i'm beginning to side with ncann on this one. this card is starting to irk me
i've had games from both sides, and the card is too powerful imo (and yes, i know why it was created)
one of the issues, is that if you pair it with entropy event (no activators). that's more or less 2 guaranteed winning hands. throw in a leech, and fuggetaboutit
so how bout this
dow: opponent's battlesite hits to ko is reduced by 26 for remainder of game. this card may not be negated.
i choose 26, because of the hard to defend 3 specials. this more or less forces the opponent to defend the site with anything over 3
thoughts?
Quote from: breadmaster on March 29, 2012, 07:13:07 PM
i'm beginning to side with ncann on this one. this card is starting to irk me
i've had games from both sides, and the card is too powerful imo (and yes, i know why it was created)
one of the issues, is that if you pair it with entropy event (no activators). that's more or less 2 guaranteed winning hands. throw in a leech, and fuggetaboutit
so how bout this
dow: opponent's battlesite hits to ko is reduced by 26 for remainder of game. this card may not be negated.
i choose 26, because of the hard to defend 3 specials. this more or less forces the opponent to defend the site with anything over 3
thoughts?
That would be another great option to help it!
Like I've always said, I'm a fan of having a powerful Any Character card to balance them w/Battlesite potential. I also love the idea of said Any Character having the purpose of voiding your opponent's Battlesite. I just don't like the fact that it's so
guaranteed!
So, with this type of revision, it's still a guaranteed turn (the epitome of safe, since there's no defensive action to take), but it's not a guaranteed effect (because it won't affect Venture directly, and you still have more work to do in order to take down the battlesite.
Also, this seems like it's maintaining the POWERFUL nature of Galactus - in that it instantly cripples a location, putting it directly and immediately into a critical status, so that's cool too :D
I think the fact that battlesite decks are winning the tournaments speaks for itself. The 'no activator' event is balanced by the 'no anyhero' event so thats a wash. And someone could always bet big with dow and their opponent happens to not have activators that hand destroying the strategy. Like any other card if it comes at the right point in the game it can screw you but such is life...
I always thought anyheroes needed one more 'screw battlesite specials'. Something like target battlesite must discard (1,2,3, whatever) random placed cards.
i defenitely get where you're coming from, but it's hardly like any other card
if any heroes get it early, it's pretty much a guaranteed win (i know it's not 100%, but it's up there)
who wants to play a game where the majority of games are decided by one card...that's not interesting to me
and yes, no activator balances no anyhero event. my point was, there's no balance for dow (as i suggested to bios in jest, darkseid: opponent cannot play any heroes until this card is attacked by 4 anyheroes...shudder).
Quote from: breadmaster on March 30, 2012, 12:16:07 AM
and yes, no activator balances no anyhero event. my point was, there's no balance for dow (as i suggested to bios in jest, darkseid: opponent cannot play any heroes until this card is attacked by 4 anyheroes...shudder).
I agree with this sentiment, save for the fact that of the, what, 18(?), different types of any character specials only 8 are actual attacks, and of those 8, 2 are numerical. I'm not saying that DoW is too broken. I've played many card games where if that 1 card hits the table, you've just (lost/won.) The thing is, there are cards that deal with DoW. If the card bothers you THAT much, play with the characters who can remove it from existance... (your GL/KL specials) and don't try to play them FROM the battle site. Try new characters out. Isn't the lack of originallity in teams one of the biggest complaints folks have on these forums, anyway?
Quote from: Nostalgic on March 29, 2012, 10:28:34 PM
I always thought anyheroes needed one more 'screw battlesite specials'. Something like target battlesite must discard (1,2,3, whatever) random placed cards.
I like this concept. It would draw balance to those that are relying on dow to win.
Also I am used to Marvel popping out a Powerhouse. When I played HeroClix, they created a "Cosmic Spiderman." Was he awesome? Yeah! Was he broken? Definitely! Did people abuse the crap out of it? Yes! Cosmic Spiderman could: 1) run up and hit you then run away so far you couldnt touch him on your turn 2) run up and shoot you from a range that you couldnt reach on your turn 3) (broken) he could shoot you through a wall :o and you couldnt even get a cover save or anything from it.....IMO DoW is essentially the same format for Marvel....after they have released a game for awhile that DC, Darkhorse, etc have joined in on they always seem to "have to have" the powerhouse piece and IMO that is what has happened here. Its a good card and yes it is beatable, but it is a little broken....again, that is my opinion
i HAVE been trying lots of different characters out.
that's what led me to this idea for dow. if i want to try out a new character, basically i look at what they do well, then i build the other 3 characters around them.
the problem with this, is that whenever you stray from the top tier characters, you leave the team vulnerable. you make up with this with a defensive battlesite usually. if i get dow'd early, the game is over, cause my characters will fall like dominoes...not fun. so then i build a more resiliant team...but now it looks like 90% of the other competetive teams...also not fun
my point is, dow is not a 'fun' card. yes, i can build teams that have strategies against it (i did for the tourney i won in toronto), but the vast majority of games i play are for fun. also, i've won as many games with, as i've lost against dow, and it's just as empty from the other side of the table
so the idea behind the new card is that it maintains the POWER of the original, without being so un-interactive. once played, your site is still active (assuming it hasn't taken 4 points of damage prior), but now you MUST defend it at all costs, or risk losing all your activators instead of 4
I admit that I do like the concept behind the rewritten DoW. Maybe I just haven't played with or against it enough to understand why folks feel it needs to change. I DO remember when Power Leech was that damned awful though...
Quote from: Demacus on March 30, 2012, 05:21:14 PM
I admit that I do like the concept behind the rewritten DoW. Maybe I just haven't played with or against it enough to understand why folks feel it needs to change. I DO remember when Power Leech was that damned awful though...
LOL....good ole leechy.....I used to hate him most of all!
Perhaps a DoW that requires your opponent to discard a card from their hand for the next 4 activators played would work...
That is almost heavier then the current DoW. lol
DoW would have been great if it were "Target Battlesite must discard 4 Placed cards chosen at random. This special may not be negated." It would get it out of the way quickly instead of giving a player playing DoW a large card advantage. With any luck, the four specials could be really crappy ones used to pad a deck in defence of DoW* (I used DoW* to note the one I propose) opening up larger battlesite deck sizes (possibly).
I wouldn't mind adding a possible way to defend it (since the "remainder of game" clause is ruled out) with "Can only be defended by a power card with icon of DoW*'s choice, cannot be defended with a Multipower Power card.". It would be akin to Leech in a way where you would pick a really random choice of icon hoping your opponent doesn't have filler power cards for it.
-
BBH also proposed a change to DoW. The mechanics would be the same, but you could use up to 4 Activators to attack DoW so you could get it out of the way quickly instead of burning turns.
Quote from: Demacus on April 01, 2012, 06:26:31 PM
That is almost heavier then the current DoW. lol
I agree with this statement. Essentially you'd lose double the cards and players would probably complain more as opposed to the original DoW.
i assume what he meant was, you still play activators as normal (exchanging them for attacks or defense), but must discard 1 card from your hand which acts as the 'attack' on dow.
this is an interesting compromise as well. it lets you keep using activators (not locking down turns) and lets you discard presumably less versatile cards from your hand
Quote from: breadmaster on April 02, 2012, 04:17:14 PM
i assume what he meant was, you still play activators as normal (exchanging them for attacks or defense), but must discard 1 card from your hand which acts as the 'attack' on dow.
this is an interesting compromise as well. it lets you keep using activators (not locking down turns) and lets you discard presumably less versatile cards from your hand
This is exactly what I'm assuming he meant as well, but in the instance of DoW being so overpowered in the instance of gaining hand advantage, tossing a discard for 4 attacks, even if it is a "less useful" card is still way worse then simply throwing 4 cards at DoW to get rid of it. As it stands now, you have a disadvantage of 4 cards before your activators become useful again, so your net hand loss is anywhere from 1-4 card(s) per hand until DoW is gone. With the discard errata, you stand to lose 2-8 cards per hand until DoW is gone. Yes you might be getting use of the activators, but at the cost of the rest of your hand, which makes DoW that much more powerful for a "venture for the win" scenario. Even if my opponent draws 3 cards and keeps them all, he's looking to lose 2 cards per activator, which essentially cuts his hand in half. It's just not a "better" revision.
i'm not seeing how you lose up to 8 cards
one of the problems with dow as written, is that very often you can lose 1 (or more!) characters while discarding the activators
with this method, you could still play activators for defense, discarding 1 from hand. this keeps a character alive AND gets you out from under dow. how is it more devastating? if i get to play an avoid or negate, and it costs me an ally/tactic/AA special, i'm coming out way ahead than if i had those cards in hand and was forced to discard activators
unless i'm seeing this all wrong
If you get hit with DoW and have 4 activators in your hand, with each activator you play, you lose an additional card. If you make 2 activator defenses with 1 attack between them, you have already blown through 5 of your potential 8 card hand, to my 4 card loss. You now have 3 cards left in hand to my 4 and have a much higher potential for conceding the battle or losing a character to my extra attacks that you would not be able to defend. If that 1 attack was also made with an activator, you'd be down 6 cards, and have only 2 remaining in hand to my 4. If you were to give DoW this errated rewrite, it greatly increased venture value. That's all I was getting at. The player who put down the DoW now has a large to immense hand advantage that battle.
Would you be more willing to sacrifice other cards in hand to play your activators? Probably, but would it be worth potentially losing the game by making them that much more difficult to play? And what about the chance that you only have a 7 or 5 card hand going into the battle. 1 attack or defense at a 2 card loss could really put you in a much worse way then simply tossing one activator card at DoW. I'm simply saying that if you think it's obnoxious now, it would be more obnoxious forcing a discard to play the outside help. If you were locked in a similar way with Any Heroes, would it be worth playing 2 cards to void 1 incoming? Isn't that the logic behind why most people don't use basic universe cards? The hit to hand advantage is too great.
I'm not saying I'm against errataing DoW, but I don't think adding a discard to used activators is the right way to bring balance to the card.
Quote from: Demacus on April 03, 2012, 01:03:15 PM
If you get hit with DoW and have 4 activators in your hand, with each activator you play, you lose an additional card. If you make 2 activator defenses with 1 attack between them, you have already blown through 5 of your potential 8 card hand, to my 4 card loss. You now have 3 cards left in hand to my 4 and have a much higher potential for conceding the battle or losing a character to my extra attacks that you would not be able to defend. If that 1 attack was also made with an activator, you'd be down 6 cards, and have only 2 remaining in hand to my 4. If you were to give DoW this errated rewrite, it greatly increased venture value. That's all I was getting at. The player who put down the DoW now has a large to immense hand advantage that battle.
This doesn't make sense to me...
under normal DoW rules, if i'm attacked twice and defend them, with one attack in between, then I've dropped 3 cards, but if I'm still holding 2 useless activators, then I'm still at -5 cards... at best, I'm able to bluff with the 2 remaining activators - but
I still know it's a bluff, so i'm just as likely to concede... since venturing happens while I still have my full hand (minus discards & places, of course), then my opponent wouldn't have been able to venture against my potential bluff...
Anyway, in my experience, the card advantage gained of DoW is usually more than 4, because most of the time I have to concede with activators in my hand, along the way. That's the really demoralizing part and that's when I hate it the most (which makes BBH's idea pretty appealing). When I play some one who gets an early DoW in play (say, the first 2 hands), then I rarely get to use more than 2 or 3 battlesite cards. That's pretty severe when I had 12 under there.
Like I said, though, my real problem isn't even the after-effect of DoW. My biggest problem with it is that it's unblockable. All of the "counters" to DoW require offensive turns. There is no other card like that in the game. There is no other mechanic like that in the game. In that regard, it's almost more like an Event, than a Special :-\
Let me start by explaining why the discard plus activators is worse:
The thing is, if you have activators in your hand now, they are not useless if you use them to attack the DoW, as the card itself states is the case. If you are conceding with them in your hand, you are simply hurting yourself further by not using them to be rid of the DoW, which is the issue. With DoW as it stands now, you could be at the same hand advantage as your opponent if you don't think of your activators as dead cards, but use them INSTEAD of attacks and simply play the hand from a more defensive position until you truly have no further options. DoW is truly no worse then getting caught by the "No Any Hero Specials may be played" event, with 2-4 Any Heroes in hand. Yes, DoW will still be there at the end of the battle, but if you play your cards right, it's not as devastating as having cards that you truly CANNOT use. The idea that padding your battlesite would help take away the strength of DoW by giving you more activators to throw at it and not lose your key tricks is also a good work around.
Now back to what I have liked about this thread:
That being said, I'm with you in your stance that the card is completely undefendable, just simply dealt with after the fact. I think the best revision of DoW that I've seen on this thread is Breadmaster's original concept of reducing the battlesite's hits to KO by 26 for the remainder of the game. That is devastating without being the "lock" that DoW currently is. Where is BBH's idea on DoW? I didn't see him add anything to this thread.
Quote from: Demacus on April 03, 2012, 03:49:20 PM...if you don't think of your activators as dead cards, but use them INSTEAD of attacks...
Maybe the difference in our POV is as simple as this, because I very much think of those activators as dead weight. Card advantage is all about adding up potential venture, or potential KO and having Activators that attack DoW do not help me on either front, so I very much consider them as hollow attacks, dead weight, lost cards, etc.
i'm not seeing it either...both methods require a card to be placed on dow
original: i have no choice. it must be an activator
revision: i get to choose which card goes onto dow, and i get to choose which card i exchange an activator for
how is any card advantage gained or lost? it just makes working around dow more versatile.
i get how you think of activators as attacks, but in this case, the cards you discard onto dow are the attacks as well
Ok... I'm gonna try this one more time. Please keep in mind that I'm simply trying to make my PoV underdstood. I'm not forcing it on anyone, just trying to be clear.
Original: You have the choice of attacking with 1 card, or playing 1 activator on DoW until 4 have been played. Net 1 card loss per offensive action. No option to play activators on defense.
Revision: You get to play your activators, but with an additional cost to discard a card from your hand. Net 2 card loss per activator played, with added restriction of not being able to play activators if you don't have an extra card in your hand to discard.
This is where there is a major difference in hand advantage. Say you drew into a hand and pulled 3 activators, but only had 2 other cards in hand, due to dupes and unuseables. You are still not getting the full potential of your activators because you can only play 2 before you run out of other cards to discard. With such a hand you essentially have 1 attack and 1 defense, then you are forced to concede/take a beating. If you really like that rule, feel free to play with it. All I was saying was that, to me, it seems like that revision made DoW stronger instead of weaker, which is what I gathered this thread was about.
The other thing I find interesting here is that you'd rather throw away 4 cards from your deck for the sake of playing your activators, instead of simply adding in 4-6 junk specials to the battlesite to toss in the case of DoW. You are always better off using all your cards to their best potential, even if that potential has been halved, then simply throwing cards away for no real benefit. That to me seems like the easier solution, but everyone has the right to do as they please.
where is the net loss though?
i can see where if you draw more activators than not, you'll be in a bind, but if you draw 3 activators and 2 other cards (assuming 3 discards here?), aren't you in an equally tough spot playing official rules? essentially you have 2 cards now to fight off 8.
where this revision would shine, is when you draw 3 activators, and an equal number of other cards (say 2 discards). ideally, you could defend/attack/defend...all with activators. this causes 3 discards from your hand, but also lets you get 3 cards onto dow. now your hand is empty, you can concede, have kept your characters healthy, and almost busted dow.
playing original rules. you'd have to defend the first attack with one of your 3 cards from hand. then you attack dow. your opponent attacks you, and you defend with another card from hand (assuming you didn't get multiple offensive cards). now you have 1 card left, and 2 activators. if you attack dow again, your characters are pretty much wide open to attack.
so your options are:
-get a second attack on dow, and most likely take damage (god forbid opponent has a tw)
-concede the battle (now you have 1 attack on dow, have done no damage to opponent, and lost venture)
in fact, the more i think this through, the more i'm digging this suggestion
and yes, i would rather throw away 4 from my hand and use activators than fill my site with junk. junk cards increase duping, decrease your sites effectiveness when dow isn't in play, and give you more useless activators when dow is in play (it's not easy to get out mutiple activators on a turn and keep a team healthy)
Quote from: breadmaster on April 04, 2012, 03:52:29 PM(it's not easy to get out mutiple activators on a turn and keep a team healthy)
THIS ^^
that's the hardest part of dealing with DoW once it lands! That's why I'd be happy with BBH's suggestion that you could play multiple Activators onto DoW in the same action (or even if Activators could be used as follow up attacks, like from a DG or ID).
Anyway, I could deal with it's severity of effect, if only it could be directly defended. For example, if it was made to target the battlesite, like Power Leech targets a character. Then I could use a Negate or Avoid from the BS to defend it.
If you still don't see what I'm getting at, then you don't see what I'm getting at.
Ncann's idea of having DoW target something to be at least AG defendable truly makes the most sense and is the least confusing.
Quote from: Demacus on April 04, 2012, 05:28:13 PM
Ncann's idea of having DoW target something to be at least AG defendable truly makes the most sense and is the least confusing.
a power leech effect
So Breadman and I tested out a couple of games using the proposed adjustment to DoW - the ability to toss multiple activators at once.
In the games where it came up it made a noticeable difference.
One game, Bread threw down two activators one round, and two the next, quickly killing DoW, and it ultimately made the difference for him because he was back up and running really fast, a timely Gods of Stone draw in the next round and it was curtains for me.
In another game, he was able to drop 4 activators at once on DoW. I still took the win, but DoW was essentially reduced to a Power Leech for that round. Still powerful, and game winning, but not frustratingly so.
We'll continue to playtest this idea, but so far I think it holds a lot of promise - both in simplicity of the rule, and the effect of cutting the edge of DoW without diminishing the intent of it.
-BBH
Quote from: BigBadHarve on April 11, 2012, 10:58:20 PM
So Breadman and I tested out a couple of games using the proposed adjustment to DoW - the ability to toss multiple activators at once.
In the games where it came up it made a noticeable difference.
One game, Bread threw down two activators one round, and two the next, quickly killing DoW, and it ultimately made the difference for him because he was back up and running really fast, a timely Gods of Stone draw in the next round and it was curtains for me.
In another game, he was able to drop 4 activators at once on DoW. I still took the win, but DoW was essentially reduced to a Power Leech for that round. Still powerful, and game winning, but not frustratingly so.
We'll continue to playtest this idea, but so far I think it holds a lot of promise - both in simplicity of the rule, and the effect of cutting the edge of DoW without diminishing the intent of it.
-BBH
I'm very happy to hear this. in the future with you and breadmaster, I'll be happy to employ the same adjustment
(btw, sorry i missed your chat. my loss to cody was INTENSE!)
it was hard to guage...the events were crushing those games
i think bbh won 3/4, and iirc, 3 times he ventured 6 cards (and won easily each time)
Quote from: breadmaster on April 12, 2012, 01:02:05 AM
it was hard to guage...the events were crushing those games
i think bbh won 3/4, and iirc, 3 times he ventured 6 cards (and won easily each time)
sure sure. for the purposes of testing, you might try playing without those crippling events...? then again, maybe just using lots and lots of games as sample data is the better way...
Ideally we'd want to test it out through dozens of games in a variety of situations. Those events would have been killer with or without DoW. There's no point in creating a specialized deck to test it, it needs to be done with all kinds of teams and deck construction.
One of those bet 6 hands also came because I had a 7 card advantage over Bread, PLUS DoW. But even without DoW I might still have gone all 6. He had two cards (and two discards, I think) placed to my 7 placed cards, and I had only one dupe from hand that round. Giving me 14 playable cards to his 8. DoW just cinched the deal.
Still, as I say, promising. ;)
-BBH
Quote from: BigBadHarve on April 12, 2012, 11:22:23 AM
Ideally we'd want to test it out through dozens of games in a variety of situations. Those events would have been killer with or without DoW. There's no point in creating a specialized deck to test it, it needs to be done with all kinds of teams and deck construction.
...
-BBH
yeah, as I was typing I realized it'd be kinda silly to try to remove all other factors, considering Overpower has a gazillion variables. It's not like you can simply remove 3 or 4 variables and have identical games, so the only way to get a real feel for the difference is to play like normal, except for the change, for lots and lots of games.
Like I said, I'm happy to play with the same mod to DoW - forever - but certainly to help the size of the test data :)
So assuming you play with DoW without any house modifiers, is your best bet to throw in as many attacks as possible in your battle site to try to dig out of it?
Quote from: mattkoz on April 12, 2012, 03:26:15 PM
So assuming you play with DoW without any house modifiers, is your best bet to throw in as many attacks as possible in your battle site to try to dig out of it?
assuming it will hit? I think there are two schools of thought. really big, or really small.
On the big side, you'd have to be sure that you're not creating extra dup's and also be sure you'll have other cards in hand that you can still play. If you have 18 activators in a deck, you're going to have hands with 3-5 activators on a regular basis, and if DoW is already landed, that means you're left with 4 cards, or so, to defend yourself for 4 turns while trying to play your activator attacks.
On the small side, you have to ensure that the limited number of activators correspond to really, really good Specials. I have built a battlesite with as few as 6 cards, 2 per character for 3 characters, and it did pretty well. Basically, you're looking to have the Battlesite be a great complement, but not be dependant on it. It seems best to still use duplicate Activators, though (as opposed to 6 diff ones) to give flexibility as you get them.
The middle ground is where most people end up, I think. Going with 2 activators per character available, ending with 10-12 (plus Beyonder). I think the general tactic is to go with 1 offensive card and 1 defensive card for each character, relinquishing the offensive cards to DoW.
Otherwise, cards that really help to counter (but not defend against) DoW are
GL (sort through Opp Draw Pile, remove card)
KL (remove all "battle" and "game" Specials)
LJ (select an Activator from your Draw Pile) - surprisingly helpful
EVENT - No Any Heroes may be played
EVENT - No cards with the word "Negate" may be played
Quote from: ncannelora on April 12, 2012, 03:52:35 PM
EVENT - No cards with the word "Negate" may be played
Well... I'm an idiot. :P Didn't think of that as another counter to dow.
Good 1. :D
but when DoW is in play, you cant use any activators, right? Or you can use defensive ones?
You can't retrieve specials from your battlesite with DoW.
Quote from: mattkoz on April 12, 2012, 06:25:12 PM
but when DoW is in play, you cant use any activators, right? Or you can use defensive ones?
Jack's right - that's not really what I meant.
What I mean is, the defensive cards tend to be more valuable (relative to venture totals). So, AG>AR because you could be using it to avoid a lv.9 or something.
So, suppose you're looking at DangerRoom for a Battlesite. You could go:
Bishop AA AR
Iceman AD AG
separating Iceman for defense only, Bishop for offense only. But, once DoW hits, if you're dropping 1xBishop and 1xIceman (as well as 2 others), then you're losing an offensive card
and a defensive card.
Or you could go:
Bishop AA AG
Iceman AR AD
by separating Iceman to offense and defense, and doing the same for Bishop, once DoW hits you have more flexibility. If you have to drop 1xBishop and 1xIceman, you're not losing a defensive card (and the potential to better venture totals for it).
im pretty sure it means any :P