This is copied from the Elo thread.
I'd think it would be funny to have someone say something like "Fei is garbage" again.
A few cards I think that don't need DT penalties
Oxen - Really, Oxen having a DT penalty is ridiculous
Dorian - Same as above
Eddie - This is DT and you are giving a Heal card a penalty???
Nanook - Seriously? 2 pts?
Cards that need lower DT penalties
Striker - 1pt penalty
Lamar + Vickie - Lamar needs 2 and Vickie needs 5.
Mona - 2 pts
Hugo - 2 pts maybe to remove Atk manip domination.
Eyrik - 2pts
Ambre- 5 pts
Morphun - 1 pt (In Dt, you aren't supposed to last all the rounds)
Eklore - 1 pt
Elvis - 1pt
Jackie Cr - Reduce to a 2 pt penalty. Look at Hawk. I know, extra star, but still.
Marco Cr - Reduce to 2 pt penalty.
Guru Cr - 2pt
Graks - 2 pts DT is definitely not about DR.
Cards that need penalties:
Beeboy - 2pts
Spyke - 5 pts
Mokra : 2 pt
Qubik - Only if they create a 1 pt penalty. He doesn't deserve 2 pts.
Askai - It's a +life clan we're talking about here. Maybe remove, maybe give 1 pt.
Ah yes, the ever-common SoA...except no. Consider, out of 18 (minus GHEIST + Roots) clans with ~30 cards each, how many are SoA? Three per clan, maybe? Of those, how many actually get used? And finally, what's the point in using one if the opponent has four cards that all have SoA-worth? This has happened in pretty much every match I've had against La Junta in the last two weeks. It's especially horrible because I'm using Pirana. Although I neuter Raven's OHKO (!!) ability, I still end up losing because Pirana has no reliable SoA/DR and Milena's ability can make her a safe low-pill to get that 2 damage in anyway. I mean, sure, La Junta doesn't have a very good counter to SoA as a bonus, but consider how often Roots/GHEIST are used in tournaments compared to the very-popular +2 damage La Junta and you'll see why that's not a worthwhile reason to let them off scot-free.
Raven is virtually an 8/10 card. How is this fair in any sense of the word? Piranas lose points with Ulrich, a 5/5 3 DR card, and La Junta get to keep their OHKO for no price? What is that about? It'd be a disgrace to the entire idea of strategy if they didn't get a penalty of any kind.
Well said, RitzMalheur. Yeah, just because 2 out of 30 clans have an advantage over La Junta is no reason to let them off without penalties. By the same reasoning, I never use Stop: cards. I might face an SoA clan one in 10 matches. The other 9 out of 10 I have a semi useless card in my hand...
Ambre, the more I see you post the more I cringe. I laugh because I know you out up that entire list in hopes people would agree with you about Ambre an Hugo. The fact that you think those two cards should have their penalties lowered makes me wonder how much you really like this game, because thy would be stupid and would wreck any enjoyment in tourneys.
"Raven doesn't need a penalty in my opinion."
Totally disagree. He should have a big penalty. In DT, its about killing the game as fast as possible, scoring the maximum points while doing it.
Raven has the capability to do it.
Also, I think the penalty on Eddie is good. Makes noob thinks twice before using such crap card in DT.
Nanook is the only card I don't see worth the penalty. The other penalties are justified.
- Emeth has a 5 pt penalty. He's not good enough to deserve that! 2 pts might be fair, but 5? Why does UR hate Emeth?
- As for Leaders, Ambre spoils any battle she participates in, whether it's me drawing her or the opp, so 10 pts is fair. The other Leaders don't deserve 10 pt. penalties though. Hugo and Eyrik aren't as game changing as Ambre, most players deal with them easily. Morphun and Eklore have abilities mainly useful in longer battles, which harm the user anyway.
- On the topic of cards like Raven, it's a fairly new card- I guess the staff haven't got round to penalising HER yet. My guess is SHE will get a 5pt. penalty. Mokra is another OP recent card, not penalised yet. This will be rectified hopefully too...
- Might a sensible idea be having certain cards awarded different penalties depending on whether the player is in Standard or Extended mode? Same principle could be used for whether it's Extended 25 or normal Extended...
Example: in Extended 25 give Copper a 2 pt penalty, due to being a big 5*, and in Extended give him a 5 pt penalty.
-5 points on Emeth is fair. Have you ever used him? Such as him against most Uppers. In mono he has a 10 attack advantage before the other ability is taken into account. In essence he beats them with their own weapon. '
-Ambre I agree with you on. The other four would be more in line with -7/8 points, maybe?
-Raven just might get a penalty next time they're tweaked. No point in constantly bringing it up in every single sentence.
-Mokra is in the same boat with Raven. Maybe with a different penalty.
Yes, I have used Emeth a coupla times in a 23* star La Junta deck. He was good and I got a place in the top 150 once or twice, but he never seemed as good as his penalty suggests, because of his clan, which for me still lags behind some of the others. Even Jungo are easier to use in Tournies than La Junta, despite their less appropriate bonus (KOing is better than life gain here).
Not sure I agree that a single card in a clan having 10 more attack manip. than the average member of the Uppers justifies heavily penalising him, as the attack manip. in Uppers is much more consistent. Without Emeth, the La Junta are stuffed against Uppers decks. Attack manip is BY FAR the most useful force in this game, of which La Junta have little (Gatline and Ray are mediocre). In contrast, Uppers have lots, and imo it seems that providing some balance by allowing La Junta one exceptional attack manipulator with a smaller penalty would make things fairer...
As far as Emeth and Raven goes, no matter what give Raven at least a five point penalty. Simply OP for 12 life formats. Emeth, I don't care about as long as Raven is given a penalty. In the meantime, with Raven running free and rampant, keep him banned. Could you imagine Emeth and Raven running around at the same time? My lord.