lol Actually the original Intergang deck relied on SNO to clear the field on turn 2 or 3 to try and push through. Not that it worked very often even then. lol

-Mike

Sorry but what is SNO?

LOL Well, lookie what we got here folks! It's a NEWB! ;)

SNO is an acronym for Savage (Beatdown) Nasty (Surprise) Overload.

-Mike

Well I see. But Overload could blast them away if Punisher´s Armory is used only one time. And to win you have to use it more than one time I guess.

True, however it would rather have Overload and be able to use it to ensure they can swing to the face, even at the cost of the opponent possibly hitting their copy. Also, if they have enough copies of Intergang in play stunning ONE of the characters won't be enough. However, they still need 3 attacking directly to win.

I really believe one day they will get the right boost. Checkmate is good with them.

You've got to understand that at this point, I don't care if they never unban it. It will always be an awful decision in my eyes.

Other parts of the game are just as hard to deal with, but are left alone regardless.

I still play, and I am still passionate about the game even if I disagree with the way aspects are handled at times.

I can give a list of reasons to keep things from being banned, and I can give another list of reasons to ban things. People act like it is some kind of sin to disagree around here. I promise you: it isn't.

I missed day two at the PCSF because of the silliness of discard from Arkham inmates. It was highly irritating. Did I deserve to lose for not preparing for it? Sadly, the answer is yes. Do I think the card should have been banned? Truthfully? No. I hate it to death, but my sense of fairness says that at the end of the day, it should not be banned.

But. I still won't lose any sleep over any of this either way. I don't agree with banning cards as a practice. I think there are situations where a card might need to be temporarily banned until a magic bullet can be created or something like that happens.

Have fun with the game, whether you agree or disagree. :)

And you will always be wrong in everyone else's (except maybe I3ullseye's).

Not everyones.

The root of the problem wasn't Overload, and the argument was made that Overload being in the game made future developments problematic. The same reason ARB was banned... as long as it was around, they had to limit all the other equipment they could possibly add for fear of that interaction.

Overload makes those 0 attack characters on teams VERY Vulnerable, and i get that.

But that being said, we now have WAY more cards in game that protect you from a plot twist like overload. And the number of cards that prevent you from stunning while attacking is up also. And they aren't even team stamped. And with the Cloak (you know, that nice 0 cost, non team stamped item in EVERY friggen deck now?) you can't be overloaded anyway.

In the end, they decided to remove a card to make their development task easier. But what they did was remove an element that was not the real root of the problem. And while it may have limited their future development plans, how many massive pumps do we now see that can target an opponents attacker? It isn't like that one card was stopping them from printing a dozen new attack pumps.

Overload mostly slows down swarms. And no, System Failure is no valid replacement. It is rare, and only removed that attacker... which is fine, that replaces the tricksy side of overload. But what card has then been added to the system that can impact overly large characters on defense? Or when not in combat? The entire true utility of Overload has NOT been replaced.

It slows swarms... but 4 copies of Overload stops 4 attacks if used in that manner. A swarm deck has way mroe than 4 attacks to throw at you on their way toward winning a game... so this doesn't stop it anyway, just gives you a bit of breathing room.

The deck (Ivy League) loses a lot of power without Dr. Light. Still a really broken machine but, Darkseid 4 drop also pretty much kills it. You can flip JLOA as many times as you want but, Darkseid 4 keeps us even, lol.


Coolexplosion

And that my friends is how VS System became Yu-gi-Oh 2

lol discard your hand before ur build plz rofflecopter

Coolexplosion

Not by very, very long shot.
UDE has yet to errata the same (VS) card 7 times.

Or restrict you to playing 1 copy of EoME or Ahmed in your deck.

If you unbanned OverLoad, so many plot twist "pumps" from the first few sets would need to have an errata to "character you control." Unless they reprint every one of them in a legacy set with this new wording, Overload would still be destructive.

I have actually lost quite a few games due to OverLoad. Back when Fantasticfun was around, at the end of the draw phase they played overload before I could replay ACNV, and losing that character with the Flamethrower lost me the game. And everytime I played TnB against a deck with Rama Tut in it... owned. Sure, I could have "teched" against it with not so fast.... but why should I have to waste an important card slot on that when I needed it for something else, that wouldn't have been a dead card for anything else?

And for the record... playing Insect Swarm is not a wasted card space for "tech" against Ahmed. If anything it's just 2end loss for target opponent. And if your playing a deck with DC characters, I would like to direct your attention to Removed from Continuity.

This is an arguement that is pointless, because if they truly wanted to unban OverLoad, I believe that it would have been done already. And what compensation would all of those people who turned in their banned EA for TTG! recieve. I know that an unbanning of OverLoad would make me mad if I traded it for TTG! just to want it back.

Just my two cents.... or less.