The Junkz players are hunting for their LD. That's teh usual "New LD!" rush. It'll wear off soon.
As for teh bans, I hope that Uranus heads back onto it soon.. She's way outside the power curve. Yes, the Saks dropped hugely in playtime due to this, but, much like Spaghetti, she's a splash-in for people that rely on her huge damage reduction. Not good for the environment.
I'm getting sick of all the Elo bans. We spend credits and hours of our time trying to get enough clintz to buy good cards to use in Elo and for what? So a few people can complain and then those cards get banned? What's the point of even buying the good cards? I've spent over $300 US buying credits and investing in this game and I have not one good card I can use. More than 30 characters are not permitted in Elo. And more than half of those complaints come from people who don't want to invest real skill in the game.
"This guy just two pilled Caelus and got me for 8 damage;WAHHHHH!!!! Admin! Admin! It's 'ruining' the game for us! WAHHHHH!!!" And then come along admins who ban these cards? This week I made a garbage Roots deck and it was only through SKILL that I got to 1230 in Elo in 2 days. I will get to the top but I know I shouldn't be surprised when half my deck is banned next week because some players found it unsavory. There is a crowd of people complaining about these cards, but even a bigger crowd asking to stop these ridiculous bans.
Disgruntled UR player
@ Hungry Panda
We all know that bans are unfortunate, especially when they are on cards you like playing, and like using. However, having likely invested over $1000 into several different TCG's over my life thus far, I can say that every game has cards that are, to use the lightest term possible, imbalanced. The cards that land on the ELO ban list tend to fit into that category.
Let's look at a card for a moment, one that you mentioned, Caelus Cr. Tell me, if you have 1 or 2 5 Star slots open in a mono-Skeelz deck, would you put in any other Skeelz member than him? Perhaps Aylen, or Thomas on a STRETCH, but no. There is no better Skeelz card. Period. Then look at a half-build Skeelz deck, and tell me how many other 5 Star cards IN THE GAME you would choose over him. I doubt you could find 20 other ones. For that matter, even 10 might be difficult, and all 10 of those are most certainly on the banned list, or will be soon.
A single card that is better than 95% of the other cards in the game? That, sir, is the definition of imbalanced. That is why there is a format within which we can play without those cards. Don't like it? Play deathmatch, survivor, fights, or make your own event.
I understand where you are coming from, but that doesn't quite work. You could make the same argument about Blaaster Cr, and each of the arguments would make the same amount of sense. In fact, almost every clan has a card or two that are better than 95% of the cards available in the elo metagame. These are known as staples. The problem is that if you keep banning the top 5%, eventually worse and worse cards are in that 5%, and fewer cards are available to use, actually restricting creativity.
However, with unbanning cards and releasing new powerhouses (Spyke), the game can be revitalized. This does lead to powercreep, which is another argument completely.
I'm not trying to offend in any way, I'm just giving the reasonable "devil's advocate" argument, where Hungry Panda apparently couldn't.
@Wakshaani: With the release of a protection: damage, Uranus isn't as effective as she used to be, especially with only 5 power. And even though so many people have complained about Roots being neutered by the bans, I have to admit mono Roots have been the most common decks I've faced this week in elo alongside mono Jungo.
@Havo: Spyke might not get a perma ban or be player banned as often the more popular the protection: power cards become. Spyke is just a regular 7 powered card against them. With the release of a couple more in a few different clans, Spyke isn't so OP anymore.
ELO suggestion: Put every card in the game (including permabanned cards) on the format election for a week, and all cards with 1.5% votes or more with the majority of the votes being bans those cards are banned, if not then they are ELO playable. Would add an interesting aspect to ELO for a week.
@UM_Aaabattery: I believe it would increase the number of cards we can use as the max # of cards that could be banned is 66, however that would assume that the majority voted ban on those 66 cards the have exactly 1.5% and no one voted for any other cards. I believe about 25 - 45 cards would be banned which is less than the amount of permanently banned cards we have now.