Author Topic: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist  (Read 63755 times)

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #300 on: September 08, 2011, 07:27:39 PM »
0
wouldnt the odds of finding 2 specific cards in your opening hand be marginally less than finding 1?
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #301 on: September 08, 2011, 07:30:12 PM »
0
Right. But finding that 1 OR finding 2 specific cards while having that one card in your top 4 would be more likely than just finding that 1.

Offline Drrek

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
  • The Bee of the Sea
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #302 on: September 08, 2011, 07:39:24 PM »
+1
The most potent Samuel band is Oak to Samuel (a 5 card advantage) to Armorbearer to Ishmiah (now 8 cards) to Asahel to Saul with TToD out (now 9+ cards and play-first). If you think that sounds like a lot of cards for a combo, I have played over 15 games with Samuel and had it out by turn 4 about 10 of them. Samuel first turn is almost guaranteed (10% of the cards in the deck deck after LS's create a 1st turn Sam), and the drawing starts piling up so quickly (in addition to the fact that Sam himself searches for Saul) that you'd have to have improbably bad luck to not have this combo out very quickly.

sorry to quote this from pages back, but I didn't see anyone contest the play-first with TToD in the posts (I may have missed it) and unless I'm missing something in this combo, TToD's play first ability is negated by Samuel.
The user formerly known as Easty.

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #303 on: September 08, 2011, 07:54:38 PM »
0
true, it was already mentioned elsewhere (this thread or the other), and thats often overlooked. good catch.
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline SomeKittens

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+10)
  • *****
  • Posts: 8102
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #304 on: September 08, 2011, 10:42:49 PM »
0
Buying 20 of something and eating 16 is not normal. But on math it is. Math; not even once.
This is a good point. Technically, if he got Peter/4 Dolla Holla, the odds of him getting an FTM go way up. Along with any other draw card he can play first turn.
I ignored a lot of factors in that (another big one being that he got to go first every time he got Mayhem).
Mind not the ignorant fool on the other side of the screen!-BubbleBoy
Code: [Select]
postcount.add(1);

Offline Smokey

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3216
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #305 on: September 13, 2011, 08:50:31 PM »
0
Due to lack of interest / occupation with the new set, Testing periods are suspended until interest picks up again.

Warrior_Monk

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #306 on: September 14, 2011, 01:11:35 AM »
0
Instead, start testing the debated NJ rule, as well as Kirk's proposition!

Offline Master Q

  • Trade Count: (+65)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Onward...
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #307 on: July 15, 2018, 01:41:11 PM »
0
UBER necropost, but I was perusing this by chance and think this is still a relevant thread. What does that say about the state of the game if cards 7 years ago are still nearly as or more abuseable now than they were on release (AutO, Sam, Throne, Ahimilek, Haman's Plot, NJ/TSC, ANB, and, to a far-lesser extent, Mayhem)?

Merely an observation- I don't expect this thread to revive and I wasn't looking to do so. Feel free to also observe how far we've come (no TGT, no Thad, no Liner) whilst still seeing how far we've yet to go in terms of diversifying themes, phasing out problem cards, etc. ;)

Carry on.
If you were to go on a trip... where would you like to go?

Offline The Guardian

  • Playtester, Redemption Elder
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+96)
  • *****
  • Posts: 12344
  • The Stars are coming out...
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #308 on: July 15, 2018, 01:59:13 PM »
0
Wouldn't you say that part of that is due to more balanced cards being made in recent sets (Children of Light notwithstanding)?
Fortress Alstad
Have you checked the REG?
Have you looked it up in ORCID?

Offline Kevinthedude

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Yo
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Type 1-2 Player Unofficial Banlist
« Reply #309 on: July 15, 2018, 02:27:47 PM »
0
UBER necropost, but I was perusing this by chance and think this is still a relevant thread. What does that say about the state of the game if cards 7 years ago are still nearly as or more abuseable now than they were on release (AutO, Sam, Throne, Ahimilek, Haman's Plot, NJ/TSC, ANB, and, to a far-lesser extent, Mayhem)?

Merely an observation- I don't expect this thread to revive and I wasn't looking to do so. Feel free to also observe how far we've come (no TGT, no Thad, no Liner) whilst still seeing how far we've yet to go in terms of diversifying themes, phasing out problem cards, etc. ;)

Carry on.

Of those cards, the only one I think that still deserves to be banned for diversity/power reasons is Throne and for game health reasons, Plot and NJ/TSC (accompanied by a rule change to 4 souls required to win in T1). It may because it's pre-Nats and no one wants to share secrets but FoM feels like the first truly diverse meta we've had in a while. There are several decks that could all potentially be the best and still more I haven't tried.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal