All things taken into consideration, who would you consider the single most powerful character pre-Marvels, and why? It's a tough choice for me, but I think I'd go with Professor X. Great totals for 3 and 4 stat which make him a great choice for those expensive E/I decks, and he has a great selection of specials.
I think it comes down to Mr. Fantastic vs. Donald Pierce.
Fantastic has a non-avoidable OPD that wins venture, an 8 stat (the most valuable thing in the game), and only costs 17. Two other usable special cards and a third situationally useful card gives him great balance. Non-avoidable specials that win venture are the best cards in the game, 8 stat characters are essential, and his low cost gives you access to the higher point total characters.
Donald Pierce is the most useful dual stat negate character, and has a neutral cost of 19. His specials are on par with Scarlet Witch, and in certain decks the access to Deathstrike is a huge boon.
Both of these characters are powerful even when graded in a vacuum. That is to say, if Character X was a 2852 with Mr. Fantastic's specials, he would still be considered top tier. However, when you take into account that Fantastic and Donald Pierce both have intellect as their main stat, that gives them a tiny edge over characters like Spawn, X-Man, Scarlet Witch, etc. Not only are intellect icons the most scarce (and thus the most valuable for spectrum KO), they are also the least likely to be impacted by other cards. This means that you gain access to cards like Shockwave Rocks the World, but much more importantly it means you are immune to your opponent's likely Anti-Energy and Anti-Fighting cards.
Our group conducted a poll a while ago to vote on the best characters. Since character strength is relative to the overall goals of your deck, the conditions were that you already had a nameless team consisting of an 8 stat character, a negate character, a glue character, a character that can play cards from reserve, and synergy between Battlesite/Events. If an imaginary fifth character was added to that lineup, rank the top 10 characters you would be most likely to use. To control for point cost, there was an imagined bonus or penalty depending on the sum of your fifth character. For example, for each point over 19 your fifth character is, opponent is +2 to venture in the first turn. The actual penalty isn't important, but it just acknowledges that characters who cost less than 19 should be considered more valuable. The results were:
1. Donald Pierce
2. H4H
3. Scarlet Witch
4. X-Man
5. Starjammers
6. Spawn
7. Professor X
8. Mr. Fantastic
9. Reavers
10. Beyonder
This was a very simplified point system, with no weight given to position. Any first place point received ten points, second place received nine points, and so on. Due to this, The Reavers came in ninth place even though only one voter included them in his top ten. This is a pretty good gauge, but I'd drop the Reavers for X-Babies. Invisible Woman and Cable are hovering right around the top ten too, I'd maybe put one of them higher than Beyonder. Of course, the cool thing about Overpower is that there is generally no way to quantify value (which is strange to say about a game that revolves around betting on who has the highest numbers). So in any given deck, the cohesion of the lineup may make a team of lower rated characters much more powerful than a deck composed of strong characters without a unified strategy.
good post, but of course, i have to disagree with an 8 stat being the most important thing in the game
Quote from: Onslaught on October 02, 2011, 06:38:16 AM
I think it comes down to Mr. Fantastic vs. Donald Pierce.
Fantastic has a non-avoidable OPD that wins venture,
and what OPD would that be?
Quote from: breadmaster on October 02, 2011, 07:59:43 PM
good post, but of course, i have to disagree with an 8 stat being the most important thing in the game
Even before accounting for special cards, eight stat characters automatically add three or four cards to your deck. The average venture of those four cards added by an eight stat character is 7.5, which is over 25% higher than the median card in most decks. Adding non-duping cards to a deck is extremely important, even if they aren't particularly useful. For example, A-Next and ally cards are low to venture and have marginal effects, yet they are a staple in every deck. Now compare them to how much venture an 8-stat character brings to the table, and the value of 8 stat characters is plainly evident.
Outside of raw numbers, 8 stats also provide virtual card advantage. All other things being equal, eight stat characters are harder to kill since they have access to extra defense. They bring extra offensive efficiency, since they can more easily make the precious level 10 followups to teamworks (as well as launch teamworks that allow a level 7 powercard to also reach 10). On top of all that, the overwhelming majority of games that go into the power pack are decided by whichever player has the helathiest 8 stat character(s). When you consider all those positive factors (on top of a deck designed around maximizing those strengths), it becomes clear that 8 stat characters are the strongest.
Important Distinction: While they are the most important thing in the game, it doesn't mean they are mandatory. Certain combinations of special cards, inherent abilities, and other various comboish interactions can combine in ways that give you an overall output that is better than what you would have gotten with an 8 stat character. I don't want newer players to read this and think that Overpower deckbuilding follows a confining template, because it doesn't.
On an individual basis of comparison though, a 7 stat character would have to have around NINE (!) playable specials in order to have more value than an 8 stat character with just average specials. Very few characters can reach this threshold. Cable comes close if you play him in a team without any other energy or fighting characters. Once again though, it's hard to quantify Overpower. Some cards should count more than others when determining if they come close to having "nine" specials to be comparable to an 8 stat. How many specials should something like Viking Pyre count as? Two, because it's so powerful? Maybe even more since it can remove the less useful/higher duping/lower to venture cards that you were forced to add by not having an 8 stat character. Or, you could even make the argument that Viking Pyre alone is enough to make Thor better than an 8 stat character since you may be using a deck that can win the game immediately after playing it. What about a character with an AI in a Thor deck? No eight stat character has an AI, and AI's help clear the way for your venture winning cards like Viking Pyre. If a seven stat character has an AI but only brings six unique cards to the deck, does the synergy between Thor and the AI character make up the difference in those missing three deck spaces that an 8 stat character would fill? The math can't take things like this into account. However, the math still shows that you need to have a damn good reason for not playing an eight stat character. One of the most fun aspects of deck building is trying to find out what those "good reasons" are, and subjective card evaluation like this is one of the things that makes Overpower so great.
(http://www.marveloverpower.com/orangeking/files/images/Mr.%20Fantastics%20Inventive%20Genius%20-%20IQ%20-%20C.preview.jpg)
If I had to pick a single character, it would have to be Mr Fantastic:
- one of seven 8stats that saves at least two points on a 15 or 16 grid team
- has an AR
- has AD for teammate
- the above pictured HQ
Also, one thing that I've noticed about Mr F is that he seems to be a VIP in my decks, both because of his useful cards and his AD for teammate. It adds to his intrinsic value: putting less cards in for him and anticipating his dying first has been beneficial for me with past decks.
Also, Onslaught pretty much said all of that, I just thought I'd add my two cents.
;D
I'd still say ProfX > Mr. F
Mr.F is a point cheaper - no real debate there.
I think his HQ is more or less equally valuable to Prof's BG, as a non-avoidable venture-winning card. BG can be played defensively, too.
I think Mr.F's AR is less valuable than having access to 2, non-dup, off-suit TW cards
Considering Mr.F and ProfX are often both first-targets for an Opponent, I'd consider that Mr.F's teammate AD is less useful than ProfX's AG/AH availability.
I think his AV is exactly the same as Prof's AV ;D
It's a good debate, though. I guess for me, in the end, it looks like this:
Gambit > Professor X > Mr.Fantastic 8)
Explain to me how Gambit is the best?
(http://marveloverpower.com/OverPower/Marvel_OverPower/MarvelOverpowerPics/mopspecials/MrFantastic_InventiveGenius.jpg)(http://marveloverpower.com/OverPower/Marvel_OverPower/MarvelOverpowerPics/mopspecials/ProfessorX_TelepathicCoordination.jpg)
I would have to value an HQ over a BG because, played correctly, an HQ can win the venture by itself. Now, the BG is killer, don't get me wrong, but it still requires other cards to make it effective.
What defines an "Action"?
Quote from: Onslaught on October 02, 2011, 06:38:16 AM
However, when you take into account that Fantastic and Donald Pierce both have intellect as their main stat, that gives them a tiny edge over characters like Spawn, X-Man, Scarlet Witch, etc. Not only are intellect icons the most scarce (and thus the most valuable for spectrum KO), they are also the least likely to be impacted by other cards. This means that you gain access to cards like Shockwave Rocks the World, but much more importantly it means you are immune to your opponent's likely Anti-Energy and Anti-Fighting cards.
This is one thing I actually really like about Professor X. He's free to use the 8E when he can, but if it gets shut out or has its effectiveness diminished he has that 7I to fall back on. True, he's a point more expensive than Mr. Fantastic, but I think that extra point is greatly outweighed by having two high-value stats whereas Fantastic is really just a single stat character. X's 7I is a high-value supplemental utility stat whereas Fantastic's 8I, while certainly higher, is all he has.
I also think X's self defense, specifically the AG and AH, are bigger boons considering he's a top-priority KO. Fantastic's AD is certainly nice, but it's completely useless against someone who is prioritizing him. Prof's BQ isn't worthless for defense either, and it helps
everyone on the team. Thus giving him yet another boost to his defense.
Offensively I don't think there's any contest. Professor X can play two teamworks, has two stats to deal the pain with, the AQ, and the BG in certain situations. You might eventually lose access to the teamworks, and the specials are one-shots, but the dual stat doesn't go away. I've found that to be real helpful with the power pack, assuming it gets that far, since you have two stats to work with for the spectrum. Fantastic's AR is nice, but it would be
much more useful if it were in any other stat.
I guess it boils down to situation, but tit-for-tat I think Professor X is simply more powerful and useful than Mr. Fantastic.
Quote from: a_noble_kaz on October 03, 2011, 02:46:28 PM
(http://marveloverpower.com/OverPower/Marvel_OverPower/MarvelOverpowerPics/mopspecials/MrFantastic_InventiveGenius.jpg)(http://marveloverpower.com/OverPower/Marvel_OverPower/MarvelOverpowerPics/mopspecials/ProfessorX_TelepathicCoordination.jpg)
I would have to value an HQ over a BG because, played correctly, an HQ can win the venture by itself. Now, the BG is killer, don't get me wrong, but it still requires other cards to make it effective.
The HQ needs a good draw (of the top 3), the BG needs a good draw (of the initial hand).
Even if you wait till you have no more cards in the battle, the HQ has the potential to backfire by drawing unusable cards (dead specials, TW you can no longer follow, Events, etc).
The BG can't ever really backfire that way. As soon as it's played, it's effective. Even if you get it with a hand that has zero iconic cards (lol, "iconic"), you place it and when you play it the next hand, it
will be effective.
So If you were playing HQ and Played a BG before it, you get to draw 5 cards?
Quote from: DiceK on October 03, 2011, 03:53:30 PM
So If you were playing HQ and Played a BG before it, you get to draw 5 cards?
sorry, no. The BG only adds 2 to icons on a card. So, all power cards, all attack specials, and defensive specials
if they have an icon-value, like a CC, or an MH (from THE MARVELS).
Telepathic Coordination is my favorite card in the game, but it's not even close to being as good as a Draw 3. Telepathic Coordination has no tangible effect on the current venture, so it can't be seen as a venture winning OPD. The HQ doesn't scale with anything about the game state other than how many unusable cards you have left in your deck. If your deck is well constructed, the HQ is going to be worth at least 15 points of venture. The BG can only impact the current turn's venture by killing a character with placed cards or with special cards still in hand. This is difficult to accomplish, and even when it happens the HQ usually still has a larger impact on the current turn's venture. The BG usually effects venture in two ways: a) forcing an opponent to concede to keep a character alive, or b) KOing a character and gaining future card advantage due to unusable discards. Those are both good outcomes, but neither of them help you in any of the following situations:
1- On the opening turn, Telepathic Coordination is essentially a free card for your opponent. Even with the +2 bonus, seven cards against eight is not going to pose a KO threat unless your hand is all attacks.
2- On a turn where the opponent bet for the win, Telepathc Coordination is again a free card for the opponent. Losing characters means nothing on the final turn of the game, so a lot of your +2 attacks that are harder to defend would have actually landed anyway. Meanwhile, Telepathic Coordination is adding nothing to venture compared to their card X. If card X was an HQ, the hand would be a total blowout.
There are more defensive decks than offensive decks, so in general Telepathic Coordination is hard to maximize. If we both have 10 cards and I see that you have a Telepathic Coordination placed, I can freely bet an extra mission and not worry too much about it. If I am going first, that's even more of an advantage against Telepathic Coordination. If I have a "get off me" effect from the battlesite, once again I can count your Telepathic Coordination as a dead card to venture.
Since it is such a unique effect, it is hard to account for its overall impact on a match. It's extremely powerful when it works properly, but it is highly dependent on the game state. Meanwhile, an HQ is good in any situation - it helps you bet for the win, it helps you survive against an opponent who bet for the win, it's good even if you're going second, it's good on the opening turn of the game, it's good even if the rest of your hand doesn't have a lot of attacks, etc.
i agree 8s are important, but from what i've seen, specials are far and away the most important thing when picking a character
in fact, i'd even put inherent ability above an 8 stat
I disagree about the BG not being tangible for calculating venture. If I have a BG, then I can count almost all of my Power cards as +2 to Venture, because I can block down. You attack me with a 4, and I block it with a 2, that means I've gained 2 venture points. The fact that I can get BG into play on a defensive action, means that it cannot be negated either, unlike the HQ.
Also, even the most well constructed deck is going to have times where a HQ pulls unusable cards, or marginally useful cards. Saying that you can count on 15 points of venture from a HQ seems like over-confidence in the most classic sense.
I'm not saying BG>HQ. I'm not even saying the BG=HQ. I'm just saying depending on a lot of factors, they are close.
Quote from: breadmaster on October 03, 2011, 05:45:54 PM
in fact, i'd even put inherent ability above an 8 stat
Even the best inherent ability in the game (Invisible Woman) doesn't even come close to the added value of an 8 stat character.
And to the point about picking a character based on special cards, well a lot of 8 stat characters have above average special cards too. An 8 stat character with average special cards is better than a non-8 stat character with amazing special cards. An 8-stat character with good special cards is the most valuable thing in the game unless your deck has a very specific gimmick.
QuoteIf I have a BG, then I can count almost all of my Power cards as +2 to Venture, because I can block down. You attack me with a 4, and I block it with a 2, that means I've gained 2 venture points.
This is false, because blocking is a zero sum game. Unless your deck is positioned to trade hits and has a hand of almost entirely offense, that trade up blocking will never factor into the way the venture points for the turn play out.
QuoteThe fact that I can get BG into play on a defensive action, means that it cannot be negated either, unlike the HQ.
This doesn't outweigh the fact that the BG is bad on the first turn, mostly irrelevant on the final turn, and potentially irrelevant on other defensive turns. If a game lasts 4 hands, then the BG is bad 50% of the time. Of course you can construct your deck in a way to try to make the game last longer than four turns, but in the average match the BG is not impacting venture.
QuoteAlso, even the most well constructed deck is going to have times where a HQ pulls unusable cards, or marginally useful cards. Saying that you can count on 15 points of venture from a HQ seems like over-confidence in the most classic sense.
A well made deck dupes at roughly a 1:9 ratio. Most decks have an average of around 5.9 venture per card. If you are playing the HQ as late as possible, it's always going to be gaining more venture than any other card in the game. On top of this, you can keep characters alive longer, threaten more KOs, etc. Even if the HQ draws 2 dupes, the ~6 that it will add to venture is more relevant in the later stages of the game than the extra offensive pressure provided by the BG. It's not really close at all, even when you base an entire deck around maximizing the Telepathic Coordination turn.
if 8s are more important, than a deck built around them should beat a deck built around specials, no?
dracula is going to get wiped out by ghost rider every time
Quote from: breadmaster on October 03, 2011, 07:28:53 PM
if 8s are more important, than a deck built around them should beat a deck built around specials, no?
Every deck in the game is built around specials. A deck built around specials with an 8 stat character is going to have a huge advantage against a deck built around specials without an 8 stat character, it's just that simple. That's why your example of Dracula is poor - he has no playable specials. A better comparison would be Ghost Rider vs. Spawn for their similar costs/multi-stats.
Like I've said three times now in this thread, there are very specific lineups that have an interaction of unique special cards that can make the deck as powerful as a team with an 8 stat character. Those are few and far between.
i'd say my example is not poor
by taking someone like spawn, you're hedging and taking a character with good specials
ghost rider is max 6, with great specials (as far away from 8 as you can get without using xbabies)
dracula is 8, with crap specials
therefore, a team of 4 ghost riders with unique specials against a team of 4 draculas with unique specials would be the ultimate test of your theory that an 8 is more important than specials
What does that have to do with Overpower, at all? Spawn is a good 8 stat character, but we should use an unplayable character as a basis of comparison because he might not be good in some theoretical four Dracula vs. four Ghost Rider format?
Even then, your scenario doesn't support your position at all. The four Dracula deck would destroy the four Ghost Rider deck, so I'm not sure where you're going with this. For an example of what that match would play out like, look at a Mission Control era matchup of an energy deck vs. a strength deck.
The math suggests that eight stats add an insane amount of tangible venture advantage (as well as incalculable advantages from level 10 teamwork followups). My personal anecdotal evidence over the last fifteen years agrees with that notion. Objective historical tournament data with >30 participants backs this up. In order to refute these things, you'll have to provide more substance to your opinion than "yea but Dracula sucks."
I don't care how terrible his specials are, I love Dracula in Overpower! But yeah, he's unplayable if you actually want to win . . .
I think Onslaught has made a very cogent analysis on the value of 8-stat characters. I completely agree and think that the depth of his analysis is excellent. Also, he has taken into account the exclusion of an 8-stat character in favor of a deck that is built to gain the same benefits through a different means.
I think the question of who the best character is is really interesting. As ncann has pointed out, your favorite character is probably the best character because you get so much joy out of playing that character. On the other hand, Mr. F and Prof. X are terrific. I don't have an IQ Mr. Fantastic, so I vote for Professor X. That way I can feel a little happier about it.
Quote from: Onslaught on October 03, 2011, 09:01:34 PM
What does that have to do with Overpower, at all? Spawn is a good 8 stat character, but we should use an unplayable character as a basis of comparison because he might not be good in some theoretical four Dracula vs. four Ghost Rider format?
Even then, your scenario doesn't support your position at all. The four Dracula deck would destroy the four Ghost Rider deck, so I'm not sure where you're going with this. For an example of what that match would play out like, look at a Mission Control era matchup of an energy deck vs. a strength deck.
The math suggests that eight stats add an insane amount of tangible venture advantage (as well as incalculable advantages from level 10 teamwork followups). My personal anecdotal evidence over the last fifteen years agrees with that notion. Objective historical tournament data with >30 participants backs this up. In order to refute these things, you'll have to provide more substance to your opinion than "yea but Dracula sucks."
Quote
1. Donald Pierce
2. H4H
3. Scarlet Witch
4. X-Man
5. Starjammers
6. Spawn
7. Professor X
8. Mr. Fantastic
9. Reavers
10. Beyonder
How are X-Babies not on your list? They have a negate, and one of the top 5 cards in the game?
very interesting thread!
i use dracula and ghost rider, because they are the two extremes
one has great specials, but not so great stats, the other has great stats, and lousy specials
if you want to compare the value of specials vs a character with an 8, you CAN'T use an 8 who has good specials. you have to isolate the things you are comparing.
and do you really think 4 draculas would beat 4 ghost riders? that's just madness
didn't BBHs team and mine in the last tournament show that specials trump the power characters?
Quote from: breadmaster on October 03, 2011, 10:24:27 PM
and do you really think 4 draculas would beat 4 ghost riders? that's just madness
Anyone who played the game during Mission Control can tell you that the Dracula team would dominate. It's acutally "madness" to think otherwise.
They would have equal access to the pool of: Any Hero/battlesite cards, allies, level 1-6 powercards, events, etc. So we'll consider them to cross cancel each other out.
The Ghost Rider deck would have: 6E TWs, 6S TWs, 6F TWs, Penance Stare, 8M, 6E AR specials probably x2 or 3 just to get to 56 cards, and some AIs.
The Dracula would have: 8I TWs, 7I TWs, 6I TWs, 6S TWs, 8i powercards, 7i powercards, and maybe some of his 5e special.
I can't predict the exact numbers, but to get to 56 it would probably be 3 or 4 copies of most good non OPD cards. Going by that, the unique cards of the Ghost Rider team average around 6.375 points of venture over 15 cards while the Dracula team would have an average of 6.6 over 20 cards. This means the Dracula deck has consistently higher venture while also having lower duplicates. Blocking in this ridiculous theoretical matchup would be pointless, so pretty much the higher raw number would win the majority of the time. There's no more need for discussion of this imagined matchup anymore, especially since it was based on a faulty comparison in the first place.
Quotedidn't BBHs team and mine in the last tournament show that specials trump the power characters?
No, nothing is ever proved by such an insignificant sample size. Variance from a handful of matches tells you nothing about statistical truths. Plus, those decks only faced off in the finals because the other two top 4 decks (both featuring 8 stat characters) were disqualified due to factors that have nothing to do with gameplay.
I'm not going to debate this point anymore, because you've provided nothing to back up your statements and it's starting to get tedious.
10 people playing each other once is an insignificant sample size?
edit:
also, the ghost rider deck would NOT have 1 of each of those specials. they would have 3. plus a opd for reserve ghost rider.
plus the marvels draw 3s
each ghost rider special is unique to one of the ghost riders. (ie: ghost rider alpha, ghost rider beta etc)
Quote from: a_noble_kaz on October 03, 2011, 02:46:28 PM(http://marveloverpower.com/OverPower/Marvel_OverPower/MarvelOverpowerPics/mopspecials/ProfessorX_TelepathicCoordination.jpg)
shame the profs i a isnt to play that from rerserve
Interesting topic. I agree on both sides of the table. I like to include 8-stat characters on my teams, but at the same time I include teammates with good specials.
Quote from: Onslaught on October 03, 2011, 06:40:45 PM
Even the best inherent ability in the game (Invisible Woman) doesn't even come close to the added value of an 8 stat character.
well now, as a footnote to this topic, we had our meetup on saturday with the max6 theme
however, a bunch of players didn't bring max6 decks
mine was built around the 3 inherent abilities of gordon/beetle/invisible woman (+2 to venture/battle)
against non max 6 decks (all of which had an 8 stat character, except bamfs wundagore team) the deck went 5-2
[/steath brag]
Non-stealth reality check:
Then the decks you were playing against sucked.
lol...never give an inch, eh? ;)
EDIT:
FYI: one of the wins came against my beyonder deck, a deck that most defenitely does not 'suck'.
It's not very good either. That being said, you can draw your own conclusions about the skill of a player using 8E Beyonder decks losing to Gordon max 6.
Quote from: Onslaught on October 26, 2011, 02:09:07 AM
It's not very good either. That being said, you can draw your own conclusions about the skill of a player using 8E Beyonder decks losing to Gordon max 6.
the same conclusion i can draw about the skill of a player using 8E Beyonder decks losing to a morbius max 6?
the same conclusion i can draw about the skill of a player using 8E Beyonder decks losing to a puppet master deck?
clown...
I have absolutely loved this debate. And I must say that I agree with Onslaught that in a 1 vs 1 scenario 8 stat characters would have a definite edge over non-8 stat characters even with better specials. Where as in a team setting specials and IA's can be used to elevate many characters into "most powerful" range.
But what I have loved most of all is Bread's final quote to Onslaught.... ouch man.
Do they not have statistics classes in Canada?
Quote from: Overtime on November 23, 2011, 04:35:58 AM
Do they not have statistics classes in Canada?
lmao
The '96 Bulls team that went 72-10 in the regular season lost to the 21-61 Toronto Raptors that year. According to Canadian statistical analysis, this game proved once and for all that not only was Damon Stoudamire more effective than Michael Jordan ("high stats don't mean everything, Stoudamire has great inherent talent") - but also some guy name named Brendan Malone was a better coach than Phil Jackson.
perhaps you failed to grasp the meaning of my last post
you feel free to make sweeping generalizations about skill levels when results don't go as you predicted. then you hide behind words like 'sample size' and 'outliers' when evidence further mounts against you
so which is it, onslaught?
are you going to apologize for disparaging someone's skill level based on one match? (by refusing, of course, you damn your own record, as YOU were the one who lost to morbius/puppet master decks with a beyonder 8 deck)
or are you going to back down, and admit 8s just maybe aren't THE determinig factor?
Quote from: breadmaster on November 23, 2011, 05:59:08 PM
you feel free to make sweeping generalizations about skill levels when results don't go as you predicted. then you hide behind words like 'sample size' and 'outliers' when evidence further mounts against you
You've yet to provide any evidence.
Quoteare you going to apologize for disparaging someone's skill level based on one match? (by refusing, of course, you damn your own record, as YOU were the one who lost to morbius/puppet master decks with a beyonder 8 deck)
You're right, a buggy program with invisible placed cards killing characters at key moments using Looney Tunes cards that were never tournament legal (not just The Marvels; 6 anypower teamwork is a very bad thing for the game) against a non-Marvels deck is totally worth dwelling on and completely invalidates math, tournament data, and logical reasoning. Good thing there were no rematches in top cut, as you wisely DQed half of the qualifying players so you could move on as quickly as possible to the next tournament with a grand total of four entrants.
Quoteor are you going to back down, and admit 8s just maybe aren't THE determinig factor?
The cool thing about about facts is that they don't require someone to "stand up" for them, nor do they allow anyone to "back down." They speak for themselves. Sorry for your lack of ability to comprehend them - let alone provide a worthwhile reply to anything that's been posted in the thread so far. Arguments from perceived authority, ad hominem arguments, and anecdotal evidence are all meaningless in this discussion.
Quote from: Onslaught on November 23, 2011, 06:55:03 PM
Quote from: breadmaster on November 23, 2011, 05:59:08 PM
you feel free to make sweeping generalizations about skill levels when results don't go as you predicted. then you hide behind words like 'sample size' and 'outliers' when evidence further mounts against you
You've yet to provide any evidence.
Quoteare you going to apologize for disparaging someone's skill level based on one match? (by refusing, of course, you damn your own record, as YOU were the one who lost to morbius/puppet master decks with a beyonder 8 deck)
You're right, a buggy program with invisible placed cards killing characters at key moments using Looney Tunes cards that were never tournament legal (not just The Marvels; 6 anypower teamwork is a very bad thing for the game) against a non-Marvels deck is totally worth dwelling on and completely invalidates math, tournament data, and logical reasoning. Good thing there were no rematches in top cut, as you wisely DQed half of the qualifying players so you could move on as quickly as possible to the next tournament with a grand total of four entrants.
Quoteor are you going to back down, and admit 8s just maybe aren't THE determinig factor?
The cool thing about about facts is that they don't require someone to "stand up" for them, nor do they allow anyone to "back down." They speak for themselves. Sorry for your lack of ability to comprehend them - let alone provide a worthwhile reply to anything that's been posted in the thread so far. Arguments from perceived authority, ad hominem arguments, and anecdotal evidence are all meaningless in this discussion.
All of this just seems like a fancy way to say that you blew it and were able to back up your grandstanding blow-hard ways when it counted. And you can rant and rave all you want, and make as many excuses as you need to feel better about it, but you lost and not only did you lose, but you were the only guy in that whole tournament who bitched and moaned and whined about almost every match you had.
You are a very good player and you build very strong teams I lost 2 out of 3 to you and conceded the other as a draw, but your poor sportsmanship is also unparalleled and it makes you one giant pain in the ass.
dude you can't always be right. Learn to accept it and get on with your life.
You are starting to look like an over intelligent 5 year old pitching a fit just because you didn't get the candy bar you wanted.
Geeze
yet to provide evidence...are you mad?
i've provided plenty of evidence. whether you decide to accept it or not (not...big surprise) doesn't discount the fact that it's evidence
as far as your points about the tourney...sour grapes much?
you knew going in that it was a marvels tourney; how you build your deck is up to you. as far as classic inserts, i can only assume you're referring to BBHs game (as i didn't use any). if you were done in by a single 6any tw, that says more about your deck's strength/the skill level of the person operating it than it does one (not very powerful) card. and as far as 'invisible anext', as you said, i mentioned that i placed it, so the onus is on you to remember. hell, i've never even heard of anyone complaining about a placed card disappearing before, and i've played a few games of opo. but as oscorp mentioned, complaining was what you did best in that contest. finally, as far as me DQing people so i can quickly (quickly...HA!) move on to the next tournament: i suppose a month to play a 1 hour game wasn't enough...would another month have been enough?
seriously bro...that whole section about the tournament seemed like a whiny brat's response.
a month between posts, and that's the best you can come up with?
Quote from: Oscorp on November 23, 2011, 07:38:35 PM
dude you can't always be right. Learn to accept it and get on with your life.
Erm
Quote from: OscorpAnd I must say that I agree with Onslaught that in a 1 vs 1 scenario 8 stat characters would have a definite edge over non-8 stat characters even with better specials.
What am I not right about? You're agreeing with the point I'm making.
Quotea month between posts, and that's the best you can come up with?
Yeah it's a wonder why I don't post here more often. It looks you've made lots of interesting contributions towards keeping things nice and active though, and the boards have truly been booming with new content lately.
i don't know about 'booming' but a couple minutes of research showed in the last month, i've created 3 topics, that have generated over 40 replies (not including me) and over 450 views
keep digging
So, the prospect of just ignoring each others jabs is right-out, eh? I mean, if you really just want to argue/fight with each other, there has to be a better way then on the public forums, isn't there?
I get the logic that fighting in public kind of incites folks to back your cause, but it's been going on for a couple of months now, and with each new point/jibe, it appears it will not be ending soon, regardless of whomelse supports your views.
You have science and facts backing your arguement? Great!
First hand experience tells you otherwise? Rock on!
You don't have too agree, hell you don't even have to like each other, but is your personal pride really worth taking away the actual value of these forums?
Now be adults and let it drop please. Last I checked, this thread was about opinions of who is the strongest character in the game, and I for one, feel that it's a character without an 8 stat: The X-babies. Sure in a hypothetical one-on-one match their lack of an 8 stat might do them in, but on a team, they always bring some useful toys to the party.
Quote from: Demacus on November 25, 2011, 08:35:57 AM
Last I checked, this thread was about opinions of who is the strongest character in the game, and I for one, feel that it's a character without an 8 stat: The X-babies. Sure in a hypothetical one-on-one match their lack of an 8 stat might do them in, but on a team, they always bring some useful toys to the party.
Agreed.
Friends and I played it out several years back... and the winner... one vs one.... Dark Phoenix.
There you go.
And personal opinion based on arguments and everything... it really depends on your team... so the X-Babies work due to low cost and usability. Mr.Fantastic would have sucked on my Team X, Maverick Deck.... but I could have swung the Babies.
My vote otherwise goes to Donald Pierce.... dual stat, neutral cost, wicked specials.
Quote from: DiceK on November 25, 2011, 09:18:03 AM
Quote from: Demacus on November 25, 2011, 08:35:57 AM
Last I checked, this thread was about opinions of who is the strongest character in the game, and I for one, feel that it's a character without an 8 stat: The X-babies. Sure in a hypothetical one-on-one match their lack of an 8 stat might do them in, but on a team, they always bring some useful toys to the party.
Agreed.
eehhh, pre-"Dead is Dead" I think you could make the argument, but post-DiD I really don't think they come close. Once you get through their specials and into the power pack they're pretty much done, though artifacts that raise their stats to 7 will help here. I think the best use for them still is as a sponge, which is how I used to use them pre-DiD. They're just not quite as good of one as they used to be.
Quote from: Oscorp on November 23, 2011, 07:38:35 PM
All of this just seems like a fancy way to say that you blew it and were able to back up your grandstanding blow-hard ways when it counted. And you can rant and rave all you want, and make as many excuses as you need to feel better about it, but you lost and not only did you lose, but you were the only guy in that whole tournament who bitched and moaned and whined about almost every match you had.
You are a very good player and you build very strong teams I lost 2 out of 3 to you and conceded the other as a draw, but your poor sportsmanship is also unparalleled and it makes you one giant pain in the ass.
dude you can't always be right. Learn to accept it and get on with your life.
You are starting to look like an over intelligent 5 year old pitching a fit just because you didn't get the candy bar you wanted.
Geeze
And you're surprised....why?
Hadn't been here in a while but some things/people never change. ;D
I vote Mr. X compared to Mr. F in a one on one due X's the dual grid stat backup (in case someone shuts down the primary) and even his AH so he doesn't have to worry about negates/avoids when making his specials stick. Fantastic's card is great, but he might get a bad draw. Now if he had an OC different story. 8)
Quote from: Nostalgic on December 06, 2011, 04:49:32 PM
And you're surprised....why?
Hadn't been here in a while but some things/people never change. ;D
I vote Mr. X compared to Mr. F in a one on one due X's the dual grid stat backup (in case someone shuts down the primary) and even his AH so he doesn't have to worry about negates/avoids when making his specials stick. Fantastic's card is great, but he might get a bad draw. Now if he had an OC different story. 8)
Are you implying that when Professor X's (AH) is in play, attacks from Professor X can't be defended by Special cards? :o
Quote from: ncannelora on December 06, 2011, 11:06:56 PM
Quote from: Nostalgic on December 06, 2011, 04:49:32 PM
And you're surprised....why?
Hadn't been here in a while but some things/people never change. ;D
I vote Mr. X compared to Mr. F in a one on one due X's the dual grid stat backup (in case someone shuts down the primary) and even his AH so he doesn't have to worry about negates/avoids when making his specials stick. Fantastic's card is great, but he might get a bad draw. Now if he had an OC different story. 8)
Are you implying that when Professor X's (AH) is in play, attacks from Professor X can't be defended by Special cards?
thats a good question
Quote from: ncannelora on December 06, 2011, 11:06:56 PM
Quote from: Nostalgic on December 06, 2011, 04:49:32 PM
And you're surprised....why?
Hadn't been here in a while but some things/people never change. ;D
I vote Mr. X compared to Mr. F in a one on one due X's the dual grid stat backup (in case someone shuts down the primary) and even his AH so he doesn't have to worry about negates/avoids when making his specials stick. Fantastic's card is great, but he might get a bad draw. Now if he had an OC different story. 8)
Are you implying that when Professor X's (AH) is in play, attacks from Professor X can't be defended by Special cards? :o
Yes. Why would you be able to defend against him with specials if no specials can be played against him? At least that was my understanding of the card.
i never thought of the AH being used that way...but i LIKE it!
Quote from: Nostalgic on December 07, 2011, 01:11:17 PM
Quote from: ncannelora on December 06, 2011, 11:06:56 PM
Quote from: Nostalgic on December 06, 2011, 04:49:32 PM
And you're surprised....why?
Hadn't been here in a while but some things/people never change. ;D
I vote Mr. X compared to Mr. F in a one on one due X's the dual grid stat backup (in case someone shuts down the primary) and even his AH so he doesn't have to worry about negates/avoids when making his specials stick. Fantastic's card is great, but he might get a bad draw. Now if he had an OC different story. 8)
Are you implying that when Professor X's (AH) is in play, attacks from Professor X can't be defended by Special cards? :o
Yes. Why would you be able to defend against him with specials if no specials can be played against him? At least that was my understanding of the card.
Well, how about because the word "against" strongly implies the offensive only act of targeting, and would therefore relegate the AH coded specials to protecting ONLY against offensive actions that actually target the Character with the card? Defensive actions never target a character.
I'm pretty sure that this was the "official" ruling on using AH coded Specials, but I could be remembering incorrectly. In any event, it's how we've always played them around here.
AH specials do not prevent the opponent from defending with special cards against attacks made by the user of the AH.
Quote from: Onslaught on December 07, 2011, 07:32:01 PM
AH specials do not prevent the opponent from defending with special cards against attacks made by the user of the AH.
Yeah, I've never played it that way, so I was just being sure that I didn't miss a huge implication ???
Anyway, still a handy card, as it would certainly defeat that (AR) from Mr.F :P