I know Mobilize in a two-team deck will fail to be as consistent as in a mono-team deck. That's should be the trade-off you have to make for the power you gain from taking advantage of another team's abilities.

Gaining the abilities of multiple teams with no drawbacks is exactly why I'm arguing against Enemy.

And my point is that in an enviroment without EomE and with Mobilize, that difference is too great to make two-team very viable at all compared to mono, in general.

I would not mind that instead of one uber generic search such as EOME there would be more and different generic tutors. For example a "two team mobilize" which would need you to have 2 but exactly 2 teams in your deck. And instead of EOME you would have the neo-EOME with one additional discard to compensate for the fact that you can cherry pick what you want. They would still be powerful but less and not the auto 4-of in every deck.

i chose top ten before i started doing the work. i quickly realized that i left of 6 8-2 decks. i am a somewhat lazy person and didnt want to add in another 6 decks. i posted that list of stuff at 3:44. my previous post (time wise) was at 2:59 in the rules forum. that is 45 minutes and the bulk of that time was organizing the post with the list. another 6 deck would easily have added in 20+ minutes. thats too much work. but you are correct that several of those deck did have the cards i was looking for in them. you want to know what kind of differance it made, figure it out.



not when you are only adding 6 or less, which i clearly had in that post. most of the time IN THAT SITUATION you will not have one of those off team characters to add.

i know that for the B-Hood reservist stuff you dont really want to add too much off team because you dont want Team-Ups sitting in your resource row.

i havent played the Evasion, Conceiled, or Cosmic one of those to know how off team you can take it. so those deck may very well be able to go off team enough to make Enemy playable.



so, just make sure that you put the right persons name in with the quote. its not hard.

And I have little doubt that people will learn to build optimally around Mobilize, but there's no point in continuing this argument, because it can't be proven one way or the other currently.

Get them to print one of those cards, and I'll be more than willing to give up EomE.

Particularly the 2-Team Mob. I would highly prefer that to EomE in the environment.

However, such a card has yet to be printed.

But the thing is they have to pre-plan the ban of EOME beforehand. Otherwise you would either get too much good generic tutors in the environment or the new ones would barely see play because they would be too weak.

I am not sure they recognize that the power level of EOME is a problem, although I am guessing from the amount of loyalty coming up in the new set, they realize it's effects on the meta. I think they want to compensate for it with that. I honestly do not know if that will be enough but we will see.

It can be. All you have to do is build the decks and see. You can optimize your deck as much as you want, it will still never be as good as Enemy in a multi-team deck.

I think that says a lot more about the power of Enemy than the power of Mobilize in a 2 team deck.

I still have to see how many of the mono-teams with Mobilize can compete with a good multi-team deck with Enemy.

It was supposed to. No one is denying Enemy's power, we are denying that it is broken in any way. Because it's not. Not even a little.

what he said. in fact i said it a couple of times myself.

As I've already stated, I know it won't be as good as Enemy. That's why I'm arguing against Enemy, it's too powerful.

The part that you quoted (out of context) was in response to Access saying the power gap would be so wide between mono-team and multi-team decks playing Mobilize that multi-team decks would be unplayable.

I don't really see how it's out of context, but that's neither here nor there.

It's not "too" powerful, it is exactly as powerful as it is supposed to be. Overload is too powerful. Dr. Light is too powerful. Enemy isn't in the same catergory as those cards.

UDE made it with the intention to bring a powerful generic search to the game and that's exactly what they did. It doesn't do one single thing it's not supposed to.

Well it might be the difference with the definition of 'broken'. To me if a card is way more powerful compared to other cards in the enviroment(it is the best search by far), and it single handedly warps the meta (the whole cherry picking and silver bulleting only started to get serious with the card) is a good indication that it is broken. I will not even try to count in how many top decks it is a 4-of, which might be some sign that something is not right with the card.

Even looking back at the justification for the Dr.Light bannings a lot of those stuff applies to this card. But we shall see what happens in the future, in the end it is UDE that decides.

Altough I can guarantee you that the banning of it will occur within a week after I finally got 4 of them.

Isn't it always the way? :(