you are one sick puppy. I like that.

Raise the endurance? Nooohhh... I just got my peace of mind back after adjusting from 20 to 50.

There are already some abusable strategies that will distill the game down into competitive versus casual play. If that is gonna drive you away, I wish you well. Making it even more wide-open by forcing it into the 8-9 turn range would drive me mad.

As a side (since like 7 posts came in while I was typing mine), I played some games last night using decks from every team but Sentinels. And there was actually a varied mix of outcomes from game-to-game. One game, a player got an early lead and "carried it out to victory". Another game I was ahead comfortably and assuming more of the same, when on turns 5 and 6 he completely took away my board control, and ran ME into the ground. Another game was an example "of too much direct damage too early", and the fourth game was just a back-and-forth blood-bath where we fought strategically every turn and at the end, the final score was something like 4 to (-2). That's a close game.

All I can tell you is, find a friend who already bought some cards, and give it an honest try with a couple different decks. From just reading rules and spoilers, I thought exactly like you, whoever gets more characters out first wins. But from playing multiple full games, I learned that wasn't the case and am now far more impressed with the cards/mechanic than I originally was....

I do not think the designers wanted to make the games last only 5-7 turns, otherwise they wouldn't have made characters like Dark Phoenix, Onslaught, or heck, even Frankie Ray. Also, cards like Gamma Bomb become fodder when you will NEVER get a chance to play them in a 5-7 turn game. It will be interesting to see what kind of "acceleration" we get in the next few sets to allow those power cards to become playable.

Hey Stu,

I never said anything was driving me away. I'm actually finding I like the game more as I play it more. I was just saying if people were THAT much against the 60/50, I'd rather see 60/80 than 40/50. That's all....

Drake, that's so true. In Sydney, we all picked up Lotr when SW:CCG died *sigh*. We also all stopped playing now I play Vs. and clix for fun. Everyone else picked up another game too whether Game of Thrones, Magic, clix, Star wars TCG, hell, as long as it wasn't by Decipher someone'll play it. We're just waiting for more stock of Vs. to arrive now, the first orders have sold out!

it is hard to keep up with the posts sometimes, this thang is hott.

I had the same experience. Since I quickly want to get qualified for the Pro Tour, I combined both the "spoiler" eye and the "playtest" gut... to find out that there is some consistency built in. Now, if I can only get qualified so I can tell the tale. So far, the first official stamp on this metagame will be Philadelphia on May 23. (and probably the 21st and 22nd)

What ghetto said about the many varieties of game finishes concerns me when I have my cutthroat competition hat on...(although I can stand to lose) ... but that could be a real boon for gamers looking for mad deckskill possibilities.

I don't buy that for a second. Look at Magic, there are novice lures in each set that get laughed at in the metagame. This game has gaudy baubles that were never intended for competition: Gamma Bomb, Onslaught, and that dirty dark firebird. That does not mean, of course, that they are not fun and will have a huge casual following... but when the money is on the line they will be conspicuosly absent from the hall.

Stu,

I'm sure you're right, there will be large a difference between the Pro decks and the local players. I'm just saying that for people looking for a game they can enjoy with other players in their area, Marvel is not as "One-Dimension/One-Outcome" that some posters would imply.

Heck, I'm sure all our different outcomes were a direct result of our desire to try different teams and different strategies. But that's what people can expect to see when at all but the "big money" tournaments.

Drop me line off-thread, you mentioned you'll be playing in Philly, and I'll be moving home to the Philly suburbs of NJ this summer....

Stu,

All I was implying is that, in most games, there is some sort of resource acceleration. I am sure that the designers has this in mind when they created "bomb" rares like gamma, onslaught, and dark pheonix. These types of cards are indeed gamebreakers and will see casual play until the resource accleration mechanic comes into play. They are not however, eye candy like Sundering Titan... or any other MTG huge creature that the kids like to trade for.

WarHulk and I will have a front row seat for the metagame in Philly. We're getting our geek on at WizardWorld East that weekend. I'm hoping for special Vs. cards...maybe some promos...add a little more variety to my decks...mmm...now that would be tasty!;)

Drake,

I personally feel those high-cost cards are for multiplayer games. Multiplayer games last beyond turn 7 and it's fun when you have 4-8 guys playing and someone drops a Gamma Bomb or Dark Phoenix and changes the whole game up.

I think UDE wanted to make sure that multi-player games used different strategies and decks to make the VS system more interesting.

It's already been mentioned here that any type of general resource acceleration will break VS in a 2-player scenario.

Man, I cannot wait until the multiplayer game when I drop a Gamma Bomb and a Pheonix on the same turn. SWEET!

Totally disagree. Those are just bad rares. They're for the Johnny-type players who get all worked up over a big, splashy effect. Every game needs bad rares, to separate the casual players from the very serious ones.

Unlike Magic, which has a diminishing returns mechanic for mana costs in creatures, Vs. has a very steep (basically exponential) increasing return for resource costs on characters. The intent of this is to reward good deckbuilding and decision-making... as well as move Vs. away from the pure card advantage game that Magic has degenerated into. (Blue wins again, you say?)

Given this, i don't think there will ever be significant resource acceleration in the game. Franklin Richards and Alicia Master are pushing the envelope of good, and their effects are restricted to a very narrow set of cards. Gamma Bomb can currently be played on Turn 7 if you play some wacky Latveria/Doom/Beast monstrosity.

I don't think the high-end rares are the bombs in this game. I think, given the incredible amounts of money to be made in Limited play (the one real format where Magic truly stands alone as the end-all and be-all of competitive, "Pro Tour"-style games), the bombs will be the best 4- and 5-cost characters.

Of course... never say never, but IMHO those cards are eye candy, and i predict that they will stay that way for the meaningful lifetime of the game.

I do not think that these rares are "bad" per se, just because of their cost, we see them as unplayable. The mechanics of the cards are cool, just way over-cost in the environment. Yeah, they are eye-candy, and you are right, in this game, atthe fast pace a game is played in, the 4-5 cost characters are the "bomb." In effect, I am agreeing with you, I can just forsee some acceleration (of some type, besides bad FF characters) coming into play somewhere down the line...

I think in order to criticise this game we have to give it more time. We are working with a first release 220 card game guys, with a card run of that size it was inevitable that one style of play was going to dominate. I also think we have to redefine our expectations on bombs, in the current environment sabertooth and Thing are bombs, not dark pheonix. In my gameplay experience turns 4 and 5 are where the game seems to swing. But to anyone who is mad that there is no viable strategy but beats, go play yu gi oh competitively for a day, where monsters are worthless and the whole game swings on who plays the godly trap/magic cards first. I"d rather fight with my critters, thanks.