@Abnormal: I definitely see what you guys are trying to say, I just don't think it's entirely correct. You're right in that usefulness is situational. But the number of situations in this game is finite. So, this is a variable that can be measured. If Karen is better than Robb Cr in 3,487 different situations, and Robb is better than Karen in 2,765 different situations, we can safely say that Karen is the better card, right? A concrete answer does exist.
Granted, none of us have the time or the energy to do anything like that. Fortunately, many situations in UR are comparable. By speculating about these situations, we can often make an accurate educated guess.
I actually went on to start listing Robb and Karen's advantages and disadvantages, and trying to explain their impact in the current meta, but that little article goes well over 1500 characters... So I'll skip it (unless someone particularly wants to see it.) The point is that we can make a very good educated guess based on how strong SoA is in the meta, and the introduction of many cards with great round-winning ability to the game (meaning that All Stars don't necessarily get a huge edge in a 3-round-win strategy any more just because they drew Robb.) What's more, Saki serves a similar role to Robb while providing much more flexibility.
So the educated guess is that Karen is overall better, and IMO that's a valuable piece of information -- even though there is no 100% proof.
Haha I agree definitely like Karen more than robb. Robb is literally destroyed by anything (soa/sob/attack manipulation) well not necessary attack manip but something like Uppers bonus forces him to pill for that mediocre 4 damage. you might say the same for Karen, but she offers something very invaluable--- All Stars weakness to SoA.
@ghelas: glad you can see from my point of view. I am still puzzled why oracle ignore my questions directed at him. Referring to your previous post at me, I thought he'll be able to handle constructive critism. Apparently, he proved me wrong. Moving on....
ELO changes very often. Example: You cant compare only Karen against other characters and clans. You also need to compare how often these cards or clans appear. That is also very important. So you are not totally correct on that too. Again, it becomes an endless debate. I guess I am more or less done with my inputs on this thread. Have a great ELO week ahead
What questions? can you make it more direct your posts are like essays I have no time reading them dude....
anyway Nightmare is an interesting one highly debatable once again... dont go hammering most of these are my personal preferences
2*: Artus, Mawpin, Phyllis, Eadh, Sheitane, Bill, Hel, K Cube
3*: Cutey, Pan, Edwin, Arawaka, Dieter, Orlok, Sargh, tommy
4*: Candy Jack, Azel, Glorg, Magenta,
5*: Karrion, Nistarok, Ozzy
Quoted from Oracle: "EXACTLY you can control the cards in your deck, but not your opponents so that is why there is a point in discussing about how useful each and every card is."
That proves that you fail at giving appropriate examples. Try again. And how useful a card is depends on the other 7 cards in your deck. Of course there are cards that are obsolete. If you compare Striker and Alexei for example. It is obvious isn't it?
"What questions? can you make it more direct your posts are like essays I have no time reading them dude...."
This is obviously directed at you. No time to read? You sure have the time to read other posts and answer them. Well done. So back on topic, can you please explain that? Why do you give poor examples to depict your stand? If you can't explain yourself clearly, it means that the foundation of this x star department of the clan tier system is very, very shaky. I'm pretty sure you've read the conversations between me and ghelas in this thread since you have so much time to give your advices on this thread. Abnormal also summed it up and I share the same sentiments as him. Learn to take some constructive criticism next time before you tell someone that I'm ruining the public ELO forum section.
P.S: Your response to this is entirely optional. After all, you sure is a very busy man who only replies selectively.
How about we stop debating the validity of the thread? Sure some cards are situational. However some are better than others in a majority of situations. Such as Noodile Cr>Jerry.
Haha, just kidding. Noodile Cr>Jerry in every situation possible except you need to do 5 damage and your opponent has a Bob Joby deck.
@Cyber well look I dont want to argue with you because it is going to end up nowhere. but LOOK there you were saying that there is NO point in having this thread...
and as many others were saying, SURE some cards are situational, but in the general cases some cards are better than others. if you still disagree with me just go start a new thread no one is stopping you, there is no reason to get all offensive here.
@oracle: A thread on deck build easily replace this tier system. My last post. Promise.
@Paladin: There are 3 kinds of deck. Staple, v situational, obsolete. The v situational can sometimes be better depending on the cards face, how often they pop up, your other 7 cards. And the debate among which staple is best (in terms of star department of the same clan) is really laughable.
Its obvious that you come up with a better example but didnt bother to read before posting.
Anyway I dont wish to devote my time here. If you, Paladin wants to continue debating, feel free to pm me. I look forward to see how you answer all my unanswered questions left hanging around in this thread. Thank you.