent to not realize that Loyalty-Reveal is a very, very minor thing for a free character in a combo deck, as opposed to a non-free character in whatever the hell deck you would run Black Thorn in.
Then stop making broad stroke generalizations, you're too intelligent for that.
Saying that certain things "won't hurt Frankie" when you mean "she'll still be a problem in spite of it" severely undermine your cause.
Losing Ivy and/or Stranger WOULD hurt Frankie. The alternatives for getting her off the field rely on hitting team-ups WITHOUT using Ivy to search them out in addition to hittin the cards that let you bounce her.
I play Devil's Advocate, it's what I do. When you make false claims by generalizing, exagerating, or maginalize things, it is less likely that people will listen to you, which includes the people you need to convince to ban this card [which is not me, my opinion on the matter is irrelevant in that scheme of things. Now if you need a Raw Deal card banned ... we could talk ...]
Broad generalizations are highly inaccurate. Including this one ...