How Would You Amend OP?

[DoktorSleepless]

Hey all,

I've been thinking a bit about OverPower, its expansions, cards, rules, history, etc. quite a bit lately. The Whole Enchilada, if you will. In the context of CCG history, OP had the dubious honor of being among the first games released for the mass market. While this (in conjunction with certain other factors such as brand appeal for characters and corporate backing) helped to give it staying power, it suffered like many early games from flaws in the design, development, and testing processes (as well as from the inescapably lack of knowledge of inherent attributes to CCG's we know about now after 20 years of market history, such as power creep within the game and market over-saturation from excess printing). Over the intervening years since the game's marketplace demise, numerous individuals have attempted to fix, balance, expand upon, or remake it entirely. It's always an ambitious undertaking (I'll take a moment here to give props to OP3, who is currently undertaking such a project), but there's inevitably differences in how it is finally expressed on the cards. So I'd like to ask anyone who cares to chime in the following question:

What would you do to alter OverPower if you had complete control? Assume that nothing is taboo. You may add or subtract card features such as Grid components, character identifying features, Inherent Abilities, etc. You may alter rules as you see fit, such as timing, KO rules, draw rules, etc. You have total artistic control over everything, such as fonts, character art, special art, card frames, etc.


I'll kick us off, because it's been on my mind lately (I don't have quite enough ambition yet to tackle a full-on redesign).

First, Character card changes:

While the semi-cgi look they have now is fine, I would be interested in comparing it custom painted pieces. I'm thinking along the lines of Hildebrandt, but obviously there are numerous talented painters for comics (Jusko comes to mind!).  I believe the painted pieces would look nicer (the Hildebrandts have produced several very fine pieces for MtG in the last several years, and the work they did for Marvel trading cards back in the day was amazing).

Grid Changes: I believe the 4-stat grid is optimum for game complexity in terms of interaction, but causes the games problems due to power creep and poor planning. Because of this, I WOULD ADD THE HITS TO KO STAT TO OP (I wanted to shout that, in case some people weren't aware that it was almost a thing in OP at one time). Further, I believe that every character should have an Inherent Ability (but not all of them should be good. The "vanilla gorilla" discussion came up over in the AoA thread).

Other card changes I would make begin with the addition of a designation, in the style NAME-#, in small font in the upper left corner of the card. This allows Character names to maintain minimalism (there can be multiple Mysterio), while affixing a designation to the card that is easy to understand in terms of whether two characters are allowed on the same team. Any character with matching designation (example: Peter Parker - 616 would be present in the upper left on Spider-Man, Symbiotic Costume, Iron Spider) may not be on a team together. Otherwise anything goes. You don't have to understand the meaning to get the code itself, it's just an alphanumeric that can't be matching on two characters. There would not be any cosmic-level characters in OverPower, they would be relegated to appearing in other forms (likely Any Character specials or Events), because it makes no sense to have either Galactus or Beyonder on one side of the table against Jubilee and Hawkeye on the other. We all know that doesn't even count as one-sided. Galactus would literally swat those two and the fight would be over.

I would also add team marker icons to the left edge of the card, because team affiliations would help the game greatly and OP3 is doing great work right now showing how much more depth they can add.

To balance the game, I would make sure that every ability has one 8-Grid, low-total character, but would minimize the total number of characters in that category. This would help give more muscle to decks that aren't Energy or Energy+Other. Ideally, they would be iconic characters too, so that people are more incentivized to play say, Professor X than say, X-Man. I would also make sure to balance stats more effectively, so that characters who would likely be on the same team in media can be together in decks. Because there's less fun for a large subsection of potential players if they can't play Iron Man/Captain America/Thor/Hulk together (that's an example, and I actually didn't check to see if you could on a 76-point team).

For Specials, I would begin by doing a complete edit of the coding system. Some cards with identical codes are rather disparate, while others with disparate codes are quite similar. I would also do editing to revise any single-type avoid (avoid 1 strength attack) to become dual-type avoids (avoid 1 strength or energy) because I believe it is good for the game to eliminate some of the excessively narrow cards. This has an added bonus of freeing up card codes, because part of game planning is planning for the future, and while AA to ZZ is a lot, it's not infinite. Look at the total number of distinct magic cards and tell me it's not totally possible that a successful OverPower would be approaching or at the full AA to ZZ point by 20 years of constant production with at least one (realistically multiple in the modern market) expansion per year. In fact, it may warrant moving to 3-letter coding. I haven't done the math to check the exact difference, but it is substantial.

For Missions, I would eliminate the sharp corners (too easy to ruin) but keep it on heavier card stock.

Events would get new timing rules, making explicit in the NOVICE-LEVEL run through for Venture games that they are played and re-drawn for in the phase of the turn before duplicates are discarded.

Locations would remain, but instead of character names, they would have designators (from the upper left of the card) on them. Any character matching the designator may be used.

I would eliminate Aspect cards. I believe they add an unnecessary additional layer of complexity to the game that is detrimental to it; but I would revisit them as a possible addition as a major-event idea (like the Blankth anniversary of OP or something).

Rules overhauls would be substantial. Turn sequence would be fully delineated, breaking down when cards are drawn, events are played, duplicates are discarded, cards are placed, hits are moved to permanent record, etc. An etiquette guide would be included, suggesting that players ask basic game-advancing questions, such as "are you ready to place cards" and be helpful and friendly to each other, as it is a game foremost. Meta-rules would be incorporated where possible/applicable. Language would be carefully deconstructed for rules referencing (for example: Opponent will always mean the other player. Character will always mean an in-play Character). All attacks will have a target (so "Acts as a level 9 Strength attack" would say "Acts as a level 9 Strength attack against target Character"), which will allow for easier comprehension of how cards interact for newer players and intuitive understanding of concepts such as shifts ("attack made on Omega Red is now made on target character of Omega Red's choice" makes more sense if an attack was targeting him, but now he changed the target).

In addition to Venture games (tournament OverPower) I would encourage younger players to begin with what I would term Brawl games (basically traditional non-venture rules) and Protect games (a rules variant I'm working on wherein the Reserve Character is being "protected" by the front line, and does not ever advance to it until all protectors are eliminated, the goal still being to eliminate all your opponent's characters but while keeping your Reserve Character, Mission-less just like Brawl).

Also, a focused web-presence and local-level tournament organizing would be a must.

That's a lot of what I'm thinking, what about you guys? What would you do to remake OverPower under your creative vision?

[Dog]

I've had most of the same ideas, and share your enthusiasm for Hits to KO. In fact, I think that could open up the game for more variability if the "sum deck rule" were junked and replaced with a maximum team Hits to KO. That way you could use, say, 4 guys, 5 weak guys, or 3 really tough guys. Break the old mold a bit and mix it up.

Tell me more about your thoughts on using homebases. Would you keep battlesites?

I honestly don't see the need for special card codes. Does any other game do something similar? Doesn't that just limit the imagination of the designers?

[steve2275]

other than make doubleshots use any type of power card  the game is fine

[Tussin]

i would make event cards trigger anytime they are drawn... not just at the start of your turn, its a waste of a draw, give people option and flexibility.

i agree with most of the above.

i would add level 0 power cards, multi teamwork/doubleshot cards that power balance created, requirements added for all that as well.

that target character text is a great idea, it would clue people in to that it is an attack and can be avoided

make the special text more intricate to minimize errata and rulings

i would just remove training/basic universe cards, they are too much work to reboot. maybe a little love to ally/doubleshot cards as well to make them at least an option for a deck

i agree with powerbalance removing one per deck status of 5-8 anypower powercards because it opens up many deck building options

i also liked the idea in that other thread about double or triple power card types as well to use with the multi-4 stat power cards

i would be fine with Beyonder biting the dust... but i would maybe keep Galactus as the only one near a cosmic level involved in the game

to balance all the types, i would redo the template... have equivalence across the board for innates, specials etc

keep battlesites/homebases/artifacts definately, aspects could go, just another card to have in your deck that is situational

[DoktorSleepless]

I had almost forgotten about the multi-power card idea in the other thread. That was a really good idea.

[drdeath25]

Great post. I'm not sure what I would do exactly. Probably alot, but also at the same time probably not so much.

I'll keep my eye on this thread and probably chime in when someone gives me the inspiration.

[OP3]

While the semi-cgi look they have now is fine, I would be interested in comparing it custom painted pieces. I'm thinking along the lines of Hildebrandt, but obviously there are numerous talented painters for comics (Jusko comes to mind!).  I believe the painted pieces would look nicer (the Hildebrandts have produced several very fine pieces for MtG in the last several years, and the work they did for Marvel trading cards back in the day was amazing).

I love the old Marvel Masterpieces guys like Jusko and the Hildebrandts did in the '90s (RIP Tim).  I can't wait to see Jusko's new set that's due out this year.  I'll be snatching those up for sure.  But I think for a game that's supposed to represent comics, if I was the art director I'd commission as many professional comic artists as I could to give the game a more authentic feel, like the original DC sets.  The CG coloring techniques used in the original Marvel sets were interesting and very well done in some cases, but most of the time felt incredibly off.  It too often resulted in some really ugly cards.

And good God, that's not even getting into the shitty pick-up art they used in the X-Men set.  As an amateur hobbyist, I've got no choice.  But they were supposedly professional game designers.  Even if they didn't have the budget to commission new art for every card in the set, they still could've found better art for so many of those cards.

Because of this, I WOULD ADD THE HITS TO KO STAT TO OP (I wanted to shout that, in case some people weren't aware that it was almost a thing in OP at one time).

I considered this for OP3, but decided against it because it skews the game unfairly in favor of tough Characters with high stats, even moreso than the game already does.  A Character like Jubilee would have a low KO number, because really.  And a Character like Hulk would be able to last a lot longer.  But that's already the case by virtue of those Characters' Power Grids.  Jubilee can't defend a 7 or 8 hit from Hulk with her Power Grid alone.  She has to rely on her Teammates or Specials.

Likewise, Hulk can easily shrug off Jubilee's biggest Power card attack, without even using the biggest Power card available to him.  He doesn't need to be harder for her to KO; she doesn't need to be easier for him to KO.  Maybe it's not as "realistic" in terms of how a matchup between these two would play out in the comics, but that's game balance for you.  Sacrifices have to be made to achieve it. 

Further, I believe that every character should have an Inherent Ability (but not all of them should be good. The "vanilla gorilla" discussion came up over in the AoA thread).

I disagree with this too because the purpose of Inherents is to provide game balance.  The last thing 8-stat characters need, especially low-cost ones, is another means to improve them.  If the Grids of two Characters without Inherents are too similar, which can happen pretty often considering the game's limited combination of Grids, let their Specials differentiate them.

In OP3, I'm going to be sticking pretty closely to the original unwritten rules for who gets Inherents (no 8-stat or 7+6-stat Characters).  There are a few Characters I plan to break this rule with, but any beneficial IA I give them will be balanced by a negative one.  And I don't mean like Malebolgia, who could've avoided that big stupid "May not use Intellect Power cards for defense" nonsense by just having his Fighting stat dropped by 2 points.  None of my Characters are going to go over 23 points, therefore requiring an IA that drops their total.

There would not be any cosmic-level characters in OverPower, they would be relegated to appearing in other forms (likely Any Character specials or Events), because it makes no sense to have either Galactus or Beyonder on one side of the table against Jubilee and Hawkeye on the other. We all know that doesn't even count as one-sided. Galactus would literally swat those two and the fight would be over.

Exactly.

To balance the game, I would make sure that every ability has one 8-Grid, low-total character, but would minimize the total number of characters in that category. This would help give more muscle to decks that aren't Energy or Energy+Other. Ideally, they would be iconic characters too, so that people are more incentivized to play say, Professor X than say, X-Man.

I'm working on that.  Some are hard to justify being low-cost though (most 8F Characters, for example).  So far, with my Core Sets (Marvel and DC), there's a total of five 18 or less 8-stat Characters.  One Energy (Professor X), one Fighting (Wildcat), two Strength (Hulk, Thing), and one Intellect (Lex Luthor).  Those are all pretty iconic Characters.

Other low-cost 8-stat Characters I'll likely add to OP3 in expansions include Abomination (18), Juggernaut (18), Shang-Chi (18), The Leader (18), Hercules (18), Molecule Man (18), Vulcan (18), Proteus (17), Batgirl (Cass, at 18), Oracle (18), and Solomon Grundy (17).  Of course, there are way more 8-stat Character to come, but I'm doing my best to accurately portray them.  Which means higher costs.  And I'm making a very conscious choice to not put any 8-stat Characters at 16 points (or any 7-stat Characters at 15 points).  Which means no Franklin Richards, unfortunately.

I would also make sure to balance stats more effectively, so that characters who would likely be on the same team in media can be together in decks. Because there's less fun for a large subsection of potential players if they can't play Iron Man/Captain America/Thor/Hulk together (that's an example, and I actually didn't check to see if you could on a 76-point team).

I think this is best done through Affiliations and Locations rather than trying to mash down their stats to make them fit.  I'd rather have an accurate Iron Man or Thor, than a compromised one just so I could put them on a team with Cap or Hulk.  Lower-cost Variants are also an option for this kind of thing, like Iron Man: OA, or a Golden Age verison of Cap.

For Specials, I would begin by doing a complete edit of the coding system.

Already on it.  I've been doing a lot of work behind the scenes eliminating useless codes, folding them into other codes, or improving the functionality of certain codes.  I haven't yet embarked on a complete reordering, because would require recoding a lot of Specials I've already posted.  But I may actually get around to this.  Because man does it ever bug me that the coding system seems completely random.  Similar-functioning Specials are all over the place, and so many letters were never finished before they jumped over to the next one (there are J-, K-, and L- Specials when I- was never finished).  Honestly, how the fuck did the designers ever make sense of this mess?

Some cards with identical codes are rather disparate, while others with disparate codes are quite similar. I would also do editing to revise any single-type avoid (avoid 1 strength attack) to become dual-type avoids (avoid 1 strength or energy) because I believe it is good for the game to eliminate some of the excessively narrow cards. This has an added bonus of freeing up card codes, because part of game planning is planning for the future, and while AA to ZZ is a lot, it's not infinite.

True.  This is definitely a good argument for a complete restructuring, and it's this kind of forethought I've been trying to inject into OP3.  Something the original designers seemed completely oblivious and indifferent to.

For Missions, I would eliminate the sharp corners (too easy to ruin) but keep it on heavier card stock.

I liked that the Image Mission was printed on the same cardstock as the rest of the set.  They felt more a part of the actual game than the Marvel or DC Missions did.  Not to mention, I bet this cut down on production costs.  And it goes without saying, if I had full control over this game, the same cardstock from Powersurge-Image would be used, because it was so much more durable than the stuff used in the first set, or X-Men.

Events would get new timing rules, making explicit in the NOVICE-LEVEL run through for Venture games that they are played and re-drawn for in the phase of the turn before duplicates are discarded.

Okay, but I've never really felt this required clarification.  Every time I've taught this game to someone, it's been pretty easy to make clear that Events happen immediately after you draw, before anything else.

Locations would remain, but instead of character names, they would have designators (from the upper left of the card) on them. Any character matching the designator may be used.

Again, I've been toying around with something like this for OP3 ever since I decided to add Affiliations to Locations.  Eventually decided it made Battlesites way too versatile.  Gave them too much of an advantage over Any-Character decks.  So I settled on allowing any one other Character to show up on an associated Location, but only when you're using it as a Homebase.

I would eliminate Aspect cards. I believe they add an unnecessary additional layer of complexity to the game that is detrimental to it; but I would revisit them as a possible addition as a major-event idea (like the Blankth anniversary of OP or something).

I would totally be okay with giving Aspects the boot.  I've been contemplating eliminating them from OP3 like I've done with Basic Universe and Training cards.

Rules overhauls would be substantial. Turn sequence would be fully delineated, breaking down when cards are drawn, events are played, duplicates are discarded, cards are placed, hits are moved to permanent record, etc. An etiquette guide would be included, suggesting that players ask basic game-advancing questions, such as "are you ready to place cards" and be helpful and friendly to each other, as it is a game foremost. Meta-rules would be incorporated where possible/applicable. Language would be carefully deconstructed for rules referencing (for example: Opponent will always mean the other player. Character will always mean an in-play Character).

All great ideas that would've seriously improved the game if they were implemented from the start.

All attacks will have a target (so "Acts as a level 9 Strength attack" would say "Acts as a level 9 Strength attack against target Character"),

I think that's unnecessary, because understanding how an attack works is the most basic and fundamental rule in the game.  There is no other way an attack works.  They all target one character.  Extra text would only be required in special cases (if the Special targets a Battlesite, for example).  I'm personally making strides to eliminate redundant and overlong text from Specials in OP3.

Protect games (a rules variant I'm working on wherein the Reserve Character is being "protected" by the front line, and does not ever advance to it until all protectors are eliminated, the goal still being to eliminate all your opponent's characters but while keeping your Reserve Character, Mission-less just like Brawl).

Now that's just awesome.  Variations on how to play is definitely what this game needs.  Look at all the variant Magic games (Planechase, Archenemy, Commander, Wizard's Tower, Horde Magic, etc.).  And we definitely need to come up with some ideas for drafting and multiplayer OP.  One multiplayer variant I can think of that would work is something like Horde Magic or Archenemy.  A co-op game where everyone teams up against one super-powerful enemy.  This may be a viable way to include cosmic characters in the game as well, like an Infinity Gauntlet-powered Thanos.

i would make event cards trigger anytime they are drawn... not just at the start of your turn, its a waste of a draw, give people option and flexibility.

Yes!  I will have to make mention of that when I add Events to OP3.

i would add level 0 power cards,

I'm still not sold on that.

multi teamwork/doubleshot cards that power balance created, requirements added for all that as well.

Definitely sold on that.  You'll see them when I post my Tactic cards (though they're exactly the same as those done in Power Balance).

make the special text more intricate to minimize errata and rulings

In OP3, I'm trying to strike a balance between simple, easy-to-understand text that minimizes redundancy, and providing enough information on the card itself.  I've most often leaned toward minimizing text for space concerns.  The idea being, a comprehensive meta-rule guide for all the Special codes would be easily available.  It's pretty much unavoidable.  Look at Magic.  They cram so much information on those cards and they still need a massive database of meta-rules.

i would just remove training/basic universe cards, they are too much work to reboot.

I've tried to come up with some way to make them viable, and they just aren't worth saving.  All the fixes the original game tried to implement, like various IAs and Specials interacting with them, just seemed like a lot of wasted potential for better, more useful IAs and cards.  I don't mind seeming them go.

maybe a little love to ally/doubleshot cards as well to make them at least an option for a deck

The Power Balance rules definitely make Doubleshots viable.  I think Allies need to be reworked a bit, but it's doable.  The 8-, 7-, and 6-stat requirements need to go however.  Personally, I only ever used the 5 or less versions.  A level 3 off-color attack beats a level 1, 2, or 3 on-color attack any day of the week.  OP3 Ally cards will have different requirements not necessarily related to a Character's Power Grid.

i agree with powerbalance removing one per deck status of 5-8 anypower powercards because it opens up many deck building options

Holy hell does it ever.  I really like the choice that now exists between an Any-Power deck and a MultiPower deck.

i also liked the idea in that other thread about double or triple power card types as well to use with the multi-4 stat power cards

These will very likely make the transition to OP3 in the expansions.

to balance all the types, i would redo the template... have equivalence across the board for innates, specials etc

Not sure what you mean...

keep battlesites/homebases/artifacts definately, aspects could go, just another card to have in your deck that is situational

Agreed.  One thing that's always bothered me about Artifacts though, is the two-Character requirement.  That doesn't make any sense.  Why do you need two Characters to use an Artifact?  Still working on how to revise those for OP3.

[DoktorSleepless]

Exactly! It just makes no sense. I mean, what the card implies is that your (inexplicable) team of Adam Warlock and Jubilee are walking around, and they find the Witchblade, and Adam's like "yo check this out" and then Jubilee can suddenly work it. But on her own, she comes across it, and instead of putting it on her arm like a normal person, she can't figure out how a glove works and throws it away.

That is crazy talk.

As far as I'm concerned, artifacts make much more sense with some base requirement to use, and any character that meets the requirement may use it (nothing says it can't be minimums or maximums in 2 Grid types for 1 character rather than the standard "teammate 1 X or greater, teammate 2 X or less" that is the current requirement system, for example).

Also, I'm just going to put this out there: I think The Witchblade as written is a mistake. It smacks of bad design to me. It violates a fundamental rule of the game (grid requirements) which can be very fertile ground to mine for new design area, but is also very dangerous. A comparable situation (for those who play MtG, I'm using it because I play and because it's an incredibly successful CCG) are cards which bypass Mana requirements in the game of Magic. While they can be very good, MtG has largely had problems/failures/bannings with cards that go too far in breaking the requirement. It seems inappropriate to go into great detail about another CCG here, but every game designer should familiarize themselves with cards like Black Lotus and Tinker, and why they (although cool) were massive mistakes from a design perspective.

The Witchblade is the same. It single-handledly stifles creativty in character design by preventing aggressively-statted or IA'd characters from seeing creation, because every one must be viewed through the lens of having a potential 8-grid due to the Witchblade. Magic has the same issue with their Artifact card type, because every artifact regardless of Mana cost can be tinkered into play for 3 mana; their solution was to ban Tinker, and I would bet that if tournament OP continued, eventually the Witchblade would be banned for creating some impossibly negative interaction with a newly printed card/character.

Conversely, permanent single-stat boosting artifacts like The Super Soldier Serum are amazing. They skirt similar design space, but don't immediately transform every character into a powerhouse (seriously, it shocks me that I don't see more reports of "Galactus, who cares about the other character's identity, and a Witchblade won the tournament"). Another example: Jubilee is great, very flavorful, lots of avoids and not a ton of insane attacks. Which is perfect for the character. But you stick her with Galactus and the Witchblade, and suddenly she can avoid everything and also fire off level 8 attacks in every category? Yuck. At least if you stick her with The Super Soldier Serum, it makes sense that she's suddenly got an amazing Fighting stat.


I like the comic-art idea as well. If I had tons of money or artistic skill, I can tell you right now that I'd put it towards better AoA artwork. In general I really enjoy painted artwork (I would love to see Boris Vallejo doing the art, but I understand that the hyper-realism is probably not in line with a super hero fantasy card game). But generally speaking I'm just of the opinion that the original art did them no services. The CGI looked really bad on some characters, and also I think they let some artists just go bonkers. I mean, I know that it's a male-dominated industry but some of the female characters are sporting 20 inch waists and EE bra size it looks like. That might be fun for the artist (who knows) but to me it transforms serious characters/combatants into charicatures you'd never believe could fight.

My big thing would be art agreement. I'd like a single artist (or a couple of high-level professionals working from an art guide) doing characters, and another artist/pros with art guide to do the specials. That way the style of Characters is internally consistent, as is the style of Specials. 

[Tussin]

yeah i wouldn't mind the removal of artifacts like witchblade/myrlu symbiote... keep artifacts as utility or single stat boosting like soldier serum/serpent crown/tentacles/darkhold to avoid the potential of breaking a limit or cap

Quote

    to balance all the types, i would redo the template... have equivalence across the board for innates, specials etc

Not sure what you mean...

i mean like how there is a Spawn for Energy, but not other power types, i would like to see a Spawn type for Fighting, Strength and Intellect, so the format isn't dominated by 1 or 2 power types. i would also want to see Fighting/Strength/Intellect grid stated characters with equal choices for negates, low grid 8's, all those good cards that seem to fall into Overpower's Energy stat mostly for the most cost efficient deck

of course with characters that truly fit the stat grid for accuracy, i wouldn't want to inflate or makeup something to force a fit, find who would work the best.

and for specials, have a template like... max 8's can get access to these types of specials and values, max 7's can get these, max 6's can get these etc... of course there can be exceptions too with characters that spend more and have higher grid values, but for the cheap max 7's max 8's you can't give them all the best specials

[OP3]

As far as I'm concerned, artifacts make much more sense with some base requirement to use, and any character that meets the requirement may use it (nothing says it can't be minimums or maximums in 2 Grid types for 1 character rather than the standard "teammate 1 X or greater, teammate 2 X or less" that is the current requirement system, for example).

Sounds good to me.  I'll keep that in mind when I get around to them in OP3.

Witchblade rant

Totally agree with all of that.  Also, it doesn't at all reflect what the Witchblade actually does in the comics.

I would love to see Boris Vallejo doing the art

That makes me cringe.  I can't stand that guy.  He doesn't understand how clothes work, and he can only depict one body type for all characters male or female: muscle-bound body builder.  If he sticks to Robert E. Howard- or Edgar Rice Burroughs-style pulp fantasy stuff, he's tolerable.  But he's seriously one of the worst superhero artists I've ever seen.

The CGI looked really bad on some characters, and also I think they let some artists just go bonkers. I mean, I know that it's a male-dominated industry but some of the female characters are sporting 20 inch waists and EE bra size it looks like. That might be fun for the artist (who knows) but to me it transforms serious characters/combatants into charicatures you'd never believe could fight.

Totally agreed, but that makes me scratch my head in puzzlement at your mention of Vallejo.

My big thing would be art agreement. I'd like a single artist (or a couple of high-level professionals working from an art guide) doing characters, and another artist/pros with art guide to do the specials. That way the style of Characters is internally consistent, as is the style of Specials.

I like what DC did by having one artist draw one character plus all his or her Specials.  There was real consistency in the art.  In fact, I honestly don't think there's any bad art among the entirety of DC OP.  It's very DC "house style," which may not appeal to some, but you can't say it's outright bad.

i mean like how there is a Spawn for Energy, but not other power types, i would like to see a Spawn type for Fighting, Strength and Intellect, so the format isn't dominated by 1 or 2 power types. i would also want to see Fighting/Strength/Intellect grid stated characters with equal choices for negates, low grid 8's, all those good cards that seem to fall into Overpower's Energy stat mostly for the most cost efficient deck

Okay, I get you.  I'm totally working on exactly that kind of thing in OP3, but I get it's not the same thing as having those cards officially printed.

[DoktorSleepless]

Haha, yeah I can see your point on Boris. I just love the feeling of absurd hyper-realism in the faces, there always seems to be an impossible amount of nuance to his (pretty universally) stern faced men and women. But you're right, on cards for OP I'd have to steer away from him in spite of personal preference. Nothing worse than letting a personal fetish cloud good judgment and production values. 

Of course I'd still love to see Hildebrandt or Jusko art, but it's kind of absurd to think they'd be able to produce enough pieces for an entire set, let only multiple expansions. So you're probably on point with the 1 Artist does 1 Character + their Specials. That way you have room for variation in individual artistic style but consistency for each character (so you don't have CGI character art, 1 anime art special, and the other specials in some kind of John Romita style).

[department_J]

1. Screw Beyonder. Get him out of here!
2. Types of cards that go to the dead pile are the same but only go there after being played.
3. Would make any-power 6, 8.
4. Give Nightwing some specials and a "may play Robin specials" type inherent.
5. Green Goblin gets a 7 in intellect. Come on!
6. Give jucier inherent abilities to max-6 characters.

[OP3]

1. Screw Beyonder. Get him out of here!

No kidding.  He's way more harmful to the game than beneficial.  And there's no real way to accurately represent beings that powerful using OP's mechanics.  Galactus needs to go too.

2. Types of cards that go to the dead pile are the same but only go there after being played.

Do you mean like, if someone forces you to discard, then that card goes to the Power Pack instead?  Because you didn't get a chance to play it?  I dunno, that seems problematic.

4. Give Nightwing some specials and a "may play Robin specials" type inherent.

He, along with every other DC character that got shafted, is much, much improved in my upcoming DC Core Set.

5. Green Goblin gets a 7 in intellect. Come on!

Agreed.

6. Give jucier inherent abilities to max-6 characters.

Agreed.

[department_J]

"He, along with every other DC character that got shafted, is much, much improved in my upcoming DC Core Set."

I don't know what you are talking about, but I keep coming across references to you designing an expansion or something (I am pretty new to the forum). Would you mind explaining what you are doing or referring me to a thread/url?

Regarding my Dead Pile idea:
Yeah. I mean for instance, if you have a teamwork and some specials in your hand, but your opponent concedes, your whole hand goes in the discard pile. This is a house rule we use when we play and it makes the game more exciting because
a. You have a better chance of playing your special cards.
b. Since you are allowed to look in your opponent's discard pile, you can see what specials they didn't play and try to work that into your strategy when the discard pile is re-shuffled once the draw pile ends.

How would this be problematic?

[justa]

Between Bios' special & the guy on Facebook, Nightwing has been well upgraded as you suggested.  (Not to mention all the other homemades people have done to upgrade the shitty way DCOP treated him.
OP3 - I hear you.  Dick Grayson has a much richer history (& more experience) than a Jason Todd or a Tim Drake.  Stephanie Brown (Spoiler), I think, is more interesting than the previous 2 Robins.
As for cards going to power pack if not played, well, almost everybody has their own house rules.  Back in the day ours was that "no"s & "only"s could be played defensively, to make them useful.  Whatever works for the local population.  But for the game as a whole, the nuances of conceding, discarding cards from hand/draw pile, etc. make the game constantly variable.  It increases the potential effect of such cards, and one has to plan accordingly.  It works both ways; sometimes for the best, sometimes not.  I think if you implemented your house rule on a grand scale, it would just further cement in "winning" tournament teams as opposed to others.