honestly i dont see any new cards besides like black panther that you could add to the deck thats "secret tech" that all of a sudden makes it alot better. give me a break :/. if you wanna think you and your group are "ahead of the metagame" continue to think that cus once silver rolls around you will see you are completely wrong.

You need a hug. You are sitting there all pist saying things about me and my group that I never said, all because in the small amount of time you tried to disect the deck you can't see what cards were added or subtracted to make it different from the last recorded deck list.


Lets take this topic back on track. I believe that Unaffiliated or Super-affiliated will do well in silver.

lol im not "pist". ill be in the army soon so #1 chances are this format wont apply to me since i wont be around playing it. #2 i am quite a decent deck builder i never base anything off of other ppls builds unless its to reference to something. #3 most builds are obvious, especially if they are aggro like MKKO where a good portion of the deck needs to be pumps.

so ya i simply just commented on how you think you have "secret tech" when the format isnt even gonna matter for 2 months. and then every1 will be playtesting. if we were talking about pc atl i wouldnt bother saying anything since you could in fact have secret tech and why would you want to say anything about it? but "secret tech" for a format thats missing a set and every1 has like 5 months to test it? ##### pleaseeeeeeeee

felix faust is probly the most we're gonna see from unaffils in sa.

Actually, tig, I am aware of a couple of decks that I am not allowed to mention in detail, as a promise to their creators. Here in NorCal, Silver Age is already being explored, and I've seem some promising off-the-wall decks taking shape. My recommendation? Untargetability and card draw are things you want to look for in a deck. :)

What I believe the others meant by 'secret tech' is actually more of a 'new tier' of decks that couldn't make a name for themselves in the Golden Age, but are viable in Silver Age. Several decks fit into this category, and it's just a matter of developing the format so we can find which are competitors, and which are just always doomed to failure.

Agreed on the unaffiliated tip, barring some zaniness in the IC set.

I personally always felt that unaffiliated cards should have gotten just alittle more power than the rest. Honestly, there is no thematic reason why at all. Most guys who aren't on a team are side guys anyways. BUT.. as a game mechanic, being unaffiliated is a pretty large drawback and it seems like it would have an equally large reward for playing with it.

But alas, unless you're an 8 drop, if you're unaffiliated you will most likely (not deffinetly by any means) see play

I would imagine Silver Age is being explored in lots of places, as it's actually an entertaining format for deckbuilders.
Lots of cards to work with, but without the Origins teams hanging over our heads.

unfortunately even with origins gone some teams are just bound to suck. i highly doubt that even with orgins gone teams like darksied elit,new gods,team superman,syn sind,revenge squad,x-statix,crime lords,underworld, manhunters,emerald enemies(by themselves) etc etc etccc. will suck. i mean really all those team couldnt cut it in a modern event so unless im seriously missing something big that they've gotten, why would they do any better in SA?

Oh for sure. I know it wasn't the Origins sets holding back Darkseid's Elite, it was the fact that they suck.

My point though was that people who fancy themselves rogue deckbuilders absolutely love Silver Age right now, because it seems to them to combine a large cardpool without all the ususal suspects in terms of other decks (and with less cost than Golden). Probably by the time San Fran hits they'll be sick of it and see Felix Faust in their nightmares, but for now they enjoy it.

I think the biggest thing to keep in mind is that "unaffiliated" aren't a team that should have anything remotely similiar in common. ok that sounds fairly obvious, but I've talked to people who talk as if they are... Most of these characters are either unaffiliated because they don't work with others, or because they simply often sit neutral in battles clinging on to teams where necessary, which you see through characters like x-23. there are different degrees of unaffiliated. Multiple Man is another interesting case.

Unaffiliated types of characters aren't thematically that much more powerful, in story, than any other character of equal power to justify overpowering them stat wise. I think over powering them would be dangerous. If they are powerful then they become 8-9-10 drops, the way it should be.

I do however think they are gifted with unique ability as often so many of them are in the comics. This gets depicted well through the cards. It is where they shine. Apocalypse and again Multiple Man are great examples. I interpret this to mean UDE wants us to make up which side of the battle these characters belong to, incorperating them into plans with other teams and such. not necessarily make them a giant team of enormous powerhouses. If they could form a real team they wouldn't be unaffiliated anymore, which would defeat the purpose of the game and the characters. their draw backs are the nature of their character. I don't think it should be tampered with and I think they've done a fine job with them. If it suddenly became a good idea to throw around unaffiliated characters. if it became "safe", then the game would be a farce.

Mechanically, characters with drawbacks ought to be better than cards without. It has nothing to do with personal power of the characters - Sabertooth (forex) isn't a particularly powerful mutant - but the CARD is powerful, because it has a drawback.

Basically, imagine that your unaffiliated character is, instead, an affiliated character with the following abilities:

Cannot team-attack
Cannot reinforce
Cannot crossover
Difficult to tutor for

I've said it before and I'll repeat it now: Morlocks get amazingly high atck in exchange for not being able to reinforce. Unaffiliated characters share the same drawbacks (and more!) but don't have anything to make up for it.

Would you play a character that required you to draw into a location just to gain abilities that other characters have built-in?

I look at the situation differently I think. Essentially I see the same thing you do but I say "ok well that's because UDE wants us to feel as if we have to take a chance with them on the team" or have an extremely well controlled environment to play them in. I don't think UDE wants you to feel safe playing a character who doesn't care about what team he's on or is a loner or what have you so naturally they make it tougher to use them.

Which, if you think of it, makes themactic sense. You can never make it safe to play them if you want them to have the same attitude on the playmat as they do in the comics. They almost have to be TOO good not to include, like in the case of putting Apocalypse in GLOCK. He's just too good not to include in that build. It took the power of will to tame the beast and put him to good use but it was done.

though mechanically I agree they suck mostly because I think alot of people see unaffiliates as a team or a coherant group. they say "wow as a whole they are hugely underpowered". But I think that thinking that way is a misconception of what it means to be Unaffiliated. I don't think they are supposed to represent a coherant group so in turn I see thinking of them as a group as contrardictory.

When I look at a new unaffiliated card I usually try to judge how it may or may not warrant being added to a deck I already have or a team that may exist based on it's ability and stats. I think this is probably where I have a distinct advantage of being more of a comic fan than a TCG player from way back. It seems painfully obvious that UDE will never change unaffiliated characters to suit this goal.

They don't play well with others. Fine, we get that.

But printing vast wodges of unplayable characters doesn't get that flavour across - it just makes it seems as though you have to be a team player of some description to ever show in a game?

Imperiex is one of the few examples of an unafiliated character who conveys that concept while still being playable.

He takes down everyone, including those supposedly 'on his side'. You can't play him without thinking 'man, this guy really doesn't work well with others'.

Unafilliated characters would have been a perfect place to, for example, put the X-Statix loner theme - they don't work well others, but they're dangerous, even on their own!


Make them risky, by all means. I mean, the Morlock huge guys are _risky_ - but that risk is worth taking, so the characters get to be played.

All the flavor in the world doesn't help a bit if the cards aren't good enough to be played.