Junior Member
lul.Originally Posted by Robchulan Go to original post
1100 player here and this combo is completely 100% ******ed and needs major nerfs.
If you had any idea of the game, you'd know that Void Arbiter is useless because part of the spell cycle is like 7 AOE dmg spells, which the void arbiter won't survive long enough for her effect to do anything. And as for the event, it counters him for ONE turn. Or max 2. This combo is stupid OP and chain casting prob needs major nerfs. Ppl defending this are most likely playing this combo, end of story.
And BTW, people saying Amman needs 5 or 6 or however many mana for this combo to happen, need to take a fking look at academy cards maybe.
Even most lvl 1 cards give passive, very very balanced "play this creature to gain +13 to mana levels".
He can reach those levels in like 2 turns.
Senior Member
Junior Member
Member
Manage your event cards that show up at random? That don't guarantee anything but maybe a 1 turn delay in you dying?Originally Posted by schattentaucher Go to original post
Try again
Senior Member
Well, when you put 8 well selected events (namely 4x Blind Arbiters + 4x Path of Ancestors) the randomness is not that important is it? And definitely you'll get a bit more than just 1 turn of the delay.Originally Posted by Freyjan Go to original post
BTW. I wonder how Amman deals with magic resist creatures. I bet it gives him some headache.
Of course the Ammar players made some mistakes. Of course there could be some improvement made with their decks - the deck is very young and people try to improve it.Originally Posted by Freyjan Go to original post
First game, the opponent kept a pretty bad hand from the looks of it, and overplayed his stone shields. Also..contagion?
Given the super slow hand Enclase had it should have basically been an autowin for Ammar.
Second game, Ammar seemed to go way too deep before being able to certainly discard Cosmic Singularity and thus milled himself. Enclase had at least one super lucky draw as well but overall I would say this was poor play on the opponent's part, and even the best deck will lose with a bad pilot behind it.
Apologies but I didn't get to watch the third or fourth as I have to rush out, but I would certainly like to check them out later. I did watch a stream of him and a few others playing as the Ammar deck though and all of them just kept laughing the whole time as they racked up free wins
But Enclases play wasn't perfect as well, was it?
In real life it is really hard to find a flawless game from both sides.
Member
Im quoting this from David Sirlin's book "Playing to Win: Becoming a Champion" because i couldn't have said it any better.Only in the most extreme, rare cases should something be banned because it is “too good.” This will be the most common type of ban requested by players, and almost all of their requests will be foolish. Banning a tactic simply because it is “the best” isn’t even warranted. That only reduces the game to all the “second best” tactics, which isn’t necessarily any better of a game than the original game. In fact, it’s often worse!
The only reasonable case to ban something because it is “too good” is when that tactic completely dominates the entire game, to the exclusion of other tactics. It is possible, though very rare, that removing an element of the game that is not only “the best” but also “ten times better than anything else in the game” results in a better game. I emphasize that is extremely rare. The most common case is that the player requesting the ban doesn’t fully grasp that the game is, in fact, not all about that one tactic. He should win several tournaments using mainly this tactic to prove his point.
It will take some time for the metagame to settle down, and even if Ammar is the best deck of the format afterwards, there's still no reason to nerf or ban him.
Member
Did he provide any... reasoning? to go with this? Because that's kind of lacking here.Originally Posted by Pascoalabear Go to original post
Member
http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/what-...be-banned.htmlOriginally Posted by amoshias Go to original post
Member
No, I trust that if you've got an actual point you're capable of making it. A link to a random online essay doesn't really say anything, except as a meaningless appeal to nonexistent authority.Originally Posted by Pascoalabear Go to original post
Member
DId you not read my comment and the excerpt i posted? there were tons of actual points in there.Originally Posted by amoshias Go to original post
* Banning or nerfing what's currently best only makes the current "second best" deck the new best and puts you in the same spot as before...
* The metagame is not yet stable / Players do not yet fully understand what the metagame looks like and how to prepare and play against Ammar
* There are enough counter-measures to Ammar available for people to react. Its not even close to being "ten times" or however much better than the rest of the competitive decks.
* People who think its too good should prove that point by winning multiple tournaments with it. If its truly too good and nerf-worthy this shouldnt be a problem. Ill count losing to mirror-matches in the later rounds as a success aswell, just to be fair.
