Spyke wipes out like 85% of the ELO cards. Even the uber Montana/Uppers bonus gets overtaken in about 3 pillz. As for his 'counters' Melanie and Elvis take all of them out anyway...DR/Power reducers/SOA LOL those two don't give a flying crap
And if even they can't take it out then Lola mops up the damage for you anyway
That Berzerk half is unarguabely the strongest half deck that could be made in ELO about 6 months ago...nothing could counter it...and nothing still does
The question is not whether or not Spyke is overpowered; ofcourse he is. He is one of a small handful of 4* characters that are better than the average 5* character. But he made Berzerk relevant. Without him, seeing Berzerk in ELO is an abberation (although there might be a rise now that Olga has been banned).
The story of ELO has been how most players have consistently failed to account for the metagame. There were dozens of answers to Spyke. There are dozens of answers to Troompah. But most players just use typical characters instead of figuring out the metagame. This has been the case for a long time and it doesn't really change. I think the developers realize this. They've released all the answers you'd ever need but players don't use them right so they can only check power with bans.
I maintain that the issue is that Spyke or Troompah or Askai etc etc give you the same kind of advantage as building a really clever deck. It's not that they can't be countered -- we all know they can. It's that they *literally* offer more advantage by themselves than 98% of the other cards you could use.
@LB_Abnormal What you described as "not fun" - playing/ countering the top of the cardpool- is that metagame dimension of strategic play that I was refering to. You don't find it fun; I'd say that 80% of ELO players agree with you; and the developers have obliged you by banning said offenders of "fun."
Did banning Spyke open up more cards in the cardpool? Not really. Instead, banning him made his entire clan irrelevant. Spyke gave characters like Herman the chance to sign; he was an assassin for the cookie cutter characters that anyone knows after they've played 20 ELO matches. You could prepare for him; you could run him; but fairly often you were challenged to win a match when your opponent drew him and you did not. And if you found a way to win that match, that's the best feeling this game can give you.
It's funny for us to get excited about a 8/5 protection power/ damage when at the same time the developers have banned the reasons (Spyke, Olga, Robb Cr) you would be excited about these characters in the first place.
In short, I find it more fun when occasionally I had to consider playing or countering the men colored red, of being on the right or wrong side of a 7-4 difference in power. Now? Red men are a waste in my virtual collection.
I also find it funny that Spyke was such a red bullseye when Nellie, who is nearly never banned, offers mathematically the same combat advantage and only 1 less gap. There are few matchup differences between Spyke and Nellie.
Nellie is good, no arguments there.
One key difference between the two cards straight up is that Spyke is FAR less bonus reliant than Nellie is. The 'mathematical combat advantage' only applies when Nellie has her bonus intact.
I'll let someone else spend 15 minutes pointing out every single difference between the cards. Obviously there are a number of them.
@the oracle Nellie is not weak necessarily to SoB. She's still a dangerous power manip even then, and SoA still means she'll force extra pills because of the bonus. Not to be underestimated like any other card. And I agree, Bezerk are still playable, they're just not very popular at the moment because most people focus on the sole fact that they actually have to use some strategy to win with that clan now that Spyke is gone.