I hear a lot of complaints about ELO mode these days, what with cards like Kalindra and Askai roaming free.
I think these come from people focusing too much on cards that are individually strong and not enough on which cards have good synergy. Right now, building a good ELO deck is a fun puzzle. Which cards are banned this week? What can I do to counter the strong cards that aren't banned? While everyone is busy complaining, I am having the time of my life.
Let's take a look at Kalindra (the card people complain about most) and then take a look at some possible half-decks in two different clans, FPC and Pussycats. Think about using Fei, Chan, Shifou, and Zhu Tang -- three of those cards can easily beat Kalindra pill-for-pill, and the forth lets you threaten a fairly big life-per-damage gap of your own. Think about using Clover, Charlie, Lucy, and Ella in a Pussycats half-deck... All of these reduce Kalindra's damage so hard, that it's impossible for her to be the huge threat she usually is.
I think the definition of "OP" in this game is starting to change. When most players say a card is "OP" they now mean "I have to work to counter this card, and I don't wanna." A card that forces you right out of your comfort zone and into a creative deck you would have never tried otherwise is *good,* both for you and for UR. IMO, you can complain, or you can step up your deck-building game. The choice is yours.
14/4 with an Ulu/Vortex deck so far this week.
Ghelas the issue isn't that the card is OP therefore should be banned, at least IMO.
Take Kalindra, the biggest abuser. when she's out the entire meta revolves around attempting to stop her...she simply dominates the meta to a point where your forced to revolve your deck around countering her or suffering a 30ld fury loss. I believe a card like that should be removed simply because it forces the entire meta to change for it
I'd say Kalindra is the only card that actually does that alone. However there are 2 other problems in ELO
1. 50/50 cards...once again Azel and Greem aren't OP themselves, but what they do is force a 50/50 situation from Round 1...oh you don't have a SOA card? Well try and predict me!! It just makes games boring if your running into cards like these continually
2. Big game changers (heavy hitters with solid support)....This is where Askai, Beeboy and Avola come in. They strengthen their clan to insane points and are themselves a giant nuke. Not only this but they have such solid low star backup that there's no real weakness in the decks other than drawing bad hands.
These 2 kinds of cards aren't 'OP' in the sense that they are Jackie Cr's. They just make the game very luck based in both drawing a solid hand yourself and in hoping you draw the right counters to the cards they have.
I dislike the current ELO system because it becomes a game of "Either counter x deck or play it, or risk playing a deck that isn't known for it's consistency." No one likes losing. People will play what's "good" for that week. It's okay if you wanna play Ulu Watu/Vortex, congrats on going 14w/4l with it, but the fact remains that some decks are just more consistent for the time, and they end up dominating. Sometimes they have a broken card in there, so you ban that card to quell their power, although the problem sometimes remains.
It's funny, I had this discussion with my friends about a different game, League of Legends. In that game, there are more consistant characters, I mean sure we have nukers and whatnot, but people tend to play the more consistent character at the time, like preferring the Utility Mage to the Burst Mage because they're more useful in a lot more situations.
Summary: Some decks are more consistent than others, my complaint is not only limited to Askai but it's Askai and his comrades who make it more frustrating to win because their pros heavily outweigh their cons.
The point that I'm trying to make is that people have an inaccurately narrow understanding of "what's good for the week." Askai is somewhat OP, and the more well-rounded Jungo gets, the more OP he seems, sure. But the game has over 800 cards in it. They may not all be ELO-playable, but there are tons of "situationally broken" cards that work great together... Some work much better than Askai + friends, or are overall stable with an advantage against the typical Askai deck.
My best Top 100 score was achieved with Montana/FPC.
The vast majority of my Top 100s were achieved by half-decking Vortex, a clan I barely ever see.
I have run most clans people feel are "extinct" in ELO to a respectable rating (near or at 1400.)
I don't have time to grind -- I have a busy job, a sick wife, and a very young daughter.
Fortunately, I've been able to achieve great win/loss ratios with literally dozens of setups that I don't see anyone using...
If people try to understand the meta beyond the simple "Unbanned card X is strong" or "Mono Clan Y is strong" they will be able to find new stable setups, like I have. Orrr, you could use that time to keep complaining about Askai and Kalindra and see where that takes you.
The fact that you have to build your entire deck to counter ONE card is insane it is like Ghumbo and Oshitsune all over again, or Gil+Rowdy week for Junkz, or Sylth week, or Shakra. I mayself Run an NM/Jungo with an Askai and Azel but only because it's the only deck i can afford and its the only way i can somehow compete.
OP ability and OP = sad ELO.
Elo is way more swingy than it ever has been before
just the reality of more cards (and therefore more powerful cards) being out there
14 life removes the threat of the 2hkos so people are more likely hoard pillz for their game changing cards
old old is a pretty common strategy now... with more 2hko threats out there in the past, playing old 1st round and losing often meant you were now facing possible KOs
the increase in good DRs (Clover, Artus) or defeat life cards have increased the 50/50 games. Increase in 50-50 games has decreased my enjoyment of ELO. The 50-50 situations are great for newer or less experienced (and i dare say, less skilled) players, cause they have a real chance vs top players.
Swingy cards are not my thing... I was always a huge fan of win 3 rounds to win a match decks or 2HKO finishes. Both sides winning 2 rounds each with the winner determined by who got the bigger nuke card to win isnt that skillful for me... just a matter of drew what cards
edited by wasteroftime Tuesday 30/10/2012, 07:31
Eh, just my personal opinion of course, but I don't see any fool-proof 50/50 cards out there. A deck with some good control options can usually take care of it.
Does "big" poison scare you? Alright, stick a couple of ability SoA cards in your deck. Is it Greem you're worried about? She's an unmodified 7 power; don't tell me you don't have a single round-winner in your hand that can take care of that?
DR bothers you? Good thing so many cards are DR resistant! Try a SoA half, poison, -life, prot: P&D...
You miss 2HKO? Play a +damage clan, and include some SoA so that the threat can't be eliminated with 1st turn DR. (But, quite frankly, I think 12 life formats encouraging 2HKO is the true 50/50 play of the game; whoever won round 1 either goes for the kill or bluffs, and that determines the outcome. No skill involved, just close your eyes and hope you read your opponent right.)
As for 3-round wins, they are still very much viable. This is why I like Vortex -- they help.
I think the people who do well are the ones who take the time to build the best decks. Even a silly Kalindra/Askai deck takes some thought. I find that cards that direct the flow of the game in your favor are usually best. How about this: Do you want to fill a 4* NM slot with Kenny Cr or Azel? Both "OP" cards have a huge impact on the game, and both force your opponent to try to pill in specific but different ways. Figuring out which is best for your particular deck can make a dramatic difference.
I agree with ghelas, though every clan has a good SOA/SOB/ dr or anything else that can hurt Kalindra's damage potential or beat her pill-for-pill. I like elo the way it is now, lots of clans are being used. Azel and Greem aren't 50/50, there's obviously more chance that the opponent is going to pill a lot if the other cards in his hand have low damage, otherwise he's more likely to bluff. That's as good as it gets because the whole point of the game is to make an educated guess of how much is the opponent going to pill and pill accordingly to make a better situation for yourself. If you have trouble with poison, play with high damage and you can get lower than the minimum. Drs, in this case, Artus and Redra aren't that much of a problem if you got -life... just keep testing different strategies and edit your deck a bit when you find a weak spot.