Hello everyone. I'm sure you have all noticed the effect of a 5* card in a game. Whether it's Beeboy
(see what I did there), you can say more often than not the whole match revolves around making sure that 7/8/9 damage does not go through. The whole metagame is affected, and the presence of such nuke cards make games unbalanced. To call a Beeboy
bluff? Pill to beat him? Or do I DR? Against a hand with Avola
, you know what happens. 1 pill Angelo
, 0 pill Oscar
, 1 pill Spiaghi
, all pill Avola
How is ELO
a strategic game mode when most games depend on whether or not a 5* is in your hand. Competitive decks actually use 2 5* when possible, like Avola
, etc. Because even with a mediocre hand, having a 5* means you can just luck your way inti a win. The result is that even good players lose a good % of their games, and then it requires more and more games to get a top score because you average +/-. It's a cliche to say you need 1000 games in order to win the ELO
tournament, but I wonder how far that estimate is from the truth.
I'm not doing this for the sake of whining, but out of actual concern on how ELO
is played. The recipe for winning is to pack
as many 50/50 cards as possible, and force your opponent to predict each one or lose. A guildie of mine proposed that all 5* be banned from the game, but this is a bit too drastic IMO. Perhaps a 24* format?