If anything, you're killing the game by banning Enemy because Ivy League needs Enemy the LEAST. With a simple rearrangement of characters, they are more efficient in a world where Silver Bullets cannot be as easily retrivied. Without Enemies, the meta would look MORE familiar and cocations like Chess League wouldn't even be thought of.

And if the PC isn't innovative, I don't know what is anymore.

All I really want to say is this: As a former MtG player, I only began playing VS because my roommate wanted me to play it with him. I collected a few cards and built a net-deck for the sole purpose of teaching myself how to play decently, but after looking at the cards, they seemed so limiting. I had honestly planned on selling all of my cards and quitting, but decided to wait until the new sets had come out. Now that I've learned more about the game and have seen X-Men and Crisis, I love the game and have 3 original decks and 1 net-deck (titans, which I never play with). I think the game is great the way it is, and I'm happy to see a combo deck do well, even if it does have its holes (that's the point of a combo deck, win against the unprepared and lose against the prepared). It is monotonous to play against decks you can name after the 2nd or 3rd turn, especially when you are just at a hobby league trying to have some fun. While I'll agree that the price tag of the card is insane, we are all playing a ccg. That's just the way it goes sometimes unfortunately. I'm a student, so I know what it is to have a budget, I personally only have 1 copy of the card, but I'm trying to be creative in ways to get my hands on it. I could just as well decide to not play with it and get creative in finding ways to play the game without it. For the time being, I am playing the game without EomE, but I'm attempting to collect a playset incase I decide I want to play a multiple team deck in the future.

Point being, I think the card is bringing something to the game a lot of players aren't used to and don't like yet. That doesn't make it a bad thing for the game. Any card that takes limits off my deck building is a good thing.

Agreed - I laughed so hard at that.

They should have put a headline on FTN's deck: MARVEL KNIGHTS DECKS A FORCE IN THE META AGAIN.

lol

ha, a lot of players? come on, you must be joking. There is no way the majority will be able to cope with the card; it rewards those who pack the cash to get a playset & leaves the rest of us in the second tier minus a few select decks that can contend without it.

Its fairly simple: the card needs to be made into a common or lowest hobby league rare.

otherwise, the rest of us are left to find a way to combat it. That means finding a way to team up viably without it, running mono, or major tech. I agree with whoever said that it is downright criminal to make such a powerfull rare such a staple and so expensive. there's no way in hell im going to get my playset for under 200 before the 10K. thats enough for like 10 copies of the whole damn squad deck.

and how is this new situation not monotonous?

I enemy for bullet one
I'll enemy for another bullet.

this will be the gist of what we see.

Basically it's when you play Reinforcement of the army for whatever warrior helps you in yugioh. is it a warrior deck, no, but it wins. I think it is going to be the DEATH of mono builds. because there is no need for them.

I very much disagree with your 49 out of 50 argument - look at the numbers at the Pc and it'll show that the greater # couldn't get their hands on a playset. Imagine what it's like for the hobby league regulars.

And you do have a stratified play situation.

And like I said earlier, it's already starting to sour a bunch of players.

Warrior decks suck =/ They lose to monarchs and chaos.

And that was the game. You picked a style of play (Team attacks had TT, Plot Twist control had Doom, Equipment had FF.) Or the team you like the most (Go Superman!) and you played. If you could just slap anything you wanted in a deck, it took away from the whole team theme this game was based on. (And don't give me that crap about it not being a team themed game. The first thing they taught people at the GenCon demo a year before the game was realsed, was team attacks, reinforcement and team targeting plot twists.)

What I've seen more and more per set (then doubled with EOME) was "who cares about team" and "This is a pro sport" it tossed the ideas of the game out the window. With that and the shady things I see at tournaments of all sorts makes me wonder if they do not want new people in the game, or if they want to make it more YuGiOH style, to gain players. (Under handed things, how is the one that gets me the most. People throwing games in order to lower someone elses standings, so they won't come place higher than a friend.)

In LARP we call them munchkins and power gamers. People that learn to bend the rules to what they want, only want the best of the best, but try to avoid the drawbacks the come with it. In order to puff up their chest and look down on anyone else. Just last week, I watched some kid who spent way to much of his parents money for a netdeck of 6 teams, laugh at some new player who cracked open a starter deck and learned to play the night before, all over the type of cards the new guy used, and the fact he lost. If we go back to teams matter, then we can see those new people hold on, and not have to worry about people cherry picking the best to avoid the worst part of their team.

Even better would be...

Spider Friends and Underworld win the PC!

OOH!

That's where you're coming from???

CCGs aren't RPGs. Your perspective will be completely erroneous if you consider the both similar enough to compare that way.

When you say, "I watched some kid who spent way to much of his parents money for a netdeck of 6 teams, laugh at some new player who cracked open a starter deck and learned to play the night before, all over the type of cards the new guy used, and the fact he lost," the person you're descibing is a jerk. You can't say he's the same as the majority of players in this game.

I played MtG before I got into RPGs. RPGs is what got me into VTes and Warlord. Have noticed most gamers play MtG or did. And lot play VS, YuGiOh, or WWE and you can tell the type of gamer they are by how they play cards.

As for the "jerk" it's one of the things I noticed that the people giving others the hardest time are the people that have the money (be it from parents, or they spend more than they should on CCGs) to buy high proced cards, and who also net deck only. Not saying that all people that have the cash/netdeck do that, just that the ones doing it fall into that group.

Jerks are jerks. I have lots of money and I netdeck, but as far as I know, I'm not a jerk. Although I do have a playset of EoME.

I know lots of people without money or netdecks who are jerks too.

You own/run a store, right? So you can set the rules for your games...making up your own tournament structures is one of the best things you can do for the casual game.

Because most players on the PC, while competative, aren't jerks like that. But most aren't 13 years old, either.

So what does EomE do? Let's analyze and see what is good and bad for the game:

1. Provides consistency to team-up decks - Good because teamups open up the game.

2. Allows single character tech slots. - Good because your not auto-screwed vs a problem deck.

3. Makes single team affiliation decks obsolete, since no single team affiliation deck will have the range of options and answers available. - Bad because it will scare away players that love the scope and lore (comic books) of VS.

4. It's a power rare. - Bad because it will scare away new players and non-power gamers. I think that it's messed up to make such an obviously powerful card a rare as it divides the community into those that can get a playset and those that cant. Please dont say trade for it, thats not realistic if you don't want to trade a million cards for it.

So 2 good and 2 bad. I don't know. One thing is for certain, the card is here to stay. UDE will NOT ban this card. They have stated thier stance on banning in the past and EomE doesn't fit into it. So I guess we just gotta learn to live with it.

Peace.

I think you misunderstood me. I said a lot of players DO NOT like the card because it brings a lot of openness in deckbuilding possibilities. That is something I welcome strongly.

As far as price goes, dual lands in MtG are expensive as all hell too. If you want to run a consistant 3 color deck with the ideal cards it will cost you $20 x 12 + 4 city of brass. Not exactly cheap, but I don't hear many MtG players complaining about it. For the record I only own 1 enemy and only play mono-team decks atm because that's what I can afford to run, but I'm not a hardcore player like some others. I plan on eventually owning 4 enemies, but who knows when that will happen. If I don't get them anytime soon, I'll just keep tweaking my mono-team decks and feel good about them when I get them competitive enough to beat the 5+ team net-decks with 4 EomE in it. CCG's are expensive to play, it's just the nature of the beast.

If we are talking about the card without the price tag, I don't see how it is monotonous to have just a few staple cards in the game. Every card game (as far as I know, but I've only played 2) has it's staples. As long as we all dont' end up playing the same multi-team decks and end up using enemy to get the exact same guy my opponent fetches every turn, it's a good thing. Just because you disenchanted my black vise and I disenchanted your sylvan library doesn't mean the game is now monotonous.

I don't know jack about YGO so I don't have any idea what you mean by that reference.

All I'm saying is that for some people, the game as it was got boring. Deck building didn't have a lot of flexibility due to team specific strengths and weaknesses. This is why I said I think the card is bringing something to the game a lot of players aren't used to and don't like yet.