offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Sunday 06/01/2013, 16:52

Hey guys so I will just start us off. I dont get how lizbeth is on top of the charts??? I mean for 1 less damage, you get lulabee, which is FAR more stable than lizbeth. I know, different clans, but Ulu is not that bad by themselves. + there are many replacements, and lizbeth is what, like 60k? this is ridiculous.

I think Dorian is quite borderline as well, uppers can still do pretty well without him. Herman, hefty, even lady are all replacements for dorian, i mean i know he is strong against SoA, but thats it!. Herman is actually more threatening than dorian in many matchups minus gheist/roots.

offline -Fruz Senior  
Tuesday 19/03/2013, 02:59


I never said she didn't lose 3 damage.

Anyhow, yeah, completely agree, when lamar was banned, he was probably one of the best cards out there, even though Mona - a 3* still matched him pill for pill.

I also dunno if Striker should still be banned?
He's a lily with 1 more power reduction or an alexei with one more damage.

And, even when he wasn't banned, I always picked Marina as my first choice 4*.

offline Ambrelo1134 Titan  
Tuesday 19/03/2013, 04:30


Yep, Lamar and Striker don't need bans. But striker's unbann would cause AS domination as they already have saki, marina, Jessie, etc. I still think it should be unbanned though smiley.

Ability Soa is better than bonus Soa!!! With ability, u can dodge stop cards and hit good abilities while the bonus is uncontrollable.

offline DUC-j00p Imperator  
Tuesday 19/03/2013, 21:09

Look at it from the other side, with ability soa the opponent can still hit his weak against soa card

offline Ambrelo1134 Titan  
Wednesday 20/03/2013, 21:59


I understand your point but Ability SOA is still better than Bonus SOA.

offline DUC-j00p Imperator  
Wednesday 20/03/2013, 22:46

Your right ambre,

new input: at least 1 character of the montana clan needs a permabann

reason: with soa and sob clans not being as good (and much used) as they used to be, and other clans get wrecked by them, there is really no stop to the montana's. like this week its hard to make a gheist or roots deck without jeena and levi

and sob clans still have a hard time against montana, and the montana even got a counter to sobsmiley

offline 0 Anderson Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 20/03/2013, 22:58

The reason people play mono roots/GHEIST is so that you CAN HAVE the bonus SOA...

offline Ambrelo1134 Titan  
Thursday 21/03/2013, 03:45


I never said that Bonus Soa is bad, just not as good as Ability Soa.


I cant score high with Montana for some reason. Avola and Mona and Spiaghi should all stay. It's true that Soa and Sob clans aren't played as much. look at this week. Jeena and tuck are banned so roots is unplayable. Gheist isn't that good because of the loss of leviatonn. They get owned by Pussycats and many others. Nightmare is basically unusable but piranas maybe.

offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Saturday 23/03/2013, 10:49

@ambre your posts spark so many arguments....

nimestiec: has SAME reduction as jose star (due to bonus) and jose has 1 more damage...

as for the uppers hand vs. junkz hand. true junkz is more stable, but not only do uppers have a +2 reduction (which actually matters quite a bit in many cases) but also most of the time uppers need to win TWO rounds to win a game, whereas junkz need 3.

lamar cr and striker are BOTH fair bans. striker needless to say, SoA with power reduction is SICK good. AS is beasting already. lamar cr EIGHT DAMAGE. leaving him till the end of the game is killer, since SoB removes so much attack/power manipulation as well.

no one ever told you to lead with rubie, although in some cases she is perfect starter. some hands are just super weak to SoA (jungo, piranas, nightmare etc.) yes 5 power, but SIX damage and bonus to back her up. so what if you overpill a bit? 6 damage in and 1 more hit its most likely gg. shes a GREAT bluff. 6 power would be op.

oxen is weak to SoA, no doubt, but still HIGHLY usable. 7 power and 10 attack is hard to beat as well. and yes, id take -2 attack over that potential 1 min. ngrath is not a bad card by any means anyway... just overshadowed by murray (8 power, not quite affected by DR) and uranas (...yah)

and i was saying something like malicia lucy clover ivana can be a disastrous hand. getting 2 rounds in with this is hard....

and honestly you would start making posts that makes sense if you get about 1317 elo dude.

offline 0_The_Oracle Imperator Open Casket
Saturday 23/03/2013, 11:00

Oh new point, as to why lizbeth is so terrible (sorry i just cant get over the fact she is more expensive than both Crs in her clan)

1 SoA is enough to screw a lizbeth hand over. why?

if you have lizbeth in hand, chances are you will be going first. leading with lizbeth? no not going to work.

second turn, your opponent plays something other than their SoA. whats the best bet here? play something other than lizbeth?? no you cant, because lizbeth will die against the SoA (like literally, i havent seen cards this weak against SoA for a long time, kolos still has 7 power). so you HAVE to play lizbeth.

so you guys see the problem?? she is SO predictable. i have literally like 70+% win rate against lizbeth hands. and SoAs arent even her only weakness. shes weak to big power reducers (ongh, fei, pilzken namely) and to a certain extent DRs. not to say shes not great with the rest of her clan.

offline Ambrelo1134 Titan  
Saturday 23/03/2013, 16:43

Rubie should have been 6-5.

"Why lizbeth is so terrible"

Lizbeth is terrible? Lizbeth is by no means terrible. Lizbeth is a good card, not op, but by no means terrible.

What overpill? You'd put 7 pills on rubie? Including bonus pill.

5 pills on my Eebiza can beat that.

Also, aren't arguments the point of this thread?

Answer to this subject

Clint City, night.