I was just reviewing some posted rules on the overpower.ca site for the upcoming tournament in Buffalo.
The ruling concerning avoiding attacks with a "x" icon...... which may be used to avoid any attack from a battlesite because of the shadow of icons from the activator. While I may not agree with it, I accept it. Which leads me to this question...
May I remove a hit with an "x" icon when "x" does not appear on the attack in cb or pr, but it was from a battle site, so it has this "shadow" of other icons?
Quote from: DiceK on February 16, 2013, 01:39:47 PM
I was just reviewing some posted rules on the overpower.ca site for the upcoming tournament in Buffalo.
The ruling concerning avoiding attacks with a "x" icon...... which may be used to avoid any attack from a battlesite because of the shadow of icons from the activator. While I may not agree with it, I accept it. Which leads me to this question...
May I remove a hit with an "x" icon when "x" does not appear on the attack in cb or pr, but it was from a battle site, so it has this "shadow" of other icons?
This is a great question! I'm not even going to this tournament ( :'() but I'll be watching for this ruling!
Nope. The attack has landed and lost all memory of the activator or any card it was played "with".
To be a bit technical about it, after an attack lands it becomes a hit, which removes said properties.
interesting.
bbh played me, and argued any hits from the battlesite counted against my site once spider-womans marvels was in play (all hits with fighting icons count for venture against battlesite)
the wording seems pretty clear, so i agreed with his interpretation. that implies that hits have some kind of 'memory'
You... misworded the special, though it is quite a confusing card to use.
Original:
QuoteSpider-Woman's Team's attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count towards Venture total for remainder of game. May be played from Reserve.
Recommended:
QuoteSpider-Woman's Team's successful attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count towards Venture total for remainder of game. May be played from Reserve.
Our's:
QuoteFor remainder of game, Spider-Woman's Team's successful attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count toward Venture total. May be played from Reserve.
From the wording, it counts the
attacks made, not
hits. My explanation differentiating the two is in my previous post.
--
After this was brought up to me (sometime after your match against BBH), I realized this possibly breaks a few game mechanics. Firstly, it breaks the fact that you need to keep memory of said activators, which is not entirely difficult. But what if you landed an AE, say a 4S+7F, does it count the whole 11 or just the 7?
And secondly, it's the only card that adds a current/permanent record for the Battlesite.
It might have been better to completely change the card to remove the problems above. But that's something I didn't want to do because I wanted to leave the Marvels set as close as possible to the source.
Quote from: Jack on February 17, 2013, 12:26:42 AM
After this was brought up to me (sometime after your match against BBH), I realized this possibly breaks a few game mechanics. Firstly, it breaks the fact that you need to keep memory of said activators, which is not entirely difficult. But what if you landed an AE, say a 4S+7F, does it count the whole 11 or just the 7?
And secondly, it's the only card that adds a current/permanent record for the Battlesite.
It might have been better to completely change the card to remove the problems above. But that's something I didn't want to do because I wanted to leave the Marvels set as close as possible to the source.
Or an AnyPower power card combined with a 6+3F Basic Universe. Hmm... actually, I think there's a Meta rule about this-- that attacks that were combined become distinct hits once they land. One of the few good Meta rules that actually clarifies how the game works.
I've always thought of this card as "For remainder of game, hits on Opponent's Battlesite's
Hits to Current Battle count towards venture."
In other words, whenever you calculate venture, look at the card. Does it have a F icon? If so, it counts towards venture.
I agree other interpretations break the game engine. Cards have no memory of what they were combined with, or who they were played from, etc, etc.
Who came up with the ruling that avoid 1 card with a fighting icon could be played against any attack from a battlesite, regardless if the card that is actually used has a fighting icon?
This was never acceptable during tournament days. This idea of battlesite cards having a "Shadow" or "Memory" is new, and definitely not the way the game developers intended.
If this tournament allows that, fine, I have no problem w/ that; however, i'm going to want to play the sentinels EA card from my battlesite which allows all cards with a strength icon to be removed from my pr, for the very same justification of "Shadow" or "Memory".
Quote from: DiceK on February 17, 2013, 12:33:31 PM
Who came up with the ruling that avoid 1 card with a fighting icon could be played against any attack from a battlesite, regardless if the card that is actually used has a fighting icon?
QuoteMeta #18: When a Special indicates a card with a specific icon then it includes cards with the specific icon OR cards that are being played along with a card with the specific icon.
Quote from: Norm BarthQuestion: Are the icons on an activator in play? - "Dum Dum Dugan" - Avoid energy draw one. - Do I play this against the Energy Icon on the activator or the special it pulls? AND IF SO can I decide after I see the special (sneaky idea); Quicksilver - Avoid energy no energy against - So can no activators now be played against him? (1997-11-02)
Answer: You can use "Avoid 1 attack made with an Energy icon" to avoid an attack made with an activator. You must wait until the attack is made before doing it though, so you can't avoid it before it comes at you (after all, it may not even be an attack), so you must avoid it after it's been made against you.
As for Quicksilver's AGILE AVENGER card, that card specifically states "NO ENERGY POWER CARDS" may be played against Quicksilver. Although it contains an Energy icon, an activator is NOT an Energy Power card. nice try, though.
Quote from: Norm Barth (again)Question: Can Nick Fury's Dum Dum Dugan [LO] block a special card coming from the Battle site since that attack would always include an Energy Icon from the activator card? (1997-12-21)
Answer: Yes
So following this logic, please answer the following question:
My opponent attacks with a Teamworks (6E +1F +1S)
The 6E Teamwork card I allow to hit.
The 2nd attack (2F power card with the +1 Bonus = 3F Attack)
My response, avoid 1 attack with an Energy Icon....because the original TW had an energy icon. You can mix and match that however you'd like. Am I correct with this logic?
Also, I'm still looking for a ruling on Overhaul (EA). I disagree with the idea that the activator is used as part of the attack as a basic universe card would be. The point of an activator is to exchange a card from your battlesite. It's not to play along w/ an attack.
I can understand both arguments on this, and I don't really care either way, I just want the Buffalo Tournament ruling on it....which obviously I've been given for the activator attacks.
yes, you can use the 'avoid 1 attack with energy icon' to avoid:
the initial tw attack (6e), or either of the follow ups (f or s)
overhaul: i don't think you can use for activators. jack has argued that hits are distinct from attacks, and it's a solid arguement
so what exactly is the ruling on the spider-woman card? i understand that the card distinguishes between attacks and hits, but venture is calculated at the end of the battle by adding up hits, not when making attacks (my head hurts ;))
The teamwork scenario would be perfectly legal.
How I understand the Activator->Battlesite: the attack encompasses the exchange of the Activator card from hand for a Special underneath the Battlesite and played immediately. The entire attack is actually two pieces instead of one, the first being the exchange, the second being the Special (as opposed to one: just the Special from the front line). I'm including the exchange as part of the attack action, so it inherits the traits of both the Activator and the Special.
I do not subscribe to the idea that the Activator should ever be played together with its Special.
Quote from: breadmaster on February 17, 2013, 02:25:35 PM
so what exactly is the ruling on the spider-woman card? i understand that the card distinguishes between attacks and hits, but venture is calculated at the end of the battle by adding up hits, not when making attacks (my head hurts ;))
For now, I consider the card flawed because it refers to attacks instead of hits.
I was thinking of a game mechanic for the card where you can exchange hits on the Opponent's Battlesite (with Fighting icons) to be used to bump up your venture total at the end of the battle. So if you landed 4M, 2S, 6F Power cards in previous rounds, and you were down by 5 venture, you can selectively choose to use the 6 in that round to win venture (and keep the 4M tucked in for later use). Wording of such a card requires a lot of thinking which I don't have the time for.
what if the SW card was errata'd to 'hits' instead of 'attacks'?
i do like the versatility of jack's wordy suggestion though!
So it would probably be something like:
QuoteFor remainder of game, hits from Current Battle with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite are added to Spider-Woman's Teams' Venture total. May be played from Reserve.
That removes one of the weird mechanics, the other one remains.
...
Maybe..
QuoteFor remainder of game, at the end of each battle, Spider-Woman's Team may remove hits with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite. Hits are added to Venture total for that battle. May be played from Reserve.
So, is the idea for her card to make the hits count every battle there after or just in the round that the battlesite is hit?
That's where I am getting confused.
Also, 'with' would be inclusive, about this avoid any attack made with an energy.
The intent was only for cards in the current battle. It was a mistake to not further clarify it on our rewording of the card.
http://overpower.ca/cards/specials/1299.png
theres the card in question
you decide
visual clarity jack
for remainder of game fighting icons count for venture total (and successful attacks are hits that determine how venture is determined) ;)
doesnt sound that hard to understand
sorry im late with my reasoning
but yeah thats why im here jack
but you guys go ahead and talk more about erratta and and other things that are not on the card
Quote from: steve2275 on February 18, 2013, 05:03:20 AM
http://overpower.ca/cards/specials/1299.png
theres the card in question
you decide
Why are you even posting? What do you think the other 13 replies have been about?
Quote from: Jack on February 17, 2013, 04:52:01 PM
So it would probably be something like:
QuoteFor remainder of game, hits from Current Battle with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite are added to Spider-Woman's Teams' Venture total. May be played from Reserve.
That removes one of the weird mechanics, the other one remains.
...
Maybe..
QuoteFor remainder of game, at the end of each battle, Spider-Woman's Team may remove hits with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite. Hits are added to Venture total for that battle. May be played from Reserve.
First, I agree that the "shadow" icons shouldn't matter, relative to "hits" whether that's for the Spider Woman card or for cards that Remove hits (like Sentinel's EA or Colossus' ET).
Second, I agree that the first re-wording of this Special (an errata, like as it was called) would be a good move. Referring to the "Successful hits" as opposed to the "attacks" would clear up the issue, as long as my first point is true (that "hits" lose their "shadows"). But also, what's the second "weird" mechanic you mean, Jack?
Third, (and maybe I'm misunderstanding this still), but I wouldn't want this card to change into a "Remove" of any kind, because I definitely want these hits to eventually KO the Battlesite, as well. Especially if I'm using this card as my OPD from a Battlesite for a Fighting team.
The second mechanic would be the separation of current and permanent hits on the Battlesite.
Quote from: Jack on February 18, 2013, 11:21:53 AM
The second mechanic would be the separation of current and permanent hits on the Battlesite.
Are you implying that, playing it as written (with the word "attacks" as opposed to "Hits"), the card would make those attacks count toward Venture, perpetually? i.e., if I landed Longshot's One In A Million ( ;)) then I would get a "+3" to my Venture total
every Battle, not just the Battle that the attack was successful?
...
it seems, to me at least, that the issue of current/permanent hits is resolved in your revision:
"For remainder of game, hits from Current Battle with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite are added to Spider-Woman's Teams' Venture total. May be played from Reserve."
The intent was to only allow hits from current battle to be counted toward the venture.
Going through the revisions of the card's wording:
Quote from: #1Spider-Woman's Team's attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count towards Venture total for remainder of game. May be played from Reserve.
Quote from: #2Spider-Woman's Team's successful attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count towards Venture total for remainder of game. May be played from Reserve.
Quote from: #3For remainder of game, Spider-Woman's Team's successful attacks with a Fighting icon made against Opponent's Battlesite count toward Venture total. May be played from Reserve.
Quote from: #4For remainder of game, hits from Current Battle with a Fighting icon on Opponent's Battlesite are added to Spider-Woman's Teams' Venture total. May be played from Reserve.
From #1 to #2 (which was Nick's suggestion), it added
successful attacks to the card. (They are more commonly known as hits.)
From #2 to #3, BBH and I had a discussion before the prints were made on the card and any abuses. We felt that moving FROG to the beginning of the card removes any confusion as to whether or not attacks with Fighting icons added to the venture total each and every battle.
#3 to #4, that's my interpretation of how the card should have been worded and what its intent was. Even from #1, there was no intention of having the attacks count every battle,
it was clarified (http://overpower.ca/archive/Ripayuheadoff/marvelguide/FW.html):
QuoteWhen Locations were introduced, there was no need to separate a Battlesite's Hits to Current Record and Permanent Record as none of these hits counted for Venture. With the introduction of this card, it is now necessary to have a Current Record and a Permanent Record for the Battlesite that functions just as they do for Characters.
Another thing to point out is that there are 3 other cards from The Marvels that also play into the current/permanent record of Battlesites. The OJ specials (Alpha Flight, Domino, and Shadowcat). So maybe the new mechanic was actually warranted?
Quote from: http://overpower.ca/archive/Ripayuheadoff/marvelguide/OJ.htmlIf used against the battlesite, after the battle in which this card is played, it would be moved to the battlesite's Permanent Record. See the "Other Info" section for code FW for additional information.
--
For your third point about wanting to keep hits on the Battlesite for KO purposes. That was my compromise for avoiding the second mechanic. But it appears to be evident that the Battlesite should have 2 records like Characters because of these 4 cards.
Yeah, this is basically what I meant, Jack. I don't think I've ever understood Battlesites to not have separate Current/Permanent Records. Mayber that's why I didn't realize there was a problem...
Also, yes, moving the FROG to the front (and really, adding the comma) definitely helps clarify that the Venture count is only good for the battle when the hit landed (which is as it should be).
I always just assumed that battlesites had a current battle and a permanent record.
It was never required since the hits never counted for venture. Until recently, there hasn't really been much attacking of the Battlesite at our meetups.
No doubt no doubt... I guess that's why DoW was made. lol So, will we be playing by this new current battle mechanic at the Buffalo Event?
It doesn't matter if there are two records for the Battlesite or not, unless any of these 4 cards are played.
Quote from: Jack on February 20, 2013, 10:07:02 AM
It doesn't matter if there are two records for the Battlesite or not, unless any of these 4 cards are played.
Or unless someone gets the crazy notion to KO a Battlesite regardless, kamakazi-style!! My brother doesn't play with DoW, so occasionally he'll make a deck using Venture-resets and go after a Battlesite directly :o
Quote from: thetrooper27 on February 19, 2013, 10:14:47 PM
I always just assumed that battlesites had a current battle and a permanent record.
I have to admit, I always thought EVERYTHING had a Current Battle and Permanent record-- characters, specials in play, battlesites, home bases, everything.
It's just that the only thing that counts to venture are Hits to Current Battle on Characters. That's why hits to an EB special doesn't count to venture. It isn't a character.
there's also the krakoa aspect 'living island'
...though it really shouldn't count, really decreases the usefulness of the card. i guess if you can get 2 or 3 out, then you can venture big in a subsequent battle and trade venture hits, forcing the opponent to concede or risk ko. maybe i'll have to give this card another look
Quote from: halcyon1234 on February 21, 2013, 03:54:52 PM
Quote from: thetrooper27 on February 19, 2013, 10:14:47 PM
I always just assumed that battlesites had a current battle and a permanent record.
I have to admit, I always thought EVERYTHING had a Current Battle and Permanent record-- characters, specials in play, battlesites, home bases, everything.
It's just that the only thing that counts to venture are Hits to Current Battle on Characters. That's why hits to an EB special doesn't count to venture. It isn't a character.
http://overpower.ca/pages/rules-fight.php?#rules-knocking-out-the-battlesite
Knocking Out the Battlesite—It should be noted that, just as a Battlesite has specific conditions on how it may defend itself, it also has specific conditions on how it is K.O.'d. A Battlesite may be K.O.'d in only one way.
The Cumulative K.O. for Battlesites—At the moment the Value of all of the Hit taken by a Battlesite add up to 30 or more. This includes all Hits in the Permanent Record and Hits From the Current Battle. (See Hits) Remember, this is the only way that a Battlesite can be K.O.'d. A Battlesite may never be Spectrum K.O.'d (See Spectrum K.O.)
Quote from: breadmaster on February 21, 2013, 06:22:06 PM
there's also the krakoa aspect 'living island'
...though it really shouldn't count, really decreases the usefulness of the card. i guess if you can get 2 or 3 out, then you can venture big in a subsequent battle and trade venture hits, forcing the opponent to concede or risk ko. maybe i'll have to give this card another look
this is different because these hits are moving to the HOMEBASE, not to the BATTLESITE. so the Homebase would still not be KO'd