Ok i take back my 'noob' card thing. but now listen to my explanation.
@kitsune that strategy really only works assuming that Greem DOES win the round. imagine a hand like this: Sasha Redra Greem Chiara Cr. Greem first turn, whats most likely going to happen? yes you pill a LOT on her. you can counter this argument by saying you can bluff, but that leaves you 3 characters that have a total of 8 damage, meaning that you probably need to win with all those 3.
the thing is, facing a hand with no wall and low damage is HIGHLY unlikely, or that your opponent has a terrible deck. in the case of facing against a wall, or a semi wall, lets say: Radek. I think that all pilling on Greem is usually suicide so lets say the max you will use is 10 pillz. 8 pilled Radek beats that, and still leaves the opponent at 5 pillz, and one more round can guarantee a victory. and for this case example i didnt even choose a strong wall card. even something like Grudj can 11 pill to ensure a victory, and you would HAVE to win the last 3 rounds against your opp. with 3 pillz left, not easy.
finally, as much as 12 damage may sound, it actually makes your second round highly predictable.
it just seems that most of the Skeelz card IS based around having landed a big nuke, and then rest of the game seems easy. what if you DONT land??? then problem starts.
What's stopping you from leading with Sasha in this scenario? I think the best use of Greem would be to sit there and apply pressure. Opening with Sasha means you get to see what card your opponent plays in r2, and which 2 cards he will have left after the round resolves. This gives you a chance to make a pretty good educated guess about whether you should block with Greem in r2 or not, and how hard.
I'm still determined to give Skeelz a fair try this week, even though it will probably be an uphill battle, with Dorian and Ongh unbanned and Greem sitting it out... After experimenting for a bit I put together this deck: http://www.urban-rivals.com/presets/?id_preset=2454220 (Two Revenge and one Confidence card?!?!?!) Towards the end of the week I expect more SoA to counter Uppers, despite Dorian's presence, and that might help. We'll see how it goes...
I must admit, I am not expecting great results. My play in general has been poor of late. I feel like the recent ELO bans have made the meta too homogenous. Even though they seem fair, every clan now has similar walls, nukes, a little bit of pill manip, etc... And less reason than before to pick one clan over another. I enjoyed thinking about how to counter the existing meta each week in ELO, but now it seems extremely difficult. Maybe there is such a thing as "too much balance."
Again, the skill in using Greem is to accurately assess 4 questions based on the initial draw:
1) which character will my opponent use to oppose Greem?
2) what is the most # of pills my opponent will likely use to oppose Greem?
3) what is the least # of pills my opponent will likely use to oppose Greem (often, 0-3)?
4) what is the least # of pills I need for the rest of my characters to keep my life total above 2?
It's impossible to assess how many pills I'd play on Greem without knowing what other characters the Jungo player drew. But I think #1 Greem is a huge threat to Jungo as she basically negates their clan bonus. #2 putting 7 pills on Radek on turn 1 is not how most players would choose to respond to Greem, as 7 pills on Radek is pretty much game over if Greem was a bluff. Does the Jungo player really expect me to put 9 pills on Greem? And even if they expect me to burn 9 pills on Greem, most would rather play conservative and let it go, and try to win in the last 3 rounds with 12 pills. The typical and generally best play would be to play 2-4 pills on a low pill wall like Mindy or Rodney.
A 1st turn response of 7 pills on Radek is possible but I think extremely unlikely. Last week I faced many -2 power reducers and never had the situation where the opponent commited 7 pills on turn 1 with a 7-5 advantage. The closest Greem came to losing was 5 pills on Havok (44 attack) and I had 9 on Greem (50 attack). If I expect 7 on Radek, then I'd bluff.
I must admit I though oracle was kidding so I played Skeelz last week.
Personally I found it really tough. You really do have to win with a nuke. The rest of their characters have such piddling damage that Ditha or a similar card can fury on any round and there is no way for you to recover. I really don't like Greem. Heavy investment and 90% of the time you will either be at a huge pill disadvantage or you will have lost round 1 and from their the game.
The next issue is when you have to play them. All their damaging cards need to be played round 1 to be effective leaving nothing for late game. Maybe it's just my personal play style, but I loathe playing my big card round 1. It makes me feel vulnerable if it doesn't hit. I really don't like to see my nukes be beaten that's why the ability to play them any round I choose is important to me. Skeelz don't provide this.
When I see Greem I see a 50/50 match in a instant and that annoys me. THis is the kind of card that needs a ban not something like Yookie who was innocent.
In summary I agree with oracle (for once) Skeelz aren't a great clan. It's land a nuke or lose. In the 20ish games I played I lost probably 15 simply due the fact I didn't have enough damage. They are simply outgunned.
Best not to high pill Greem against pill manipulators (+pillz specifically). Losing a round after using a ton of pillz will screw you over in that position. By not high pilling, even if your opponent doesn't use much pillz to beat you, you'll at least still have a high amount of pillz to fight back with.
Sometimes bluffing is not an option @kitsune as i mentioned most if not all of Skeelz main usable cards have serious low damage. and that was just an example, Radek 7 pills is not that over if you bluffed. thing is, all of jungo's cards minus a few of the 2 stars have very good damage, and one more hit would usually mean game over. and thats all only assuming you pilled ZERO on Greem, what if you pilled something like 3 or 4? you will have a hard time using your Redra to win a round.
my point is, Greem is PREDICTABLE most of the time. in the case of drawing a nice hand, you are probably not gonna have a good DR (unless you use Dwan for some weird reason). and Greem is less valuable, and easy to predict, since you are not going to use 10 pills on her.
@HaCk: Greem is most definitely not Kolos. Having to spend 75%+ of your pillz to *try* to land 12 damage is NORMAL. Other clans just do it with two cards, but the pill investment required is about the same.
@Oracle: I think Skeelz just have a problematic bonus. They almost can't have a good 2-3 star "threat" card because of it. UR doesn't have 9 power, nor 5 damage on 3*s. If they make something like an 8/4 3* with a strong gap ability, it will be OP. A 7/4 with a strong gapping ability, on the other hand, will just be another hard-to-use nuke (see Snowflake.) They need at least 2-3 low star cards that combine good round-winning power and gap the way, for example, Moses does. Right now they simply have nothing of the kind, and at this point every other clan has a few.
I think pilling 4 on Greem is a lousy play. I can see sometimes there are situations where you would wager 2 on Greem (i.e. because you can spare 2 and still beat their 8 power bomb with Sandro (110 attack vs. 104 attack) but really going near all-in on Greem is the best way to play her. Trust me, if you whiff on 7 pilled Radek 1st round against Skeelz, you wont win another round against a 5-12 pill disadvantage. So I like my chances and if I ever face a 7 pilled Radek, I'll take the loss.
You are also not seeing Greem's strategic advantage. Why are SOAs, DRs and low pill walls so popular in ELO? They allow you to respond to a turn 1 nuke with minimal pill commitment. You can't consistently win if your defensive strategy requires you to commit 6+ pills on turn 1 all the time. There are only 3 ways to "stop" Greem: beat her, play an all stop or play a heal character on turn 2. All stops and heals are very rare. Greem's strategic advantage is she takes some of the most valuable characters in ELO (SOA, DR, low pill walls) and turns them irrelevant.
I'm not sure if your problem is with Greem or if it's with Skeelz in general. Skeelz don't have a low damage problem; they have a problem against DR. When Greem is available, she helps you solve the DR problem. As for the hands where you don't draw Greem, that's why you play with Michael, Falkenstein and Belle. Belle has no synergy with Greem; you play her to help you win the matches when you don't draw Greem.